National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-03-10

hUOW Muhb utNhllt VI lN NOhlh ~ Nt |
within the power Of the Secretary Of State
or the President Of the United States TO
say MOP II so, we had better be extremely
careful hereafter as to how much money
VIC put into the contingency fund for
foreign intercourse. The improvement in
public methods so far as we had yet gone
would seem to be chiefly and most con
splcuously the suppression and conceal
ment Of public papers with the best inten-
tions undoubtedly but Mr.. Edmunds would |
repeat that for the first time In forty years
or more, so far as he had been able TO ais
cover, had either house Of Congress failed |
to get the information IL had asked for !
from the public departments of the gov |
Why, in respect OF this very instance, |
which illustrated the Importance of standing |
up for this right Of good government, when
this resolution was sent to the Attorney
General there was pending in another
branch Of Congress billlprovding for a de-
fccncy Of about $lS5, O0Oin the Department
Of Justice for fees Of jurors and witnesses,
and there was there, without doubt, a letter
Of the Attorney General stating that there
must be added for this current fiscal year,
ending on the 30th Of June next-a year
covering twelve months OF purely Demo
cratic control--a deficiency Of $ls5,OOO. II
the case of Duskln was fairly illustrative Of
the circumstances OF all the dis
trict attorneys and marshals OF the
United States-everything that went TO
make up the autonomy Of the administra-
ton Of justice-.then we have drawn In the
| question what has become OF the money
| that was appropriated at the regular session
to carry on the administration Of justice
| through the Department Of Justice in the
| United States9 Duskin was one of the per-
sons who were to draw upon that fund. In
| that district he was the very person whose
agency more than that Of any other man
| NpAN M n un nnnnnmtNul ~
| gant-n Just or an unjust-eXpenditure
| of the public money. Could we not know
| ANYTHING about itY Take the other sixty or
seventy districts In the United States. If IL
were denied to us, MS TO Duskln, IL must be
denied rs to Dorshclmer and as to Henry
| (the marshal OF NormOnt), and every other
marshal and every ether district attorney.
What, then, were we TO dop II we had
passed this resolution while we were acting
In n legislative way-as II there were any
difference In the Senate, whether sitting
with open or with closed doors-if we had
sent precisely this resolution and applied II
| TO all the districts In the United States-if
the Attorney General and the President
were right now they would be right then In
saying, mo; we can give you no informa-
tion, because II we do you may be able to
know the reasons why so many OF these
marshals and district attorneys have been
suspended and that is purely within the
States. That was the logic Of our good
friends, the minority of the committee, and
their good friend and ally, the President of
the United States, who, with o courage
certainly unique, had interjected his sup
Elementary report to the report Of the mi
nority committee before the Senate had even
considered 1t. Was 1t possible to carry on
the government in that way2 lie (Mr. Ed
munds) thought not.
So far as the constitutional relations
between the two houses Of Congress and
the executive department OF the govern
ment and their respective rights to informa-
ton or tho denial OF It depend upon
whether one house or the other was acting
at the time of its call with its doors closed,
why there were no two bodies here, there
were no two jurisdictions here. The Senate
was one. There was, about fifty years ago,
n very celebrated senator from a southern
state, who, on q similar occasion, In an eX-
ecutive session concerning the Panama
mission-Mr. Hayne, of South Carolina
discussing a resolution which 1t was pro-
posed the Senate should adopt, for the pur-
pose of getting possession of all the facts
relating to an assembly OF congress Of
South American and Central American
states and the United States-some very
Jealous friends Of the President apparently
opposing the resolution-said "howcver
, gentlemen may be enamored OF this new
doctrine Of confidence in rulers, 1t Is not the
= ground / apprehend on which the Senate
= ought to act In fulfilling their constitutional
= duty Of lgiving advice to the President
r If we are to act by faith.and not by knowl
Q | edge we have no business to be here.n HI
l (Mr. Edmunus) thought 50 too. knowledge
was denied, and II the Senate acted In the
direction that the Attorney General and the
| President desired 1t to act in putting
through these G43 or $50 removals and APP
? pointments, by faith and not by knowl-
| al tban ha of,ranl with Snpafpr IUoupn
= that tive have no business to be here" He
would say, In fairness to the gentlemen on
the other side, the minority, as they say In
their report that theIehad beenno instances
: Of calling for papers in such case as this
0 that had been obeyed until 1867, that II was
J true, because until 1867 there was no statute
: | authorizing the President to suspend any
I official at all. 1t was therefore to him q
I perfectly easy and safe proposition, that
a | until 1861 no case OF q call for papers had
: appeared in which the President or head
C OF department had acceded to the demand
j Perhaps the minority had simply meant tC
say that the Senate had never, with
C his reasons for removal, In 1881
z President jackson removed a surveyor gen
Q eral-a man named WirtZ-as he had thu
Q lawful right to do. He had not "sus
4 pcndedn him-there was no law for suspen
s sions. He appo9inted to I'll the vacancy
J. man named Williamson. The Senate called
II on the President for papers and informa
@ ton regarding the removal Of Writ. TIL
President replied in characteristic mes
Il sage, saying In substance that that was on
j. OF the numerous calls made on him by tn
r Senate which he had hitherto complied with
d but he was going to stop now; that he ha'
Q removed Mr.. Wirtz as he had right to do
II and the reason was none OF the Senate
IS business. The Senate next day with but
h division rejected Mr.. Williamson, although
+ In the very message In which the Preslden
C said he would not tell anything about wha
If Wirtz had been doing, he took particula
pains to say that Williamson was one o
y the best qualified and most valuable per
Is sonages he had ever known. That was tn
10 end Of the affair between President Jacl,
Is son and the Senate on the subject of paper
10 about appointments.
). Down to that time every species of infor
If nation touching foreign affairs of til
II most delicate misunderstanding the opei
4 ations Of the army-touching every par
Is Of the administration that belonged not +
10 the Senate but to the President, and to til
le President just as exclusively as did th
V, power of removal or suspension. Pres
or dent jackson, like all his predecessors, an
like all his successors tuntil to-day, fel
ct bound to furnish to both houses Of Congress;
~ Mr.. Edmunds cited and commented on
ut large number Of instances gathered fror
a. the journals of Congress, in which, by resC
Mt luton and otherwise, Congress had Gale
ut on the President or heads of department
c. for information and papers respecting
te great variety OF topics, and got what
IS called for
- Here, he continued, was a series of prect
to dents covering, he would say, every charat
IS ter OF information; private papers Gale
ey for by express resolution Of the Senate
We private letters written to the President {
a the United States by some minister Of I'll
he United States upon topic that the Senat
y, thought itself entitled to know about