Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

say:

minary proceeding had always been precisely the M. Stanton is, in substance, as follows, that is to same as in the case just read. When the managers appeared on the part of the House of Repre--Sir:-By virtue of the power and authority vested in me EXECUTIVE MANSION, WASHINGTON, D. C., Feb. 21, 1868. sentatives, they presented their articles to the Court of Impeachment. This, however, was only the presentation-the notice always given to the Senate.

Mr. JOHNSON (Md.) had no doubt the mode proposed by the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Howard) was proper. He believed that in all preceding cases, a committee had been appointed to take into consideration the message received from the House, and to recommend such measures as were deemed advisable; and he knew no reason why that should not be done here. Perhaps, however, it would be more advisable to delay the resolution for a day, and let the matter be disposed of by the Senate.

Mr. CONKLING (N. Y.), referring to the case of the impeachment by the Senate of Judge Humphreys, of Tennessee, suggested that the words "to be appointed by the Chair," be included in the resolution.

Mr. HOWARD accepted the amendment.
The resolution was unanimously adopted.

as President, by the Constitution and laws of the United States, you are hereby removed from the office of Secretary for the Department of War, and your functions as such will terminate upon receipt of this communication. You will transfer to Brevet Major-General L. Thomas, Adjutant-General of the Army, who has this day been au thorized and empowered to act as Secretary of War ad interim, all books, papers and other public property now in your custody and charge. Respectfully, yours, ANRREW JOHNSON.

To the Hon. E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War. Which order was unlawfully issued, and with intent then are there to violate the act entitled "An act re

gulating the tenure of certain civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, and contrary to the provisions of said visions of the Constitution of the United States, and act, and in violation thereof, and contrary to the prowithout the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States, the said Senate then and there being in session,.to remove said E. M. Stanton from the office of Secretary for the Department of War, whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit, and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office.

Article 2. That on the 21st day of February, in the year of our Lord 1868, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his oath of office, and in violation of the Constitution of the United States, and contrary to the provisions of an act entitled "An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, without the advice and consent of the Senate, then and there being in session, and without authority of law, did appoint one L. Thomas to be Secretary of War ad interim, by issuing to said Lorenzo Thomas a letter of authority, in substance as follows, that is to say:

EXECUTIVE MANSION, WASHINGTON, D. C., Feb. 21, 1868.

Articles of Impeachment. Meanwhile the House Committee appointed to draw up the articles of impeacment examined numerous witnesses and proceeded carefully to pre--Sir:-The Hon. Edwin M. Stanton having been this day pare the charges and specifications against the Executive, and on the last day of February they reported the results of their labors as follows:

Articles exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States, in the name of themselves and all the people of the United States, against Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, as maintenance and support of their impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanor in office:

Article 1. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, on the 21st day of February, in the year of our Lord, 1868, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, unmindful of the high duties of his oath of office and of the requirements of the Constitution, that he should take care that the laws be faithfully executed, did unlawfully, in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States, issue an order in writing for the removal of Edwin M. Stanton from the office of Secretary of the Department of War, said Edwin M. Stanton having been, therefor, duly appointed and commissioned by and with the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States as such Secretary; and said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, on the 12th day of Adgust, in the year of our Lord 1867, and during the recess of said Senate, having suspended by his order Edwin M. Stanton from said office, and within twenty days after the first day of the next meeting of said Senate, on the 12th day of December, in the year last aforesaid, having reported to said Senate such suspension, with the evidence and reasons for his action in the case, and the name of the person designated to perform the duties of such office temporarily, until the next meeting of the Senate, and said Senate thereafterwards, on the 13th day of January, in the year of our Lord 1868, having duly considered the evidence and reasons reported by said Andrew Johnson for said suspension, did refuse to concur in said suspension; whereby and by force of the provisions of an act entitled "an act regulating the tenure of civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, said Edwin M. Stanton did forthwith resume the functions of his office, whereof the said Andrew Johnson bad then and there due notice, and the said Edwin M. Stanton, by reason of the premises, on said 21st day of February, was lawfully entitled to hold said office of Secretary for the Department of War, which said order for the removal of said Edwin

removed from office as Secretory of the Department of War, you are hereby authorized and empowered to act as Secretary of War ad interim, and will immediately enter Mr. Stanton has been instructed to transfer to you all the upon the discharge of the duties pertaining to that office. custody and charge. Respectfully yours, records, books, papers and other public property now in his ANDREW JOHNSON. To Brevet Major-General Lorenzo Thomas, Adjutant General United States Army, Washington, D. C.

Whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit, and was guilty of a high misdemanor in office.

Article 3. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, on the 21st day of February, in the sixty-eight, at Washington in the District of Columyear of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and bia, did commit, and was guilty of a high misde law, while the Senate of the United States was then meanor in office, in this:-That without authority of and there in session, he did appoint one Lorenzo Thomas to be Secretary for the Department of War, ad interim, without the advice and consent of the Senate, and in violation of the Constitution of the United States, no vacancy having happened in said office of Secretary for the Department of War during the recess of the Senate, and no vacancy existing in said office at the time, and which said appointment so made by Andrew Johnson of said Lorenzo Thomas is in substance as follows, that is to say:

EXECUTIVE MANSION. WASHINGTON, D. C., Feb. 21, 1868. -Sir: The Hon. E. M. Stanton having been this day removed from office as Secretary for the Department of War, you are hereby authorized and empowered to act as Secretary of War ad interim, and will immediately enter upon the discharge of the duties pertaining to that office. Mr. Stanton has been instructed to transfer to you ak the records, books, papers, and other public property now in his custody and charge. Respectfully yours, ANDREW JOHNSON. To Brevet Major-General L. Thomas, Adjutant-General United States Army, Washington, D. C.

Article 4. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his office, and of his oath of office, in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States, on the 21st day of February, in the year of our Lord 1868, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, &d unlawfully conspire with one Lorenzo Thomas, and with other persons to the House of Representatives un

known, with intent, by intimidation and threats, to hinder and prevent Edwin M. Stanton, then and there, the Secretary for the Department of War, duly appointed under the laws of the United States, from holding said office of Secretary for the Department of War, contrary to and in violation of the Constitution of the United States, and of the provisions of an act entitled "An act to define and punish certain conspiracies," approved July 31, 1861, whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit and was guilty of high crime in office.

Article 5. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his office and of his oath of office, on the 21st of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, and on divers others days and times in said year before the 28th day of said February, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, did unlawfully conspire with one Lorenzo Thomas, and with other persons in the House of Representatives unknown, by force to prevent and hinder the execution of an act entitled "An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, and in pursuance of said conspiracy, did attempt to prevent E. M. Stanton, then and there being Secretary for the Department of War, duly appointed and commissioned under the laws of the United States, from holding said office, whereby the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit and was guilty of high misdemeanor in office.

Article 6. That Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the duties of his high office and of his oath of office, on the 21st day of February, in the year of our Lord 1868, at Washington," in the District of Columbia, did uniawfully conspire with one Lorenzo Thomas, by force to seize, take and possess the property of the United States at the War Department, contrary to the provisions of an act entitled "An act to define and punish certain conspiracies," approved July 31, 1861, and with intent to violate and disregard an act entitled "An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit a high

crime in office.

Article 7. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his office, and of his oath of office, on the 21st day of February, in the year of our Lord 1868, and on divers other days in said year, before the 28th day of said February, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, did unlawfully conspire with one Lorenzo Thomas to prevent and hinder the execution of an act of the United States, entitled "An act regulating the tenure of certain civil office," passed March 2, 1867, and in pursuance of said conspiracy, did unlawfully attempt to prevent Edwin M. Stanton, then and there being Secretary for the Department of War, under the laws of the United States, from holding said office to which he had been duly appointed and commissioned, whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United Stares, did there and then commit and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office.

