Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1881-07-21
IRONTON NO. THURSDAY. JULY o. 1881

delivery of commission to an officer
after it has been made out. The case
went out Of Court for want Of original
Jurisdiction; but the Court expressed
the opinion that the Withholding the
commission was violation Of a legal
right. The denial of the right of the
President to withhold the commission
was equal to q denial of his power of
removal.
Whilst the recent jog at Washington
was not a matter Of mere personal
spleen, it is very far from being fair
presentation of the question of the
Presidents power of removal, which
was really the original question at
stake. Instead of contesting the right
of the President to administer the civil
affairs of the nation OH military princi-
piles, his opponents raised the question
whether the dlspensation of the FEEDER
al patronage in a State should be in the
hands of the President or in those of the
Senators from that State. That is to
say, the question raised is whether the
disposition shall be in the hands of one
man, or in those of commission. So
far as the real principle involved is con-
cerned there is no difference. In thus
ignoring the real question at issue, MIR.
Conkiing committed the worst blunder
of his life. In this instance he sinncd
against what should have been to him
light and knowledge.
Fifty years ago, when the anti-slav-
cry people petitioned Congress to abol-
sh slavery in the District of Columbia,
Il vigorous move was made in that body
to have those petitions thrown out as
incendiary documents. John Quincy
Adams displayed real generalship. He
came squarely and unanswerably to the
front, not as the advocate OF the aboli-
ton of slavery, but as the champion of
the right of petition. The eventual alb
clifton of slavery in the district was the
drop in the bucket and the small dust
of the balance among the points he
gained.
Now if Mr.. Conkling had attacked
the right Of the President to remove
arbitrarily a regularly appointed and
confirmed official, his base of supplies
would have been in the whole scope
and genius of our political institutions.
The Tenure-of- Office Bill would have
been for him an imptegnable field
work; and standing as he would have
done squarely on the Democratic
ground of resistance to Capitalization,
he could have secured their assistance;
or if that was withheld, he could have
captured and moved their artillery
himself, and they could not have car
ried one gun etf the field.
AS it was the question of centraliza-
ton was not referred to, at least not
made prominent, the Democracy did
not need to act, and wisely forbore to
do so. Mr.. Conkling retired to private
| life, and the President carried his
poinr.
Mr.. Conkling erred in that he did
not set all his lights ahead SO that all
the shadows in the case-his own in
cluded-might fall behind him. There
are five present truths of which he
seems to be densely ignorant. One o
these is that there is revolution com.
ing in the near future. Another truth
is that revolutions never go backward
and that when revolution is devel
oped three courses are open to all con
cerned-they must study carefully the
trend of the revolution, keep ahead o
it, and let it follow and support them
for if it overtakes, it will Overwheln
them, and if they resist it, they will b'
destroyed.
In casting the horoscope of the flu
ture, it is to be remembered that actor
and reaction are always equal and op
posite. The last grand national rally
took place on Republican ground, th'
War-Democracy coming over. WheT
the next one comes the sun will toucl
the other tropic. The steady quie
patience of the Democracy, like TIM
"Grand Hesileon" of the North, ii
the early days of the war will no
be of any benefit to their oppo
nents.