[Hinds' Precedents, Volume 1]
[Chapter 7 - Removal of Officers of the House]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
REMOVAL OF OFFICERS OF THE HOUSE.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A proposition to remove an officer a question of privilege.
Sections 284-285.\1\
2. Instances of removal, arraignment, and investigation.
Sections 286-296.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
284. A proposition to remove an officer of the House for misconduct
is a question of privilege.--On August 3, 1854,\2\ Mr. Theodore G.
Hunt, of Louisiana, submitted, as a question of privilege, the
following resolution:
Resolved, That John W. Forney, the Clerk of this House, by directing
and causing to be made the alteration of the House bill No. 342,
entitled ``An act to aid the construction of a railroad to the
Territory of Minnesota,'' and mentioned in the report of the special
committee of this House, has falsified a record of this House in
violation of the parliamentary law and of his sworn duty, and that the
said J. W. Forney, Clerk of the House of Representatives, should be,
and is hereby, removed from the office of Clerk of this House.
Mr. David T. Disney, of Ohio, made the point of order that this
resolution was not privileged.
The Speaker \3\ said:
The Chair overrules the question of order which has been raised by
the gentleman from Ohio. In the opinion of the Chair the question of
the gentleman from Louisiana is a question of privilege.
The question being taken on the resolution, it was disagreed to--
yeas, 18; nays, 154.
285. On April 18, 1850,\4\ Mr. Albert G. Brown, of Mississippi,
presented this resolution:
Resolved, That Robert E. Homer, acting Doorkeeper of the House of
Representatives, be, and he is hereby, discharged.
The Speaker \5\ decided that this resolution presented the precise
question which was decided by the House on a former occasion not to be
a privileged question, or a question of privilege; and, in conformity
with that decision, he ruled it out of order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Charges against officers of the House are questions of privilege.
(Secs. 2644-2647 of Vol. III.)
\2\ First session Thirty-third Congress, Journal, pp. 1275, 1276;
Globe, pp. 2101-2103.
\3\ Linn Boyd, of Kentucky, Speaker.
\4\ First session Thirty-first Congress, Journal p. 806: Globe, p.
765, 766.
\5\ Howell Cobb, of Georgia, Speaker.
Sec. 286
Mr. Brown having appealed, Mr. Orin Fowler, of Massachusetts, moved
to lay the appeal on the table.
On this motion there were yeas 80, nays 85. So the House declined to
lay the appeal on the table.
The appeal being open to debate, Mr. Robert Toombs, of Georgia,
commented on the fact that the House, by declining to lay the appeal on
the table, had indicated a purpose to overrule the Chair. But at the
conclusion of Mr. Toombs's remarks Mr. Brown withdrew the appeal and
the resolution in order to present the subject to the House in a
different form.
286. It being alleged that the Clerk was guilty of official
misconduct, a resolution removing him from office was presented and
entertained. On January 21, 1815,\1\ Mr. James Clarke, of Kentucky,
offered this resolution:
Resolved, That Patrick Magruder, Clerk to the House of
Representatives, be removed from office; that this House will, on
Monday next, proceed to the election of a Clerk.
On January 23 the resolution was considered, the objections to the
Clerk relating to his alleged neglect of proper administration of the
contingent fund at the time of the destruction of the Capitol.
On a motion to postpone the further consideration of the resolution
one week there were ayes 71, noes 71, whereupon the Speaker voted with
the ayes.
On January 28, the Clerk resigned.
287. The House by resolution dismissed its Clerk, who had been found
guilty of misappropriation of public funds.
The House has requested the executive authority to prosecute one of
the officers of the House.
For misappropriation of funds the House arrested its Clerk and
arraigned him at the bar.
The Clerk being arraigned to answer charges, leave was given him to
address the House.
The Clerk being arraigned, and addressing the House in his defense,
the Journal merely records the fact.
Pending examination of the Clerk on a charge of misappropriation of
funds, he was suspended from the exercise of his functions.
The Clerk being incapacitated, the House authorized the Chief
Assistant Clerk to attest a warrant and exercise the other functions of
the Clerk.
The Speaker has authority to issue a warrant of arrest only by order
of the House.
On January 17, 1845.\2\ Mr. William Taylor, of Virginia, from the
Committee on Accounts, made a report, showing a misappropriation of the
funds of the House by the Clerk, and recommending the following:
Resolved, That Caleb J. McNulty be, and he is hereby, dismissed from
the office of Clerk of this House.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Third session Thirteenth Congress, Journal, pp. 682, 684 (Gales
and Seaton ed.); annals, pp. 1085, 1100.
