The New York Herald Newspaper, April 21, 1868, Page 3

ooo WASHINGTON een. THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL. Glose of Testimony on Both Sides. Adjournment of the Court Unti) ye Wednesday. The Bill for the Protection of American Citi- sens Abroad Passed in the House. THE IMPEACHMENT. SPECIAL TELEGRAM TO THE HERALD. WASHINGTON, April 20, 1868, auw@ Closing of the testimopy for both sides isa wabdject of universal congratulation, and the pros- pecte of anow speedy termination of: the impeach- ment trial is received by both radicals aud demo- Crate with equal anticipations of triumph. During today’s proceedings Manager Butler took occasion 0 display his cloven foot in a species of browbeating which he attempted to practice upon the Chief Justice, the latter having ordered Butler to submit a question in writing, which request was received by a rade reply. Both the Managers, Boutwell and Bing- ham, and the counsel, Evarts and Stanbery, are now busily at work upon their arguments. Mr. Boutwell has’ very nearly completed his speech. 1t will require at least the whole of Wednesday for Mr. Boutwell to @ispore of his effort for the benefit of the High Court, Before the final argument is commenced another attempt will be made to allow those of the Managers and counsel who are debarred from speaking by the persistency of the Senate in adhcring to the twenty- ‘Sret rule to file the arguments which they have pre- pared in advance, to form a sort of appendix to the oMicial report after trial, General Logan has an elaborate argument finished, covering the whole ground of the controversy and making fifty-five printed pages. Thad Stevens has also a Incubration which he is anxious to get in in some shape. , SPECIAL CORRESPONDENCE OF THE HERALD. ‘The Judgment of the Sennic in Impeachment Casee-What it Meanse—Removal Not Ne- ecessarily the Result ef Conviction—A New Peiut Regarding the Power of Appeal— @an the Supreme Court Review Impeach- ment Cases? WASHINGTON, April 20, 1868. DOES REMOVAL NECESSARILY FOLLOW CONVICTION? In my despatches last night I alluded briefy toa point that is being much discussed at the present ‘moment, to wit, the power of the Senators, sitting a8 a Court of Impeachment, to convict the President of 4he charges preferred against bim without imMieting the penalty of removal and disquali- Beation to hold office in future. A good @eal i# said on both sides of the question, seme holding that the penalty necessarily follows conviction, and others that the two are entirely dis- tinct and left wholly to the discretion of the Sena- tora, The only thing in the constitution bearing wpen the point is to be found in the seventh lange of the third section, article one, which reads as follows:— Jud it in cases of impeachment shall not ex- vena farther than to removal from office and dis- rage to hold and od any office of honor, Seen a under the United States; but the party peat aternate dae i and prulect 4 nae ee The meaning of the language of this clause seems plain and simple. It merely prescribes how great the punishment may be, limiting it to a certain penalty, a8 removal from office and future disqualiq- eation, without declaring that such penalty must ‘de inflicted as the necessary sequence of conviction. ‘Under this common sense reading o1 the clause it is patent that the Senate is at liberty to flx any degree of punishment short of removal and disqualifica- thon, and can in its discretion, after finding the ac- cused guilty, either merely reprimandor censure him er remove him from office, with or without future disqualification. In this view of the case removal is not at all a cer- tain result of conviction, though, of course, the gain anything by adopting such a pian, while they ‘would be sure to lose a great deal, inasmuch as they ‘would leave the convicted President still in power to Jaugh at their lame and impotent conclusion, and it ‘would give the impression that the great party which has made impeachment its battle cry and expended wpon it so much thunder, feared, when put to the Girect test, to carry out their own policy. The idea, therefore, that conviction without removal is among things probable may be dismissed without further ‘There ts a plan, however, that might be adopted with safety by the radicals, supposing them to be oemvinced that the President has not committed crimes removal from office, and that to in- Mict the penalty under such circumstances would be reiacus to their party. I briefly alluded to this plan im my despatches last evening. It is this:—Let them hold a meeting among themselves and resoive to vote unanimously for acquittal. Let not a single radical Senator show that in this trial he is infuencea Dy partisan prejudice or by any other motive incon- stent with the solemn oath he has taken te consider the case fairly and impartially. The effect ef such 4 show of unanimity would be sure to have a It would elevate them in the estima- 4 than they could hope to achieve by the mere triumph of their fos rt wont have an imity. 41 it would be doing would save them il i g i i it ra, indeed, itting themselves and not the ited States, whose onty crime has struction of a law in accordance with convictions of the meaning of the constitution. THR DECISION OF THR IMPEACHMENT COURT NECRSSARILY PINAL? ‘The lar answer to this question would seem be jediy in the affirmative; but there is a Mttle tm im the ling case of the trial of Johnson that would seem to leave the ques- Won im considerable doubt. In ordinary impeach- cases, where the President is not on_ trial, perk th Jud mene e ‘and should be final. isthe the present case? ( But what is the controversy | | branches of the govern- The legis- | ve and the Executive, the i : s i | Fi = 3 2 & wie Gir § | 5 u 3 i B NKW, YORK HERALD, TUESDAY, APRIL 21, 1868—TRIPLE SHEET. baat flat BS i § La Bee 38 33 i ‘ould seem to demand imperativel should hear such an application on its merits, Because the Senate has the sole Power to try impeachment cases is no reason why their judgment should not be reviewed ‘hen the question involved is whether a law is con- stitutional or the reverse, and whether the President it to have enforced it or not, To