The New York Herald Newspaper, May 2, 1868, Page 3

3 conside! corer» tune pene prdennd ws eit ap} tinent. ir boen appointed Be Lincols ana the other three by Mr. Johason. All of them held by the same tenure—“the pleasure of the President.” All of them, without reference to constitutional provisions, were by exi laws re- movable by the independent action of the ent. Tue acts of Congress creating the offices of Secreta- Ties of State, of War and of the Navy expressly re- ygnized the Executive power to remove them at pleasure. The acts of Congress creating the four other heads of departments place them on the same footing as to tenure of office. All these acts remained in this particular in full force. This Tenure of Office act introduces a distinction, made applicable to Cabi- net oficers alone, never made before. For the first | time it gives to those appointed by the President for the tim @ new tenure. It secures them from IMPEACHMENT, Trial of President Andrew Johnson for High Crimes and Misdemeanors. Conclusion of Mr. Evarts’ Ar- gument. that department, or to partineat, Rowe dnt of all it Une 5 that these articles ‘are Stant Entered into possession of the War De ay on ‘ar ‘tment and wal exercise of its duties. as secretary, that up to the date inted,and for one month after jidential term, exempt from removal by the sole Able Le ¢ Mr. " wal Joeert | o act of the President, only subject Sooremnayel | by Stanbery- cles of impeachment that lawful the concurrent act of the President and Senate. But actual jon rel undisturbed; | it gives them no right to hold against the pieorare of that all the acts charged in these eight articles were | the succeeding President one moment the ex- these acter StuntSa rematne awfully and etal | hot tas has arhived thelr: gn hold ceases’ and c wfally and actually in e Vv old ceases The Impeachment Articles Argued | possession; and that the omtce has at no time their offices become vacant. The policy here declar- Vacant. We see, then, to the case | ed is unmistakable—that ithstanding sovthing Down on Every Point. made in these elght articles’ the President did not | to the contrary in the act, every President shall have succeed in getting Mr. Stanton out of office, or of 8 the pri of nis own choice, of his own selec- ting Thomas tn, either in law or in fact. We | tion of members of his abinet. ‘The see, according to these ‘articles, that the President | right of selection for himself is, however, qualified. did not succeed, either by force or otherwise, in pre- | He may not, as heretofore, enjoy the right throughout ELOQUENT CLOSE OF THE ARGUMENT, | venting mr. stanton from holding his ofice, or in | his term, the first month he must take the Cabi- tting m of the public Property that | net of his predecessor, however opposed to him in —_—_— le; or in controlling disburse- | opinion or obnoxious to him personally. Then, too, ments of ‘public money appropriated for the | while the right is given to him, it can be exercised vee spay 1868. | use of thas feoacmenk ere has been, | but once. Seis s.powan thas does not survive, but . Evarts concluded his speech for the defen according v case made these | expires a single execution, Now, a8 e three bs oes a ‘33 he lawful | members of Mr. Johnson’s Cabinet, appointed by his this afternoon with a peroration of some length and @ffectiveness. He appeared rather exhausted from his long sustained effort, and his voice became sub- officer yustody of the public property and public money of the has not been changed. No inj own exercise of this independent power, he having, as to them, once exercised the power, it is, as to them, exhausted. The.consequence is that these ued was been done either to the public service or the public oficers no i remain subject to his pleasure Rx ione ne he drew Bian ene ends. 8 Mg | omicer. There has been De F removal of Mr. Stan \— | alone. They are entitled to hold, in denance of his tened to with profopnd attention, and though he | only an abortive attempt at removal. There has | wishes, throughout the rei ler of his term, be- cause they arehis own selected officers; but they os failed to exercise that electric power over his hearers wre ae o fareae tere successol been no pay» poainias ane vacant by ‘which Judge Groesbeck in the corresponding portion om ae on Tena ity—put there during the actual vacancy or temporary absent r, but 1 for @ modicum of that of his speech wielded with such amazing influence, | all the time ~ Inet naa been here i re just because eer ae bod schon the was nevertheless feeling in his allusions, and | the actual performance of his duties. Noad tnterum | by successor. mucl ese three. Now, it in law or been constituted; for, in | a8 the other four, as to whom Mr. Johnson has not ‘made his final appeal for justice to his client in classic pa pres [tng Ho eae h ‘as to the Secre- | exercised his right of choice even by one appoint- May they hold during the residue of ni term in defiance of his wishes? Do they come withip that clear policy of giving to every President one oppor. tunity at least to exercise his independent right of choice? Surely not. Then, if, as to them, he has no right, how can he exercise it, ft, as in the case of Mr. Stanton, the Cabinet offcer holds on after he has been requested to resign? What mode is left to the President to avail himself of his~own independent right when such an officer refuses to re- sign? None other than the process of removal for he cannot put the man of his choice in until he has put the other out. So that the inde- pendent right of choice cannot, under such condi- tions, be exercised at all without the corresponding right of removal, and the one necessarily implies the other, We have seen that the tenure of office fixed by the proviso for Cabinet officers applies only to those members of Mr. Johnson’s Cabinet ap- ointed by himself. It, therefore, does not apply to ir. Stanton. If there is any other clause of the act which applies to Mr. Stanton it must be the first neral’clause, and if that does not apply to him then his case does not come within the purview of the act at all, but must be ruled by the pre-existing laws, which made him subject at all times to the pleasure of the President and to the exercise of his independent power of removal. And this is precisely what is claimed by the Managers. They Maintain that although the proviso does not give Mr. Stanton a new tenure, yet the first general clause does, and that he is put by that clause on the same footing of all other civil officers who at the date of the act held by the concurrent appointment of the President and Senate by no other tenure than “during the pleasure of the President.” But all the otticers intended to be embraced by that first clause, who held by that tenure before, are declared to hold by @ new tenure. Not one of them can be removed by the President alone. Whether appointed by the President for the time being or by his prede- cessor, they must remain in detlance of the Presi- dent until removed by the concurrent action of the President and the Senate. In effect, so far as the pOwst of the President is concerned, they may hold for liie, If Mr. Stanton comes within the protection of that clause, it follows inevitably that Mr. Johnson cannot remove him. It follows as inevitably that no succeeding President can remove him. He may defy Mr. Johnson’s successor as he now defies Mr. Johnson. He may say to that successor, as he ‘Manguage and in tone of tender pathos. , Mr. Stanberry came in after Mr. Evarts, ahd, though evidently laboring under much physical pros- tration, proceeded to make his argument, standing @irectly in front of the Chief Justice’s desk. His Voice was clear and full, and his manner, as usual, engaged the attention of his audience. He had not proceeded far when a motion to adjourn was made and carried, thus leaving to-morrow, the last day of the week, as the last occasion for an argument in the President's behalf, PROCEEDINGS OF THE COURT. Twenty-eighth Day. . UNITED STATES SENATE CHAMBER, WASHINGTON, May 1, 1868. } ‘The court was opened this morning with the usual formalities in the presence of an audience that indicated an