The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1868-04-26
xLth CoNGREss---Second Session.

sa&
WAsHrsaros. April 25
HOUSE.
No business was done. except presents
ton by the Speaker of several Executive
communications. The members were, as
usual, in attendance on the impeachment
trial
The Chief Justice stated the first business
in order was the order offered by Mr.. Ed
munds yesterday, to admit official reporters
to report proceedings on the final question.
Mr.. Edmunds. at the suggestion of several
Senators, moved TO postpone till Monday.
Mr. Drake moved an indefinite postpone
ment. which was rejected-2o against II.
A motion to postpone to Monday was then
agreed to.
Mr.. Sumner offered the following
0rdered-Thas the Senate, sitting for the
trial Of Andrew johnson, President Of the
United States, win proceed TO vote on the
several articles of impeachment at IL o'clock
on the day after the close Of argument.
Senator johnson objected, and it was laid
over.
Senator Summer send to the Chair two
from the practice Of the Senate ON the trials
of Judge Chase and Judge Peck.
They we're read, ~ follows
Rule %. In taking the votes Of the Senate
on articles Of impeachment, the presiding Of
fcer shall call each Senator by his name, and
upon each article propose the following ques-
ton. in the manner following
. Mr.. ---, now say, is the respondent
guilty or not guilty, as charged in the article
of impeachment
Whereupon each Senator shall rise in his
place and answer guilty" or mot guilty"
Rule "a. On conviction by the Senate,
i. shall be duty of the presiding officer forth
with TO pronounce the removal from office Of
the convicted person, according to the re-
quirenents of the Constitution, and any fur,
ther Judgment shall be on the order Of the
Senate.
Senator johnson again objected, aud the
rules went over.
Mr.. Groesbeck then addressed the Senate
on the part Of the respondent. After few
introductory remarks he proceeded 10 con-
slider the question whether or not The Senate
is now sitting as court. de challenged
proof to show that during any Of the trials
which form our preeedents the idea that the
Senate was not court had ever been ad-
vanced. He quoted from Story and other
authorities to show the judicial character OF
the Senate and the qualifications Senators
must bring to the discharge of their OBJ
legations in reference 10 their jurisdiction.
He held that the only question for them to
decide Was of crime or no crime. and further
that no action could be so considered in COM
nection with which evil intention was not
brought. He said he should consider the
question whether the President had right to
remove Mr. Stanton and grant letter of au-
thority to General Thomas, for on these two
issues hang the fate Of eight OF the articles.
As to the frss points he held the CIVIL Tenure
OF Office law did not apply to Mr. Stanton,
becanse be vas not appointed by Mr.. John.
son. But even if Mr.. Johnson is not serving
his own, bat Mr.. Linooln's term, Mr.. STAN
ton's term OF Office expired one month after
,he expiration OF his Hrst term, and If Mr..
Lincoln we're now living Mr.. Stanton could
be removed by him, and SO equally can he be
by Mr.. johnson if the lLtter is merely serv-
ing out the remainder Of the term. ln sup.
port of his proposition thst the President had
| power TO remove Mr., Stanton. under the Law
Of 1889, Mr.. Groesbeck quoted the letter OF
Mr.. Adams to Mr.. Pickering announcing to
him, not that he was to be removed, but that
| he was actually removed and . successor ap-
pointed. The Tenure Of Office bill does not pro-
| fess to repeal the act of lI69, and AZ there
| was room for doubling the construction Of the
| law, the President must be held guiltlees in
constituting the Law as be did. Assuming its
| constitutionality the Presidents action could
| not be deemed criminal. In Mr.. Boutwell,
speech be denied that the President wal
| merely the servant of Congress, TO execute
| their laws; his oath of Office required hin
| first to maintain the Constitution. Mr.
1 aros beck further combatted the position as,
1 sumed by the honorable managers, that tht
| President is required to execute all laws
evenif they are pronounced unconstItutiona
! bv the Supreme Court, claiming that in suct
| cases he was bound by his higher obligation
| He claimed tina. the meaning Of the act of 17s'
! was so determined ana fixed by government
usage and judicial decisions that the Presi
4 DENT had the right to challege the eoastitu
| tionality of law in conflict with 81
old Law which had been framed an,
| 80 long construed as embodying the princi
+ pies OF the Constitution regarding the powe
Of removals.
At this point the Senate took recess.
1 On re-assembling Mr.. Groesbeck resumes
his argument, maintaining that the dehst
in Congress in 1889 proved the CORRECTNESS
Of the Presidents construction Of the law
then passed. He then cited the acts c
1889, Of the Post Oiice Department, sn'
those Of 1920 and 1849, creating the Navy
| Post Office and Interior Departments
and assuming or affirming the right Of re
| moyal by the President, a set forth in th
Acts Of 1859. Against all this preponderanc
i Of construction and precedent there WAS op
I posed only the act Of 1867, and Mr.. Groes
beck clsimed there vas truly ground 70
4 doubt and hesitation on the part of the Presi
dent sufficient 10 induce him tc resist It, viii
view Of having the matter determined b