Dodgeville chronicle. [volume] (Dodgeville, Wis.) 1862-current, 1868-04-24
THE IMPEACHMENT.

After the opening of the, Impeachment
Court on the 18th, Mr.. Evarts stated that
Mr.. Stanbery was i'll, but would be able to
resume his duties within thirty-eight
hours-possibly on the 18th. He asked
the indulgence of the Court, whereupon
motion to adjourn was agreed to, Messrs.
Sumner and Pomer0y alone voting
against it.
On the opening of the Court on the 18th,
the question of extending the rules so as
to allow more than two to speak on a side
in closing was Indefinitely postponed-34
to 15 Er. Evarts announced that Mr..
Stanbery was better, and would probably
be present on the 10th and that the coun-
sci, wishing to avoid delay, would proceed
to offer documentary evidence. The mes
sage nominating Thomas Ewing rs Secre-
tary of War was offered and received.
The message of the President TO the SEN
ate on the Oath of February was offered in
evidence, and rejected after considerable
debate. Other documentary evidence was
introduced, after which the Court adj
journed. Atare 81
In the Impeachment Court, on the 10th,
Mr.. Sumner offered an order to admit all
evidence which might be offered tabled
SO to II. Mr. Stanbery still continued
too i'll to be in attendance, but Mr.. EVarts
announced that they would proceed as far
as possible without him. Mr. Walter Cox
was called, and objection made to the evil
dence offered through him; objection
overruled-29 to 21-and Mr.. Cox testified
that the President had wished him to con.
suit with Mr.. Stanbery, with regard to
having proceedings Instituted to test the
constitutionality of the Tenure ofofice
act, in the Stanton-Thomas case; witness
moved Thomas discharge, SO as to force
his eommittal and then apply for writ of
h0bsds corpus, but the discharge was grant
ed; witness considered himself as counsel
for the President, but appeared before
Judge Garter as counsel for Thomas,
and did not state that his purpose
was to get the case in train to test
the constitutionality of the Tenure Of
Office law, but supposed the Court and op-
posing counsel OWNED the object; he had
never received authority from the Attor-
ney General or President to use the papers
On which he proposed to obtain gao scar
ranto, but they were returned to him q
few days ago, by Mr.. Stanbery, with a
verbal message foI him and Mr.. Merrick
to use them in their discretion. r. s. Mer-
rick testified that he was employed as
counsel by General Thomas; on the 22d
of February, he went to see the President,
and during the interview, the Attorney
General told the witness, in the presence
of the President, to see if he could carry
up the case to the Supreme Court on
writ of habeas corpus; the Presidents
counsel, MI. Cox, and witness agreed to
work together to accomplish this pur-
pose; witness testimony relative to
the efforts, made in the case was
similar to that of Mr.. Cox. E.
o. Perrin, of Long Island, was called,
and testified to seeing the President on the
2lst of February, about two p. M, in COM
pany with Congressman Seelye Counsel
then offered to prove that the President
Informed them Perrin and Seelye) he had
removed Stanton, but would soon send
into the Senate good name for the posi-
ton; that he did not anticipate resistance,
and regarded the arrangement as tempo