The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-03-24
Mr.. Blaine on the Tenure.Of-
Office Act.

The following extracts from Mr.. Blain
second volume of Twenty Years of ca
gress were read during the debate in
senate last week;
" The bill was not passed, however. wi
out considerable misgiving on the part
many members of both houses who voted
1T. IL was an extreme proposition-a new
parture from the long-established usage
the federal government and for that reast
II for no other, personally degrading to
incumbent of the presidential Office
could only have grown out of abnormal
element created by the dissensions betwe
the two great departments of the COVE,
ment. The bitterness engendered resembl
that which always distinguishes a fam
quarrel. The measure was resorted to as 0
OF seli-defence against the alleged aggressio
and the unrestrained power of the executi
department. But the history of its opeI
ton and of its subsequent modiicatidX
which practically amounted to its repeal
one to which the republican party cannM
recur with any sense of pride or satisfactio
AS matter of fact, a republican congres
largely composed of the same members wi
had enacted the law, indirectly confess\
two years later that it could not be mail
tanned. Regarded only in the light of
pedlency at the time 1t could readily |
ueno,nstrated las was afterward admitted
candid men among those who supported
10 be blunder-a blunder all the mo
censurable because the act was not needt
10 upnolu the reconstruction policy of co
gress, in aid of which it was devised.
When the bill reached the senate ther|
was disposition on the part of some lead
ing members of that body TO mass IL !
promptly as it had been passed by the bousI
Mr. Morton urged that it be put on its paI
sage without referring it; but the sena{
was not prepared for such haste. and d
motion of Mr.. Trumbull, the bill was sei|
to the judiciary committee. That committd
reported it without delay to the senate. viii
an amendment in the form of substitute
The house bill was a simple repeal in tlI
fewest possible words. The judiciary com
mittee now proposed that instead of an absd
lutte repeal, the tenure-of-office act be- AMI
the same is hereby, suspended until It'd
next session of congress- This was a lam|
and impotent conclusion and did not COM
mand the support or even the respect of TIL
senate. Mr.. Thurman, a member of th
committee that reported it, made haste d
announce that he had not approved it. III
treated the proposition for suspension as
practical confession that the tenure-of-offic
act is to be enforced when it will have n
practical effect, and is not to be enforce
when it will have practical effect Tn
chief defenders of the proposition to sus
pend the act were Mr.. Trumbull, Mr.. Ed
munds and Mr.. Schurz Mr.. Edmunds
pressed by Mr.. Grimes to furnish a goo,
reason for suspending the act, replied tina
owing to the peculiar circumstances tina
nave attended the last administration it i
desirable that there should be an immediate
and general removal of the office-holders O
the country as rule, and as an agency TO
that removal, subject to our approval whel
we meet again in confirmation of their sue
cessors, these bad men being put out, w
are willing to trust this executive with tina
discretion
Coming from a senator of the United
States, this declaration was regarded as ex
traordinary. The bad men to whom MI
Edmunds referred were the appointees @
President Johnson, and every one of then
had been confirmed by the senate of tn
United States when the republicans ha,
more than two-thirds of the body. If thes
appointees were bad men, why, it wa
pertinently and forcibly asked by the az
grieved, did not Mr.. Edmunds submit proc
OF the TACT to his republican associates anC
procure their rejection? He knew, the ac
cused men declared, as much about thei
characters when their names were befor
the senate as he knew now when he sought
behind the protection of his privilege. t,
brand them with infamy. To permit then
to be confirmed in the silence and confidence
OF an executive session, and then in opel
senate, when their places were wanted TO
others, to describe them as bad men,
seemed to them procedure not to be ex
pioihCt ch tuC DIOdt Oh States
manship, or even on the common law of fai
dealing.
60 The amendment of the judiciary com
mittee providing for suspension of the Law
until congress should meet again-a periot
OF about eight months--was so objectionabl,
that 1T won no substantial support from sen
ators There was something so badly ant
shamelessly partisan in the proposition t,
suspend the act just long enough to PERM
PRESIDENT Grant, without obstruction or in
cumbrance, to remove the democrats whom
President johnson had appointed to offic,
that the common instinct of Justice anC
even of public decency, revolted TIL,
tenure-of-offce act was either right or wrong
eXpedlent or inexpedient, constitutional OF
unconstitutional; and it was easy to see tina
men could honestly differ as to its character
In these respects. But it was impossible &c
comprehend how candid legislator coulC
MAINTAIN the conStitutionality and expedi
ency of the act, and then propose to SUSPEND
1t Tor that specific period of General Grants
administration, when, if needed at all. i
would be most needed Within the eight
months next ensuing the President would
probably make more removals and appoint.
ments than for the remainder of his term
and II was just for this period Mr.. Trumbull
Mr.. Edmunds and Mr.. Schurz urged that
the law be made OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES in
Ciuoi uildp IciuONdlS OF ueHlOCratlc once
holders for good cause, and for no cause ex.
cept that they were democrats might in
every way be expedited
Casting off all political DISCUSSES and
personal pretenses, the simple truth remains
that the tenure-of-office law was enacted lest
President Johnson should remove republic
can office-holders too rapidly; and it was
practically repealed lest President Grant
should not remove democratic office-holders
rapidly enough"