Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1868-06-04

/
tiently indicated that Trey wanted
them ruled out of court at once. 1t
was not difficult TO sec where the
Chief Justice stood with respect to
most of the questions, but he whely
concluded to submit each one as il
was raised 10 the Senate without him
self formerly deciding. The result in
every instance was that the impeach-
ment men carried their point by ma
jorities running from four to eight.
The impeachment Republicans who
voted with the other side on these
points were Anthony, Corbctt, Ferry,
Edmunds, Morgan, Morrill, of VT,
Patterson ofN. H., and Wiley. All
this was mere by-play of serious
character to be cure, but not involv-
ing the main question.
The real struggle began when the
clerk submitted Conkling's order to
vote on the articles at once This
was lost by two majority, the vote
being yeas 26, nays 2S, the impeach-
mentmen who voted with the otherside
being Cole, Conkling, Ferry, Morgan,
Morrill, of Vt, Morton, Patterson of
N. H., and Wiley. This proposition
being rejected, Mr. Morrill, of Maine,
presented his order for an adjourn
ment to the 23d of June, which was
also lost by tie vote Of q to 27.
The impeachers who now voted in
the negative were Cole, Conkline,
Edmunds, Frelinghuysen, Ferry, Nor
rill of VT, Morton, and Patterson Of
New Jersey.
At ten minutes before two the vote
on the third article having been an
nounced, Senator Williams moved
that the Senate, sitting as court of
impeachment, do now adjourn sine die.
The vote having been taken by
yeas and nays, the Chief Justice said
that before announcing the vote, be
would remind the Senators that the
22d rule provided that Impeachment
should not, in any article presented,
be sustained by a vote of two-thirds
of the members present, a judgment
of aequittal should be entered. He
added, after some interruption by
Senators, that ii there were no obiec-
tion, the clerk would enter the judg-
ment ofacquittal according to the rule.
Senator Conkling misunderstanding
the proposition of the Chief Justice,
suggested that the rule required
vote to.be taken on each article before
judgment could be entered.
The Chief Justice assented, but said
he had reference simply TO those ar
ticles on which the vote had been Ia.
ken. There being no objection the
Chief Justice directed Judgment of ac-
quittal to be entered on the second,
third and eleventh articles OF impeach-
ment.
The vote on adjournment sine die
was then announced, yeas "a, nays 16.
The Chief Justice then declared, at
ten minutes before two o'clock, that
the Senate, sitting as n Court of I'm
parchment for the trial of Andrew
johnson on articles of impeachment,
stood adjourned without day.
There was no perceptible manifes-
tation OF feeling on the part of the
spectators. The members of the
House then returned to their chamber,
and the galleries were in a few min
utes almost deserted.
Mr.. Anthony rose TO a personal OK
planation, and stigmatized the reports
in regard to the Chief Justice endeav-
oring to influence him in the matter
of impeachment as a malignant false
hood.
Mr.. Wiley made statement of
similar kind.
Mr.. Johnson contradicted the story
in regard to dining with the Chief
Justice in company with other Sena-
tors.
Mr.. Fessenden denied the truth of
the story in regard to a consultation
between him and the Chief Justice,
and others in regard 10 the formation
of Lew party.