The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1897-04-02
TENURE OF OFFICE.
Case That Presents a Question OF
General Interest.
Can the President Remove From Oiiice
Except for Cause.

Washington, ID. c., April 2.-The
supreme court will, next week probably,
hear argument upon case presenting
question of the widest interest at this
juncture of affnirs-does the President
have power 10 remove district attorneys,
except for cause, before the expiration Of
their termsg The title OF the case on tho
docket is Lewis T.. Parsons .Ir., ~. the
United States, and il comes on appeal
from the Judgment of tho court of claims
against Parsons.
The history OF the case is this Parsons
was commissioned by President Harrison
on the ith Of February, 1890 attorney for
the northern and middle district OF Ala
bama-his commission rcciting that nc
was appointed for a term of four years.
On the 26th day OF May, 1893 President
Cleveland dismissed him from office, no
charges of delinquency being made against
him.
Parsons refused 60 surrender Office To his
successor, Emmett O'Nci, and on the 2Oth
of June, 1893, at the request ol the latter,
the circuit court for the United states IS
sued AN order directing Parsons 10 turn
over the papers and other property OF the
Office, which lac did. At the expiration OF
the year Parsons brought suit in the court
OF claims to recover the amount of Ices
and salary for the Office for the part of thu
year following his removal, but tho court
decided against him.
The brief OF Parsons counsel goes into
the process of legislation regulating the
appointment of district attorneys, which
brings 10 light some interesting, but
ong-forgotten, political history.
This was based upon statements in the
decision of the court: For period OF
over 80 years the President exercised the
power of appointments under tho act of
Il tn,
define or control his right as to the mode
or manner Of appointment or the time
for which the appointment should bo made
During that period IL Is safe 10 assume
that changes had been made in the Office
of district-attorney and other offices by
the Presidents whc served during the
period from 1889 TO 1920. From these re-
peated removals it had become the prac-
tico and custom of the executive TO re-
move officers at pleasure without the au-
thority or sanction of the Senate y
Against this counsel put the declara-
tlons made in the report recommending
the passage of the civil service law, pre-
sented by Mr.. Pendleton in the 47th Con-
gress:
"Thesc abuses have grown out Of sys-
tenn comparatively new in our govern
ment Appointments because of special
fitness and removals for cause were the
rule in It's early history. The committee
nation accessible but have not learned of
"A single removal among this class of in
forior officers, except for cause, from the
commencement of the administration OF
President Washington TO the accession OF
President Jackson.
Also similar statements from Dorman
II Eaton's article on Removals From
Office in the "Cyclopedia of Political
Science.
From 1880 to 1S20,' say counsel cor
nine years longer than the period nLmed
by the court. six Presidents removed from
office of tho thousands in office during
that whole time, but 73 officials. Under
the law of 1889 there was no fixed tenure
of office, no term was named, no power of
removal granted or recognized in terms
or by implication. But i'm 1920 the law
was changed, creating term of four years
for district attorneys, collectors, naval
officers, navy agents, surveyors of customs
paymasters and other officers, with power
of removal. This change, Mr.. Adams
said, was made for the purpose of securing
support for Crawford for the presidency,
and under its operation was built up the
machine that brought about the nomina-
tion Of Jackson in 1928.
This law Of 1870, however, was not
pleasing To many eminent statesmen, and
repeated efforts were made by them To re.
peal It, None were successful, however,
until 1895, when, despite the weight Of
.Iackson's administration against 1t, the
repeating act passed the senate by vote
of 81 20 l6; every distinguished name in
the senate--Bcnton, Webster, Clay, CAL
houn, Ewing, Southland and White among
them, except Buchanan of Pennsylvania
and Wright of New York-being recorded
in favor of the appeal.
"The senate, says Mr.. Eaton, "had not
at that time come very much under tho
vicious influence of patronage, or of the
feudal code called the courtesy, which
have i'm late years been so disastrously
potential to that body"
As result of their investigation Of the
course of legislation, counsel conclude
that mt present the only law on the subject
is section 100, Revised Statutes, which does
not confer on the President the right 60
remove an officer whose Office Is created
by law, and the term fixed by Congress.