The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1901-03-20
PLATTS LOST OPPORTUNITY.
Might Have Prevented sanger's APP
pointment by Remaining Firm.

| dent and the Secretary of War on one
| hand and the Senators from New YORK
| State on the other over the appointment
| Of Col. William Cary Sanger as Assistant
| Secretary of War. 1t is a question that
| has bothered the heads of distinguished
| statesmen and high executive officials
| since the American Republic was yong
! 1t was practically fought To finish Just
about twenty years ago. when Senators
! Conkling and Platt resigned their seats
| in the Senate because President Garfield
| refused to be dictated to by them in the
| appointment of Federal officials in the
| State of New York
A burnt child breads the fire. and evi-
IDENTIFY Senator Plat hesitated TO oppose
| President Mckinley and Secretary Root
| to the extent that he opposed President
| Garfield and Secretary Blaine in 1881.
| The late Benjamin Harrison, before he
became President. and perhaps afterward,
| had some very decided views as to the re-
| lltions of the Senate and the Executive.
| The most noteworthy speech that Mr..
Harrison delivered while he was in the
| Senate was in support of the resolutions
reported from the Committee on the Jul
dietary February Is. 1886, relative to the
refusal of President Cleveland to trans
| nit to the Senate the papers in the case of
the removal of George NJ. Dusdn, United
States District Attorney at Mobile. Ala.
| This resolution did not deal directly with
the power of the President to appoint
against the wishes of the Senators. but
it did discuss the right of the President
to remove an officeholder without the
sanction of the Senate
Indeed the point of Mr.. Harrison's
speech which was delivered March 26.
1886. was that President Cleveland did not
dare to remove Mr.. Duskin or any of the
numerous officials "decapitated" by him
in the early days Of his first Administra-
ton, but that he was careful to say in
all cases that he suspended them. The
resolutions from the Judiciary Committee,
which were signed by Senators George f.
Edmunds chairman, J. ]. Ingalls, S.
Q. r. Mcmillan. George F. Hoar. James
F. Wilson, and William NJ. Evarts. con-
demned the refusal of the President to
give his reasons for removing Mr.. Duskin,
declared it to be the duty of the Senate
to withhold its sanction under the cir
cumstances, and denied the right of the
President to remove an official, especially
a soldier or sailor, for political reasons.
claiming that such action would be Il
violation OF section 1854 of the Revised
Statutes. which gives preference in the
matter of Federal appointment to honor
ably discharged soldiers and sailors.
In the early days of the controversy
over Colonel Sangers appointment. Sem
ator Depcw repeatedly stated for publ
cation that he had no personal animosty
to Colonel Sanger. and no desire to OPP
pose Secretary Root IN his choice of an
assistant, but that he stood on the broad
ground of Senatorial perogative. and
h.
with regard TO the announced purpose of
Secretary Root to have Colonel Sanger
appointed, he was naturally opposed TO
the selection. After the appointment had
been agreed upon. however. and infor-
plaIly announced Senator Depew was
consulted by the President ut White
House conference suggested by the New
York Senators.
When the appointment had been official
~ made, Senator Platt took occasion to
explain at some length that he had been
opposed to Colonel Sansers selection
largely. IL not altogether. because OF the
belief that Colonel Sanger had personal
" attacked his CPlatt's) public and prl-
vate record in a speech made to the leg
islative caucus at Albany, in urging the
nomination of Joseph H. Choate to the
United States Senatorship. Mr.. Platt let
1t be known. Furthermore. that during
the conversation which he had with Colo
mel Sanger In New York when the latter
speech alluded to, the colonel convinced
the Senator tina. hereafter he would be
a good organization or machine Repub-
Iican, no matter what his record may
have been in the past for Independence
Of spirit.
In return for consenting to Colonel San
gers appointment the New York Senators
were allowed the privilege of recommend
ing persons to be appointed to various Of
fees which will become vacant in the
near future by death. resignation; or
,, and hfTsh HOY a va
been asked to fill as n matter of course
had the question of Colonel Sangers APP
pointment as Assistant Secretary of War
never been raised.
In view of the foregoing facts the ques-
ton of what would have been the result
had the New York Senators sought the
aid of Senatorial prerogative' and OPP
posed Colonel SGngers appointment to
the extent of making a fight against con-
frmation IN the Senate is interesting. of
Course. there is no method Of determining
this now, and the most natural basis for
forming a conjecture Is found in the re
membrance of what happened when
Conkling and Plat opposed the appoint
ment of William II. Robertson to be col
lector of the port of New York twenty
years ago. Mr.. Robertson got the office,
and the Senators retired to private life.
But what happened in 1881 might not have
happened in 1901. and In this connection
the opinion OF a Senator who has had
twelve years experience in studying pol
tiles as well as craftsmanship in Wash
tant. This Senator said day or two
ago:
Il think there is little doubt that if
Senators Plat and Depew had invoked
the power of Senatorial prerogatIve and
carried their fight against Colonel San
ger to the Senate they would have won,
and / form this opinion merely IN my
judgment of the present political situa-
ton. President Mckinley is now serving
his second and last term, and everybody |
Is casting about to decide the ail-im- |
portant question of his successor. In the |
Senate there are various gentlemen in !
whose bonnets the bee is buzzlng. but II is |
csident that the Senator who at present |
has the best chances Of being nominated |
is Mr.. Fairbanks, of Indiana. or course |
ii is too early yet to attempt to pick out |
a winner. But of the Senatorial candi-
dates Fairbanks seems to be the coming |
man. lie is generally regarded as the ,
Administration candidate lust as his wife |
was when she was so easily elected To |
the Office Of President OF the Daughters |
Of the American Revolution. Everybody |
who has a political axe to grind has an /
eye on Fairbanks. and is trying 10 get !
next to him. Now suppose the New York
Senators should have gone to Fairbanks
and appealed to him to stand by them
in opposing the confirmation of an anti |
machine New York Republican to "A hirh
executive office. Would the Senatorial
candidate for the Presidential nomination
have turned them down. or would he |
have attempted to make such an ar |
rangemcnt with them as would give hin,
the support of the Republican orgauiZa-
ton in New York State with its seventy
two votes In the National Convention
And would not Hanna or Lodge or Roy
eridge, or any one OF the Senators who |
have been spoken Of as Presidential can
didates think twice before declining ia
Join hands with the man who controls tn.
New York machine? | tell YOU In my
opinion Platt made a mistake if he de