The weekly Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1861, 1860-04-04
veto By m,iority Of two third. Of both

or Vetoing any bill. This participation in
the performance of legislative duties be-
tween coordinate branches Of the govern
ment ought TO inspire the conduct Of all OF
them in their relations towards each other
with mutural forbesrance and respect; at
least, each has right to demand justice OF
each other.
The cause Of complaint is that the con-
stitutional rights and immunities Of the Ex.
ecutive have been violated 10 the person Of
the President.
The trial Of impeachment Of the Presi.
dent before the Senate on charges preferred
and prosecuted against him by the House of
Representatives would be an imposing spec.
tscle for the world. In the result not
only his removal from the Presidential Office
would be involved: but, what is OF infinite
ly greater importance to himself, his char.
scter, both in the eyes OF the present and Of
the future generations, might possibly be
tsrni,hed. The disgrace cast upon him
would, in some degree, be reflected upon the
character of the American people, who
elected him. Hence the precautions adopt
ed by the Constitution to secure tair trial.
| On such a trial it declares that the Chief
Justice shsll preside. This was, doubtless,
because the trainers Of the Constitution be.
lieved it to be possible that the Vice Presi
dent might be biased by the fact that in case
OF the removal of the President from Office
the same shall devolve upon the Vice Pre-.
sident.
The preliminary proceedings in the House
in case of charges which may involve i'm
peachment have been we'll and wisely set
tied by long practice upon principles OF
equal Justice and right, both to the accused
and to the people. The precedent estab
lished in the case of Judge Peck OF Missouri
in 1891, after careful review OF all the
former precedents, will, venture to predict
stand the test OF time. In that case Luke
Edward Luwless, the accuser, presented Z
petition to the House, in which he set fo'tf
minutely and specifically his causes Of com
plant.
He prayed that the conduct and proceed
ings in behalf Of the said Judge Peck may
be inquired into by your honorable body
and such decision made thereof as to YOU
wisdom and justice may seem proper.
This petition wss referred to the judiciary
Committee, to make similar investigation
1t is a standing committee. supposed to be
appointed without reference TO any speca
cause, and at all times is presumed 10 bt
composed OF the most eminent lawyers o
the House from different portions of tbs
Union, whose acquaintance with judicial pro-
ceeding, and whose habits Of investigation
qualify them pecn,iarIy for the task. NJ
tribunal. from their position and character
could, in the nature Of things, be more i'm
partial. In the case Of Judge Peck the wit
nesses were selected by the committee itse Il
with view to ascertain the truth of the
charges. They were cross examined by him
and every thing was conducted in such q
manner ss to afford him no reasonable cause
for complaint. In view OF this preceden,
and what is Of far crater importance, in view
of the constitution and the principles OF
eternal justice, in what manner has the
President been treated by the House of Rep.
resentatives OF the United States.
Mr.. John Covode. representative from
Penney ania is the accuser OF the President.
Instead of following the wise precedents
of former times, and especially that in the
case Of Judge Peck, and referring the eccu
sation to the Committee on Judiciary, the
House has made my accuser one of nv
judges. To make the accuser the Judge is
a violation Of the principles of universal JUS
tice, and is condemned by the practice of all
civilized nations. Every freeman must re
volt al such spectacle. am to appt ar
before Mr.. Covode, either personally or by a
substitute, to cross examine the witnesses
which he moy produce before himself to sus.
tain his own accusations against me, and
perhaps even this poor boon may be denied
to the President And what is the nature
of the investigation which his resolution
proposes to institute! 1t is as vague and
general ss the English l;ngusge sffords
words with which to make it. The Com
nittee is to inquire not into any specific
charges, but whether the President has by
money, patronage or other improper means,
sought to influence, not the action OF any
individual member or members of Congress,
bot the action of the entire body of Con-
gress itself, or any Committee thereof.
The President may have had some glim
mering of the nature OF the offence to be
investigated, had his sccusers pointed out
the act or acts Of Congress which he sought
to pass or defeat by the employment OF mon
ey, patronage or other improper means, bu,
the accusation is bounded by no such limits.
1t extends to the whole circle of legislation n
to interference for or against 'he passage of
any law appertaining to the rights of any
State or Territory; and what law does no,
appertsin to the rights of some State or
Territory? end what law or laws has the
President failed to execute? These might
easily have been pointed out had any such
existed. Had Mr.. Lswless asked an inquiry
to be made by the House whether Judge
Peck in general terms had not violated hie
judicial duty, without specifying any partic
ular act, do not believe there would have
been single vote in that body in favor ol
the enquiry. Since the time of the Star
Chamber and of general warrants, there has
been no such proceedings in England. The
House of Representatives, the high i'm
peaching power of the country, without con.
senting to hear word OF explanation, have
endorsed this accusation against the Presi.
dent, and made it their own act
They even refuse to permit member to
enquire of the Presidents accuser what were
the specific charges against him. Thus in
this preliminary accusation OF high crimes
and misdemeanors against a CO ordinate
branch OF the Government under the i'm
peachiDg power, the House refuses to hear
single suggestion even in regard to the
correct mode OF proceeding, but without q
momenrs delay pass accusatory resolutio ms
under the pressure Of the previous question
In the Institution Of prosecution for any
offence against the most humble citizen, auc
| cloim for myself no greater rights than he
enjoys-the Constitution of the u. 8. ant
OF the several States require that he sbs
be informed at the very beginning of the
nature and cause of the accusation sgalns
} him, in order to enable him to prepare fol