where where, on appearance day, the defendant was required to answer immediately, and proceed with the trial. We have not a witness summoned; we hardly know what witnesses to summon. We are entirely at sea. Mr. Chief Justice, I submit to this court whether we are to be caught in this way. "Strike, but hear." Give us the opportnuity that men have in common civil cases, where they are allowed hardly less than thirty days to answer, and most frequently sixty days. Give us time; give us reasonable time, and then we shall be prepared for the trial and for the sentence of the court, whatever it may be. Remarks of the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice, rising, said: The Chief Justice would state, at the start, that he is embarrassed in the construction of the rules. The twenty-second rule provides that the case on each side may be opened by one person. He understood that as referring to the case when the evidence and the case are ready for argument. The twentieth rule provides that all preliminary or interlocutory questions and all motions shall be argued for not exceeding one hour on each side, unless the Senate shall, by order, extend the time; whether that is intended to apply to the whole argument on each side, or to the arguments of each counsel who may address the court, is a question which the Chief Justice is at a loss to solve. In the present case he has allowed the argument to proceed without attempting to restrict it, and unless the Senate order otherwise he will proceed in that course. Mr. BINGHAM said:-It was not my purpose when I raised the question under the rule prescribed by the Senate, to touch in any way on the merits of any application which might be made for the extension of the time for the preparation of the trial. The only object I had in view, Mr. President, was to see whether the Senate were disposed to abide by its own rules, and by raising the question to remind the Senators of what they know that in this proceeding they are a rule and a law unto themselves. Neither the common iaw nor the civil law furnishes any rule whatever for the conduct of this trial, save it may be the rules which govern the matter of evidence. There is nothing more clearly settled in this country, and in that country whence we derive our laws generally, than the proposition which we have just stated, and hence it follows that the Senate shall prescribe rules for the conduct of the trial; and having prescribed rules, my associate managers and myself deem it important to inquire whether those rules, on the very threshold of these proceedings, were to be disreregarded and set aside. I may be pardoned for saying that I am greatly surprised at the hasty words which dropped from the lips of my learned and accomplished friend, Mr. Stanbery, who has just taken his seat that he failed to discriminate between the objection made here and the objection which might hereafter be made, for the motion for the continuance of the trial. But, Mr. President, there is nothing clearer-nothing better known to my learned and accomplished friend, than that the making up of the issue before any tribunal of justice and the trial are very distinct transactions. This is perfectly well understood. A very remarkable case in the State trials lies before me, where Lord Holt presided over the trial of Sir Richard Brown, Preston and others, for high treason; and when counsel appeared, as the gentlemen appear this morning in this court, to ask for a continuance, the answer which fell from the lips of the Lord Chief Justice perpetually was:-We are not to consider the question of the trial, until a plea be pleaded. Because, as his lordship very well remarked, it may happen that no trial will be required. Perchance you may plead guilty to the indictment, and so the rule lying before us contemplated. The last clause of it provides that if the defendant appears and shall plead guilty, there may be no further proceedings in the case; no trial about it. Nothing would remain to be done but to pronounce judgment under the Constitution. It is time enough for us to talk about trial wheu we have an issue. The rule is a plain one-a simple one, and I may be pardoned for saying that I fail to perceive anytning in rules ten and eleven, to which the learned counsel have referred, which in any kind of construction can be applied to limit the effect of the words in rule eight, to wit:-"That if the party fail to appear, either in person or by counsel, on the day named in the summons, the trial shall proceed on the plea of not guilty;" and further:-"That if failing on the day named in the summons, either in person or by attorney. he failed to answer the articles, the trial shall, nevertheless, proceed as on a plea of not guilty." When words are plain in written law there is an end of construction. They must be followed. The managers so thought when they appeared at this bar. All that they ask is that the rule be enforced-not a postponement for forty days, to be met at the end of that time, perhaps, with a dilatory plea and a motion, if you please, to quash the articles, or with & question raising the inquiry whether this is the Senate of the United States. It seems to me, if I may be pardoned in making one other