142 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



other officer who will discharge his duties; 

 and I am sure that no one who knows me will 

 attribute any remarks which I utter as being 

 intended to apply to the present very efficient 

 and very able presiding officer of this body. 

 My sole purpose is to maintain what I conceive 

 to be indispensably and absolutely necessary : 

 the right of this body to change its officers 

 whenever in its pleasure it becomes proper to 

 do so." 



Mr. Jones, of Florida, said : " Mr. President, I 

 agree in all that has been said by the commit- 

 tee in the report except what is stated in their 

 last conclusion, and I concur entirely with the 

 Senator from North Carolina (Mr .Merrirnon) in 

 the views he has expressed in regard to this case. 



'' Whatever might have been the construc- 

 tion of the Constitution before the act of March 

 1, 1792, was passed, it is very clear that that 

 act must have great, weight in the considera- 

 tion of the question before us. It is not enough 

 to show, therefore, by the terms of the Consti- 

 tution, that the President pro tempore of the 

 Senate is an officer of the Senate, and under 

 those provisions alone would be removable at 

 the pleasure of the Senate. It is possible that 

 such a construction would have been war- 

 ranted before the act of 1792 was passed; but 

 the Constitution gave to Congress the right to 

 say, and that body has said, what officers shall 

 succeed to the office of President in the event 

 of the death of the President and Vice-Presi- 

 dent. While it may be true, therefore, that 

 the Constitution intended to place the Presi- 

 dent of the Senate under the control of this 

 body and make him removable at its pleasure, 

 if no legislation was had under the first section 

 of the second article of the Constitution, which 

 empowers Congress to provide for filling the 

 office of President when the first two officers 

 in the Government are dead or are removed, 

 still, the last provision in the Constitution gives 

 Congress the power to change the tenure of 

 the office of the President of the Senate when 

 it gives it authority to say that the person who 

 fills it in a certain exigency shall be President 

 of the United States. 



" If the power conferred upon Congress 

 touching the filling of the office of President 

 of the United States be in conflict with that 

 which is supposed to exist on the part of this 

 body to remove its presiding officer, then rea- 

 sonable construction must decide the question 

 at issue. It is not enough to say that the Pres- 

 ident pro tempore of the Senate, like the Ser- 

 geant-at-Arms of the Senate, is an officer of 

 this body, and because the Sergeant-at-Arms 

 may be removed by the Senate, so may the 

 President pro tempore be removed. This mode 

 of reasoning would be admissible if Congress 

 under the Constitution had not pointed out 

 duties beyond the Senate for the one officer in 

 a certain contingency which it has not pre- 

 scribed for the other. 



" This is the great point, in my opinion, upon 

 which this debate must turn. 



" If Congress has the right (which no one 

 will deny) to cast upon the President pro tem- 

 pore of the Senate the office of President of 

 the United States when the President and Vice- 

 President are dead, and, in order to guard 

 against duubts and uncertainties in a matter 

 of so much importance, it becomes necessary 

 that the tenure of office of the President of 

 the Senate should be fixed, can it be said that 

 the right to remove such officer on the part of 

 the Senate should supersede the right of Con- 

 gress to designate him as heir-expectant of the 

 presidency ? Or, to put the proposition in an- 

 other shape, if Congress under an express pro- 

 vision of the Constitution has the right to cast 

 upon the President of the Senate duties and 

 powers, either in presenti or in expectancy, 

 which are in conflict, or which may come in 

 conflict, with the right of the Senate to remove 

 such officer, derived by implication, which 

 powers shall prevail ? The right of this body 

 to remove this officer is a right derived by im- 

 plication, while the other right exercised by 

 Congress is in virtue of an express power given 

 by the Constitution. The Constitution made 

 it the duty of Congress to declare by law what 

 officer shall exercise the executive office of the 

 nation when left vacant by both the President 

 and Vice - President. Congress accordingly 

 has provided that in such a contingency the 

 office shall be filled by the President of the 

 Senate or the Speaker of the House for the 

 time being. Congress was not invested with 

 the general power to fill the office ; but the 

 Constitution requires that it shall provide by 

 law what officer shall act as President in such 

 an exigency. 



" The law then designates the President pro 

 tempore of the Senate as the officer who shall 

 succeed to the presidency in the contingency 

 mentioned. How will this law operate with 

 the right asserted' in behalf of this body to re- 

 move that officer at its pleasure? Remember 

 that the law provides that if there be no Pres- 

 ident pro tempore of the Senate the Speaker 

 of the House shall act as President. All ex- 

 perience teaches us that nothing is more dan- 

 gerous to the peace and security of nations then 

 those conflicts which arise out of disputes 

 about the right to the chief office in the state. 



" With the absolute power of removal over 

 the officer who is designated by law to fill the 

 office of President, if the occasion should arise, 

 which I pray it may not, for putting in practice 

 this part of our Constitution, to what intrigue 

 and political excitement would not this power 

 lead in the Senate when it was within its com- 

 petency to designate the man who should oc' 

 cupy the first place in the nation ! The power 

 given in the Constitution to the Senate to 

 choose its own President would in that event 

 be converted into a power to elect a President 

 of the United States. But, sir, this is the body 

 which has the power to remove from office by 

 impeachment. A large partisan majority here 

 and in the other House may remove both the 



