The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1866-10-30
IMPEACHMENTS.
-Four Instances an the History Of the Govern
= = - -E-- nlenf.

Since the household of Uocle Samuel was
organized, little more than three-fourths of a
century ago, four public officers have been i'm
peached for "high crimes and misdemeanors." E"
Three OF them were judges and one had been a
Territorial Governor One case was dismissed
by the Senate one offender was convicted and
removed from Office, and two were acquitted for
want of a two-thirds vote of "guilty," although
there was very strong vote against them
None of the offences charged were defined by
law. We will briefly sketch these impeach-
ments in the order Of time
l. William Blount, of Tennessee, for some
years Governor of the territory south of the
Ohio river, having been elected to the United
States Senate, was, in 1899, expelled from that
body by vote of rs to l, and declared to be
"guilty Of high misdemeanor, entirely incon-
sistent with his public trust and duty SEN
ator" His offence was an attempt to seduce an
United States Indian interpreter from his duty,
and to ALLEVIATE the affections and confidence of
the Indians from public officers residing among
them. It was believed that he instigated the
Indians to assist the British in conquerine the
Spanish territory adjoining the United States
Two points were made for the defence: First.
That Blount had not done these evil deeds in
his capacity of public officer, but as private
citizen. Second. That his being United States
Senator screened him, for an officer elected by a
State Legislature, and neither chosen nor ap-
pointed removable by the General Govern
ment, could not be "civil officer of the United
States" within the scope of the Impeachment
clauses of the Constitution. On these technical
grounds the Senate "et him down easy" by
dismissng the case. Blount had many friends
and hackers, the Southwest being then corrupt
and turbulent to degree that foresha1owed the
great rebellion lately quelled by the North and
West.
2 In 1904, John Pickering, Judge of the
United States District Court of New Hampshire,
was impeached before the Senate, by order of
the House, for drunkenness and profanity on
the bench, and refusing to perform his duties
in case where he was called to enforce the
revenue laws of the UDtedaStates. The Judge
did not appear; but his sent petition, set
ting forth that his father was insane, and asking
leave to be heard by counsel. This was granted,
and several depositions were put in going to
show insanity. The reply was, that he had
brought ''rum craziness" on himself. Judge
Pickering had raved and blasphemed on the
bench 10 open court cursed the parties called
people sometimes perfect strangers) to come up
and sit beside him on the bench, threatening to
cane them if they refused. We can find no
of mankind, or backguarded that branch of the
government which voted him his ''bread and
butter" or called for the hanging OF those who
differed from him in opinion. But perhaps the
whiskey of those times was not SO fiery as the
Presidential beverage Of to day. Judge Pick
erDg having exercised judicial authority during
bis insanity, and not Offering to resign, the Sen
ate voted him guilty and removed him from
ofhce-yeas 20, nays 6. All the Federal Sena-
tors voted in the negative; just as the Demo-
Gratis of our time, having swung clear Ground
the circle" in political principles, would now
vote on Johnson's case, if he were to be i'm
peached.
3. To 1906 Samuel Chase, Of Maryland, an
associate justice Of the United States Supreme
Court, was i:npeached by the House (73 to 32)
and tried by the Senate. He was gray haired
old man, of powcrful INTELLECT, vast legal learn
ing and irreproachable morals. He had sat in
the Congress of '76 and signed the Declaration
of Independence, and had by his zeal aud energy
done wonders in redeeming Maryland from
British and Tory sway, and bringing her over
to the side of American liberty. He had by
hard work, sharp ''fguring' and legal shrewd-
ness, secured for his State debt of S650,O00
due her 10 England before the Revolution No:
a man of greater ability and patriotism then sat
on the judicial bench in our land. His faults
were ultra Federal notions, an abusive tongue
and quick temper. The great public services
of the accused; the national eminence of the
tribunal the excited state of party feeling,
we'll represented by the celebrated John Ran
dolph OF Roanoke, as accuser on the part OF the
House, and the continuance Of the trial for
nearly a month-all these things com bned to
make most notable and interesting case. 1t
Ls,l
tive pen of Motley or Macaulay. Judge Chase
was allowed one month to prepare his defence,
and, in consideration Of bis age and infrmities,
he seated in the centre Of the area of the
Senate chamber, in front of tho Vice President.
That officer was the BLACK sheep" of our early
politics, Aaron Burr, who with respects and
reputation blasted by his Southern Glibuster:ng
and his murder of Alexander Hamilton, yet pre-
sided with all his wonderful dignity, tact and
grace. There were eight articles of lmpeach-
ment Large numbers of witnesses were ex-
amined on both sides, and the forensic displays
remind one Of Warren Hastings trial IN Eng
land, ten years before. Chase's counsel were
three most able lawyers-Luther Martin, of
Maryland Charles Lee, late United States At
torney General and Robert Geodloe Harper,
former Federal leader in the House. Randolph
had SIX Representatives to help him manage the
case, and he never bad more exciting theme
for his peculiar sarcasm.
Article [. charged Judge Chase with unfair
ness and oppression at the trial Of John Fries
for treason, in 1900, whereby the accused was
condemned to death without having been heard
BY counsel in his defence. On this article there
were l6 Senators for conviction and Is for ac-
qu,ttal Article Ii charged him with arbitrary
ruling in regard to jurynan. at the trial Of
James Calender for libel on President Adams,