interest well sustained in the proceed- ings. Mr. EvarTs commenced with an apology for hav- Ing 80 long occupied the time and attention of the Senate, and, saying that he would claim their indul- gence but a little while longer, proceeded to consider the power of the President to fill vacancies under the acts of 1792, 1795 and 1863, He admitted that the act of 1863 limited the choice for appoint- ments of Secretaries ad interim in cer- tain cases to the heads of other departments; ‘but he argued that under the act of 1793, which allowed him to choose from all the officers employed in the departments, the President had full warrant for the appointment of General Thomas, ‘who was then Adjutant General. Referring to the action of Mr. Lincoln in appointing an ad interim successor to Mr. Blair, Postmaster General, he said that the appointment was made under authority, only implied, of the acts of 1792 and 1795, which did pees be has been no moment CAH a ich there cot an acting Secretary or ine im , either in law or in fact; for itis impossible to conceive of an ad interim Secretary of War when there is no interim—that is, when the lawful is in lace and in the actual attempted and not accomplished, attempt and the unlawful intent with which it was formed that the President is to be held responsible for. So that it comes to be a question of vital consequence in reference to this part of the case whether the high crimes and misdemeanors pro- vided for in the Tenure of Office act and in the second section of the Military Appropriation act purport to punish not only the commission of the acts but to pi as well abortive attempt to commit them. I limit myself in what has been last said to the tour articles touching the removal of Mr. Stanton and the appointment of General Thomas. As to the four conspiracy articles, there can be no eepe that the actual accomplishment of the thing intended is not made necessary to constitute the offence, for the statute against conspiracies expressly provides for the punishment of the unlawful intent and the unlawful conspiracy itself, without reference to any further act done in pursuance of it, or to the ners or complete accomplishment of the unlawful esi But, contrawise, the other two acts do not unish the intent alone, but only the commission of he thing intended; and the offence provided for in these two acts, while it requires the unlawful intent to be a part of the crime, requires something else to supplement it, and that is the actual commission of the thing intended. Mr, Stanbery then proceeded to consider whether the President had been guilty of an impeachable offence. He argued with great force that he had not; that the act of attempting to remove Mr. Stanton was neither a high crime nor a misdemeanor. He then took up the Tenure of Ottice law and referred to the right of removal and to the qualifications in the general clause. Continuing he said :—If the act contained no other provisions qualifying this general clause then it would be clear—First, that it would apply to all civil officers who held by appointment made by the President, with the advice of the Senaie, including judicial officers a8 well as executive officers. It gives all of them the same t to hold, and subjects all of | has said to Mr. Johnson, ‘I am compelled not relate to the Post Office Department at all. He them to the a abt eo ee reeneren pane a ony bir ri ooh fore ge tipo apr seo asked why that conduct was not considered an im- | exercise of the power of suspension e- | and laws Of! e Un! a without the peachable olfences He then maintained that it made | pendent, act Of the President made. applicable to | advice and. consent of the Sehate.” If the any officer so holding, by the second section Juc of the United States are expressly excepted. We find no such exception, ee Red or implied, as por successor of Mr. Jonnson should point him to the roviso, and at the end of the month require him to leave, his answer, according to the Managers, would No difference either in the theory or practice of the government whether the temporary appointments ‘were made during a session or a recess of the Senate and instanced the four examples of Nelson in 1! to the exercise of the rer of removal de- | run thus:—‘“That proviso did not fix my tenure of of- Scott in 1850 and Kelly and Holt ia 1861, a8 ae clared in the first section. Judicial officers as well | fice. Itdid not apply to me, but only to those aj ‘warrant for his assertion. Passing to the first actiole as executive officers arc made to hold by the | pointed by Mr. Johnson. They must go ont with the same tenure. They hold during the pleasure of the President and the Senate, and cease tohold when the President and Senate appoint a successor. Second, it applies equ: to officers whose tenure of office, as fixed prior to the act, was to hold during month; Ido not. My tenure is fixed by the first clause, and you cannot get clear of me without the advice and consent of the Senate.” But if it be held that Mr. Stanton did come within the purview of the Tenure of Office act, if it be held that his removal he said he should consider at the outset the nature of the positions occupied by the members of the Cabi- net. He would not again refer to the opinions of ‘Mr. Boutwell, except to say that he might name three more Senators before him who wourd share, with others, what he.had mentioned in th ro. | the picasure pf the President as to those who were to | by the independent action of the President Drium cast upon such. positions by the honcrable fora fixed of years or during good be- | 18 forbidden by the act, then we maintain that no rs. He then read the address to Lincoli rd, urports tq take from the Presi- | such removal is charged in the articles or made out in the proof. It is only in the first article that any a made in reference to Mr. Stanton’s removal. That article nowhere alleges that Mr. Stanton has been removed either in law or in fact. It does allege that on the 2ist of February Stanton was “lawfully entitled to hold sald office of Secretary for the De- partment of War,” and that on that day the President “did unlawfully and in violation of the constitution and laws of the United States issue an order in wri- ing for the removal of Edwin M. Stanton from the of- fice of Secretary for the De] ment of War.” It is the issuance of this order for a removal that is made the gravamen of the charge. It is not followed by any allegation that it had the effect to work a re- moval either in law or infact. On the contrary, in the very next article which is founded on the order to Thomas, which Pu s to be made after the order for the removal of Stanton, it is alleged that Stanton still held the office lawfully, and that not- withstanding the order of removal to Stanton and the order to Thomas to act as Secretary, Stanton still held the office, and no vacancy was created or existed. This is the tenor of every articie, that Stan- ton never has been bay he in pee a veg that hege nev: h ousier, either in law or in fk , and That faere hag been at no time a vacancy. ‘The proof shows that Stanton remains in possession and that his official acts continue to be recognized, Now ifthe order per se operated a removal in law, it Mant aigned ' by thirty Senators, which was written in 18 to urge his removal of-Mr. Blair so as to secure har- monious action. The opinions therein Lae wget by ‘Aifteen of the Senators now present on the subject of Cabinet relations he (Evarts) fully endorsed. He further quoted from the ches of Mr. Sherman and others in the debate on the passage of the Tenure of Office bill, and in explanation of the report of the ‘Committee of Conference, various expressions and arguments, which unconiradicted opinions and ex- eaten he claimed, were accepted as the proper interpretation of the bill so acted upon by the Presi- dent. He held that it would be monstrous to convict the President of crime by the same voices which ve utterance to or concurred in these authoritative Seclarations that the bill did not reach or affect ‘the relations of Mr. Stanton and the President. He also read from the report of Messrs. ‘Schenck and Williams on the