The Sun.
London, England, 1868-05-25 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, MAY 25, 1868.

ROMAN AFFAIRS.

(From the Roman Correspondent of the Westminster Gazette.)

ROME, May 16

The impression that we are not to be left
long at peace which I mentioned last week,
and which many persons had gained from the
address of the Pope on the occasion of the
presentation of colours to the troops, continues
to prevail and spread. It is curious to remark
that while the parallel they draw between the
armed efforts of the Holy See in the days of
Pius V., and at the present time, holds good
to a great extent. It calls up, also, a strik-
ing contrast in the altered position of the
balance of political ascendancy. The Pius
of the sixteenth century had but to call on
the heads of the ancient dynasties of Europe
to find himself at the head of a procession of
kings and magnates who were followed into
the field by their people as a matter of course.
The Pius of the nineteenth century has no such
support. if certain sovereigns send him tokens
of adhesion it is in their individual capacity,
not as head of their states. It is the Catholic
people who now range themselves round the
Holy See, nor can their rulers hold them back.
We all know now how the French people sent
their army to its defence in spite of the wishes
of the most aristocratic of rulers. There is
not a country, how opposed soever its minis-
tration to the principles of the Papal Govern-
ment, which is not represented by its contin-
gent of volunteers to the Papal army. True,
its ranks are small compared with the vast
armaments of modern times, but then every
man is animated with the will and determina-
tion of a hero, and every man stands as the
representative of his village or commune ; if
he fall or fail, he will be replaced by any num-
ber of others as resolute as he. There is no
limit to the supply. Recruits have been arriv-
ing lately faster than ever. Among those of
this week is a party of very fine-looking young
Portuguese. So vast has it been necessary to
make the provision for lodging them, that a
report was strongly prevalent some days back
that 20,000 French were to arrive from Mar-
seilles, and people even went up to the station
in expectation of seeing them march in.
The • United States have promised a thou-
sand men, of whom 300 are readyto start under
the captainship of a Frenchman, De Nanteuil
by name. They are to form part of a distinct
corps to be commanded by General Carrol
Lewis of the Confederate army.
A company of the 2nd Battalion of Zouaves
displayed their prowess this week by captur-
ing and bringing into Rome a band of twelve
dangerous brigands who had for some time past
been worrying the Monticelli.
It is said it is the Holy Father's intention
to put up a monument at Monte Rotondo to
the men who fell in the Mentana campaign.
A Prussian sculptor, named Scheffer, has
just been arrested on a serious charge. It
seems that he has been an active agent for pro-
moting desertion among the German contin-
gent of the army ; he has a friend in the
Prussian Consulate, Schloesser by name, and
he abused the means of access to the bureau
of the Legation thus acquired, to procure a
number of passports duly stamped and signed,
with which he provided the men whom he had
previously bribed to desert.
The Carbinieri Esteri, on whom he practised,
are a very loyal corps, and though he was
successful in upwards of fifty cases, it was
not long before he came across men whose
mouths could not be closed by offers of gain.
There was another compromised in the same
affair, a Protestant minister, who used to give
reason to suspect his intentions at the time
when he was allowed to visit the wounded
prisoners in the hospitals. Finding their pro-
ceedings discovered, and the police on their
track, the latter made good his escape, but
Scheffer took refuge in the Legation, where
he kept himself closely concealed. The means
by which he was ultimately run to ground
forms quite a little romance. A note was sent
him in the name of a young person with
whom he maintained relations of no very re-
putable character, appointing a rendezvous to
meet her. As she was not sufficiently edu-
cated to be able to write, there was no diffi-
culty as to feigning her hand. The astute
trickster was thus himself hoaxed in turn,
and, instead of finding his mistress at the
appointed spot, he fell into the clutches of the
officer of the law. Schlcesser was naturally
suspected of complicity, and though he has
justified himself to the satisfaction of this Go-
vernment, it is probable his own will recall him
in token of indignation at the negligence of
which, to sav the lf• It, he h. •b.

