St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-03-19
The Deadlock Between President and
Senate Discussed by the Junior SEN
ator From Wisconsin,
Who Maintains That Certain Statutes Have
Not Yet Fallen Into Innocuous
Desuetude.
Pan-ElectrIc Rogers Asserts That
Garland Was vi can When He Might
Have Been Generous.
A Satirical Canto Which Causes a
Great Deal of Merriment in the
Committee.
A Word From rIr. spoouer

was agreed to, as also was that of Mr.
Hoar To make the bankruptcy bill a special
order for March 81. The urgent deficiency
bill came up. and the senate agreed with
the house that certain items of the Grant
funeral expenses should be stricken out.
The remaining senate items were insisted
on. y bill was passed providing for COM
mission to investigate the alcoholic liquor
traffic, its relations to revenue and taxa
ton and its general economic, criminal,
moral and scientific aspects. The bill pro-
viding for the study in the schools of the
territories and the District of Columbia of
the nature OF alcoholic stimulantS and mar
cOticS also passed. The Edmunds reSOu-
tlons then came up. Mr.. Van Wyck
offered an amendment as follows: '.And
in all such cases of removal the confirmation
shall be considered in open session of the
senate" Mr.. Brown opposed the Edmunds
report. The constitution, he said, gave the
president absolute power of removal. The
senate might as Well attempt to review the
acts of the supreme court. 1t would be
quite as reasonable for the president TO ask
the senate its reasons for rejecting a nomi-
nation. The people were the high court,
and they blamed the president more for his
sins of omission than his sins of commission.
They would have been better pleased had
clean sweep been made.
THE WISCONSIN JUNIOR REMARKS.
Mr.. SpOOner took the tCOr in support of
the majority report. He said:
VIII make no attempt TO disguise the fact
or apologize for IL thar the fortunes o. the
Republican party are very dear TO me. 1
will not attempt to deny that ! wish that that
party might, here ana elsewhere, reap every
fair party advantage which might be taken
from the bluuderS and shortcomings If any
such there were, o. this admin tIat on. But
trust that do not forget ana shall not for
get that am a senator OF the United States
as well as Republican, and that rs u senator
my first duty always is u the people, and
that have no right TO take action ere TO
subServe party interest which would be
harmful To the interests OF the people. 1
deny that the Republican majority of the
senate desire 10 hamper the resident. and
after reading the senate II Solution calling
for the papers in the Duskin case. and the
attorney generals reply to il. characterize
the letter as the most remarkable response
ever made from an exc Ccutive officer to a leg
tslative BODY The attorney general has not
denied the eXis elce OF the Ea)ers called for
but contendCd tuat the papers were private
papers and said. substantially, that rs the
papers were called for by the sena-e for
special purpCse, namely, to b. con sidered in
relation 10 a suspension, the senate was not
entitled to them. Has it come TO this, that
the senate must,
WITH EASTERN sALAAM,
approach the door of the department. bound
to disclose, first TO the attorney general and
then 10 the president, the precise purpose for
which the papers were desired, under penalty
OF not receiving them at all? How would it
look, when either house of congress asked for
papers on file in the department., for the
president 10 say, 'YOu must indicate to me
the purpose for which you desire them, and.
after having disclosed that purpose, If 1 shall
think they are Tor purpose within your jur-
isdiction, and If think the purpose to be to
SubServe legitimate purpose | shall trans
init them, otherwise not" Would that be
anything but one-man government? Could
it not enable president at his will to shut
out the sunlight OF investigation from the
public officers? Suppose the papers to be- rs
the president said, voluntarily written" and
by private citizens" what of that? We're
they private and confidential on that account?
Certainly not. lt often happens that charges
against public officers have been made by
private citizens. The character of the paper
could not be determined by the will of the ex-
ecutiye, but by the character of the docu-
ment. Mr.. SpOOner read from the presi-
dents message the clause inviting the senate
TO the fullest scrutiny of the nominations
submitted" Does this mean that he is will
ing TO give the senate
ALL THE INFORMATION
in his possession? or does it mean that he
should make n partial presentation? Mr..
Spooner then took up the question from a
legal point of view, and quoted from the con-
sttutton aud the tenure-of-office act, TO show
that the power of removals as well as ap-
pointments, was in the president and senate
acting together, and that what was in his sole
discretion absolute was the power of suspen-
sion during the recess OF the senate. One
source of much confusion iu this debate was
confcunding by the Democratic senator of
suspensions with removals. \ suspension
did not mean a removal. 1t was a very diff
ferent thing. To suspend an officer caused
temporary cessation OF his functions. To
remove caused a permanent cessation. To
suspend the writ OF habeas corpus was one
thing. To obliterate it was another and quite
different thing. 4 suspended officer was
not removed officer, for if the senate re-
fused TO confirm his successor the suspended
man returned TO the office. The supreme
court had so decided. Mr.. Spooner read
from decisions OF the courts TO show this.
The president declined to furnish the papers
called for because, forsooth, they would en-
able the senate to see the reasons for the sus-
pension They would enable US TO see that
he had exercised the power of suspensions
wantOnly. No power could be so
DANGEROUS TO THE REPUBLIC
as the power now asserted by the president
that papers relating to the public business on
the files of the government were his private
papers, to be removed from the files, buried
in the cellars of the White house or carted
OF to Buffalo il he chose, merely because he
had used them in exercising his power of sus-
pension. ii the mere fact that the president
acted on the papers made them his private
property and shut out the light of investiga-
tion from all the public Offices in the coun-
try. then it rested with any chief executive to
lock the door upon the honse and senate and
defeat all investigation. Mr.. Spooner did
not mean TO Imply that President Cleveland
would abuse that power. Itwas no part of
his argument TO impeach the good faith of
the president, but he warned the Democratic
side of the chamber that we were not dealing
with this question for day. The issue was
one that would outlive us. Suppose all the
Republican officials were removed and the
Offices filed with Democrats. Suppose that
from Wisconsin John Smith should write a
letter to the postmaster general. telling him
that John Jones, the Democratic postmaster,
at a given time, robbed the mail. IL was a
private letter. IL was voluntarily writ
ten. IL h vi been invited by the postmas-
ter general. Ii related to the conduct of
public officer. Suppose it TO be Investigated
and
THE MAN SUSPENDED.
Such things would happen. Tue Repub-
iicanS had not been able to have ali their
officeEolders honest, aud the Democrats would
not be. They would have dishonest men.
Suppose the senate wanted to investigate the
condition OF that pOsioli as 10 the time IL was
occupied by the suspended Official and the
president should refuse to furnish the inform
alton in his possession? Mr.. Spooner defied
tuS DSuoStosiS SthotOES W snOW Wnal III
their doctrine, was TO prevent any president
from shutting congress from all knowledge
of dishonesty occurring under his administra-
tiOn- The people could thus be kept in utter
Ignorance OF the defects of any administra-
tiOn- MOI mol That could not be the law.
Ii never was intended that the business of a
public trust should be Il private trust 1t
never was iutcnGe1 that the doctrine pub
lie Office is n public trust" should apply
everywhere but TO the executive. 1t could
rever have been intended that trustee of an
express trust could ut his will make private