Article 8. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his office, and of his oath of office, on the 21st day of Febquary, in the year of our Lord, 1868, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, did unlawfully conspire with one Lorenzo Thomas, to seize, take and possess

the property of the United States in the War Department, with intent to violate and disregard the act entitled "An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit a high misdemeanor in office.

Article 9. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, on the 22d day of February, in the year of our Lord 1868, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, in disregard of the Constitution and the law of Congress duly enacted, as Commander-in-Chief, did bring before himself, then and there, William H. Emory, a Major-General by brevet in the Army of the United States, actually in command of the Department of Washington, and the military forces therefor, and did then and there, as Commander-in-Chief, declare to, and instruct said Emory, that part of a law of the United States, passed March 2, 1867, entitled "an act for making appropriations for the support of the army for the year ending June 30, 1868, and for other purposes," especially the second section thereof, which provides, among other things,

that all orders and instructions relating to military operations issued by the President and Secretary of War, shall be issued through the General of the Army, and in case of his inability, through the next in rank was unconstitutional, and in contravention of the commission of Emory, and therefore not binding on him, as an officer in the Army of the United States, which said provisions of law had been therefore duly and legally promulgated by General Order for the government and direction of the Army of the United States, as the said Andrew Johnson then and there well knew, with intent thereby to iuduce said Emory, in his official capacity as Commander of the Department of Washington, to violate the provisions of said act, and to take and receive, act upon and obey such orders as he, the said Andrew Johnson, might make and give, and which should not be issued through the General of the Army of the United States, according to the provisions of said act, whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit, and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office; and the House of Representatives, by protestation, saving to themselves the liberty of exhibition, at any time hereafter, any further articles of their accusation or impeachment against the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, and also of replying to his answers, which will make up the articles herein preferred against him, and of offering proof to the same and every part thereof, and to all and every other article, accusation or impeachment which shall be exhibited by them as the case shall require, do demand that the said Andrew Johnson may be put to answer the high crimes and misdemeanors fn office herein charged against him, and that such proceedings, examinations, trials and judgments may be thereupon had and given as may be agreeable to law and justice.

An animated debate sprang up on the question of the adoption of the above articles, which was continued until March 2, when they were adopted, and Speaker Colfax announced as managers of the impeachment trial on the part of the House, Messrs. Thaddeus Stevens, B. F. Butler, John H. Bingham, George S. Boutwell, J. F. Wilson, T. Williams and John A. Logan.

It was then ordered that the articles agreed to by the House to be exhibited in its name and in the name of all the people of the United States, against Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, in maintenance of the impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors in office, be carried to the Senate by the managers appointed to conduct such impeachment. General Butler's Supplementary Ar

ticle.

On the 2d of March, General Butler proposed an additional article, but as the vote on the previous articles was taken on that day, final action was postponed until the 3d, when General Butler again reported it, remarking that, with but a single exception, the managers favored the adoption of the article. He strongly urged the reception of the charges he had prepared, saying:—

"The articles already adopted presented only the bone and sinew of the offenses of Andrew Johnson. He wanted to clothe that bone and sinew with flesh and blood, and to show him before the country as the quivering sinner that he is, so that hereafter, when posterity came to examine these proceedings, it might not have cause to wonder that the only offense charged against Andrew Johnson was a merely technical one. He would have him go down to posterity as the representative man of this age, with a label upon him that would stick to him through all time."

The article was adopted. Yeas, 87; nays, 41-the only Republicans voting in the negative being Messrs. Ashley (Nev.), Coburn, Griswold, Laflin, Mallory, Marvin, Pomeroy, Smith, Wilson, (la.), Wilson (Ohio), Windom and Woodbridge. This article was made the tenth on the list, and is as follows:

