Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1868-04-17
IMPEACHMENT.
WASHINGTON, April 16.
- SENATE

Mr.. STANBERH was not present, but
Mr.. EVARTS said they would proceed
as far as possible without him.
Walters Cox, of Georgetown, was called
by the defense and asked when his con-
nection with the case OF Stanton v. Thomas
commenced. and when and by whom, and
under what circumstances he was en-
ployed?
Mr.. BUTLER objected, but
The CHIEF JUSTICE overruled. He
might. answer the first part of the ques-
ton.
The witness said he was sent for Febru-
ary 22d, and went to the White House at
five O'Clock. He was proceeding to state
what the President said to him, when
Mr.. BUTLER again objected and de-
manded that the counsel put in writing
what they expect to prove. s-is7a
Inc counsel proposed to prove that the
President employed Mr.. Cox to procure a
Judicial decision by filing quo warranto.
Mr.. BUTLER argued that the President
did not appear in the record of the case,
and the writs should have been filed by the
Attorney General. f---EF .--- -
Mr.; EVARTS rejoined that the Presi-
dent had made the case his own. He could
not appear in it, and the Attorney General
appeared in the employment OF Mr.. Cox
Mr.. BUTLER argued at length that the
ldoctrine was an estoppel. g., 49,
| Mr.. CURTIS said that the remarks of
Mr.. Butler required no reply, and in an
sWer to Mr.. Ferry, stated that the counsel
did not propose to disprove the record, but
would show that the motion to discharge
General Thomas was made only when his
lawyers saw no hope of procuring Judi
cial decision on the constitutionality Of the
act.
The argument was continued by Messrs
WILSON and EVARTS as to the admissi-
bility of the evidence concerning the in
| fpnt M thp President
| The CHIEF JUSTICE ruled that evil
dence to show that the President employed
lawyers to obtain decision on the consti-
tutiOnality of the tenure of Office act was
admissible in support of the denial of the
first articles, in accordance with former
votes of the Senate, and with the princi-
Piles of law and right. s-f
: The yeas and nays were called, which
resulted 20 to 81. The evidence was, there
| fore, admitted. -%s,
The witness resumed. The President
| told the witness he desired to have pro-
ceedings instituted to test act the constitu-
tionally, and wished him to consult with
Mr.. Stanbery, who had been too busy to
look into the matter. He LETT General
Thomas with the President, and concluded
it would be best to apply for writ of ha-
beas corpus, after General Thomas should
be committed by the criminal court, which
course Mr.. Stanberry approved.
"What did you do towards getting out
writ of haheas corpus by direction of the
| PRESIDENT" Granted-27 to 20.
Answer-Tried to hay e Thomas commit
| ted to prison. Mr.. Stanton's counsel ap-
piled for postponement. Chief Justice
| Carter said he should not be held in custo-
day. Witness moved his discharge, eX-
pecting his committal, but the motion was
granted.
The Senate refused to allow statement
| to be made of the conversation with the
| President the same evening. and the coun-
sci then asked: Alter reporting this to the
President did you do any otherac in pur-
suance of his previous instructions, to test
the constitutionality of the tenure of office
act? if so, what were they?
Objection, which the CHEF JUSTICE
overruled and the Senate sustained his rul-
ing-27 to "a.
The witness answered: Next day I ap-
| piled to the District Attorney to sign infor-
nation in the nature of quo warranto
which he declined to do without authority
of the Attorney General. / visited Stanton
and gave him his opinion. Not allowed to
be stated, and nothing else was done in the
matter.
The Senate took recess for 15 minutes.
On reassembling. at 2:50, Mr.. Cox was
cross examined by Mr.. BUTLER. He
considered himself as counsel for the
President, but appeared before Judge Cart
ter as counsel for General Thomas, and did
not tell the court or opposing counsel in
court that his purpose was to get the case
in trim to test the constitutioDality of the
Tenure of Office law, and supposes they
| OWNED the object. sl
Mr.. Bradley, senior. testified that he was
advisory counsel for General Thomas. The
papers which he prepared to obtain a quo
| warranto were returned to him few days
ago by Mr.. Stanbery, with a verbal mes
sage for himself and Mr.. Merrick, to use
them at their discretion. He has never re-
ceived direct authority from the Attorney
General or the President to use them
General Thomas was discharged from GUS
tody, on motion of the Presidents counsel.
r. T. Merrick, lawyer of Washington,
was employed by General Thomas On the
morning of the 22d of February. after the
action of Judge: Cartier insthe Chambers,
witness went to see the President about
noon, and told him what occurred in the
case General Thomas and Mr.. Stanbery
being present. The Attorney General, in
the presence of the President, told the wit
ness to see if he could carry up the case tu
the Supreme Court on writ of habeas cor.
pus, and a few days afterwards wrote the
Attorney General a note on the subject
On Monday he communicated the result ol
his investigation to the Presidents coun
sci, Mr.. Cox, and they agreed to work to-
gether in order TO accomplish the purpose
suggested by the Attorney General. On
Thursday night had an interview with the
Attorney General relative to the conduct
of the case next dav
Question objected to--what did you and
Cox do in order to accomplish the result
referred to?
Held admissible by the CHIEF JUSTICE
and no appeal asked.
For answer, all we did in court on Wed
nesday morning-witness commenced in
detail to recount the circumstances already
briefly narrated by Cox.
Mr.. BUTLER interrupted him to say he
wished to clear his skirts. All this matter
was going in against the objections of the
| managers and under the ruling of the
/ Chiet Justice. whereupOn
! The CHIEF JUSTICE rose and said-I
goes in by decision of the Senate of the
United States.
The witness resumed his minute nara
ton, and at the close of the cross-examis.
alton by Mr.. Butler, testified that Thomas
was not at.the White House when he ar
rived; did not know whether he was at the
War Department or not
E. o. Perryn, of Long, Island, was ther
called; has been personally acquainted
with the President about fourteen years
was in this city during the month of Feb
ruary, in company with Mr.. Seleye, mem
Der of Congress from New York; had ar
interview with the President February
Dist, about two O'Clock in the afternoon
took Mr.. Seleye to introduce him. Neither
he or Mr.. Seleye had any knowledge of the
removal of Mr.. Stanton.
Counsel offered to prove the President
informed them he had removed Stanton
and would soon send in to the Senate gooC
name for the position, that he did not anti
cipate resistance and regarded the arrange
ment as temporary.
Mr.. BUTLER objected, and an argumen
ensued on both sides. ra-t
The question was ruled out by the Sen.
ate. -...l--
Mr.. EVARTS had nothing more to ask il
that view and suggested an adjournment.
Mr.. BUTLER opposed it in long speech