Newspaper Page Text
SATURDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY », I«68. jm- Edward H. Fort«, Ko. Ml Poplar street, Wilmington, u authorised to solicit subscript fcStr"**""-' **• f8r " id dletown ~~W W 1 "# War DOm I labres 11«. space, to-day, is devoted to this subjected we could not, perhaps, have rendered Our readers a more acceptable service than in presenting them A large portion of our xte view of it, whieh we have endeavored to do by publishing a statement of the facts " bave occurred, and the fairest and reasonable commentaries of some of the leading journals of the country, reject tog the ultra views of heated and insane partisans on either side. Tha orisis is too grave for passion, pre judice, or blind party seal and rage. The mere partisans of the country array them selves at once either on the side of the President or Congress, and bestow thinking praise or ceusure according to their party predilections, without much gard to the legal or constitutional aspects of the case. Such journals and such indi viduals are not the proper exponents of public opinion nor of legal or constitution al right, power or authority, and are unfit oonnseilors and unsafe leaders in moments of doubt or peril, and are therefore nn Worthy of consideration The gist of the whole matter is, that the President, nnder what he believes his constitutional right and privilege, un dertook to remove an obnoxious member of his cabinet, who resisted his order and caused the arrest of the person designated as his successor. The court, it was hoped, ^ould determine the right or wrong of this proceeding, settling the question whether the tenure-of-office aot is in conflict with the oonstitntion, or not ; hut the issue was evaded, for the present, by the discharge of Gen. Thomas, on Wednesday last, lest a decision adverse to impeachment should bo reached in the courts before the Senate conld act. un re to be Congress haring undertaken to impeach, the President sent a special message to that body, which we think will be acoepted hy the country as a clear vindicatiou of his constitutional right in the premises. But it strikes us that this message of the Pres ident was au after-thought, a lowering of the crest, made necessary hy the irregular mode he adopted of bringing this question to the adjudication of the courts, surprised at this, as the President is not only a good constitutional lawyer himself, but might have had the counsel of tho best legal minds in the country. He declares, however, in his message, that his object in removing Mr. Stanton was to briug the question to the Supreme Court, and aie bound to accept his declaration as true. Congress, having long desired to impeach and depose the President, could not let the occasion pass without making another effort to consummate what had been twice before attempted, but which had resulted in signal failure. We are « ; With indcoent haste, in the midst of s gust of passiou and of excitement, a resolution of impeachment adopted, and the preliminary steps * being taken, to arraign, for the first time the history of the country, the Presi dent of the U. States, for "high crimes and misdemeanors." a storm wm If Congres« should press the matter of impeachment to a vote and conviction, without allowing time for the Supreme Court to determine the issue, it would af ford additional evidence of the revolution ary designs of that body, and would call . upon the people for tho gravest to uphold the constitution and the lawB, and to maintain their liberties against its The country will abide cheerfully tlie decision of the Supreme Court, whatever it may be, but a decision by a fragmentary Congress, such as it now is, without due representation from twelve fifteen Sûtes of the Union, would be a source of public discontent and measures encroachment«. or exaspera tion fraught with imminent peril to the tranquility of the country. During the excitement growing out of th» war-office difficulty, rash and ill-tidvis •4 men seemed ready to resort to arms without a moment's considération. Fore most among thesa waa Gov. Geary, of Pa. who telegraphed to Hon. Simon Cameron troops were ottering themselves to sustain Congress. This heroic announce ment called forth another, fror» N. York sustaining the President, adding, * will take care of Gery's sand fighting men were enrolled there in one day to sustain the President, and tel egrams have been flashing over the wires ever 4 we Five thou men.' since, offering encouragement to both pnrties. These circumstances should ad monish all to prudence and caution, aiuce it is apparent that the slightest spark may kindle the flame of a civil wer compared to which our late sectional contest was hut a trifle. The Philadelphia Ledger advis es these fighting men to stick to their bu siness end leave the» result to the R. courts. North East is trying to become tlie Çomity seat of Cecil, in place of Elktou. Th« »«tlowa Dom as t* The National Democratic Committee, at their meeting hi Washington, on Saturday lart, agreed Upon the city of New York as the place for holding the presidential mating convotltio*, and the 4th of July the tbne. The o»ly other action take* #aa ah agreement to give thin announce ment, acoompnied by an tîon to all the opponents f ^ unite in this movement to «elect anti-radi oal candidates for the Presidency and Vice Presidency of the . Unites .States. The proceedings were harmonious, and the suit, it is understood, moets the alfnost unanimous approval of tho mem ben of the committee. The place selected, we think, is well enough, but the time is not sufficiently early. The candidate of the Republican party is already in the field, and organi sation is in progress. The Democrats and Conservatives,ought also to organise with out further delay, and not give their oppo nents any advantage over them as to time. MM invita is 1 Congress ia not to be thwarted in its reconstruction" plans. Laws