believe other- wise would clearly to believe that Congress absorbs both the legislative and judicial powers of the country—a belief inconsistent with the spirit and let- ter of the constitution, 3 a decide it The Impenehment Trinl—Confession ef a Radi- cal Sheet, {From the Springfield Republican (radical) Apri) 20.) Many of the reports and despatches from Washing- ton throw doubt upon the result of the Senate's vote on the conviction of the President. ut our private advices sustain the judgment we have all along expressed, that conviction is inevit.ble, and @will follow not so much from a Jeeting Of the President’s technical guilt or tnnocense on this oy that charge, a3 from the feeling that it is a necessity of the political condition of the country, and earned by its victim by his interference with the legislative branch of the PA ed and his trifling with the public peace. We are assured that no more than three republican Senators are likely, under any clrew to vote for the President. These are Grimes, of Iowa; Van Winkle, of West Virginia, and Fowler, of Tennessee. The withdrawal of these from the republican vote inst the President still leaves it several in excess of the number necessary to a conviction. The mt week will undoubtedly ‘witness .the conclusion of the whole matter—the de- poet of one President and the institution of another in his place, PROCEEDINGS OF THE COURT. Nineteenth Day. WASHINGTON, April 20, 1868. ‘The court was opened in due form at eleven o'clock, All the Managers were present. In response to an inquiry from the Carer Justicr, Mr. Curtis stated that the counsel for the President considered their evidence as closed. Mr. Brnouam said the Managers might desire to place on the stand one or two witnesses who had been subpoenaed early in the trial, but who had not appeared hitherto. The Curler Justice was understood to say it would be proper to first obtain an order from the Senate, Mr. Brncnam—I wish it to be understood that I desire to consult my associates about it first: So far as the order is concerned, I take it for granted that the suggestion made at the time that the evidence was closed on the part of the Managers, that it would be competent for us, without further order, if those witnesses should appear, to introduce them on the stand, is sufficient, because the Senate will recollect, although I have not myself referred to the journal, that it was stated by my associate Manager (Mr. But- ler), in the hearing of the Senate, that we considered our case closed, reserving, however, the right of call- ing some other witnesses or offering some document- ary testimony that might be obtained afterwards, Senator Jounson—I am not sure that I heard cor- rectly the honorable Manager. I rise merely for the purpose of inquiring whether the Managers desire to have the privilege of offering any evidence after the argument begins, Mr. BINGHAM—AS at present advised, although on that subject, as is donbtless known to the honorable Senator, though I am prepared to say that it has happened in this country—I am sure that it did in the case of Justice Chase—such orders have been made, I am not aware that the Managers have any desire of that sort, I wish it to be understood by the Senate that there are one or two witnesses who are important on the part of the Managers who were early subpoenaed on this trial, and although we have not n able yet to find them, we have been advised that they have been in the capital for the last forty- += hours. nator Y. Srreated the inquiry whether the Managers in! ed to offer testtmony after the argu- ment was commenced. Mr. BINGHAM—As at present advised we have no pul of the sort. ‘e do not know what may oc- cur in the pri of the trial. Mr. BUTLER, having come into the chamber, put in evidence from the Journal of Congress of 1774 and 1775 (the first Cengress) the comm! iasued to denice aunties Cniearenaetn Sac arm! e Un ol im, amoi oer = tool and follow ci ie shor that be ng ne commission to continue in force until revoked by that or @ futare Con- gress. Mr. Butler said that the point on which he offered it was to show that that was the ouly form of commission ever this country toa mill oficer, and that mission was to be held during the has aince been letters which had not been brought of the Senate in the schedule already Mr, Evarts asked Mr. Butler in evidence, ether he con- sidered that letter as referring to any it which counsel for the President had made in argu- ment or in evidence, or whether he led it simply as the expression of an m on the part of ‘a Sect of the Treasury? ‘was simply an im- of evidence, and he did not consider it worth while to discuss it. Mr. BuTLeR—I ask whether you object to it? Mr. EvanTs—We do not. Mr. BuTLer—Very well. Mr. BUTLER then put in evidence the letter which is dated Department a 1845,” aon by James Guthrie, eeretry i acl Cady fd receipt of a Ay I somebody surveyor of some district in Sout caren, om stating that the A so EI filled the adjournment of the Senate, it must vacant until the next session, but the recommendation of the writer would receive the ration of the President. Mr. But- brought to him, until this moment, the papers which he had called for ast Saturday, and he asked moments to examine them. . POSTMASTER GENERAL RANDALL RECALLED, After @ short interval of time Postmaster General Randall was again called to the stand and cross- —— by Mr. Leen gmt eet R jave you a copy 0! indictment against Fos- ter'loagett on ‘tie ln your office? A. Yes. Q. When was it made? A. I cannot tell you; I suppose about the time the original copy was filed. Have you produced it here? A, No, sir. ta ‘hat did you do with it? A. It is im the office. Ta the copy of it here? A. Yes, . From where does it come? A. From the Treas- it. 5 ny did Fig not produce the copy from your own office? A. Because that would not prove anything; I could not certify that it was a true copy without having the original. b Q. Have you the original? A. T understand it is ere. . Where? A, With some committee, The letter of Mr. McCulloch explains that. Mr. BuTLER—The letter of Mr. McCulloch explains = the Hopkins case, which I do not want to go to. Witness—Copies of the indictments