When the bill was taken up for consideration, Senator
Hoar remarked that he did not believe there were five members of
the Senate who really believed in the propriety of that act. "It
did not seem to me to be quite becoming," he explained, "to ask
the Senate to deal with this general question, while the question
which arose between the President and the Senate as to the
interpretation and administration of the existing law was
pending. I thought, as a party man, that I had hardly the right
to interfere with the matter which was under the special charge
of my honorable friend from Vermont, by challenging a debate upon
the general subject from a different point of view."
Although delicately put, this statement was in effect a
repudiation of the party leadership of Edmunds and in the debate
which ensued, not a single Senator came to his support. He stood
alone in upholding the propriety of the Tenure of Office Act,
arguing that without its restraint "the whole real power and
patronage of this government was vested solely in the hands of a
President of the United States and his will was the law." He held
that the consent of the Senate to appointments was an
insufficient check if the President were allowed to remove at his
own will and pleasure. He was answered by his own party
colleagues and committee associates, Hoar and Evarts. Senator
Hoar went so far as to say that in his opinion there was not a
single person in this country, in Congress or out of Congress,
with the exception of the Senator from Vermont, who did not
believe that a necessary step towards reform "must be to impose
the responsibility of the Civil Service upon the Executive.
Pages:
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86