Remarks in the Senate, May 12, 1870.
The Senate having under consideration a bill for the reduction of the Army, reported by Mr. Wilson, of Massachusetts, from the Committee on Military Affairs, as a substitute for one from the House, and the pending question being on an amendment by Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, restoring to its original form in the House bill the provision “That it shall not be lawful for any officer of the Army of the United States on the active list to hold any civil office,” by striking out the words “on the active list,” Mr. Sumner said:—
MR. PRESIDENT,—There is a principle of our institutions, to which reference is constantly made in this debate, which is worthy of constant memory. It is the subordination of the military to the civil power. Mr. Jefferson, in his Inaugural Address, so memorable as a representation of the fundamental principles of republican institutions, expressly declares the subordination of the military to the civil an essential element of a republic. I accept that idea; and I confess that I have always admired in our system that the Navy Department and the War Department each is in charge of a civilian; that neither a naval officer nor a military officer, in the ordinary course of affairs, takes his place at the head of either of these Departments, to the end that the Navy and the Army shall see in a civilian the visible head of each. In that I recognize the genius of the Republic.
But now, Sir, for the application. I confess I agree entirely with the argument of the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Sherman]. I consider that the demands of republican institutions are completely satisfied, if we exclude men in active service from taking part in civil life. To go further is to tie the hands of the appointing power,—to take from the country the opportunity of securing, it may be, important service,—and, I think, is to be needlessly hard on men who in their day have rendered good service to the country. It does seem to me that cases may occur where it may be important to take into the civil service a retired officer. Why may not that occur in the natural course of events? There is talent, there is experience. Are our offices so well filled, is the public service so completely performed, that we can afford to exclude talent and experience?
Mr. Conkling. Is not that much more true in regard to active officers?
Mr. Sumner. There, Sir, you come in conflict with the fundamental principle of republican institutions. You cannot, as I submit, fill civil offices from the active service of the Army or Navy without conflict with that fundamental principle.
Mr. Conkling. Why?
Mr. Sumner. But I find no such conflict, if you take an officer on the retired list.