subject, which, he ‘claimed, had bound the House to the same conclu- sion as the Senate, tad pe of Fat en shat the practice Wal to 8¢) e Tame of the appointee Wefote thakide 6 eatival, hs met by the consideration that removals are generally made, not because the incumbents are unfit, but decause political favorites are to be putin. The in- stances of removal of Cabinet officers are only two, for the simple reason that a polite hint is usually ‘suf- ficient to induce resignation. He then referred to dent the power to remove om 3 Officer at any time for any cause by the exercise of his own power alone. But it leaves him @ power of removal with the concurrence of the Senate. In this process of removalj the, separate action of the President and the Senate is required. The initiatory act must come from the President, and from him alone. It is upon his action as taken that the Senate proceeds, and they give or withhold their consent to what he has done. The manner in which the President may exercise his part of the proceedings is merely for- mal, It may be simply by the nomination of a suc- cessor to the incumbent or the officer intended to be removed. Then, upon the confirmation by the Sen- ate and the issuance of a commission to him, removal becomes complete. Or the President may exercise his oe of the process by iss an order of removal, followed by & nomination. Neither the order for removal nor the nomination works achange tn itself. Both are necessarily conditional upon the subse- quent action of the Senate. too, the order of removal, the nomination and the confirmation of the nate are not final.’ A iurther act remains to be lone before the yy ee of the successor is complete and that is an Executive act exclusively— the signing of the commission by the President. Up to this point the President has a locus pent- tentia; for aichough the mate have advised him to appdint fis nominee, the President is not bound by their advice but may defeat all e instances of the removal of various officers juring the session of the Senate, which have been | the prior action by allowing the incumbent to remain ust follow that the order was valid and in con- put in evidence, and went on to argue the neces- in office. Thus far we NAve considered the first | formity with the constitution and laws of the United States, for no order made contrary thereto could take effect in law. If there was a removal in law the ex- ecutive order which accomplished it was a valid, not an invalid act, But if the order did not operate a removal per se, and if a removal in fact, notin law, might be held sufiicient to consti- tute an offence, and if it were allegea and were proved that under the illegal order an ouster or re- moval was effected by force or threats, the answer to be given, heed case ig conclusive. No ouster—in fact, no act clause of the first section of the act, without ref- erence tothe context. Standing alone, it seems to have a universal application to civil officers, and to secure all of them who hold by the concurrent action of the President and the Senate removal, otherwise than by the same concurrent action, and to make all of them liable to removal by that concurrent action. Are these exceptions to the universality of the tenure of office so declared? We say they are, Mr. Stanbery sald that sity for the existence of such power of instant removal, by several suppositious cases where delay would lead to disastrous consequences. Alluding to the concession in Mr. Butler’s opening 7 that if ‘the President had properly notified the Senate of his intention his action would not probably have been deemed ground for impeachment, Mr. Evarts said It appeared that crime was not found in his fortitur dare, but in the absence of suaviter in modo. He pe Od assertion of a Rong spay gue no fence whether thi they were exceptions, first by necessary im- physical removal—is proved or Constitutional 0 a a desperate attempt to | plications and second by being made ex-| so much as charged. » Stanton has never escape from the Force of the arguments of coun- | Pressly by the act; and argued at length to | to this day been put out of actual ion, gel for the President which he would not sustain this position. He then referred to the | He remains in possession as fully since the or- ‘Ow repeat. He also qnoted the admission of Mr. Fae gn which the President was piaced in by the | der was as before, and still holds on. Now, we look Boutwell that the President would have been justified w, and in connection with this subject proceeded | in vain through this Tenure of OMlce agt for any if he acted with ioneat intent, in violation of law, | to say:—The officers in the Cabinet of a siden: provision Lets | 32 fem t t6 cause which was ainbiguous or equivocal, and claimed it | who were nominated by him, who were appoin| a removal, or making t pel jal (6 isdiie an order for was al they needed, after showing as they had done, by him, with the concurrence of the Seni such purpose. The sixth section is the only one on that hs act was iitly characterized by those very | those to whom this new and better ténure is given. | the subject of removal, and that provi les “that rma. Taking up the question of the character of | They are officers of his selection; they are his chosen | every removal * * * made * * contrary agents. He has once recommended them to the Senate as fit persons for the public trust, and they have obtained their office through his selectton and choice. The theory here is that having had one free be eke ity of choice, having once exercised his right of selection he shall be bound by it. He shall not dis- miss his own selected agent upon his own pleasure or caprice. He is, in legal language, “estopped” by the selection he has made, and is made incapable b; to the provisions of this act * * * shall be deemed, and is hereby declared, to be a high misde- meanor, and is made punishable by fine not exceed- ing $10,000, or imprisonment not exceeding five ise or both, at the discretion of the court. No jatitude of construction can torture an attempt or ven the offence of Violating the Tenure of Office law, he said there was no punisment provided in the law for attempts to remove, as there wes for the articles to appoint; and also that the articles now here charged the removal. Hence, there was no indictable or im- peachabie offence committed by the attempt to re- move Mr. Stanton. He then maintained that no tenure of office could be given by legislation for to make @ removal into an actual removal, can turn an abortive effort to do a al Sucl J than for which the om- thing into an accomplished fact. a oor is Sppointed; and applying this doctrine to the his own act of dissolving the official relation whic! latitude of construction could not be allowed when case of Mr. Stanton argued that he was not ap- | he has im on himself. Having selected his | the rule of construction is least restricted, and least pointed, but held his office by suiferance of the Prest- | Cabinet officer, he must take him as @ man takes his | of all in a penal statute where the rule of construc. dent from day to day, and therefore could not in any | chosen wife, for better or worse. But as to such | tion is the most restrictive. It seems a waste of be affected by the law in question. Ip reference | Cabinet officers as are not Sie treet dent's selectiog— | words to argue this point farther. There is a total to the srgument t hat ‘it Mr. Stanton is not Protected | as to thog¢ wg have ‘én selected ty ® former | failure of the case upon the first article on this point, by the proviso he is by the body of the section, he President—as jose whose title was given by | if we had none other. And yet this article is the said he must speak of tle office, and not of the mat another—as to those he never appointed and, per- | head and front of the entire case. Strike it out and and if this office is covered by the section we are haps, never would have appointed—as to those who | all that remains ts “leather and prunelia.” But Jed to the absurdity of admitting that its tenure can | came to him by succession and not by his own act— | Senators, if you should be of 0; 3 be made