t.I I ! ;\' ',!\ \ I' I j, I I I. ' I I i , I I ' ·1 :1 ii I I ' ti t '1 !. i! I I I JI
WRlTINGS OF SAIi! HOUSTON, 1837-1841
48
or correction of great evils; that this power should be exercised judicially and with a special regard to the true interests of the service, as well as the rights and merits of the individual, is clear and should be manifest; the question arising is, whether it is necessary that examples should be made, though unpleasant in their character, or whether offences and conduct should be overlooked, that have been and will continue to be injurious to the character of the service and prejudicial to the reputation of the country and the firm establishmnet of its institutions. Such a letter written to the Head of the Department in Wash- ington City in terms as the one alluded to, without a refusal to take the oaths prescribed, would have caused the instant dismissal of that officer, no matter what his grade might have been in the Army or Navy;-if an officer acquires a reputation that enhances his value in public estimation, it certainly can furnish him no justification for a violation of orders, or any official misconduct, but rather, it imposes an additional obligation upon him to enforce, by his example, obedience to the laws and regulations by which he is bound; while others observing his course, would find incen- tives to honorable emulation of his actions and conduct. That the Executive has the right to remove officers for dis- obedience of orders, and that Congress has heretofore entertained the same view of the subject, there can be no doubt. The Bill pro- viding for the defence of the Frontier, expressly conceded to the President the right to discharge officers of the Army dishonorably, and no good reason is perceived by the Executive, why a distinc- tion should be made between the Army and Navy, in the exercise of a right that has ever been conceded to the President of the United States from the days of Washington down to the present day. Frequent attempts have been made in Congress to deprive the President of the power, and that at a time when the President had a minority of friends in the Congress of the United States; but it was considered a right which inured to him in the Constitu- tion, inasmuch as he had a right of nominating officers to the Senate, and appointing them by their advice. Others who doubted his constitutional right of dismissal, were in favor of his retain- ing the power, because they believed it would maintain a more prompt obedience to orders, and supersede an annoyance that becomes grievous from the frequency of courts martial, and the expense attendant thereon to the Government. If the power were not confined to the Executive, officers might form a combination of such a character for the attainment of particular objects, that no man could even be punished, or an
I ~ I' '
I
;1 :,
I •
I .
I I l \
l , I' I i' I 'I I I
' : '
·jl
'
I
't
I
I
I I
Powered by FlippingBook