The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-06-02

Mr.. Butler continued the examination in the
same abusive and insulting manner, at one
time saving to the witness that he lied. 10
this the witness replied that he would not per-
init sich an insult, and claimed the protecaon
of the managers whilst In the committee room,
and if such language Was repeated out OF the
room he would claim protection from no one.
Some little confusion ensued, when MIR. Butler
replied that he had been hasty, and retracted
what had been said.
On Wednesday, the 21st, the same insulting
and abusive course was pursued by MIR. Butler,
and the testimony Of the witness was not taken
down as he gave it from his own mouth, but
his answers when given were modified, altered
and changed by Butler, and taken down as he
(Butler) directed them to be written. At the
same time witness was denied any opportunity
to explain, except on one or Two occasions,
when such privilege was extended to hlm by
Mr.. Boutwell,.
On the morning Of Wednesday, the 9th,
witness sent q written request to the mana
gers, asking that he might be allowed to have
copy Of his testimony and a copy Of the re-
port of the managers, thathe might compare
them and see whether errors which were mani
fest in the published report arose from the
mistake of the stenographer who took down
the testimony or the manager BY whom the
report was made. This was denied him; that
is, they gave him copy Of the report Of the
managers, but refused to allow him to see his
evidence, and required him to 20 on and
testify.
The witness then requested to be allowed
fifteen minutes within which to send for bis
counsel, with whom he might consult. MIR.
Butler thereupon moved that the witness be
not allowed the privilege Of counsel, and the
motion was submitted and adopted. They
then put to the witness the following question:
'rDid you send telegram as follows to Sherl-
dan Shook, New York - "My business is ad-
ka1 tar, tn NV f0-6a Ulf
Gillis, Harney& Co., No. "a Broad-street. An
swer ~ HOOKER
To this witness replied: "This is q private
and confidential communication passing be-
tween counsel and client. II has reference
to business in that relation and nothing else.
and no reference whatever to the trial OF the
President. and the articles Of impeachment
or result Of the trial; nor the votes Of any
person on the trial nor any allusion thereto
whatever 49,
They then inquired If that was all the wit
ness had to reply to the question, and he an
swered that it was, and requested that If his
answer was not sufficiently explicit and full,
he might be taken to the bar Of the House to
receive its orders In the premises.
The following question was then propounded
to the witness: s'Didy you send q telegram to
Sheridan Shook, dated 18th May, as follows:
The 5 should be had; may be absolutely ne
cessary.'" - -, : ,ss1>,ri5.1i.. -.
70 Which witness gave the same reply which
is set forth in full to first question above quot
ed; repeating the request then made, and sub
mitting to answer further il the House requir-
ed; General Butler thereupon remarked that
he would offer resolution to place the witness
in solitary confinement until the 4h Of March,
1869, and witness was thereupon remanded to
the custody Of the sergeantat-arms.
The witness considers that he cannot diyulge
matters that came to him under the protso-
ton and sanction Of the relation Of client and
counsel, and if he should make such dis
closures, under any circumstances, they can
be made only when demanded by competent
authority which possesses the power to punish
for refusal to disclose. When the authority
which can punish fora refusal to disclose re-
quires it to be done at the peril Of mourning 3
penalty, the disclosure is not voluntary, but
coerced, and the Witness is protected. The
committee cannot punish, and It is their duty
in;an issue between them and witness to SUBJ
init the matter to the House, and lot it take
action in regard thereto.