The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1868-04-28
IM PE AC III M e n T
PROGRESS OF THE TRIAL.
WASHINGTON, April 16.
SENATE.

Il 1rf u
Il WASHINGTON, April 16.
Il SENATE.
i MIR. Sumner offered an order to admi
all evidence which may be offered.
On motion of Mr.. Connoss the order
!. | vas tabled-22 to II.
Il Mr.. Stanbery was not present, but Mr.
Evarts said they would proceed as far as
possible without him.
i Walter Cox, Of Georgetown, was called
| by the defense and asked when his con
lnection with the case of Stanton VS..
Thomas commenced, and when and by
whom and under what circumstances he
was Employed
i Mr.. Butler objected, but the Chief
Justice overruled; he might answer the
first part Of the question.
/ Witness said he was sent for on Feb
ruary %, and went to the White House
at 8 o'clock.
He was proceeding to stats what the
President said to him when Mr.. Butler
again objected and demanded that the
counsel put in writing what they expect
ed to prove.
The counsel proposed to prove that the
President employed Mr.. Cox to procure
a Judicial proceeding by filing quo war
|ranto.
Mr.. Butler argued that the President
did not appear in the record of this case,
and writs should have been fled by the
Attorney General.
| Mr.. Evarts rejoined that the President
had made the case his own, and he could
not appear in it, and the Attorney Gene
raj approved the employment Of Mr..
lCox.
| Mr.. Butler argued at length that the
doctrine was an estoppel.
Mr.. Curtis said that the remarks Of
Mr.. Butler required no reply, and in an
swer to Mr.. Ferry, stated the counsel did
not propose to disprove the record, but to
show that the motion to discharge Gen.
Thomas was made only when his lawyers
saw no hope of procuring judicial de-
cision on the constitutionality of the act.
The argument was continued by Messrs.
Wilson and Evarts as to the admissibility
of evidence concerning the intent of the
President.
The Chief Justice ruled that the evi-
deuce to show that the President en-
ployed lawyers to obtain decision on the
constitutionality of the tenure of-ofice
| act, was admissible in support Of the de.
nial of the first article in accordance with
former votes of the Senate and with prin-
ciples of law aud right.
The yeas and nays we're called which
resulted 20 to 81. The evidence was
therefore admitted.
Witness resumed-The President told
| the witness he desired to have proceed
ings instituted to test the acts consti-
tutionality and wished him to consult with
Mr.. Stanbery, who had been too busy to
look into the matter; he left Gen. Thomas
with the President, and concluded it
would be best to apply for habeas cor
pus after Gen. Thomas should be com.
mitted by the Criminal Court, which
course Mr.. Stanbery approved.
The question was asked and objected
to.-What did you do towards getting out
the habeas corpus by direction of the
PRESIDENT Admitted-29 to ~.
eAnswer-Tried to have Thomas COM
mitted to prison. Stanton's counsel ap-
| piled for q postponement. Chief jus
tice Cartier said he should not be held in
custody. Witness moved his discharge,
expectingto force his committal, but the
motion was granted.
The Senate refused to allow a state
ment to be made of the conversation with
/ the President the same evening, and the
counsel then asked-After reporting this
to the President, did you do any any 9TH
er act in pursuance Of his previous in
structions to test the constitutionality Of
the tenure -of.ofice act?. If SO, what were
Ithey2 Objected to, which the Chief JUS
ltice overruled and the Senate sustained
his ruling-yeas ~, nays %.
| Witness resumed-Next day I applied
to the District Attorney to sign the in
formation in the nature Of quo warran-
to, which he declined to do without the
Authority of the Attorney General; visited
stanton and gave him his opinion. Not
lsllowed to be stated, and nothing else was
i done in the matter.
i The Senate took recess for 10 min
lutes.
j On reassembling, at 2:50, Mr.. Cox was
cross examined by Mr.. Butler. He con.
T sidered himself as counsel for the Pres.
ident, but appeared before Judge Cartier
as counsel for General Thomas; and did
mot tell the Court or opposing counsel in
!, Court that his purpose was to get the
lease in train to test the constitutionality
of the tenure Of Office law, and supposes
diyined the object.
| Mr.. Brady, ST., testified that he was
advisory counsel for General Thomas
The papers which he prepared to obtain
ia quo carranto were returned to him q
few days ago by Mr.. Stanbery with ver-
bal message for him and Mr.. Merrick to
use them at their discretion. He has
never received direct authority from the
Attorney General or the President to use
them. General Thomas was discharged
from custody on motion of the Presi-
dents counsel. R. T. Merrick, lawyer
Iof Washington, was employed by Gen.
j eral Thomas on the morning Of the 22d
of February, after the action Of Judge