remark, that in prescribing both these rules, that the summons shall issue to be returned on a certain day-given, as in this case, six days in advanceit was intended thereby to enable the party, on the day fixed for his appearance, to come to this bar and for saying, farther, what is doubtless known to every make his answer to those articles. I may be pardoned one within the hearing of my voice, that technical rules do in no way control, or limit or temper the action of this body; that under the plea of not guilty every conceivable defense which this party can make prepared by a competent tribunal at all-can be atto these articles-if they be articles at all-if they be tempted. Why, then, this delay of forty days to draw up an answer? What we desire to know on behalf of the House of Representatives-by whose authority we appear here is whether an answer is to be filed, in accordance with the rule, and if it be not filed, whether the rule itself is to be enforced by the Senate, and a plea of not guilty entered upon the accused? That is our inquiry. It is not my purpose to enter on the discussion at all as to the postponing of the day for the progress of the trial. My desire is for the present to see whether, under this rule and by force of this rule, we can obtain an issue. The Chief Justice-Senators, the counsel for the President submit a motion that forty days be allowed for the preparation of his answer. The rule requires that as every question shall be taken without debate, you who are in favor of agreeing to that motion say yea. Senator EDMUNDS (Vt.) rising, said:-Mr. President, on that subject, I submit the following order:— "Ordered, That the respondent file his answer to the articles of impeachment on or before the first day of April replication thereto within three days thereafter, and that next, and that the managers of the impeachment file their the matter stand for trial on Monday, April 6, 1868." Senator MORTON (Ind.)-I move that the Senate retire for the purpose of consultation. Mr. BINGHAM-I am instructed by the managers to request that the Senate shall pass on the motion under the eighth rule, and reject the application to defer the day of answer. The Chief Justice-The Chief Justice will regard the motion of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Edmunds) as an amendment to the motion submitted by the counsel for the President. Senator CONKLING (N. Y.)-What is to become of the motion of the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Morton). Senator SUMNER-What was the motion of the Senator from Indians? Senator CONKLING-That the Senate retire for the purpose of consultation. Senator SUMNER-That is the true motion. The Chief Justice put the question and declared it carried, and the Senate then retired from the Chamber at 2 o'clock P. M. The galleries thinned considerably while the court held a long consultation, and the floor presented very much the appearance of a county court room, when the jury had retired, and the court was in recess, not half the House and other occupants of the floor remaining, and they scattered in knots among the Senators' seats and elsewhere. The managers, meanwhile, occasionally consulted or pored over books bound in law calf. Mr. Stevens discussed with ap parent relish some raw oysters brought him from the refectory. The President pro tem., Mr. Wade, was on the floor during most of the time occupied by the consultation. At seven minutes past 4 o'clock the Senators reentered and took their seats, when order was restored. The Chief Justice said:-The motion made by connsel is overruled, and the Senate adopts the order which will be read by the Secretary. The Secretary read the order as follows:Ordered, That the respondent answer to the articles of impeachment on or before Monday, the 23d day of March instant. The Replication. Mr. BINGHAM-Mr. President, I am instructed by the managers to submit to the consideration of the Senate the following motion, and ask that it may be reported by the Secretary. The Secretary read as follows: Ordered, That before the filing of replication by the ma nagers on the part of the House of Representatives, the trial of Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, upon the articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives, shall proceed forthwith. The Chair put the question, and said the yeas appeared to have it; but the yeas and nays were demanded, with the following result: YEAS.-Messrs. Cameron, Cattell, Chandler. Cole, Conklin, Conness, Corbett, Drake, Ferry, Harlan, Howard, Morgan, Morton, Nye. Patterson (N. H.), Pomeroy, RaniBev. Ross, Stewart, Sumner, Thayer, Tipton, Williams, Wilson and Yates-25. NAYS.