are alter edor abolished to suit it« purposes, with the utmost facility, vote neoessary to adopt a constitution, but the Alabama constitution having been de feated for want of the requisite vote, it is chaugod to a majority. Aud if this should not do, these bogus Southern State negro governments would be recognised without any vote at all. A Continuous Session ok Conoress._ The Baltimore American's Washington correspondent thus writes, under the head of "Congressional Prospects" : The prospect of a continuous session of Congress henee to the 4th of March, 1869, is beginning to be discussed among the members. Nearly all the expressions point to a recess in June for a couple of mouths, a reassembling in September, if events require it, ami then a recess until Decem ber. it made a two-thirds The name of Alexander Warren, of Appoquinimink Hundred, has been nounced as a candidate for the Sheriffalty of New Castle county, subject to the de cision of the Democratic Convention. an Andes Cartier's Dlspnctsl DodRe. A special dispatch to the Baltimore Sim dated, Washington, Feb. 26, says:_The unexpected termination of the criminal prosecution against General Thomas, by dismissal of the case and his discharge from custody, is the subject of comment to night. Judge Cartter's apparent readi ness to discharge the accused, so as to de stroy the foundation for hubcas corpus, is severely criticised by those who desire a decision of the legal points iu the United States Supreme Court, pffor to a final vote in the Senate, whilst tho notion ia approved and chuckled over as a shrewd manouvre hy those who favor the instaut conviction of the President by a vote of the Senate, without reference to the action of the Su preme Court. By preventing the Wur Department im broglio from reaching the Supreme Court iu any form, the Senate will dispose of im peachment upou party considerations, after the manner of the House. As the matter now stands, the Supreme Co*t cannot get jurisdiction of the sub ject, except by a proceeding of some kind upon the civil «idc of the law. There are three modes suggested for bringing the controversy ultimately before the Supreme Court. One of them was commenced to day, by direction of the President, in the form of petition for quo warranto. Wheth er the writ has beeu served upon Mr. Stan ton has not been made public. It is said, upon apparently good au thority, that the House special committee to prepare articles of impeachment have decided to include in the articles several other counts besides the violation of the tenure-of-office act. Immediately after the discharge of Gen eral Thomas, this morning, a suit was commenced in the District Court by him against Mr. Stanton for false imprison ment and mischievous prosecution. Dam ages laid at one hundred thousand dollars. The proceedings of Congress on Monday, in view of the proposed impeachment of President Johnson, were highly interesting. At 121 o'clock Mr. MePherson, the clerk of the House, appeared at the door of the Senate, and announced that the House had passed a resolution to impeach the President of the United States for high crime and misdemenors. Soon after Messrs. Stevens and Bingham, acommittee of the House, appeared at the bar of the Senate, and announced that the House of RepresenUtives had adopted a resolution proposing the impeachment of the presi dent, and would, in due time, exhibit particulars of said impeachment, Ac. j Senate thereupon adopted a resolution appoint a select committee of of ot for aud in is the Tin to seven to consider the snbject, and to report thereon Messrs. Howard, Trumbull, Conkling, "Edmunds, Morton, Pomeroy and Johnson were appointed the committee. In the House, a resolution was adopted changing the rule of the House so as to >»»tt the debate of oacb member to fifteen minutes when articles of impeachment of the President are reported. This was done to expedite the work of impeach ment The impeachment eommitteo ob tamed leave to stt during the session of tl.e The trial of John H. Surratt, which was to have taken place on Monday l agt has been postponed uutil May. Messt.' R. Merrick, Judge Black, and Mr. BratU ley are his counsel. Lucy Purnell, negress, was to have Mt" ® xeouted yesterday, near Snow Hill, Md. for the murder of Hanson Robbins. MES S AG E QE -THE -EÄESIDEÜT, Ui- *»--- Ämtl u " Arn n , Wr ' *" d Def "'" Washington, February 24.—The Prescient to ? ay 116111 te the Senate the following message.— It was read in »ret session, laid on the table as nod ordered to be printed. The Senate removed the injunction of secrecy : To thé -Senate of the United States ■ _I have re reived a copy of the resolution adopted bv the Senate on the list instnut follows^ S "Whereas the Senate have received and eon t* iidesod the ejwtmunicntion of the l'(evident at£ '• ting that hehad removed Edwin a Stanton Secretary of War, and had designated the A-dju tant General of the Army to act as Secretary Of Wur ad, nerim; therefore 'he Senate o/the United Slater, Tha under the constitution and laws of the United 0 * l " e ^ r i". s .'^ ent * iaa no P°"'®r to remove tbe Secretary of \\ ar and designate auy other offie to perform the duties of that oflice ad interim " Thul resolution is confined to the power ofThe 1 resident to remove the Secretary of War and to designate another — the office ad ha&h at as ^ a a of of so cy by by to It of ■ officer to perforin the duties o.« i ». i*!