y Le least, las been guilty.
I have already once or twice expressed
doubts of the possibility of the necessary work
being got through in time for the Council to
assemble this year. It is expected that on
SS. Peter and Paul's day it will be proclaimed
for the feast of the Immaculate Conception,
1869. L' Osservatore Cattolico, a Milan journal,
has opened a subscription at its office towards
defraying the expenses of the council : other
papers, I am told, are following this example.
The telegrams will have informed you already
of the death of Cardinal d'Andrea, which took
place on the night of the 14th. Though he
has been long out of health, this termination
was quite unexpected. He was born at Naples
in 1812, and created cardinal on his fortieth
birthday. The funerale is to be at the Chiesa
Nuova, and it is expected the Holy Father will
himself assist and pronounce the absolution.
This rather sudden death has proved a most
prolific subject of speculation for the bigoted
enemies of the Papacy, as well as of the idle
quidnuncs always glad of some new theory of
spiteful conjecture to season their gossip ; and
I can fancy I see their circles of wild talk ex-
panding over the surface of the whole sea of
European journalism for nine days to come.
It may not spread to England, for our writers
at home are more sober in their views, and
are generally confined by a matter-of-fact pub-
lic within the limits of probability. But it may
amuse you to hear some of the sinister sus-
picions a certain party have caught this op-
portunity for setting in circulation—romances
which seem to have escaped from the plot of
a sensation-piece of some second-class theatre.
First, then, it is suggested, with a knowing
look, " Does it not look odd, two such sudden
deaths within a few days—Count Crivelli and
Cardinal d'Andrea? Who would have thought,
a week ago, that both would be already num-
bered with the dead P . . ." " Very strange,"
echoes, another ; " there is something beneath
the surface here." Then there is a whisper
about Jesuits and poison, and the knot of news-
mongers disperse to scatter the welcome scan-
dal among congenial listeners. But mark the
self-contradiction•into which passion and pre-
judice hurry men ! If there were anything in
the suggested connection it would imply that
the two distinguished men in question had
been sent to their account by the same hand.
Yet could it have been to the interest of the
same party to destroy both the devoted ser-
vant of the Holy See, whose faithful loyalty
protected its interests so fearlessly, and the
alleged corypheus of alleged Liberal tenden-
cies in the Conclave ! And, besides, it is not
the first time we hear of Cardinal d'Andrea's
weak health. Has it not been the reason
adduced again and again for months and years
past for his absence from Rome, and from pub-
lic functions, and again for his but now pro-
jected journey to a climate better suited to
his complaint ? Do the party who invent the
calumnious report know that this was an ex-
cuse without foundation, and are they now
letting it out ? I do not say so, nor do I
think it. But their feigned surprise at the
fatal termination allows the question to be
asked. Enough, however, of this. English-
men will generally be found to believe much
more easily in death by pulinonary asphyxia
than by secret poisoning.
There has been a triduo held this week at
S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, commencing
on Tuesday, in honour of Sta. Maria Fran-
cesca delle cinque pidghe, who was canonized on
the centenary of St. Peter last year. The
little church was very elegantly draped ; the
whole interior, including the cupola, being

covered with ornamental hangings. On the
evening of each day the exterior was illumi-
nated, and concerted pieces performed by a
military band outside. The saint was a Neapo-
litan, born in 1715, and belonged to St. Peter
of Alcantara's reform of the third order of St.
Francis. Her life, though passed within the
limits of a dull home of humble condition, was
a model of the most heroic virtues exercised
in patience and silence, and hidden from the
admiration of the world.

The marriage of Prince Gaetano (Count
of Girgenti) with the Spanish Infanta, and
the betrothal of Prince Alfonso (Count of
Caserta) with his cousin, Antonietta, Prin-
cess of Trapani, leaves only unmarried of
the late Ferdinand IL's children the Count of
Bari, the little lad who may so often be seen
driving a pair of spirited ponies about Rome.
The remains of Count Crivelli are to be car-
ried to Bell'agio on Lake Como, a noble villa
belonging to his family, which is one of the
most distinguished in Milan, and counts seve-
ral names known to history, among others
Pope Urban 111. A considerable sum was
distributed in alms on the occasion of the
funeral function at Sta. Maria del' Anima.