in the two cases are fastened together, and the originals are there, as I understand. Mr. BuTLEX then proceeded to read a copy of the indictment found against Foster Bl tt at the November term, 1867, of the United st District Court for the Southern District of ce It re- cites that on the 27th day of July, 1 Poster Blodgett was ea by the of Chited States to the office of Postmaster of Augusta, Ga.; that after said a and before entering apon the duties of the office, and before being entitled to any salary or emoluments thereof, he juired by oath, which is that he had never borne arms against the States or given aid or encouragement to the enemies of cn Uni Lay a8 he took that oath Ne a mi ‘trate, on the Sth ; ereas, in truth and in fact, he had voluntarily borne arms aid and en- Against the United States and held the ohnee of oni tain in an artillery company, and aan conregt oe teary to the Sotnte® me jury, cont Mr. BoTLER—On the notice hich you have pat in an answer, being sent to Mr. Blodgett, did he and in this. pap the. siwwer of w copy of it A. ‘These are co) rs on file; I only swear to them aa such believe it is copy of his The nsion was dated the 34 of January t 80. On the i this answer? A. Yes, Y offer it In evidence, Mr. EVART# objected—He said that the counsel for evidence bat the oficial action of Omoe in the to am oral statement I it whi Boe, freer himself gives. now the na : it ito the right to repel Evarts) submitted to ar. Fonter Blodgett, who in Mapor of the chy of ae: and was a mem Convention of Geo ‘What does the cir tem mein ra am, member, of the Constitutional Convention and an active Union ‘The Crimp Jusricy, interrupting—The honorable M will to writing what be anager wil please wreduce Dg Bro Mr. BUTLER—I will after I state the The Cau the Managers mi which they propose to offer, and the Senate wi then pon upon the question whether it desired to hear that class of evidence, Senator JoHNson ‘(to Mr. Butler)—Does ba Propose to offer that paper in evidence? Mr. BUTLER—I do. Senator JonNson--Not! else? Mr. BUTLER assented, and said—This is the first time in this trial that any counsel has been st It seems, Mr. President, that the same rule should be applied to- as yesterday, ¢ CuikF JUsTicE—The honorable Manager ap- Pears to the Chief Justice to be maxing @ statement of matters which are not in proof,and of which the Senate has, as yet, heard nothing, The Manager states that he intends to put them tn evidence. Chief Jus- tice, therefore, Es eed that the natare of the evi- dence which the Manager to put before the Senate shall be reduced to writing as the ordinal offers of proof*have been, and then the Senate will sonnet whether it wil receive that class of evidence or ne Mr. BuTLeR—I am trying to state that this was a femal the record produced by the counsel for the President, and I have a right to say thet this ts the _ time that any counsel has been interrupted in this way. The ‘Sime IvsTicE—Does the honorable Manager decline to put his statements iu writing? Mr. BUTLER—I am not deciining to put the state- ment in writing, The Cnigr Justice—Then the honorable Manager will have the goodness to put it in writing. Mr. BUTLER—I will do it, if I can take sufficient time, ‘The Crier Jostice—Yes, sir, * After some time spent in fixing the form of the show that Foster Blodgett, Mayor, Of the clay of Ate show r ‘or of the of Au- Ga., appointed by General Pope A cea tutional Convention of Georgia, being, because of his loyalty, obnoxious to some rson of the citizens lately in rebellion inst the Jnited States, by the testi of such citizens was indicted ; that said indictment was sent to the Post- master ‘ral, and that thereupon, without author- ity of law, he che, Postpasver Generel suspended ponies ag m office without any ot complaint against him and without any hearing, and did not send tothe Senate the report of his suspension, the office being one within the appointment of the Presi- dent with the advice and consent of the Senate. ‘This proof in part by the answer of Blodgett to the Postmaster General being a portion of the pal rs on tile in the Post Office Department, on which the ac- tion of the Postmaster General was taken, @ portion of which has been put in evidence by the counsel for the President, is to show that Mr. Blodgett has always eee and loyal to the United States govern- Mr. EVARTS—We object to the evidence, as bein; foreign and allen to the case. Foster Blodgett, rid the evidence concerning him, were produced on the ‘part of the Mi and on their part the evidence was confined to his oral testimony that he had re- ceived @ certain commission under which he held the office of Postmaster in Augusta; that he had been suspended from office by the Executive of the United States, and there was a superadded conclusion that his case had not been sent to the Senate. In takin, up the case the defence offered nothing but the ofi- cial action of the Post Office Department, coupled with evidence of the head of the department that this was his own act without the previous notice to, or su’ juent direction of, the Presi- dent of the Unit States. It appears that the und of the action was the indictment against Mr. lodgett. The complaint was made last Saturday that the indictment had not been produced. The Managers having now procured it have put it in evi- dence, and they now propose to put in evidence Mr. Blodgett’s answer to that indictment or to the accu- sation made before the Postmaster General. Mr. BuTLER—His answer to the Postmaster Gene- ral’s notice, not to the indictment. Mr. Evakrs—His answer to the accusatfon and the evidence concerning the accusation as placed before the Postmaster General, I understand, Mr, BUTLER—Not his answer to the indictment? Mr. EVARTS—His answer to the indictment, so far as it was the accusation before the Postmaster Gen- eral. 1 understood you to say 80. To prove that he was friendly to the United States and that he always had been, notwithstanding he had deen a captain In the rebel army, the honorable Manager states that that paper is apart of the evidence to sustain Mr. Blod- it's loyalty and to defeat the accusation against im. Part of it is a letter written e: him ten days after his removal, and the honorable Manager states to fa that that letter is CF gpa of the papers on which the Postmaster Gene! acted in suspendi: him from office. How that can be, in the nature things, Jt is difficult for me to sce. Now, the honor- able court can see that this is not evidence tntro- ee eras cc eeeion oe It is evidence introdus by us to show the action of Office his removal, =e ae x epeineemnga it. If legos’ rightfally ir part, we, o! will meet it on oura, and we will have an excursion from the impeachment trial of it to the trial of Mr. Blodgett on the ques- I am instracted to say there is a 10 can testify that he was a cap- ready to goon tain THe pore r. President and Senators,! think now that order made either to-day re, for me to state the grounds 1 this evidence, Mr. Blodgett ‘was called here to show that without his case bein: 2 i 5. 