The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1881-05-19

norant Of n purpose 10 take any aciio
now. wo bad no opportunity VII sfte
The Nominations, TO mako any suggestions
We now present that NO do not believe th
interest VI the pu' lie service will DO pro
NOTED by removing the present c~Ollecto
and putting Mr.. Robertson 10 his stead
Our opinion IL quito the reverse, and "
believe no practical advantage can be game
for either the republican party or its princi
| ples, believing that no individual has claim
or obligations which should b
liuuidated in such n manner. We %earnestl,
aud respectfully urge shat the nomination Q
Robertson he withdrawn.
CHESTER A. ARTHUR.
Il. q. PLATT,
THOMAS +. JANIS.
RoscoE CoNKLINa."
The following is the remainder of the lei
ter of resignation of United States Senator:
| Conkllpr and Plat, the first part of which
WAS printed yesterday:
This paper was ~p-e'ented by Mr.. James OF
Monday, the 10th day of March. Knowing
The frequency with which every ont
Of the twenty presidents Of the republic, and
markedly the present incumbent, had with.
drawn nominations for less serious repre-
sensations, we did not apprehend that such
suggestion would be treated rs all intrusion
or IN invasion of any prerogstive
of the nominating power. We we'e disap-
pointed. Immediately the public press, even
articles and dispatches written by those in
close and constant association with the
president and with en- Influential member
of his cabinet, teemed with violent denuncia-
tons of the senators from New York for
opposing the administration aud debating
to the president.
Persons Who visited the executive
man,ion reported the president as re-
sentful and impatient, hesitating to
advise and consent to the whole. We had
no assault to make on any one. Wehavo at all
tunes refused to ans'er questions By
representatives Of the press or to make
complaint or comment or even
= denial of mspy RUTHLESS
charges against us by officers and champions
of the administration; indeed beyond
confidential consultation with brother sena-
tors and officials we have ssid nothing till
now on the subject, nor have We or eitner of
us promoted the deadlock in the senate in
order to prevent or influence action
on any nomination, nor have we
ever so stated. Immmediately after the
nominations were published, letters and telc-
grams 10 great numbers came from every part
of the state, from its leading citizens, protest
ing against the changes and condemning them
on many grounds. Several thousand of the
leading mercantile firms of New York con.
shutting, we are informed, Il majority of
every branch Of trade, sent us
remonstrances. Sixty Of the eighty-one
republican members of the assembly by
letter or memorial, made objections to the
republicansi 10 congress. State officials, bust
ness men, professional men, commercial,
industrial and political, are among the
remonstrances They speak from every
section OF the state.
Besides the nominations already referred
to there were awaiting the action of the
senate several citizens of New York named
for office connected with the courts, district
attorneys and narshals. These were ell
appointments. Most of them had been
originally commissioned by Mr.. Hayes and
were certified by judges of the courts, aud
attested to the faithfulnH:s
and worth of the services, and recommended
their c%ontinuances. They were not pre-
sented by us. We have not attempted to
dictate, nor have we ssked the nomination of
one EGIspu W Any tIltt VI tuO EbatSs u
deed, with the sole exception of the
written request we set forth above,
we have never even expressed an
opinion of the president in any case, unless
questioned in regard to it. Some days ago
the president abruptly withdrew, in one and
the same act, the names of Hon. Mr.. WooG-
ford and Mr.. Tenny for .Ae two marshslabips.
This unprecedented proceeding, whether
,,arr icsih1a hi lam or not Uas cravplU
signiicsnt--to prohibit the nominations
OF these officers after they bad been weighed
in the balance of Official records which were
before him and had been fully scrutinized
and approved. Il must be presumed that he
thought tho nominations fit 20 be made and
that it was his duty to make them.
There are no allegations that
he discovered u~nftness in
them afterwards. 1t could hardly be that
he had discovered unftness in al of them
alike. What, then, was the meaning and
purpose of the p%eremptory step?
II was Immediately stated, MS
If by authority, and seemed to be
that the purpose was to coerce the
senate or senators TO vote as they would not
vote If left from executive interference. The
design was TO control the senators touching
committed by The constitution 10 The
senate, and to the senate exclusively. 1t had
been suggested in addition that
by recalling those nominations
and holding them in his own hand the
president might in the event If failure of
nomination, use them to compensate
that failure. Can it be supposed that all
these public trusts are TO be or would in any
event be made personal perquisites 10 be
and disposed %, not only TO
punish the independence of the senator's
votes or action, but to liquidste
obligations of any individual, how
sver high in station The conditions are
obvious and degrading in their ac-
ceptsnce,a aud would compel representatives of
10 fling aside their oath ard report for
duty at the footstool of the executive power.
Following this startling and sweeping
act. came ominous avowals that
dissent or failure to advise and ~cOnsent would
be held as an act Of o%fense, exposing all
from whatever state 10 the executive
iis pleasure. Thus we find ourselves con-
by the question, which shall
surrender, plain right and sworn DUTY OF
by coneenting 10 what we believe TO
be vicious and hurtful, or be assigned a po-
of disloy atty 10 the administration
which we helped 70 bring In and the success
which we earnestly looked for eve
and move which can enter the csge. We |