The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1868-04-14
BY TELEGRAPH.
CONGRESS.
WASHINGTON, April Is.
SENATE.

bate as may wish to do so.
Mr.. Sumner offered an amendment,
that no further postponement should
be caused thereby, and accepted sever
al amendments relative to the MEM
bers who should close the case. The
length of time to he occupied by each
| was made.
Mr.. Stanbery said the counsel for the
defence were strongly opposed to the
limitation of time in the final argu-
ment. Ftl
Mr.. Butler intimated that he would
not take advantage OF the clause to
| speak.
Mr.. Evarts said the result OF the
proposition as 1t now stood, would give
six Managers against four of the coun-
sci on closing the argument.
Mr.. Drake raised the point OF order
that the Senate, sitting as court,
could not take such action. The point
was overruled.
The vote was then taxed resulting
SO to 10. So the rule remains un-
changed.
Examination of General She,1pam re-
sw'Hed-Mr. Stanberry asked II latter
the restoration of Mr.. Stanton, did You
form an opinion as to the desirability
or as to the good OF the service of the
office of Secretary of War being filled
by any other than Stanton, II so. did
you express your opinion to the Prest-
dent?"
Objections made and argued by Mr..
Bingham. .1-
hfr. Stanberry replied that Che ques-
lion of intent was of vital Importance;
that they did not offer this testimony
as an abstract opinion, but as the judg-
Inent formed and expressed by the
second officer in the service for Its
good. he referred TO the relations
existing between the President and
Mr.. Stanton, and claimed that it was
competent to prove whether distin-
guiShed Generals like Grant or Sher-
man believed a change should be mnde
in the Interest of the President. he
appealed earnestly to the Senate for
the sake Of justice 10 admit the evil
dence.
Mr.. Butler reioined, that by intro
ducing irrelevant testimony, law
would be broken 10 defend breaking
of law. He said there would be no
limit to the inquiries which would be
put to the witness; the managers could
ask him II he had quarrel with Stan
ton; II that Influenced his decision; so
that the field would be boundless. 1t
seemed to be assumed by the other side
that the evil intent must be proved by
something the President had said,
whereas II was proved by his act in
breaking the act; it was also immaterial
| whether Stanton was fit man or not
be done that good might come. Refer
ring to remark of Mr.. Stanbery, that
| Mr.. Stanton did not take part in the
Cabinet councils, he said there was no
such thing contemplated by the Con-
| stitution; members of the Cabinet were
to be called on for advice respecting the
affairs of their own departments. The
President must show that he ever call
ed on Mr.. Stanton for written opin-
ion, or that he had given him an order
which he had disObeyed.
Senator Conkling inquired If the
counsel proposed to prove that General
Sherman had advised tho President to
procure change in any particular
way.
Mr.. Stanbery replied in the negatives
witness had only expressed an opinion
as TO the advisability of such n change
Mr.. Evarts said it was not merely 8
question of having committed viola
tion of law which was punishable in
another court by so small u penalty as
six cents fine, or IL few days imprlson.
ment, but II was question of the com
mission ofan impeachable offence, pun
ishable by deposition from the highes
Office, which question, all eVidenct
relating to the motive was of the mos
vital importance.
Mr.. Bingham held that the rules o
evidence we're the same on the trial O
| ueSSdT OE VI u L GEeSIuents
Mr.. Evarts interrupted, to say he had
in his remarks, supposed the Presiden
to be on trial for petty ohense, an
repelled the insinuation that he woult
mete out justice according to rank.
Mr.. Bingham continued in an ear
nest appeal against the admission O
the testimony, and at the conclusion
the yeas and nays were taken, whic
resulted 10 yeas to So nays, SO 1t wa
not admitted.
Mr.. johnson offered a question
whether before the removal Mr.. Stan
ton had advised the President that h
should be removed and replacedH
The Chief Justice said the Court mus
decide whether the question be put
and the Senate decided in the negative
vote, 1S to 80.
Mr.. Stanbery then said he had n
more questions to ask General Sher
man.
The Managers declined to cross ex
anime, and the Court took reces
at 2:10.
On re-assembling, N. ]. Melgs, clerl
of the District Supreme Court, testified
that he had affixed the seal to the war
rant for the arrest of General Thomas
about 2 O'Clock on the morning of tn!
22d of February. MIR. Pile, OF Missouri
brought it to him at his house. ln an
swer TO Mr.. Butler, he said he bad beer
of pressing necessity.
Mr.. Stanbery then offered to put II
evidence the warrant and atndaVlt
Mr.. Stanton on which 1t was issued.
II Mr.. Butler objected to its reception
Il Mr.. Evarts said they related to the
same subject on which the Managers
had introduced the testimony, and thai
the President's counsel intended Il
show that he took advantage of the
proceedings commenced by Mr. Stanton
as the speediest method of bringing
the question before the Supreme Court
Mr.. Butler argued that sthe effect oi
i introducing these papers would be tC
open up new regions OF controversy IT.
relevent to the case.
Mr.. Stanbery referred to the fact thai
the declarations of General Thomas
had been admitted as the declarations
OF the President to prove his design In
employing force, and went to rectte the
circumstances attending the discharge
of Gen. Thomas, which he said they
would show was In order to prevent the
President from testing the question
The evidence would also show that
Gen. Thomas was not regarded as q
great criminal by those who procured
his arrest.
Mr.. Butler rejoined, when the Chiei
Justice ruled that the warrant and an
davit were admissible and on taking
the yeas and nays his ruling was sus-
tanned by 81 to II.
Mr.. EvRrts read the document and Mr.
Stanbury resumed the examination.
The warrant was issued in the Cham
bers; has not the docket book with him
Senator johnson offered a question
to be put to Gen. Sherman: When this
President rendered you the ONCE o
Secretary OF War dd interim, January
9th and Goth, 1858, did he at the time o
making such tender state what his pur