-Messrs. Anthony, Bayard, Buckalew, Davis' So the order was not agreed to. Mr. SHERMAN offered the following order, which was read: Ordered, That the trial of the articles of impeachment shall proceed on the 6th of April next. Mr. HOWARD-I hope not, Mr. President. Mr. WILSON moved to amend by making it the 1st instead of the 6th of April next. Mr. BUTLER-I would like to inquire of the Pre sident of the Senate if the managers on the part of the House of Representatives have a right to be heard upon this matter? The Chief Justice-The Chair is of opinion that the managers have a right to be heard. Speech of Gen. Butler. Mr. BUTLER-Mr. President and gentlemen of the Senate: However ungracious it may seem on the part of the managers representing the House of Representatives, and thereby representing the people of the United States, in pressing an early trial of the accused, yet our duty to those who send us here - representing their wishes, speaking in their behalf and by their command-the peace of the country, the interests of the people, all seem to require that we should urge the speediest possible trial. Among the reasons why the trial is sought to be delayed, the learned counsel who appear for the, accused have brought to the attention of the Senate precedents in early days. We are told that railroad speed was not to be used on this trial. Sir, why not; railroads have effected everything else in this world; telegraphs have brought places together that were thousands of miles apart. It takes infinitely less time, if I may use so strong an expression, to bring a witness from California now than it took to send to Philadelphia for one in the case. of the trial of Judge Chase; and, therefore, we must not shut our eyes to the fact that there are railroads and there are telegraphs to give the accused the pri vilege of calling his counsel together, and of getting answers from any witnesses that he may have summoned and to bring them here. It should have an important bearing on the course we are to take that I respectfully submit is not to be overlooked. Railroads and telegraphs have changed the order of things. In every other business of life we recognize that fact, why should we not in this? Passing from that which is but an incident-a detail, perhaps-will you allow me to suggest that the ordinary course of justice, the ordinary delays of courts, the ordinary term given in ordinary cases, for men to answer when called before courts of justice, have no application to this case. Not even, sir, when cases are heard and determined before the Supreme Court of the United States, are the rules applicable to this particular case, for this reason, if for no other, that when ordinary trials are had, when ordinary questions are examined at the bar of any court of justice, there is no danger to the Commonwealth in delay; the Republic may take no detriment if the trial is delayed. To give the accused time interferes with nobody; to give him indulgence hurts no one-may help him. But here the House of Representatives have presented at the bar of the Senate, in the most solemn form, the chief rulerof the nation, and they say-and they desire your judgment upon the accusation-that he has usurped power which does not belong to him; that he is, at the same time, breaking the laws solemnly enacted by you, and those that have sent you here-by the Congress of the United States-and that he still proposes so to do. Sir, who is the criminal? I beg pardon of the counsel for the respondent, he is the Chief Executive of the nation! When I have said that, I have taken out from all rule this trial, because, I submit with deference, sir, that for the first time in the history of the world has a nation brought its ruler to the bar of its highest court, under the rules and forms provided by the Constitution; above all rule and all analogy-all likeness to an ordinary trial ceases there. I say that the Chief Executive, who is the commander of your armies; who claims that command; who controls, through his subordinates, your Treasury; who controls your navy; who controls all elements of power; who controls your foreign relations; who may complicate, in an hour of passion or prejudice, the whole nation by whom he is arraigned as the respondent at your bar; and mark me, sir, I respectfully submit that the very question here at issue this day, this hour, is whether he shall control, beyond the reach of your laws and outside of your laws, the army of the United States? That is the one great question here at issue-whether he shall set aside your laws; set aside the decrees of the Senate and the laws enacted by Congress; setting aside every law; claiming the Executive power only that he shall control the great military arm of this government, and control it, if he pleases, to your ruin and the ruin of the country. Again, sir, do we not know, may we not upon this motion assume, the fact that the whole business of the War Department of this country pauses until this trial goes on. He will not recognize, as we all know, the Secretary of War whom this body has declared the legal Secretary of War, and whom Congress, under a power legitimately exercised, has recognized as the legal Secretary of War; and do we not know, also, that while he has appointed a Secretary of War ad interim, he dare not recognize him, and this day, and this hour, the whole business of the War Department stops. Mr. Butler reminded the Senate that a gallant officer of the army, if confirmed by them to-day, who, by right, ought to have his commission and his pay commence immediately his appointment reached him, would have to wait if this motion prevailed for forty days, as long as it took God to destroy this world by a flood (laughter), and for what? I wonder that the intelligent and able counsel might delay the trial