The New York herald., 1868-05-15

authorized or suggested the use OF force What was
said by Mr. Thomas was said out OF doors not to
Mr.. stanton, nor communicated TO him by message.
The interviews between General Thomas and
Mr.. stanton were OF the most pacific char
acter. The reply or Mr.. stanton when the letter
OF the President was delivered to him, was motive
to repel the idea OF resistance, and the testimony OF
General sherman shows that the President did not
anticipate resistance. IL IL essential TO the support
OF this (fourth) article, and also OF article six that
intimidation and threats should have been contem-
plated by the parties charged with conspiracy under
the act OF July 81 1861. These failing the charge
fails with them I'm both articles As to the NTH and
seventh articles the attempt Is made to sustain them
under law OF Congress, passed February 27, 1904,
extending the criminal laws OF Maryland over 30
much OF the District as was part OF that State mas
been changed by the statutes OF the law OF Maryland
on conspiracy or misdeneanor. The President
r,,,,c Is charged WITH n misdemeanor by con-
made unlawful by the act Of March q 1861 This il
the only Interpretation which am able with the aid
OF the arguments OF the Managers TO place upon
these articles. Granting the positions assumed AZ
the foundations for the charges In these articles
they must fail II the act which the President pro.
posed to do was lawful act and he did not propose
TO accomplish 1t by unlawful means The removal OF
stanton Is the means proposed in order to prevent
MIN from holding his oficc, as charged In the nfth
and 10 take and possess the property of the United
states In his custody as charged In the seventh ar
tcie. The right to remove him, therefore, disposes
ot both articles Outside OF any OF these consdera-
tons have been unable to look upon either OF
these articles % as as justifying a charge Of copspi-
totally inappicaDle to the facts proved The Presi-
dent, II you please intends to remove person from
oice by an open exercise OF power against the pro-
visions OF law, contending that he has right so to
do. notwithstanding the law and Temporarily TO
supply the vacancy thus created. lie Issued an order
TO that efect and at the same time orders another
person to take charge or the ONCE who agrees to do
10. How these acts, done under a claim OF right
can be tortured into conspiracy under the absence
OF any specific provision OF law declaring them to he
such, is beyond my comprehension. Article eight il |
disposed OF by what has been said upon the preced
lag articles. Article nine Is In my iudgment not
only without proof TO support IT, but actually dis
proved by the evidence. Referring to the articles
charging high crimes and nisdcmeanors Mr. Fessen-
den held that the President could not be convicted
Tor the assertion OF his opinion He had only exer-
csed the right OF freedom OF speech and that was
guaranteed by the constitution. After discussing
Tie various points AZ length Mr.. Fessenden contin-
ued:-To deny the President right to comment free.
" upon the conduct OF coordinate branches of the
government would not only be denying him riaht |
secured to every other citizen OF the republic but
might deprive the people Of the benet OF his opIn.
on o. publc AFFAIRS and OF his watchfuness OF their
nterests and welfare. That nnder circumstances
where he was called upon by large body OF his fel-
ow citizens to address them and when he was road
n by confumey and Insult, he permitted himself 10
ranscend the limits OF proper and dignined speech
nch - was becoming TO the dignity OF his station
natter 0fdeep regret and highly censurable but
2 my opinion. II can receive no other punlshn,ent
nan pupfc sent'meDt alone can innict. II rightly