perpetual if successive Senates adhere to | a8 to those who hold merely by his acquiescence or | the Tenure of Office act protected Mr. ton, the same views. But if the law is susceptible of two | sufferance—they are entitied to no favor and | and that the attempt to remove him was ‘conatructions he bad the Managers’ authority tor | receive none. They stand as astep-children juivalent to & remov: We hext maintain— and not placed rst, that the President right to constrae the law for himself, and ifin the exercise of that right he committed an error of construction, and acted under that error, he is not to be held responsible. Second, if he had so construed the law as to be of opinion that Mr. Stanton was intended to be pro- tected by it against his power of removal, and was also of opinion that the law in that respect was con- trary to the constitution, he is not to be held respon- ped if he therein committed an error, 1p to que these the order in which they in his political family, are th ‘ine Mame level with the rightful "heirs entitied to the inheritance, The construction claimed by the Managers leads to this inev- itable absurdity—that the class entitled to favor are cut off at the end of the month, while those mo a less meritorious title remain indefinitely, Wh was intended for a benefit becomes a mischief, and the favored class are worse off than if no favor had been shown them, Their condition was intended to claiming that it would be abhorrent to the sense of justice vo convict the President. He farther argued that there was no attempt to violate the statutory right of Mr. Staunton to hold his office, but merely to withdraw the tenure which he held at the pleasure of the esident. Briefly reviewing the evidence, he ridiculed Lis insuMiclency as instanced in the testimony of Karsner, the solitary witness to prove the altempted coup Wetat, Mr. Evarta then reminded the,Senators that they must treat each ar- ticle separately without any reference to the charac- | be made better than their fellows’, and has ints in ter or ‘ree ‘of the others, and always upon the pre- | made worse. From those entitled to protection have been Fig, sen is Bag, Feesiaeat sumption of entire innocence. They must discard |.taken away and given to those not entitled, NdW, | responsibié ol act yy him politial considerations judge of Mr. Johnson’s sep- | when President Johnson was. invested with | under an erroneous construction of an act of Con- arate acts as they would of Lincoln’s or of Grant's. | his oMce, he found Mr Stanton _ holdi: gress? agree that ignorance of misconception of He called attention to the former services of the | the office of Secretary of War. He hi e law does not, in general, excuse a party from le been appointed by Mr. Lincoln during his Presieent and to the circumstances of his early life ent stormy ca first term, and was holding in the second month of civil or eriminal liabillt 4 for an act contrary to law. and subsequent stormy career Which have made him But this well-estabil Tule has exceptions equal well established, and the case here fails within rnd what heis. Referring to his political training, un- | Mr. Lincoln's second term under the old appoint- Minching Joyait; in times of trial and un- | ment. Mr. Stanton was neither appointed by Mr. | of the exceptions, and not within the rule where # wavering devotion to the constitution, which | Lincoln nor Mr. Johnson for that second term; so | law 1s which concerns the President and he made the guide and study of hhis life, | that we are relieved from all question whether the | touches his official duties, it is not only his it, bat and appealed to the Senate in earnest terms to grant | fractlonal Spain gl from the accession of Mr, | his duty to determine for himself what is the trae Johnsion, is to be called the unexpired term of Mr, Lincoln, or the per term of Mr. Johnson, and whether, if he had been appointed or reappointed by Mr. Lincoln during his second term, he might not have claimed that he was entitled, a8 against Mr. Jolinson, to hold on to its end, Mr. Stan ton never had any tenure of office under the Tenure of Office act for the current Presiden- tial term, never having been oe for that term by either Mr. Lincoln or Mr. Johnson. He therefore does not come within the category of those members of Mr, Johnson's Cabinet who have been appointed by Mr. Johnson, At the date of the pass« aye of the Tenure of Oflce act the Cabinet of Mr. these considerations the utmost weight to which they were entitled, Tllustrating the universal truth that unrighteous jaws are always eventually righted or set aside by reference to some of the consequences of war and by descriptions of the march of the national armies, he passed to the consideration of the threatened dangers to the consiitation, and closed with an eloquent peroration, invoking the calm consideration and impartial justice which would be worthy of the successors of the great men who first dignified the Sepatorial halls, A reces# was then taken, ARGUMENT OF ME. STANRERY. ng, Mr. STANBERY rose, a construction of the law, and to or refuse to act according to that deterinination, whatever it may be. Ne is .an executive officer, not @ mere minis terial oMicer, He is invested with a discretion, with the right to form a judgment and to act under his judgment so formed, however erroneous. No such discretion is allowed to a ministerial officer. His business 1s not to construe the law, but merely to perform it and he acta at his peril if he does not do that which is commanded by reason of an erro- neous construction, however honestly entertained. Mr. Stanbery then claimed that the constitution clearly gives the President the power to construe lawa, end argoed at length that Mr. Johnson had po » s few introductory remarks, in Which her ison was composed as follows;—The Secretaries | rignt to go to th reme Court to ascertain the feeble state of his health, but said he f , of the ‘Treasury, of War and of the Navy | whether the law Was constitutional, nor was he polled by an irresistible impulse to lift his voice in nt of Mr. Lincoln made in nis | obliged to take advice from his Cabinet as to what Eis just catige, and proveeded with his argumen! f the Interior, the Po hould pursue. Proceeding he said: Mf. Stansery opened his argument by referrin H exposition this Jato” authoritative ‘ r of the President, thority entitied to the ent thy or Mr. re was pointer current tern. the magnitude of the case—one that ha the departipents of (he goverament together | hen, as NEW YORK HERALD, SATURDAY, MAY 2, 1868—TRIPLE SHEET. law, treason felony? Could any case have been made against the President under an articie all trea- ten amendments were introduced and adopted, and gravest consideration, which ht be adduced to the w —_ trod first in order among them is this amendment:— same effect, and which I propose to int juce yl the next point, which I now proceed to con- Anricur lL shall make no law respecting Son, short of actual levying of war or giving aid and sider, and that it is that if the ident had 80 | tablishment of ‘or probibiting the {ree exercise there: | comfort to the ‘enemies of the United Brats ? Then construed this Tenure of OMice act as to be satistied | of; or abridging the freseom of ‘or of the press; or | as to bribery, would anything short of actual brit that Mr. Stunton came within its provisions, but | the right people pesceab! Terievancen® 82410 petition | have sufticed ? Would an attempt to bribe—an act yee also at pen ae dod iy = any searnct was ——. article, with religious aon equal to bribery, yet just short of it? Certainly trary \" ion, my - ba ook Pog the freed a aes = ban red not, ey are crimes and misdemeanors, says Mr. sponsibie if therein he committed an error. The case Burke, not of form, but of essence. You cannot call in that aspect stood thus:—Here was an act of right of popular assemblage and of petition— | that a’ high crime meanor which, in the ce which, in the construction given to ftere we ‘and safely anchored forever this | the ature of things. ie not There is no rooms for it the President, for the removal of right of free speech. Mark, now, | cunning