Mr. HENDRICKS. As illustrating the views I have expressed on the point made by the Senfrom Michigan, I wish to cite one or 2 cases. On the 3d of March, 1863, an act was passed “to provide a temporary government for the Territory of Idaho.” That act required for its execution the appointment of a Governor, of a secretary, of judges, so that there might be a government established out there. It was passed during the day some time, and affo on the 3d of March, perhaps 12, perhaps 24 hours before the adjournment of Congress. Now, I submit to any Senator whether the Congress of the U.S. understood that the President was not to execute that law, whether any senator dreamed that he was to fill all those offices during the 6, ten, 12, or 24 hours that intervened before the adjournment of Congress? Did any Senator expect that of him? None. It was impossible; he could not select the right men in that time. He had to consider of it; it was a matter requiring a good deal of consideration. Here were important officers to be appointed to establish a new government for a people in the distant West. Again, sir, on the 3d of March, 1865, a law was passed “to establish a Bureau for the relief of Freedmen and Refugees.” That bill provided for a Commissioner to be at the head of the entire establishment. This government within a government was to extend over the rebelliqus States, and this Commissioner of the bureau was to be at the head of the entire business. The execution of the law required the very 1st thing that he should be appointed; and yet the law was passed within but a few hours of the adjournment of Congress. Now I ask of Senators 2 questions: 1st, was it expected that that important officer would be selected by the President and his nomination sent to the Senate and confirmed within the few hours before the adjournment? and in the 2nd place, if that was not practicable, which it was not, as a matter of course, or probably not, at least, then was it anticipated by Congress that that law should not be executed during the 9 months before the meeting of the Senate again, provided that there should be no session of the Senate in the mean time? It is true an extra session of the Senate was called on the 4th of March after the adjournment, but Congress had no control of that. That session was not called with a view to the confirmation of this particular officer. Whether he was con: firmed at that extra session I am not prepared to say; but I am citing this as an instance. Here was a law that it was expected would be put in force. It was the duty of the President to execute it. He could not execute it except by the appointment of an officer. This was all contemplated by Congress when they passed the law at an hour of the session when it was impossible for the President to make a nomination and for the nomination to be confirmed. The only reply that is or can be made is, that whenever a vacancy of that sort might occur the Senate should be called to consider the nomination. I think that is not practicable, and it is, to say the least of it, very in convenient.