still longer when one department of the government was already thrown into confusion while they were blamed. But, he continned, that is not all. The great pulse of the nation beats in perturbation whiie this strictly constitutional but wholly anomalous proceeding goes on, and it passes fitfully when we pause, and goes forward when we go forward, and the very question today in this country is arising out of the desire of men to have business interests settled, to have prosperity return, to have the spring open as auspiciously under our laws as it will under the laws of nature. I say the very pulse of the nation beats here, and beating fft. fully requires us to still it by bringing this respondent to justice, from which God give him deliverance, if he so deserves, at the earliest possible hour consistent with his right. Mr. Butler then urged that while all the time shown to be necessary when the case comes to trial should be granted, no time should be fixed in advance. They should not presume in advance that the respondent could not get ready. Let him put in his answer, and then, if he showed the absence of necessary witnesses, the managers would either acquiesce in a proper delay or admit all that he sought to prove by the testimony. He would not deny the respondent a single indulgence consistent with public safety. They asked no more privileges than they were willing to grant to him. The great act for which he was to be brought to the bar was committed on the 21st of February. He knew its consequences just as well as they did. The House of Representatives had dealt with it on the 22d. On the 4th of March they had brought it before the Senate, with what they called its legal consequences; and now they were here ready for trial-instant trial. Some Judges had sat twenty-two hours in the day on the trial of great crimes; and they, God giving them strength, would sit here every day and every hour, to bring this trial to a conclusion. He knew exactly what he had done; they had granted him more time, and now they ask that be should be prepared then to meet them. He hoped hereafter no man anywhere would say that the charges upon which Andrew Johnson was arraigned were frivolous, unsubstantial, or of no effect, when counsel of the highest respectability, who would not, for their lives, say what they did not believe, told the Senate that with all their legal ability they could not put in an answer to the charges, so grave were they, in less than forty days, yea fifty days. Mr. Butler concluded after recapitulating the considerations which he thought ought to influence them in deciding this question by reminding them that a speedy termination of the trial either way would bring quiet to the country, and praying them not to decide this question, upon which the life of the nation depends the greatest question that ever came before any body-on any the ordinary analogies of law. Mr. NELSON, of counsel for the President, said:I have endeavored, in coming here, to divest my mind of the idea that we are engaged in a political discussion, and have tried to be impressed ouly with the thought that we appear before a tribunal sworn to try the great question which has been submitted for its consideration, and to dispense justice and equity between two of the greatest powers, if I may so express myself, of the land. I have come here ander the impression that there is much force in the observation which the honorable manager (Butler) made, that this tribunal is not to be governed by the rigid rules of law. but is disposed to allow the largest liberty, both to the honorable managers on the part of the House of Representatives and the counsel on behalf of the Pre sident. I have supposed, therefore, that there was nothing improper in our making an appeal to this tribunal for time to answer the charges preferred, and that, instead of that appeal being denied, much more liberality would be extended by the Senate of the nation, sitting as a court of impeachment, thin we could ever expect on a trial in a court of common law. It is not my purpose, Mr. Chief Justice, to enter at this stage into a discussion of the charges, although it would seem to be invited by one or two of the observations made by the honorable manager (Butler). He has told you that it is right in a case of this kind to proceed with railroad speed, and that in consequence of the great improvements of the age, the investigation of this case can be proceeded with much more speedily than it could have been a few years ago. The charges made here are charges of the greatest importance. The questions which will have to be considered by this honorable body are questions in which not only the representatives of the people are concerned, but in which the people themselves have the deepest and most lasting interest. Questions are raised here in reference to differences of opinion between the Executive of the nation and the honorable Congress, as to their constitutional powers, and as the rights which they respectively claim. These are questions of the utmost gravity, and are questions which, in the view that we enter tain of them, should receive a most deliberate consideration on the part of the Senate. I trust that I may be pardoned by the Chief