Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senfrom Maryland is mistaken in supposing that this is a measure hostile to the Executive of the U.S. It is an amendment intended to carry Out what I conceive to be clearly the constitutional authority of Congress and to reveut l practice which has grown up of making up pointments to office without consulting the senate. The Senfrom Maryland remarked the other day, veryproperly, that if the practice were to prevail that the President should fill up vacancies during the recess to continue until the end of the next session of the Senate, and then, without nominating anybody to the Senate during its session who could obtain a confirmation, were again after the adjournment of the Senate to make a new appointment to continue to the end of the then next session, he could in this may continue to exercise the appointing power without consulting the Senate at all. he Senator admitted that this would he a violation of the spirit of the Constitution. This is no new idea in this body, nor is it aimed at the present Executive of the U.S. u Congress had occasion more than 3 years ago to pass an act upon this very subject. At that time persons were being appointed to office in this same way, without consulting the Senate. What did Congress do! it passed an not providing “Thnt no moneyshall be paid from the Treasury of the U.S. to any personacting or assuming to act as an officer civil, military, or naval. nssalary in any office which ofllec is not authorized by some previously existing law. Unless where such office shall O subsequently sanctioned by law; nor shall any money be paid out of the Treasury as salary to any serson appointed during the recessof the Senateto ll a vacancy In any existing office which vacancy existed while the Senate was in sessionand is by law required to be filled by and with thoudvice and consent of the Senate until such appointee shall have n confirmed by the Senate." We provided more than 3 years ago, on the fit of February, 1863, that in all cases where a vacancy existed which might have been filled by and With the advice an consent of the Senate while it was in session, if the Pros ident afterward undertook to fill that vacancy, the appointee should receive no salary until he was confirmed by the Senate. That is one case which is covered by the pending umendment. This amendment, however, goes alittle further than the law of 18433.but not very much further. What is there in it? A practice has grown up, not under the present Executive J more than under other Executives, of filling offices, as I think, in violation of the spirit of the Constitution, he doing it himself without consulting the Senate when it is practicable to consult the Senate. We tried to check this in 1863. Now, the provision that is offered is simply that if a ierson is placed in office under circumstances where it would have been prac ticable to have the advice and consent of the Senate without their advice and consent, then that person shall not be paid until the Senate consents to his appointment. When the Senate does consent he receives pay from the be ginning. If the Senate of the U.S. were to adjourn on the 1st day of May, tomorrow, and a person were appointed by the President to an office which is vacant today, he could not under this provision receive any salary until the Senate met again next December and confirmed him; and why? Because the President ought, under the Constitution. to have sent us the name of the person to till that office while we were here an to have had our advice and consent to his appointment. If ho will not do that, the appointee must wait until the Senate convenes and gives its sanction to the apointment, and then he will receive his pay.There is no violation ofany constitutional provision in doing this. But it is said that an officer maymisbehave and the President ought to have authority to remove him. He may in using the public money during the recess of the Senate be guilty of some malfeasance, and he ought to be turned out. This provision does not interfere with that. Let tie President suspend him and turn him out: let him also, if you please, designate some otherperson to fill the othee until the Senate meets; and all there is of it is that until that other person is confirmed he will not. be mid; but when he is confirmed he will be paid from the beginning. Is there any hardshipin it? It has been suggested by some that the amendment might be amende in that res eetso as to provide that in case of a remova for cause, to be reported to the Senate when it assembled, the appointee should receive pay from the time of the appointment. There perhaps would be no ver good objection to an amendment of that km, though I do not deem it essential or necessary, for I think there would be no sort of difficulty in finding good men to take any office and run the hazard of their confirmation by the Senate when they were apointed because the incumbent was unfit. to told the Office. There would be no hesitation on the part of the Senate in confirming aperson a pointed under such circumstances and allowmg him his pay. He would run no hazard in taking the Office; but if without cause, if simply to put into office a partisan for party purposes and to the detriment of the public service, a remmal is made. it is very question able whether the appointee could or s ionld be confirmed or even receive any compensation. Where the removal was for cause there would be no dilfieulty. That is all there is of this amendment. It is no new provision. no attack upon the Execirtive, and do not think it is likely to occasion war with Austria. [Lnughten] I do not my self think that we should be diverted from properlegislation by getting up any alarm of that kind. The withdrawal of our minister from Vienna or the withdrawal of the Aus trian minister from Washington I do not think should prevent properlegislation on a subject of this character, and I really do not know whnt it has to do with the particular provision before the Senate. I cannot see, therefore, Mr. President, any objection to the amendment. It seems to me it involves no constitutional principle whatever. All there is of it is that it will have a tendency to correct a practice which has been indulged in withoutnnydesign, robnbly. on the part of former Presidents. on which I think ought to be corrected. 1 think the tendency of the not of hair: was to correct a practice which was then growing up. It attucked it. This is another provision in the same direction covering what is already covered by the act which I have read and going a very litt c further, so as to embrace appointments to vacancies which are created during the recess of the Senate. I trust, sir, that the amendment will receive the sanction of the Senate.