The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-05-14

| OF the PreSldenL dere, In QeDate, con
tinued through several days, they have ex
hausted ingenuity in the attempt to do this
and signally failed. What is the radical bill
against the President It is made up of three
points. Mr.. Johnson's policy is not the policy
of Mr.. Lincoln; Mr.. johnson Is false to the re-
publican party; Mr.. johnson will not hang
traitors, and Mr. Johnson has usurped the pre-
| rogative of Congress. Is 1t any sound allega
ton against the President that his policy is no,
identical with the policy ofa President to whom
was never presented the circumstances that
make Mr. Johnson's labor difficult? Even the
authority Of the Senate cannot make such non.
sense pass current with the people. What is
there in the charge that Mr.. johnson will moi
hang traitorss Nothing but a cry on which to
excite against the President the unreasoning
hate Of those wild fanatics who wish to erect
party malice and sectional revenge into a State
policy. One Senator, with defamation as
extravagant as it was contemplate, assailed
the President for not hanging JEFF Davis with
out trial in hollow square Of the army" II
is admitted that Southern traitors are the pro-
perry of the Supreme Court, and while Con-
gress complains that the President has usurped
the prerogative of Congress is it not incon-
sistent in finding fault with him for not usurp-
ing the prerogative of the Judiciary Is it q
good allegation against the President that he
will not hang traitors when we all know that
it is the Supreme Court that is to blame, and
that the President has nothing whatever to do
with it?
With Congress thus assailing the President
because he does not usurp the prerogative of a
coordinate branch of the government, it is re-
markable to find 1t so jealous of its own pre-
rogative and charging the President with that
very usurpation against itself to which it urges
him rs against the Supreme Court. The Presi-
dent, says Senator Howard, has usurped the
prerogative of Congress because he has made
peace, and the argument is that he has no power
to make war-therefore no power to make
peace. But he has power to make war, and,
moreover, just such war as we have gone
through. 1t is his duty, and therefore he has
the power, to make war for the defence of the
nation with Congress not in session, and hav-
ing that clear authority for war he has an equal
one for peace. The armies made peace and he
recognized it while Congress was not in ses-
sion, and adopted necessary measures to re es-
tablish the supremacy of law. The warrant
for war or peace is the constitution and the
laws, and the President must execute them as
he finds them. Ifthey ore not sufficient for the
case it is the business Of Congress to make new
ones. 1t was the first imperative duty of Con.
gress to prescribe the method of reconstruction
if the laws were not sufficient. Has it done so!
Is il not absurd to assan the President for act
ing on existing laws when Congress
has failed to furnish any other coursei
Another charge is that the Presi.
dent is false to the republican party
This is thing that any man ought to be
ashamed to say in his place in the Senate. To
recognize party lines, ties and programmes as
governing influences in the sphere of public
duty is a crime against the people. Party may
decide, according as it is strongest, which OF
two men shall represent u certain district In
the United States Senate; but, that question
once decided party stops. The man chosen
does not represent party. he represents the
whole people of his district and he scanda-
lousy abuses his position If he holds the inter-
e,s of those people az subordinate to party
claims. This is the funlamsntal moral law OF
public station. The highest honor that could
be paid to any President would be to say that
he recog nized no party when the public inter-
est was at stake-that he was the President OF
the people without lihitl.ion, especially such
contemplate limitation as that o! parry
This last and greatest of the radical charges
against the President is the keynote of the Who'll,
radical war. The course of The President, as rs
directed to secure the good of the whole country
| is likely to disappoint the mad ambition of tha'
party. This charge exhibits the gigantic falsiiy
upon which Congress stands. What is the
meaning of all The bitterness and imprecaton
of Stevens? -of the insulting inveciive of the
whole session? It ia, we are told, that the
President has abandoned the principles of tho
republican party. We are told this, though
nothing il more notorious than that it is thu
President who has not abandoned those prin.
ciples. II is hardly possible to DC so intcllectu
ally blind as not to see that it ia the party tina
has abandoned its own rinciples-been guilty
| Of that very political crime with which II nov
charges the President; and II makes war OF
the President because he has not gone with thu
party in its summer. The President stands to
day on the great platform of the war-that tn,
Union is imperishable {; that no State can leave
1.-THE great national platform Of the Ameri
can people-the platform on which the repub
lican party came into power; and Congress
denounces him before the country, declaring
that he has abandoned the principles Of tn,
Union party, when 1t is only that portion o
the party has abandoned him. Thus Con
gress stands on a great falsehood and henc
the weakness and pititul character Of all tn
declarations it is able to make against tn
Presidents policy. Hence the impregnabl
strength Of the Presidents position before tn
/ = -