manufacture here, If a legislative act Mr Stanton from the War Department. The the prescient lom of the peo- | should undertake to declare that the commonest ple! thin ‘ten years after the adoption of the constitution the government was entirely in the hands of one party. All of its departments, ex- ecutive, legislative and judict Were concentrated formidable onary haa Dek Degun to show tae formidable by a formidable leader, a party then call pobliona, since known as the democratic party. jothipg was left to them but free speech and @ free ress, All the patronage was upon the other side. ut they made the most of these great engines. So much, however, had the! dominant iY President, in the exercise of his executive functions and of his duty to see that the laws were faithfully executed, came to the conclusion that in the execu- tion of s0 much of this executive duty as had rela- tion to the administration of the War Department it was expedient to place it in the hands of another reon. His relations with Mr. Stanton were such at he felt unwilling any longer to be responsible for his acts in the administraiton of that department or to him as one of his confidential advisers. ‘The question at once arose whether this right of re- moval, denied to him by this law, was given to him assault and battery should be a high crime and mise demeanor under the constitution, that would now change its essence or make it the high offence which the constitution requires. Look througs all the correlative provisions of the constitas tion on the subject, as to trial, convictions judgment and punishment, as to parionty and last of all, to provision that, “the trial all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury,” and that other provision, that after convic- tion on impeachment, “the convicted nevertheless be Hable and subject tu indictment by the constitution; or, to state it in other | lost discretion, confident in its party strength, | trial, judgment and punishment accord: of words, whether {his ‘law was in this | that, irritated to folly and madness Via the | If you are not yet satistied, ponterg or benno respect in pursuance of the constitution. | flerce attacks made upon its executive, its ju- | of the convention that framed this article, and se@ Now, it appears that his opinion upon this question | diciary and its Houses of Congress, in an/ how studiously they rejected all impeach had been made up deliberately. When this same law | evil hour it passed an act July 14, 1798, entitled ‘An | ment for misbehavior in office, and how steade was on its and had been presented to him | act for the punishment of certain crimes against | ily they adhered to the requisition that nothing for his approval, his opinion was formed that it was | tne United States.” The second section of this act | but a ign crime and misdemeanor should suffice. in violation of the constitution. He refused to ap- | provides “That if any person shall write, prin Mr. Stanbery then referred to the promise of the prove it, and returned it to Congress with a m utter, publish, * * * any false, scandalous an Managers that they would show that the President which this opinion was distinctly announced. malicious writing or writings against the govern- | had made no attempt to carry the Tenure of Ome law pone. notwithstanding, by a constitutional majorit} ment of the United States or either House of the | before the courts, and said:—Senators, where has both houses. No one doubts that then, at ee, Congress of the United States, or the President of | this been shown on the part of the Managers? he had a perfect right to exercise a discretion, and | the United States, with intent to defame the said gov- | Where is there even @ feeble attempt to show it? no one ever yet asserted that an error in | ernment, or either House of the said Con; or the | But look now to the proof on the part of the Presi- an opinion go formed involved him in any liability, | sald President, or to bring them or either of them | dent. Cabined, crib! and confined as we have The exercise of that veto hausted all his | into contempt or disrepute, or to excite been by ti Lis of the Senate upon this Spr ane ‘Of theih the hatred of the good | Cectucy, “aee “wnat 4 means of resistance to what he deemed an unconsti- | them or either or uestion, et «what rs? From first to tutional act in his legislative capacity, and so far us | people of the United” States * * such persons | fast the reat fact Rrces itself upon our the law provided @ rule of action for others than * shall be punished by a fine not exceeding | attention that this was no subterfuge of two thousand dollars and by imprisonment not ex- ceeding two years.”” No act has ever been passed by the Congress of the United States so odious to the people as this. Mr, Hamilton and other great fede ralists of the day attempted in vain to defend it be- fore the people. But the authors of the law and the law itself went down together be- himself no other means of resistance were left to him, But this law was directly aimed at him and the exercise of the executive power vested in him by the constitution. When, therefore, he came a second time to consider it, it was in the discharge of an ex- ecutive duty. Had he then no discretion of any sort? Was he bound to act in a merely ministerial the President no afterthought to escape the conse-) quences of an act, but, on the contrary, that thid wholesome and lawful pu of a resort to the proper tribuual to settle the diiticulty between Con- gress and himself was in the mind of the President They proved it by his own from the very inning. Hs ca themselves in his letter declarations, introduce capacity? Having once finally exercised a discretion | fore the popular —_ indignation, and _ this | to General Grant dated Vecruary 10, 1868, which may in his legislative capacity to prevent the | act, which was gotten up by & great and powerful | be found on page 234 of the printed record. One ex- passage of the law, was he thereby de- | party in order to preserve itself in power, became | tract from that letter will suffice. The President priv of his discretion im his executive | the fatal means of driving that party out of power, | says:—“You knew the President was unwilling to capacity, ‘whien he was called upon to act under itr | followed by the maledictions of the people. History | trust the office with any one who would not, by It has been said that a law passed over a President's | continues to teach us now as heretofore “eternal | holding it, compel Mr. Stanton to resort to the courts. veto by @ majority of two-thirds, has a greater sanc- | Vigilance is the price of liberty.” Three is now, a4 | You perfectly understood that in this interview, tion than a law passed in the ‘ordinary way by a | there has been in the past, a constant tendenc: some time after you accepted the office, the Presl- mere majority. 1 know that there are those who, | transfer power from the many to the few. ere | dent, not content with your silenc esired an ex- whilst they admit that as to a law passed in the ordi- | the danger lies to the permanence of our pression of your views, and you answered him that nary mode by the concurrent acts of the two | political institutions, and its source in ir. Stanton would have to appeal to the courts.” If Houses and the President, it may be questioned on | the legislative department alone. Guard that this is not enough, Senators, remember the testi- mony of General Thomas, of General Sherinan, of Mr. Cox, of Mr. Merrick, and see throughout the Ps rap of the President declared at all times, from rst to last, to bring this question to judicial arbitra- well and we are safe. And to guard it well you must guard the other departments from its encroach- ments. Without the help of the people they cannot defend themselves. This last attempt manifested in the score of unconstitutionality, yet maintain that a Jaw not passed by such a@ concurrence but by the separate action of the two Houses without the con- currence of the Executive or against his will, is something superior to ordinary legisla- | this tenth article to again Deine into play the fearful | ment. After