*» an,i b T preamble is made expressly applicable to*the removal of Mr. Htau ton, and the designation to act ad itdtrim of the Adjutant General of the army. WiUiouL there fore, attempting to discora the general power removal as to all officers, upon which subject no expression ot opinion is contained in the resolu Uon, I «hail coniine myself to the question as thus lunited—the power to remove the Secretary of of It is declared hi the resolution "that under the (onstitutmu and laws of the United Slates the President has no power to remove the Secretary 1 s.' , ' i i es r , " c an >' 0Ülcr olli « r te perform the duties of the oflice ad ml,Tiki." As to the question ol power under the constitution I dd not propose at present to enter upon it» discussion, the uniform practice from the beginning of the government, as established by every President who has exercised the office, and the dcoiafolia of the Supreme Court or the United States, have settled the question in favor of the power of the Presi dent to remove all officers excepting ing appointments of a judicial character. No [auction, or any derision, has excepted the Secre tary o! War from this general power of the Presi dent to make removals from oflice. It is only necessary, then, that 1 should refer to tlie power of the Executive under the laws of the United States, to remove from office a Secretory of War. The resolution denies that under these laws this power has any existence. In other words, it af üiJün t "il n °. such 8uth « r 'ly is recognized ot Ifil n, tht "tetutesof the country. What, then are the laws of the United States which deny the VnTi K . î* 18 P uwer to remove that officer ? 1 tiôn b Th c' 0 . "* 8 " bich l,e,,r u P un toi" ques nte 7 .h ln of timi! 18 toe act of Au gust 7th 178», creating the Department of War, , , 'iv* r providing for a Secretary C 1 P?> officer, proceeds as follows : shullhl to 18 / •'ï Ÿ Sufher enacted, That there to h. b «, L h ^ an inferior officer, to be appointed by the said principal officer, to be employed itorein as he shall deem proper, to I» called the chief clerk in the Deportment ol rl: h °'r b ' nev - 'he "aid pncip.il officer thî UnitaTS?'^ 1 fr °. m offloc 'V toe President of -hill a ■ Stetes, or in any other case of vacancy, shall, during ,„ch vacancy have the charge and custody ot all records, booiu and talning to tho said department. u ""ÂÎ' thi t aCl ' passcd *>/* Congress many or whose members participated Iu tlie for Ic 11 "" of toe constitution, so far foom denying the power of the 1 resident to remove the Sccro , ur ' roroynizes it as existing in the Ex «.uu e alone, without the concurrence of the Senate or of any other depiirfmenf of tlie goveru UKn r ' y ur toermoro, this act does not purport to confer the power by legislative authority, nor in fo t was there any other existing legislation thro' winch it was brought upon the Executive. The reeognitiou of the power; by this net is stiriilbm SP r' 1, ri c,J t:tfi 1 ' 0 ii ander the con «m ilile r 1 f 'Z- to'« WaFno other source or authority from which it conld be derived - ; The other aot which refers to this question is that reg ulating the tenure of certain civil ofliccrs,massed byt ongresson the second duy of March, 1867. The hrst section of that act is in tlie following words : • Tlint every person holding nny civil office to w-inch he has been np|a.intod bvand witli the advice and consent of tfic Seli»te,'and every E° n <R h ° eh j M Jterotrfter lie appointed to nny such office, and shall become qualified to net thorein, is and »hail be entitled to hold siu-h office until a successor shall have been in like appointed and duly qualified, except 'TÄ ,,r0 lin tout the. Secrete I s ,'.".l °f lbe Treasury, of War, of tlicNavy, M"i of the Interior, the Postmaster General ami the Attorney General, shall hold their offices, respectively, for and During the terra of the Presr ident by whom they may have been appointed, bringt r n !, h • ,hcl ^' f te- - . subject to removal "J"' d »'to th ;b advice and consent of the Senate •' The fourth section of the same aot restricts the terra of offices to the limit prescribed by the law creating them. That part of tig, first section ZZ Fm 11,6 F 0 """ declares that every person holding a civil office to whieh he has been may be appointed, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall hold such office until a successor shall have been in like manner appointed. It purports to take from the E«c tive, during the fixed time established for the tenure of the oflice, the independent power of re moval, and to require for such removal the con current action of tlie President and the Senate_ The proviso that follows proceeds to fix the term of office »[seven heads of departments whose tenure never had been Defined before, hy prescribing ïy ''shall hold their offices, respectively, during the term of the President by whom they may have been oppointod, and for one month thereafter, subject to removal by and with advice and consent of the Senate." . Thus, os to these enumerated officers, the pro viso takes from the President the power of re moval except with the a'dvice and consent of the Senate. By its terms, before he tan be deprired of the power to displace them, it must appear that he himself lias appointed them. It is only in that caw that they have any tenure of office o'r anyht depeudent right to hold during the term of the 1 rc-sident, pud for one month after the cessation of his official functions. fV'lc 0 ' toorefore, gives no tenure of office o any of these officers who has been appointed by a former President lieyond one month after the AcceHHion of his successor. In the is a i'ln.ss hold it« prin papers upper manner as herein that the for and of Mr. Stanton, the onirspnoitnient under winch ho held the oflice of Secretary of VI nr wns that conferred upon him by my imme diate predecessor, with tlie ndxiee und the Senate, lie has never held from me any au pointmcnt as the head of the War Department Whatever right he hud to hold the office was rived from that original appointment aud own siltieraure. consent of . ' ber act bill the as ers V\ vail had ing the in iny The law was not intended to protect such an incumbent of the War Department by tukin« from the President the power to remove him — This in my judgment, is perfectly clear, and the 'tsejf admits of no other just construction.