5 ef Fi we , on the 3d day of January 18 , without wrere concerned, and without ‘any justiveation, oF were any cation or conviction of any crime ; and that a man was placed in the ofice as it, with the same salary, and @ ii more, so that it amounts to @ removal and putting another man in office. Mr. Blodgett that up to the time that he tes- tified he had not any knowledge that hie case was before the Senate, he could get no redress, We thonght that on the proposition that the Presideut desired to obey the law, except where he wanted to make a case to test the constitutionality of it, this was qui pertinent evidence. The President put forward broadly in his answer that he was exceed- a ally the Civil ‘Tenure act, except where he wanted to make a case to decide its constitutionality. Thege facts were pat im, and these facts Raed not ‘in dispute. They call aces a letter of a] ‘men tee Somers as » tal agent, wh @ salary therein set out; i also Yo in evidence & letter informing Mr. Blodgett that he had been sus- from office. That letter states previously at itwas on that indictment for perjury, not set- ting out the indictment, so as to leave us to infer shat, Mr. Foster Bi had in some controversy between neighbor and bor, or between citizen and citi- zen, committed wilful and corrupt perjury, and that it was so heinous a case that the Post: General felt obliged iustantly to suspend him. It was @ case, he said, where the great law of necessity competied him to suspend him at once. In order to meet that we ask for the indictment, and we get at last a copy of it from the fee | Department, Mr. Foster Blodgett being notified of his suspension on the 3d of January, this answer to the Postmaster General on the 10th, seven days after, not ten days, as the counsel stated, Mr. EVARTs—It is entirely immaterial. Mr. BorLeR—I do not consider it material, only as @ matter of correction. A week after he sent and put on file in the Se ogee his justification, saying that this was @ rebel plot and treason inst the United States. Having put that on iile, itis a part of the case. Now, I have not said to the Senate that this paper was one on which Mr. Randall acted in suspending Mr. Blodgett, but I do say, that it ts a part of the proceedings of the case; that it is @ paper on which Mr. Randall is acting im not re- turning the suspension through the President to the Senate. It may be said Mr. Randall had no business to retarn it to the Senate. He had as much business to return {it to the Senate as he had to suspend him. We are answered that the counsel for the President only put In the omicial act of the department. I had the honor to explain to the Senate some days ago that I under- stood an official act to be that which It is made a man’s duty by law to do. I ne understood there Was any other official act, I always understood the acta which the law does not empower a man to do are oMctous acts—not offictal—and I think this the most officious act Ihave ever known. The case affects the President, because he was informed of this sus- pension after it was made, and he has taken no ac- Uon upon it; and when we put Mr. Blodgett on the stand to testify that he has been suspended and that he could not get his case before the Senate, the answer is—what? They put biacken his reputation and send it out to the country. Now, gentlemen of the Senate, I never saw Foster Blodgett until wi it to th stand, and I have no interest in him i; any other of ‘ve has been mong bie legabors : Propose to pu papers le in the Post OmMice Department about this case to bear on my side of the case. The counsel for the President put in such part of the papers as they choose to bear on their side, SiO Lor ose 7 Pes it each p rs as bear on my side of the case; out of the same bundle they shall not pick out such as please them without my being permitted to he same bundle such as us, EvaRTs—We put in nothing from the bundle, We wy in merely the action of the De it, We have as ‘little care for Fos- ter Bi as you have, You brought him here, and tf his case is to be tried by this court we are ready to try it. Mr. BUTLER asked leave to withdraw the offer of evidence, and to substitute for it the following:— “The defendant's counsel having produced from files ofthe Post OMce Department part of the reco) showing the alleged reason for the suspension ol Foster Blodgett as postmaster of Augusta, Ga, we now proj to give in evidence the residue of sald record, including the papers on file in the said ¢, for the purpose of show!ng the whole of the case, as the same was presented to the Postmaster General before and at the time of the suspension of sald Blodgett, Mr. EVanrts renewed his objection to the offer on account of irrelevancy. The Cursr Justice put the question to the Senate whether the evidence should be received, and de- clared Without a division that the testimony was excluded, Mr. BUTLER—Mr. Randall, I have been informed that you desire to make some statement. If it does not de Syuning that the President said or that anroany. else said I have no objection. ‘itness—I wish to explain the circumstances under which I made this suspension. A copy of this indictment was brought to me by the District Attor- ney at or about the same time, soon after it was found, He came to me and made a statement of the circum- stances