Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1893-07-07
RIGHT OF REMOVAL.
Another Case to Test the Presidenfas
Authority.

Washington, June 29.-The question
Of the right of the president to remove
a public official before the expirat ton Of
his term of four years without assign.
ing cause, comes up in new phase.
differing from the points raised in Ala
bama recently.
certain old officials in that state. n
Will be remembered, set I'D the claim
that the president had no power to re-
move them before the end of their
terms. One Of them was an United
States attorney, who refused to give
way to the new appointee The matter
came up in court, and while the court
did not render any decision involving
the question at issue, it cut the gordon
knot by simply recognizing the new ap-
pointee and refusing to listen to the
old United States district attorney.
Now judge in one Of the territories
refuses to turn his office over to the
new judge appointed by President
Cleveland, and Attorney General OIney
Is somewhat embarrassed by the situa-
ton. The old judge is removed ON
paper, but physically he is in possession
OF his office today.
There are several old treasury officials
who resent their removal to the extent
OF threatening to appeal the cases to the
court. These cases differ from the
cases i'll the department of Justice i'm
that the removed persons held their
commissions from the secretary of the
treasury instead of the president of
the United States
Some doubt is expressed in high Off
cial circles as to the absolute right Of
removal OF 4 person holding presiden-
hal commission. The late Caleb Cush-
ing is usually quoted by those who
entertain this view. In a legal opinion
rendered while he was attorney general
he argued at some length against the
right OF absolute removal of officials
who We're appointed by the president
with the advice and consent Of the
senate His deduction was that the
same power that consummated the ap-
pointment must be cooperate in making
the removal.
This opinion, however, seems to stand
alone, and during all administrations
the power of removal has been exer-
cised by the president, and now that
that paragraph of the tenure of office
act relating to the term of service has
been repeated, it Is contended that
there Is nothing in the law that abridges
or qualities the right of the president
as to removals.
Still the question is an undecided one
as far as the courts go. The attention
Of the civil service commission has been
called to the subject by some of those
recently affected and Commissioner
Roosevelt has had an extended confer
ence with Secretary Carlisle, persuma-
bly, on this subject.
1t will be remembered that Col. Con-
rad krez was removed from the office
of collector of customs for the Milwau-
kee district in 1889, several months be-
fore the expiration of his four years
commission. In answer to the order Of
removal Col. Krez addressed letter to
President Harrison protesting against
his removal before the four years speci
fled in his commission had expired.
He took the same ground that republi.
can officials are now taking, but IL
awaited him nothing and he was obliged
to vacate the office. His commission
as collector was issued in May, 1886,
and he was removed in November, 1884
Col Watrous, who was appointed II
succeed him. has had his term shortene.
about as much as Mr.. Harrison short
ened that of Col Krez