New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-03-22
THE TENURE or OFFICE.

| At D. m. to-day-unless some one should
| insist on speaking farther in defiance of a
! general understanding-the Senate will close
| its able and dignified but too verbose debate
| on the bill repeating the act regulating the
Tenure of Civil Office, and proceed to vote on
the various amendments thereto, then on the
bill itself and it is understood that the result
will suspend the operation of the act hence
forth to the close of Gen. Grants term.
This is one of those shifty expedients to
which modern craftsmanship is addicted-from
which the Constitution itself is not free-but
which do not commend themselves to our ap-
probation In so far as the Tenure-of- Office
act was a temporary device to circumscribe
the mischievous influence of Andrew Johnson's
treacherous abuse of power, it ought to be
repealed outright, as no longer necessary nor
proper; in so far as the act asserted and up
held a correct principle, applicable at all times
and under all circumstances, 1t ought to be
upheld and continued in force. If the mere
fact that we have now President who may
be implicitly trusted affords reason for sur
rendering this act, it affords an equally good
reason for confirming his nominations In O
lump, even before they are made, and thus ig
n0ring the right of the Senate to any voice in
the premises.
We approved the passage OF the Tenure of
Office act apart from and above our dlstrust
of or aversion to Andrew Johnson. Ever since
the great debate in the Senate on the removal
of Secretary Duane by President Jackson our
conviction has been Sclear that removals by
the President in the recess of the Senate of
public functionaries should be restricted to
cases in which he presumes, and has reason to
presume, that the Senate would concur if it
were in session. That is leading principle
affirmed in the Tenure of Office actin our
view, a sound and important prnciple-and we
no wise incline to abandon 1t.
The power to remove from Office at will is
not expressly conferred on the President by
the Constitution. 1t is one of those ipferental
powers which the sticklers for "strict con-
struction are accustomed to stretch beyond
warrant or reason. The provision (Act ii, \ D
that
"The President shall have power to al up all vacancies
that may happen during tho OF the Senate by
granting commissions u'eh shall esDe at the end their
,,eJt session -
is significant and pertinent. 1t is one that no
believer in the modern doctrine Of Senatorial
impotence in the premises could ever have
suggested.
-
sons whom he deems fit to hold certain i'm
portant offices; the Senate approves and con
firms them; and they enter upon THOR duties
accordingly: whereupOn the Senate adOurns
and disperses. Now may the President turn
short about and remove the persons so APP
pointed, replacing them by others whom he
knows the Senate would not confrm9 We say,
No-that would be. if not clear usurpation
at least fragrant abuse of power, for which
the Constitution affords no warrant, against
which it would have provided had such action
been anticipated or apprehcnded. We think
the Tenure-of- Office act goes mono too far in
obstructing and counteracting it.
There is no question involved which should
antagonize the President and the Senate. Tho
Senate is in session, ready and willing to act
upon any nominations that the President shall
. see ct 10 make. and certain to con6r'e at least