The Bolivar bulletin. [volume] (Bolivar, Hardeman County, Tenn.) 1865-1888, 1866-11-03

p Lord Finch for unlaWfully enlaFging
the forest For threatening other judges to
make and subscribe TO his opinion For de-
livering opinions knowing them 20 be con
traFy 70 law For drawing business Of the
courts to his chamber
% For extort.ons aud deceits
a Cardinal 0olsey for exercising lega-
tive powers
p tor converting public money 70 his own
use. For procuring exurbitant grant of
land fram the KING.
26 Lord Halifax, for Ol tanning grants of
estates forfeited for rebellion For obtain
ing grants of money when there was war
and he w taxes.
lLaTe fanii ar with Warren Hastings
trial, and il Is .sOt necessary therefore to al
lude t. the chaFges against him
Prom this summary q: the principal cases
of impeachment which have occurred in
England we think Il fellows that according
to the practice there the House Of Commons
have been in the usage of impraehing for
ANYTHING ti.ey chose to consider an 0ffeuse
Evidently, whenever the House of Commons
wanted to get rid of public Ofice,, all they
had to do to get up an impeaGhment was to
work up the best charge they could against
him. There was no limit to the exercise Of
the power of impeachment but their own
discretion impeachment was political
contrivance to get rid nf an obnoxious Off
Ger. The practical result was that every
man held bis ufire at the discretion of 4
majority of the House of Commons and q
majority of the House Of Lords
Such was the practice and therefore the
parliame ntary law of imreachment in Eng-
land when the Constitution of the United
States was adopted The Constitution. Ar
ticle H. section f. provides: The Presi-
!. Z
the United Sta'es shall be removed from of
fee on impeachment for and conviction of
treason, bribery, or other high crimes and
misdemeanOrs."
Article I, Section g. The Senate shall
have the sole power. to try all impeachments.
When sitting for that purpose, they shall be
on oath or affirmation When the Presi-
dent of the United States is tried, the Chief
Justice shall preside; and no person shall be
convicted without the concurrence of two
thirds of the members present Judgment
in cases Of impeachment shall not extend
further than to removal from Office, and dis
qualification to hold and enjoy any Office of
honor, trust or profit under the United States q"
The first inquiry is what the President
nav be impeached for? The Constitution
says he may be impeached for misdemeannrs
What is a misdemeanOr in public officer
ANY violation of duty doing anything be
ought not to do, neglecting to do anything
he ought to do Any public officer is indict.
able for misbehavior in his ofi"e. Ledford vs.
Thomas 6 Modern r. &C. Russell on
Crimes, l39 Any neglect Of duty, ground
for indictm mt. Regina vs. Wyatt ! Sal
kelds II. 38l l Russell or Crimes, 1877.
The great principle of the parliamentary
Law and the common law is that any official
misconductis is a misdemeanor. An interest
ing inquiry arises here Is it necessary be-
fore the senate can act on u case of impeach
ment, that a statute law should have been
previously passed defining for what ofFenses
impeachment lies /? 1t is a familiar princi-
pie that the courts of the United States can
not take cOgnizAnee of any criminal Offense
unless it is an offense against some statute
of the United States. In other words, the
United States courts exercise no criminal
jurisdiction deTiyable merely from the COM
mon law. Does the same rule prevail In re-
/ gard to the Senate of the United states act
| ing as a court of impeachment Judge
/ Story, In his commentaries, decides this
| question in the negative. He says: No one
asserts that the power Of impeachment is
| limited to statute nffenses Second Story,
! page 264, section, 795 Yer he protests
/ against the whole subject being left tp the
/ arbitrary discretion Of the Senate" and
/ insists that resort must be had either to
| parliamentary practice and the common law
/ IN order tb ascertain what are impeach
ment 0ffenses. But when they consider that
| the parliamentary practice give the House oi
! Commons an unlimited discretion in the ma
ture of the charges, provided they allege
some violation OF duty, and the common law
lays down principle equally comprehen
siye as to indictable ufenses in officers, we
do not perceive thar there is any difference
I
I ject 10 the arbitrary discretion of the Sen
ate, which be objects to so vehemently, and
| leaving it t0 th N under the restriction o
/ parliamentary practice and the common law
winch, in effect, as We have seen. is no res
friction at all. According to Judge Story
you cannot impeacn the President for hav
! inga rrd head, q mere arbitrary offense Bu
al that you have to do, in order to impeach, j:
to charge some alleged violation of duty
The practice of the senate, in the four
cases of impeachment which they nave had
before them, assumes a jurisdiction To pr"
ceed without aRy previous statutory enact
ments "The purposes of an IN peachmen
lie wholly hey"nd the penalties of he statute
or Gust, mary law The object of the pro
ceeding T.. ascertain whether rhe cause ex
lists for removing public officer from Office
= cause for remnvb
from Office may exist where no offense agains
positive law has beer committed, or wher,
the individual has, from immortality or i'm
beciiity, or mal-administration, become uni
t. exercise the eiiice Second Curtis, His
tory Of the Origin of Courts, 26I Prsctic
ally, the President holds his ufice at the dis
cretion of a majority Of the House Of Rep
resentatiyes and two-thirds of the Senate
1t may be, as Ar. urtis suggests in anotbe
passage than the one cited, that the framer
Of the Constitution only reconciled them
selves TO the great pFerDgatives conferred OF
the Executive, bS making him removable II
effect, at the wiIi OF majority Of the Hous,
and twO-thirds Of the Senate.
Ii is said of the government of Russia
that it is despOtism tempered BY assas-ina
ton Our President may be then defined ~
authority tempered by the power of im
peachment The result Of our examination
Of this subject has been, to give US the IN
preston ts'at the Impeachment power Is
prerogatiye, which places the President in
greater degree Of dependence and insecurit
than In our casual reflection upon the sut
ject We had previously supposed The res
outrage in the case of President johnson