The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-10-18
oUSTED FROM A FAT OFFICE.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY CLAYTON OF
ALABAMA REMOVED.

Uehera1 OAney never AhsWcFSu-A
Second Letter Evoked n Reply
That Mr.. Clayton Saw no IncOn-
sistency in His Candldacy-Re-
mOvaI Follows.
Washington, Oct. 17.-Henry D. Clayton,
United States district attorney for the
middle district of Alabama, was to-day
summarily removed from Office by the
President. Mr.. Clayton was a delegate
to the Chicago convention, is now a can
didate for congress from the Second dis
trict of Alabama, and is a son-in-law of
Senator Pugh of that state. Assistant
District Attorney G. F. Moore has been
placed in charge of the office Some in
teresting correspondence led up to to-
days action by the President.
Early in October Attorney General
Harmon wrote Mr.. Clayton letter, stat
ing that newspaper clippings and letters
showed that he was candidate for con-
gress and his duties as district attor-
ney made the two positions inconsistent
with each other. To this letter no reply
was received.
On Oct Attorney General Harmon
wrote Mr.. Clayton another letter. in which
he assumed that his first letter had not
been received by Mr.. Clayton. He re-
peated much of his first letter, in SUBJ
stance, and concluded: please advise
me, upon receipt of this, what you pro-
pose to do, in view of the rule which
makes your candidacy for another office
inconsister4 with the holding Of your
present position"
Mr.. Clayton, on Oct. IA, replied from
Montgomery, Ala, to this last letter of
Attorney General Harmon. He stated
that he was the regular nominee of the
democratic party from the Montgomery
district for congress, and was engaged in
the discourage of his duties as district at
torney; that he had heard of no COM
plants as to his neglect.ng his work, but
that he was making speeches in behalf of
his candidacy. He concluded as follows:
II am not aware that any Of the duties
of my Office have been neglected. l have
| thought that a man. though an office
! holder, had the right of speech and the
right to aspire to represent his people.
do not believe that my retention of the
| Office of district attorney should preclude
me from those rights of citizenship which
| are enjoyed by my fellow citizens. l,
! therefore, respectfully decline to admit
| that my candidacy for congress is ineon-
sistent or incompatible with my present
! position"
Attorney General Harmon laid the cor
| respondence before the President, and at
! 2 o'clock to-day this telegram was sent:
| Department of Justice, Washington, ID.
| c.. Oct. II, 1896.-Henry D. Clayton, Of
| flee of United States Attorney, Montgom-
cry, Ala: For reasons appearing in our
correspondence, the President has to-day
removed you from the Office of United
States attorney, which you now hold.
You will govern yourself accordingly.
Answer to your letter mailed to-day. Jud-
son Harmon, Attorney General"
The letter herein referred to, reads as
follows:
Department of Justice, Washington, D.
c., Oct. II, 1S96-Henry D. Clayton, Of
fee of United States Attorney, Montgom-
cry, Ala. Sir-Your letter of the 14th
inst. was received to-day, and after con-
sultation with the President, an order for
your removal was made of which you
have just been advised by wire, and of
which 1 now enclose a copy.
1t hardly seems necessary to say that
this step was rendered imperative by your
wilful and persistent disregard of the set
tied rules and practice Of the department
to which l expressly called your atten-
ton in my letter of the Sth inst, but
which, it is fair to assume, you knew be-
fore.
This rule has been acquiesced in, with
respect to nominations for congress, by
no less than three United States attor-
neys during the present year, namely:
Andrew F. Fox northern district of Mis-
sissippi, and Cornelius c. Watts, district
of West Virginia, both of whom
voluntarily resigned their Offices
TO accent nominations for congress, and
ID ~ Of
Mexico, who declined to become a candI-
date for office because of the rule.
You seem from your letter either not to
know or to lack appreciation of the OBJ
vious reasons on which the rule is founded
l attempted briefly to mention some OF
them in a letter, dated June II, last, TO
the Hon. Edward c. Wathall, one of tho
senators from Mississippi, who had COM
municated with me on the subject on
hehaf of Mr.. Fox. Among other things,
/ wrote: Engaged as he is, in the prose-
cution of offenders against the govern
,nert, and in the collection Of claims due
it, some embarrassment would naturally
arise during a canvass in which he would
be soliciting the votes of witnesses ana
pariies. While, in the case of an honor
able and upright man like Mr. Fox, the
public interests would not suffer, prece-
dent would be formed which might arise,
as precedent have an awkward way or
MY observation Is that the dangerous prec-
edents are those which are made in good
eases. In fact, precedents would hardly
be made in bad cases. Moreover, there,
is always room for the charge that
the repeated and prolonged absences
and the demand on bodily and mental
vigor which the making of a campaign i'm
posed, especially In a presidential year.
would afford ground for criticism based
upon alleged neglect Of official duties.
While / am sure Mr.. Fox would not in
fact neglect and duty for the sake of
his canvass, It is sometimes necessary for
officers connected with the department Of
Justice to avoid appearances as well as
realities
In recent letter to Mr.. Lasister United
States attorney for the Eastern district
of virginia, which was widely published, /
had occasion to treat OF the same subject
In connection with United States attor-
news acting as members Of campaign COM
mittees. which letter has doubtless reach
ed your eye. You must have
been aware when you wrote
your letter Of the instances, which
I have named above in which this whole
Some rule was recognized and acqulesced
In bv others. 1t must have been quite ap-
parent to you, therefore, that your letter,