Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-01-23
An Appeal to the Courts.

Senator Walsh of Montana proposes
to take into the courts the legality of
the appointments Of three members of
the Federal Power Commission whose
nominations the Senate "reconsidered"
after President Hoover had commits
stoned the appointees and they had as
sumed Office. At first, after President
Hoover had fatty declined to return to
the Senate these nominations for
further and unfavorable action by the
Senate, the Montana Senator said that
it would not be possible to get the mat
ter into the courts for determination.
But he now holds that under law in
the code of the District of Columbia a
quo warranto proceeding may be insti-
tuted in the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict which will reach the commission
ers' case. In consequence he has offered
q resolution In the Senate requesting the
district attorney for the District of Co
lumbia to institute such proceedings.
A decision by the courts, including
the Supreme Court of the United States,
may be advisable. AS the matter stands
and would continue to stand unless
final determination is made by the
courts, the Senate is left with the
nominations of the power commissioners
on its executive calendar or before its
Interstate Commerce Committee, or the
Senate may even reject" the nominal
tons. The effect Of any of these pro-
boxing, since the commissioners are In
ONCE, are performing their functions
and are drawing pay therefor. AS
Senator Walsh told the Senate yester-
decision of the Supreme Court which
held that under the statute no person
is an interested person unless he has
some other interest than such as per-
tains to the ordinary taxpayer of the
District, it would seem that the United
States attorney for the District of
Columbia has the right to institute or
decline to institute these proceedings"
If this be the case, the executive
branch OF the Government might deny
to the Senate the opportunity TO get
this matter into the courts. The At
torney General, the superior ofscer Of
the United States attorney for the Dis
trict of Columbia, has already given an
opinion to the effect that the Senate
H. - rs0I, %N
nations and by the device OF vote Of
reconsideration remove them from
ONCE. The President Of the United
States has taken the same position.
What the Senate could do in the face of
refusal TO institute the proceedings
requested has not yet been made clear.
1t is to be assumed, however, that the
Attorney General and the United States
attorney, believing in the soundness
Of the position assumed by the Attorney
General, will not object to the adjudi-
cation of the matter by the courts.
The three power commissioners, who
aroused the wrath of members of the
Senate because they let out OF office
two officials of the old Power Com
mission whom these Senators con-
sidered opponents of the power trust, "
we're duly confirmed" by the Senate
and the President was properly notified
that the Senate had advised and con-
sented to their appointment. The
Chief Executive then appointed the
OsNVa1 les ~
But later the Senate majority. aroused
by the dismissal of the officials of the
old commission, sought TO reconsider
and recall the nominations under the
terms OF Senate rule which authorizes
a motion to reconsider the vote Of
confirmation within the first two
executive sessions of the Senate fol-
lowing confirmation. The Senate, how
ever, waived this rule when it sent to the
President the notification of the con-
firmation Of the power commissioners,
and the commissioners were legally APP
pointed the President holds. One part Of
the Senate rule, which seems in a meas
ure contradictory, provides for reconsid-
Grafton Of nominations even after the
President has been notified that the
Senate has advised and consented to the
appointments. 1t is on this part of the
rule that the Senate bases its case. The
President, on the other hand, insists
that the matter of appointment has
gone beyond the reach of the Senate
1t Is a nice question and one which
should be determined.