The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1869-03-09
THUS BAD BEGINS


diency of obeyipg and executing, without
hesitation and without scruple, all the laws Of
Congress just as they stand, whether good or
bad, approved or disapproved. He does not
once, in the whole paper, mention the
Constitution or implicitly acknowledge its
superior obligation. By clear implication, on
the contrary, he avows and promises supreme
allegiance to the statutary law. And what is
he seen doing the very next day after this
ayowal and promise2 His first act in the ex-
ercise of the appointing power runs directly
in the teeth of one of the oldest statutes-and
one of high importance, too-defining the
qualifications for certain executive Offices only
next in dignity and responsibility to the pres
idency itself And what is he seen doing when
this statute is found to stand in his way?
Does he recall the legally obnoxious appoint
ment, that Of Mr.. Stewart to the treasury
department, and hasten to substitute another
strictly conforming TO the requirements of the
statute? No. Neither by retraction nor
amendment does he express prompt submits
sion to the law in question or admit It's wis
dom and utility. On the contrary, he main
tains the appointment, and sends to Congress
a communication to the effect that the law
making power will please take this little legal
obstacle out of his way! The logic of this re-
quest is not to be mistaken. 1t rests on the
fiat assumption that the law, in this case, is
obnoxious, and ought not, for one moment,
to obstruct the executive will. And why OBJ
noxious? Is it injudicious in design or per-
nicious in tendency? Would its execution
conflict with any of the conditions of faith
full, honest, incorrupt, disinterested, patriotic
administration of the treasury department?
Consider the following provision, the pith of
it, and then answer "That no person ap-
pointed to any Office instituted by this act
shall, directly or indirectly, be concerned or
interested in carrying on the business of trade
or commerce, or be owner in whole or in part
of any sea vessel, or purchase, by himself or an
other in trust for him, anypublic lands or other
public property, or be concerned in the pur-
chase or disposal of any public securities ofany
State or of the United States, or take or apply
to his own use any emolument or gain for ne
gotiating any business in the said department,
other than shall be allowed by law" No one
can reasonably doubt that this provision COM
mends itself to the public conscience as, in
spirit and letter, eminently judicious and
salutary. Were it not on the statute book,
the substantial fulfllment of all that it pre-
scribes would be Indispensable to singleness
of devotion in the head of the treasury de-
partment to the great national interests COM
mitted to his charge. The utmost effect of its
enforcement could be no more than this, to
exclude from the administration of that de-
partment men who were prepared to render
only half-hearted service to the country, or
men who meditated the corrupt aggrandize-
ment of their own fortunes at the expense of
the country. If it excludes Mr.. Stewart, the
reason must be simply because he is unwill-
ing to qualify himself by retiring from mer-
camille business and giving up specula-
ton in United States bonds, although,
being hundred millionaire, he
could well afford to pause in the amusement
of private wealth, and to devote all his facul-
ties to the public service in department
where such devotion is most imperiously
needed. Nevertheless, Gen. Grant has asked
Congress to relieve Mr.. Stewart from the dis
ability imposed by this law. And he evil
IDENTIFY, as before observed, regards the law as
obnoxious And, the question again comes
up, why does he thus regard it? AS the
general purport and intent of the law are I'M
exceptionable, and indeed obviously salutary
and needful, it is scarcely possible to con-
ceive that, in Gen. Grants view, it can be
obnoxious in any other sense than that of
legal impediment to executive action. We
dwell upon the position of the new President
in respect to this matter because it seems so
broadly to indicate both the temper and
the theory with which he is pre-
pared to deal with cases in which
a meditated policy may be opposed by
existing laws. If laws are to be held as OBJ
noxious or as proper, accordingly as they
agree or disagree with acts which the Presi-
dent has it in design to do-and such is the
doctrine which, in logical effect, Gen. Grant
announces-then the statute book might as
we'll be burned, and the legislative branch of
the government might as well be suppressed.
1t is to be regretted, on many accounts, that
the new President has SO infelicitously, upon
IQc luItSuOlu Vi us NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS., IcCdlhcu,
by suggestion of contrast, his inaugural de-
claration that he would not discriminate be-
tween good and bad laws, but would "exe-
cute faithfully all laws whether they meet my
my approval or not" The Senate declined
to take steps, as requested, to clear away the
legal difficulties to the induction into the
treasury department of General Grants
appointee and in thus stand
ing by an obviously wholesome
law, it has obtained a moral victory which
win go far, we apprehend, to mitigate popu-
lar disapprobation or It's course in the per-
sistent refusal to repeal the obnoxious and
pernicious tenure-of-ofice act No doubt
most of the Republican senators are at this
moment mentally chuckling over the dis
comfture of Grant in this attempt to foist a
legally disqualified secretary into the treasury
department They anticipate still graver
collisions, and whatever tends to abate Grants