The New York herald., 1869-03-27

n0mely-that II was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. he uld not
know whether 1t was going to benefit or to embar-
rass President Grant, but he knew that the act was
the same snake as 1t had been then, and he was In
favor OF killing not scotchng IT, II anybody doubted
its unconstitaiionaty he would refer him TO the
report Of Senator Sprague's speech In the Senate,
where there was demonstration OF Its unconstitu-
tionality nearly absolute as any moral PROPOSE
ton could be made. He did not know whether
Senator Sprague originated the proposition or not.
not care who originated It. Senator Sprague had
produced II, and he lMr. w0odward) commended
II to the prayerfu attention OF gentlemen who
were conscientious about violating their oath to
support the constitution. According TO political
science, In all times and m all countries, the re-
mova OF executive officers was an executive trust.
What did he care that o parcel OF Senators, ami
mated by patriotic motive, or any other motive
came together and declared that the executive
power shall be executed by branch OF the legisla-
ture 2-that the people knew that that was not the
distribution Of the powers OF the government which
gentleman from Massachusetts, Nr. Buter) SAID yes.
terday-that the repeal OF the Tenure OF ONCE act
was the most acceptable measure that Congress
could OFFER the people. lie was therefore, to-day as
he had always been, against oil modIncations ol tnls
unconstitutional measure, and Ia favor Of lts aDso-
Mr. BurIEx stated thai the reason why he had
moved to reconsider the vote referring tns matter
to the Judiciary Committee was I'M ,ma' ne was az be
committee might not be called on for reports. He
moved the previous question. "
The House refused To second the previous ques-
tion, the democrats voting against II, circum-
stance to which Mr.. Butler called attention by ask
Ing his OppOnents Nv mere are tue allies now r.
Mr. BINGHAM then took the moor and made an
hours speech favor OF concurrence In the
Senate's amendment, examining the whole question
mn its constitutional, legal and practical bearing lie
said that It was perfectly manifest that an uncondi
tional repeal OF the law was impossible The House
could not compel the senate TO change its mind.
Mr. BuTLRR-Can the Senate compel the HouseS
Mi. BINGHAH-T understand that II cannot but
until the Senate shall change its mind II s imposs
bic 10 repeal the law simply hy act OF repeal. lie
went on to argue that the senate amendment was q
substantial repeal OF the Tenure OF once act In as
far as that act letered the President therefore he
desired the House 10 concur In II.
Mr.. DAVIS, (rep.) OF N. Y, argued against the
Senate amendment and IN favor Of an unconditional
repeal OF the Tenure OF 0ce law. He regarded this
as the most important measure that would come
before the House at this or any future session. In
his judgment the Senate. under the preext OF laying
down power, had drawn to itself ali the executive
power OF the nation. The Senate amendment substi-
tuted for the constitutional executive OF one head an
executive OF seventy heads. He believed as soemnly
as he believed anything that the Tenure OF once
act was utterly In conflict with the constitution.
The Senate had under the constitution no executive
power whatever. The President could be tmpeached
II he appointed corrupt officers; but II the Senate
should restore corrupt ofilcers where was tho re-