The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-05-04
THE NEW ORLEANS DEMOCRAT, SUNDAY, MAY 4, 1879.
A RESPONSIBLE CABINET.

A RESPONSIBLE CABINET.
Whatever may Be the merits Of Mr.. Pendle-
toms proposition To give Cabinet officers seats
In Congress, with the privilege OF debate upon
all questions affecting their respective depart
ments. he was most unfortunate in the choice
OF time and opportunity to urge his proposed
innovation on long established American
usage At the time public attention WAS
absorbed by the more exciting party issue
presented in ths army bill, and it naturally
followed that Mr.. Pendleton's very able
speech was but coldly received and generally
regarded as comparative failure.
His project has not failed, however, TO at
tract public attention, and we are glad TO
note that 1t is very generally approved by the
press. There has been o growing sentiment
in this country for some years past that
graver responsibilities should be imposed
upon the heads OF departments than now at
tach to them, and that they should bs held to
some sort Of accountability. At the time
that civil service reform first began to be
agitated, just anterior to the last presidential
campaign, this question was very deliberately
discussed by the press, by which means at
tention was drawn to the differences between
| the structural organization and modes
OF operation Of our institutions and those OF
other Parliamentary countries, notably Of
England Mr.. Pendeton's scheme may be
regarded as. In measure, a result Of that
discussion. which has come in response to
the growing belief that, as nearly as our in
situations will admit OF 1t, the American
Cabinet should. In respect to its accountable
ity, be made to assImilate to that Of England.
Mr.. Pendleton very wisely recognizes In his
scheme the fundamental differences between
our government and that Of England. In the
latter country the presence of the British
ministry In Parliament Ia Indispensable.
They are, In fact, invariably members of
one or the other branch Of Parliament, and
are virtually appointed by the House Of Com
mons, since they remain In power only SO
long as they retain the support OF q majority
of that House. BY reason OF this fact the
Ministry has In charge all important legisla-
ton and Is held responsible for 1t. 1t Is, In
deed, the controlling power in legislation,
and 1t IL necessary for It's members to be on
the floor Of Parliament to urge and defend
the measures and policy Of the government
In this respect our institutions are
entirely different, and consequently no such
necessity exists for the presence on the floor
of Congress Of members Of the Cabinet, either
to urge or oppose legislation. Unlike the Brit
ish Ministry, the American Cabinet has nc
power to propose or initiate Legislation, and
their tenure Of office Is In no wise dependent
upon their being In accord with Congress
There Is broad line of demarcation between
the executive estate, of which the several
departments are constituent parts, and the
legislative, where all legislation must orig.
mate. That provision of the constitution
which provides that mo person holding any
Office under the United States shall be mem
Der 81 either house during his continuance
IN Office applies to Cabinet officers and for.
bids them to become members Of Congress.
The constitution says that the President
himself "shall, from time to time, give to the
Congress information Of the state OF the
Union and recommend to their consideration
such measures as he shall judge necessary
and expedient;" but, whether his recommen-
dations shall be acted upon or not Is entirely
discretionary with Congress, which may OF
may not take them under consideration. as II
chooses. The executive department, neither
! by Its head nor any Of Its members, can &c
J into Congress and agitate any measure the
President may see fit to recommend.
Mr.. Pendleton recognizes this wide dlstinc.
ton. and he very wisely refrains from any
attempt at fundamental change Of our In.
stitutions. The change which he proposes
contemplates no amendment Of the constltu-
ton, nor any alteration or embarrassment Of
the independent relations existing between
the several estates Of government. Its sole
object Is to require the communications id
dressed to Congress by the heads Of depart
ments to be oral instead Of written.
There Is no violation of the constitution in
this, yet Mr.. Morrill,, Of Vermont seeing how
easily this proposition might be misrepresent-
cd as an attempt to engraft upon our institu
tons monarchlcal customs, could not resist
the temptation TO 80 charge In his opposition
to 1t. In his speech upon this subject, In reply
to Mr.. Pendleton, he said that "the depart
ments were not the creatures OF Congress, te
be expanded at will, but were created by the
constitution" This assertion displayed Q
; phenomenal ignorance on the part Of Mr.
Morrill,, who, we believe Is q lawyer
while he is certainly O Senator. There is not
In the whole constitution the slightest refer
, ence to any particular one Of these depart
ments. Certainly none Of them have beer
created by that instrument, On the contrary
the departments are all the creatures b
Congress-" and there can be no manner o
doubt of the control over them by Congress
: Congress created them, prescribes their func
tions, and may expand or limit or abolist
them. as it may deem most expedient, with
out any other formalty than is neces
>, sary TO the passage Of any other ordinar,
legislation. In the act Of the first Congress
organizing the Treasury Department, the Sec
rotary Ii required to report to Congress, al
8 person or In whiting. as may be required;
Q and certainly what Congress had the RICH
8 to require of this department it may exac
J OF all others. There Is no reason then, VIII