Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1868-05-12
CONGRESSIONAL.


The Sehate met at 10 o'clock. The
Chief Justice swd: 1.-THE Senate meets
to-day, under the order, for elaboration,
and unless some Senator make motion
10 the contrary, the doors will be closed, :
Mr.. Sherman moved that the sergeant
alarms place his assistants in the gal
leries to-day and tomorrow, and with
instructions 10 arrest any person VINO
violates the rules Of order.
The Chief Justice stated that this pre-
caution had already been taken.
Mr.. Sherman then suggested that no.
tice to that effect be given in the morn
Mr. Williams suggested that the Chief
Justice, before the call Of the roll, ad'
monish all persons that no manifestation
Of applause or disapproval would be al
lowed in the Senete, under the penalty Of
arrest
This proposition meeting with general
approbation, Mr.. Sherman withdrew his
motion, aud the doors were then closed
at 1920. .
In the secret session this morning the
Chief Justice addressed the Senate as
follows:
Senators-In conformity with what
seemed to be the general wish OF the
Senate when it adjourned last Thursday,
the Chief Justice in taking the vote on
the articles Of impeachment will adopt
the rule sanctioned in the cases Of Chase,
Peck and Humphrey. He will direct
the Secretary to read the several articles
successively, and after the reading OF
each article, will put the question of
guilty or not guilty, each Senator rising
ia his place as in the form used an the
case of Judge Chase: Senator, how
say you, is the respondent, Andrew
johnson, President of the United States,
guilty or not guilty of high INSIDE
meanor, as charged in this articleY In
putting the question on articles four and
six, each Of which charges crime, the
word crime will be substituted for the
word misdemeanor.
"The Chief Justice has carefully con-
sidered the suggestion Of the Senator
from Indiana, Mr.. Hendricksl, which
appeared to meet the approval of the
Senate, that in taking the vote on the
eleventh article, the question should be
put on each clause. In this find myself
unsble to divide the articles as suggested
The article charges several facts, but
they are so connected that they make |
but one altogether, and they are charged
ss making one misdemeanor The first |
fact charged is in substance that the |
President publicly declared, in August,
1866, that the Thirty-ninth Congress
was q Congress of only part Of the States,
and not constitutional Congress, in.
tending thereby to deny it's constitutional
competency to enact laws, or propose
amendments to the Constitution, and |
this charge seems to have been made
as introducing and as qualifying that
which follows, viz: that the Presi-
dent in pursuance of this declara-
ton, attempted to prevent the execution
OF the Tenure Of Office act by contriving |
and attempting to control means to pre-
vent Mr.. Stanton from assuming the
functions of Secretary of War, after the
refusal of the Senate to- concur in his
and also by contriving and
attem ptiug to contrive means to prevent
the execution Of the Appropriation act
of March I'd, 1867; and also to prevent
the execution of the act relative to the
of the rebel States, OF the
same date. The grievance of the article
seems 10 be that the President attempted
10 defeat the execution of the Tenure Of
Office act, and that he did this in pursu-
ance Of declaration which was intended
to invade the constitutional competency |
of Congress to enact laws or propose
amendments, and by con-
irving means to prevent Mr.. Stanton
from resuming his Office of Secretary of
War, and also to prevent the execution
of the Appropriation act, and the
Rebel State Government act. The sim
gle substantive matter charged therein is
the attempt to prevent the execution of
the Tenure-of-O Office act. Do the other
facts alleged, either as introductory and
exhibiting the general purpose, or show
ing the means intend, to Illustrate that
attempt. Is this single matter connected
With the other matter-previously and
alleged-charged as high
Of which the President is
alleged to have been guilty2 The gene
raj question of guilty or not guilty seems
fully to cover the charge, and will be put
in this article as well as in the others, to
the Senate direct, in the same mode of
division as in others. In the tenth arti-
Gle, the division suggested by the Sena-
tor from New York lConkling) may be
more easily made, as it contains a more
general allegation to the effect that
On the 9Th of August, 1867, the
President, with the intention to set aside
the rightful authority Of Congress, and to
bring il into contempt, delivered certain
harangues and therein uttered
loud threats and bitter names against
Congress and the laws of the United
States, enacted by Congress, thereby
bringing the Office Of the President into
disgrace, TO the grestecaudal of all good
citizens, as set forth 10 these distinct
aud the remedies com
planned ofin the respective specifications;
then the question Of guilty or not guilty OF
l high misdemeanor, as charged in the
article, can also be taken. The Chief
Justice, however, sees no injustice IN
putting the general questions in this ar
tieIe in the same manner as the others.
For whether the particular question be
pot on the specifications or not, the an
swer to the final question must be deter
mined by the judgment OF the Senate
whether the facts alleged in the speciica-
ton have been sufficiently proved that
they amount to a high misdemeanor
within the meaning of the Constitution. |
On the whole, therefore, the Chief JUS
tice thinks the better practice would |
be to put the general questions
in each article without attempting 10
make any subdivision. and will pursue
this course if no objections be made.
he will be pleased, however, to conform
TO such directions as the Senate may see |
g, 10 tb;a matter Whereupon Mr..