The Sun.
London, England, 1867-12-18 00:00:00

THE LAST OF IMPEACHMENT.

The impeachment of the President has, thank
Heaven ! come to a final and ignominious end. By
a curious and unexplained change of opinion on the
part of Mr. Churchill, of New York, who joined
Williams, Lawrence, Thomas, and Boutwell, the
latter gentleman was able to lay before the House
the report of the majority in favour of impeach-
ment. Whatever may have been Mr. Churchill's
reasons, there can be little doubt that he has ren-
dered good service in swinging round, as the ques-
tion has now come fairly before the House ; and the
millstone, hanging round the Republican neck, has
been shaken off. The committee consisted of nine
members, seven of whom were Republican. Five
reported in favour of impeachment. Mr. Wilson
and Mr. Woodbridge, both lawyers, dissented from
the rest of the party; and Mr. Marshall and Mr.
Eldridge, the Democrats on the committee, de-
fended Mr. Johnson, and denounced the proceed-
ings of the majority. The majority report ex-
tended over twelve closely-written columns, while
one of the minority reports fills seventeen and a half
of those of the New Fork Times. Mr. Williams, of
Pennsylvania, is responsible for the argumentative
portion of the majority report, and not Mr. Bout-
well. The style is heavy and turgid : one of the
sentences takes away the breath, even to look at it.
Considering that the business of the committee was
to accumulate evidence, &ad not to argue as par-
tisans or counsel on the evidence, this portion of the
document is not only bad in style, but bad in taste.
The testimony accompanying the reports would be
strong if it derived force from the weight of
paper which it covers. But it is like some very
thin soup deluged with water, or grog which
has only the smell of rum about it, which
the hungriest pauper and the thirstiest sailor
might disdainfully reject. Not a particle of in-
formation has been given to the country, except,
that all that could, has long ago been said against
the President. The grounds for the Impeachment
are mainly these. That he did not convene Con-
gress on the surrender of the rebel armies, but on
his own responsibility recognised State Governments
in the South —that he appointed traitors to office,
and denied the right of Congress to reconstruct the
South ; that he vetoed Congressional measures,
removed loyal persons from office, and abused the
pardoning power. The gross charge brought
against Mr. Johnson by Mr. Ashley, that he was
privy to the assassination of Mr. Lincoln, is sus-
tained by no evidence except that of the perjurer
Canover. Of the value of that evidence Mr. Ashley
has had a sample. The only interest attaching to
the Report is the evidence extracted from some of
the most prominent men in the States. General
Grant's answers were quick and blunt, and in
matter are much less important than the public ex-
pected. He said as little as he could, and that little
in no way affected his political position. He was
rather badgered by the members of the committee,
but they failed to extract much out of him. " Who
is being tried ?" he exclaimed angrily, when pressed
on a point beyond endurance. his testimony has
raised him still higher in the estimation of the
country. At the moment of victory, in opposition
both to the people and to the President, he took the
true view of the position, confining himself strictly
to his military duties, and not thrusting, as M'Clel-
lan had done, obtrusive counsels on the Cabinet.
The moderation and good sense shown by the
General, his obedience to the orders of his superior,
the simple and single-minded way in which he dis-
charged his duties, and the truth with which he
discerned them, as shown in this testimony, will
endear him still more to the American people. Consi-
dering the magnitude of his success and the bril-
liancy of his military career, he displayed at the trying
moment a marvellous modesty and a self-possession,
which we believe pecularly fit him for high office
coupled. with his magnanimity and kindness of heart.
He has been accused of ruthlessly sacrificing men
to attain a military object ; but his examination
before the committee shows him to have stood as a
bulwark between Northern vengeance and the cap-
, T I syby n ruN gra
seizing on the happy moment preserfted 'tte fine
feeling manifested in the South immediately on the
close of the rebellion, which offered an opportunity
for Reconstruction, which has passed away, we fear,
for ever. No hammering of the committee could
extract a spark from the General damaging to his
chief ; and we have little doubt that Grant's evi-
dence added to the large majority by which the
motion for impeachment was defeated. Indeed the
tendency of all he said went to prove that Mr.
Johnson's " My Policy" was, in truth, that of his
predecessor, Mr. Lincoln, and that the minority
were justified in stating that acts for which Mr.
Lincoln was clamorously appauded are deemed high
crimes in Mr. Johnson. When asked whether the
scheme of Reconstruction was the President's own
creation, Mr. Seward replied that it "grew during
the Administration of Mr. Lincoln and the Adminis-
tration of Mr. Johnson, and it was modified from
time to time by the circumstances as they occurred."
Mr. Seward thought he was the author of the
first plan of reorganisation (in the case of Ten-
nessee). Mr. Johnson subsequently adopted it.
He had seen no indication on Mr. Johnson's part
to prevent the trial of Jefferson Davis, but the
contrary. Mr. Stanton stated that no member of
the Cabinet ever expressed a doubt of the authority
of the President to recognise the Southern State
Governments, without the aid of Congress. He
(Stanton) fully approved President Johnson's plan.
He (Stanton) had himself made the rough draft of
Mr. Lincoln's plan, which was afterwards adopted
by President Johnson, with no important changes.
The question of extending the suffrage came up,
and there were differences of opinion, but the Cabi-
net finally agreed with Mr. Johnson. After the
adoption of the North Carolina proclamation it was
not again discussed in the Cabinet.
Secretary M'Culloch testified that the revenues
were not as well collected as if the original appoin-
tees had been allowed to retain their offices, and
gave an account of some removals by order of the
President. Commissioner Rollins gave similar tes-
timony as to the internal revenue service, said that
few of the removals had been for dishonesty or
incapacity, and that the removals by the President
had caused the loss of several millions of dollars.
There were men in the service whom he had re-
quested to be removed as many as six times. The
Secretary always made removals when he had evi-
dence of their inefficiency. In most districts where
the officers had been changed a loss had occurred.
In 240 collection districts 150 assessors had been
removed. In States where removals were made,
the best men were removed.

