Year: 1866

/ The holders of impcrtan Federal positions on
this coast who are being disposed of at the will
of the would -like-to-be "Dictator at Wash
ington, do not seem to be entirely satisfied that
the guilotine master is not overstepping his au-
thority. This official beheading is understood
to be natural and just consequence when com
| ing with change of administration, or as the
result of incompetence or malfeasance in Office.
But such has not been shown to be the case in
any single instance of the removals on this coast
of late, nor has it been attempted.


| We invite attention to the following remarks
from the Sacramento Bee in regard to the course
proposed to be pursued by the United States AS
SCISSOR for the I'd District of California lately
moved to furnish place for that arrant old Cop
perhead, John Bgler. Avery is accused of no
misconduct or dishonesty in office, but is remov-
ed because he holds the political ciers he did
Uhen appointed to the position. His only crime is
refusing to swallow the disgusting Ito sincere
Union mem and damnable treason-pill which An
dy Johnson is endeavoring to cram down the
throats of Federal officials. We trust the mat
ter will be fully tested. But read the grounds of
appeal as set forth by the Bee


UNITED STATES AssEssoR.-Who is Assessor
of the Fourth Internal Revenue District of Cali
fornia? John Bigler has been appointed by the
President to the position but J. NJ. Avery, the


incumbent, who also appointed by the Pres


dent and confirmed by the Senate, refuses to
recognize the power of the President to remove
him without cause-that is, legitimate cause,
such as misdemeanor or mafeasance in Office
The power of the President to fill vacancies is
not denied by Avery, bnt he denies, under
stand, that there is a vacancy. In fact, he holds
that only the appointing power-the President
and Senate-can remove unless for sufficient
cause. No case similar to this has yet so far as
we can learn, been adjudicated in the Supreme
Court of the United States. Under the Consti-
tuition, and in the absence of judicial decisions,
it is therefore nice legal point and the prevail
ing opinion among lawyers seems to be that
Avery will make his case good. At any rate the
point should now be tested The strange be-
havior of the President-his apparent, and we
may say perseverng, determination to commit the
Government into the hands of its enemies, is
sufficient cause why Union men should refuse to
recognize his authority in such cases, until
they are assured of his right by solemn opn-
ion of the Supreme Court If the President
has power to make these appointments without
the consent of the Senate and in opposition to it,
and it be so decided by the tribunals erected for
that purpose, every good man will willingly bow
| his head in submission but until such decision,
and while the best lawyers hold the contrary,
Union would not be justified in surrender
ing the Government into the hands of its ene-
mics without legal contest. And it may be
here said that all the leading Federal officers in
San Francisco have, told, resolved to do
in like circumstances as Avery has done. There
are several modes of making the issue-one is
for the .appointee to bring suit in the Q. S.
District Court against the party refusing to
render. Thence it would go to the Supreme
Court of the United States, and by that time Con-
gress will be in session and the question would
be settled-if against Avery taking the Sacra-
mento case) by the Court, for him in Congress
by the enactment of proper law the sub
ject. Another mode would be to apply to the
President for order directing the Marshal or
the military power to turn the incumbent out
by force and put the appointee into the place
If the President has the right to make the ap-
pointment he has power to enforce his commands
by the means suggested, but if he has not the
power to appoint, he would be exceeding his
authority to use the military arm to carry out
his illegal act, and might thereby create just
cause of impeachment.