under which it was found. Under the OMice ‘Tenure law, asI understood it. the President could have no power tosuspend sar oten: Cant thesession of the Senate. The only thing he could do would be to send up the name of some man in his place and to remove Mr. Blodgett. It occurred to me that this violation of the law ig Mr. Blodgett might be merely a technical one; and if it was merely a technical vio- lation of law—if it was true that he was forced into the rebel service and fag fed of it as soon ashe could and this violation of the law was merely a technical one, 1 did not want him turned out, and for that reason I took the responsibility of aon this thing and putting a temporary agent in until I should as- certain more ‘what action to take, Mr. BuTLER—Why Cag et not report to the Presi- dent for his action? A. I told the President what I had done afterwards, Q. Why didn’t you report {t before you undertook the responsibility? A. Becanse the only thing he couid do, if he did take action, was to send in another name and turn this man out. Q. And you thought you would break the law as you could do nothing better? A. I did not consider ‘that case at all, I thought if he was an honest man Jwould take this course and try to ascertain. [ know it is a technical violation of the law, but I dtd it for the purpose of having an act of justice doue him if he was an honest man. Q. Was the Senate in session on the 3d day of January? A. I can’t tell yon whether it was or not, Q. Hadn't it been adjourned over? A, It might have been; I don’t remember, Q. Then the reason that the Senate was in session didn’t apply? A. f considered that the Senate was in session. I don’t recollect whether it was in ses- sion on that day, rs Q. You deemed it to be insession? A. Yes sir; one explanation I had forgotten; the reason why some- thing further has not been done in the case was, I was trying to get some further information on the subject, aud then this trouble began; and so the case has laid ever since, Q. By “trouble” you meas impeachment? (Langh- ter.) A. Yes, sir, Senator CONNEss submitted the following question to the witness in writing:—‘Have you ever taken any step since your act suspendingFoster Blodgett in further investigation of hiscaset” A. Yes sir, in try- ing to secure further information; there is considera- ble further information beyond that which has been offered and put in, ‘The witness then left the stand. Mr. Lega now offer, = Fresicent apc ‘opy of the order creating. the Military Division ot fine’ and ing Sherman in charge. ‘Mr. EvARTS—What does that rebut? We are not aware of apy evidence that that rebuts, Mr. BUTLER—Do you object? Mr. Evanrs—We do. It is not relevant. I do not recall any evidence that we have given concerning the di ment, Mr. BoTLeR—It is put in to show the action of the President at the same time that he restored Mr. Thomas. On the same day that he restored General Thomas he took this action, and that date was not fixed until after General Thomas was on the stand, It is to show what was done miliiarily on the same day ir. EVARTs—We do not still see any connection with General Thomas’ testimony. The only connec- tion the honorable Manager suggests is that he learned from General Thomas when he was restored. If he did learn that it does not connect itself at all with any evidence that we have produced. If it is put in on the ground that it was overlooked that's another matter. If it is put in in rebuttal it has not relevancy that we can see. Mr. BuTLER—When I speak ot eetting a thing in the trial of a cause I mean learning it in the eourse of judicial evidence on the trial—not ascertaining from the newspapers; they are not always the best source of knowledge. I that General ‘Thomas testified that on the 13th the President gave the order that he should be restored, Now, then, that was fixed—a thing that was not known either in the court or in the country, because that was an order given on the 13th to General Grant, which was not published. I want to show that on the day before this new military division was made here and General Sherman ordered here in command what were the acts of the President at or about the same time. As the presiding oMfcer has very well told us heretofore, the competency of the acts of a party about the same .ti being @ part of the res geste, and the Senate es allowed anne A to come in, it 1s apart of the thi re by the President on the very day—the 12th February the very day before Thomas was restoted. [don’t mean to say @ word on the question of rebutting. I don’t understand that that question belongs here. ‘The Cajsr JUSTICE said he would put the question to the Senate. Senator ANTHONY Called for the yeas and nays, Senator KUCKALEW asked for ihe reading of the be put to General Sberinan on this subject afew jays since. ‘ur. BurLeR—Being a matter that we can refer to in the argument, we withdraw it, I have now, Mr. President and ators, 2 list prepared as carefully as we were able in the time from the law, of the various officers in the Uni States who would be affected by the President's claim he.e of a right to remove at pleasure; that is to say, ifhe can remove at pleasure and appoint ad fnterim. ‘This is a list of officers, taken from the law, with their salaries, being a correlative list to that one put in by the counsel, showing the number of officers and the amount of sdlaries which would be affected by the power of the President. In order ae it before Senate I will read the recapitul only:—In the Navy, War, State, Interior, Post Omice, Attorney General's, Treasury, Agncultural and Edu- cational Departments, 41,568 officers; the amount of their emoluments, $31,108,736 87 @ year. pore that the same course will be taken with this as with the like schedule printed as a part of this case, The Cuizy Justice (to the counsel)—Any objec- tion? Mr. Fyanre (after examination)—-We have no ob- POD. Mr. BuTLRR—I have the honor to offer now, from the files of the Senate, the message of Andrew Jonn- son rp Lieutenant Geoeral W. T. Sherman to be general by brevet in the army of the United States on the 15th of February, 1868, Mr. EVanrs—Under what article is that? Mr. BurLex—That is under