Justice and Senators for making an allusion to a statute which has long been in force in the State from which I come. I only do it for the purpose of making a brief argument by analogy. We have a statute in Tennessee which has been long in force, and which provides that where a bill of indictment is found against an individual, and he knows that, owing to excitement or other cause, he may not have a fair trial at the first term of the court, his case shall be continued to the next term of the court. The mode of proceeding at law is not a mode of railroad speed. If there is anything under heaven, Mr. Chief Justice, which gives to judicial proceedings a claim to the consideration and approbation of mankind, it is the fact that justice and courts hasten slowly in the investigation of cases presented to them. Nothing is done or presumed to be done in a state of excitement. Every moment is allowed for calm and mutual deliberation. Courts are in the habit of investigating cases slowly, carefully, cautiously, and when they form their judgment and pronounce their opinions, and when these opinions are published to the world they meet the sanction of judicial and legal minds everywhere, and meet the approbation and confidence of the people before whom they are promul gated. If this is so, and this is one of the proudest characteristics in the form of judicial proceedings in courts, so much more ought it be so in an exalted and honorable body like this, composed of the greatest men of the United States-of Senators revered and honored by their countrymen, and who from their position are preserved free from reproach and to be calm in their deliberations. I need not tell you, sir, nor need I tell these honors. ble Senators whom I address on this occasion-many of whom are lawyers, and many of whom have been clothed, in times past, with the judicial ermine-that in the courts of law the vilest criminal who ever was arraigned in the United States has been given time to prepare for trial; and right not only to be heard by counsel, no matter how great his crime may be, the malignity of the offense with which he has been charged, still he is tried according to the forms of law, and is allowed to have counsel. Continuances are granted to him, aud if he is unable to obtain justice, time is given him and all manner of preparation is allowed him. If this is so in courts of common law where they are fettered and bound by the iron rule to which I have alluded, how inuch more so ought it to be in a great tribunal like this, which does not follow the forms of law, and which is seeking alone to obtain justice. It is necessary for me to remind vou and the honorable Senators, that upon a page of fooiscap there may be a bit of indictment prepared against an individual which might require weeks in the investigation. It is unnecessary to remind this honorable body that it is an easy thing to make charges, but that it is often a laborious and difficult thing to make a defense against those accusations. Reasoning from the analogy found by such proceedings at law, I earnestly maintain before this honorable body that suitable time should be given us to answer the charges preferred here. A large number of the charges involve an inquiry running back to the very foundation of the government; they invoive an examination of the precedents that have been sanctioned by different administra tions; they involve, in short, the most extensive range of inquiry; and the last two charges presented by the House of Representatives, if I may be pardoned for using an expression of the view I entertain of them, open up Pandora's box, and will cause the investigation as to the great differences of opinion which existed between the President and Congress-au inquiry which, so far as I can perceive, will be at most inter minable in its character. Now, what do we ask here for the President of the United States, the highest officer in this land? We ask simply that he may be allowed time for his defense. On whose judgment is he to rely in relation to that? He must, in a great part, rely on the judgment of his counsel, to whom he has entrusted his defense. We, who are professionally responsible, have asserted, in the presence of this Senate, in the face of the na tion and of the whole world, that we believe we will require the number of days to prepare the President's answer, which was stated in the proposition submitted to the Senate. Such is still our opinion. Are these grave charges to be rushed through the Senate, sitting as a judicial tribunal, in hot haste, and with railroad speed, and without giving the President an opportunity to answer them-that same opportunity which you would give to the meanest criminal? I do not believe, Mr. Chief Justice and honorable Senators, that you will hesitate one moment in giving us all the time that we deem necessary for preparing our defense, and what may be necessary to enable this body judiciously, carefully, deliberately and cautionsly, and with a view of its accountability not only to its constituents, but to posterity, to decide this case. I have no doubt that the honorable Senators, in justice to themselves and in justice to the great land which they represent, will endeavor to conduct this investigation