The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1868-04-25

sion. The trial lasted thirteen days The
spectators used to come as early as five in
tho morning. BY seven the Hall was
full. The proceedings began at nine, and
were often prolonged till two, three, or four
o'clock in the morning without intermis-
sion. When the prisoner was brought
in, he made three obeisances TO the Lord
High Steward, and then knclt at the
bar. The managers, thirteen in number,
opened the proceedings with speech rel
ativc to some particular charge. Their
witnesses were examined and cross exam
iDed, and the Court then adjourned for
half an hour, to allow Stafford an oppor-
tunity of comforting with his COUNSEL
Afterward the Earl spoke and produced
witnesses for his defense, and the mana.
gers spoke TO evidence. The prisoner was
then remanded to the Tower. As the
trial went on it became evident that the
number of Stafford's friends increased
Though modern research has shown that
he was guilty of the offences with which
he was charged, that fact was certainly
not made out at the trial. The Commons
abandoned the impeachment and intro
ddced into their own body bill Of at
tainder, charging Stafford with an at.
tempt TO subvert the liberties Of the coun-
try. Convicted aud sentenced to death.
he met his fate with magnificent calmnoss
and dignity, aud has doubtless received a
more lenient judgment from posterity
than If his fate had been less cruel and
his prosecutors more mcrciful
When Stafford was lcd out TO exccu-
ton, he knclt before the window Of cell
which he hal to pass, and begged the bless
Ing of Archbishop Laud, who was there
imprisoned on charges similar to those for
which the Earl himself was TO suffer-
Laud was impeached, ADD, after n year
and quarter was brought to trial. The
cause was prolonged six months. and then
terminated just as Staifords had done.
The Commons, despairing Of a conviction
before the Upper House, brought in bill
of attainder, and the Archbishop was be-
headed.
impeachment, indeed from this time forth,
seems 70 have been. with n very few cxcep.
tions, tedious, irritating, and expensive fail
ures. Charles |. impeached the leaders Of
tho Parliamentary party but his action was
clearly unconstitutional, and nothing came
of IL; While the civil war was raging, the
Commons impcacheI the Queen because she
had joined Charles with body Of troops.
This matter was never prosecuted. The trial
of Charles /. was not by process Of impeach.
ment-the Lords. indeed, refused 10 have
anything 10 do with IL. but the Commons
erected themselves for the OCCASION into n
high court gf justice. Lord Clarendon was
impeaele'i of high treason in the reign Of
Charles H., aud went into voluntary exile.
Lords Arlington and Danny were impcached
IN the same reign, aud the prosecution failed.
But during tho insane period Of Oates ''Po-
pisa Plot, the venerable Niscount Stafford
was placed Mt the bar Of the House Of Lords,
charged with completely in that imaginary
scheme. and after Il seven days trial was con.
yicted and executed His death had an effect
very different from what his prosecutors de.
sired, and probably did more than any other
thing 70 arouse the nation from its bloody
dream Of plots and conspiracy. Indeed, the
tendency Of impeachment in modern times
has almost always been 20 raise the prisoner
to the dignity of martyrdom, and benefit the
cause for which no suffers The famous trial
of DR.. Sacheverell, In the reign of Queen
Anne, II a striking instance in point. This
man. preacher who possessed little of re.
ligion. virtue, learning or good sense" was
lmpeached in ITO on account Of two SER
mons, in which he denounced tho act Of toler-
alton, and inculcated high Tory principles Of
passive obedience thus condemning by i'm
plication the Revolution of 1859. During
the trial public passion became infamed to
nm almost ludicrous extent the sermons were
printed and sold in incredible numbers, and
the populace made the accused the hero of
the hour. lie was suspended from preaching
for three years but the mob celebrated this
mild sentence as popular victory, and re-
ccivcd Sacheverell with oyations and bonfres.
On change Of Ministry he got n rich living.
Lord Lovat, who was impcached and behead.
cd in the reign of George l., for conspiracy
to restore the Stuarts, would have been re.
membercd only for his rascalities, had not
the dignity Of his trial raised him out Of the
mire in which he belonged In the early
years Of the reign of the House of Hanover,
impeachments were numerous, and the two
Houses of Parliament did not even deem it
beneath their dignity to put forth all their
power for the punishment of such petty
crimes rs smuggling. In several cases the
only result of the proceedings was that the
Lords and the Commons got at loggerheads
on technical questions, and the prisoners es.
capped scot free.
The circumstances of the trial of Warren
Hastings arc so we'll known that we need on
ly briefly refer to them Impeached for ty- |
rannical and corrupt practices during his ad- |
as Governor.G General of British |
India, he was tried before one of the most |
distinguished assemblages that ever gathered
in Wncfpoin Hall n1rLa Eo.r avJ Cho.
idan making some Of their celebrated speech. |
es rs managers on behalf of the Commons.
The articles of impeachment were brought
forward in April, 1885. Two sessions were
consumed in preliminary measures. The
trial began in February, 1888, and lasted un-
til April, 1895, one hundred and forty light
days having been actually consumed in the
process. Hastings was acquitted by large
majorities on all the charges, and public
opinion, which was sayagely hostile to him
at the beginning, was strongly in his favor
before the end and in neither case was it /
precisely just.
Henry Dundas, Viscount Melville, the col. |
ebrated colleague and friend of Pitt, was
impeached in 1905 for misapplication of the |
public money and completely with swind. |
ling paymaster, while Treasurer the Navy. |
His trial began in Westminster Hall, May
20, 1906, and on the 18th of June he was
acquitted by large maiority--a result which
satisfied nobody of the innocence of the ac-
cused, and tended to bring into contempt
both the House Of Lords and the practice of
trial by impeachment. Thatwas the last no.
table trial of the kind which has taken place
in England. A Mr.. Paul made frequent at
tempts in the House of Commons, in 1906, |
to bring forward articles of impeachment