The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1881-05-26


send them had been made to him, and that the
first he kneW-Of the matter was by hearsay.
Following this event, after earnest reflection
and consultation, we believed the pr oceeding
unwise and wrong, whether considered wholly
in relation to the preservation and integrity of
the public service and public example
to be set, or in relation also to the
integrity of the Republican party. No public
utterance of comment or censure was made by
either of us in the Senate or elsewhere On
the c)ntrary, we thought that the President
would reconsider the action so sudden and
hasty, and would at least adopt less hurtful
and obectiona bic mode of requesting personal
or individual service. In this hope the follow
ing paper was prepared and signed and pre-
sented by Mr.. James to the President, who
was subsequently informed that you had au-
thorized your name to be added also.
TO the President:
We beg leave to remQnstrate against the change in
tie collectorship at New York by the removal of
Mr.. Merit end appointment OF Mr.. Robertson. The
proposal wholly surprise. We heard of it only
when several nominations involved In tho plan
announced in the Senate. We had only two days be-
fore this been informed from you that change in
the custom Off. es at New York was not contemplated,
and quite ignorant OF tue purpose to take any ctiou
now. We had no Opportunity until after the nomina-
ton to make the suggestion We now present We do
not believe that the interests Of the public servic,
wi be promoted by removing the present collector
and uttIng Mr. Robertson In his st ad. Our opin-
ion is quite the Ieverse. and believe political
advantage an be gained for either the Republican
party its prisci les. Believing that individual
has claim or Obligation which should be liauIat d
IN sue a mode, We rresty ana respeciruiy isl.
that he nomination OF Nj Robertson De withdrawn.
(Signedl CEE,rER A. ARTHUR,
G. RLATT,
Ills. L JAMES,
ROSCOE CoNkLI
This paper was presented to the President
by Mr.. James Monday, the 25th day of March.
Knowing The frequency with which every one
of the twenty of the Presidents of the repub-
lie, and markedly the present incumbent, had
withdrawn nominations on less serious repre-
sentatious, we did not apprehend that sucha
suggestion would be treated as an intrusion
or invasion OF any .prerogative OF
the nominating power We were
disappointed. immediately the public
press, especially in articles and dispatches
written by those in close and constant associa
tion with the President and with influential
members Of his cabinet, teemed with violent
denunciatlons of Senators from New York for
opposing the administration and debating
to the President.
Persons who visited the executive mansion
reported the President as resentful and i'm
patient of dictation, to what he proposed. We
had made no assault upon anybody. We have
at all times refused to answer questions by rep
resentatlves of the President or make com
plant or comment, or even denial, of many
truthless charges published against us by Off
ciOus champions of the administration. In
deed, beyond confidential consultation with
brother Senator's and officials, we have said
nothing till now on the subject, nor have we,
or either of us, promoted the deadlock IN the
Senate in order to prevent or influence action
on any nomination, nor have we ever so
stated.
Immediately the nominations were pub
lshed, letters and kilograms in great numbers
came from every part of the State, from Its
leading citizens, protesting against the pro-
losed changes, and condcmning them on
many grounds. Several thousands of leading
mercantile firms of New York, constituting,
we are informed, a majority of every branch
sixty of the eighty.one of the
Republican members of the Assembly, by
letter or memorial made objection. Republic
cans in Congress, State officials, business men,
professional men, com mercial, industrial and
political organizations, are among the remou-
strants, and they speak from every section of
the State.
Besides the nominations already referred to,
there were awaiting action Of the Senate sew
eral citizens of New York, nominated for Of
fees connected with the courts, district at
pointments. The most of them. had
been originally commissioned by Mr.
Hayes. They were recommended by
nd ges of the court, and many other eminent
persons who attested their faithfulncss and
merit, and recommend their continuance.
They were not presented by us. We have not
attempted to dictate, nor have we asked tho
nomination of one. person to any office in the
State Indeed, with2 the exception of
the written request set forth
above, we have never even expressed an opin-
ion to the President in any case, unless ques-
toned in regard to it.
Some days ago the President abruptly with.
6cay in oaI In .< %lo,,
Gen: Woodford, Mr.. Tenny, and of two mar
shals. This unprecedented proceeding,
whether permissible by law or not, was
gravely significant. The President has nomi-
mated these officers after they had been
weighed in the balance. Their official records
were before him and had been scrutinized and
approved. 1t must be presumed he thought
the nominations fit to be made and that
1T was his duty to make them. There is no
allegation that he discovered any unfitness in
them afterwards. 1t could hardly be that he
had discovered nnftness in all of them alike.
What then was the meaning and purpose of
this peremptory stcp9 1t was immediately
stated, as if by authority, and seems to be adj
mlttee, that the purpose was to coerce the Sen
ators to vote as they would not vote if left
free from executive interference. The design
was to control the action of the Senators
touching matters committed by the constitu-
ton to the Senate and the Senate exclusively.
IL uuS uccil SugStSteu IN aQultlOn JQaG ny re-
calling these nominations and holding them
in his own hands, the President might in the
event of failure of another nomination use
them to compensate that failure.
If it can be supposed that ali these public
trusts are to be, or would in any event be made
personal perqusites to be handled and
disposed of, not only to punish
the independence of Senatorial votes and &C
ton, but to liquida,e the personal bligations
of any individual however high in station,
the conditions are utterly vicious and de-
grading, and their acceptance would compel
representatives, of the States to fling down
their oath and representative duty at the foot
stool of executive power. Following this
sweeping and startling executive act
came ominous avowals that dissent or future
''adverse CONSENT would be held an act of Of
Tense, exposing all Senator's, from whatever
State, to executive displeasure.
Thus we find ourselves confronted by the
question whether we shall surrender the plain
right and duty of Senators, by consenting to
what we believe to be vicious and hurtful, or
be assigned position of disloyalty to the ad-
ministruton which we helped 70 make ,and the
success of which we earnestly wished.
For every reason and motive which can
enter into the case, we know no theory
advanced by any party which requires such
submission as was eXacted.
Although party service NAV he fairly con.