— 7 " nd ,n Z 11 ! hat Portion of the first section which precedes the proviso that as to civil officers generally, the President is deprived of ihe power of removal ; and it is plain that if there had been no proviso, that power would just as clearlv have been taken from him, so far as it applies 'to the seven heads of the departments, but tor reusons which were no dpuht satisfactory to Congress these principal officers were specially provided for, and as to them the express and onlv require ment is that the President who has appointed them shaH not, without the advice and umsent ot the senate, remove them from office The consequence is that as to my ealtinet, emlimcing the seven officers designated in tlie first section the act takes from me the power, without the coin corrence of the Senate, to remove anyone of have appointed, but dôes not protect stich of them as I did not aj»point, nor give to them any tenure of office beyond my pleasure. An examination of this act, then, shows that while in one part of the section provision is made for officers generally, in another clause there is a class of ofheers designated by their official titles who are excepted by tlie general terms of the law' aud in reference to whom a dear distinction h made as to the general power of removal limited in the first clause of the section. This distinction is that as to such of these enumerated officers ■Jbold under tho appointment of the President, the power of removal can only be exercised by mm w»ru th 0 consent of the Senate, while as to tike »PP°tot«d hy him there is no tike denial qf his power Id displace them. It woald he » violatten of the plain meaning of this ennet aient to plucc Mr. yianUm upon tbc same of footing ua<w ueuuof d^ruucuiM wUo h»»» K ' < n »ppolmea by myse'f. Ai to him. thU law B 1VUB h 'm no tenure of office. The ntsmbers of my cabinet, VI,o have been J 1 '!* 0 " 11 ™ b y me, are by this act eutitled to hold "I" r ,' Je term Of my oflice shall ,1 Mr ' Stanto " " uW aot - i «, ainst «* If 3 ,u ' oes ?«i h ° ld ® moment thereafter, Jfhe wçre permitted hy that sttccessor to hold for 148 ' . tW0 w "**: " ""Id that iucoessor have no • M>wor to remove him? Rut the power of my successor over him could be no greater than my ° WB ' If m? suc «**> r «ou'd have the MiTa '"r f " H,Ur . P',™ 1 " 1 "« 1 two weeks because he was not m to re ,, „ .xaartrsd« years, certainly have the same right to remove him, and upon the same ground, namely, that lie was not appointed hy me, but by my p re d ece s sor. Under llna construction of the tenurc-of-ofllce act, I have never doubted my power to remove Mr. Stanton. Whether the act was constitutional or ant, h was always my opinion that it did net secure him from reraural. i was, however, aware that there were doubts us to the construction of the law, and front the first I deemed it desirable that at the earliest poauhle moment those donbts should be settled, mid the true construction of the act fixed by the decision of the Supreme Court ot the United Suites. Mv order of suspension, in August last, wns intended to place the case in such a position us would make a resort to a judi cial derision both necessary aBd proper. My un derstanding and wishes, however, under that order of suspension, were frustrated, aud the late order for Mr. Stanton's removal was a farther step towards the accomplishment of that purpose. 1 repeat that my own convictions as to the true construction of the law, and ns to its constitu tionality, were well settled and were sustained by every member of my cabinet,-including Mr. Stanton himself. Upon the question of constitu tionality each one iu turn deliberately advised me that the teuure-of-office act was unconstitu tional. Upon the question whether, as to those members who were appointed by mv predecessor that act took from mo the power to remove them' one of those members emphaticallv suited, lu thé presence of the others sitting in cabinet, that thev did not come within ihe provisions of the act, and it was no protection to them ; no one dissent ed from this construction, and I understood them nil to acquiesce m its correctness. in a mutter of such grave consequence I was not disposed to rest noon my own opinions, tho' fortified by my constitutional advisers. I have therefore sought to bring the question at ns early a daji as possible before the Supreme Court of the United Suites fur final and authoritative decision. In respect to so much of the resolution as relates to the designation of an officer to net us Secretary of War ad interim, I have only to say that 1 have exercised this power under the provisions of the first section of the act of February 13,1795, which, so far as they are applicable to vacancies caused oy removals, 1 uudersUind to lie still in force. The legislation upon the subject of ad interim appointments in the executive departments stands as to the War Office os follows : The second section of the act of the 7th of Au gust, 1789, makes provision for a vnennev in the rery case of a removal of the head of the Wur Department, and upon such a vacancy givea the charge and custody of the records, books fold papers to the chief clerk. Next, by the act of the 8th of May, 1792, section 8, it is provided that in rese of vacancy occasioned by death, absenoe from the scut of government, or sickness of the head of the War Department, the President mar authorise a person to perform the duties of the office until a successor is appointed or Ihe disa bility removed. . The act, it will lie observed, does not provide for the case of a vacancy caused by removal Then by the first section of the net of February Uth, 1795, it is provided thut in case of any va cancy tlie President mny apppoiut a person to perform the duties while the vacancy exists. These acts are followed by that of the 20th of February, i 8G3, by the first section of which pro vision is again made for to vacancy caused by deatli, resignation, absence from the seat of gov ernment, or sickness