the eleventh and the tenth. Mr. Evants—The tenth is the speeches. Mr. Bor. ek—I should have said the ninth. F Mr. EvaR Do you offer this ty evidence on the ground that conferring the brevet on General Sher- man was intended to obstruct the Reconstraction acts? * Mr. Bortrr—I have already im the ment stated my Views on the question, and was replied to, Lthink, by yourself; J was, I am certain, by Mr. Curtis, : Mr. ByantTs—It does not seem to us to be relevant; it certainly 8 not rebutting. We have offered no evidence bearing upon the only evidence you offered—the telegrams between Governor ns and the President. We have offered no evidence on that subject, and we do not see that this appointment is Corbett, Davie) Ferry, Frelinghtiysen, ‘MoCreery, ‘Of N. H., Patterson of T Sprague,’ Stewart, Thayd, Vickers, - BUTLER—I have the honor to say that the case Of the Managers 1s closed, and all wit- it the instance of please to proceed with their Mr. BourweLL—! have had the honor to be chosen by the Managers to make the first argument on the pet of the House of Representatives, and it is very ikely that I shail be obl to occupy the larger part of the day in presenting to the honorable Senate the views that I shall deem it my duty tooder, Under these circumstances I shall have to ask the Senate to do me the favor of adjourning the court until to- morrow morning. Senator Jounsox—Mr. Chief Justice, T move that the Senate, sitting as court, adjourn until to-morrow. Mr. Evarts—May I be heard? The Cuigr Justice—On the motion to adjourn there ia no debate allowed. Senator JouNSON withdrew the motion to adjourn, Mr. EVARTS—I do not rise for the purpose of making the least objection to the request of the honorable Manager, but to make a statement to which I beg leave to call the attention of the Senate. Our learned associate, Mr. Stanbery, has, from the outset, been relied upon by the President and by the associate counsel to make the final argument in this cause, and there, are man, reasons, rofessionai and otner, by which we all wish that this purpose should be carried out. It has been his misfortune in the midst of this trial to be taken suddenly ill. His illness is of no great gravity, and is yielding to the remedies and the pro; of time, and he is convalescent, so that he now occupies his parlor. The summing up of@ cause of this weight in many respects, considering the amount of testinfony and the subject, is of course @ labor of no ordinary magnitude, physically and otherwise, and Mr. Stanbery is of opinion that he will need an interval of two days, which, added {o what he has had in the course of the trial, would probably bring him in condition for the argument with adequate strength for that pur- pose. This might have been left until the day on which he should ap) and then a request made for a day or two's relief in this regard; but tt occurred to us the much fairer to the Managers that the interval we proj should be interposed at a time when it would be useful and valuable to them also, As the proofs are not entirely printed in the proper form of evidence, and the voluminous evi- dence on the subject of appointments and on the practice of the government is such as to require con- siderable investigation in order to point out to the Senate the efficacy of what is to be proved, it is there- fore our duty now to suggest, and to accompany it with the suggestion of the Managers, that ‘until to-morrow should be given for the introduction of the argument on their part, that you would con- sider this statement that 1 have made to you and see whether it is not better in all respects that the mat- ter should be now disposed of, in which the Man- agers concur and consider the providential interfer- ence with the President's counsel and his confidential friend and adviser. ‘The suggestion is that an inter- val of two days should be given, and, as I under- stand, the Managers believe that it is better it should occur now than later, Mr. BoUTWBLL said he would express no opinion upon the request made by the learned counsel, but he desired that whatever time was given should be granted at once, as he wished to make further and more careful examination of papers than he had yet been able todo, Under the circumstances, how- ever, he did not feel at liberty to ask the favor on his own account. Mr. Evarrs made the additional remark that if in Mr. Stanbery’s expectation to be able to speak he should be disappointed, it was a matter of some im- portance to tue defence to be able properly to supply his place. Senator JOHNSON moved that when the Senate, sit- elgg adjourn, it be unt Thursday morn- ng next. Several SENATORS—Wednesday, Senator JoHNSON—! modify the motion, Mr. Chief Justice, by making it Wednesday. Senator DOOLITILE suggested at twelve o'clock, Several SENATORS—*NO, no.’* Mr. LoGaN—lI wish to make a request. Is this the ‘proper time to do it? ‘The Caikr Justice—Yes, Mr. Logan—I desire to make a request of the Senate before it adjourna, Doubtiess the adjournment will proceed on the statement of the Managers and the counsel. It is thie: had not presumption enough to ask leave of the ate to speak on the issue pre- sented to the Senate, but I ask that 1 may he per- mitted to file to-day a printed argument that | have made as part of the record without taking up the tyme of the Senate, inasmuch as the evidence is all in. tor STRWAKT—I move that leave be granted, The Cnikr Justick—As that would invole a change Lo the role, it cannot be done, if there is any objec- tion. Senator BrckaLEw—I object. Senator Jounson—May [ ask the honorable Man- oe if the speech is now in print? r. LOGAN—It 18, Senator Wi1son called for the reading of the rule in question, the twenty-first, and it was read, Mr. Logan added that his reason for making the request to file it to-day wag so that the counsel for the respondent, if they thought it worthy of it, might reply to it. ‘he Carer Justice again said that under the rule it could not be considered except by unanimous con- sent. Senator SUMNER—There is no objection. Senator DooLitrLy—i object. Mr. BuTLER—Before the adjournment of the Senate 1 beg to cali the attention of the counsel for the re- = to one feature. It