in a manner that will stamp the impress of honor and justice upon them and upon their proceedings, not only now, but in all time to come, after all of us shall have passed away from the stage of human action. Mr. Chief Justice, this is an exalted tribunal. I say it in no spirit of compliment, but because I feel it. I feel that there is no more exalted tribunal that could be convened under the sun, and I may say, in answer to an observation of one of the honorable managers, that I, for one, as an American citizen, feel proud that we have assembled here to-day, and assembled under the circumstances which have brought us together. It is one of the first instances in the history of the world in which the ruler of a people has been presented by a portion of the representatives of the people for trial before a Senate sitting as a judicial tribunal. While that is so, it is equally true on the other hand that the President, through his counsel, comes here and submits himself to the jurisdiction of this court-submits himself calmly, peaceable and with a confident reliance on the justice of the honorable Senate which is to hear his case. Mr. Chief Justice-I sincerely hope that the resolution offered by the Senator from Ohio will meet the approval of this honorable body. I hope that time will be given, and that these proceedings which in all time to come. will be quoted as a precedent, will be conducted with that gravity, that dignity, and that decorum which are fit and becoming in the representatives of a free and great people. Senator CONKLING submitted, as an amendment, the following: Ordered, That unless otherwise ordered by the Senate for cause shown, the trial of the pending impeachment shall be proceeded with immediately after the replication shall be filed. The Chief Justice decided the amendment out of order as an amendment to an amendment offered by Senator Wilson. Senator WILSON withdrew his amendment so that Senator Conkling's amendment to the motion of Senator Sherman might be in order. Mr. BINGHAM said, I am instructed by the managers to say, that the proposition just suggested by the Honorable Senator from New York, is entirely satisfactory to the managers on the part of the House. and to say further, that we believe it is in perfect accord with the precedents in this country. The Senate will, doubtless, remember, that in the trial of the Chase case, when a day was fixed for the trial, the Senate adopted an order which was substantially the same as now suggested. It was as follows: "Ordered, That the 4th day of February next shall be the day for receiving the answer and proceeding on the trial of impeachment against Samuel Chase." If nothing further had been said touching the original proposition, we would have been content and satisfied to leave the question, without further remark, to the decision of the Senate; but in view of what has been said, we beg leave to respond that we are chargeable with no indecent haste when we ask that no unuecessary delay shall interpose between the people and the trial of a man who has been charged with having violated the greatest trust ever committed to a single person; trusts which involve the highest interests of the whole people; trusts which involve the peace of the whole country; trusts which involve in some sense the success of this last great experiment of republican government on earth. We may be pardoned, further, for saying that it strikes us with somewhat of surprise, without intending the slightest possible disrespect to any member of this honorable body, that any proposition should be entertained for a continuance in a trial like this when no formal application has been made by the accused himself. To be sure, a motion was interposed here to-day, in the face of the rules and of the law of this body, for leave to file an answer at the end of forty days. The Senate has disposed of that motion, and in a manner, we venture to say, satisfactory to the whole country, as it is certainly satisfactory to the Representatives of the people at this bar. And now, sir, that being disposed of, and the Senate having determined the day on which answer shall be filed, we submit, with all due respect to the Senate that it is bu jtust to the people of the country that we shall await the incoming of that answer and the replicasion thereto by the Representatives of the people, and then see and know what colorable excuse will be offered either by the President accused in his own person, or through his representatives, why this trial would be delayed a single hour. If he be innocent of those grave accusations, the truth will soon be ascertained by this enlightened body, and he has the right, in the event of the facts so appearing, to a speedy deliverance, while the country has a right to a speedy determination of this most important question. If, on the other hand, he be guilty of those grave and serious charges, what man is there, within this body or outside of it, ready to say that he should, for a day or an hour longer, disgrace the high position which has been held hitherto only by the noblest and most enlightened and most trustworthy of the land? We think that the executive power of this nation should only be represented in the hands of