This response of the Attorney-General was referred to the Senate
Committee on the Judiciary. Early in February, 1886, a majority of
the committee made a report to the Senate, in which it seems to have
been claimed that all papers--whatever may be their personal, private,
or confidential character--if placed on file, or, in other words, if
deposited in the office of the head of a department, became thereupon
official papers, and that the Senate had therefore a right to their
transmittal when they had reference to the conduct of a suspended
official, and when that body had under advisement the confirmation of
his proposed successor. Much stress was laid upon the professions made
by the President of his adherence to Civil Service reform methods, and
it was broadly hinted that, in the face of six hundred and forty-three
suspensions from office, these professions could hardly be sincere.
Instances were cited in which papers and information had been demanded
and furnished in previous administrations, and these were claimed to
be precedents in favor of the position assumed by the majority of the
committee. Almost at the outset of the report it was declared:
The important question, then, is whether it is within the
constitutional competence of either House of Congress to have
access to the official papers and documents in the various
public offices of the United States, created by laws enacted by
themselves.
In conclusion, the majority recommended the adoption by the Senate of
the following resolutions:
Resolved, That the Senate hereby expresses its condemnation of
the refusal of the Attorney-General, under whatever influence,
to send to the Senate copies of papers called for by its
resolution of the 25th of January and set forth in the report
of the Committee on the Judiciary, as in violation of his
official duty and subversive of the fundamental principles of
the Government, and of a good administration thereof.
Resolved, That it is under these circumstances the duty of the
Senate to refuse its advice and consent to proposed removals of
officers, the documents and papers in reference to the supposed
official or personal misconduct of whom are withheld by the
Executive or any head of a department when deemed necessary by
the Senate and called for in considering the matter.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account