The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1886-02-25

AUi
Of one political character and sometimes of an
other. In no instance, until this time, has the
committee met with any delay or denial in respect
10 furnishing papers or information, with single
exception and in which exception the delay and
suggested denial lasted only for two or three DAYS.
The precedents are cited and discussed at great
lens tn
One Of the appendices is a list showing the mum
b'r of officials of various ranks who were s1s-
y 'nded or removed by the president during the
ii II thirty DAYS Of the present session of congress
The report quotes a resolution adopted by the
senate, calling upon the attorney general for the
papers in the above mentioned case, and lis reply
hereto and continues: "rhis letter, although in
Spouse 10 the resolution Of the senate asking
ipies Of any papers bearing the subject within
a glyen period Of time to De transmitted, assumes
that the attOrney-general Of the United States If
the servant of the people, and can give, or with
hold, copies of documents in his Office only ac-
cDrding 10 the will of the executive and not other
wise. Your committee Is unable to discover,
either in tine original of act of 1I9 creating the
Office Of attOrney general, and the act of 1870,
creating the department of justice, any provision
which makes the attorney general Of the Inited
States in any sense, the servant of, or controlled
b., the executive in the performance Of
the duties imputed to him by
law, the nature of his Office. The
executive il bOundl by tie Institution and by his
oath to take care the laws are faithfully exc
Cuted and he il himself az much bound by the
regulations of the law as the humblest officer
in the service of the United States, and he cannot
have authority to undertake to faithfully execute
the laws, whether applied to his special funC tiOns
or to the departments created by law, otherwise
than by causing, so far as he lawfully may, by law
full methods, the heads of departments and other
officers Of the Uuited States To execute the duties
which the law and not his will has imputed to
them. The important question, then, Is whether
II IL within the constitutional competence OF
either house OF congress to have access to oihCla
papers and documents in the various public offices
Of the United States, created by laws enacted by
Themselves IL may be fully admitted that except
in respect to the department of the treasury there
il no statute that commands the head of any de-
partment to transmit to either house on Its de
mand any information concerning the adminisra-
ton OF his department, but the commit
tee believes it to be- seen that
from the very nature of the powers entrusted by
the constitution to the two houses of congress, il
il a necessary incident that either house must have
at all times, the right to know all that officially
exists, or taken place, in any of the departments OF
the government.
The committee feels authorized to state, after
somewhat careful research, that within the fore
going limits there IL scarcely, until now, any in
stance Of refusal by the head Of a department, or
even of the president himself, to communicate of
fetal facts, or information, as distinguished from
private or unofficial papers, motives, views, reas-
on6 and opinions, to either house OF congress,
when Internationally demanded. Indeed the early
journals of the senate shows great numbers Of
instances OF directions to heads OF departments, as
Oh course 10 FURNISH papers ana reports upon all
sorts of affairs, Legislative and executive. The in
stances of requesting the president and the com
mands of the heads of departments by each house
of congress, from the early days until now, for
papers and information on every conceivable sub
jet of public affairs, almost innumerable. For
II appears to have been thought by all the presi
dents who have carried on the governments
for almost a century, that even in respect to re-
quests to them by an independent and coordinate
branch of that government, they were under a con-
sttutional duty and obligation to furnish to either
house papers called for unless it has happened, in
very rare instances, when requests we're coupled
with an appeal to the discretion of the president
in respect To the danger of publicity to send papers
IF In his judgement II should not be incompat-
ible with the public welfare"
The report among other things, also SAYS. VT
will also be observed the president has not under
taken to remove the incumbents of the office, but
has only expressed and stated that in pursuance
the statutes on the subject he has sus ended that
officer That same statute expressly provides that
such officer shall not be removed without the adj
vice and consent of the senate: if that advice and
consent he not given the incumbent would, unless
the regulpr term Of his Office had expired, at the
close of this session of the senate be restored to
his lawful right to exercise its duties.
The senate, then, by this nomination, is asked to
advise and consent to the removal of the incum-
bent and to the appointment of candidate pro-
posed for his place In respect To these questions
il il plain the incumbent's conduct is matter
absolutely essential to be known to the senate in
order that il may determine whether it can rightly
advise his removal, or rightly leave him to assume
the functions of Office at the erd of the session, and
as TO whether the candidate proposed has, in eXer-
clsing Offices under his designation, conducted
himself 50 as to show that he Is competent and
faithful
Indeed, II may be stated with entire accuracy,
that even in case of vacancy in an office and the
proposed filling of such vacancy, it il important
Tor the senate to know the previous condition and
management of the office, the state Of it's affairs,
and whether there has been any misconduct or
abuse of power, or embeZZlement of money and,
indeed, all the circumstances bearing upon its adj
ministraiion, in order that it may Judge of the
sntableness of appointing successor.