Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-03-10

| place and destroy 1t. IL IL addressed
to you in your official character, and
that is what gives character to paper
of whatever kind it is, whether Official
or private"
AS to the suspension Of an officer the
President and the minority OF the Judi
cary Committee said il was an act
solely within the discretion Of the
President. So also said the majority
OF the committee but was it not an
official act? The statutes SAID il was,
the President said it was, and of course
it was an official act. Every paper,
therefore, addressed to an officer exer-
cising that official function upon that
topic must be an official paper, no mat
ter how vile or false it may be. 1t
did not belong to a man, whether
President or Attorney-General, but to
the officer in his character as an officer.
The Acknowledgement gave no hint
that any part Of the papers called for
were private or unofficial or even conf
Dental public papers. Official papers
were called for, and such papers only
were spoken Of in the response. Did
those papers relate to the motives Of
the President in suspending Duskin?
Did any body suppose that the President
or any Of his friends had filed state
ment Of his motives: BY no means
that would he absurd. The papers,
therefore, stated the facts on the state
ment Of the Acknowledgement that they
related exclusively to the suspension;
stated facts or alleged facts as to the
conduct of the officer suspended. Since
the Senate was called upon to assist
the President in diSplacing this man
permanently every paper existing
there relating to him, on the admis
sion Of the Attorney General, related
to the conduct Of the Office while in
possession of DuSkin; but the papers
were refused because they would not
only give facts, but would enable us to
understand the reasons of the President
for exercising his official act. There
fore the proposition was that the Sen
ate being called on in the exercise OF its
jurisdiction to judge Of the official con-
duct OF Duskin, the President having
already boen called on within his
jurisdiction to pronounce judgment
on a similar question about the same
man. the Senate could not have the
papers. because if it did, they would
disclose the grounds on which the Presi-
dent acted. If that" said Mr.. Ed
munds, lis not a proposition which
would stagger the credulity and amaze
the understanding of any intelligent
nan in a government Of law or IN
! Government of reason, | am quite I'M
able to comprehend what would be-"
All the operations of the Govern
ment. Mr.. Edmunds continued, were
executive, and had it come
to this, that because the Presi-
dent was the chief executive Oil
Ger Of the Government, Congress could
know nothing as to the facts and cir
cumstances relating to the execution Of
the law. because if they did they
might be able to comprehend the motives
or reasons OF the President in carrying
out the law? Why, such statement
was shocking. Yet that was the logic
Of this whole thing.
Mr.. Edmunds continued The At
toiney- General had said that "public
interest " would not be subserved by
sending papers to the Senate. Accord
ing to this public interest would not be
subseryed by telling the Senate. which
was asked to help remove an officer,
what the truth vas, lest the truth should
! disclose to the Senate and possibly
10 the public what the Presidents
reasons were in exercising an Oll-
cial act. The reasons must be
tremendously sacred" if the facts
were never to be revealed lest the rca.
sons also might be revealed. The ju-
risdiction of Congress was infinitely
broader than that Of the President.
, Ills was the executive power. Congress
made the laws, and when the COnsttu-
ton commands him to give Congress
information on 1.-THE state Of the Union "
il saws he shall " do it. That had
reference to the universal power Of the
knowledge Of the two houses Of Congress
in respect to every operation Of the
Government and every one Gifts officers
That is 1.-THE state of the Union The
state Of the mon is made up of every
drop in the bucket -; Of the execution
Of every law and the performance Of
every officer under the law. There
was 10 one thing, no one subject that
represented the state Of the Union
1t was the condition Of the Government
and every part Of it; not only It's
legislative parts-about which The
President could communicate no
information without impertinence, for
the Constitution had declared that the
two houses were to regulate them
selyes-but ho was to give Congress,
and was positively commanded to 10
so, from time to time, information on
the state Of the Union, and it is be-
cause Congress was entitled to have it
every time they called for it; and he
violated the positive command Of the
Constitution when on constitutional !
call in the regular way he omitted 70
60 it.
Referring incidentally to the fact that !
a deficiency Of SIS ,O00 in the Depart
mcnt of Justice for fees of jurors and
witnesses was pending before the |
House. Mr.. Edmuuds said there mus, |
be added for this current fiscal year
ending June 30,hnext. covering year of |
purely Democratic control, a deficiency |
Of $lo5,OOO. IT the case Of DuSh!n was !
fairly illustrative Of tae circumstances |
Of all district attorneys ard marshlls |
Of the United States everything that
went to make up the autonomy Of the !
administration of lustice-then we have /
drawn in the question, What has become /
of the money that was appropriated at
the regular session to carry on the al
ministration Of justice through the De-
IaTtment OF Justice in the United
States: Duskin was one of the per-
sons who were to draw upon that
fund in that district. lie was the
very person whose agency more
than that Of any other would 50