The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-08-23
The Law OF impeachment.

CTOHt Ue HuSttpgtOH CTtTOUtCGe
The remedy of impeachment is not novel
one, although its application to the President
would be novel, and we presume it is because
of such novelty of application in the contem-
plated impeachment of Andrew Johnson, that
it is magnifed into something terrible and
startling. We do not see any justification for
the impressions which have been studiOusly
cultivated regarding it. Everything has been
done to make it appear that Congress in i'm
peaching the President would be exceeding it's
powers-would be perpetrating some dreadful
act full of evil portent, and fraught with trou-
BILE to the country. There is no reason for
this. Impeachment is a constitutional remedy,
especially provided to meet Just such cases of
official malpractice as President Johnson has
been guilty of, and we do not see why his re-
moval and disfranchisement need create any
greater disturbance than the removal of any
other President by operation of law. Every
President, except two, who died, has been re-
tired by operation of the law, and Andrew
Johnson will be retired ALSO whether before
! or at the end of his term remains to be seen.
A serious error has been adopted by many
/ people in supposing that an official must be
guilty of an indictabe otfense to be subject to
impeachment. This is not the case. Every
public officer is as responsible as any private
citizen to the ordinary process of the penal
law, and consequently the constitutional orga-
nization of the departments of the Government
only requires that the power of impeachment
should apply to public officers for official
otfenses, by an immediate removal and per-
petual disqualification. The subjects of i'm
peachment are treason, bribery, or other high
crimes or msdemeanors." Treason is cOnsti-
tutionally defined; bribery is determinable by
the rules of law, "other high crimes or misde-
meanors'' are an indefinite classification of
official delinquencies intended to subserve the
public good by leaving it to the determination
of the high court of impeachment, whether the
ofense charged shall be so classed, and the party
on trial convicted. These embrace equally
those cases of official misconduct which may
also be prosecuted by indictment or informa-
ton, as those cases which are only cOgniZable
in a course of impeachment. For instance,
every species of direct corruption committed
by judge, whether off or on the bench,
would furnish occasion for an indictment to
punish the ofense, as well as for impeachment
TO remove the offender. But for the arbitrary
department, the oppressive conduct of a JUS
tice in court, the ordinary tribunals can afford
no redress. The judicial history exhibits a
great variety of both these descriptions of
offenses. Lord Bacon is memorable example of
the corruption of money, yet he could not
thereby produce as much oppression and wrong,
as the judicial alterations of Jeffries, Scroggs,
or Tresihan, from party hatred and passion.
At period of great party contest, when
pOpish plots were the bug-bear of religious
factions, the non-conformity of the Duke OF
York, the presumptive heir to the crown, and
great body of the Catholic nobility, had
raised hue and cry throughout the kingdom,
Lord G. J. Croggs heard that the grand jury
/ intended to present the illustrious offenders,
I and he dismissed the grand jury before they
q had completed the business of the sessions.
: Nobody doubts the right of the court, in the
exercise Of wise discretion to discharge q
9 grand jury, yet the circumstances surround
IT ing this case caused an impeachment of the
n chlef Justice. The act was charged as illega
10 ana arbitrary; high misdemeanOr, violation
ie el ms oath, and the means to subvert the
n lunqamental laws of the land.
y hon' Alexander Addison, chief justice o
le tne western circuit in Pennsylvania was i'm
N Peached' tried, and removed from office for
lg similar oilense by the Legislature of Penn
OF syivama IN 1902 He interrupted an associat
3. lndge, VINO was not lawyer in instructinj
ne the Grand Jury as to the law, and adjourned
to the court SO as 70 prevent their hearing hi
IL associates opinion. Bot as c. j. Soroggs AM
n, Judge Addison both acted as Judges Il
~ court, the ordinary tribunals could not arraie
~ or punish their misconduct, and the process .