Article 10. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his high office and the dignity and proprieties thereof, and of the harmony and courtesies which ought to exist and be maintained between the executive and legislative branches of the Government of the United States, designing and intending to set aside the rightful authorities and powers of Congress, did attempt to bring into disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt and reproach, the Congress of the United States, and the several branches thereof, to impair and destroy the regard and respect of all the good people of the United States for the Congress and the legislative power thereof, which all officers of the government ought inviolably to preserve and maintain, and to excite the odium and resentment of all good people of the United States against Congress and the laws by it duly and constitutionally enacted; and in pursuance of his said design and intent, openly and publicly, and before divere assemblages of citizens of the United States, convened in divers parts thereof, to meet and receive said Andrew Johnson as the Chief Magistrate of the United States, did, on the eighteenth day of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, and on divers other days and times, as well before as afterwards, make and declare, with a loud voice, certain intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues, and therein utter loud threats and bitter menaces, as well against Congress as the laws of the United States duly enacted thereby, amid the cries, jeers and laughter of the multitudes then assembled in hearing, which are set forth in the several specifications hereinafter written, in substance and effect, that is to say:

THE SPECIFICATIONS.

"Specification First. In this, that at Washington, in the District of Columbia, in the Executive Mansion, to a committee of citizens who called upon the President of the United States, speaking of and concerning the Congress of the United States, heretofore, to wit:-On the 18th day of August, in the year of our Lord, 1866, in a loud voice, declare in substance and effect, among other things, that is to say:

So far as the Executive Department of the government is concerned, the effort has been made to restore the Union, to heal the breach, to pour oil into the wounds which were consequent upon the struggle, and, to speak in a common phrase, to prepare, as the learned and wise physician would, a plaster healing in character and co-extensive with the wound. We thought and we think that we had partially succeeded, but as the work progresses, as reconstruction seemed to be taking place, and the country was becoming reunited, we found a disturbing and moving element opposing it. In alluding to that element it shall go no further than your Convention, and the distinguished gentleman who has delivered the report of the proceedings, I shall make no reference that I do not believe, and the time and the occasion justify. We have witnessed in one department of the government every endeavor to prevent the restoration of peace, harmony and union. We have seen hanging upon the verge of the government, as it were, a body called or which assumes to be the Congress of the United States, while in fact it is a Congress of only part of the States. We have seen this Congress pretend to be for the Union, when its every step and act tended to perpetuate disunion and make a disruption of States inevitable. We have seen Congress gradually encroach, step by step, upon constitutional rights, and violate day after day. and month after month, fundamental principles of the government. We have seen a Congress that seemed to forget that there was a limit to the sphere and scope of legislation. We have seen a Congress in a minority assume to exercise power which, if allowed to be consummated, would result in despotism or monarchy itself."

"Specification Second. In this, that at Cleveland, in the State of Ohio, heretofore to wit:-On the third day of September, in the year of our Lord, 1866, before a public assemblage of citizens and others, said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, speak

ing of and concerning the Congress of the United States, did, in a loud voice, declare in substance and effect, among other things, that is to say:-"I will tell you what I did do-I called upon your Congress that is trying to break up the government. In conclusion, beside that Congress had taken much pains to poison the constituents against him, what has Congress done? Have they done anything to restore the puion of the States? No. On the contrary, they had done everything to prevent it; and because he stood now where he did when the Rebellion commenced, he had been denounced as a traitor. Who had run greater risks or made greater sacrifices than himself? But Congress, factious and domineering. had undertaken to poison the minds of the American people.'

in the State of Missouri, heretofore to wit:-On the 8th "Specification Third. In this case, that at St. Louis, day of September, in the year of our Lord 1866, be fore a public assemblage of citizens and others, said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, speaking of acts concerning the Congress of the stance and effect, among other things, that is to United States, did, in a loud voice, declare in subsay:

Go on; perhaps if you had a word or two on the subject of New Orleans you might understand more about it than yon do, and if you will go back and ascertain the cause of the riot at New Orleans, perhaps you will not be so prompt in calling out "New Orleans." If you will take up the riot of New Orleans and trace it back to its source and its immediate cause, you will find out who was responsible for the blood that was shed there. If you will take up the riot at New Orleans and trace it back to the Radical Congress, you will find that the riot at New Orleans was substantially planned. If you will take up the proceedings in their caucuses you will understand that they knew that a convention was to be called which was extinct by its powers having expired; that it was said that the intention was that a new government was to be organized, and on the organization of that government the intention was to enfranchise one portion of the popu lation, calied the colored population, and who had been emancipated, and at the same time disfranchise white men. When you design to talk about New Orleans you ought to understand what you are talking about. When you read the speeches that were made, and take up the facts on the Friday and Saturday before that convention sat, you will find that speeches were made incendiary in their character, exciting that portion of the population-the black population -to arm themselves and prepare for the shedding of blood. You will also find that convention did assemble in violation of law, and the intention of that convention was to supersede the organized authorities in the State of Louisiana, which had been organized by the government of the United States, and every man engaged in that rebellion, in that convention, with the intention of superseding and upturning the civil government which had been recognized by the Government of the United States. I say that he was a traitor to the Constitution of the United States, and hence you find that another rebellion was commenced, having its origin in the Radical Congress. So much for the New Orleans riot. And there was the cause and the origin of the blood that was shed, and every drop of blood that was shed is upon their skirts and they are responsible. I could test this thing a little closer, but will not do it here to-night. But when you talk about the causes and consequences that resulted from proceedings of that kind, perhaps, as I have been introduced here and you have provoked questions of this kind, though it does not provoke me, I will tell you a few wholesome things that have been done by this Radical Congress in connection with New Orleans and the extension of the elective franchise. I know that I have been traduced and abused. I know it has come in advance of me here, as elsewhere, that I have attempted to exercise an arbitrary power in resisting laws that were intended to be forced upon the government; that I had exercised that power; that I had abandoned the party that elected me, and that I was a traitor, because I exercised the veto power in attempting, and did arrest for a time, that which was called a "Freedmen's Bureau" bill. Yes, that I was a traitor. And I have been traduced; I have been slandered; I have been maligned; I have been called Judas Iscariot, and all that. Now, my countrymen, here to-night, it is very easy to indulge in epithets; it is easy to call a man a Judas, and cry out traitor,

city of Washington, commit and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office.

Senate.

On the 4th of March, 1868, at five minutes past one o'clock, members of the House entered the Senate, preceded by the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate. As they stepped inside the bar of the Senate, the Sergeant-at-Arms announced, in a loud voice, "The Managers of the House of Representatives, to present articles of impeachment."

but when he is called upon to give arguments and facts he is very often found wanting. Judas Iscariot-Judas! There was & Judas, and he was one of the twelve Apostles. O, yes, the twelve Impeachment Articles Read to the Apostles had a Christ, and he never conid have had a Judas unless he had twelve Apostles. If I have played the Judas who has been my Christ that I have played the Judas with? Was it Thad. Stevens? Was it Wendell Phillips? Was it Charles Sumner? They are the men that stop and compare themselves with the Savior, and everybody that differs with them in opinion, and tries to stay and arrest their diabolical and nefarious policy is to be denounced as a Judas. Well, let me say to you, if you will stand by me in this action, if you will stand by me in trying to give the people a fair chance-soldiers and citizens-to participate in these offices, God be willing, I will kick them out. I will kick them out just as fast as I can. Let me say to you, in concluding, that what I have said is what I intended to say; I was not provoked into this, and care not for their menaces, the taunts and the jeers. I care not for threats, I do not intend to be bullied by enemies, nor overawed by my friends. But, God willing, with your help, I will veto their measures whenever any of them come to me.'

"Which said utterances, declarations, threats and harangues, highly censurable in any, are peculiarly indecent and unbecoming in the Chief Magistrate of the United States, by means whereof the said Andrew Johnson has brought the high office of the President of the United States into contempt, ridicule and disgrace, to the great scandal of all good citizens, whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did commit, and was then and there guilty of a high misdemeanor in office.

The Eleventh Article.

On the same day Mr. Bingham offered still another article, stating that it had received the unanimous vote of the managers, and he moved the previous question on its adoption. After slight objections from Messrs. Brooks and Eldridge it was adopted by the same vote as the previous articles.

