The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1885-07-09
The Status of Suspended Officials.

The Status of Suspended officials.
1t has been quite generally assumed, that I'M
der the Tenure-of-ofice act, an official who is
suspended by the President during the recess of
the Senate is not restored to office by the failure
of the Senate to approve the new appointment
of the President. This is question which is
pretty certain to be raised when the Senate
again meets. An Illinois Postmaster, for ex-
ample, with an excellent record, was recently
removed, and his place was given to a man who
turns out to have been dismissed from the army
and to have been twice under indictment for
completely in whskey frauds. Suppose that the
Senate should decline to give its consent to such
an extraordinary act of administrative re-
form as that, and should reject the Presidents
nomination, would the suspended officer be
thereby restored to his place:
The Chicago Tribune, which maintains the
affirmative Of this question, goes back for evil
dence to the debates when the Tenure-of-office
act was passed. Mr.. Trumbul reported the bill
to the Senate, and in so doing, on March 81
1869, he made the following lucid explanation
fits provisions:
This leaves the law in this shape: The first
section of the act provides that all persons al,-
pointed by and with the advice and consent of
the Senate, except Judges, shall hold their Of
flee during the term for which they were APP
pointed unless sooner removed by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate, except as is
provided in the next section.
The second section authorizes the President
of the United States, during recess of the Sen
ate. to suspend from office any officer appoint
ed by and with the advice and consent of the
81 n ne v al
Senate, and requires him, within thirty days
after the meeting of the Senate, to make NOM
nations in place of all suspended officers; and
now there is added to that provision that, if
such "a nomination is not approved, he shall, as
soon as practicable, make another nomination;
aud. AS matter of course, If none of the nOmi-
nations are approved, hiS authority To suspend IN
der tie lttU erpGts arth tie session, AND THE OLD
OFFICER TAKES POSSESSION OF THE OFFICE.
The only change made is this AS the bill pass
ed the Senate it required Il positive affirmative
vote on the part of the Senate disagreeng to
the suspension before the old officer could go
back. As the Committee of Conference report
it, the officer would go back at the end of the
session unless somebody else was confirmed in
his place. Tie deth0lttg of tie President 10 SuS-
pend erteds to tie ehd of lie session. aud no tarther
asd, Of course, tie otd cce uen tAes possession q
tie oDice."
Ii would appear from this that In the event
of failure on the part of the Senate to approve
of the change of officers, the former official
would resume his place. 1t would be possible,
of course. for the President to suspend him
again after the adjournment of the Senate, but
this would be SO tlagrant an attempt to evade or
nuify the law that few Presidents would I'M
dertake it. Upon this point, Senator Trumbu
said:
And would it not be trifing with the legis-
laton of the country, h'iftng riM that ooM rhtch
Me Pfestdeat takes to that tie lars are ttt,th6lig
executed, if the moment that, by the execution
of the law, an officer was restored to his form
er position, he atoad again suspend him? THIS
WOULD BE THRILLING WITH THE STATUTE, ant
hare ditogetter too march confidence tie President
OF tie IAtted Stales to think for neoment that lie
roNid do, OF attempt 10 do, atty SAch Mutg.... The
presumption is that, when the Senate had dis
tincly refused to confirm an officer appointed
in lieu of a suspended officer, and had also by
its vote declared that that officer ought not to
have been suspended, NO PRESIDENT would
think, the moment the Senate had adjourned,
in defiance of lis action, of again suspendng
the officer who was by law restored to his
former position, unless t was for some cause
subsequently arising"
These citations make it clear that it was the
intent of those who framed and advocated this
law that it should protect officials from arbitra-
ry suspensions by the President. Boston
journal.
| Webb telegraphs the Boston journal from
| Washington:
| The United States flag was not displayed on
the Fourth of July from all the departments.
! 1t was visible over the Treasury; but there
| was no flag raised over the Department of
Justice. The reason assigned is that the At
torney General went fishing. But it is not
understood that Mr.. Garland himself generally
raises the flag. There was no flag raised over
the Interior Department. The reason given is
that Mr.. Lamar has the malaria; but Mr.
Lamar does not raise the flag. Care enough
was taken to see that the flag was lowered.
when Jake Thompson died.