of the bend of any executive department of the government ; and upon the oc curence of such a vacancy, power is given to the President to authnriie the head of any other ex ecutive department, or nny officer in either of -'Aid departments whose appointment is vested in the President, at his discretion, to perform the duties of the said respective offices until a succes sor lie appointed, or nntil'such absence of inabil ity by sickness shall cease : provided that no one vacancy shall he supplied in manner aforesaid for a longer period than six months. This law, with some modifications, re-enacts tlie aids of 1792, und provides, as did Unit act, for the sort of vacancies so to lie filled, but, like the net of 1792, it makes no provision fora vacancv occasioned by removal. It has reference alto gether to vacancies arising from other According to my construction of the act of 18 U 3 , while it mipliudly repeals the act of 1792, regu lating the vacancies therein described, it hits no bearing whatever upou so much of tlie act of 1795 at applies to a vacancy caused bv removal. The act of 1795, therefore, furnishes the rule for vacancy occasioned by removal—one of the va cancies expressly referred to in the act of the 7th of August, 1789, creating the department of wur. Certainly there is no express repeal bv the act of 1863 of the act of 1 *95. The repeal, if there is any is by implication, and can only be admitted so far as there is a clear inconsistency between the acts. The Wot of 1795 is inconsistent with that of 1803 as to a vacancy occasioned by death resignation, absence or sickness; but not ât ail inconsistent as to to u vacancy reused by removal. It is ssstiredly proper that the President should have the Biimc power to fill temporarily a vacan cy occasioned by removal as he has to supply a place made vacant hy deatli or expiration' of ten» 1 ., Hi for instance, the incumbent of an office should he found to be wholly unfit to excrciso its functions, and the public service should require his immediate expulsion, a remedy should exist and lie at once applied and time be allowed the President to select and appoint a successor, as is permitted him in case of a vacancy caused bv death or the termination of an official term. The necessity, therefore, for an ad interim ap pointment is just as groat, and, indeed, may he greater, in ease of removal than in uny others. Before it be held, therefore, that the power given by the act of 1795 in ease of removal is abrogated by succeeding législation, an express repeal ongltt to appear. So wholesome, a power should cer tuinly not lie taken away by loose implication. may be, hdvvever, that in this, a* In other cases of implied repeal, doubts may fessedlv one of the most sub causes. arise. It Is con >tle nnd debatable questions which arise in the construction of stat utes. If upon such a question l have fallen Into nn erroneous construction, I submit whether It should be characterized duty and of law. is it a violation of official . .. have deemed it proper, in vindication of the course which I have considered my duty to take, to place before the Senate the tiaon* upon which I nave bused^my action. Although I have been adviacd by every mem ber of my cabinent t at the entire tenure-ôf-office act m unconstitutional and therefore void, and although I have expressly concurred in Unit opinmion in the veto message which I had the honor to submit to Congress when I returned the bill fjr reconsideration, I have refrained from making a removal*of any officer contrary to the provisions of the law, and huve only exercised that power in the case of Mr. Rtantoi* whiclv, in V judgment, did not come within its provisions, have endeavored to proceed with tlie greatest circumspection, and have acted only in un ex treme anti exceptional cure, carefully following the course which I have marked out for myself a general rule, faithfully to execute all laws' though passed over my objections, on the score constitutionality. In the present instance I have appealed, or sought to appeal, to that final arbiter fixed by the constitution for the determi nation of till such questions. To this course I have been impelled by the solemn obligations which rest upon me to sustain inviolate the pow of the high office committed to my hands. hatever inay be the consequences, merely personal to myself, I could nut allow them to pre vail against a public duty so clear to my owu mind and so Imperative. If w hat whs possible had been certain ; if I had been fully advised whin I removed Mr. Stanton Huit in thus defend the trust committed to my hands mv own re moval was sure to follow, I could not have hesi tated, actuated by public considerations of the highest character. I earnestly protest against resolution of tiie Senate, which chnrgas what I have done with a violation of the con stitution and laws of tho United States. ... , . _ Anoiikw Joiinro.v. Washington, D. C., February 2 * 2 , IffiiH. It is for me h»»» law been hold shall «* for no my my not ate» The views of the leading papers of the country in regard to the removal of Secre tary Sauton and the proposed impeachment of tho President, are of interest at this particular juncture of afiairs, That por tion of the preaf which is regarded as at all rational, it will .be seen, takes Bound and safe views on the subjoot. Wc there fore make the flfflowflng etrtractsffroni jour nals of different parties, excluding ultra views on either side : From the New York Journal of Cion merer. AR good eitiveng must controversy between two departments of the government I but if the breach cannot be healed, and we ®e to have no peuoo until the coutest is decided, perhaps it is as well that the parties should measure their strength at onoe, aud bring about the result as quickly as possible. It must be evident, to every candid ob server, that the congressional party lias uiudu a great mistake iu forcing the issue upon the