The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1868-05-13

abridged by the passage of the tenure
of-ofice act. He then passed over the
question of the constitutional validity
of that act, and took up the discussion
of whether Mr.. Stanton's case came
within its provisions. He did not con-
slider the Secretary of War either within
the first section of the act, or the pro-
viso, and quoted the declarations OF Mr..
Schenck and Mr.. Sherman in the debate
on the passage of the Till in March,
1867, to sustain the theory. He thought
Mr.. Stanton held office under the pleas
ure of the President alone, under the
act of 1899, aud that the President
could remove him. He did not think
there was any distinction between the
power of the President to remove il the
recess and his power to remove during
the session of the Senate, an Of
ficer who held solely by his pleasure.
Taking up then the second article, he
said the temporary designation OF a per
son to discharge the duties OF an once
until the office could be filled was made
legal by the act of 1895, which he is sat
isffed has not been repealed by that OF
1863. But even if he thought other
wise, Mr.. Grimes said he should be I'M
able to convict the President of crime
in such temporary appointment, not
doubling that the President acted in
good faith, and believed he was acting
within the laws. He dismissed the con-
spiracy articles very briefly, as he did
the eighth and ninth articles. He then
took up the question Of intent, saying he
had no doubt that the President thor
oughly believedthe tenure-Of-office act
Unconstitutional and void, and that he
was advised of its unc0nstitutionality
| by Mr.. Stanton and other members OF
his Cabinet, and Mr.. Grimes thought 1T
not strange that under the circumstan-
ces the President should doubt or ques-
ton its scope. He held, however, that
the Stanton case was not included in
the provisions of this act, and that
therefore the questions of intent need
not be considered, as the President had
done no unlawfll act. But even If he
were included, the guilty intent was
not such as warranted thejudgment de-
manded by the House.
The Senator went on to say that if the
President might not in this way make
| u
complete supremacy of Congress over
all other branches of the government
was established, and he was no believer
in such doctrine.
Mr.. Grimes turned off the remaining
articles in few words, and closed as
follows:
"I express no views upon any of the
questions upon which the President has
been arraigned at the bar of public
opinion outside of the charges. have
no right to travel out of the record.
Mr.. Johnson's character as q statesman,
his relations to political parties, his con-
duct as citizen, his efforts at recon-
struction, the exercise of his pardoning
powers, the character of his appoint
ments, and the influences under which
they were made, are not before US OH any
charge; nor can suffer my judgment of
law governing this case to be influenced
| by political considerations. l cannot
agree to destroy the harmonious work
ing of the Constitution for the sake of
getting rid of an unacceptable Presi-
dent. Whatever my opinion of the in
cumbcnt, cannot consent to trifle with
the high office he holds. Iditfer widely
with the President respecting his polit-
| ical views and measures, and deeply
regret the differences between him and
Congress, but cannot in my judicial
capacity record my vote that he is gull
ty of high crimes and misdemeanors."
Senator Edmunds was the next speak
er. He drew up the tenure. of-otlice act,
had entire charge of it before the SEN
ate, and was thoroughly conversantlwith
its intent and meaning. There was
consequently great curiosity to hear his
opinion OH the case now prosecuted.
He spoke nearly an hour, reading en-
tirely from manuscript very carefully
prepared. He said at once that the
charges specified in the first, second and
third articles were clearly proved, and
the only question to consider was
whether they constituted high crimes
and misdemeanors. He found that the
Presidents duties were all defined in
the Constitution, and the chief of these
is, he shall see that the laws are faith
fully executed and shall execute them
by such means and such means only as
are provided in the laws themselves.
The President could not rightly violate
law in order to enforce it, and could
only use the power of appointment in
the manner fixed by the legislative de-
partment of the government, and could
not accomplish legal purposes by illegal
means. From these premises Mr.. Ed
munds argued that the Presidents
course in removing Stanton and ap-
pointing Thomas was not only illegal,
but 80 grossly illegal as to constitute a
high crime. He could not support any
of the conspiracy articles, but should
vote for the first three.
Mr.. Williams was the tifthi speaker.
He reached about the same conclusion
as Mr.. EdmuBds had. He would vote
for the first, second and eighth articles,
and left the impression on the minds of
his associates that he might also vote
for some others.
Mr.. Howe followed, with brief state
ment of his conclusions, which it was
found did not materially differ from those
of Mr.. Sherman. He would not vote for
the first article, but would support the
second and third and part of the
eleventh article, if it were divided.
Mr.. Hendricks was the first speaker
OH the Democratic side of the chamber.
He spoke from notes, but had no writ,
ten opinion. He of course took ground
against the whole thing. Such of the
allegations of the House as rested on
documentary evidence he admitted were
proved, but if everything charged were
admitted, he held that there was no
guilty intent, and therefore no case.
He would vote against every article,
and charged that impeachment, if car
red at all, would be carried as par
tisan measure, and not as measure of
Justice.
Mr.. Pomeroy and Mr.. Morrill,, of
Maine, followed, and indicated that
they would vote for all the principal
articles, but against that about the
Presidents speeches and that resting
on the evidence of General Emory.
At this point recess of fifteen min
utes took place, and during the time
there was much comparing of notes
among impeachment men inside and
outside the Senate. 1t was gener-
ally admitted that the case against the
| II 4 n l. Il L.