Chief Justice Chase said he had not been un-
willing to try Jeff Davis, but he did not think it
right to do it while military rule continued in his
district in Virginia, and the President declined to
issue a special proclamation removing such rule.
(It continues now, just as it did then, but the
Chief Justice does not adhere to the objection.)
Previously he had declined to give the President his
opinion as to whether Davis should be tried by a
military or civil court, as he did not think that a
matter for himself (Chase) to theorise about.
IVhen he held court he should try everybody
brought before him. _ _

Attorney-General Speed testified that the prose-
cution of Davis was entrusted to him, and the
Pr.sident instructed him to bring him to trial as
speedily as it could be done. Ile said—." I em-
ployed counsel to aid in the prosecution, and we
all came to the conclusion that unless the Judge of
the Supreme Court could preside he should not be
tried ; that the case was one over which he should
preside; and I had great disinclination to have
Davis tried before Underwood; I would not con-
sent to it at all; the Chief Justice declined to go
there, because the country was not so quiet as
he desired, and because military rule prevailed
there. So long as I was in office I opposed a
trial before Judge Underwoud, and as Mr.
Chase would not or could not go there the trial
did not come off. A question was made about
trying Davis in Kentucky. That I opposed, be-
cause it would have to be a case of constructive
presence in liQutucky, The question Wm mooted

as to trying him in Pennsylvania, Indiana, or
Ohio, in connection with John Morgan's raid; but
I opposed his being tried in any State except where
he had been actually present. Then it was said that
we could appoint a judge in Judge Caton's place
and try him in East Tennessee. That was anxiously
considered, and on a consideration of it by the Pre'
sident, with myself, we both concurred that it would
not look well for the President to make a judge to
try Davis at the President's own home and in his
own State. I violently opposed his trial for the
crime of treason before a military commission, and
so the thing stood until I left office. I must sq
that. I was, on these grounds, the principal cause of
the non-trial of Davis."

Lafayette C. Baker testified as to a letter of
Andrew Johnson to a Southern man, written ill
1864, giving advice to Davis and information about
the troops around Washington. Barker raid that
a son of Parson Brownlow hired a negro to steal the
letter from Johnson's table at Nashville, and that it
was given to him (Baker) by John W. Adamson, of
Nashville, to whom he afterwards returned it. The
letter was not produced, and Baker's account of the
contents is vague, and does not begin to sustain the
story that it was an offer of Johnson to join the re-
bellion if he could be Vice-President with Davis•
The rest of Baker's evidence concerns the notorious
Mrs. Cobb, and Baker says she confessed to an flu"
proper intimacy with the President. Her Word
would be worthless enough, and is not improved in
credibility by coming through Baker. Biker had
nothing else to tell.