particular point now most prorn iueut in dispute, it is altogether the weakest part of their whole ease, and the President lias shown no little shrewdness in auleotiug Mr. Stanton as the object attack..; tin toe first place the general pub ■lioftbel no personal symputhy for Mr. Stun tou..! Unscrupulous, overbearing, double laced, tuid greedily selfish, even the radi cals dislike and mistrust hlui. re lie sor. net of of in judi un that late true Mr. thé act, was the the the in of of •uch a u! Nor have thosu who defend the tenuro-of-oflico act any strong ground to stand upon iu its support, its coiiBtitutioimlity is, to say tlie least, very doubtful, and hence they are afraid to submit it to the courts. AU other considerations are aliko against it. Kvery one muHt confess that it sceuis a great hardship to insist that the President may not select his own Cabinet, nor change those of his constitutional advisers whose opinions are directly adverse to the prin ciples he is eudeuvuriug to establish aud maintain. EspociaUy will the people sy pathize with him iu this struggle to free himself from an" obnoxious uuviser, when it is remembered that the secretary lie would displace was not of his own appoint ment, but came to him as a legacy from a former incumbent of tho office to whioh he has succeeded. No man who had auy proper self-respect, or decent regard for public opinion, would hold tho office to which Stanton clings thus desperately a moment longer than ceptable to his immediate sujierior. if .Ur. Stanton were tho best man iu tho Uni ted btates forthat office, and Mr. Johnson evidently disposed to evil if unrestrained, the principle would not be changed. The end, however desirable, does aot justify improper means. Every right-minded mau feels that the attempt to force this cabinet officer into the President's coun sels, when the latter has signified his willingness tax continue him in that rela tion, is an outrage to whieh no one could be expected to submit patiently. It is be cause such an intrusion it an outrage and an indignity toward the one who is hated that the radicals have sought to enforce it. Tho plea that tho safety of the nation requîtes it is known to be a subterfuge. It designed to humiliate the President, and to punish him for his opposition to the treme measures of the dominant party, al though it may be coupled with the ' hope that the Secretary can bo useful ' ring a further lease of power for thoso who support him. In making these remarks we arc not indorsiug President Johnson's views upon any subject involving national interests. If Frederick Dougtuss were elected President, or iu auy way fell heir to this office, wo would claim fur him th e right to select his own cabinet, tmd to change the members thereof at his discre tion. way ac of by of of the ex in gocu From the Net York Timer, rep, ■The President's removal of Mr. Stanton, and bis appointment ot Gen. Thomas, were in distinct and unmistakable defiance of law. It is also clear that this violation of the law has boon intentional on the Presi dent's part—not with a view, as the heated zealots of Congress assume, of usurping power and overthrowing the institutions of tho country, but for the purposo of tesliiuj the con slit nt ioiuditi/ of the law, aud of pro curing a judicial definition of the limits aud prerogatives of the executive depart ment of the government, under the con stitution of the United Sûtes. It would be going too far to say that the President has a right thus to violate and disregard a law by his own official acts, for the pur pose of testing its validity, for it is the solemn aud imperative duty of the Presi dent, as of every other officer und citizen, to obey tho laws. But if he takes tho risk of disobedience, he is eutitled also to the chance of being sustuined in tho opinion on which his action is based. Iu this ease the President beliovcs that the constitution gives him the right of removing civil of ficers of the government ' explicit manner that Cong law, deprive him of it. tu Buch a fu!%nd cannot, by He claims, there fore, to have removed Mr. Stanton by vir tue of an authority higher than that of the law, aud he demands and expects that this collision of authority between him and Congress shall be brought to tho judgment and decision of the Supreme Court. He is not only entitlod to such decision, but the whole country is interested in having it given. 6 There can be no donht, aril we presume, in any one s mmii that the Supreme Court is the proper tribunal for the decision orthe question involved, in this particular fiict between tire President and Cong It ia not a political question in any such sense Ss could exclude it from the jurisdic tion of that court. It does not involve any exercise of political sovereignty, the reconstruction acts are said to do.' is simply a question oouceriiing the rela tive powors and rights of the executive and tlie legislative departments in the mat ter of appointment and removal of civil officers of tho government. Does the con stitution confer on tho President official power whioh Congress, by the tenurc-of offiee bill, seeks to invade and take from him 1 It is purely a question of interpre tation a»id construction, and clearly one which neither party can claim to decide for itself. Both must submit to the judg ment of the common arbiter which the constitution itself provides. con rc88. in of as li of The impeachment of the President, if pushed to trial m advance of such a deoi sion by the Supreme Court, is in violation oi this principle. It is an attempt of one of the parties to the controversy to decide. for , b ,° l ,h - tha ,' 9° n * rcM a right to pass the law—and that tbcPresi hying that right, commits a ,, J C "'S* penalty -not only the & th< " 'r the higher pertalty of rentovai from o«oe winch follows tonMctioa uuder pro cess of .mpeachment And it makes the Senate, which is one of the parties to the the Pfeift for what ' 00Urt i° r iTthTuL T . *" 0ffe "y e ° n ' 3 ' as the law itself makes it one, and gives the Senate the full power also of deciding Urn constitutionality of it* own .