The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-03-24
The Senate Debate.

The debate in the United States SEN
ate on the issue with the President was
continued last week Tuesday by SEN
ator Cullom of Illinois, who contended
that the refusal of the encouragement
to furnish the papers called for by the
senate was denial of the constitu-
tional right of that body to inquire into
the management of a public office. He
was willing to allow large latitude to
the President in that matter, but as a
very hungry and very thirsty crowd
were clamoring for seats at the official
feast there was danger that falsehood
or even perjury might be resorted to.
Senator Dolph of Oregon expressed
similar views, and dwelt particularly
on the fact that the provisions of the
law intended for the protection of
SCARED and disabled veterans of the
Union army had been disregarded by
this administration.
Senator Morrill, of Vermont corrected
certain statements of Senator Kenna in
regard to the action of the senate
finance committee upon suspensions of
internal revenue collectors; and said
that, under the law, it was perfectly
clear that the senate had a right to call
on the secretary to come before any
committee or furnish papers.
On Wednesday Senator Coke of
Texas was the first speaker He
argued that the Constitution did not
provide for the consent of the senate
to be given to removals from office.
Senator Beck next took the floor, and
declared that the suspended official,
Duskin, was known to be unfit for the
place he occupied, and that this fact
was well known to the republican sena-
tors. Mr.. Beck and Mr.. Edmunds had
some warm words over the alleged di-
vulgence of business transacted in ex-
ecutive session.
The debate was resumed on Thurs
day, when Senator Van Wyck of Ne
braska offered an amendment to the
pending resolutions that in all cases of
removal the matter of combinations
shall be considered in open sessions of
the senate. Senator Spooner of Wis
consin then discussed the question
from legal point of view, and claimed
the power of removal, as well as of ap-
pointment, was in the President and
senate acting together. Mr.. Spooner
did not conclude his speech until Fri
day. He maintained the constitution
atty of the tenure-of-office law, but be-
lieved that the administration had the
right to fill the offices with its friends.
He did not believe in divorcing the
offices from politics and putting ma
chimes in office. Honest partisanship
was honest citizenship. Under the
Presidents idea of offensive partisan
ship' the new democratic oflice-hold-
ers could be embalmed and laid away,
and their wives allowed to perform the
duties of office, in order that there
might be no suggestion that the office
holders could by any possibility be
" offensive partisans." Every man
suspended had the right to know why
he was suspended. Senator Salisbury
of Delaware claimed that the matter
under discussion was not within the
jurisdiction of the senate, and that the
tenure-of- act was unconstitu-
tional. The Constitution, he said,
placed the power of removal solely in
the Presidents hands and the decisions
of the courts had been uniformly to
that effect.
On Monday Senator Colquitt of
Georgia opposed the majority report,
and argued that it had been settled re-
peatedly that the right of removal was
wholly in the President. Senator Jack
son of Tennessee followed with a SINH
lar argument. Senator Logan offered
a resolution that executive sessions, so
far as they apply to nominations, con-
firmations or reflections, shall hereafter
be held with open doors. A letter from
Secretary Manning was received de-
Ginning to furnish the papers in the case
of Collector Wells. The resolutions
are likely to be brought to vote to-day
or tomorrow. 1t is rumored that Mr..
Edmunds has been persuaded by sew
eral senators to offer substitute for
the second resolution, which states that
no nomination shall be confirmed where
information is refused.