The Hickman courier. [volume] (Hickman, Ky.) 1859-current, 1868-04-18
The Impeachment Trial.
SATURDAYS pRoCEEDINGs.


as he swore yesterday, but to go and
take charge of it,
GENERAL SHERMAN ON TIE STAND.
At this point Mr.. Stanberry said Call
Lieut.. Gen Sherman" and as that dis
tingushed officer jumped up from a seat
and went forward to take the oath, the
galleries rose almost IN n.dsss and levelled
hundred opera glasses at him. He was
attired in full uniform, and gave his evil
dence standing, With IL mess and pre-
cision, so far as he was allowed to 90,
that reached every listener in the vast
auditory. Alter the usual preliminary
questions, Gen. Sherman announced that
the President had rendered him the posi-
ton of Secretary of War ad interim
twice during the month of January and
that he had declined it each tiwe. lie
then stated that, before and after Mr..
Stanton's reinstatement, he had con-
yS'ssd o Sjsa the pFs'iden l''iVs to the
The defence asked him what the Pres
ident said about Mr. Stantons return,
and if the President did not say that his
object in removing Mr.. Stanton was to
test the law in the Courts, &c? to all of
which the prosecution objected.
y U2GE CHASE BY SENATOR'S.
des beforevsrs,- -..-..s-r--y -susr
hnse astonishment of many senators,
the Chief Justice said the evidence was
admissible, aud, at subsequent stage of
the proceedings, gave his reasons why it
was admissible.
A long argument arose, during which
the counsel were " Eloquent, bitter
aud, at zines, persqx&
from tie decision of tssTs stice,
and the vote was awaited .wWIfh x,e,keen-
est interest. 1t resulted yeas, -; nays,
%. The following Republicans voted to
admit the evidence Of what the President
said, to-wit: Messrs. Sherman, Anthony,
Cole, Fessenden, Fowler, Grimes, Nor
gan, Ross, Sprague, Sumner, Trumbull,
Van Wrinkle and Wiley.
The substantial qu9sRn was put in a
half dozen different fdS, and, although
the defence labored hard, every time the
yeas and nays were called, they were de-
feated by from FIVE to seven votes.
SUPPOSED EFFECT OF THE oYER-RULING.
This decision is looked upon as a sub
Istantial reversal of yesterdays opinion
and rules, but it will be seen all the con
versation held with the President on the
removal of Mr. Stanton was subsequent
to said removal. 1t destroys pretty much
all of the evidence which the defence
have gathered, and will shorten the tria !
several days. 1t throws out the testi
mony of important witnesses, yet to come,
and is looked upon tonight as great
triumph of the impeachers, despite the
effect that Sumner and others voted for
the admission of such evidence. The
Court has adjourned till Monday noon.
MONDAYS PROCEEDINGS.
Examination of General Sherman was
resumed.
Mr.. Stanbery asked IF after the resto-
ration of Stanton, did you form an opin-
ion as to the desirability, or as to the
good of the service of the office of
Secretary of War being filed by an
other than Stanton; if so. did you ex-
press your opinion tho Prosident?
Objection was made and argued at
length by Managers Bingham and But
Ter, and Stanhery and Evarts
The Chief Justice again expressed the
opinion that the witness could answer the
written question sent forward by Senator
ReveIdy johnson as to both interviews
with the President.
Senator johnson then offered to put
this question to General Sherman: When
the President rendered you the Office of
Secretary of War ad interim, January
27th, 1868; did he at the time of making
such tender, state what his purpose was
The question was objected to and sub
mitted to the Senate, and the yeas and
nays resulted &c to D. So the question
was putand answered yes.
Witness said that at the first interview
nothing very definite was said by the
President or himself. During the second
conversation the President expressed a
wish to have the constitutionality of the
tenure of Office law decided. He also
also said to witness that if he accepted
the position of Secretary of War ad in
term, Stanton would make no resistance,
because he knew him to be cowardly.
Witness gave DO positive answer, but
Mr.. r. Henderson, pu0s question. Did
the President, on either occasion, ex
press a firm determination to remove
Stanton
Witness replied that the President
never expressed any intention to use
force, but seemed determined that their
relation should cease.
Mr. Howard asked what d;Gthe Presi-
dent say about force IN.
Witness repeated ffT5e said before
in relation to the st-the belief
that Mr. Stanton w make no resist
ance.
Mr.. Henderson asked whether witness
gave the President any advice ON this
subject?
Senate, without division, refused to ad-
nit the question.
Mr.. johnson then offered an nidition-
al question: VIII you state what he said
as to what his purpose was.
Objected to, when the Chief Justice
ruled that the question was admissible,
as it tended to show the report of the
Presidents action, and ia expressing his
opinion, remarked his Court was
not bound by the sal estrictive rules
in admitting evidence aSsome of differ
ent character.
Witness-The question asked me
seemed to restrict me so closely to +" the
purpose" that l endeavored to confine
myself to that point alone. The first
day on the first interview, in which the
President offered me the appointment ad
Interim, he confneds himself to general
terms, and l gave hiln1Sp definite answer.
The second interview IN the afternoon
of the Both, (not the 31st, as the ques-
ton reads,) was the interview during
which he made the point which l have
testified to; and, in speaking of referring