The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1886-02-19

branches OF the government for so long |
p riod, would seem, upon acknowl- !
edged principles, to settle what |
are the rights and powers of |
the two houses OF Congress in |
the exercise of their respective duties |
covering every branch of the operations |
OF government, and il is submitted |
with confidence, that such rights and |
powers, are indispensable to the dis
charge OF their duties, and do not in |
fringe on any right Of the executive, |
and thai 1t does not belong to either the |
heads OF departement or the President
himself to take into consideration any
OF the supposed motives or purposes
that either House may have in calm
for such papers, or whether their pos
sessions of their contents could be APP
piled by either House to useful pur-
poses. The Constitution of the United
States was adopted in the light of well
known history that even ministers of
the English Crown were bound, to lay
before the Parliament all papers
when demanded, on pain of instant dis
missal of such ministers on refusal
though the rapid and effectual instru-
mentality of vote of want of confidence
and the Continental Congress had, for
more than ten years, itself COVE Led the
country and had control of all papers
and records, not by reason of anything
expressed in the articles of confeder l.
ton, bat by reason of the nuinsic
nature OF free government. The juris-
diction of the two Houses of Congress
to iegislate. and the power to advise or
withhold advice concerning treaties and
appointments, necessarily involves the
irisdiction to officially know every
step and action of the officers of thelaw
and all facts touching their conduct in
the possession of any department or
even in the possession of the President
himself. There was no need to express
such a power, for it was necessarily
an inherent incident to the exercise OF
! the power granted. 1t will be observed
that in this instance, the call for papers
covered a period OF for more than six
months, turing which the regular in
cumbent of the Office has been dis
charging its duties and also the further
period of more than six months, dur
| ing which the person designated to dis
charge those duties had been acting,
and that that person is the one now
proposed to be appointed to the place.
1t will also be observed that the Presi-
dent has not undertaken to remove the
incumbent of the Office, nut has only in
the expressed and stated pursuance
of the statutes on the subject,
suspended that officer, and that
the same statutes expressly provide
that such officer shall not be removed
without the aCY.ce and consent of the
Senate, and that if that advice and con-
sent be not given the incumbent would
(unless his term of Office should have
previously expired) at the close of that
session of the Senate be restored TO his
| To- nj fohf -, 10 tyff N
Senate, then. by this nomination, is
asked to advise and consent to the re
moval of the incumbent, and to the
appointment OF the candidate proposed
for his place. In exercising its duty in
respect to these questions, it is plain
that the conduct and management of
the incumbent is matter absolutely
essential to be known to the
Senate, in order that it may de-
termine whether it can rightfully
advise his removal or rightly leave him
to resume the functions of his Office at
the end of its sessi- II, as well as whether
the candidate proposed has, in the ex-
ercise of the office under his designation,
so conducted himself as to shoE that
he is competent and faithful. Indeed
1t may be stated. with entire accuracy,
that even in case of vacancy in Office,
and the proposed filling of such va
cancy, it is important for the Senate to
know the previous condition and man.
agement of the Office, the state of its
affairs. whether there have been cases of
misconduct or abuse of power, embez-
Element of money, and indeed all the
circumstances bearing upon its admin
istration, in order that it may judge
of the suitableness of appointing
a particular person to take up its du-
ties with reference to the difficulties
that may exist in its affairs the state
of accounts and everything concerning
its administration, so as to measure the
fitness and competency of particular
candidate to meet the emergencies OF
the case.
A table is presented showing the large
number of persons appointed in the
place of the officers suspended and the
query Is made: have these suspended
officials, or any considerable number of
them, been guilty of misconduct in
Office or of any personal conduct max
ing them unworthy TO be longer trusted
with the performance of duties imposed
upon them by law? If they have,
it would seem to be clear that
every consideration of the pub
lie interest and of the public
QuIy Was W buAI ldtlS NC
made known, in order that the Senate
may Understandings and promptly ad-
wise their removal, and that the most
!. careful scrutiny should be had in re
spect to the selection of their successors,
as well as in the respect of providing
better means and safeguards by legis-
lation for administering the laws of the
United States. such information, it
would seem, the Executive is determined
the Senate shall not possess, for the al
J legged reason that it might enable the
Senate to.understand what circumstan-
, ces connected with the faithful ex-
ecution of the laws induced the
, President to exercise the discretion the
statute confers on him, to suspend
, them and ask the Senate to unite
with him in their removal from office.
The report quotes the passage on civil
service contained in the Presidents an
nual message and says: This highly inn
, portant and valuable official commune
cation in the presence of GAS suspensions
: from Office, would seem to lead TO the
conclusion that this number of civil
J officers of the United States elected to
be suspended and removed. had been sc
derilect in the performance of theil
| functions, or guilty of such persona
) misconduct, as to put them in the cafe
| cory of rInfaithful nuhIic servants de