Article 11. That the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his office and his oath of office, and in disregard of the Constitution and laws of the United States, did, heretofore, to wit:-On the 18th day of August, 1866, at the city of Washington, and in the District of Columbia, by public speech, declare and affirm in substance, that the Thirty-ninth Congress of the United States was not a Congress of the United States authorized by the Constitution to exercise legislative power under the same, but on the contrary, was a Congress of only part of the States, thereby denying and intending to deny, that the legislation of said Congress was valid or obligatory upon him, the said Andrew Johnson, except in so far as he saw fit to approve the same, and also thereby denying the power of the said Thirtyninth Congress to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States. And in pursuance of said declaration, the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, afterwards, to wit:-On the 21st day of February, 1868, at the city of Washington, D. C., did, unlawfully and in disregard of the requirements of the Constitution that he should take care that the laws be faithfully executed, attempt to prevent the execution of an act entitled "An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, by unlawfully devising and contriving and attempting to devise and contrive means by which he should prevent Edwin M. Stanton from forthwith resuming the functions of the Office of Secretary for the Department of War, notwithstanding the refusal of the Senate to concur in the suspension theretofore made by the said Andrew Johnson of said Edwin M. Stanton from said office of Secretary for the Department of War; and also by further unlawfully devising and contriving, and attempting to devise and contrive means then and there to prevent the execution of an act entitled "An act making appropriations for the support of the army for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1869, and for other purposes," approved March 20, 1867. And also to prevent the execution of an act entitled "An act to provide for the more efficient government of the Rebel States," passed March 2, 1867. Whereby the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then, to wit, on the 21st day of February, 1868, at the

[ocr errors]

The managers walked to the front part of the Senate Chamber, close to the President's desk, and took seats, while the members of the House ranged themselves around the seats of the Senators.

After silence was restored, Mr. BINGHAM arose and said, holding the articles in his hand :-"The Managers of the House of Representatives, by order of the House of Representatives, are ready at the bar of the Senate, if it will please the Senate to hear them, to present the articles of impeachment, in maintenance of the impeachment preferred against Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, by the House of Repre sentatives."

Hon. B. F. WADE, President of the Senate, then said: "The Sergeant-at-Arms will make proclamation."

The Sergeant-at-arms then said:-"Hear ye! hear ye! hear ye! All persons are commanded to keep silence, on pain of imprisonment, while the House of Representatives is exhibiting to the Senate of the United States, articles of impeachment against Andrew Johnson, President of the United States."

Mr. BINGHAM then rose and commenced reading the articles.

Every person kept perfectly still while Mr. Bingham was reading the articles. The galleries were closely packed, and hundreds of people stood in the halls and corridors, unable to get even a glimpse of the inside proceedings.

At the conclusion of the reading of the articles, which occupied thirty minutes, President WADE said: "The Senate will take due order and cognizance of the articles of impeachment, of which due notice will be given by the Senate to the House of Representatives."

The House then withdrew, with Mr. Dawes as Chairman of the House Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union, to the hall of the House.

i

Opening of the Trial.

On the day following the presentation of the articles of impeachment to the Senate, the trial was formally opened. At the conclusion of the morning hour, Vice President Wade announced that all legislative and executive business of the Senate is ordered to cease, for the purpose of proceeding to business connected with the impeachment of the President of the United States. The chair is vacated for that purpose.

The Chief Justice then advanced up the aisle, clad in his official robe, assisted by Mr. Pomeroy,

chairman of the committee appointed for that purpose, with Judge Nelson, of the Supreme Court, on his right; Messrs. Buckalew and Wilson, the other members of the committee, bringing up the rear, with members of the House, who stood behind the bar of the Senate.

The Chief Justice, having ascended to the President's chair, said, in a measured and impressive Voice:

"Senators-In obedience to notice, I have appeared to join with you in forming a Court of Impeachment for the trial of the President of the United States, and I am now ready to take oath."

