Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1881-10-15
A President at Will.
Neto Orleans Picaysme.

<~0~pa---
A President at Will.
Netc Orleans PicGyGne.
The defects in our system of Presidential
succession were never more clearly por-
trayed than at the present time. Congress
In 1892, according to the direction of the
Constitution, declared the President pro tenn.
OF the Senate the next in line Of succession
to the Vice President.
While it but seldom happens that there is
not President pro tenn. of the Senate, the
peculiar character of that office ought to
have excluded the holder from any execu-
tive duties. It is established that the pre-
siding officer of the Senate does not cease
to be Senator or lose his vote, even when
acting as President of the United States.
His tenure is at the will of the Senate, and
there may be new one chosen during every
daY of the session.
In January, 1876, one of the ablest de-
bates Of recent years in that august body
was upon the character OF this office. Vice
President Wilson was dead, and the Presi-
dent OF the Senate pro tenn, Mr.. Ferry, was
the recognized successor to the executive
chair in case of the death of General
Grant. Mr. Ferry had been chosen at the
preceding session, and the question was
raised as to the necessity for a new cleo
ton.
Mr.. Morton, of the Committee on Privi-
leGes and Elections, submitted on January
10th a report reviewing the whole subject
and embracing the following resolutions:
l. Resolved That the tenure OF Office of the
President pro tempore of the Senate elected at
one session does not expire at the meeting of
Congress after the first recess, the Vice Presi-
dent not having appeared to take the chair.
2. ReSOlUed, That the death of the Vice Presi-
dent does not have the effect to vacate the
Office OF President pro tempore- of the Senate
3. ReS0lUed, That the office Of President pro
tempore Of the Senate is held at the pleasure
of the Senate
a. RESOLVED, That Hon. Thomas W. Ferry. a
Senator from Michigan, who was elected Presi-
dent pro tempore of the Senate at the last ses-
sion. is now the President pro tempore of the
Senate by virtue of said election.
The debate upon the third resolution
lasted for several days, and was participated
in by the ablest constitutional lawyers in
the Senate. 1t was finally adopted by a
vote of "a against Is, with % absent
Judge Merrimon, of North Carolina, a
superior jurisprudent, in the course of his
remarks, speaking of supposed and not i'm
possible cases, said:
Suppose the party majority here were two; ;
that three of that majority should die; how
would it comport with the dignity of this body,
its character its nature and its purposes, and
our system of government, for the minority,
thus turned into majority. at once and with
out cause to turn out the President pro tenn
pore and put in one to suit their will and plea
sure? Again, suppose in the faithful discharge
of duty the President pro tempore should feel
constrained to make a ruling distasteful to the
majority: how would it appear to see him
turned out of office by the arbitrary will of a
furious majority? A President pro tempore
thus at the will and pleasure of party or fac
tious majority would have a high temptation
to prostitute his office to base and ignoble DUR
poses"
The eech of Senator Jones, of Florida,
was very able. Indeed, It was perhaps the
most lucid and brilliant of the speeches de-
livered on this occasion. Remarking that
reasonable construction must decide the
question at ISSUE" he said
ut is not enough to say that the President
of the Senate, like the Sergeant alarms Of the
Senate, is an officer of this body, and because
she Sergeant-at-Arms may be removed by the
Senate, so may the President pro tempore be
removed. This mode Of reasoning would be
admissible il Congress, under the Constitution,
had not pointed out duties beyond the Senate
for the one officer In a certain contingency
which it has not prescribed for the other
This is the great point in my opinion, upon
which this debate must turn"
Further, considering the right of the SEN
ate to remove the President pro tempore at
at will, and quoting from a great master of
jurisprudence a definition of statutory law
(adroitly paraphrased from the great
Cicero's magnificent and perfect definition
of law in general, which latter includes ia
the conception both statute and moral lsw):
claw is rule of action prescribed by the
supreme power in the State, commanding
what is right and forbidding what is wrong"
Senator Jones proceeds:
''The law, then, designates the President pro
tempoFe of the Senate as the officer who shall
succeed to the Office in the contingency mem
toned. How will this law operate with the
right asserted on behalf of this body to re-
t,af ot sfc rata
that the law provides that If there be no Presi-
dent pro tempore of the Senate the Speaker of
the House shall act as President. All expe-
rience teaches us that nothing is more danger
GUS to the peace and security of nations than
those conflicts which arise out of disputes
about the right to the chief Office in the State n
The chief speakers In ths discussion of
January 18th were Judge Edmunds, of Yer.
mont; Senator Wallace, of Pennsylvania;
Governor Morton, of Indiana; Governor
Stevenson, of Kentucky, and Judge Thur
man, of Ohio. The debate was ON the third
resolution, "Thst the Office of President pro
tempore OF the Senate is held at the pleasure
of the Senate" In the midst of the re
marks of Judge Edmunds, Senator Wallace
inquired:
''Will the Senator from Vermont permit me
to ask him whether this resolution would cover
the case of the devolving of the Presidency of
the United States on the Incumbent of the
chair. the President of the Senate pro temporef
In other words, does he hold that the Senate
would have the power to change the President
pro tempore Of the Senate after the Presidency
of the United States had been cast upon him
by the operation of the act of 1792s''
The reply of Judge Edmunds, after
specifying with his usual astuteness that
the resolution did not touch that question
at all, was;
81 think the power OF the Senate over its
President pro teHa., which exists in the nature
of its own body and under the Constitution,
cannot be- cut short by any act OF Congress
whatever"
Explaining that he differed with the
opinion of the majority OF the committee,
Senator Wallace proceeded to speak of the
contemporaneous Interpretation of the
clause in the Constitution (article 2, sec
ton 1, clause 81, aud Of the intention of
the trainers of the Constitution.
Asserting his view that the Presi-
dent pro tempore of the Senate is an officer
OF the United States as well as of the Ser
ate, and speaking of the intention of the
trainers of the Constitution to place the pos
sible succession TO the Presidency only upon
an officer of the United States, he said: =
But we are not left to conjecture on this
subject, for in the debates during the passage
Of the act Of 1892 this very question was moot
ed. Pending the debate upon the bill it was
both asserted and denied that the President
pro tempore was an officer OF the United States
within the meaning of clause 5 of section Of
article 2; but after a prolonged struggle the
question was settled affirmatively, and the bill
became law. Both Roger Sherman and FL
bridge Gerry asserted the poaton that the
President pho tempore vas an officer OF the
United States, and the latter declared that the
Speaker of the House had equal dignity
Madison objected to the selection of the Presi-
dent pro tempore or Speaker for the success
sion, not because he was not an officer, but be-
cause if he became President be would be both
Senator and President, and might be instructed
by his State.1
Further along in she days discussion,
Governor stevenson asked Governor Morton
the following question;
Does the Senator from indiana sincerely
believe that the Senate OF the United States
would remove at its pleasure the President pro
tempore OF the Senate after he became Presi-
dent Of the United StatesS If the argument
in favor Of tne right Of the Senate to remove
the President pro tempore at its pleasure be
correct, the right TO remove him after he was
President would follow If not, why notY IN
deed, understood the hoporabIa Senator to
claim that this right Of the Senate to remove