The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1868-04-14
Congressional Proceedings


sENATE..............W ASH ISs sToEs April u.
The reading Of the journal was dispensed
with
The Chief Justice stated the question be-
fore the court, to be on the motion allow
ing as many OF The Managers and counsel
to participate IN the hnaf debate as may
wish TO do 50.
sumner offered an amendment-that no
further postponement should be caused
thereby. Accepted.
Several amendments re ative to the
number who should close, and the length
of time to be occupied by each were made.
Stanbery said the counsel for the defense
were strongly opposed TO a Limitation Of
time N the final argument
Butler intimated that he would not take
advan nta2e of a chance To speak.
EVartS said that the result of the prOpO-
sitIOn as 1t now ood, would give six Man
ayers an opportunity TO s. ear against the
counsel, on The closing argument.
Drake raised a point OF order-that the
Senate. sitting a Il court, could not take
such action. Point oveFruIed.
A vote was taken, resuitlng-38 TO 10, and
the uIe remains unchanged.
The examination OF Gen, sherman was
Stanbery-After the restoration OF stan
ton, did you form an opinion as to the de-
STABILITY or as to the good OF the service
OF the office of Secretary OF War being
6Hed by another han Stanton2 ~. 50, ald
4 on ex press your opini on to the Pre-i ideut?
Objection made and argued by 81 ugham.
intent was of vital importance; they did
not offer this testimony as an abstract
opinion, but as the Judgment formed and
expressed by the second officer in che SER
vice. for its good. He referred to the rela-
tiOns existing between the Presid Mt and
stanton, and Gained that 10 was compe-
tent to prove that DISTINGUISHED Generals
like Grant ana SheruaH believed that
change should be made IN the Interest of
the Government. He app aled earnestly
70 the Senate, for the sake o. iU-tise, 70 ad-
NIT the evidence.
Butler rel0ined that bF Introducing ir-
broken. To defend a breaking % the law,
he said there would be no limit 70 The il
quries which would he pu 70 WItne 8. Ile
Managers could ask him II he lad a quar-
rel with stanton; if that Influenced his
opinion. so that the ne would be bound
less. It seemed to be assumed 0Y Lhe
other side that the evil intent must be
proved by something the Presldeut ha&
said; whereas, il was proved By his act In
brea Stng the act was also lmIn teflal
whether 5 anton was ftt man or not TO
be retained In office. Evil could not be
done that good might come.
Referring TO remark Of Stanbery, that
Mr.. Stanton did not take part IN Caolnet
council, he said there was no sucn bnlhg
co tempIated by the Constitution, as that
membeI5 Of the Cabinet We're % be caiied
on for advice respecting the affairs Oi tneir
Snow mat he ever called on Stanton for a
written opinion, or that he had given him
an order which he had disobeYed.
senator CoAkitng inquired il the eoun-
sci proposed to prove that Gen. sherman
had advised the President 70 procure
change in any particular way.
Stanbery replied IN the negative. The
witness mad only expressed an opinion as
To the desiEabnity Of some change.
Evarts said IL was NOT merely question
of having committed a violation Of the
law, which was punishable ID anotner
court by 30 small penalty a. "A six cents
fine or IA few days imprisonment, but was
a question OF Lhe commission on an inl-
peachab.e Ofense, pUnIshap4e by deposl-
tIon from the highest Once On Wh-ch
question all Tie -s--1- G relating 70 the
matter was Of the most vital importance
Bingham held fnat the rules OF evidence
were the same tue trial Or a DeLGaE
Mr. Evaris interrupted him 10 Say he
lad, in his remarks. supposed tue Are-i-
dent to be on trial on petty oLenee. slild
r=pen The ms uuation Uhat le wo1ta
mete out Justice aeeordlns 70 rank.
Bingham continued In an earue APP .eai
against the admission or 1ests Q2ouyi ans
at the conclusion tte E--as $3.50 aayS were
taken, and resulted Is - -. - i W - nor
admitted.
johnson offered a question whether. be-
fore the removal or stanton ne nad al
vised the President that le should De- re-
moved and replaced.
The Chief Jus,ice said the C0grt must
decide whether the question should De
put. and the Senats decided In the mega
tive by vOie of s 20 s..
SLanberN then said he IaG nc more
questions to ask Gen. >hernl IA.
The managers declined 90 cross exam
ile. AMI the Court took recess at Zsll.
On re-aSseInblng. n. y ielgs, C-ts4 ~
the District Supreme Cour. testified nat
he afii xed the seal 70 the v irr4ut Tor 5le
/ arrest Of General Thomas about = . COCK
on the morning Of Februsry I'd, Pie, OF
Missouri, brought IL to him at his house.
In answer To Butler, he said lie lad been
called on at such hours before "a ctae- or
pressing necessity
Stanbery then offered to put in as evil
dence the. warrant and a1ddaFit OF stan
/ ton, on which It was issued.
Butler objected 10 It's reception.
Evarts said they related 20 the same
/ subject on which the Managers had afro
4 dQced testimony, and that tne Pres dent :
counsel int6Hdet TO show that he took s.d-
+ vantage of tne proceedings ca1li-eneae DE
Stanton, as the speelisst method OF o---5-
ing the question Before tle Supreme court
Butter argued that the effect 1t l-Ec-
+ duefng these papers would be @ open n
i new regions Of c01trOTe-sys 1t-rlesa-- 10
+ the case.
Stanberys referred o the. fact that tue de-
f claratiOns OF Gen ThOInas mad been 4l-
. mitted as declarations Of the President. 70
I prove his design IN EN- pIOytng force aud
+ went on to recite the circumstance at
tending the discharge OF Thomas, which
i he would show was done in order to pre-
I vent the President from testing the Ques-
tiOn. The evidence Will also show that
I Gen. Thomas was not regarded as a great
+ criminal by those who procured his arrest.
! Butler rejoined, when the Chief Justic e