The New York herald., 1868-04-12

Put your question in writing.
q. What conversation passed between you and the
Presiden.f
Mr. BUTLER-Excuse me, l asked to have the
question In writing.
The CHIEF JusTICE-The counsel will please put
the question in writing.
The question was reduced to writing, as follows:
+" At that interview what conversation took place
removal OF Mr.. Stantonf'
Mr.. BUTLER-To that we object. suppose we can
agree as TO the date 1t was the 14th Of January On
the l3th Mr.. stanton was reinstated, and the 14th
was the day after.
Mr.. STANBERY ito witness)-Can you give us the
Orandum which Ihold Mr.. Stanton was reinstated in
possession OF his 0lce Secretary Of War Tues
day, tne ls1n OF January and the conversation oc-
CURED on wednesday, the l4th.
The CHIEF JUsTICE-The Chief Justice thinks the
question admissible within the principle of the de-
cision already made by the Senate but he win be
pleased to put the question to the Senate
Senator CoNNEss demanded the yeas and nays on
admission Of the question:
Mr. STANBERY rose to argue the point. He said-
The counsel for the President ask merely to state the
ground on which they claim to put this question.
Mr. BUTLER qnterruptingl[I object to your stating
that did not ask that. That is an attempt to get
before the COURT mean before the Senate-the tes
timOny by the statement Of counsel. The question
solely is whether the declarations Of the President
can be given In evidence What these declarations
would be begging the whole question and attempting
to get them In In that way by recital OF the counsel
The whole question Is whether any declarations Of the
is no occasion to state what the conversation was.
Mr.. STANBERY-Do you propose to argue 1t nowf
Mr.. BUTLER-We do not want to argue 1t.
Mr.. STANBERY-Then will. Mr.. Chief Justice and
Senators, the testimony which we expect to elicit
from General Sherman ! look upon as admissible
grounds perfectly well understood and perfectly an
swerable. presume can-say in argument what we
expect to prove. First Of all, what is shown heref
What ts the point which gentlemen assume to make
against the Presidents Let the gentlemen speak for
thsmselves First rec received rom the honorable ION
ment):-
Having shown that the President wully violated act Of
Obtaining w wronsfuy The possession Wa! o%cs
poss eonsoins appropriation: through ss as
And y a IL S
Then on page 100, speaking Of the orders Of reno
val, he says:-
attempt the control Of the military force of the
ne or possible m
throw the Congress Of the United States claims
execution Of the very design and every army,
navy, civil and diplomatic service Of the United States
Then on page 90 he says:-
the Rs as he admits to re-
ne 70 .a all on and % sens sSSa Ss
the respondent quarres with him. ss him n the
sss i: ss%s % s A. t.
take 70 the rank q general S
to Sh ni the
By breve appSinsd he can by simple order put him
Of the IL command st WsshngSI through % whom he he
dd .rsn,sess had spprSvea ana q
2 :hs same bIeys but Thomas declined
Senate had reinstated military service by
promosion take that form and otherf many
determined % set aside Grant with whom he had had
ss s
$ Ct Ct:
him out" He has caught his masters word.
Still more clearly to the point is the argument in
reference to the admission Of Mr.. Chanders testi.
mony, which we find on page 25l. They had called
Mr. Cooper to show the ,.I1sa intent ,n of the the
Of his alleged conspiracy, by controlling the re-
trolling the purse as well the sword Of the nation.
'The only question is" says the learned Manager,
ways and means p, The difiicuity that rests in the
minds Of my learned friends the other side is that
they cluster everything about the 2st OF February
1885, They seem to forget that the act OF the 2st Of
February 1868, was only the elimination OF purpose
formed long before as In the Presidents answer:
he ss 70 cay 4s ei oa as there
various things to do. He must get control
OF the War ONCE But what good does that do II he
cannot get somebody who shall be his servant, his
slave dependent on his breath to answer the requisl
tions OF his pseudo officer whom he may apponts
and therefore he began when Stanton was gus-
pended, and early as the 18th Of December. He
had got to put that suspension and the reasons for 1t
before the Senate, and he knew It would not live
Now he begins. What Is the first thing he doesf
'sTO get somebody In the Treasury Department that
him in the war Department. That is the first thing;
and thereupon, without any vacancy he must make
an appointment. The difficulty that we find is
that are obliged TO argue our case step by step,
upon single point Of evidence. 1t is one Of the in
felicities always OF putting in case that sharp,
keen ingenious counsel can insist at all steps i'm
paling you upon point OF evidence, and, therefore,
have got to proceed little further. Now evil
dence, II you allow It to come in is, first, that he
made this appointment; that this falling he sent 1t TO
the Senate, and Cooper was rejected. Still deter
mined to have Cooper in, he appointed him ad int.
run, precisely as this dd tnterim was appointed,
without law and against right. We put it as a part
OF the whole machinery by which to get hold to get,
II he could his hand In the Treasury OF the United
States although Mr.. Chandler has just stated there
through the War Bapaftnsess and nd Il tssU sSe sa%e
fiomeht, to show thar this was part Of the same
McCplloch, Secretary Of the Treasury, must have
known that Thomas was appointed yet the Presi-
dent took pains 1--WE have put In the paper per TO serve
ment Of Thomas dd interim In order that he and
Cooper might recognize his warrants. This Is to
early as the 18th of August 1867 that 1t was pro-
gressed in by the appointment Of Mr. Cooper In the
fan OF 1857 going through all the subsequent time
until il at last culminatedn saw the gentlemen 'ton
the aist Of February by the President finding the
proper tool to put In the War ONCE" Accord
Ing 10 this argument he was looking for O
proper tool for servant for one who would do his
bidding; and after that search they say he found
the proper one In person whom they have called
"a disgraced onlcer.n Mr.. Chief Justice and Sena-
tors especially those Of you who are lawyers, what
case they attempting to make against the Presi-
dentf Not simply that he did certain actsp That
does not make him guilty. But he did those acts
ynaid Hde, with an unlawful intent and criminal
purpose They do not therefore, attempt TO prove
that purpose by any positive testimony, but
they say there are certain facts which raise
A PRESUMPTION of criminal intent. This being
40 what Is the rule TO rebut this pre-
suInpton when prosecution is allowed to raise
nresmption OF the intent of the acts by proving cir
cumstances may not that presumption be rebutted
by proof OF other circumstances 10 show that the
accused had no such intentionS Was anything ever
palmer than tnatf Consider In what attitude the
person Is charged with passing counterfeit money.