The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-03-11

request from this great law making power to the
chief magistrate of the country, or his Attor-
ney-general. that would result in breaking up
| their relations of confidence and trust, and
making the Attorney general liable to instant
dismissal from the Cabinet? What did the Pres
ident say about the action Of the Senate asking
the Attorney-general for these papersa Mr.
Pugh read at length from the Presidents mes
sage, among other things, the statement that
there had been no official papers or documents
fled in his (the Attorney generalsl department.
relating to the case within the period stated in
the resolution
"There," said Mr. Pugh, lis statement made
by the President of matter of fact within his
personal knowledge, and the Senator from Yer
mont contraverts the truth Of his statement
having no foundation whatever for the denial
There is square Issue made in the report of the
majority of the judiciary committee with the
President upon matter of fact that is within
his personal knowledge. Are these papers called
for from the Attorney general such as the SEN
ate has right TO have in the discharge of its du
tiesi The President had stated that the papers
were private and unofficial, and related to
nothing over which the Senate had jurisdiction.
The majority of the judiciary committee and its
distinguished charman-the Senator from Yer
mont-said that, although private and unofficial,
they would enable the Senate to discharge
duty it had to perform-a power it is claimed
of revising the official act of the President in
suspending George M. Duskin as district at
torney. That was the undisputed basis of the
Ciallu 10 LneS0 private, un0Iuclal papers. LII was
the power Of the Senate to exercise the same
control and revision over the act of
suspension or removal that was claimed,
and exercised, and given to the
Senate expressly by the Constitution-of adivs-
ing and consenting to appointments There
was no mistake about that being the claim as
serted by the majority of the judiciary commit
tee, and there was no mistake that the reso.u-
ton reported condemned the official act of the
Attorney-general for the reason that he had
Wi on ho rdorO oft he nj
ton that he stated was EMBELLISHMENTS and
papers that he said were unofficial and private,
and withheld from the Senate ON the Presidents
positive order-frst, because they were private
and unofficial; and second. because they related
to no duty that the Constitution or law imposed
upon the Senate.
IFS there anything, said Mr.. Pugh, ''in the
history of the government to support this claims
The distinguished Senator from Vermont has
presented long array of what he calls 'prece
dents ! undertake to say-and challenge de-
NAL, upon the fullest text--tnat there is
in the history of the government for eighty years
this resolution were ever transmitted to the Sem
ate in executive or public session, on the order
of tine Senate upon the Attorney general or the
President. My honorable and distinguished
friend paraded, in manner that indicated that
he was about to achieve a great tri-
umph over the President in the
production, letter sent by the
judiciary committee and signed by Allen g.
Thurman as its chairman to the Attorney gen
era ndorse all that the Senator has so we'll
said about Allen G.. Thurman. Yes, Mr.. Presi-
dent Allen q. Thurman Is the greatest, and the
wisest, and the purest American statesman now
living Applause in the galleries, whose occu-
pants were notified by the occupant of the chair,
Mr.. Harris, that any further demonstrations of
applause would result in the galleries being
cleared l was surprised that the great Sena
tor from Vermont, in this great law-making de-
partment of the government should invoke the
An1 ne <hnt
statesman tn sustain the claim now made on the
Attorney general for those documents. What
had Senator Thurman said on the floor of the
Senate in relation to this power of removalV
Mr. Pugh read from Mr.. Thurman's speeches
on the debate on the tenure-of-ofice act in which
he expressed the conviction that the power of re-
moval was executive power exclusively, re-
siding in the President alone. Yet the Senator
from Vermont invoked an order signed by Mr..
Thurman chairman of the judiciary commit
tee, addressed to the Attorney general, which
Mr.. Pugh would read to the Senate Mr. Pugh
then read the letter which was read yesterday
by Mr.. Edmunds. calling for papers bearing on
the removal of Judge Shaffer. of the Territory
of Utah. That person, Mr. Pugh said,
had been judge of a territorial court,
and in the provision comforting the power of
suspension on the President there an ex-
press exception of judges Of the United States.
The question was whether local Territory
judges were embraced in that language. The
Senator from Vermont knew that that question
was now before the judiciary committee. He
knew that the great lawyer from New York
IMr. Evartsl a member Of that sub commit
tee with the splendid lawyer, Mr.. jackson,
from Tennessee. and that after two weeks or
more of consideration, they had made no report
on that question, submitted to them. of the
power of the President in vacation to suspend
Judge of Territory court. The Senator from
Vermont knew that the Senator from New York
lMr. Evartsl had expressed the opinion that
these Territorial judges were not subject to the
power of suspension by the President. That was
to-day an open question before the very commit
tee of which the honorable Senator was chair
man. Why was it that Senator Thurman, as
chairman of the judiciary committee, sent that
order or request to the Attorney generaH He
sent it under Section 1767, making them subject
to removal, but only by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate There the pred
icate for the order of Chairman Thurman upon
the Attorney general to send in all information
and papers relating to the removal, not to the
suspension
Mr. Pugh here read Section 1767, and con-
tinued: under that section the power of
lnoval was to be exercised by and with the ad-
vice and consent of the Senate. 1t was in
obedience to the provisions OF that section that
the order was sent by Chairman Thurman to the
Attorney general, calling for information in
reference to a removal that required the advice
and consent Of the Senate, just as in the case of
an appointment
Mr.. Pugh had Senator Walthall read for him
epSCch Va oCuotol OpioSuO Az VIC ocuotc III
the debate on the tenure of-offce bil-a careful
statement of the question here involved, Mr.
Pugh said, which statement was known to have
been written by Chief Justice Chase expressing
the conviction that the only function of the
Senate in the cases involved in the discussion
was merely one of assent or dissent. and strongly
controverting the point that the function of re-
moval was legislative one. He Mr. Pughl
boldly challenged reply to that paper. Now. ne
continued, let it be true that this was not
substantive executive power vested by
the Constitution in the President alone;
let it be true shat like the power of
appointment, the Senate shared with the
President the power of removal; let it be true
that the power of removal was a legislative
power, and not executive power, and that
the entire regulation of it belonged to Congress
under the Constitution. Let all that be true
he would now call attention to the eXpediency
and practicabity of such power being exer-
hxx the Sanafa He Rad from thu taf