Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-07-07
The Tenure of Office.

The Republicans are trying to put a
new meaning upon the Federal Consti-
tution-one that will enable the incum-
bents to hold on to the offices, or at
least such Of the Offices as are filled by
men appointed by and with the advice
snd consent Of the Senate. The Chi
cago Tribune has gone so far as to ex-
press the opinion that under the tenure
of-oflice act suspended officer resumes
his Office when there'is failure to con-
firm the nomination made by the Pre-
sident for successor to him.
That is to say, in the opinion of
the Tribune the President Of the United
States can remove no officer without
the permission Of the Senate. This
opinion is expressed in the face of the
practice of all the Republican Presi-
dents from GRANT down to ARTHUR,
and in face Of the fact that during
GRANTS Administration the tenure
of-office act was amended with the in
tention Of leaving no doubt whatever
on the point under consideration.
But even if the tenure-of-office act
contained provision declaring in so
many words that a suspended official
should resume his place when there
was failure on the part Of the Senate
10 confirm his successor, the President
would nevertheless possess the power to
appoint third man TO the office. It's i'm
possible fora mere act Of Congress torob
the President of power conferred upon
him by the Constitution Of the United
States, and conferred upon him because
it was absolutely necessary that the
Executive should have the right to
choose his own officers and select the
instruments wherewith to govern the
country and promote its growth, its
peace, and its prosperity.
According to the doctrine Of our
Chicago contemporary the President is
at the mercy Of thieves. That paper
holds not only that suspended officer
resumes his Office because the Senate
has refused to advise and consent to
the nomination Of the man recon-
mended as his successor, but that the
said officer cannot afterwards be sus-
pended nor removed by the Pre-
sident at oil !. lie may get
drunk, steal, cheat, defraud, do
what be will, and still retain his
Office in virtue of the facts, first, that
he has once been suspended, and, Sc
condly, that the Senate was not pleased
with the nomination made by the Pre-
sident to fill his place. The Senate
may have objected, not because that
body did not desire to have the sus-
pended officer kept ont Of Office, but
because the proposed successor was not
5 suitable person TO succeed him.
Thus the Chicago Tribune would not
only wrest from the President a power
granted to him by the Constitution Of
the United States, but would deprive
the Senate Of its constitutional right to
advise and consent, or TO refuse to ad-
wise and consent, to the Presidents
nominations. For il when the Senate
rejects nomination the old officer
resumes his place and cannot be
removed nor even suspended by the
President, then the Senate cannot in
contemplation Of law reject nom;na-
ton for any other than one reason
For whatever might be the real reason,
the reason acted upon would be the al
,sged desire Of the Senate to restore TO
Office the suspended officer. Ina word,
according to the teaching we are CON-
batting as upsound, the tenure-of-ofiice
aet Is doubly unconstitutional. II Is