Reconstruction and the Constitution, 1866-1876

by John William Burgess

The propositions contained in the Tenure-of-Office bill were, however, of a very different significance. There was no clause in the Constitution which by express literal grant vested the power to dismiss from office in the President, but the clause which made the President solely responsible for the execution of the laws was interpreted by the first Congress as doing so. Madison took the ground that the President must have this power in order to secure the necessary obedience in his subordinates, and declared that the convention which framed the Constitution so understood it and so intended it. This is certainly sound political science and correct constitutional interpretation. It had also been the practice of the Government from the beginning. The Whigs had undertaken to reverse it in their contest with Jackson, and Webster had given his opinion that good political science required that dismissal from office should be treated as an incident of appointment, and should be effected in the same manner as appointment, i.e., with the concurrence of the Senate, and that the decision of 1789 on this subject was, in his opinion, erroneous from the point of view of a proper interpretation of the Constitution as well. But the Whigs did not succeed, as we have seen, in their attempt to break down Presidential prerogative and introduce parliamentary government, and the practice of the Government on this subject remained, after, as before, the fourth decade of the century, the same.

During the experiences of the years 1865 and 1866 the Republicans feared that the President would use this great power of dismissal from

The reasons for the
Tenure-of-Office bill.

The bill drafted for this purpose made the removal of all officers, appointed by and with the consent of the Senate, except only members of

The contents
of the bill.

From the point of view of the present this would seem, in all conscience, to have been a sufficient usurpation of the President's

Discussion
of the bill.

The bill as finally enacted contained, moreover, the most stringent provisions for its enforcement. It made

The provisions for
enforcing the measure.