\2\ Second session Twenty-eighth Congress, Journal, pp. 223-227, 230-
233; Globe, pp. 147-149, 152-154.
Sec. 287
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to institute
forthwith the necessary legal proceedings to ascertain and secure the
balance of the public moneys due from Caleb J. McNulty, as Clerk of the
House of Representatives.
Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to
cause criminal prosecutions to be commenced against Caleb J. McNulty,
late Clerk of this House, for an embezzlement of the public money, and
all persons advising or knowingly and willingly participating in such
embezzlement, according to the provisions of the act of Congress
approved August 13, 1841.
It was objected that the action proposed by the committee was too
summary, and Mr. Cave Johnson, of Tennessee, offered this resolution:
Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed forthwith to arrest
Caleb J. McNulty, Clerk of this House, and bring him before the House.
Mr. John Quincy Adams, of Massachusetts, expressing doubts as to the
power of the House to arrest for a criminal offense, proposed an
amendment to provide for summoning the Clerk before the House.
After debate this amendment was disagreed to, and the resolution was
agreed to as offered by Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Adams then made the point that a warrant was necessary, and the
Speaker \1\ said he considered that the Chair had no authority to issue
the warrant except by the order of the House. The point was also made
that the rules required a warrant to be attested by the Clerk.
Accordingly, by suspension of the rules, the following was adopted:
Resolved, That the Speaker of this House issue his warrant for the
arrest of Caleb J. McNulty, in accordance with the resolution of this
day; and that the Chief Assistant Clerk attest the warrant under the
seal of this House.
The Sergeant-at-Arms was then furnished with the Speaker's warrant in
accordance with the foregoing resolution and proceeded to execute the
order of the House.
On the same day the Sergeant-at-Arms came in with Caleb J. McNulty,
Clerk of the House of Representatives, in his custody, when the House
proceeded to the consideration of the report and resolutions from the
Committee on Accounts.
On motion of Mr. George C. Dromgoole, of Virginia, leave was given
Caleb J. McNulty to address the House in his own defense.
The Speaker addressed Mr. McNulty as follows:
By the order of the House I am directed to state to you that you are
required to appear before the House on sundry charges contained in a
report made by the Committee on Accounts this morning, and the House
will now hear what you have to say in defense against these charges. In
order that you may be correctly informed of the charges reported by the
committee, they will now be read to you.
The report and resolutions were read accordingly.
Mr. McNulty then addressed the House.\2\ denying that he had
misappropriated any funds of the House as charged in the report.
Mr. Cave Johnson then proposed the following:
Resolved, That the report of the Committee on Accounts, in regard to
Caleb J. McNulty, Clerk of the House, be postponed until to-morrow, at
2 o'clock p. m.; and that the Sergeant-at-Arms hold said C. J. McNulty
in custody until the further order of this House.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ John W. Jones, of Virginia, Speaker.
\2\ The Journal gives only the statement 6f this fact and does not
give his defense.
Sec. 288
Mr. David L. Seymour, of New York, moved that the resolution be
amended by striking out all thereof which directed the Sergeant-at-Arms
to hold Mr. McNulty in custody.
This amendment was agreed to, yeas 99, nays 76.
Mr. Armistead Burt, of South Carolina, then moved the following
amendment:
And that in the meantime the exercise of his functions as Clerk of
this House be, and they hereby are, suspended, and that they be
performed by B. B. French, the Chief Clerk.
This amendment having been acquiesced in by the House, the resolution
as amended was agreed to.
On January 18 the consideration of the report of the Committee on
Accounts was considered, and the three resolutions were severally
agreed to, by the following votes: 196 to 0; affirmatively without call
of the roll; 173 to 4.
Then, the rules requiring viva voce election being suspended, the
following resolution was agreed to:
Resolved, That Benjamin B. French be, and he is hereby, appointed
Clerk of this House.
Mr. French thereupon appeared, and the Speaker administered to him
the oaths of his office.
288. Because of the misconduct of the incumbent, the office of
Doorkeeper has been declared vacant, and the duties have devolved upon
the Sergeant-at-Arms.
A matter affecting the character of an officer of the House involves
a question of privilege.
