The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1867-10-22

ment sitting. In that case, it is true, you had
been accused by the grand jury OF one county; IN
the present the whole body of the Commons Of
Great Britain, by their representatives, arc your
accuSers." Hatscl 295.
The trainers of the New York Constitution of
A. D. 1777 held this view, for they couple to-
gether in the same sentence impeachments and
indictments, as though they were only modes OF
trial in every trial on impeachment tor crimes
or misdemeanors, the party impeached or indicted
shall be allowed counsel as in civil actions" Art.
81. Says Blackstone: SAN impeachment is
prosecution Of the already known and established
opinion, in Lord Clarcndon's case, that the evil
dence on an impeachment must bo the same as
on an indictment. How, S. T., 514. Mr.. Web
ster has well expounded the whole subject in his
speech in defence of Judge Prescott. Though he
made an argument as counsel, yet his remarks on
this point carefully elaborated and characteriz-
ell by great precision of statement. Wcbsters
Works, vol. 5, PIP. 513, 515.
l have dwelt the longer on this point because
MANY seeui to think that public officer can be
impeached for mere act of indecorum. On the
contrary. he must have committed true crime
not against tho law OF England but against the
law of tho United States: As impeachment is
nothing but mode of trial. the Constitution only
adopts it as modo Of procedure, leaving the
crimes to which it is to bo applied to be settled by
the general rules of criminal law.
A basis for very important concession has now
been laid. 1t is this AS there are under the laws
only those which arc contrary to some positive
statutory rule, there can be no impeachment ex-
ccpt for violation OF law of Congress, or for the
commission of q crime named in the Constitution.
English precedents concerning impeachable crimes
are consequently not applicable. There was for
long time tluctuation of opinion on the point
whether the common law crimes did not exist un-
der the General Government. Justice Story lent
the great weight of his influence to the opinion in
favor of their existence. His discussion Of the
subject of mDcachmeut rests mon this view MIR. |
Rawe is of the same opinion. Both of these emil
nent writers admit that if there are no common
law crimes for which indictments can be brought |
there are none for which lmpeachments can be in
stituted. Mr.. Rawle is especially clear upon this
point The doctrine that there is no law of crimes
except tn vt founded in statutes renders mpeach-
ment nullity i'll all except the two express
ly mentioned in the Constitution, treason and |
bribery, until Congress shall pass laws declaring
what shall constitute the other high crimes and |
273 ed. 1S29 Story tho Constitution title elm
peachment.")
That thCro are no crimes against tho United !
States which not statutory, is fully proved by
great number OF cases collected by Air. Wharton |
in his work on criminal law. Though he dissents |
by the decisions. (SS 16S-17l). The decisions of
the Senate as a court Of impeachment, should not |
be regarded as adverse TO this view.
In the three cases already tried OF Pickering,
Chase, and Blount, only Pickering con- |
lemned His case was heard or pdrie as he did |
q fldrcths History, $751; As far as precedent is |
concerned the question in that court is still open,
md should be decided i'll accordance with prin-
riplo.
The result is that unless the crime is specially |
named i'll tho Constitution, impeachments, like |
can only be instituted for crimes COM
mitted against the statutory law of the United |
States. e.