New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-04-13

conversations. for think may say without Ofense that
Mr. EVARTsNMr. Chief-Justice and Senator'S as ques-
S ar pr0 s sags Manager
me to read from page 10e OF the record OF TINS a oh w
question Of stating what is to be proved. .-.----
Mr. Manager Buer-be object. TO show the intent and purpose
with which Gen Thomas weO. the War Department on tne
possession b force that be alleged that intent purpose that
sequence allegation NJ B1elgh invited SeY MGcraeaS .pa
this Ahe the President Of the United had appointed Gen IhSn,.
1 u % bSre S & On 'D q. yDa s be told M
leigh that the next day be going take possession By oree MI
NJ sanbeyNo matter about that We OSsc, that testimony
Nj MANAGE Bgteioa do not know whatyou object to you DO
II this evidence pertinent under any the eleven
Of August 49, 1860, il alleged laying the foundation Of
the illegal purpose which eliminated in 1863 The point
Of crimnality which is made the subject of the accuse
ton In the articles is the speech OF 1866 SO. too tee
gram to Gov Parsons in January 1857 Is supposed to be
1865 So, too an interview between MI Wood, an oce-
seeker and the President in 1866 supposed TO bear in
Of a crime alleged TO have been committed in 1858 Aud
apprehend that in the question OF time this interview
between Gen. sherman and the President OF the Uned
States on the very matter OF public transaction oI te
Presidents changing the head OF the War Department
which was actually completed in February, 1893, Is near
enough TO that intent and to show the purposes OF the
transaction There remains then, but ono consideration
the part Of the President concerning his in
Gaent act Of I the removal Of Mr. stanton 1t certainly
Ho Not 70 ta1 orcd @ Question viii arise to be
disposed Of on the very point az to what the fresdehts
b eneg of The armies of the United states
TO INDUCE him TO take the place on the other question as
to whether his efforts were 10 create violence cVi WAL
bloodshed breach Of the peace IN the re-
moya Of the Secretary OF War; propose 70 snow hat
I'm that same consultation il was the desire Of the Pres
dent that the General should take the place In
order that by that change the judiciary might De got 10
decide between the Executive and Congress TO the
CONSTITUTIONAL powers of the former II the conduct Of
the President reference the matters which are made
means which he used in the selection Of agents
not 70 rebut the intentions OF presumption
sought to be raised, well was my learned associate
justified in saying that this Is vital questIon-yital IN
the ntcres, Of justice at least not vital TO any import
ant consideration OF the case IL Is VITAL on Ihe tiCe
principles OF common justice that when the Chle Mag
sate OF the nation Is brought under lhcGlRaIon, anu
when motives assigned for his action ana presulh
tons raised and mnuendQes urged, we should DC per
and dong justice 70 MN as an hulFdua out more pa
tcuary doug justice IN reference 70 the oince OF me
President OF the United States and doing justice 10 the
great pubic questions proposed 70 D9 aeetSu ~ ioI
Judgment, to have this question properly decided ap
prehend that this learned court Of lawyers and aymen
VIII not permit TINS last anu loVse Edne V n.iteu otn
for purposes Of proof and Of unlimited crime Tor purposes
Inc senate, at 2.4o took a recess OF IS minutes.
After Mr. WILSON, OF the Managers TOOK me oOr
II this conversation lie said 10 10 be admitted where are
we to topi Who may not be put on the stand ahg hsSe
for conversations had between him and the Ffesde a.
MY associate suggests al any time since the PIesluent
entered upon possession the Presidential Office, show
ing the general intent and drit Of his mind and conduct
II TINS be competent and may % IhIIouueeu S - 10
be followed by attempt to introduce conyersai2ns
tween the President and MS Cabinet ana Seneta OIa,
BY way Of inducing this Senate under presence Oh tyis
the President 20 ny question between 'ae Gcier 9
interview occurred about the time, ana suppose
the next offer VIII be the conversations occurring nc
General OF the Army, in order that the weight the pre-
ponderance OF testimony submitted here on thls ta!
may weigh down the General OF the Army s"y tnae
that may occur because it was eOnNeIs@uOh WHICH
transplred about that time.
Mr. BUTLER-Ony the day before.
Mr.. WIISoN-Yes only the dag before We eetltAlihy
must insist upon this well.lm0wn RUE being alpiea 70
fbe deSIafaops oY fine President made. il NAV be- for
the purpose of meetings impeachment II is offered To
tod Cen ernan that lie desired him 10 take possession
OF the War Department in order that Nh Stanton might
driven the courts of law for the purpose OF testing
lis title to that Office and Inasmuch the counsel have
referred closing argument OF my associate Mana
gers and seemed 10 delight IN reading therci0m let me
read brief paragraph or two from the opening applying
10 this pretended purpose Of the President Of
driving the Secretary OF War 70 the courts 10 test ms
title. on that occasion the Manager sad the PrcaE
dent knew, or ought to have known, his official adj
WISER who appears as his counsel eoni aud dd tell
MIN doubtless, that he alone, as Attorney General could
Information IN the nature OF 0a1Td'iy 10
determine the question OF The validity 81 ne law, Mr
stanton ejected from the once, was wthout rei1euy
settles OF decisions mas settled the law 10 De
that an elected onicer cannot felns,ae hmsen ei ~
quo pdrdtg mandamus OF olher appt2piiate remedy Ia
the courts Then the purpose was NOT the harmless one
position Of Secretary Of War to the additional end OF
having judicial decision OF this question: but the RaT
department for his purposes, and putting the sece
tafy OF War In apOsitou where he could not SECURE
Judgment Of the courts upon his title 20 that office
= The CHIEF USTICE-SenatOrs, the Chef-Justce has
EXPRESSED the opinion that the question now proposed is
admissible within the Of the Senate OF yesterday
lie will state briefly the grounds OF that opinion Inc
question decided yesterday had reference to acOnyers
ton between the President and Gen Thomas after the
note addressed 10 Mr. stanton was delivered, ana the
senate decided il admissible. Tie question to-day has
reference To conversation relating 10 the same subject
between the President and Cen sherman which occurred
before the note OF removal written Both questions
asked for the purpose OF proving the intent OF tne
President the attempt 10 remove MI stanton Inc
ChefJus thinks that proof OF conversation occur
ring the transaction is better evidence or the IN
tent OF act than proctor conversation occurring aer
the transaction. - -,,,
The Yeas and Nays were taken and the Senate excluded
he question by the following vote