

CONGRESS, UNITED STA I 



10 allusion whatever made to the subject 



of removals tVoin otliec, and therefore all the 



:i ohiain from that source upon 



.11 mii>t IK- alto/ethcr a matter of iu- 



. :l'oil has be.-n mad.' tOOOfl 

 pro.-ei-diii^s into evidence that they sus- 



M.- claim nl' executive power as to remo- 

 . and which lias heretofore been 

 I. lit 1 claim that a fair and reason- 

 11 of those proceedings, so far as 

 any bearing upon the subject, tend 

 mitrary direction. I argue, in the first 

 i hat the absence of any express provision 

 in the Constitution conferring any such power 

 upon the President of the United "States is pre- 

 sumptive evidence that the men who made the 

 ( 'on-titution did not intend that ho should pos- 

 sess ami exercise that power. 



"Now, Bir, the absolute power to remove 

 from office in this .country is a very great pow- 

 er, a power that enables the Executive to abso- 

 lutely control, if not revolutionize, the admin- 

 istration of the Government. If the men who 

 made the Constitution intended the President 

 should possess it they would no doubt have said 

 so, for to confer that power in express language 

 i easy thing ; and the fact that they did not 

 make any provision creating or delegating such 

 a power is, I say, strong evidence that they did 



itend that any such power should exist in 

 the President. 



Manifestly the subject was before the mind 

 of the Convention ; the question was presented 

 and discussed there as to what powers the Ex- 

 ecutive of the United States should possess and 

 exercise ; and therefore it cannot be claimed 

 that this omission to give the power of removal 

 to the President was an accidental omission in 

 the formation of the Constitution ; but on the 

 contrary, it is to bo presumed that after duo 

 consideration all provisions for such a power 

 were excluded from the Constitution because 

 those who made it did not intend that it should 

 exist. Those powers which the President of 

 the United States may exercise are specifically 

 enumerated and defined in the Constitution ; and 

 I think it is a rule of construction recognized 

 by all legal authorities that where general lan- 

 guage is employed to create an office and after- 

 ward in the same connection the powers which 

 shall attach to that office are specifically enu- 

 merated, the particular words control those of 

 a general nature, and the office has those pow- 

 ers which arc contained in the specific enume- 

 ration and no others. There can bo no other 

 object in expressly declaring what shall be the 

 powers or attributes of an office except to limit 

 its jurisdiction and prevent the exercise of non- 

 enumerated powers. I can see no reason why 

 the framers of the Constitution did not grant to 

 the Executive all the primary powers which 

 they intended he should have, and I conclude 

 that they did so, and they did not give him the 

 right to remove from office, which is a power 

 e'jiial in magnitude to any that were conferred 

 upon the Executive. 



" I fortify this conclusion by the fact that the 

 proceedings of that Conveiitiu-i 

 men who made the Constitution \vi-n- ! 

 fill of executive power. Imprc. 

 lessons of history, they were of tin- opinion 

 (and subsequent events have verified tli 

 roctness of that opinion) that it would be the 

 ncy of power to concentrate in tin- hnnda 

 of the Executive; and various propositions 

 were made in the Convention to place a limita- 

 tion upon his power. Suggestions were made 

 that a coun>il of <tate should In- oirani/ed; 

 that ft privy or ancillary council should bo 

 formed ; that persons should be placed around 

 tho President to advise with him as to hi 

 ecutive action. Those suggestions, however, 

 were not adopted; but tho Senate of tho 

 United States was, to some extent, placed in 

 the relation of a council of state to the Execu- 

 tive. 



''This bill only undertakes to control what 

 has been confessed by the advocates of this 

 power to be an abuse of the executive authority. 

 What does it propose to do? Take it alto- 

 gether and it amounts practically to this: that 

 the President shall not remove persons from 

 office without cause ; but whenever an officer 

 should bo dismissed from the performance of 

 his duties, and another person put in his place, 

 this bill provides that it may be done. It pro- 

 vides for every case wjiere the public necessi- 

 ties or interests demand a change, and it only 

 prohibits the abuse of executive power. I pre- 

 sume that no Senator will contend that Con- 

 gress cannot prohibit by law the abuse of lii.s 

 authority by any officer of the Government. 



"I hope, Mr. President, that Senators who 

 argue this question on the other side will not 

 fail to notice this distinction. The question is 

 not so much as to what the Constitution does or 

 does not provide, or as to what the Constitution 

 does or does not confer upon the President, but 

 the question is, has the Congress of the United 

 States the power under the Constitution to 

 create offices and declare during what time tho 

 persons appointed to fill shall hold those offices? 

 All that this bill proposes is simply to say, in 

 substance, that when a man, under the Con- 

 stitution, upon tho nomination of the Presi- 

 dent, is appointed by and with the advice and 

 consent of the Senate, he shall hold until his 

 successor is nominated by tho President and 

 appointed by and with tho advice and consent 

 of the Senate ; and I ask any reasonable man if 

 that is not what the Constitution contemplates. 

 I say it is a plain perversion of the Constitution 

 when, under that clause which authorizes the 

 President to fill vacancies, he undertakes to 

 absorb all the power of the appointment, and 

 ignores and disregards the authority and wil! 

 of the Senate. 



"Sir, this bill is only intended to vin 

 tho constitutional power of tho Senate. We 

 have more light on this subject than tho men 

 who made the Constitution. Sir, they were 

 good men and patriots, but they were born and 



