New-York tribune., 1868-04-14
PRICE FOUR CENTS.

Sir- BINGHAM replied that they had no auosuorsto
The oHLEFJUsTIcE inquired whether the counsel for
called ~
Mr. stanbery stepped up TO Gen. sherman and bad
same While they eonversing the senate on motion
OF Senator COLE, at 2os o'clock took Of -
behalf OF the President and examined by sIr stanbery
| MR.. r. J. MEIGss TESTIMONY
| @ What office do you hold A. Clerk Of the Supreme
Court Of the District Of Columbia. ~
Yes, SIR S'' ''' ''''- . '"' NOl'' ''O'' '''''
o. Haze you with you the affidavit and warrant unde,
which Lorenzo Thomas was arrested A. Yes, Sir lpro
] o. The original paperi A. The original paper
q Did you ax the seal Of the Court to the Warranti
q. At what hour in the dayf A. IL was betweehssnd
o'clock ON the morning Of that day
q. AT what pacei A. Az the Clerks once;
q. Who brought that warrant TO youi A. don't know
the gentleman who brought It 70 He said that he vai
| Member Of Congress, Mr.. Pyle OF Missouri
O. He brought It to your house that hour OF tie morn
| ngi A. Yes, Sir.
| TO the clerks office and affixed the seal.
| Q, To whom did You deliver the warranti 4. To Mr.
@ The Marshal was not there At that timei A. No Err
ySS SSn Sns f the aaa upon which was
founded or ala you get that afterwards A. De'e'e'
q, is that the affdsyit' showing paper) A. Thatb
he counsel er the sad Sr the %
Wit and warrant in evidence, would like TO ask the wit
To the wtnessHQ You say that you affixed the seal
about o'clock in the morning If understand you'll A.
Q. You were called upon 10 get up and do thati A.
Q. And in a case where great crime is committed.
and when necessary to stop the further progress of
sary TO prevent crme, have done the same thing in
habeas corpus and IN one repley1n case tnDE
O. Whore 1t matter Of consequence do you 90 ths'
O. Il is nothing unusual for you to do that in such
| BY Mr.. STANBERY-Haye you been often called upon
| TO dot 2 a; Only in extreme cases a.,
rant and afidavit Of Mr.. stanton do not think Mr.
stanton can make testimony against the PRESIDENT OF
between him and Lorenzo Thomas 1 do not think the
fo ns can Be N that
The affidavit upon which he was arrested ls certainly
te ire and this is between Thomas and Stanton
and in IL pertinent or relevant to THIS case or
| competent in any form, far as am instructed.
| Mr.. EyARTS-Mr Chief-Jnstce: The arrest OF Gen
Thomas has been shown IN the testimony ana ney argue
possession of the War Office: We now propose 70 show
that was u ST0ng dSm and the WsS aS ny the
affidavit which II was based Inc andavt OF course
adaVt Shows the facts upon which, as judicial feund
ton the warrant proceeded We then propose 70 follow
pTD ny NV q By
corpus to force RE question 60 III 'ne
Mr. BUTLER-I understand If this affidavit goes in at
all 1t is then evidence of all that is stated they hasos
Mr. EVARTs-You have right to your own conclu-
Mr BUTLER-Not from tho conclusions; but think
nothing more clearly shows that it cannot be evidence
snM 10 cs 6S before the Court il was an
attempt OF Mr. Stanton TO protect himself from violence
night stanton informed, II we may Judge from tns
evidence of the threats made 10 Messrs Mhknson and
ing Informed Of it, he did not know at what hour THIS
might bring his upon h sRa sssTe s
President from crime because stanton arrested Inonas
Sose Stanton hasnot arrested Thomas would chow
that the Presdcn guilty heref Suppose he dc ar
S done Sy other parties We only adyertod
10 the arrest show what effect had upon h crime
Thomas that he went to the Court upon this arrest hs
Jaw the President and told him OF his and that The
rresSsnt Sehs GSstCn IN t The Courts Now propose
show that this Is the question that was ~ the %
under this CiyTenpre aet and then propose os 70 sas
and substance of this statement already in evidence
that this proceeding having been commenced as WIS
taken hold Of as the speedest and most rapid mode,
through habeds corpus, IN which the President of zen
Thomas, acting that behalf would be the actor ia or
der TO bring at once before the Supreme Court OF the Dis
the Of the TO o. be- SS aSf
with an immediate ate OF se IN esoh H S
which at there could have been obtained detTnI
| nation OF the question 49,. T., ,oosoa a. IA
shown propose TO show that Thomas was dlsehsrsed
from arrest upon motion by hs own & counsel , ana e
various facts taking place III another oour, nav & nos
not come within the rule inter alias facts done be
tween T other parties S,d NOT think It necessary
Mr. BUTIER-Perhaps that would be q good anewefi
but whether it is necessary or not Is ~ not so Ia ~ a
not know that proceedings between two otner
after crime Is committed were never or9usn' nab
case 10 show that the crime was not comnlted Du -.
sse that afidaytl Never Did he know that was ~ III
No. that his name was ea5sd & lnG nUt
what was the evidence; but Thomas went aha to1 nn;
Thsy aaSs Sen fns courts s This AFFIDAVIT @
is excellent reading. IL shows tue terror anu & Hs
tn"Tp to be men of eontineDcy and sobrety, represent
ing important Districts in Congress saw II was eI
vno% the venerable Clerk the Court, at night TO et
warrant and take immediate means 10 p.sSen. tns
and alarm that the unauthorized, % Illegal a sna
criminal acts Of this respondent Ss nndSedy
ali that can be- shown And then we nave hinn D ,hs
sesSdsdens sals neScr asked either A.
though furnished with all the pahopy 81 hbt wrts
Of ono rarTono or any process Al that might apPes
should be coppeed to have ~ M uncertain d
fuse Improper evidence upon collateral Issue ~, 50s
ready to int " We s make quite as s'p much
thew can but is portion OF tins case. ~ no. % .o
act Of the he Passen, neVer saw these papers
| evidence what Stanton and Thomas dld tDey 'be"'
selves sTASBERYMr ChIetuslce and Senators there
are two grounds upon which ask the adesioh VI ts
from what is already evidence mark that Is air;a1y
in evidence, of the declaration OF the PIssSeT % a. 80
made the removal 10 bring the question Of that law 20 e
of the Courts is already in evidence but as
TO that the Managers cay that is all pretehSe
Ar In. BUTLER-where in evtdencei ,o,o.,,,o M
| Mr.. srANBERY-ln the speech oi INC I0hoi~''' ~
| aoor who opened this case. -. 49,.
Mr.. BUTEER~f you put my spcechn evidence have
no objections. ,,
that tbs Is ali pretense that 10 subterInge an a.f
thought mere scheme on m ts @ one With enohsr nisnt