all this, what a shocking perversion tion, and takes the character of a fundamen. | privilege of the legislative department is only &| of testimony it is to pronounce it an after- tal’ or organic enactment. But this is a | repetition of what has happened from the dawn of | thought or @ subterfuge. And after the proof of modern heresy unsustained by the slightest reason | history, Wherever that been the governing | what took place on that trial of Thomas, how cam or authority. Itis at least but a legisiative act. It | element it hag always been jealous of free | the Managers be bold enough to say tiul they will stands upon an equal footing with other legislative | speech and a free press. It has not been 80 | “show you that he has taken no step to submit the acts. It cannot be put upon higher ground orlower | With the absolute monarch. He feels se- | matter to any court, although more than a year das ground. No distinction is aliowabie between the | Cure surrounded by physical power, sustained | elapsed since the passage of the act.” Senators, it one and the other. But if it were, it certainly wouid | by armies and navies. ACcOrdInEy, we find that | was not at all necessary for the defence of the Presi- seem more reasonable that such & law passed by one | Such a monster as Tiberlus pardoned a poor wretch | dent that, in the exercise of that discretion which co-ordinate department would stand on lower ground | Who had lampooned his authority and ridiculed his | the law allows to him, he should be put to prove thas conduct; while the decemvirs remorselessly put to death a Roman satirist who ws bold enough to attack and bring into contempt their authority. ‘The eleventh article is the only one that remains to be considered; I confess my inability to make anything than a law passed with full concurrence of both departments. The question then recurs, is the President invested with a discretion in his executive capacity? In the exercise of that discretion may he compare the law with the constl- his intentions were all ri beyond the necessities of ht. He has gone far is case. Never were good intentions and honest motives more Shopgugnly proved than they have been proved in this case. repeat it, that if everything else were made out tution, and if in his opinion the law vests him with a | out of that article. And now, Senators, after this | against him, this great exculpatory fact must, ab- wer not granted bv the constitution, or deprives | review of the articles of impeachment, | solve him from all criminal abluty. And now, Sena- 1m of a power which the constitution does not grant, | We are prepared to form some idea of | tors, I have done with the law and the facts of the the nature of this impeachment itself. Where now is the mischiefs ? ere now is the injury to any individual or to any officer of the government brought. about by the action of the President? Whether actuated by good motives or bad no injury has followed; no public interest has suffered; no officer has been changed, either rightfully or wrong- fally; not an item of public property or public money has passed out of the custody of law or has been ap- Prcprnted to improper uses. To all this it is said hat it is enough that the law has been violated, that may he refuse to execute the power so given or pro- ceed to exercise the power so taken away? We have already cited a late decision of the Supreme Court directly in point, that presented the direct question, whether as to the reconstruction acts passed like this Tenure of Civil Omlce act, by a vote of two-thirds in each House, the President had, notwithstanding, in reference to those laws an executive discretion? The decision maintains that he had. I proceed to show that this is no modern doctrine. The authori- ties which I shall cite go beyond the necessities of case. There remains for me, however, a duty yet to be performed—one of solemn import and obiigation— a duty to my client, to my former chief, tomy friend. ‘There may be those among you, Senators, who can- not find @ case of guilt against the President. There may be those among you who, not satistied that a case for impeachment has yet arisen, are fear- ful of the consequences of an acquittal. You may entertain vague apprehensions that, flushed with the success of acquittal, the President will proceed to acts of violence and revolution. Senators, you do this case, Some of them go to the length of assert- | powers hav m assumed by the President not | not know or understand the man. I cannot say that ing that this executive discretion survives even after | conferred aie him by the constitution of the United you wilfully misunderstand him; for I, too, ough the passage of the law by the legislative department, | States. It is in the order of the 2ist of February, | never an extreme party man, have felt more thal It has been construed by the judicial department 1868, that it is claimed on the part of the Late once, in the heat of party conflicts, the same bitter an¢ and in that extreme case leaves the President at last | that the President ugurped o power not grant uncompromising spirit that now animate yor to act for himself in opposition to the express will of | the constitution, If that proposition could be e8- | he time has m when I looked upon. Ge! both the other departments, 1 will first cite some | tablished the Managers would still be a it way off | Jackson as the most dangerous of tyrants, The opinions upon this extreme position. Mr, Stanbery | from a conviction for an impeacbable oifence. Much | jas been when, day after day, I expected to see hit then quoted from Presidents Jefferson, Jackson, | More must be made out bes! ides the actual violation | inaugurate a revolution; and yet, after his admin! Van Buren, from the Federalists and from a large | by the President of the constitutional provision— | tration was crowned ‘with success and sustained number of loyal authorities, and decisions of the Su- | first of all, the criminal intent to aes the people, I lived to see him gi preme Caurt of the United States to sustain his posi- | and secondly, the existence of an act of | render his’ great powers to the hands Congress providing that such violation with criminal tion. Conti he id: tart from opin- te gen es gems ¢ Miho | intent should amount to a high erlme and misde- and under the softening in- ions of the Supreme Court maintaining that the conferred — them, rd him, not as fluences of time came to ref wa executive power isin no sense merely ministerial, | Meanor. But I hasten to meet the Managers upon | tyrant, but as one of the most honest and patriotic P| but strictlydiseretionary, might be muitiplied indefi- | the main proposition, and I maintain with contl- | men. ’Now listen for a moment to one who perha| nitely. And indeed it is easy to show from ee dence that the order issued on the 2ist of February, | understands Andrew Johnson better than most decisions of the same court that the heads of depart- | 1868, for the removal of Mr. Stanton was issued by | you, for his opportunities haye been greater, Whem ments, except where the performance of a speci- | the ident in the exercise of an undoubted power | Dearly two years ago he calied me from tha vested in him by the constitution of the United States. No executive order Issued by any President, from the time of Washington down to the pre- sent, comes to us with @ greater sanction or higher authority or stronger endorsements than this order. If this order is indeed, as it is claimed, a usurpation of wer not granted by the constitution, then Wuantngton was a usurper in every month of his administrat and after him every udent that ever ‘occupied that high office from his day to that of the present incumbent, for every one of them has exercised, without doubt and without question, this executive fic act or duty is requil of them by law, ate in no sense ministerial officers, but that they too are clothed with # discretion, and protected from responsibility for error in the exercise of the discretion, Thus:—Decatur vs. Paulding, 14 Peters; Kendall vs. Stokes, 3 Howard; Brashear ve. Mason, 6 Howard; in which latter case the court say :—‘*The duty required