Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-03-25

NOblb Nv Nh~ JN"' TNe
made by the Senate in this matter.
Mr.. Morgan discussed at some length
the question of constitutional limita-
tons on the President S powers to show
that they did not affect his power Of
removal and that his discretion in that
respect was absolute ; that 1t was purely
anexecutive function. Mr. Morgan said
it was shown by the plain fact that it i'm
piled the exercise of force when that was
necessary to dispossess an Objectionable
oiiice-holder. 1t was not to be sup
posed that the Constitution gave Con-
gross the power of impeachment by a
two-thirds vote if that power could be
asserted by a mere majority Of one
house, as was substantially attempted
in this instance. If the Republican po-
sition was now correct, the people In
order to effect change Of AdminIstra-
ton would not only have to elect a
President, but also to wait TIL the change
could be effected in political majority
OF the Senate.
Nlr. Mitchell, Of Oregon, cOncurred
in the report of the majority Of the com
mittee in so far as it asserted that 1t
vas the duty Of the executive officers
to furnish, when called upon by the
Senate, papers relating to the admins
tration of an Office by suspended
Official. lie would not be disposed to
insist. however. that the presence OF
such papers in the Senate was abso-
lutely necessary to the discharge by
the Senate Of its constitutional
duty in advising and consenting
10 proposed removals from Office.
With that qualification he cOncurred in
the report of the majority. lie be-
lleyed the Acknowledgement plainly in
error in refusing to furnish the papers
called for, but If called on to vote on
the series of the majority resolutions
as a whole he would do so reluctantly
and under positive protest. His only
hesitancy would be because Of the OBJ
ectionablc character of the resolution
/ which asserted substantially that
the absence of the papers called
for would be ground sufficient to
warrant the Senate in refusing
TO act on the nominations referred to.
So far as his vote, if given for the whole
series Of resolutions, was concerned,
while that objectionable resolution was
included, his vote must be considered
merely perfuactory and under decided
protest, and he would consider himself
TO be permitted further on to apply his
own construction TO that resolution.
When the nominations came to be con-
sidered be would reserve the right TO
exercise his individual judgment as to
such nominations.
Mr.. Mitchell believed that the Ad-
ministration had committed It's very
worst blunder in declining to furnish
PAPERS. but he was unwilling TO make
that error on the part of the Executive
who was striving, perhaps. to give the
country a good Administration, an eX-
cuse for still more serious error on
the part of the Senate. II would be
like the case Of the boy who refused tC
play because some other boy had made
a " mouth at his sister Laughter.
Mr.. Iloar declared similar indepcnd
ence to that Of Mr.. Mitchell in regarl
10 action upon each individual case as
presented. If satisfied that he possessed
facts in a case, refused or not refused
be would be inclined to act upon 1t
MIR. Hoar said he believed that three
lourths Of the Republicans in the Senat'
agree precisely with the constitutional
views as to the power Of remOva
that have been expressed with 81
much pains and so much repetition bJ
gentlemen on the oiher side. lie wa
himself. Mr.. lloar said, committed t
that doctrine over and over again. an
had introduced bill for the repeal o
the,enure- Of. office act, and if the Presi
dent had allowed the Attorney-Genera
I to send to the Senate the papers Gale
for he (Mr. Hoar) believed that tn
tenure-ol. office law would have been re
pealed by this time.
\ long colloQuisl debate followed
, in which Messrs. Gray and Edmlnl
, were the principal participants. /
, was directed to defining the contenuo
I of the Republicans that the act of II
moyal was not complete until the Sen
+ ate had advised and consented theret
by the confirmation Of successor.
Mr. Edmunds said that this was eN
, actly the position Of The Republicans.
Mr.. VOORHEES, obtained the floor, bJ
[ gave way for motion TO adjourn. II
{ will be the first to speak on the resolt
. ton tomorrow, and will be folloSe
E by Mr.. EvsrlS.
4 Adjourned.
q House o. Representative
Q Mr.. Anderson, OF Kansas, aske
: unanimous consent that an ord'
should be made allowing the CommittC
r on Labor TO report for action at an
r.. time mot to interfere with the reyent
f or appropriation bills legislation Il
e the purpose Of providing for arbitr
) ton in strikes on railroads.
q Mr.. 0'Neill, OF Missouri, though
q that the order should properly con
from the Committee on Labor.
y MIR. Randall, Of Pennsylvania, su
. gested that the subject was the sau
I whether it came from the committee
. an individual, and Mr.. Anderson poin
ed out its importance by stating tn
/. the whole Southwest was without
4 wheel for carrying freight.
a There was no objection, and the ord
r was made.
9 At the expiration OF the mOrni'
/. hour the House resumed the Indian a
a preparation bill. The pending questi'
r was on the point Of order raised ys
9 terday by Mr. Nelson, Of Minneso'
q against the appropriation for the Sale
I Indian school. Mr.. Nelson said tn
. be thought the committee was VITO
E yesterday in ruling ont the clause rel
0 tive to Captain Pratt, Of the Carii'
! Ipdisn school, end tbs Decision vas :
/ plicAbls y u pending clsuss but