What does this mean?
"It is apparent to my mind that the President thoroughly believed the tenure of office act to be unconstitutional and void . He was advised by every member of his cabinet......
"This was a punitive statue. it was directed against the President alone. It interfered with the prerogatives of his department as recognized from the foundation of the Government... This government can only be preserved and the people maintained by preserving intact the co-ordinate branches of it -legislative, executive, judicial - alike. I am no convert to any doctoring of the omnipotence of Congress." Okay so I understand about the first paragraph but not the second. Please help me.
The speaker believed that congress had no power to prevent him from firing office holders. He believed the office holders worked for him, not congress.
In the second paragraph, the speaker is stating their perspective on a law called the Tenure of Office Act. They describe this act as a punitive statute, meaning it was intended to serve as punishment. The act specifically targeted the President, interfering with the powers and privileges of their office.
The speaker believes that this act was unconstitutional and void, meaning it did not comply with the principles outlined in the Constitution and therefore had no legal force. They argue that this act went against the established structure of the government, which consists of three co-equal branches: the legislative (Congress), executive (the President), and judicial (the courts).
The speaker feels that in order to preserve the functioning of the government and protect the rights of the people, it is essential to maintain the integrity of these three branches. They imply that this act undermines the balance of power between the branches by giving excessive authority to Congress.
Finally, they state that they do not support any belief that Congress has supreme power or authority (the "omnipotence of Congress"). Instead, they advocate for a system where the co-equal branches of government are respected and their respective roles and powers are carefully preserved.
In the second paragraph, the speaker is referring to a "punitive statute" that was directed specifically at the President. This statute is most likely a reference to the Tenure of Office Act mentioned in the first paragraph.
The speaker argues that this particular statute interfered with the powers and prerogatives of the President's department, which refers to the executive branch of government. The executive branch is one of the three co-equal branches of government, along with the legislative and judicial branches. The speaker believes that these branches should maintain their independence and authority in order to preserve and maintain the government and the well-being of the people.
The speaker then states, "I am no convert to any doctoring of the omnipotence of Congress." This means that the speaker does not agree with any attempt to manipulate or excessively expand the power of Congress. They believe that each branch of government should have its own defined powers and responsibilities, and that the balance of power between the branches should be maintained.
In summary, the second paragraph explains the speaker's opposition to a specific statute that targeted the President and infringed upon the powers of the executive branch. They emphasize the importance of preserving the separation of powers among the three branches of government for the effective functioning of the government and the protection of the people's rights.