New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1920-06-05
Clause Providing for
Removal of Officials
by Congress Is Held
TO Be Unconstitutional
Holds 1t lnfringes
Executive Power
House Fails in Effort
to Pass Measure Over
Wilson's Disapproval

WASHINGTON, June 4.-President
Wilson tonight vetoed the bill estAb-
fishing nation budget system, and an
unsuccessful attempt was made in the
House to pass the measure over his
veto.
The vote was 17s to 1o3, or nine less
than the required two thirds majority
Thirtytive Democrats joined with tho
Republicans in voting to pass the
measure.
In vetoing the bill the President held
it to be unconstitutional because it took
from the Chief Executive the power to
remove the Comptroller General and the
Assistant Comptroller General officers
advice and consent of the Senate.
The President said he returned the
measure without his approval with the
greatest regret because he was "in en-
tire sympathy" with its objects. He
added that he returned it at the earliest
possible moment with the hope that the
Congress may find time before adjourn
ment to remedy this defect"
Presidents Message
The Presidents message read:
~ do this with the greatest regret.
| am in entire sympathy with the OBJ
jects of this bill and would gladly ap-
prove it but for the fact that regard
one of the provisions contained in Sec
tion 303 as unconstitutional. This ls
+,,o ;cic 10 oFn %loo
Comptroller General and the Assistant
Comptroller General, who are to be ap-
pointed by the President with the ad-
vice and consent of the Senate. may be
removed at any time by concurrent
resolution of Congress after notice and
hearing, when, in their Judgment, the
Comptroller General or Assistant
Comptroller General is incapacitated or
inefficient or has been guilty of neglect
of duty or Of malfeasance of office or
Of any felony or conduct involving
moral turpitude, and for no other
cause except either by impeachment or
has, think, always been the accepted
construction of the Constitution that
the power to appoint officers of this
kind carries with it, as an incident,
the power to remove.
81 am convinced that the Congress is
without constitutional powers to limit
the appointing power and its incident
power Of removal derived from the
Constitution.
"The section referred to not only
forbids the Executive to remove these
officers, but undertakes to empower
the Congress by a concurrent resolu-
tion to remove an officer appointed by
the President with the advice and con-
sent Of the Senate.
Offending Clause
"I can fnu IN the Constitution no
warrant for the exercise of this power
by the Congress. There is certainly no
expressed authority conferred, and |
am unable to see that authority for the
exercise of this power is implied in
any expressed grant Of power. On the
contrary, think its exercise is clearly
negatived by Section 2 of Article II.
That section, after providing that
certain enumerated officers and all
officers whose appointment are not
otherwise provided for shall be APP
pointed by the President with the ad-
vice and consent of the Senate, pro
the appointment of such inferior Of
ficers as they think proper in the
President alone, in the course of law,
or in the heads Of departments. 1t
would have been within the constitu
tional power of the Congress, in Gre
ating these offices, to have vested the
power of appointment IN the President
alone, in the President with the ad-
vice and consent of the Senate, or ev m
in the head of department. Regard
inp as I do the power of removal from
office as an essential incident to the
appointing power, | cannot escape the
conclusion that the vesting of this
power of removal in the Congress is nn-
constitutional, and therefore | am un-
able to approve the bill.
81 am returning the bill at the ear
liest possible moment with the nope
that the Congress may hnd time before
adjournment to remedy this defect
British Send Sugar to Y. ).