of the Secretary, by the resolution, was to be performed by him as the head ef one of the executive departments of the govern- ment, in the ordinary discharge of his oficial duties, that in general, such dutie whether imposed by act of Congress or by lution, are not merely of ‘professional life to take a seak Cabinet, I answered the call under @ sense of public duty. I came here almost @ stranger to him and to every member of hig Cabinet, except Mr. Stanton. We had been friends for many years. Senators, need I tell you that all my tendencies are conservative? You, Mr. Chief Justice, who have known me for the third of ‘a cen- tury, can bear me witness. Law, not arms, is profession. From the moment that I was honot with a seat in the Cabinet of Mr. Johnson not a step was taken that did not come under my observation, not a word was said that escaped my attention. eo ministerial duties that the ‘head of am] power of xemoval from office. far 38 | } regarded him closely in Cabinet and In still more executive. department of the. government | this question stands upon authority it may be | Drivate aud Tonfdential conversation; 1 saw hina in the administration of the various and important | Said to have been more thoroughly and satisfactorily | often tempted with bad advice; 1 knew that evil concerns of lis office, is continually required to ex- | settled than any one that has at any time | counsellors were more than once around him; y agitated the country; settled first in 1789 by the very men who framed the constitution itself; then after the lapse and acquiescence of some forty years brought again and into question in 1826, in 1850 and in 1835. But in the worst party times it was never changed by the Legislature, but left as it was until the 2d of March, 1867, when, after the lapse of almost eighty years, a new rule was attempted to be ercise judgment and discretion; and that the court could not, hy eee act directly upon the offi- cer, to guide and control his judgment and discre- tion in matters comaitted to his care in the ordinary discharge of his oMcial duties.” I will now ask your attention, Senators, to the remaining art 4, and first, the four conspiracy articles. These allege that the President un- observed him with the most intense anxiety, but never in word, in deed, in thought, in action, did F discover in that man anything but loyalty to the con- stitution and the laws. He stood firm as a against all temptation to abuse his own powers or to exercise those Which were not conferred upon him. Steadfast and self-reliant in the midst of all dim- culties, when dangers threatened, when temptations lawfully conspired with Lorenzo Thomas, and | established which proposes to reverse the whole past. S constit lawfully conspired, with, Lorenzo Thomas, and | sire ekanbery argued chat although te constitution | were ftrong he looked only to Ye const T cave on the 2ist of January, 1868, first, to hinder and } Was silent about the power of removals, it plainly | geen that man tried as few have been tried, implied that power. The purpose of making appoin' revent Edwin M. Stanton, Secretary of War, from nth y Y ments subject to the advice and consent of the Senate Thave seen his confidence abused. Ihave seen him fotaing the office of Secretary for the Department of rte 2 ai endure day after day provocations such as few men War, contrary to the Conspiracy act of July 31, 1861, | Was to prevent corruption and favoritism, but not to | nave ever been called upon to meet. No man could and in violation of the constitution of the United | give the Senate power to control the Executive. have met them with more sublime patience, Sooner States; second, to prevent and hinder the execution } Continuing, he said:—I stand, then, Senators, on the | or jater, however, I knew the explosion must of the “act regulating the tenure of certain civil oM- | Constitutional power ie ee ans remove Mr. | come, it did come ont And when my cers,’? and in pursuance of this conspiracy did unlaw- | Stanton from office. that | wonder was t it had been so long delayed. fully attempt to prevent. Edwin, M. Stanton from | power what becomes of the Tenure of Office act or Yon heaatork: tak it had oeita. the President has holding the said oitice; third, by force to seize, take | Anything else in the way of legislation? if} een more sinned against than sinning. Fear not, ee the propecs of the United States in | it is a@ constitutional power which he pos- | then, to acquit lim. Fhe constitution of the country the Department ot War In the custody and charge | S€sses, how. can it taken away by any | ig gafe in his hands from violence, as it was of Edwin M. Stanton, Secretary thereof, contrary to | mode short of a constitutional amendment? Then, | in the hands of Washington. But ii, Senators, the Conspiracy act of July 31, 1861, and of the Tenure | too, if he deems it his constitutional power how can him of the the Conspiracy act of Suly Si, 1e6l, and of the Tenure | you punish him for following in good faith that oath | YoU.,comdemn huni, WY me eee him to ae take and possess the property of the United States in | Which he has been compelled to take, that he “will | yimost stretch of your power, mark the prophesy ¥ the Department of War in the custody of Edwin M. | preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the | ihe strong arm of the people wili be about him, Stanton, the Secretary thereof, with intent to violate | United Stgtes.” Look, Senators, at what has hap- ey will find a way to ratse him from any a te the “act regutating the tenure of certain civil om- | pened since the beginning of this trial. During the pro- pA, you may oun him, and we shail live to ces.” It will be seen that these four conspiracy | gress of the on March 31, 1868, a ques! arose | seg fim redeemed and to hear the majes counts all relate to the same subject matter—the War | In which the Senate as an Impeachment Court were | tj, voice of the people: Well dé6ne, faith- Ofice, the Secretary of the War Office and the public | equally divided. Thereupon the Chief Justice de- | fj yervant, you shall have your reward t property therein ‘situated—and this is that | cided the question in the affirmative by his casting | got if, Senators, as 1 cannot believe, but as has ls necessary to be said about these arti- | vote. I make now the following extract from the | heen boldly said with almost offictal sanction, your minutes of the next day, April 1. Mr. Stanbery then quoted from tne proceedings relative to Mr. Surnner’s resolution declaring that the Chief Justice had no authority to vote, and continued:—How near, Mr. Chief Justice, did’ you come to the commission of an impeachable offence, according to this modern doctrine announced here by the Managers? But it is said on behalf of the Managers that al- though each department of the government may cles, for not @ ascintilla .of proof has been addaced in their hepa seh The case attempted to be made out under these conspiracy articles by the Managers was, in the first place, by the produc- tion of brdots Issued on the zist of February. But ‘ag these of themselves did not amount to evidence of ‘a conspiracy, a8 they carrieg {he “qo of no unlawful agreement, but oy oe stood upon the footing of an order given by the President to a subordinate, the votes have been canvassed and the doom the President is sealed, then let that judgment not be pronounced in thik Senate chamber; not here, where our Camilins in the hour of greatest peril, _< handed, met and baiMed the enemies of the ase 3 not here, where he stood faithful among the faithless not here, where he fonght the good fight for Union and the constitution; notin this chambe: whose wails echo with that clarion voice thal : “ ) for itself in Managers, in order to make some show of a case, | have # right to construe the constitution in the days of our greatest danger ed, offered to introduce the declarations of Generai | the matter of its own action, tat being — Ko hope and comfort to many a di nding. ‘Thomas, marie on the night of the Zist and on the | lative department may carry ov Own om of | heart, strong as an army with banners. No, not - ded of