The Washington critic., 1886-12-18
SENATOR EvARTs AND THE TEN
URE-oF-OFFICE ACT.

Senator Evarts made an excellent
speech in favor of the repeal of the
Tenure.o Of. Office act, and started out
by saying that he intended to vote for
the repeal bill but for some reason or
other he failed to put in an appearance
on the call of the yeas and nays
There is no question, however, as to
The sincerity of his convictions or the
strength Of his arguments in their sup.
port
The only repugnance he felt toward
the repeal of the act was In regard to
section 1860, which reads as follows 4;
The President Is authorized to llll all va
cancies which may happen during the re-
cess Of the Senate, by reason of death or
resignation, or expiration Of term OF Office,
by granting commissions which shall ex-
fire at the end Of the next session there
after. And IL no appointment, by aud with
the advice Of the Senate, Is made TO au Of.
flee so vacant or temporarily filled dur
ing such next session OF the Senate,
the Office shall remain In abeyauce,
without any salary, fees or emoluments at.
tached thereto, until II is filed by appoint
meIt thereto 10y aud with the advice and
consent of the Senate.
Mr. Evarts says:
.@aI suppose It will be agreed that the
clause, which in the public Interest allows
the President to fill up vacancies occurring
in the recess till the end Of the next session
Of the Senate, is a provision for public
occasion which ought not to be overlooked,
and should be, as II was, provided for.
The meaning Of that was that Il President
should fill without the concurrence Of the
hat. Il ,ln,, IL,
the relation between the Senate and the
President in regard to the appointment of
a man to Office the Senate shall have re-
jected him as unsuitable for appointment,
that on the adjournment of Congress there
should be an opportunity of Immediately
filling up the place with the same rejected
officer to continue during the next session
Of the Senate, and thus step by step there
should be d resolute purpose of the Presi-
dent that he should take to himself power
Of keeping man in place from time to
time against the rejection Of the Senate, IL
perversion of constitutional authority
that ought to be curbed in some way or
other.
II correctly view these matters consti.
tutionally, understand that q permanent
system OF that kind on the part OF any
President OF the United States (and no
occasion has arisen In our history to make
an imputation OF that kind, II 1t should
occur, would be plainly matter for i'm
peachment.
When by rejection the Senate has ex-
pressed lis judgment, this section expresses
the effect of that exercise OF the constitu
tional function Of this body. | am not al
all sure that section 1863 ought to be re.
pealed, which provides that when the Office
shall be left in this condition 1t shall pas:
out and shall not need to be filed.
make the reservation that by that sec
tlon now being repealed 1t is not to b,
treated as a conclusion Of any votes In thi!
body that 1t is not within the power OF leg
islation to prevent an excess OF Presidential
usurpation by some other means than thOs,
Of impeachment.
1t will be seen from the above eX
tracts that while Mr.. Evarts favOrs the
repeal oil the Tenure of, Office act, ht
does not believe in the impairment o
the Senate's constitutional powers
These are still to be maintained agains
Presidential usurpation, either by i'm
peachment, or preferably by new legis
lation.
As the case now stands, the relation
of the President and Senate are pre-
cisely where they were before tn
statute of 1867 was enacted; and wha
was good enough for the first seventy
five years of the Republic ought t
answer well enough for the future.