On May 22, 1876,\1\ Mr. Samuel S. Cox, of New York, from the
Committee on Rules, to which was referred the resolutions of the House
of the 13th and 16th instant, in relation to the Doorkeeper and the
consolidation of the offices of Sergeant-at-Arms and Doorkeeper,
submitted a report thereon in writing, accompanied by the following
resolutions:
1. That the office of Doorkeeper be vacated by its present incumbent.
2. That the duties of Doorkeeper be, and the same are hereby,
devolved upon the Sergeant-atArms until otherwise ordered.
The resolutions were severally agreed to.\2\
289. On February 1, 1878,\3\ Mr. John H. Baker, of Indiana, rising to
a question of privilege, made certain charges against J. W. Polk, the
Doorkeeper of the House, and moved a preamble reciting the charges,
which were of corruption in office, and the following resolution:
Resolved, That the Committee on Reform in the Civil Service be, and
it is hereby, directed to inquire into the several matters and things
so as aforesaid alleged against said Doorkeeper, and to report at any
time to this House whether said Doorkeeper is guilty of any of said
alleged acts; and the committee is authorized to send for persons and
papers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ First session Forty-fourth Congress, Journal, p. 998; Record, pp.
3251-3253.
\2\ This action was the result of a resolution presented to the House
on May 13, as a question of privilege, charges against the Doorkeeper
having appeared in a newspaper. The Speaker pro tempore [Mr. Cox] held
that the resolution, affecting the character of an officer of the
House, was a question of privilege. (Journal, p. 948; Record, p. 3066.)
\3\ Second session Forty-fifth Congress, Journal, pp. 339, 358, 783,
792-796; Record, pp. 707, 744, 2209, 2285-2287.
Sec. 290
On February 4 Mr. Charles C. Ellsworth, of Michigan, claiming the
floor for a question of privilege, which seems to have been admitted as
such, presented the statement of the Doorkeeper in reference to the
charges, and the same was referred to the committee having the matter
in charge.
On April 2 the House proceeded to consider the report of the
committee, which recommended the following:
Resolved, That the position of Doorkeeper of the House of
Representatives be, and hereby is, declared vacant; and
Further resolved, That until the appointment of a new Doorkeeper, the
duties of the office be, and hereby are, devolved upon the Sergeant-at-
Arms.
On April 4 the first resolution was agreed to---yeas 139, nays 80.
Then the second resolution was agreed to--yeas 122, nays 114.
290. A report from the Committee on Accounts having impeached the
integrity of the Doorkeeper, the House removed him.
A motion to proceed to the election of an officer is privileged; but
it is not so with a resolution naming a certain person to fill the
office.
On May 17, 1858,\1\ the House considered a report from the Committee
on Accounts, charging the Doorkeeper of the House with irregularities
in his office, and offering to the House the following resolution:
Resolved, That R. B. Hackney, the Doorkeeper of the present House of
Representatives be, and he is hereby, dismissed forthwith from that
office.
After debate, this resolution was agreed to--yeas 141, nays 34.
Mr. John B. Haskins, of New York, then proposed, as a question of
privilege, the following resolution:
Resolved, That Darius Truesdell, of New York, be, and he is hereby,
appointed Doorkeeper of the House of Representatives, for the Thirty-
fifth Congress.
Mr. Thomas S. Babcock, of Virginia, made the point of order that it
was not a question of privilege to move to appoint a particular person
Doorkeeper, but that it would be in order to move to proceed to the
election of Doorkeeper.
The Speaker \2\ sustained the point of order.
The House thereupon voted that on the succeeding day it would proceed
to the election of a Doorkeeper, and that until an election should be
effected the Sergeant at-Arms should take charge of the property in the
office of the Doorkeeper.
291. For permitting a Member under arrest to escape, the Doorkeeper
was arraigned at the bar of the House.
An officer of the House being arraigned for neglect of duty, it was
voted that he might answer orally.
The Journal recorded the substance of the oral answer of an officer
of the House arraigned at the bar for neglect of duty.
On June 6, 1860,\3\ during proceedings to obtain the attendance of
absent Members, under a call of the House, the arrest of absent Members
was ordered, and the doors were closed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ First session Thirty-fifth Congress, Journal, pp. 833, 835;
Globe, pp. 2187, 2195.
\2\ James L. Orr, of South Carolina, Speaker.
\3\ First session Thirty-sixth Congress, Journal, p. 1025; Globe, p.
2710.
Sec. 292
Pending these proceedings, Mr. John Hickman, of Pennsylvania, offered
the following resolution:
Resolved, That the Doorkeeper be called before the bar of the House
to answer for the escape of Mr. Stanton, of Ohio, from the floor of the
House after he was brought before the House under its warrant.