«tom. Suppose the House should impeach the President and the Senate should convict him and depose him from office for having .Kited in violation of this law j and the Su preme Court should afterward, in due course of its judicial action, decide the law to be unconstitutional what would be the position of the President and Senate before the country Î Must the President be punished for maintaining the authority of the constitution against an invalid law? Or is the Senate s judgment of the eon stitutiou to override that of the Supreme Court V Iu our judgment, the impeachment the President is wholly out of place long ns the constitutionality of this law in controversy. If the law is unconstitu tional, and therefore null and void, then the President has committed no offence und done nothing to deserve impeachment. If the law is valid, then he lias been guilty of a " high misdemeanor," under the de finition of the law itself, and may bo ar raigned , tried and punished therefor. And neither the llouso nor the Senate is the proper tribunal for deciding this question. It certainly would be a very extraordinary spectacle to see Congress pass a law crea ting an offence and prescribing a penalty, and then acting at once os prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner upon the Pres ident for violation of its provisions. Such a proceeding confounds all our idous of the distribution of power among different de partments of the government. We do not believo tho Senate will take such action i the present case. That body will probably await the action of the Supreme Court in the case growing out of Mr. Stanton's proceedings against General Thomas. If the law is sustained by tho court, impeach ment may go on. If not, it will probably be dropped—for wo do not think the Sen ate is prepared to set aside that court to disregard its decisions altogether. dent, in i crime and of in or From the New York World, dem. It e Tlie crime for whieh the President is to be impeached eonsists simply iu the exor cise of a right whieh 1ms been enjoyed by nil his predecessors, and belongs to the executive head of every government in the world. This right is called in question by a pretended law, which is in such fla grant violation of the constitution, as well us of nil precedents, that this same Stan ton, who is a lawyer mid has been attor ney-general, advised tho President to veto it. And now the President is to be iin tcaclted in Stanton's interest because ho jelieve» tho law to be unconstitutional, and institutes proceedings to bring it to à judicial test 1 If tho precedent now set is to be followed, it will be in the power of any future Congress to summarily eject anyfnture President. Congress has merely to pass some unconstitutional luw which the whole past practice of the gov ernment, nnd when the President takes the first steps for bringing it to a judicieial test, forthwith put him out of office bv articles of impeachment. Wc might as well abol ish the farce of presidential elections if Congress can thus unmake elected Presi dents at their caprice. From the VhdaJelyhia hedger, iud. Tiie President should be made to under stand that wiiiie it is his duty, as well as his right, to see that the constitution, as well as tlie laws, be fuithfully observed, he must discharge that duty by due process of law, openly and honorably, prosecuted by regular and orderly preceding» thut will not keep up the constant succession of excitements that result from sudden strata gems und semi-elandestine movements to gain momentary advantages. And Con gress shout] be equally made to understand that the people have a deep and abidiug regard for the constitution and govern ment founded by the fathers of tho republic, and that hasty and inconsiderate depar tures from their teachings aud practice, and their orderly and conscientious ways of carrying oil the government, are not favored hy any but the over-zealous ad herents of party. The quustion of Mr. Stanton's legal right to hold the office of Secretary of War is now with the courts, and there it should be allowed to remain undisturbed until settled by the Sup Court, and it ought to bo settled without delay. The meu who counsel the Presi dent to turn him out by force, while legal proceedings are pending, aro enemies alike of the President and of the welfare of soci ety. Tilt question of the President's mis use, or proper and legal exercise of his power, is almost certain now to Senate for trial, and there it should be conducted with judicial propriety, in con formity with existing laws. The meu who clamor for special enactments to meet the case are as bad advisers as those who urging the President to violence. These matters are too serious for party passion, and the first resort to force on either side may lead to collisions the end of which no man con foresee. From Ike New York Poet, republican. The conflict of authority at Waahingtotp t, because of the reverses o to the aril assumes a serious as peculiar character of the pnrtie* engaged in it ; but it does not, in itself, contain the It is a question of constitutional power, and, like all such questions, is susceptible of a pacific and tisfactory solution. The President believes that as the chief executive officer of the nation he has the right to appoint, with the consent of the Senate, subordinate civil officers, and to remove them at his own will and discre tion. seeds of serious results. In favor of this view we have the eulier legislative and judicial conatructions of the constitution, and the uniform cedent of the action of the pre overnment, from its origin to the time of the accession if of Mr. jlnson. There are in favor of it besides, those general reasonings upon the theory of the government which aflian one the