Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1867-01-05
xXxIxth Congress Second Session
WASHINGTON, Jan. 4.
SENATE.


The CHAIR laid before the Senate q
memorial of the Legislature of Montana fol
land office and surveyor in that territory;
also for all increase of the pay of territorial
officers. Referred to appropriate commit
tees.
Mr.. WILSON presented petition from
army officers for an increase of pay.
Mr.. CATTELL presented petition OF
artists of Philadelphia against foreign COM
petition.
Mr.. ROSS introduced bill to donate a
portion of the military reservation OF Fort
Leavenworth for public road; also, a bill
authorizing the construction of military
bridge across the Missouri river at Fort
Leavenworth; also, bill granting the
right of pre-emption to settlers on Cherokee
lands in Kansas. All were appropriately
referred.
Mr.. HOWARD offered resolution that
the committee on Foreign Relations be in
structed to report the present relations
between France and the Republic of Mex
leo, extent Of population and territory,
prospects of the success of Maximilian's
overthrow by that Republic, the amount
and character of his military force, includ-
ing French auxilliaries, and the action of
the Executive branch of the Government
of the United States in reference to the in
terventiOn of France in the affairs of
Mexico.
The contiscation bill was taken up.
Mr.. JOHNSON said when the subject
was before the Senate prior to recess, he
(Johnson) asked Mr.. Trumbull, Chairman
of the Judiciary committee, If he proposed
to repeal the section on the ground that it
gave power to the President which he had
l. hot ha .
within the authority of Congress to take
from the President any power which is
conferred upon him by the Constitution.
To the latter question he Of course answer
ed in the negative. He told us, and cor
rectly,, that the power to pardon was
vested In the President by the Con-
stitution, and cannot by legislation be
taken away from him. 1t is vested in him
alone, in his official capacity. as President,
The Senate were not to be told that in the
deliberations OF the convention by which
the Constitution was formed this particular
clause was the subject of one contrariety
of opinion. Some of remembers of the
convention believed that If this power to
pardon existed at all, ana most OF them did
think it should exist contrary to the opin-
ion of Montesquie and other European
writers, that power should not exist i'm a
Republic, because there was no necessity
forit. But the trainers of the Constitution
thought it ought to exist. Some of them
thought it should be vested in the hands
otthe President alone, or any of the de-
partunents alone,4 but that. it should be
given, to the President if at all, in con-
Ilection with some of the other depatt+
ments, or some branch Of one OF the other
departments. They, however, came to the
conclusion>4and believe that conclusion
finally received the unanimous consent Of
the convention-that it was much moread-
fisable to give il to the President alone,
and so it was given. From the nature Of
the power think it must be very evident
thatit is not only In the President, but in
the President exclusively. The power Of
pardoning cannot, under a Government
like ours, be well given to any two of the
departments of Government. Mr.. John
son quoted from the Federalist, and said
he thought the President ought long since
to have issued proclamation of general
amnesty. .AHs ~ FgAtS
Abiding to Jefferson Davis, Mr.. John
~ ,o3H&5AOo 2Jb.ry,b