Brownlow's Knoxville Whig. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1866-1869, 1868-04-29
THE KNOXVILLE WING
Knoxville, Tenn, April 20 1868.
From Che frankfort (Ky.) Commonwealth.
Removals from Office Henry Clay the
Author or the Te1uFe-O Office Bill.
BY BRowNLow & HAws.

Il so happens that Henry Clay was the author o
This bill In 1885 there was lengthy discussion
ia The Senate Of the United States UPON the power
-, appointment and removal. The constitution, it
viii be remembered s wholly silent on The question
IF removal. To pending bin, Henry Clay offered
The following amendment
BE Il further c7sastod, That in all instances OF
snpointuent 10 Office by the President by and with
ne advice and consent Of Jbe Senate the power Of
removal shall be exerc sed in concurrence with the
Senate: and when the Senate lie not in session, the
President may suspend any such officer, communi-
eating his reasons for the suspension during the first
month Of the succeeding session, and if the Senate
concur with him, the officer shall be removed but
# Il do not concur with him, The officer shall be r.
gtOred 30 office.
This amendment covers the whole ground assumed
10 the tenure of-ofBce law IL is shat law in con-
densed form II contains every principle Of that
law.
III Clay supported hil position by the following
arguments, among others
i Is legislative authority which creates the Office,
defines its duties and may prescribe its DURATION
speak Of course, Of offices not created by the con-
atituuon, but the law. The Offices coming into ex-
is,once by the will Of Congress, the same will may
provide how and in what manner the Office and Of
fcer shall cease 10 exist. 1t may direct the cond-
lions on which he shall hold the office, and when
and how he shall be dismissed. Suppose the con-
stution had omitted 10 prescribe the tenure OF the
judicial OATH could not Congress do it ?
But the constitution has not fixed the tenure Of
any subordinate officers, and therefore Congress
may supply the omission. T. would be unreasoua-
be 10 contend that although Congress, in pursuance
Of the public good brings the Office aud The officer
INTO being and assigns their purposes yet the Pre-
sdent has control over the officer which Congress
cannot reach and regulate The prece-
dent OF $50 established in The House of Repre-
Fontatves against the opinion Of a laIge and able
minority and ia the Senate by the casting yote of
the Vice President John Adams IL is impossible
10 read the debate which II occasioned without being
impressed with the conviction that the lust conf
dencs reposed in the father Of bis country then at
the head Of the government had great If not deci-
sive influence in establishing IT, 1t has never prior
TO the commencement Of the present administration,
been submitted 10 the process Of review.
No one can carefully examine The debate in the
House Of Representatives in 1889, without Oel1g
truck with the superiority Of the argument on tne
-ide o. The minority, and he unsatisfactory haturo
of that Of the majority.
Daniel WebSieE asssRaa z.lle - ~, -,
siii0nt 40 INC lV"'"iOs 'a"s''so "7'
me occasion
II lbipk. then sir, that the power OF appointment
naturally and necessarily includes the power OF re-
p,oval where no Limitation is expressed nor any
,n,re lint .bnt AZ viii declared The power of APP
continent being conferred on the President ana
Sanasa / think tho power of removal went along
with H. and should have been regarded as part OF
"a and exercised by the same hands. l think Che
Legislature possesses the power Of regulating the
condition, Duration qualification and ten1re oil once
IN all cases where the constitution has made no eA-
nress provision on the subject. am, therefore, o.
Spipion that Il is competent for Congress to decide
by law. as one qualification Of the tenure OF ONCE
hat the incumbent shall remain in place TIL The
President shall remove him, for reasons TO be stated
d, me Senate And I am Of opinion that this quail
.scafiof, mild and gentle IT is, viii have some
ea In arresting the evils which oeset the progress
NJ Inc rovernuent and seriously threaten its futGr
property. r,..
Ewing of Ohio
Mr. Ewing spoke al leagth upon the question o
removals, maintaining that the constitution doc
not confor on the President alone tho power OF re
moval-that It is a matter Of legislative provision
,lbiect 20 be vested, modified, changed, or take
away at their will; and if it is not regulated at q
nv law it rests IN the President in conjunction W.T.
the Senate, as part Of the appointing power
These authorities settle cOnclusivey that Henri
CLAY, Daniel Webster, Thomas Ewing, and oth9r
we're heartily in accord with the Congress Of th
United States in their construction Of the bill, an'
were equally As Radical in their opinions.