Ask the Scholar
Page 39 of 227
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
62
63
his openeon, touched the question now pending before the
themselves, by which the duties of the one are actually in consistence with the
President. that whether he right of promotion in the
other Whether a particular person can physically perform the duties of two
lines so secured to General Iones. as to under it the duly of the
Offices, not incompatible, and whether the public interest requires their
President to nominate minute the vacant office. Though. indeed,
union orsereance, are questions for the discretion of the appointing
it is not unworthy of remark. that the action of the Senate might have
power. Whether two officed, otherwise in comp atible shall be severed or
taken place, and yet, might not have indicated any decision
united is a question for the law making power. Itwill be seen,
upon the question respecting the union of the two Office in the
withrespect to the execution of the duties of adjulant Feneral and
case of General Jones For the confirmation of his nomination to an
Majar of artillery, by the same person, the argum cut drawn from in.
appointment in the line of the army, was the subject presented for
convenience was used, and it certainly a fair argument in the in
the consideration of the denate, and the approval of that measure did
aestigation of a question otherwise doubtful. But I war precluded from
not necessarily shew the sense of the denate, acspecting to operation
extending this argument to the cases, put by General Jones of the afsed
upon any other Military appointment held by Feneral doned.
lane Quarter masters, Commiparies before this plain reason that
It was a maked act, and its consequences were left to be determine
these officed are expreply enjorned by law to be executed by personi
red in the proper mode, and by the proper authority.
holding lineal com mipion. of course, this legislative arrangement
Peneral Jones refers to the act of april 24 1/1816, as se
precludes all examination of the question, so far these appointment
curing to him the right of promotion. But that act contains
are can carned. It will be observed that the general principle laid
no provision on the subject, except so far as the clause in the
down, that the union or deverance of military officer, applied to cased
9th Section, retaining the privileged secured to the staff of the
where there in no legislative provision on the subject; and here
army by the act of March 3d 1813, quaranties this night. It
General dones seems to have misapprehended the tenor of my aemarks
will therefore, be seen at once, that the claim rests upo the
He goes on to specify a number of instances where staff and lineal
original provisions of the act of March 3 d 1813 and upon
offices are united; and where the tenure of both might occapion in
the question, whether those provisions are yet in force. and are
convenience to the public service, and, as draw a distinction be
applicable to the present Office of adjuant General.
tween those cased and his, he seems to think my view an inconsistent
must have expresed my self unfortunately, or General Jones
one. I beg leave to observe, however, that the true solution of the ques
could scarcely have so much misunderstood my observations
lion is to be found in the difference I have stated. The general prin
concerning the union of military Officer. laid down the prin.
ciple of exclusion embraced all cased coming within it, and not special
aple, which is certainly a round one, that two officer incompatible
ally provided for bylaw. The cases of afsistance Quarter tear
within nature cannot beheld by the same person, at the same
de not come within it, for they hold but one commission, and of
time; and this principle I take applicable to all the officer
they did, they are exprepsly met by the provision which authorized their
of the Government; whether civil or Military If unther stated chal
union. General Jones thinks the construction Y have given le the
two commissions, confering absolute military rank, were in my
words, taken from the line is an inconsistent me, providing a
openion inconsistent and compalible with each other. now the
measure for one office not applicable to another. He says. the
case put by General Jones of post baptain the stavy, and
argument apumen, that the phrase "shall be taken from the lines,
Commitioner of naral affairs does not come within the prin
when applied to certain officers, means that they shall be seperated
aple herein alluded to. For the offer ceof Committioner confers
from the line, but when applied to afaistant Quarter Mad.
