The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1869-03-24
~ Thurman's First speech in
sen the SENATE.

tho SeuuIe.
Below we give the speech OF Senator
THURMAN, of Ohio, delivered in the
limited States Senate, on the bill to
repeal the Tenure of Office law, which
was passed to cripple President JOHN
son. We give the remarks as they ap-
pear in the Congressional Globe:
Mr. Thurman-Mr. President, as re-
ports frem committees do not show how
the members of the committee voted on
the measure recommended, | deem it
proper to say that in the committee of
the Judiciary did not assent to the
proposition to ameI d the bill of the
House which is before the Senate; nor
does my Judgment approve Of that
amendment now.
1t is not my purpose TO 60 into an ar
gument of the constitutional question
where the power of removal IS vested.
The question has been argued until l
imagine no new light is likely o be shed
upon'it. shall not, therefore, 90 into
thas discussion, further than to netice
the different opinions that have prevail
ell with respect to it.
Until lately supposed there were but
two interpretations thought Of; one an
Interpretation that gives to the Presi-
dent the unqualified power of removal,
the other an Interpretation that requires
the concurrence of the Senate in the ex-
rrcise of the power of removal. OF late
understand that third Interpretation
has been suggested, and that is that the
n ,f
mOval, but subject to such suggestions
DIS Congress in it's wisdom may prescribe.
To my apprehension, sir, this third view
of the Constitution is totally inadmissi-
BILE. Either the power is vested in the
President by the Constitution without
limit or qualification, or the concurrence
of the Senate is made necessary to the
exercise of that power. If the Consti
tuition vests the power absolutely in the
President, then it is not competent for
Congress TO restrict, restrain, or limit it.
So, if the Constitution vests the power
in the President with the concurrence
of the Senate, ii is equally inadmisslble
for Congress to restrain or limit or re-
strict power thus vested in the Presi-
dent and Senate.
L
ence to those who think differently,
suppose that this is subject for legis
latiOn. suppose that Congress may
well enough prescribe term of office;
! but do not suppose that that touches
the question where the power of remov-
al resides. Congress may prescribe a
term of office; but if the Constitution
vests either in the President alone orin
the President and this body the right
| to rrmove, that power can be exercised
notwithstanding it may abridge the in
cumbency of any individual.
| say, then, Mr.. President, that we are
brought simply back to the original
question, is the power of removal vested
in the President alone, or is the concur.
renee of tAe Senate necessary to that
poweri 1t is not, in my humble judg-
ment, a question for legislation; it is
a question Of constitutional interpreta-
tinn. This being the case it seems to
me that there is but one OF two modes
to adept If in the opinion of this SEN
ate the power of removal is vested in
the President alone, then the civil ten
ure of Office act ought to be repealed. lti
i'm the opinion of the Senate he does
not possess that unqualified power, but
he assent of the Senate is necessary to
q removal, thCn l submit that the ten
ure of Office act or some similar law (
should stand Us the law of the land.
Why, Mr.. President, what is now pro
posed TO do ? To take neither one OF
these interpretations. | understand it
to be very truly stated by the Senator
from Illinois that a majority of this
body believe that the true interpreta-
tion of the Constitution requires the
concurrence of the Senate IN the re-
moval of an officer. If so, | submit to
honorable Senators how can they vote
re suspend this lawi There is one the
ery upon which they can vote for 1t
very well, one theory upon which they
can vote for the repeal of the tenure of
office act, aud that is that the
President of the United States will obey
the Constitution as they understand 1T;
that without any law rsn tho statute
book he will, in every Instance, submit
to the Senate the question OF removal
from office. Do Senator'S expect that !
Do they expect that the President will
interpret the Constitution as they inter
pret it, and act upon it as they think it
requiresi Do they eRect that every
removal from office will be submitted
to this body if the tenure of Office
act should be repealed If they
do not expect that, what,
then, do they propose to do' Do they
propose to suffer the President of the
United States to violate tie Constitu-
tion according to their interpretation
of shat instrument, OF what will they
do should he 80 violate it' Should he
so violate it, and should he be impeach
ed for that violation, what will be their
votes on the impeachment Will they
find him guilty or not guilty of an in.
fraction of the Constitution! If they
believe that lac has nOuuqualltied power
of removal, if they believe that the cop-
currcuce of this body is necessary in
every instance OF removal, how can
they say that he will be guiltless of
violation of the Constitution if he re-
move an officer without submitting the
question to the Senatei And yet is not
| that the object of the bill, to suspend
this act' Suspend it whyi Suspend
it for what 7 Suspend it that the Pres.
ident of the United States may exercise
! that absolute and unqualified power of
removal that was exercised before the
passage of the tenure of office act.
Now, sir, 1t does seem to me that it
will be regarded throughout the couu-
! try, if this bill be passed, that the SEN
ate ofrhe United States interprets the
| Constitution to mean one thing when
one man is President and interprets it
to mean another thing when another
man is President; and do most respect.
fully submit to this body THAI it is hard
ly consistent with its dignity, that it is
hardly consistent with the dignity of
the Congress of the United States, to
pass law like the tenure of Office act
after great and solemn consideration,
and the moment another President is
elected and installed into office TO suS-
pend the law aud make it dead letter.
Let this precedent be set, and what will
be the value of the claim of the Senate