Cardinal Borromeo took possession of his
titular church on Sunday, with the usual cere-
monial. Though commonly called S. Carlo al
Corso, it is dedicated in honour of the two
Milanese patrons —S. Ambrose and S. Charles;
and the Ambrosian hymn, which always closes
the function, seemed to belong to it on this
occasion of special right. Before leaving the
church his Eminence passed into the tribune
behind the altar to 'generate the heart of S.
Charles, which is preserved there.
The Academy of Archaeology resumed its
public meeting last week in presence of Cardi-
nals Barnabo, Bozzarri, Monaco, and Guidi,
Mgr. Tizzani, Cavaliere di Rossi, P. Tongiorgi,
and P. Garucci, lately returned from Spain.
The report was read by Comte Visconti, who
passed an elegant eulogium on the members
lost to the society during the past year, the
ex-King of Bavaria and igr. Pila, and pro-
posed Cardinal Berardi, Canon Fabriani, and
several others to be elected members of the
society. He then gave a very interesting ac-
count of the excavations at Ostia, Villa Cecca-
relli, and at the Marmorata, and announced
that Prince Torlonia has put at the disposition
of the Pope, in order to facilitate the works,
the land he holds on the bank of the Tiber
contiguous to the present diggings. P. Ferrari
read an elaborate paper on cuneiform inscrip-
tions.

The medal annually struck here in com-
memoration of the most important work of the
year's reign will record for 1867 Mentovani's
completion of Giovanni da Udine's decorations
in the Vatican Loggie.

There is no excuse for presenting such a monstrous
proposition as this to the Senate. The appellate ju-
risdiction of the Supreme Court is limited to
cases of law and equity, and under neither is im-
peachment embraced. These were the Manager's
words:—

"The gentleman from New York (Mr. Evarts) took
occasion to refer to the Fugitive Slave Bill of 1850, a bill
that was disgraceful to the Congress which enacted it ; a
bill that was in direct violation of the letter and spirit of
the Constitution ; a bill of which I can say at least, al-
though I doubt much whether the gentleman from New
York can, that it never found an advocate in me ; a bill
of which Mr. Webster said that in his judgmentit was un-
warranted by the Constitution ; a bill which offered a
bribe out of the common treasury of the nation to every
magistrate who sat in judgment oa the right of fleeing
bondman to that literty which belonged to maa when
God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and he
became a living soul ;' a bill which offered a reward to the
ministers of justice to sharpen the judgment of the poor;
a bill which, suiting the conscience of the American people
and the conscience of the civilized world, made it a crime
to give shelter to the houseless or a cup of water to him
who was ready to perish ; a bill enacted for the purpose
of sustaining that crime of crimes, that sum of all
vi)lauies, which made merchandise of immorta

which transformed a man into a chattel, a thin

trade into what, for want of a better name, wo call a
slave, with no acknowledged right in the present, wit

hope of inheritage in the great hereafter, and to whose
darkened soul the universe was voiceless and God him-
self seemed silent.; a bill under the direct violation of
which that horrible tragedy was enacted within our own
commonwealth, within the sight, Mr. Chief Justice, of
your own beautiful city, when Margaret Gardner, with
her babe lashed upon her breast, pursued by the officers
of the law, iu her wild frenzy forgot her mother's affection
in the joy she felt at sending before the appointed time by
her own hand the spotless soul of her child back to her
God who gave it, rather than allow it to be tossed back
into the hell of human bondage under American law ;
bill, nevertheless, by the American people even on that
day when Anthony Burns walked in chains under the
shadow of Bunker Hill where ' every turf beneath your
feet is a soldier's sepulchre,' and' where sleep the first
just martyrs in the cause of American independence, to
be tried before a magistrate in a temple surrounded it-
self with chains and guarded with bayonets, and yet the
people stood by and said Let the law be executed until
it be repealed.' Talk to me about the American people
recognizing the right of any President to set aside the law.
Who doesnot know that two years after this enactment of
1852, the terrible blasphemy was uttered in the platform of
the party whose Representatives to-day insist on the Exec u-
tive prerogative to set aside your laws, and annihilate your
Government; that all discussion in Congress and out of
Congress, tauching this very fugitive slave bill, should be
suppressed. The body that adopted that resolution should
have remembero I that there is something stronger after
all than the resolution by mere partisans in Convention
assembled. They ought to have remedied that. God is
not in the earthquake or in the fire, butin the still, small
voice, speaking to the enlightened conscience of men, and
that voice is omnipotent. God knows that for the honour
of our common country I would take the step backward,
and cover the nakedness and the shame of the American
people in that day of American disgrace. They nominated
their candidate for President, and he accepted their terms,
and was carried into the Presidential chair by the votes
of all the States in this Union. With such a record as
that; With such a law, offensive to the judgment and con-
science of the people of the United States, and of the
civilized world, executed, how dare gentlemen come be'oro
the American Senate, and tell us that it is the traditional
policy of the American people to allow their laws to be
defied by any executive ? I deny it. There is not a line
in our history that does not give flat denial to the assump-
tion. It has never been done, never."