necessity and policy of keeping the sev er*l departments of it, us far as possible independent and distinct. Mr lT.di.on who had more to da with the framing of a the organic law than any other man, was the at first disponed to believe that the consent oftheSenatewasaanecessarytoaremov al as to an appointment, but he afterwards changed his opinion, and in the Congress the of ni», when the subject wae debLd the strenuously maintained that the Dower of removul *«« »» exclusively executive ' 3 ' r Wer -. Dnr *ng Jackson's aiftninistratidu also, when the whig party; was so incensed by tho numerous official dm-apitntioni ma le by the Prwidet, Dm.iel Webster Wmltf admitted that policy aud precedent all on the saute side, Rut Congress, at a late session, fearing tho improper use of this power on the na * of the President, passed s low over hisTe to, providing that no officer shall be be moved during a session of Congress witli out the consent of the Senate, and that any removal made contrary to the provisions of the act should be deemed a misdemeanor subjecting the offender to legal trial and' on conviction, to * ' were IV penalty. Senator Sher man asserted on Saturday that this law was not, at the time of its passage, intend ed to bear upon the change of his Cabi net by the President, hut the words of it contain no such exoeption, and are peremp tory and explicit. Now this statute, as it stands, is a law of the land, and it continues such uutil in validated by a competent authority. The President is bound by it as mueh as any humble citixcn, whatever his convictions may be in regard to its constitutionality its policy. On those points we ooncur with him ; wc are sorry that the Congress considered it a duty to take this method of restraining the executive action ; we have steadily disapproved of the conduct of Mr. Stanton is consenting to accept a position in a Cabinet where be was not wanted, and under a law which his conscience coni * demns. or But, having vetoed the hill, the Presi dent has exhausted his constitutional re medies aguinst it in every respect, save one. He may test his difference of opin ion with the Congress by an appeal to only remaining department of the govern ment, whose appropriât« functions it is to determine the validity of conflicting laws —-tlie judiciary. Congress cannot, wo think, by any words of luw itself, or hy any other device, deprive him of this priv ilege of self-defence. It is due to tho in dependence of his office, and to his official oath, " to preserve, protect, and defeud" tlie integrity of the constitution, that ho should have the right to invoke the shelter and support of the Supremo Court. His proper mode of proceeding for a writ of the to apply quo warranto against Mr. btauton, compelling him to show : why lie had undertaken the duties of office to which he was oause III! was not called by tlie usual authority. But the President h taken another :i i course, not so regular and uot so courteous, but whieh hardly chan ges the inorits of tho case. If the President, in tlie removal of the Secretary of War, acted merely with the intent of bringing the law before the courts, he was in his right ; but if he acted with a view, or shall act with a view, of asserting his own interpretation of the law by force, he is not in the right, and will not bo up held by public opinion. I» the former case we hardly see how he ia liable to im peachment ; he is not opposing the law with a view of annulling it,, but with a view to testing it ; he is at tho most tech nically guilty of a broach of its provisions. If the courts should decide that the law ia unconstitutional, there is an end to his of fense ; but if they should decide that it i» constitutional, it will be time enough then, for Congress to inquire into the natura and degree of his offense. As Mr. Stan ton, by the arrest of General Thomas, has appealed to the courts, it is incunibent on - — Parties to await the result before either of them resorts toother proceedings. all DIBD. In Uiis town, on the 21st instaut, Mrs. Sarah Foster, ayed 67 yenrs. At Odessa. ~ J. wife of Willi In Smyrna, < Tuesday night last, Mrs. Mary 8. Vnndyke, Etq. the 18th instant, Rachel, wife of 1 homos Sherwood, in the 63d year of her age. THE markets, MIDDLETOWN MARKET. Wheat, prime red Corn yellow. " white........ $2 BO . R 1 Oats. Timothy Seed Clover 8eed.. Butter. ÜBE* . Turkeys. Geese.*....... Dneks. Chickens. Lard.. Hogs. Beef. Hams. Sides.. Shoulders. Potatoes. 70 . 4 0» ... 8 50 .:.45<Q50 cts. %* lb ... 30 cts £1 dozen ...18@20 cts. » lb ...]6<SU8 " " ...16^,18 " " ...16(S)18 " " ...13@I5 » " ...1051)15 « « ...20025 11 " ...16018 " " 14 16 " ..I3@15 " " 1 00@1 10 yi bosh W1I.HIXOTON. Wheat red. Corn. Oats. Flour. $2 50 1 16 ... 75@ 80 $10 00@13 50 ...$2 50@2 55 80(5*81 VHll.ADM.nttU , Prime red wheat. Corn, new yellow. Guts. 1 19 PUBLIC SALE. W ILL be sold on the farm belonging to the estate of Garrett Cox, at Armstrong's Cor ner, on T hunt day, the 5th day of March , inetant. at 10 o'clock, a. m. the following described prop erty, Stock :—1 uuir bf well broke MULES, 1 good Work Mare, 1 fnr i uni ÖjfSfcV-v «rood Ma re, my D r i v i n g Horse 1 three year __ old Colt, 2 Cows, one of them fresh ; 8 Heifer» coming in profit early this Spring, 8 Young Steers and 1 Thorough-bred Bull. 1 Farm Wagon, 1 Light Peach Wagon, Mill Wagon, I Horae Cart, together with Wagon, Cart and Plow Harness, 1 good Peninoton RettDcr J Wood 4 Haines' Wl eat Drill, Hand Corn Slid!«, Fan, Twin and W Harrows, Slettl Tooth How ttok«' 1 Large Cultivator for Working Peach Trees, Plows, Cultivators, 2 Corn Planters, Forks, Grindstone, Briar Scythe, 2 Grain Cradles, Strew Cutter, *c. 1000 Peach Baskets, more or lee«. Conditions or Sal* : AH sums udder $26, Cash: over that amount a credit of six months, by giv ing bankable note with approved security, v gether with stamps. Notes to bear interest fro date. February 20—U to* J M. COX.