The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1868-02-25

only be exercised by him win tho co.
sent or the Senate, while as to those who
nave not been designated nv him
mere Hisio5 Is no IKE denial of his power to
MISPLACE them. It would be a yiolss
ton OF the plainmeRning OF Ihis enact-
ment TO place Stanton upon the sana
footing, as those heads OF departmanTs
who have been appointed by myseIi. as
10 him, this law gives him no tennre ~
office. The members of nv cabinet
VINO been have appointed by me are by
this act entitled to hold for one month
after my term of Office shall cease
But Mr.. Stanton could not, aga inst the
wishes of my successor, hold Il moment
thereafter, and II he were permitted bv
my successor to hold 1t for the FIRST two
weeks, would that successor have NO
power to remove him But the power
OF my successor over him could
be no greater than my own, If my sue.
cessor would have power to remove
Mr.. Stanton after permitting him to re-
main period of two weeks because he
was not appointed by his predecessor.
l. who have tolerated Mr.. Stanton now
more than two years, certainly have
Inc same right to remove him, and
upon the same ground, namely: that
ne was not appointed by me but by my
predecessor. Under the construction
OF theltenor of office act have never
doubted my power to remove him,
whether the act was constitutional or
not. was always of the opinion that
1t did not secure him from removal.
was aware however that there were
doubts as TO the construction OF the law.
and from the first deemed it Desirable
that at the earliest possible moment
these doubts should be settled, and that
construction Of the act fixed by the de-
cision OF the Supreme Court OF the
United States. My order of suspension
IN August last was intended to place
the case in such a position as would
make resort to judicial decision both
necessary and proper. Nv under.
standing and wishes, however, under
that order OF suspension were frustra-
ted, and the late order for Mr.. Stanton's
removal was further step toward the
accomplishment of that purpose. l
repeat that my own conviction as to
the true construction of the law as to
cOustituttonaltty were well settled, and
were sustained by every member of
my cabinet, including Mr.. Stanton
himself. Upon the question OF consti
tutionAlIty each one in turn deliberate
~ advised me that the tenure OF Office
law was unconstitutional. Upon the
question as to whether the members
who were appointed by my predecessor
that act took from me the power, to re.
move, one of these members emphati-
call stated, in the presence OF others
sitting in the cabinet, that thew did not
come within the provisions of the act:
~ was no protection to them. Not one
dissented from this construction, and
understood them all to acquiesce in its
correctness. A matter OF such grave
consequence / was not DISPOSED
to rest upon my own opinions, though
fortified by my constant advisers.
have, therefore, sought to bring the
question. at as early a day as possible,
before the Supreme Court ofthe United
States for final decision. In respect to
so much of the resolution as relates to
the designation of an officer to act as
Secretary OF War dd interim, have
only to say 1 have exercised this power
under the provisions OF the LIST section
OF the act of February Is, 1875, which,
so far as they are applicable to vacan.
cy caused by removal, understand to
be still in force. The legislation upon
the subject of dd interim appointments
i'll the Executive Department, stands,
as to the War Office, as follows: The
z, section OF the act of August 7, 1883,
made provision for vacancy in the
very case of a removal OF the head of
the War Department, and upon such a
vacancy gives the charge and custody
of the records. books and papers to the
chief clerk. By the act or the 9Th Of
May, 1892, sections, it is provided that
in case of u vacancy accustomed nv
eminent, or sickness of the head of
the War Department, the President
may authorize person to perform the
duties of the Office until a successor ia
appointed or the disability removed.
The act, It will be observed, does not
provide for the case of a vacancy
caused by removal. Then by the first
section of the act OF February IS, l795.
IL Is provided that in case OF anv wa.
cancy, the President may appoint a
person to perform the duties while
such vacancy exists. These acts are
followed by that ofthe I'd of July, 1858,
by the first section Ut which provision,
is again made for vacancy caused 6v
death. resignation, absence from the
seat oil government, or sick ness of the
head of any Executive Department.
and upon the occurrence of any such
vacancy, power is given 10 the Pest
dent to authorize the head of any 9TH
er Executive Department, or other OH
Ger In either of said Departments.
whose appointment Is vested in the
President at his discretion, to perform
the duties of said respective officers un-
til a successor be appointed or such alb.
sence or inability by sickness shall
cease; provided, that no one vacancy
shall be supp led, In the manner afore-
said, for larger term than six months.
This law, with some notifications. re-
enacts the act OF 1892, and pro.
Vides' as did that act, for the
sort of vacancies to be filled, but like
the act of 1892 it makes no provision
for vacancy occasiOned by removal.
1t has reference altogether to vacancies
arising from other causes. According 10
my construction, the act OF 1868. while
It implicitly repeats the act OF 1892. req
ulatinE vacancies therein described, il
has no bearing whatever upon go much
OF the act OF 1895 as applies 10 vacancy
caused by removal. The act Of 1895,
therefore, furnishes rule for Vacun
cy occasioned by removal. One vAcnn-
cy Is expressly referred to In the rot OF
the 7Ch OF August 1853, creating the De
partment of War. Certainly there ia
nothing expressedi IT there is any 1t is
by implication aud can only be admit
ted so fur as there Is a clear incousist-
ency between the two acts. The act of
1863 Is inconsistent with the act of 1888
as to vacancy occaSIoned by death.
resignation or absence by sickn
but not at all Inconsistent as to
vacancy by removal; IL is assured.
ly proper that the President should
have some power to fill Temporarily a
vacancy occasioned by removal, as he
has to supply place made vacant BIZ
death or the expiration of the term. If
for instance the tncumben OF an office
should be found wholly unfit to exc.
cute the functions, and the public ser
vice should require his immediate ex.
pulsion, remedy should exist and be
at once applied, and time be allowed
the President to select and appoint a
successor, as is permitted hin in The
case oil vacancy caused by death or
termination OF the official term, The
necessity, therefore, for an dd in
term appointment Is lust as
great and indeed may be greater
IN cases OF removal than in others