San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1889-04-08
SPECIAL CORRESPONDENTS.
Halstead's Rejection Still Discuss
ed--Indianapolis News on the
SItuation--What HalStead
Saws,
WASHINGTON, April 8, 1889.

News paper, which may be regarded
as semi-official, has to say in regard
to the action of the senate:
"The rejection by the senate of the
nomination of Mr.. Murat Halstead as
Minister to Berlin is an event of more
importance than may appear at first
glance. By this action the senate has
pushed to the furtherest verge its con-
stitutional prerogative of advice and
consent in the matter of executive APP
pointments. The Constitution does
vest this advisory apd consenting
power in the senate, but it clearly in
tended the President to be the source
of executive authority and the sole
custodian of the appointing pow
er. The consent of the senate should
only be withheld for public reasons
and in the interest of the national
honor or the general welfare. In the
absence of overruling reasons of that
kind, the appointing power of the
president should prevail. In the pres
ent case the action of the senate is
not based on reasons of the character
indicated, but upon personal reasons.
Another and graver aspect of the case
is the precedent it establishes i'll eX-
ercisng a sort of senatorial censorship
of the press. Mr.. Halstead is rejected
for an important office simply because
his newspaper openly differed with
and severely criticised certain sena-
tors in matter of public policy. This
looks like notice to editors to be care
full how they criticise senators, lest
they or their friends may some time
be published as Mr.. Halstead has
been. In this view of the case it savOrs
of being a blow at the Independence
of the press, and we think it will be
so regarded. The senate has made
and sowed the seeds of
trouble
Il fail to see wherein "the senate
has pushed to the furthest verge its
constitutional prerogative." Its
right to approve or disapprove of
pl esidential appointments is UNI
questioned, and this is all the senate
has assumed to do in this case Mr..
want of judgment and
lack of wisdom, as manifested i'll his
severe stcritures on President Lin
coin and General Grant during the
war have long since been apparent to
all, and should have been apparent
TO him then, and doubtless would
have been, but for his impetuous ma
lure. This, say they, is an evidence
If his unfitness for a position re-
Iuiring, especially at this time,
IN even balance OF mind, and calm
In regard to the person
II grievances of the dissenting sena-
jors, the Journal holds that the
question of seating Senator Payne four
years ago is past and gone, and
should be forgotten. That is gilt
,ering goal to which Christ
an philosophy points, but which
alas, how few numbered with
human frailty reach. Conscious
,fther own rectitude Senators Evarts,
Cullom and colleagues must have felt
to endorse Mr.. Halstead now would
have seemed an indirect way of con-
Tossing his charges of corruption
against themselves. There is no law
human or divine that would require
them to humiliate themselves in this
way. Here is what Halstead says of
them. Speaking of the Payne in
yestigation:
ut was a sickening spectacle and
the only relief is found in the thought
hnt hn II tifNNn fn
suggest to the nation that an admin
istration conducted by such men will
not be wanted by an honest people.
The black list entire is Cameron.
Chase, CullOm, Evarts, Ingalls,, Jones,
Logan, Miller, Plumb, Riddleberger,
Sawyer, Sewell, Teller, Van Wyck.
To classify in a single sentence, it is
made up of milliOnaires, servants of
Logan men and cOrrup-
tiOnists. There was not vote cast
that was actuated by the slightest re-
gard for the honor of the senate or of
purity of politics. Each man should
be burned in effigy on every cross-road
in Ohio"
THE Journal is apprehensive that
"another and gravel aspect of the case
is the precedent it esta dishes of
senatorial censorship of the press"
Halstead was rejected as many have
been before him, and this "prece-
dent" has honorable company. 1t is
more of lesson than "precert" and
one that is likely to be of lasting
benefit to the press. We believe in
freedom of the press. but not in it's
rights to villify all who fail to trim
their sails to its breeze There is
such thing as despotism of the
press, and between this and the I'M
bridled freedom of the press there