The New York herald., 1868-04-28
PROCEEDINGS OF THE COURT.
Twenty.fOurth Dny.
UNITED STATES SENATE CHAMBER,
WASUINCTON Anril o. 1890

UNITED STATES SENATE CHAMBER,l
WASHINGTON, April q, 1865. !
The court was opened in due form at noon. The
pending question was stated to be the order OF Sena
tor EDMuNDs that the official reporters be admitted
to the secret session to take down the debates on the
nnal question, to be reported with the proceedings
Senator WILLIAMS moved to amend by inserting
the following at the end:-
But no Senator shall speak more than once, nor to
exceed fifteen minutes during such deliberations.
Senator JOHNSON called for the reading OF rule 23
and 1t was read.
Senator JoHNsoN-That will be on each article.
Senator HOWARD moved to amend the amendment
by inserting after the words "ffteen minutesr the
words ION one question: ...u.
The amendment was rejected by the following
v0te:-
YEAs-Senators Bayard, Buckalew, Davis, Dixon,
Doolitte Fessenden, Fowler, Frelinghuysen, Grimes,
PatesSn Of nn Mc0res NNCIton
NAYs~Senators Cameron, cattell, Chandler conk.
Ian, Henderson, Howe, Morgan, Morrill, Of Ne, Nor.
Fill OF Vt, Morton, Nye, Patterson OF N. H. Pome-
TSsyei 1iIton, van winke, Wilson, Williams and
Yates-30. syE, !, s.s
The question recurring on Senator Williams
amendment, Senator BAYARD moved to amend by
striking out "1fteen" and inserting "thirty."
The amendment was rejected by the following
vote;-
YExs-senators Bayard, Buckaew, corbett Davis,
Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Fowler, Grimes, Hem
Tenn, Salisbury and vckers--le.
NAYs-senators Anthony, Cameron. Cattell Chan
Frellnghuysen, Harlan, Henderson, Howard. Howe
Morgan, Morril OF Me- Morrill, Of Vt, Morton, Nye,
PATTERSON Of N H., POmeroy Ramsey, Ross sher-
man, Stewart, Sumner, Thayer, Upton, Trumbull
Van Wrinkle, Wiley, Williams, Wilson and Yates-S4
On motion Of Senator MORTON, seconded by Mr..
HOWARD, the further consideration OF the subject
was postponed until after the argument is con.
cluded.
The additional rules offered by Senator SUMNER
were also upon his motion laid over until the close
Of the argument.
The CHIEF JUSTICE directed that the argument
proceed, and at half-past twelve O'Clock Manager
TnADDEUs STEVENS mounted to the Clerks desk and
read his argument In pretty firm voice from print
ed slips. After about ten minutes he took O chair
and read sitting. At ve minutes before one O'Clock
Tead the remainder OF the argument The following
is
Manager Stevens, Argument.
NAY 1T PLEASE THE COURT trust to be able to be
brief In my remarks, unless should end myself less
master Of the subject which propose to discuss
than hope, experience having taught that nothing
Is so prolx as ignorance. fear may prove thus
ignorant, as had not expected to take part in this
debate until very lately. shall discuss but single
artice-the one that was finally adopted upon my
earnest solicitation and which, II proved, con.
sidered then and still consider quite sufficient for
the ample conviction Of the distinguished respondent
and for his removal from ofllce, which is the only
legitimate object for which this impeachment could
be instituted. During the very brief period which
shall occupy / desire to discuss the charges
against the respondent In no mean spirit or
malignify or vituperation, but to argue them
In a manner worthy Of the high tribunal before
whiQb appear and OF the exalted position OF the ac-
cused Whatever may be thought OF his character or
condition, he has been made respectab And his con-
sition has been dignincd by the action Of his fellow
citizens Railing accusation, therefore, would III be-
come this occasion, this tribunal or proper sense OF
the position OF those who discuss this question on the
one side or the other. To sec the chief servant Of
trusting community arrarned before the bar OF pub-
lie Justice, charged with high delnquencies In inter-
estlng To behold the chief Executive Magistrate Of
trust, and alTaigDed for high crimes and mis-
demeanors, Is always most interesting specta-
want accuse MIN OF an attempt TO betray the
high trust con1ded in him and usurp the power OF a
whole people, that he may become their ruler it Is
Intensely interesting to millions % men, and should
be discussed with calm determination, which
nothing can divert and nothing can reduce 10
ockery. such IL the condition OF this great repub-
Tic, ~ looked upon by an astorishcd and wondering
world. The Offices OF impeachment in England and
america are very different from each other In the
uses msde OF them for the punishment OF offences,
ana ne VIII greatly err who undertakes TO make out
sn analogy between them, either in The mode OF trial
or ihe hna result. In England the highest crimes
may be tried before the High Court or Impeach-
menf, anu the seyerest punishments. even to
lVipfL.Onineht nne and death, may be In
vtei. Mnen our constitution was framed all
th,Se personal punishments were excluded from
the Judgment and the defendant was To- he dfaIt
With st 70 iar ~ the public s1fety required and no
ful he. uence y was made 10 apply simply 70 DO.
litcal ,nehceS-t0 persons holding political pos-
tons eitNsrby appointment or election bv the peo.
pie. Thus ~ H apparent that no crime containing
NAL gnant or inuctabc ofielces, higher than mis-,
demeanors, vas necessary either TO be alleged or
proved. Il u respondent was shown to DC abusing
his Official trust W ne injury Of the people for whom
such obuse to the sqry c his constituents tho truc
modc Of dealng wllV him was TO impeach him FOR
crimes or mseInean,vs land only the lat or ia necea
sary) and thus remove Vim froll the oncc which he