The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1868-04-28

the highest public welfare. GENERA
Sherman's evidence was at last admit
ted. But. OF course, %hateVer me 9. Gen
dent declared, the declaration itsel
could not be of the least Importance
on The ed of February the Presiden
removed the Secretary of War. o.
the LIST and 3Ist of Janury he told Gen
| Sherman that he wRnted to remove tn
Secretary merely to bring the matte
are then obliged by the Presidents an
| tecedents and character TO ask whether
his word upon such point must ne
cessarily be trusted I; whether we be
| lieVe his sole object WAS what ne ue
clared Ii TO be; whether his dispatch &C
| fact. his whole career, does not reveal
an animus which forbids the theory
| that he was merely an honest magis'
! trate troubled about the validity OF c
Law. Or, again, supposlnR that he
wished to thrust Secretary Stanton out
and an tagent of his own in, for the
purpose OF organizing opposition to the
laws would ne be likely TO announce
it to the Northumberland? Would
he not, of course, declare that his pur-
pose was as puro rs purity!
During the discussion upon admit
hitting this evidence Mr.. Eyarts made
a very remarkable observation de
said that he hoped the case was not to
tnrn upou .'the mere formal technical
10 faiction of the tenure. of-office act. In
other words, he hoped that the Fresi-
dent was not impeaChed for violating
law. and he went on to say that the de-
tense hoped to prove that the President
had done nothing against the PuoAc
welfare with bad motives and improper
purposes. This Is a very remarkaD!e
/ observation, because it assumes that II
Z 4 4, Hy,,T h q iNln for the HFe9-
idant formally and technically to Vio-
late n law unles his motives coulo Oe
y,rovA,i TO be bad. From such 1u opin-
ION we wholly dissent. Indeed the es-
Z san,faI noiut OF the trial Is just here.
/ we have Omen stated it, and II should
| be constantly borne in mind. II the
I President, after having conslitutionally
I objected to law which has been con-
stitutionally passed over his veto. still
continues to urge that veto and makes
I il operative by formally and technical
! " violating the law, under whatever
plea and for whatever purpose, he
usurps a function which the Constitu-
ton does not assign TO him. and which
wholly supersedes the express constl-
tutionaI authority OF Congress to null
( ifT his veto, and he consequently
changes the form of the government.
] That is the very head and front of
4 this case. For II the violation of one
/ law may be justified, if "the mere
/ formal, technical iufractiOn of the
/ Tenure OF Office Act" is OF no conse-
toueuce, pfsvided the Executive pleads
! a Constitutional doubt, then his plea
ola Constitutional doubt must equally
Justify him in formal and technical
infraction of every other act and OF
| every law upon the Statute Book. Such
an argument excuses him from obey
| ing any law until he has chosen to
| bring the question OF its validity before
the Supreme Court, and until the SUI
preme Court has chosen TO decide. 1t is
| no answer to say that there are some
For it is better that some laws should
| not be tested, than that the President
should be permitted to decide what
| laws he may violate under plea OF test
| ing them. Nor is il sufficient to offer
to show that there was no bad motive.
a Dictator may have no bad motivei
| but tho President, even with the best
come Dictator. IL the Tenure'of- Office
Act was a law, it was binding upon the
President with. all other laws. If Mr..
Stanton stood within the terms of the
law and the President removed him
without consulting the Senate, the
| President is guilty of deliberately viO-
| latinE the law. If this shall be estab.
| liSlltNl ny Allp ~
TO US as plain AS any proposition can
be-Hnd the President be acquitted
by the Senate, its decision Will. cOnfirm
| him aE Dictator.
The elaborate effort of the defense &c
show the purity of motive seems to us
useless. The Senate did wisely in adj.
hitting o reasonable number of decla
rntious of the President that he haC
nothing but the noblest purposes in
view, for really there is nothing else
for him TO say, except that Mr.. Stanton
is not within the law. We;are glad &c
know all that we can of the Presidents
| communications TO men like General
Sherman, and as little as possible OF
his OratiOns to correspondents with
note book in hand. We know that the
Cabinet thought the law unconstitu-
tionRl. His counsel with the utmost
ability will present his case. 1t is clear
that the Senate is as candid and upright
n tribunal as any impeached officer
could desire. Its conduct from the be-
ginning shows that II means to do JUS
tice. But VIC shall wait with curious
interest the argument that shall at
tempt to prove TO the Senate of the
United States that President Andrew
johnson, in the present condition OF
the country and with his notorious
sympathies, associations and hopes,
may at his pleasure formally and tech
nically violate the laws.