The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-01-28
WHY THEY BACK HILL
Many Senator's Have Grievances
Against the Executive.
They Contend the President Has No
Right to Make Nominations Without
Consulting Members of His Party.
special to the IndianapoIis Journal.

Special TO the Indianapolis Journal.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 2.-Before the SEN
ate gets through with Its consideration of
nominations TO filI the existing vacancy on
the bench OF the Supreme Court it will
very likely have fully settled the question
OF how far a President must consult Sena-
tors within his own party in iilling Offices
Ordinarily the Senator's In the minority
party take very little interest in the quaIms
and contentious of Senator's in the majority
party who take exceptions to the nominal
tions of their President In the Hornblower
case a number of Republicans voted with
the Hill side Of the issue, because they be-
lieved that President Cleveland did wrong in
refusing TO consult the two Democratic
Senators from New York in selecting an
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court
from that State. Most of them have tasted
the wormwood and the gall by similar treat
ment from a President of their own polit-
ical faith. The situation which surrounded
the Hornblower case has settled down upon
the nomination of Peckham, and there is
still waging a contention as to senatorial
and presidential prerogatives in the matter
OF nominations to offices.
There is an extreme view taken by many
who are considering the principles involved
upon both sides. Some contend that the
10 any Office without the full consent of the
Senators or congressman representing his
party from the State or district in which
the nominee is taken. Others contend that
the President has full authority, and he
should exercise il to select men of his own
liking under any condition of circumstances,
without any regard to the Senator'S repre-
senting the State from which the nomi-
nees come. The Republicans who are
supporting Senator Hill in his fight
against presidential power explain their po-
sition by saying that they believe the time
icy should be agreed upon and both the
President and the Senator's should know
just where they stand upon the question at
issue They say the President unquestion-
ably has power to nominate wnomsoever he
wishes to an office. but that the Senate has
the same power and privilege to reject that
nominee II for any reason whatever he is
objectionable. They take the ground that
while the President may ignore the Sena-
tors ne owes 1t to them, as a matter of
common courtesy To consult them. when
they are or his own political faith. in MAX
Ing nominations; that especially the Presi-
dent should, before the nomination Is made
ask the Senator's representing that state if
or the man under consideration. and when
an agreement cannot be reached between
the President and his own party Senator'S
from the State the President should waive
his preferences and try TO reach an annie
able agreement IL a man cannot be set
tied upon, for any good reason, they ac-
knowledge that the President should take
the matter In his own hanus and make his
own choice, and then the Senator's who have
been consulted Will have no good ground
t9r Objection. But when. as in the case of
completely ignores the Senators and NOM
mates their personal and political enemies.
without even an intimatiOn OF his deter
minatton. the Senators have a perfect right
TO protest, and those who believe i'm sena-
torial prerOgatves ia the opposite party
should support them in the protest