The New York herald., 1869-04-03
0suerai Grant and the New Tenure Of
Once Law.

0suerai Grant and the New Tenure Of
Once Law.
The repealers have been cheated. The bill
agreed upon by the joint committee of confer
ence on the Tenure of Office law, and accepted
by the late out-snd-out republican repealers of
both houses as satisfactory adjustment, they
say, proves to be a shabby trick. It appears
that the new act, which it was thought restored
to the President a decisive authority in the
matter Of removals and suspensions from Office,
does no such thing but that in the case of q
suspension from Office upon which, within a
limited time, the Senate shall have taken no
action, such suspension lapses and the sus-
pended officer is reinstated. Looking at the
new act for its own Interpretation, it is case
that might puzzle Philadelphia lawyer
whether the law has been changed from twee-
dledee to tweedledum or from tweedledum to
tweedledee.
But this compromise was Hobsons choice to
the President; for it was either this or the old
Andy johnson law, which not only tied him
fast in regard to removals and suspensions,
but fastened his Cabinet upon him for his
whole term, subject in any removal to the con-
sent of the Senate. Now, as General Grant
has intimated pretty broadly that when he
shall become dissatisfied with any Cabinet
officer he will make q change, even to the
extent, if necessary, of changing the whole
Cabihet every week till he shall have
found the right materials, the full liberty
given him here by the Senate in this
new law is an important point gained. But
the difficulty suggested in the matter of sus-
pensions during the absence OF the Senate still
remains. The President may assume that the
law means tweedledum but if the Senate say
that it means tweedledee they have him, or
they bring him to an issue for the Supreme
Court. Here it is. We will suppose that the
Senate has adjourned and that John Smith,
an unsatisfactory internal revenue officer in a
good whiskey district, has been, in the
absence of the Senate, suspended, and that
John Jones has been put in his place. We
will next suppose that the Senate has reas-
sembled, and that this suspension, according
to law, has been reported to the Senate, but
that the session has closed without any action
upon the case. Then it is claimed that under
this new law, Smith, the man suspended, goes
back to his Office, and Jones, the Presidents
substitute. goes out.
But what does this signify if the President
shall conclude to stick to Jones? In this
emergency the Senate, on reassembling, will
be waited upon by Smith and informed of his
continued exclusion from his whiskey inspec-
tions in defiance of the Senate's construction
of the law. A resolution of inquiry upon the
President will then be necessary in behalf of
will have to do will be to say to the Senate
that according to his construction of the law
Jones is the right man. 1t will be re-
membered that President johnson found
in one of the reconstruction laws hole
through which Gas Daniel O'Connell said of
the holes In the laws of ParliamenD you might
drive a coach and four, and that johnson did
drive his coach and four, labelled ''my policy,
through the hole aforesaid. This done, the
two houses of Congress, under special law
provided to head off Johnson, speedily reas-
sembled and passed an explanatory law, filling
up the hole in question and heading off John
son over his veto, as usual.
In the case of Jones the only alternative to
the Senate will be the same thing-a law ex-
planatory of this new Tenure of Office act
but if they attempt it they will be swamped in
the House and the President will have the
victory. The case is clear enough. The
President must execute the laws; but where
there is manifestly trick of pettifogging in
law capable of two or three constructions, the
President must execute 1t as he understands
it. In doing this, in default Of any explana-
tory law, he may get up case for the
Supreme Court where, as that court now
stands, all this Office legislation trenching upon
the unbroken practice of the government down
to the tying up of Johnson would doubtless be
pronounced unconstitutional and void. 1t
would be great thing for the country, too,
If General Grant were to seize the first oppor-
tunity to make case for the. Supreme Court
which would result in defining the consttu-
tonal rights of the Executive and the metes
and bounds of Congress.