Myself when young did eagerly frequent
Doctor and Saint, and heard great Argument
About it and about; but evermore
Came out by the same Door as in I went.
-- OMAR, KHAYYAM.
THE shades of James Madison, Andrew Jackson, Andrew Johnson and Woodrow Wilson, as well as other statesmen, who had taken part in the century-old controversy as to whether there should be a bureaucracy, controlled either through the power of removal by the President alone or by the legislative control of the Executive's power of removal, stood behind the Ionic pillars of the Supreme Court of the United States, when the Court finally decided the question. On April 13, 1925, the author, as Solicitor General of the United States, commenced his argument in that great Court to defend the Executive power of removal free from legislative interference. George Wharton Pepper, then a Senator from the State of Pennsylvania, and a distinguished member of the historic bar of Philadelphia, defended the asserted legislative right of Congress to restrict and control the President in the exercise of such power.
Little was said in the two-day argument or in the later exceptionally voluminous opinions of the Court that had not been fully anticipated and eloquently stated in the First Congress.
No political struggle has been more continuous in our history than that between Congress and the President on this subject of the power of removal. Washington and all his successors as President have insisted upon their independence in the matter of removals and Congress, when occasion required, has been equally insistent as to its powers over the President under the terms of various statutes which sought to regulate his power of removal.
The conflict of authority first became acute in the administration of Andrew Jackson. He believed that the