He next considered the references of the counsel for
the defence to Mr. Lincoln in saying that he had
violated the laws and furnished precedents for Mr.
Johnson's crimes, and charged that they were bold
and calumnious slanders on his memory. The sus-
pension of the habeas corpus was not made by Mr.
Lincoln, but by the civil war, which rendered it
necessary. Congress had passed an Indemnity Act
to furnish authority to the Courts to dismiss cases
brought against the President's agents for what they
had done in pursuance of the Constitution. If such
Acts had been unwarranted, indemnity laws would
have been of no avail. The Tenure-of-Office Act,
which was in dispute, did not allow the President
any discretion whatever. It was his duty simply
to see that it was faithfully executed. The counsel
for the defence had referred to the successful resist-
ance that had been made to the " brokers' tax-law"
in New York, on the ground of its unconstitu-
tionality, the brokers refusing to pay the tax, and
the Supreme Court sustaining them in their refusal,
and this had been cited as a precedent for resistance
to the Tenure-of. Office Act. Mr. Bingham said
that counsel making such an argument were not lit
to discuss grave constitutional questions. He then
considered the constitutional provisions relative to
the passage of bills over the President's veto, main-
tainieg that it was easy to settle the question
whether or not the President broke a law. Read-
ing the list of powers granted to the President by
the Constitution, he called attention to the fact that
no power of suspending laws until the Courts could
test their validity was anywhere given, and such a
claim for both executive and legislative functions
was in contravention of the express terms of that
instrument. This claim, he also insisted, involved,
in addition, the assumption by the President of
judicial power, and he characterised the entire pro-
position as an absurdity. By the exercise of this
assumed power the President could suspend legisla-
tion of all kinds ; could prevent the creation of
judicial districts, the erection of States, and the
election of members of Congress, the enactment of
revenue laws, and, in short, could destroy the whole
framework of American Constitutional Govern-
ment. Whether he shall be allowed to do this is a
question now to be determined by the Senate, and for
a righteous decision the prayers of millions ascend.
As to what crimes can be considered impeachable,
Mr. Bingham said that all offences under the com-
mon law are indictable in the district of Columbia,
and that the same offences are also impeachable. If
this proposition was not self-evident, he need not
argue it, for as to the offences specified in the Im-
peachmeut Articles, he held that no one could deny
that an open violation of law by the President was
an impeachable crime. No one would deny this
who was not destitute of honour and a s3nse of
duty. The defence of the President, as exhibited
in his answer, rests on the assumption that he pos-
sesses the right to resist and bring to a judicial de-
cision any law which he supposes to intrench on his
constitutional prerogatives. This assumption could
readily be made an excuse for refusing to execute any
law whatever. Mr. Bingham then read from a pamph-
let, written by Judge Curtis, one of the President's
counsel, in 1862, expressing a directly contrary view
to that now claimed by the defence, and he coin-
mended it as good law. He then went on to say
that no man who did not admit the assumption that
the President possessed judicial as well as executive
powers could deny that his written orders clearly
showed his violation of law, and proved him worthy
of conviction and removal from office. Numerous
legal authorities were here cited to show that the
averment and proof of real intent are not necessary
in proceedings; that no class of persons are exempted
from this, and that in the case of judicial officers
only can ignorance of laws be admitted as an excuse
for error. With reference to the allegation of the
defence that the President suspended Secretary
Stanton under the Constitution and supplied the
vacancy with a Secretary ad interim as provided by
law, Mr. Bingham claimed that the President's
answers showed a violation of the law on his part,
for that limited the tenure of such appointments to
six months, while the President appointed Lorenzo
Thomas for an indefinite period. The argument that
the President is bound to intervene and protect
the people from unconstitutional laws he spoke at
length to show was a fallacious position ; and he

declared that the people are the guardians of their
own powers, and that Congress is responsible only
to them. If Congress transcend- its powers, it is

the people at the ballot-box and not the President
who is to apply the corrective. He has no other.

