New-York tribune., 1868-05-02
THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL
Continued from First Psge.


takes his chosen wife, for better or worse -,
But as TO such Cabinet Officers as not Of Presl-
former Presdent-as those whose title gwen 10y
another-as those he never appointed and perhaps 20
him by succession and not by his own act-as 10 tn
hold merely by his scouiescence or T6ey
fteV are entitled TO favor aud receive none 80
stand stepchildren In his political "a & rs % entitled
placed on the same level with the rghfu leils S Mn
10 the inheritance The construction eameI y tbe class
ayers leads 20 this inevitable abnrdiy - abe n,onb
Whlethose having less meritonous title remain inaen
nitey. What intended for Oeneat .So f1 No fovnr
chief and the favored class are worse on tau ~ av m
had been shown them Their condition was lh'enueu 10
be made better than that OF thet ieoS t rotectoD I IL
made worse From those entuea t,,J 70 PIV'oo'ion IL
is taken away be gwen TO those noI With bis
hO"i Sn sennd Mr. stanton holding the Office Of Secre
ty ~ War lie mad been appointed by Mr. Lincoln dur
incon's second term under the old appointment
Mr. Stanton was neither appointed by MI Lincoln OF MI
from All question whether the fractional term, counting
from the accession 81 M D pcn TIM o tbs proDer term OF Mr.
Johnson and whether II he had been appointed or reap
pointed by Mr. Lincoln during his second term, he might
not have claimed that he was entitled, against Mr.
Johnson TO hold on TO its end Mr stanton never had
current Presidential term having been appointed
for that term by either Mr. Lincoln or Mr.. johnson.
CORY OF those members of Mr.. Johnson's Cabinet
who have been appointed M by Mr aoc johnson ant on
Cabinet of Mr. johnson was composed as follows; The
Navy. held by appointment Of Mr. Lincoln, made in his
first term the Secretary Of the Interior the Postmaster
There then, TO the entire difference as TO
been sppointed by Mr. Lincoln and the other three by
Mr. johnson, All of them held by the same tenure the
pleasure OF the President" All OF them, without reference
To constitutional provisions were, by existing laws re-
movable by the independent action OF the ~
state OF War; and OF the Navy expressly reeognlaeo re
acts Of congress creating the four other heads of depart
ments place them the same footing as 70 tenure T
office All these remained, in this particular IN iu
force This Tenureof Office act introduces distinction
made applicable to Cabinet otcers alone never SS H
befsre. For the first time IL gives 10 hose appqheu os
the President the time being new tenure III secures
them from removal at his pleasure alone IL repeais as
to them, the existing laws ana declares tnaL ty y of
thereafter be entitled to hold durpg the remaIneL u
and for one month OF the succeeding Presidential term
exempt from removal by the act Of the President and
Py and 70 seEae But Ut gives them no right to
hold against the pleasure of the succeeding PTesuent
one moment after expiration of that punctua time OF
one month. When that time has arrived, H tnet
right 10 hold ceases, and their offices become vacant
The policy here declared is unmstakable that notwlth
standing ANYTHING the contrary IN the act every
bis oWn Selection of the members Of his Cabinet The
right of selection for himself s however, qualified He
may not Heretofore enjoy this right throughout ms
term For the first month he must take the
Cabinet of his predecessor, however opposed TO nm
too whilst the rghts given to him. it can be exercised
but 1t is power that does not S9rDxe % & ouI %
with single execution Now, as 70 the thIee %
OF Mr.. JObnsons Cabinet appointed Dy MS O" eAeIoe
once S xercsaS tSe mower it is as to them exhausted
The consequence that these three 0tcers no longer
hold in defiance his wshes throughout the remainder
OF his term because they are his own selected omeeIs
but they are not entitled TO hold during the whole
term of his successor, but only for modlcum OF
that term just o thsy ess SG5S 6eee O SoT as @
other four, whom Mr. johnson has not exercised
hold during the residue Of his term in defiance Of his
wishes DO they within that clear policy Of giving
his independent right of choice Surely not. ,
But if it be held that Mr. Stanton did come WITHIN the
purvew Of the Tenure Of Office act ii be held that MS
removal by the independent action Of the President Is
forbidden by the act S9 %e ma1s 6n @ IN t the
sOny in the first article that any CHARGE is made IN
nowhere alleges that Mr.. stanton has been
removed either in law or in fact. 1t does
fuilS entitled to hold said office OF Secretary of the De
pariment Of War" and that on that day the President
laws of the United states issue an order IL w9g IN or
the removal OF Edwin stant9n Io tne & once OF seS
this order for a repoDai is made the grapaen of the
the OBJECT to work removal either law in fact
on he contrary ar e the ne bo1a Which pnrports
to after the order for the removal OF Stanton
alleged that stanton stl held the once Iawduiy, ana @
that notwithstanding the order OF 10 ana
the order to Thomas to act as secretary stanton sun ed
the Office and no vacancy was created OF eIeG 10 a hs
removed law in fact that there never has been an
no time a vacancy The proof shows that Stanton re-
mains in possession, and that his Official acts continue To
But Senators if you should be of opinion that the Ten
ureOf0ce act protected Mr. stanton and that the at
First That the President had right to construe the
law for himself and IT, in the exercise Of that right he
committed OF construction ana acted under thaJ
error, he Is not TO be held responsible.
SOd II he had construed the law as to be OF opn-
ion that Mr. Stanton intended 70 be protected by
against power of removal and was also OF opinion
that the law In that respect contrary TO the Constr
tuton he is TO be held responsible he therein com
viii now call attention TO certain leading authorities
upon the point that law passed by Congress IN violation
vested in the President 70 decide for himself the
sd -o i S9Ss & eyc w h o SaOey 3 HTi Snd olssG see
.ondly from No. 81 Of the same authority, and
read extracts from ChefJustce Marshall and Others
is merely ministerial but strictly discretionary
TO SHOW from repeated decisions Of the court that
the heads of Departments except where the performance
in no sense ministerial officers, but that they
clothed with discretion and protected from responS
win now ask your attention. Senator'S to the remain
And first the four conspiracy articles. These allege
that the President unlawfnly consnred with Lorenzo
Thomas and Others TO the House Of Representatives
known ON the 2st OF February, 1s6s-rs hinder and
prevent Edwin NJ Stanton Secretary Of War, from hold
contrary the Conspiracy act of July 81 1861 and in vio
lation ot the Constitution OF the United states;
second to prevent and hinder the execution OF
the "act regulating the Tenure OF certain Civil
did Gniawfuliy attempt to prevent Edwin NJ. stanton
from holding the said office third by force TO seize,
Department Of War in the custody and charge OF Edwin
stanton Secretary thereof contrary to the Conspiracy
act of July 81 1861, and OF the Tenure-6fOfice act
ourth with Intent unawfuy to seize take and possess
the property OF the United States In the Department OF
War i'm the custody OF Edwin NJ Stanton the Secretary
thereof with intent 10 violate the "Act regulating the
Tenure OF certain Civil Offices"
IL will be that these four conspiracy counts al
relate subectmater, the War ONCE the Sec
retry of the War Oce and the public property therein
situated and this all that necessary 10 be said about
these articles; for not sciDta OF proof has been ad
duced their support The attempted TO be made
under these conspiracy articles by the Managers was
in the first place by the production OF the two sets OF
themselves did amount TO evidence of conspiracy