Mr. Madison, whose adverse opinion in the Federalist had been relied upon by those who denied the exclusive power, now participated in the debate.  He declared that he had reviewed his former opinions, and he summed up the whole case as follows: 

The Constitution affirms that the executive power is vested in the President.  Are there exceptions to this proposition?  Yes; there are.  The Constitution says that in appointing to office the Senate shall be associated with the President, unless in the case of inferior officers, when the law shall otherwise direct.  Have we (that is, Congress) a right to extend this exception?  I believe not.  If the Constitution has invested all executive power in the President, I venture to assert that the Legislature has no right to diminish or modify his executive authority.  The question now resolves itself into this:  Is the power of displacing an executive power?  I conceive that if any power whatsoever is in the Executive it is the power of appointing, overseeing, and controlling those who execute the laws.  If the Constitution had not qualified the power of the President in appointing to office by associating the Senate with him in that business, would it not be clear that he would have the right by virtue of his executive power to make such appointment?  Should we be authorized in defiance of that clause in the Constitution, “The executive power shall be vested in the President,” to unite the Senate with the President in the appointment to office?  I conceive not.  If it is admitted that we should not be authorized to do this, I think it may be disputed whether we have a right to associate them in removing persons from office, the one power being as much of an executive nature as the other; and the first one is authorized by being excepted out of the general rule established by the Constitution in these words:  “The executive power shall be vested in the President.”

The question, thus ably and exhaustively argued, was decided by the House of Representatives, by a vote of 34 to 20, in favor of the principle that the executive power of removal is vested by the Constitution in the Executive, and in the Senate by the casting vote of the Vice-President.

The question has often been raised in subsequent times of high excitement, and the practice of the Government has, nevertheless, conformed in all cases to the decision thus early made.

The question was revived during the Administration of President Jackson, who made, as is well recollected, a very large number of removals, which were made an occasion of close and rigorous scrutiny and remonstrance.  The subject was long and earnestly debated in the Senate, and the early construction of the Constitution was, nevertheless, freely accepted as binding and conclusive upon Congress.