the men who are faithful to these great trusts of the people. This issue has been made with the President of the United States, and while we admit that there should be no indecent haste, we do demand in the name of the people, most respectfully, that there shall be no unnecessary delay, and no delay at all, unless good cause be shown for delay in the mode and manner hitherto observed in proceedings of this kind. Senator JOHNSON inquired whether there was any period fixed within which replication was to be filed ? Mr. BINGHAM replied that replication could only be filed with the consent, and after consultation with the House; but he had no doubt that it would be done within one or two days after answer was filed. Senator CONKLING called for the enforcement of the eighteenth and twenty-third rules, requiring motions to be voted on without debate. The Chief Justice ruled that debate was not in order. Senator JOHNSON said he had simply been making an inquiry, The question being on Senator Conkling's amendment to Senator Sherman's motion, the yeas and nays were taken, and resulted:-Yeas, 40; nays, 10, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Anthony, Cameron, Cattell, Chandler, Cole, Conkling, Conness, Corbett, Drake, Edmunds. Ferry, Fessenden, Fowler, Frelinghuysen, Grimes, Harlan, Henderson, Howard, Howe, Morgan, Morrill (Me.). Morrill (Vt.), Morton, Nye, Patterson (N. H.), Pomeroy, Ramsey, Ross, Sherman, Sprague, Stewart, Sumner, Thayer, Tipton, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Willey. Williams, Wilson and Yates. NAYS-Messrs, Bayard, Buckalew, Davis, Dixon, Hendricks, McCreery, Patterson (Tenn.), Saulsbury and Vickers. Senator SHERMAN'S motion, as amended, was then agreed to; so it was ordered that unless otherwise ordered by the Senate, for cause shown, the trial of the pending impeachment shall proceed immediately after replication shall be filed. On motion of Senator HOWARD, it was ordered that the Senate, sitting as a Court of Impeachment, adjourn until the 23d of the present month, at one o'clock in the afternoon. PROCEEDINGS OF MONDAY, MARCH 23. The choice seats in the gallery were secured at an early hour by the ladies, who occupied, at the opening of the Senate, about three-fourths of the space allotted to the public, as on the occasion of the organization of the Senate into a court. The floor was arranged as before. The Chaplain again invoked a blessing upon those now coming to the consideration of grave and momentous matters relating to both individual and to the national welfare, praying that God would preside over this high council, and that justice be done in the name of God, and of all the people of this great nation. The Trial. At half-past twelve o'clock the Chair announced that according to rule all legislative and executive business would cease, and directed the Secretary of the Senate to notify the House. Mr. TRUMBULL (Ill.) called for the reading of the rule, saying that he understood that one o'clock was the hour appointed, The rule was read providing that on the day set apart for the trial the Senate shall cease Executive business and legislation, and proceed to the trial of the impeachment. Mr. EDMUNDS (Vt.) called attention to a subsequent order introduced by Mr. Howard, of the Committee of Seven, adjourning the court until one o'clock to-day. This, he said, was the day set apart for receiving the answer, not for proceeding to the trial. Several Senators suggested to leave it to the decision of the Chair. The Chair decided that the rule was imperative, and business must now cease. Mr. EDMUNDS respectfully appealed from the decision of the Chair. The Chair announced the question to be, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate, but at the suggestion of Mr. TRUMBULL, Mr. Edmunds withdrew the appeal, and the Secretary of the Senate was again directed to notify the House that the Senate was ready to proceed with the trial of the impeachment. During the interreguum Mr. Stevens entered quietly at a side door, and took his seat at the manager's table. Chief Justice Chase Enters. At 1 P. M. the President pro tem. vacated the chair, the Chief Justice entered by the side door te the left of the chair, and called the Senate to order. The Sergeant-at-Arms made the usual proclamation commanding silence, whereupon the managers appeared at the door. The Sergeant-at-Arms announced "the managers of the impeachment on the part of the House of Representatives," and the Chief Justice said, "The manágers will take the seats assigned by the Senate." Messrs. Bingham and Boutwell led the way up the aisle, and they took their seats. In the meantime Messrs. Stanbery, Curtis, Nelson, Evarts and Groesbeck seated themselves at their table in the order named, Mr. Stanbery occupying the extreme right. The Sergeant-at-Arms then announced "the House of Representatives," and the members of the House appeared, preceded by Mr. Washburne, on the arm of Mr. McPherson, Clerk of the House, and took their seats outside the bar. By direction of the Chief Justice, the Secretary of the Senate then read the minutes of the proceedings of Friday, the 13th inst. Mr. DOOLITTLE (Wis.) was called by the Clerk, and came forward and took the oath. Ordered, That the Court of Impeachment for the trial of the President cannot be legally and constitutionally formed while the Senators from the States aforesaid are thus excluded from the Senate, and which objection continues until Senators from those States are permitted to take their seats in the Senate, subject to all constitutional exceptions and objections to their return and qualification severally. Senator HOWARD-Mr. President The Chief Justice-The question must be decided without debate. Senator HOWARD-I object to the receiving of the paper. Senator CONNESS (Cal.)