so happens that the janagers, under the construction given to the rule, are to proceed first. A large mass of testimony has been introduced upon the subject of removals and appointments. I am not informed whether there are tal cases on which the counsel for the re- I think it be proper for them whether there are cases on which they purpose to rely, as furnishin; precedence for the course pursued by the Presiden’ on the 21st of February? Senator ANTHONY—I will make a motion, to lie over until to-morrow, that the twenty-first rule be so modified as to allow the le Manager to pre- sent his views in writing. Senator Srewankr offered the following:— wh BA the honorable he meng rE Rey ard written argument to-day, and furnish @ cupy each of the counsel for the President.” Senator SHERMAN offered the following as an amendment:— ‘That the Managers on the of the House of Representatives 22 Resse te respondent have leave to file written or printed arguments before the oral argument commences. Senator BUCKALEW again objected, and the order went over. Senator Jounson’s motion, that when the court meet again tt be on Weduesday next, was agreed to. Me court then on motion urned at two o'clock “The Senate went into executive session for a short time and then adjourned, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. - WASHINGTON, April 20, 1868, The House met at eleven o'clock A. M. APPOINTMENTS IN THE TREASURY. Mr. HARDING, (rep.) of Tih, offered the following resolution, which was adopted:— Reso! Secretary of the Treasury is herob eee We coaseacattoaty wo the Honse the paimes of persone who have applied for appointments in his depart. ment, the offices eppited for, the name ‘of any member of Congress recommending the same in any way and in what case the appointment has been di vy the of the President of by his secretary since the 2th of February, 1638, THR IMPRACHMENT BXPENSES. Mr. Wasnnvrne, (tep.) of Ill, gave notice that on the return of the House from the Senate he would ask to have taken up and passed the Senate bill makihg appropriations for the expenses of the trial of impeachment of Andrew Johnson, and of other con- tingent expenses of the Senate. THE PRINTING OF THE OPENING sPERCHTS, ‘The SPEAKER aleo gave notice that as the length of the aeasion of the Senate to-day was uncertain, basiness of another character might be expected in wie House at the retarn of members, as, probably, there would be @ oes of the Committee on Print- ing im reference to the number of copies of the pro- ceedings of the trial to be printed, including all the evidence and all the speeches. ‘The Congressional rinter desired, while the “pe was standing, to Enow what wae the wish of the House on the sub- te a. DETENTION OF THE SABINE AT NEW LONDON. Mr. STARKWEATHER, (rep.) Of Conn., asked leave to offer the following resolution:— on the application of mes Je TT GE hy CHAMBER. DEP: ry PPh rr phn regolved ec ato Committee proceeded to the Senate chamber to attend impeachment trial. ~ RETORN FROM THE CHAMBER. N The members returned minutes past one o'clock, when Mr. WASHBURN: IL, made the usuat that they had the bar of the United States Senate, and cours Ra adjourned until Wednesday at elev: o’ CI The SPEAKER said that the effect of the action losmorto at twelve o'clock, tat. belng the BOUT Wat twelve o’c! that iD business when not otherwise ordered. " On motion of Mr. Scor' SUD ire f Pas, i ir, SCOFIELD, (rep.) 0! it was resolved. that, the Cominittee ‘on reign Afiaira be: instructed to inquire into the riety of prov: by law that no claim of British eitizens for the ceeds of captured and abandoned property shi allowed by the Court of or by any executive. department, until the claims of citizens of the United States for spoliations committed by rebel cruiwers, fitted ons be ritish citizens or in Briuish porta shail be adjusi provision made for their payment, and that the committee report by bill or otherwise. — , REGULATIONS AGAINST RAILROAD ACCIDENTS. Mr. MoORHEAD, (rep.) of Pa., introduced the fol- lowing, which was agreed to:— Whereas the t loss of life and injury to a centrailrout atcldenta, andthe destruction &¢ cars by tre, © for j therefor Resolved, ‘That the Commisiee on Commerce be instructed to: inquire Into the power and authority of Congress to make Teguistions in, relation and it the power exists, then into the propriety of the government ni ol Uerralishnd ‘other matters used 10 te railed, and aa to substituting irou for wood in the consiruction of all cars for the carrying of passengers and the mails. ‘ NAVIGATION OF THE TENNESSEE. Mr. MAYNARD, (rep.) of Tenn., presented the joint resolutions of the Legislature of Tennessee in relation to the navigation of the Tennessee river, which were referred to the Committee on Commerce. THB NAVY. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Ill, introduced a bill to amend certain acts concerning fleet officers of the navy, which was referred to the Committee on ‘Naval Affairs, EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, | The SrrakeEx laid before the House several execn- tive communications, including one from the Secre- tary of the Interior, enclosing @ juest from the Commissioner of Patents relative to the necessity of an increased force of clerks and provision for ‘ir accommodation, Also @ communication from the Secretary of the Treasury, covering one from the Commissioner of Indian Affuirs, in regard to the ne~ cessity of an early appropriation for the purpose of subsisting friendly Indians, ‘TH CENTAL SYSTEM. Mr. PILE, (rep.) of Mo., pens. the resolutions adopted by the St. Louis Merchants’ Exch: con- cerning the cental system, which was refe! to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, THE EXPENSES OF THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL, ‘The House by unanimons consent referred back to the Committee on Printing the resolutions to print forty thousand copie of Manager Butler’s opening argument on the impeachment of the President. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Ill, from the Committee on Appropriations,’ reported back the Senate bilf making an appropriation of $10,000 for defraying the expenses of impeachment, $40,000 for miscellaneot nses of the Senate, and $17,000 for extra Capito! police, &c. Mr. Washburue said the committee hak stricken out the other items of the bill, and to add $15,000 for the pay of laborers, who had no money since last December. '. ELDRIDGE, (dem.) of Wis., in noticing the item of $40,000, wanted to know whether that was @ cut) in the meal tub? Mr. WASHBURNE replied that there was no “cat in the meal,” and said he did not think the gentlemar’ from Wisconsin could suppose that the Committee on Appropriations would improperly foist anything on the House. «Mr. ELpripar did not believe the gentlemat would; but when unanimous consent was given for acting on this bill he did not want to be found in this dilemma. 4 Mr. WASHRURNE said the $40,000 appropriation in- cluded @ great number of expenses, for which the vouchers were filed in the Senate. He had not to critically examine them, but was assured by the, Chairman of Appropriations of the Senate that h went over them one by one, and found the amount actually correct. Therefore he thought it to be his duty to consent to the items. i ir. SPALDING, (rep.) of Ohio, inquired if they were all for legitimate purposes or conuected with the impeachment trial? : ‘ir, WASHBURNE—Not all for impeachment, but. otherwise legitimate. Mr. SPALDING moved to strike, out the $40,000 item. He did not think they should appropriate this with- out knowing more about it, It aid not come in as an ordinary deficiency, but in @ bill to prpvide for, paying the expenses of the impeachment ‘They: should see how this large item is made up. ‘ Mr. ELDRIDGE asked whettter it had already beer ascertained that $10,000 is ap. sdeqnate gum to pay the expenses of the impeachment trial, or is this merely to strike the public mind as all the Sangene of it, merely for the sake of sugar coating the pill? ‘The SPEAKER said the inquiry was not germane as et. 4 ‘Mr. WASHBURNE sald the amount covered contin- gent items necessary to the Senaic. urge anything not ne and proper. If his col- league on the committee e . Spalding) possessed all the information he (Mr. Washburne) had from the chairman of the Senate Committee on Fo gang tions he would have been satistied, and would not have moved to strike out this approp! jon. Mr. SPALDING, in reply to his most excellent col- league on the committee, said he was most com- monly governed by his opinions. This when the bill came before the committee he that the gentleman should examine the items mak- ing up the sum of $40,000, He that it should not come in under the head ot contingenci but that he would give it a substantial place, in er ta let the people see what they were paying the money, for. the gentieman was satistied he would with- draw the motion to strike out the a Mr. WASHBUKNE replied that he had no special in- terest in this matter. He was as much indisposed as the gentleman {rom Ohio was to have general and miscellaneous items in this bill, The Senate found that this amount was necessary for their purposes, aa aan Ween) of Manns inquired whether ti . DAWES, (tep.) 0! _ whether the nileman wea sicar that this item was for miscel- us and not for contingent expenses ? Mr. WaSHBURNE—Docs my friend think there is difference between them? a Dawes sald he should vote for the items if if they were for contingent expenses; but if for mis- cellaneous expenses he desired they should be fully informed on the subject. Mr. WASHBURNE Would like to have his friend’s vote. . Mr. Dawes said he should not give it, because the tieman from Qhio and his “excellent friend’? oy Dhnois said it was not for contingent expenses, could judge what they were when he mentioned that one item—a large item—was to vay the funeral ex- nses of a late Senator from Vermont, Mr. Foote, Mr. Dawks—That is miscellaneous. Mr. SPaLpinc—I want the Jiouse to understand that the Committee on Appropriations did not know of what thissum was made up. I now withdraw my jog to strike it out. ELpripee—We on this side cannot decide whether this item of $10,000 ts to pay all the expense of the impeachment, or is ® mere ile be followed by ten times as much more, Mr. Wasnsurne—if necessary 1 would vote $ 100,000, Mr. ExprtpGE—No doubt it would be used for that —— Mr ‘ASHBURNE—I don't think it could be used for @ better purpose not iilegitimate. Mr. ELpRIDgE—Does the gentleman say that ho would give $10,000 to obtain success, and that if it was necessary to add ten times that sum he would vote it? And does he pier ern yom oe Senate in that way Mr. WaSHBURNE—Of course the gentleman from Wisconsin does not understand me as say! any such thing. The Senate, which is charged with try- peachment, wants $10,000. 1 do not know whether this amount is sufficient or not. ask, for it, 1 am for may ramones money, wa further amount Is necess: will vote for that also. Mr. ELprivak—Did not the gentieman say that if he could make the impeachment trial @ success he would vote $100,000, Mr, WasisURNE—I said ten times that amount, will sey one hundred millions if the geatieman would be better satisged with that, Mr. ELDRIDGE—I did not suppose the could be so candid on this subject. I did not su that $10,000 would be taken as the nécessary It is @ mere bagatelle for the purpose of making the public believe that this is all the money necessary to pay the expenses of the trial; and the tleman rom IMinots admitted this when he said that he would vote not only $10,000, but $100, and then added with (ne approbation of his that he would agree to vote $100,000,000, The sentiment i+ unworthy of the gentieman from Iilinois and worthy of the House, when the trial is pending, that they wontd appropriate this large sum of money for the purpose of cep my ‘hment a success, would not beh doilar, the trial On ac~ to the rules of justice, unaffected Sy mousy. 10,000 is appropriated to create the belief thas 1 the money necessary to meet the Te e country know what the expenses of the triai really are. Mr, WashBURNE—The io did not misunder- sti 3 hi ye would be worth a jundred millons of dol: ve to 8 to a country; ie SALE OF UNITED STATES GRCURITIRG. Mr. Loose, (rep.) of LiL., offered @ resolution, which COMIINTED OM TENTH PAGE Dad He would not -