Fevruary and other days, intending to show | the constitution to all their final results, even if | here,’ Seek out rather the darkest and gloom ae tain possesal thereby they totally absorb every power of the | chamber in the subterranean recesses of this cupli or yr Rhe property: of the depart: executive department, ‘They oo em = ‘where the cheerful light of ‘day Deve! ‘enters. ‘There ment by in tion gud force. Objection was | of their own powers whe emselvea, erect the altar and immolate the victim. made at the time to the Introduction of these decia- rations without laying a foundation upon which the President could be made liable by such declaration. Impressed with this objection, the Manager who opened the prosecution, after some consideration, at length answered an inquiry of a Senator, that he ex- pected to follow up the proof of the declarations by proof connecting the President with a pan tae assurance he was allowed to give the declaration’ of Genera! Thomas in evidence. But that is the last we have heard of any supporting proof so romised. Not a scintilla of proot byen obtained other to act ad s But if they hive Pe thd ff decison, 80 algo has the executive; and if they Pek AR 8 enforce their construction againgt thé éXécdtl also has the executive a right t6 enforce its construc- tion against the It was to meet that very con- tingency, it WAS 16 dave us from such fatal conse- quenges: ‘that the wisdom of our forefathers intro- je Judicial ee THE NATIONAL GUARD. ‘The officers and AIS. Al Company D, Seventy first regiment, assembled at the regimental armory for drill and inspection on Monday evening. ‘Th jover ore artment as the final arbiter of all such questions. That failing, there is but one alter- tive—an actual coljision or @ resort to the people Jast is the great conse ive ele- Lonny pee When. this fails fs all is men were in full fatigue, knapsack and white gi and overcoats rolled on knapsack. The drill, was the last of'the season, passed o/f very ber General Thomas or from at juarter, | ment in our government. under the conapiracy shares, ot a authority sives gone, Mey the bid Came vg — be torily to all concerned, pemenrns Intended to be given President to General | appealed to, or, , conses Battery B, First artillory, Capta ‘em, Thomas ‘0 resort to force, intimidation or threats in | listened to, then faction and part wi aay Pees \- ry B, ben aregular field drill on the 27th ult. at Tomp! put the ord Pres! lished their perfect work, and t 4 j eon Tite aune enough #0 say with poi i+ ent Will tike o. worth ing, be @way. | square, The drill began at one o'clock in ese articlon. Weak. 8 eae ae iar ‘y ca declare eS ee ‘ee ruoon. The ful attery sx guns) were present gr ee in it ef the ‘Sogttn Preceny , Pasi 4 nis’ on the | and the drill was witnessed by Major General Shal ons jon. : and Colonel Teller, all_ of whom e} Rh cence tnermacives as highly pleased with the hig standard of excellence to which the efficiency of xe uncer of the battery had brought it. Oe oere and non-commissioned officers of tl Twelfth regiment infantry assembled for Continuifg he said:—And now, Sena- tors, 1 ask your close attention to what seems to me & most singular characteristic of this case. How does it happen that for the first time in the hi or our country the President of the United States and since the testimony of Mr. Welles remains wit! out the slightest foundation, Next, as to the tenth article, relative to the speeches made at the Execa- live Mansion, at Cleveland and at St. Louis, in the months of August and September, 1366, It isin the the le of ynited been suddenly subjected to such punitive legislation Pa are frthis artiste, cou led pom te heed web " at whieh was passed on the 2d ee end drill last evening at 0 ¢ State Arsenal. . + resident of te Upited States crimmally responsi- Laws wer passed on that day pur: | © ‘There will be » Dactation qrill of the regiment OB, le, even You of his office, for speaking, as hing to. change the order of Executive | the evening of the sth inst, ote ¢ Sat the joie has at, with yojpe to an assemblage qorone such laws have not been uncommon, | The Seventh regiment will assemble tn full of “Mericxn ia | led scandalous mat, { either in qur natio or State Legislatures, | for battalion drill on Thursday evening, May 7. ; ter touching a rty-uinth Congress of the Unt; It has often happened tl he legisiative depart- call Se at a lp en a? The — va States, | Mr. Stanbery Reld that the Tutrty. | meut had nade toe } = parade on oF abso NS goth of May in the new fu ninth Congress having taken no notice of the | tration of the executive department, oftentimes im- mentioned. Whoever drew these acts shrutl} bane this Congress could not ding duties never inn Defore; oftentimes pre- | dress uniform, and every member of the regime me ran came © rasan hi " eta qucted beer action in the most direct and explicit terms; | is expected to be pay equipped in accordance wit Se hare wpe 5 then, woke Ke five hundred | et ne ended Mun poo palma ant peat One ey regiment of infantry are soot 8 . | found 5 > yoarsing tilt Fel ian nam were punished for ex: | toy ue we find here? Now, observe \sena- | to elect a colonel to fill the vacancy occasioned as follows:—Upon formation of the constitution | tors, that neither in the mitive clauses | the election of General Meserole to the ¢o / of the United States fathers were not unmindful | of the second section of that Mili ‘Appropriation | the Eleventh brigade, are reginest of what had happened inthe past, They had brought | act, norin the sixth section of that Tenure of Oftice Two companies of the Seventy. Fe enOn with them the trad $ of suffering and eoaton act, is the President of the United States so m as | making preparations to attend the ‘> ire t0 gO x Governor Engtish, in Connecticat., R., ey rm ag for opinion’s aki i they determined to lay here for themselves the foundations of civia liberty so strong that theynever could be changed. When our constitution 3 formed and was presented to the = \pud of sieady habits in full ly equipped. noid: r Seventh regiment will 4 sen aera reat ual summer, fod dat the only ute referring to the office by name. It is under the if “person or “civil other ee mt for. and imprisonime! ‘eat there eral description of he is made liable to various Stat for adoption the universal objection | to carry out the new isions of law. on choempme! fuir just now is the place ‘ : no question that it {# ident, apd the President | certainty about the amuir made to it, was not so much for what it contained as sone, ‘that is edgy Sg ve made for him. | where the encampment is to be held. There are for what |, omitted. It was said we find here no bill of rights; we find here no guarantee of con- scionce, of apeech, of the . The answer was those who contend for Newport, while others to the cou He is left no choice, no chance of appeal to tly seen Galand affords more advantages for no mode of testing the validity of the new law. that 11 constitution. itsolt was, from beginning to | In these pregnant words the whole matter Is settled. | end in view. end bill of rights; that it conferred upon ‘the gov- | There is, first of all, an enumeration of what crimes The Central Park Parade Ground, bil Res J fone, ernment only certain specified and delegated powe are in the contemplation of the constitution—treason | tinder, from the bags > rie Railroad folke—at leasS tod among these was not to be found any gran and bribery; and they are the highest of offictal | as much money a9 i os ut tne will content of any power over the consolence or over free speech } crimes that can be committed. If oe 80 _ eine | pointments have been uvade in the or a free press. The answer waa plausible, but not | had stopped there, no doubt b fe oe ™ aa ae Lik 3 aries He Ooneil, sergeant anything short of treason by of impeacnment—anything even amou sion of treagon or even that edern crime satisfactory. The conseqnence was that at the frat il under the constitution, according to yarjous Siate cquycntlons, CoLWright, Quarter Maser KOI ating to mispri { Freeman, hospital steward in Kuglish major; geaut; Congress he jastyugtipos sent from Wwe + ARO