National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-02-01
The Issue Between the President and
the Senate.

rifle controversy between the President and
the Senate, concerning his removals and
nominations of officers, exists mainly in
the imaginations of various enterprsing
newspaper correspondents and writers. We
are not aware that any grave issue has yet
been made or is likely to arise.
TheSenate certainly will not undertake
to force the President against his will to
state the unrecordcd motives or reasons
which have Influenced him in making either
removals or appointments. The President,
on the other side, certainly will not under
take TO deny to the Senate the right, II they
insist upon it, to inspect and receive copies
of the public records in any Of the execu-
tive departments.
Until one or the other Of these mistakes
Is made there will be no quarrel.
In recent editorial we argued that in
exercising the function of appointment to
federal office the President and the Senate
are independent of each other; can each act
for reasons which impress each alone, and
neither can be compelled to disclose or
justify those reasons to the other.
In our paper Of Saturday we showed the
case in which President Washington, waiv-
ing any question Of right, volunteered to
communicate to the Senate the information
and reasons which led him to nominate a
certain officer. But he certainly could not
have been compelled to place on record his
reasons If he did not wish to do so. Presi-
dent Cleveland can, voluntarily, on request,
or of his own notion give his as yet unre-
"a N m 20
moval. But he clearly cannot be forced to
give them. We do not understand that he
has been requested to give such In any case.
As to the public records Of all the depart.
| ments the case stands upon different
grounds. These are public archives; should
be accessible to every citizen certainly are
| at the service Of either house of Congress.
IL may be proper for the President to ex.
press to the Senate his opinion that the
public interests will not be promoted by
their looking at the records, but IL they
differ with him on this point he must yield
to them as graciously as they must yield to
him when he declines to put his motives or
reasons on record and communicate them to
the Senate.
The original act of Sept. 2, 1850, creating
the Treasury Department required the
Secretary "to make report and give in.
formation TO either branch of the legisla.
ture in person or in writing, us he may be
required, respecting all matters referred to
him by the Senate or House of Representa-
tves, or which shall appertain to his office"
This language is repeated in the present
law (Revsed Statutes, United States, sec
tion 24S.)
The other departments stand upon no
different footing, and can be compelled to
submit to either house of Congress any doc.
ument or paper constituting part Of their
public records.
Either house of Congress while legislat.
ing, the Senate while acting on removals
or appointments, has the right to know
what the public records of the departments
show concerning the subject matter upon
which it is acting.
1t seems to us that these propositions are
too plain to need illustration. Suppose @
postmaster has been suspended, or his re
moval is proposed, upon charges of dis
honesty, filed In the department, has mo-
the Senate the right to know this fact be
fore acting on the nomination for success
sion? Suppose that the charge has been con
cealed from the postmaster, and the Senate
also without knowledge Of it, consents 10
the removal by concurrence in the nom
nation, and years afterward the record
is produced, will not the removed oflica
stand branded with adiudged dishonesty
inflicted by Senate as well as President? II
would be preposterous for him then to say
that the Senate did not know of the charge
against him contained in public and ac
cessible record of the Postoflice Depart
ment.
The right Of the Senate to see publ,
records would extend even to the reason
of the President II he has chosen to maxi
them public records, instead Of keepin!
them within his own breast Suppose
letter is on file in the Treasury Department
signed by the President, directing the re
moval Of a collector for dishonesty or mis-
conduct in office; cannot the Senate Sc
that letter before consenting to the re
moval2 If they consent to the removal
do they not indorse the letter as efrectual
as If they also had signed ltY
These questions are too clear for argu
ment. 1t is the fault Of the administrator
if, instead of removing officers merely be
cause they were Republicans, they hay
numbered the records Of the department
with aflidavits making degrading charge
against them. The officers slandered ma
remain out of office, but they are entitle
not to have the Senate, while In Ignorance
like themselves, Of the charges, vet indors