Qath of the Chief Justice.

Was it.

a case where he holds a direct interest.
right, he said, to subject a Senator to such great
temptation-the whole Executive power of the
nation, with twenty-five thousand dollars a year?
He submitted, therefore, that it was due to the cause
of impartial justice that such precedent should
disrepute. Why was it that the Chief Justice
not be established as would bring the Senate in
now presided? It was because the fathers of the
républic thought that he who was to be entitled
to benefits should not be permitted ever to pre-
side where he could only vote in case of a tie vote.
He did not know that the question could be de-
cided at once. It was a grave and important
question, and would be so considered by the
country, and he submitted whether it was not

The following oath was then administered to proper to postpone its decision till to-morrow, in the Chief Justice by Judge Nelson:

"I do solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, I will do impartial justice, according to the Constitution and laws. So help me God."

The Chief Justice then said:-Senators, the bath will now be administered to the Senators as they will be called by the Secretary in succession,

The Senators Sworn.

The Secretary called the roll, each Senator advancing in turn and taking the oath prescribed in the rules as given above, The only Senators absent were Doolittle (Vt.), Patterson (N. H.), Saulsbury (Del.) and Edmunds (Vt.)

Hom. B. F. Wade Challenged. When the name of Senator Wade was called, Mr. HENDRICKS rose and put the question to the presiding officer, whether Senator from Ohio, being the person who would succeed to the Presidential office, was entitled to sit as a judge in the case.

Remarks of Mr. Sherman.

order, particularly, that the precedents of the English House of Lords might be examined. He moved, therefore, that the question be postponed till to-morrow.

Mr. DAVIS (Ky.) argued that the question was to be decided on principle, and that principle was to be found in the Constitution. It was thought the man who was to succeed the President in case of removal from office should not take part in the trial of the President. If the case of Mr. Wade did not come within the letter of the Con

stitution, it did come clearly within its principie and meaning.

Mr. MORRILL (Me.) argued that there was no party before the court to make the objection, and that it did not lie in the province of one Senator to raise an objection against a fellow Senator. When the party appeared here, then objection could be made and argued; but not here and now. It seemed to him that there was no option and no discretion but to administer the oath to all the Senators.

Mr. HENDRICKS (Ind.) argued that it was inherent in a court to judge of its own qualification, and it was not for a Senator to present the question. It was for the court itself to deterit-mine whether a member claiming a seat in the court was entitled to it; therefore, the question was not immaturely made. The suggestion of Senator Sherman that Senator Wade might not continue to be President of the Senate, was no answer to the objection. When he should cease to be the presiding officer of the Senate he could be sworn in, but now, at this time, he was incompetent.

Mr. SHERMAN argued that the Constitution self settled that question. It provided that the presiding officer should not preside on the trial of the President, but being silent as to his right to be a member of the court, it followed by implication that he had the right to be a member of the court, each State was entitled to be represented by two Senators.

The Senate had already seen a Senator who was related to the President by marriage take the onth, and he could see no difference between interest on the ground of affinity and the interest which the Senator from Ohio might be supposed to have. Besides, the Senator from Ohio was only the presiding officer of the Senate pro tempore, and might or might not continue as such to the close of these proceedings. He, therefore, hoped that the oath would be administered to the Senator from Ohio.

Reverdy Johnson's Views.

Mr. JOHNSON (Md.) assimilated this case to an ordinary judicial proceeding, and reminded the Senate that no judge would be allowed to sit in

In the case of Senator Stockton, of New Jersey, the question had been decided. There it was held that the Senator, being interested in the result of the vote, had no right to vote. One of the standing rules of the Senate itself was, that no Senator should vote where he had an interest in the result of the vote, but in his judgment the constitutional ground was even higher than the question of interest. The Vice President was not allowed, by the Constitution, to keep order in the Senate during an impeachment trial. He hoped he need not disclaim any personal feeling in the matter. He made the point now because he thought the Constitution itself had settled it that no man should help to deprive the President of

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »