, 1886-02-25
Senate and Executive.


Of appointments. The president has
suspended many officials: the senate
demands the papers on which the
removals were made. and the presi-
dent declines to furnish them. The
senate in its turn refuses to confirm
the persons nominated by the presl-
don't 10 succeed the suspended officials;
and It's Judiciary committee. IN an
elaborate report, sets forth the
grounds of its action
There Is no doubt that the usage
through the whole history of the gov
ernment has been just as stated by
the judiciary committee. That Is. 1t
has always been held to be within the
constitutional competence OF either
house of congress to have access to
official papers and documents i'll the
various pnblic offices of the United
States. The report of the judiciary
committee makes this very plain
Applied to the present situation, the
conclusion Is this. viz: 4 large mum
her of officials have been suspended
from office under circumstances that
imply on their part gross dlrelictlon
in the performance of their official
duties. or such personal misconduct
as Justly puts them in the category OF
unfaithful public servants; and the
senate therefore wants to know
about it.
To every one it is apparent that
these removals have been solely for
party reasons. The president simply
resolved to put political opponents
out that he might put political friends
in. But is this surprising? He can
not. indeed. say this to the senate in
plain words. since it wouldn't look
we'll; but everybody knows it is true.
It would seem. however. as if the re
publicans had done enough Of this
same thing during twenty-five years
| to lead them to look upon it now as a
trivial offense. During all this time
they have kept democrats cut of
Office because they We're democrats;
and it certainly can't be worse now to
put republicans out because they are
republicans. True. there Is the pre-
sidnnt's word that this sort of thing
shouldn't be done under his admin
istration. But he has found it ncces-
sary to do ii. to some extent, or lose
the support of his own party. Every
one must admit that he has used the
power with moderation. Nor is it
true that the officials whom be has
suspended are supposed to be dis
graced 1t is well known that they
have not been suspended for personal
or official misconduct, or the Presi-
dent would say so, but the sole rea
son for their suspension has been to
make room for adherents of the party
to which the president belongs.
But the right OF the senate to call
for official papers is a matter OF
another kind The debate in the
senate some days ago and the report
of the senate's Judiciary committee,
Just published, would seem to leave
no doubt as to this right. Senator
Sherman made a speech on this sub
iect on the Sth of February, which
has been widely accepted as settle
ment of the question. But he pre-
faced his speech with the remark that
the senate had no right to call upon
the president for statement of his
OWL motives or reasons; and in ac-
cord with this principle he drew a
clear distinction between the reasons
which may have actuated the eXecu-
tive in reaching a conclusion. like the
decision TO remove an official, ana the
information which he considered in
reaching The conclusion. He declared
that Mr.. Cleveland was right in hold
| ;,,rr inof oS n nn orIipofa l,ra aDcb of
the government, he was not bound to
give his reasons for an official act, in
which respect he only followed the
course of President Hayes when q
similar controversy arose during the
latter's administration. The senate,
Mr.. Sherman declared, had no more
right to say to the president, For
what reason did you do this thing?'
than the president has to ask the
senate, "Why did you pass this law? ?"
But he affirmed at the same time
that the senate had an unquestiona-
bic right to call upon the president
for all information, not confidential
in its nature, upon which his action
! was based. Nobody" said Sherman,
proposes to control the discretion OF
the president in suspending an Off
ciai. He is as Independent as we are,
but he must not control our discre-
ton. He must not prevent US from
having the same sources of informa-
ton that lie has. The information
comes to him first because he per-
forms the first act in an appointment
that Is, lie makes the nomination
Why did he make that nomination? !?
Was the former incumbent an unfit
man? Was he a corrupt man, thief,
a defauiter. or the like? Our discre-
ton must be enlightened by the in
formation that he has; and, therefore,
we have tho right to call for that in
formation" This seems to be sound
doctrine. The New York EreRiag
Post, a journal that supF orts the ad-
ministration, says the position is i'm
pregnable;" and it adds: If con-
trovsrsy should arise between the re-
publican senators aud the democratic
president upon these lines, the former
could appeal to the country with
entire confidence that they would be
sustained by popular sentiment.
w hio tHey lhSiS1 upou, 80 lar dS tnty
go, is simply publicity regarding ap.
pointments and removals alike, and
publicity is the fundamental princi-
pie upon which government of the
people is based. The people are as
much entitled to all the facts regard
ing an appointment to office as re-
garding the enactment of law, and
as much entitled to all the facts
about the Official who was removed
as about the man appointed in his
place"
Annexation Of North Idaho.