The New York herald., 1868-03-31

Mr.. Butter snow tnat any previous COhgrc5s
questioned the right or power of making such
l removals.
But perhaps the most astonishing portion
Of Mr.. Buffers speech is that in which he
denies that Mr.. johnson is President in his
own right. We are told that he is but serving
out Mr.. Lincoln's unexpired term, and that as
Mr.. Stanton was appointed Secretary Of War
by the latter his successor is bound by such
appointment, and cannot, therefore, take ad-
vantage of that portion of the Tenure of Office
bill which provides that the Cabinet of each
President may be of his own selection.
Mr.. Stanton is serving under Mr.. Lincoln's
term of administration, just as Mr.. Johnson is |;
it was a violation Of the law to attempt his re-
moval, and consequently high crime and
misdemeanor. Mr.. Butler denies the right Of the
President to question the constitutionality Of
any law, so that, no matter how glaringly un-
constitutional an act of Congress may be, it is
the duty Of the President to enforce it, although
in 80 doing he violates his oath of Office. Turn
ing to the appointment of General Thomas as
Secretary of War ad interim, the counsel de-
nounces it as q usurpation. The charge Of
conspiracy Is enlarged upon and has for its
main foundation an allegation that General
Thomas said he intended to skick' Mr.. Stanton
out of Office. The creation of the new military
department and the promotion first Of General
Sherman and afterwards of General George II.
Thomas are all declared part of a plot to
remove the barnacle of the War Department
and take possession. The charge Of conspiring
with General Emory is made the subject of a
long sensation story, in which Mr.. Butler
proves to his own satisfaction that because the
President sent for General Emory and asked
him the questions he did at that particular
time the purpose was to seduce that officer into
disobedience Of the laws.
After discussing the various phases of con-
spiracy at an almost intolerable length Mr..
Butler takes up his own charges that the Presi
dent, in his speeches, had endeavored to bring
Congress into disrepute, and that by speaking
as he had his remarks tended to bring the
Executive Office into contempt. Now, we
would ask, who commenced this vituperation
and denunciatiye speechmaking Did not
Mr.. Thaddeus Stevens, in the House Of Repre-
sentatives, denounce Mr.. Johnson in a fierce
and bitter speech long before that gentleman
left Washington on his tour to Chicago?
During the canvass last year radical Senator'S
and Congressman delivered political harangucs
filed with the most violent denunciatons aud
coarse abuse of the President. Even Mr..
Colfax, the Speaker of the House, went so far
as to declare that he (Mr. Johnson) would be
hanged if he did thus and so. Were not all of
these things equally as bad as anything that
Mr.. Johnson ever said or did? Mr.. Bntler, in
at st. Louis and Cleveland, where the Presi-
dent banded words with the mob, and shud-
ders with virtuous indignation at the "ungentlc-
manlike" position then occupied by the Chief
Magistrate Of the nation. But Mr.. Butler en-
tirely forgot to mention another scene which
took place in the City Hall Park of New York,
in which he was an actor, and very promincn.
one, too. He forgot to mention that ne, too,
banded words with a mob, and was SO undig-
niied as to describe the voters of New York
as pack Of thieves and robbers, and he would
have continued, probably, with other. un-
apple, thrown by bcllgerent citizen, struck
him on the breast. Was his position then less
rcprehensible than that Of Andrew Johnson,
citizen of Tennessee and President of the
United States.
We have thus hastily reviewed the opening
speech Of Mr.. Johnson's prosecutors. If they
have proved anything like ''high crimes and
misdemeanors" we have failed to discover the
proof. The speech has not even the advan-
tage of sophistry. It's arguments are lame
can aid the defence only; its charges fall to
the ground from their own weakness Through
out the long pages we have perused we find
everything of the partisan and stump orator
and nothing of the statesman performing
grave duty. As legal argument it scarcely
rises above the level Of the pettifogger's bal
derdash. There is but one truth to be found
in it, and that says that ''the future political
welfare and liberties of all men-in this country
we suppose-hang trembling on the decision
of the hour" All true, very true, but not in
the sense that Mr.. Butler means it; for what
ever be the end of this trial, 1t will be the
deathblow of the radicals as political entity,
and thus will be assured the future liberties Of
the people of this republic.
Daniel Drew Versus Cornelius Vanderbilt.
Daniel, in escaping to Jersey, escaped from
the lions den, and Mr.. Drew, in secur-
ing recognition from the Jersey Legis-
lature, is intrcnched in his new posi-
,, tion. Jay Gould, of the Drew com
pany, in hurrying westward with couple Of
millions to push forward the Erie broad gauge
extension, has made good flank movement
against Vanderbilt. Nor is 1t positively GER