The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-03-27

| 10 prevent OT uluue( cGduCOu uOlu uOiuIlS
Office as Secretary of War, or that he was guilty
of high crime or misdemeanor. he denies
| that Stanton was Secretary OF War at that
time, and that he did not advise Thomas or
any other person or persons to use any CO.
ercion to obtain possession of the Department
of War; that no force was used by Thomas In
obedience to the President, and was no agree
ment between him and Thomas to use any
force whatever. The allegations of said arti-
Gle that there was an intent to use force is
wholly unsustained.
Inasmuch as to sixth article respondent de-
MES that he entered at ally time with any per-
son or persons into COL spiracy to defeat the
operation of the Tenure CT Office law, and that
there is no statement OF the steps taken in
pursuance of such alleged design.
In answer to the seventh article he denies
that he attempted at any time to take posses
sion of the property Of the War Department;
that he did not commit crime and misde-
meanor, and refers to other articles to show his
intent.
In answer to the eighth article he denies that
he made an attempt to take possession OF mo-
ney and records of the War Department.; that
he acted in constitutional manner.
In answer to the ninth article, Mr.. Stanbery
read the Presidents noe to General Emory,
and stated that the Preident merely wished
to consult with Emory OIL some matters per-
| tanning to the administration of department.
General Emory called his (the President's)
attention to ths law directing that orders to
the army shall be sent through General Grant,
| to which the President replied that he con-
sidered it in conflict with .he constitution. The
article, after detailing the conversation be-
tween the President and General Emory, de-
MED the allegation that the respondent had
attempted to interfere with or influence Gene
raj Emory in an unconstitutional manner, and
that his opinion there expressed was what he
honestly and sincerely believed.
Mr. Evarts then proceeded to read the an
swer to the tenth article. The article gave the
history Of the committee, and stated that, In
reply to the address Of the committee, he made
certain remarks. He denied that he was cor
rectly reported on that occasion, and that the
remarks attributed to him are not his precise
words. He also denied that the speech attrib-
uted to him at Cleveland vas correct, and that
as contained in the articles of impeachment,
give q true representation Of his meaning.
Respondent also denies the accuracy of the st.
Louis speech, and begs that If admitted it shall
be all considered, and no part Of 1t eXpunged.
Respondent further alleged that he had COM
municated his views to Congress relative to
the misrepresentation Of certain States and
that no such statements we're made in accord
ance with his rights as an American citizen,
and as President Of the United States. Fur
thermore, the views and opinions expressed by
him in these speeches are the same as he had
expressed to Congress, and should be so con-
sidered. In further answer to the tenth artl-
Gle, in consideration Of his duties to the peo-
pie, he hath and has the right of, on occasion,
expressing opinions to the people relative TO
the duty and character Of Congress, the views,
motives and aims Of public men; and that
abridging the liberty Of speech and the liberty
of the people. he cannot hut hold that rule was
and is his clear right md duty. Therefore
he insists that he but exercised the right OF
any citizen in thus addressing his fellow
citizens, and therefore is not subject to
impeachment, or other sction at law.
In answer to the eleventh article, respon-
dent denies that he declared or affirmed that
the Thirty-ninth Congrnss was legal Con-
gress, or that he made any allegation contain
ed in said article. In tile address then made
he said nothing Of the competency OF said
Congress to pass any laws while Southern
States were unrepresensed. He denied that
he had attempted to defeat the operation OF
the act providing for the more efficient gov
ernment Of the rebel Sta;es, or the act making
appropriations for the army and navy, and he
refers to other articles to show his intent.
Further answering, the matters contained in
the eleventh article do not name, designate, or
define any attempt, design or device to render
him guilty Of the high crimes and misde-
meanors alleged against him.
The QUESTION OF GRANTING TIME.
Upon the conclusion Of the reading of the
answer at three P. NJ, the Chief Justice put
the question whether tie Senate would receive
the answer Of the President of the United
States, and order it to be fled, which was de-
cided in the affirmative.
Mr. Boutwell, here almost took the breath Of
people away by announcing that the replica
ton would be ready by to-day at one o'clock.
He asked for copy of the answer.
Mr. Evarts here roso to ask for reasonable
time for preparation oftheir case. So far their
whole time had been taken up in preparing
the answer. In order tc examine properly the
questions of law involved, the rules Of fevidence,
&C., they desired thirty lays.
Then comes the tug of war on the demand
for time. General Logan, no longer patient at
being kept IN the background, rises to en-
tighten the honorable court. Even Radical
senators grew listless over the eloquence
which go often inspires The House, and could
not see why the honorable manager should
travel so YEARLY over and over again the same
ground. The contrast is marked indesd-not
merely as to manner and style Of speaking,
but as to matter between General Logan and
Mr.. Eyarts, who follows him-close, logical,
iucisiye-with touch o., irony and sarcasm as
fine as Damascus blade. Mr. Wilson
came next, something o. an Improvement upon
General Logan, but falling in dignity and ele-
vation far below his former speeches upon I'M
peachment in the House. This member has
now burned his boats. He schemes and tricks
with such as Schenck, snd sinks to the level of
such declaimers as Bine ham and Logan. 1t is
q pity. There were not many Of his sort in
bis party.
Mr.. Stanbery made very candid, cogent
appeal for time, remarking that only eight
working days had been allowed them to pre-
pare their answer its preparation had con-
sumed every hour they could spare day and
night, and he was sorry to say that they had
been forced to work even upon Sunday. They
had had no time to summon or arrange for wit
nesscs. On the contrary, the managers had
been preparing their witnesses while the Presi-
dents counsel were preparing their answer.
Mr.. Bingham here clairled the right to open
and close the debate or the managers on oil
questions, and then proceeded to deliver him
self of one of his ususl vehement and violent
harancues, chanted in his usual monotonous,
sing-song style, and abusing Mr.. johnson
roundly. It was obvious from this and other
speeches that the answer OF the President had
told as centre shot, and the parties hurt were