check but the veto, and when that is constitu-
tionally overcome he must submit. Mr. Bingham
here yielded to a motion for the adjournment of the
trial. He proceeded to argue the question whether
the President had power to remove a head of depart-
ment, and to 6.1,1 the vacancy thus created during the
session of Me Senate, and argued at length the nega-
tive of the proposition. If the negative was true, the
President had to violate the Tenure-of-office law and
violated the Constitution. He denied that the framers
of the• Constitution even intended to invest the Pre-
sident with the absolute power of removal, but in-
tended that the Senate should concur. The power
of removal is a legislative grant, and is subject, to

legislation. There could be a doubt of the guilt of
the President. There could certainly be no doubt
that all the crimes chargeable were impeachable
offences. To deny it is to place the President above
all law. The President had no power to remove Mr.
Stanton, and he denied the position assumed by Mr.
Stanbery that the Tenure-of-Office A et made auy dis-
tinction as to Cabinet officers. It might be proper
to invest this power in a President who had proved
faithful, but not in one who had betrayed his
trust. No President had ever claimed such power as
was claimed by Mr. Johnson. But even admitting
the President had the power be claimed, he was
nowhere vested with power to construe laws for
himself. ' The law must be obeyed by the President
and people until the judiciary declared it unconsti-
tutional. When the people once recognize the rig:it
of the President to select what laws he should obey,
then there would be an end of all liberty. In this
connection Mr. Bingham adverted to Mr. Evarts'
remarks that Congress was trying to make itself
supreme, and denied any such purpose. At 21.12
Court took a recess. Mr. Bingham resumed at
2.40, and repe tted his accusation of the guilt of
the President, and entered into a defence of Mr.
Stanton. The President had, in the removal of
Mr. Stanton, abused the powers conferred upon him.
Mr. Bingham agreed with the President's counsel
that an unconstitutional law was no law, but it was

not for the President to decide that point, and he
was therefore guilty for the violation. lie doubted
whether the President's purpose in removing Mr.
Stanton was to have the law tested in the courts.
A case could have been made in some other way,
and he believed the statement about the test ques-

tion was only another of the President's falsehoods.
He denied the position assumed that the President
could be convicted for the attempt to remove
Mr. Stanton. Mr. Bingham then proceeded to
argue upon the validity of the Tenure-of-Office
Act, and was referring to the practice of the Go-
vernment in relation to appointments and removals
when he was interrupted by adjournment, and the
argument was continued the next day as usual
before a crowded audience. He claimed that the
Tenure-of-Office Act repealed any power, if the
President had any previously, to fill vacancies in
the bead officos of Departments without the consent
of the Senate. The Act of 1789 permitted him to
create a vacancy in one department, but restricted
him to the choice of a chief clerk to fill it; another,
the Act of 1795, went further, applying to the
other departments, but limited, the commission
of the ad interns successor to 'the period of six
months, and was then clearly a grant of power made
by Congress to the Executive, and that, too, a re-
stricted grant. The third, the Act of 1863, abro-
gates both these laws, and again restricts him in his
choice of ad interim appointees. All the legislation
that had been taken assumed the entire control of
Congress over this matter. Mr. Bingham claimed
that the Tenure-of-Office Act superseded all these
previous laws ; that Congress had the right to pass
it; and that it covered the cases of all the Cabinet
officers, Mr. Lincoln's appointees, or Mr. John-
son's. This point be argued at length, maintain-
ing that the President's term of four years con-
tinued on his death, his successor serving out the
unexpired portion. The wording of the Act
was not " the term during which they were ap-
pointed," but " the term of the President by whom
they were appointed." T here was no such inten-
tion in the minds of its framers as that claimed
by the Defence, and the Act could not be so
construed. He then went on to argue that whether
Mr. Stanton was affected by the law or not, the
President by his appointment of General Thomas
had committed an impeachable offence, because

the Tenure-of-Office Act repealed all the powers
of appointment granted by the previous laws. He
asked why the counsel for the defence made such
lengthy arguments to prove the unconstitutionality
of this law if they did not feel and know that Mr.
Stanton was protected by it ? They felt and knew.
also that it repealed all former grants of power to
remove and appoint heads of departments. Mr.
Bingham next spoke of conferences between the
President and Gen. Thomas relative to the policy of
suspending the execution of their schemes until the
result of the trial should be known ; and, referring
to Mr. Nelson's remark that the President was will-
ing to abide the trial, he regretted that his High-
ness had not signified his pleasure to abide the
judgment as well. lle characterized the President's
intimation through his counsel that he did not
believe the Senate was constituted to sit as a Court
so long as States were unrepresented as a piece
of arrogance, and said he would not be surprised
if the President to-morrow should issue a mili-
tary order dissolving this Court. He referred to
the President's language to General Emory, as
a suggestion of the Commander-in-Chief to his
subordinate that he would stand by him in a
violation of law. This, in connection with his de-
clarations to General Grant, would in any other
country have been sufficient to cost the President
his head. This charge of an attempt to create in-
subordination in the army was not one to be sneered
at as the counsel for the defence had done. Mr.
Bingham then considered the 10th Article, founded
on the President's speeches, and argued that his
language in those speeches not only violated
decency, but was the language of sedition. The
sedition laws of 1798, so often referred to as un-
constitutional, were never pronounced so by any
Court. Such laws were necessary in times of danger,
and he further claimed that seditious utterances by
any President were indictable by the common law
in the district of Columbia. Mr. Bingham said he
favoured virtuous, constitutional liberty of speech,
but was opposed to seditious licence, which would

shake the security of peaceful Government, and
reach even the dead in their graves. Mr. Bingham
then considered• the 11th Article, founded also on
the speeches, and claimed that the President in
referring to Congress as a " set of individuals,"
used the language of a conspirator, and not of an
honest man. His whole purpose in opposing
the Constitutional Amendments was to revive
the " lost cause." The people had rightly

judged the President's intentions. The averments li
in these two arguments are undeniable, and he re-
minded the Senate that many of the offences
charged are indictable in the district of Columbia.
Believing that he had made it clear to every Sena-
tor that the substance of the averments of all the
articles was established on the evidence adduced and
on the law admitted, Mr. Bingham denied that the
American people would coincide in the opinion of the
defence, and considered the character of the confes-
sions made in the President's answer, which he held
were of themselves sufficient to warrant his con-
viction. He insisted that the President's assump-
tion of judicial prerogative was a crime in violation
of the Constitution, which of itself called for his
deposition. The people were determined that the
supremacy of the Constitution should be main-
tained, and Mr. Bingham from this passed on to
an eulogium upon the majesty and divine cha-
racter of law. He drew a parallel between James
11. and Andrew Johnson, and said that, as his
usurpations were similar, the President's punish-
ment should be analogous and equally severe.
The triumph of liberty in the war just ended he
could not believe would be thrown away, and
American principles of free Government denied by
countenancing the assumption by the President of
legislative, executive, and judicial functions com-
bined. Then he proceeded in eloquent terms to give
the considerations which in his opinion should in-
fluence the Senate to convict and remove the Pre-
sident and his assured confidence that such would
be the happy result. Mr. Bingham's speech occu-
pied the 4th, the sth, and closed at half-past two on
the 6th May.
May 6.—After Mr. Bingham had concluded his
eloquent address, the audience, carried away by en-
thusiasm, expressed their sentiments by loud clap-
ping, which grew into cheers, when men and women
arose, waving hats and handkerchiefs, and giving
utterance to uproarious applause. The Chief Jus-
tice ordered silence to be restored, and, failing this,
he arose and directed the galleries to be cleared.
For a moment the din ceased, then broke out afresh
more violently than before, 'when Mr. Chase pe-
remptorily ordered all to be turned out. Senator
Trumbull advised the arrest of the disorderly, and
both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Grimes aided the Chief
Justice, Senator Cameron hoped the people

would not be driven out, but the Chief Justice and
the Senate were inexorable, and the Sergeant-at-
Arms with his myrmidons proceeded to clear the
galleries. The general public in great wrath were
hustled out of the Chamber, and then the corre-
spondents and reporters were expelled, the police
eventually entering the gallery of the Diplomatists,
which they cleared notwithstanding Mr. Thornton's
expostulation, who was compelled to leave. Silence
soon reigned within, but riot without ; 4-4 Old
Grimes is dead, that good old man" being proposed
as a song to the " indignation meeting," which was
lustily roared for an hour. The Senate remained
in secret session, when a recess took place, after
which the galleries were again closed and the Senate
continued to deliberate in secret.