no rank, and is to beremarked that this incom patibility
ters Ye thewords are to be construct as meaning "exactly the re
does of depend upon the physical inability of the person
verse". So far, in my openion, are the words taken from the line"
to execute both duties; but up on the nature of the offices
from indicating any union, or sererance of two offices, that I
Page data
- Page
- 39
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- 7175f127f5b70533
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 292775561
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "292775561",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/292775561",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Volume 3: May 20, 1833 - October 19, 1840",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/292775561",
"collections": [
"Records of the Office of the Secretary of War",
"Letters Sent to the President"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/dc-metro/rg-107/627704/M127/M127-03/M127-03-0001.tif",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/dc-metro/rg-107/627704/M127/M127-03/M127-03-0001.tif",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/dc-metro/rg-107/627704/M127/M127-03/M127-03-0001.tif",
"imageCount": 227,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "292775561",
"label": "Volume 3: May 20, 1833 - October 19, 1840",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/292775561"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "292775561",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/292775561",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Volume 3: May 20, 1833 - October 19, 1840",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/292775561",
"collections": [
"Records of the Office of the Secretary of War",
"Letters Sent to the President"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/dc-metro/rg-107/627704/M127/M127-03/M127-03-0001.tif",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/dc-metro/rg-107/627704/M127/M127-03/M127-03-0001.tif",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/dc-metro/rg-107/627704/M127/M127-03/M127-03-0001.tif",
"imageCount": 227,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/292775561",
"naId": 292775561,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 39,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/dc-metro/rg-107/627704/M127/M127-03/M127-03-0039.tif",
"mediaId": "7175f127f5b70533",
"ocrText": "62\n63\nhis openeon, touched the question now pending before the\nthemselves, by which the duties of the one are actually in consistence with the\nPresident. that whether he right of promotion in the\nother Whether a particular person can physically perform the duties of two\nlines so secured to General Iones. as to under it the duly of the\nOffices, not incompatible, and whether the public interest requires their\nPresident to nominate minute the vacant office. Though. indeed,\nunion orsereance, are questions for the discretion of the appointing\nit is not unworthy of remark. that the action of the Senate might have\npower. Whether two officed, otherwise in comp atible shall be severed or\ntaken place, and yet, might not have indicated any decision\nunited is a question for the law making power. Itwill be seen,\nupon the question respecting the union of the two Office in the\nwithrespect to the execution of the duties of adjulant Feneral and\ncase of General Jones For the confirmation of his nomination to an\nMajar of artillery, by the same person, the argum cut drawn from in.\nappointment in the line of the army, was the subject presented for\nconvenience was used, and it certainly a fair argument in the in\nthe consideration of the denate, and the approval of that measure did\naestigation of a question otherwise doubtful. But I war precluded from\nnot necessarily shew the sense of the denate, acspecting to operation\nextending this argument to the cases, put by General Jones of the afsed\nupon any other Military appointment held by Feneral doned.\nlane Quarter masters, Commiparies before this plain reason that\nIt was a maked act, and its consequences were left to be determine\nthese officed are expreply enjorned by law to be executed by personi\nred in the proper mode, and by the proper authority.\nholding lineal com mipion. of course, this legislative arrangement\nPeneral Jones refers to the act of april 24 1/1816, as se\nprecludes all examination of the question, so far these appointment\ncuring to him the right of promotion. But that act contains\nare can carned. It will be observed that the general principle laid\nno provision on the subject, except so far as the clause in the\ndown, that the union or deverance of military officer, applied to cased\n9th Section, retaining the privileged secured to the staff of the\nwhere there in no legislative provision on the subject; and here\narmy by the act of March 3d 1813, quaranties this night. It\nGeneral dones seems to have misapprehended the tenor of my aemarks\nwill therefore, be seen at once, that the claim rests upo the\nHe goes on to specify a number of instances where staff and lineal\noriginal provisions of the act of March 3 d 1813 and upon\noffices are united; and where the tenure of both might occapion in\nthe question, whether those provisions are yet in force. and are\nconvenience to the public service, and, as draw a distinction be\napplicable to the present Office of adjuant General.\ntween those cased and his, he seems to think my view an inconsistent\nmust have expresed my self unfortunately, or General Jones\none. I beg leave to observe, however, that the true solution of the ques\ncould scarcely have so much misunderstood my observations\nlion is to be found in the difference I have stated. The general prin\nconcerning the union of military Officer. laid down the prin.\nciple of exclusion embraced all cased coming within it, and not special\naple, which is certainly a round one, that two officer incompatible\nally provided for bylaw. The cases of afsistance Quarter tear\nwithin nature cannot beheld by the same person, at the same\nde not come within it, for they hold but one commission, and of\ntime; and this principle I take applicable to all the officer\nthey did, they are exprepsly met by the provision which authorized their\nof the Government; whether civil or Military If unther stated chal\nunion. General Jones thinks the construction Y have given le the\ntwo commissions, confering absolute military rank, were in my\nwords, taken from the line is an inconsistent me, providing a\nopenion inconsistent and compalible with each other. now the\nmeasure for one office not applicable to another. He says. the\ncase put by General Jones of post baptain the stavy, and\nargument apumen, that the phrase \"shall be taken from the lines,\nCommitioner of naral affairs does not come within the prin\nwhen applied to certain officers, means that they shall be seperated\naple herein alluded to. For the offer ceof Committioner confers\nfrom the line, but when applied to afaistant Quarter Mad.\nno rank, and is to beremarked that this incom patibility\nters Ye thewords are to be construct as meaning \"exactly the re\ndoes of depend upon the physical inability of the person\nverse\". So far, in my openion, are the words taken from the line\"\nto execute both duties; but up on the nature of the offices\nfrom indicating any union, or sererance of two offices, that I"
}