Indiana American. [volume] (Brookville, Ind.) 1865-1872, 1867-09-20
Impeachment.
To tho Editors Of tho Journal.

DclcVluB that thOse highest In place,
criminal, arc, by reason of the inhuenc'
Of their positions, the greatest Of criminals
l have ever thought it the duty of society
to hold those persons occupying the mos
prominent social or political stations L
the most strict accountability. Rank, in
fluenco and power, instead Of shielding
the perpetrator Of offences, ought TO be The
reasons for closer scrutiny Of conduct
and more speedy application Of such
penal and.remediel measures as the law.
provide. While none can dispute the trutl
fof the principle here asserted, in its broad
est application, in the most especial man.
ner it applies to those upon whom the peo.
pie have conferred official rank and power
For in such cases the wrong doer derives
his greatest ability for mischief not from
the exercise Of any inherent individual
talent or energy, but by the misuse OIL
perverision of powers derived from Others
and accepted in trust, TO be exercised pur.
suant to the purpose and intent Of those
who conferred them. Ho who accepts of.
fetal position is in that position strictly
the agent of the people, and is bound by
the will Of his constituents and the laws
Of the land; and when any person, in off,
cial ranks, shall do offense to the will OF
the people and violate the laws, he has
ceased to comply with the terms upon
which bis office was received by him, and
gives just cause for forfeiture Of the same,
and il becomes the duty of the people, if a
lawful remedy exists, to dismiss from Of
fee such faithless and recreant public SER
want, that another, who shall regard the
laws and the wishes Of his constituents as
his rule of action, may superccde him;
otherwise, that intended as the highest
agency of public good will become the
agent OF great and almost remediless evil.
AT the present time the people Of the
United States have a President who has
violated all pledges to, and disappointed
all the expectations Of those who elected
him; who to comply with the demands,
and in aid Of the political policy and per-
sonal interests Of a very numerous, power
full and dangerous body of people, recent
ly rebels In arms agairst the United States,
regards neither the wishes, interests, nor
rights of Che loyal people who elected him;
nor has respect for nor yields obedience to
the laws Of the land.
No man can doubt the duty Of removing
this faithless man, who wantonly and
wickedly misuses the powers of his high
station, if the right to DO so lawfully ex-
lists. Fortunately it does. The Constitu-
ton OF the United States provides that the
President, Vice President, and all civil
officers Of the United States shall be re-
moved from Office, on impeachment fer
and conviction of high crimes and misde-
meapors." This provision of our Consti
tuition, like most others, was derived from
the Constitution Of Great Britain; but
somewhat modified in purpose and effect
Under ihis proceeding in Great Britain,
both removal from Office, and punishment
for any oifense could be inflicted. In the
United States, by express limitation, only
removal from Office, and judgment of
disqualification can be pronounced in a
trial of impeachment. 1t is not, then, a
proceeding for the punishment of crimes,
but a proceeding to protect the public in
terests against the misdeeds of those who
shall abuse the powers of those high in
stations Of trust under the Government, to
which wicked men sometimes attain. The
punishment of ordinary crimes is left to
the criminal laws, aud the judicial tribu-
nails. The Constitution leaves no doubt
upon this subject, for so far as it specifies
impeachablc offences, it also illustrates the
policy upon which this provision is found
ed. 1t does not declare that "civil officers
Of the United States shall be removed
/ for murder, arson, assault and battery, nor
any act Of strictly personal criminality.
On the other hand, it does specify "trea-
son, bribery, and other high crimes and
misdemeanors," which effect the public
interests, on account of the greater effect
that attaches to these crimes against the
public, by the force Of official influence;
and because public officer, by their COM
mission, directly violates the trusts of his
official station, and thereby demonstrates
his unworthiness for the exercise Of Off
cial power and influence.
impeachment can not be regarded as a
proceeding necessarily to be founded upon
ordinary statutory crimes; for the enact
ment aud enforcement Of laws for the gen.
eral punishment of crimes is LETT etclu-
sively with the States; and the different
s5turcs CO NOT cxgrcfsU n UNIFORM legislation
on these subjects Properly aud strictly
speaking, the United States has no general
penal code-and in relation to many OF
the most heinous crimes against individ'
uals and society, the laws of the United
States are silent, except as to crimes com
mitted where the United States have e1
elusive Jurisdiction. An understanding
Of the meaning of the terms "high crimes
and misdemeanors, as used in the Con
stitution, and as furnishing ground fol
impeachment, must Judge Story says, b'
sought "in Parliamentary history and il
common law" We go to the source from
which we received this provision of or
Constitution, for the circumstances anC
the occasion of its application, unless W.
have expressly otherwise provided. W.
there find, that in the impeachment of al
officer for his removal from Office, the of
fence need not be defined or even alluded
to by any statute law. It is sufficient tha
an official is grossly delinquent in the per
formance of duties; or is guilty Of exer
cising his powers in a manner prejudicia
to the public interests.
Here are some examples from Englisl
history in which officials have been i'm
peached' for offences clearly and who'll.
within the principles above stated, NJ
statutory law having been violated b.
J, thum. "Chancellors aud judges have beer
impeached for misleading their sovereign
by unconstitutional opinions; for attempt
to subvert the fundamental law OF tn