-I desire to submit a motion which will meet the case. I move that the motion be rot received, upon which I call for the yeas and nays. Senator HOWE (Wis.)-I rise to submit a question of order. The Chief Justice-The Senator will state his point of order. Senator HOWE-I would ask if the motion offered by the Senator from Kentucky be in order? The Chief Justice-The motion comes before the Senate in the form of a motion, submitted by a member of the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment. decisions shall be made and had by yeas and nays, The twenty-third rule requires that all the orders and which shall be entered on the record, and without debate, subject, however, to the operation of rule seven. The seventh rule requires the presiding officer to, in the first instance, submit to the Senate, without a divison, all questions of evidence and incidenial questions, but the same shall, on demand of one-fifth of the members present, be decided by yeas and nays. The question then, being on a proposition submitted by a Senator under the twenty-third rule, it is in order. Mr. CONNESS-Mr. President, is the motion submitted by me in order? The Chief Justice-No sir. The call for the yeas and nays were ordered, and voting yea. Messrs. Saulsbury, Bayard and Wade did they were called. Messrs. Davis and McCreery only not vote. So the motion was not agreed to. Mr. STANBERY then rose and said-Mr. Chief Justice, in obedience to the order of this honorable court, dent should be filed to-day, we have it ready. The made at the last session, that the answer of the Presicounsel for the President, abandoning all other business-some of us leaving our courts, our cases and our clients have devoted every hour to the consideration of this case. The labor has been incessant. We have devoted, as I say, not only every hour ordinarly devoted to business, but many required for necessary rest and recreation have been consumed in it. It is a matter of regret that the court did not allow us more time for preparation; nevertheless, we hope that the answer will be found in all respects sufficient. Such as it is, we are now ready to read and file it. Mr. CURTIS proceeded to read the answer. The President's Answer. To the Senate of the United States sitting as a court of impeachment for the trial of Andrew Johnson, President of the United States. The answer of the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, to the articies of impeachment. exhibited against him by the House of Representatives of the United States. Answer to article 1. For answer to the first article he says that Edwin M. Stanton was appointed Secretary for the Department of War on the 15th day of January, 1862, by Abraham Lincoln, then President his Presidency, and was commissioned according to of the United States, during the first term of the Constitution and the laws of the United States to hold said office during the pleasure of the Presi Senator DAVIS (Ky.) said-Mr. Chief Justice, I rise dent; that, the office of Secretary for the Departto make the same proposition to this court that I ment of War was created by an act of the First made to the Senate. I think now is the appropriate Congress in its first session, passed on the 7th day of time, before the Senate proceeds to make up the case. August, A. D. 1789, and in and by that act it was proI, therefore, submit to the court a motion in writing.partment of War shall perform and execute such vided and enacted that the said Secretary for the De The Secretary read as follows: Mr. Davis, a member of the Senate in the Court of Impeachment, moved the court to make this order: That the Constitution having invested the Senate with the sole power to try the articles of impeachment of the President of the United States, preferred by the House of Representatives, and having provided that the Senate shall be composed of two Senators from each State, to be chosen by the Legislature thereof; and the States of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana and Florida, having each chosen two Senators who have been excluded from their seats respectively: duties as shall from time to time be enjoined on and intrusted to him by the President of the United States, agreeably to the Constitution, relative to the subjects within the scope of the said department; and furthermore, that the said Secretary shall conduct the business of the said department in such a manner as the President of the United States shall from time to time order and instruct; and this respondent, further answering, says that, by force of the act aforesaid and by reason of his appointment, the said Stanton became the principal officer in one of the Executive |