Mr. Hickman having stated that Mr. Stanton had escaped, the
resolution was agreed to.
The Doorkeeper thereupon appeared at the bar of the House, when a
question was raised by Mr. Horace Maynard, of Tennessee, as to the mode
of response. He held that under immemorial custom the Doorkeeper had no
right to address the House, but must present his answer in writing. He
was brought before the House in contempt of the House, like a witness.
The question was put to the House, and the House voted that the
Doorkeeper should answer orally. The Journal has this entry:
The Doorkeeper appeared at the bar of the House, and the question
having been submitted to the House, ``Will the House receive a verbal
answer?'' and decided in the affirmative, he stated ``that Mr. Stanton
had passed out at one of the side doors, which was in charge of one of
the messengers, in company with certain Members who had temporary leave
of absence, and that he had censured the messenger for permitting Mr.
Stanton to pass without leave.''
292. Charges against the Postmaster being sustained, his office was
declared vacant and his assistant was directed to perform the duties
temporarily.
The resignation of the Postmaster was laid before the House while a
resolution of dismissal was pending, and was disregarded.
On September 25, 1890,\1\ the House agreed to a resolution directing
the Committee on Accounts to investigate the conduct of the Postmaster
of the House.
On October 1 that committee reported at length, recommending the
adoption of the following resolution:
Resolved, That the office of Postmaster of the House of
Representatives be, and the same is hereby, declared vacant; and that
the Assistant Postmaster of the House be, and he is hereby, directed to
perform the duties of Postmaster until a Postmaster shall be elected
and duly qualified.
This resolution was agreed to.\2\
The report of the committee, but not the testimony, appears in full
in the Journal, apparently without any special order.
293. The late Sergeant-at-Arms having announced a deficit in his
office, the House authorized investigation by a select committee.--On
December 9, 1889,\3\ the Speaker laid before the House a letter from J.
P. Leedom, late Sergeant-at-Arms, announcing that the late cashier of
the office had departed without settling his accounts, and that there
was a deficit in the cash.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ First session Fifty-first Congress, Journal, pp. 1083, 1118;
Record, p. 10786.
\2\ Shortly before the action of the House on this resolution te
resignation of the Postmaster was laid before the House and read. No
action was taken on it. (Record, p. 10785.) A Postmaster was elected
December 10, 1890 (second session Fifty-first Congress, Journal, p.
42), the election being effected by the adoption of a resolution, which
was presented as privileged.
\3\ First session Fifty-first Congress, Journal, p. 14; Record, p.
115.
Sec. 294
Thereupon the House by resolution directed the appointment of a
select committee to examine the accounts of the office.
294. Certain charges being made against an officer of the House, he
petitioned for an investigation.--On August 26, 1789,\1\ a petition was
presented from Joseph Wheaton, Sergeant-at-Arms of the House, praying
that an inquiry might be made into certain charges exhibited against
him in an anonymous letter addressed to the Speaker.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.\2\
295. A newspaper charge against the Clerk was, at the request of that
officer, investigated by the House.
The report of an investigating committee exonerating the Clerk was
printed in full in the Journal.
On May 18, 1876,\3\ the Clerk of the House asked the House by a
letter laid before the House by the Speaker to order an investigation
into a charge made by a newspaper that he had corruptly used his power
in appointing subordinates in his department. The House ordered the
investigation. The report \4\ exonerating the Clerk was submitted on
June 27 and was printed in full in the Journal, apparently without
special order of the House.
296. A candidate for the office of Secretary of the Senate was
allowed to address the Senate in explanation of certain charges.
On December 19, 1831,\5\ as the Senate was about to reelect its
Secretary, Walter Lowrie, a charge was made that Mr. Lowrie had
betrayed executive secrets of the Senate. Thereupon, by unanimous
consent, Mr. Lowrie was permitted to address the Senate in his own
defense.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ First session First Congress, Journal, p. 90. (Gales and Seaton
ed.)
\2\ On March 31, 1876, the House, on application of the Chief Clerk,
ordered an investigation into certain charges against that official.
These charges had been made by a Member on the floor. (First session
Forty-fourth Congress, Journal, p. 714; Record, p. 2136.)
\3\ First session Forty-fourth Congress, Journal, pp. 975, 1168.
\4\ Journal, p. 1168.
\5\ First session Twenty-second Congress, Debates, pp. 8, 9.