The New York herald., 1869-03-18

limit the power q the Execut1v&s ~ 0e d tloee
the Tenure Of Once act py providine that commits %
sons should no longer be Issued 10 officers OF the
a thar 5s ssoaa SS &c Continue ssY's In ocs
during the pleasure OF the PRESIDENT but
should continue In iorge during good behavior
by the President except In pursuance OF the sentence
OF court martial or address 70 the PRESIDENT
history Of the u Country the leading statesmen had
learned and pro1ted by the great lesson OF AL
history-tbat the liberties OF q free nation are
always DESTROYED II destroyed at an by me sraduai
accrenon OF executive powers eliminating 10 des-
p0tisln. Passing to the history OF the tenure oi
ONCE act Itself he denied that It had been enacted
merely as checa upon President Johnson. The
republican party, when 1t had President IN Wnom
1t had the fullest confidence Mr. Lincoinl had
enacted q similar law, providing that the Comp
troller OF the Currency should not be removable
at the VIII OF the President alone. The fact was as
shown by the GtO6e that the Tenure OF once act had
been introduced and advocated and passed. not
merely TO check the maadministratton OF PRESIDENT
Johnson, but chiefly upon the ground tnat u miro TO
duced an honest and greatly needed reform In tie
administration Of the government IL was true tnat
immediate occasion for the enactment was the
conduct Of President Johnson IN removing rom
office men who had deserved well OF their country
and replacing them by men whose only merit was
that they had shed tears ct Phladepbis embraced
at Boston. lLaughtcr) But the act was, neyerthe-
less based upon great principle ana intended 20
continue in force after President Johnson should
have passed out OF 0ce as well as during his TERM
Senators who thought that the act had operated To
prevent reforms IN the public service should remem-
bnug IL Opcr8Jeu III TcStTlClOu upon TfCsA-
dent only during the recess. ~. ~ s..s
Mr.. MORTON, lrepl Of Ind asked whether, II 1t
was proper that the President should De restrained
from snspendng oficer during the recess except
for cause, the same principle should not govern him
during the session OF the Senate and whether, there
FORE, the law dm not operate upon him, at least
Mr. EDYuNDs agreed with the Senator from Indi-
ana Mr. MoItonl that the President had no night to
propose To the Senate to put man out OF an Office
and another into 1t except for cause, and the effect
OF this law was merely 70 put him during the recess
session OF the Senate. The statement that the law
had embarrassed the President in his attempts
s,, to reform the public service was shown 70 S be
tie passage Of the law ali recesses OF the Senate had
amounted TO only three hundred and twentv-tnree
days, while that body had been In session three hum
dred and ninety-tw0 days. giving the President
ample opportunity to avoid the embarrassment Of
making out "causes' for removal In recess by bring
ing the cases To the attention OF the senate during
iLe sessions
Mr.. InAYER, trep.) OF Neb, offered substitute for
The tenure OF certain civil 0fces Is hereby made and
declared to be imperative and void from and after
President shall report to the Senate within ten days
! from the beginning-of eacn session all appointments
I made by him during the preceding recess OF the
Senate which require confirmation by the Senate.
Mr. SHERMAN, trep.) OF Ohio spoke briefly In favor
OF the repeal OF the act He indicated some OF the
embarrassments caused to the President by the ope-
ration Of the Tenure Of Office act aud was proceed
I ing to speak or others when
Mr.. TRtMBULI, rep.) OF H., suggested that It was
under the operation OF the act, IN the Sen
ate seemed TO wish to keep 1t IN force.
MIR. SHERMAN--If understood the Senator from
Vermont (r. Edmunds, correctly he spoke for more
tnan two hours In advocacy OF the principles upon
4 which he says the net Is based.
| MI. TsUMBUIL-Yes) and he has Joined In the re-
port OF the committee recommending the suspension
I OF the act
MIR. SHERMAN continued his argument He held
the true constitutional principle TO be that the Presi-
dent has power 10 make absolute removals from
4 ONCE during a recess OF the Senate but can onl '
! ysean nf.tl<,
to be confirmed rejected by the Senate Its next
ensuing session. Ihe great reason for passing the
| sought by track to evade, ana did in many
| cases evade, this constitutional provision. IL ii
enact d civil service law, gcpera In its
provisions, and tl,is might guard against the abuse
| OF executive power 10y improper removals. If II
was right 10 suspend the law for year, il was. OF
course, equally repeal ii. II the law were re-
pealed for year General Grant might, II he chose,
/ remove everybody now IN oiice; and after that
should be done how could Congress deny the same
right TO succeeding administrations. The public
opinion Of the country demanded the repeal Of the
CURED with the Senate IN passing II, had already
manifested its Willingness to repeal the law. The
occasion Tor IL having passed, the Senate In consd-
ering the question OF repeal really sitting as
Judge Its case, and II 1t insisted upon the law
! SO from design 10 maintain for itself the excep
| uonai powers conferred upon 1t two years ago X
%ss ss spesal sena.er e~ssrsecy now happily
@ nad spoken much .,i, OF the the danger 60 the nb
erty Oh the country from the love or powes
i in the Executives but IL should be remembered
that senators generally were no more willing than
the President TO yield mp power once obtained. lie
cusson OF this question: to the character OF Presi-
dent Grant or hls wishes on the subject The Senate
was not required to grant HIM any special Iavor but
onIy 10 pui him in this respect upon the same foot
ing with AL the other Presidents, from Washington
70 johnson.
substitute. lie In favor Of IL because It removed
Of the strongest reasons that had been urged for
tue enactment u the law by requiring him To send
the nominations made by HIM during the recess to
the Senate within ten days after the beginning OF the
next session, instead OF leaving him ree to withhold
/ them until the end OF the session. He was M
favor Of the repeal Of tho law because 1t mad arisen
out OF stringent but temporary necessity, now past
probably to hn inexperiencc in legislative debaie,
he surprised 1T the course OF this discussion.
Much had M neen ~ sa,d about the high character and
ciated them more highly than he did, but they had
/ nothing to do with the question before the Senate
which was dry question Of law, namcIy-Where
| il the power OF removal under the constitution
Mr.. Carpenter then made an argument to show
remove pubic offcer exccpf NV ann VIM M,' ,ne no
advice and consent Of the Senate. There wen,
he said, few maxims OF constitutional
often forgotten. Among these were some when
bore directly upon the question under discussion.
Of the United States its several departments and
officers possess no power not expressly granted
resulting by necessary implication IRON the words
administration OF the government disclosed any de-
nciency OF necessary power In any department OF
the government the remedy was by amending the
constitution. The mere discovery Of the defect did
not authorize the department TO assume
the needed power. II the President might
usurp powers, because they seemed 70 him
necessary, he would soon become the peoples,
master Instead OF tneir servant. There were but
two provisions OF the constitution applicable TO the
determination OF the extent Of the power OF the
President In appointing to and removing from
Offices. The FIRST that authorizing the President
10 appoint ambassadors and other officers for whose
appointment the constitution Itself did not provide.
THIS provision contemplated two things-nomina-
tion and appointment The nomination was to be
made BY the President alone: the appointment
by and with the consent OF the Senate There being
no express provision for removal from otfce thai
power was evidently 70 be regarded as mere Incl
dent OF the powers OF appointments, It being necessa
~ that vacancy should exist before IL could bc
lIlcd Then since the power OF appointment be-
longed not 10 the President alone but to him and
the senate together, the conclusion was inevitable
that the other power implied In this power Of reno
val also belonged TO the President and Senate, acting
.euf..