The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-04-10
The impeachment Proceedings.

ARGUMENT OF JUDGE cURT1s FOB THE DEFENCE
WASHINGTON, April 9.-In the Senate the
court Of impeachment was opened as usual
After reading the journal, General Butler call
ed up other witnesses, among them Mayor
Blodgett, of Augusta, Ga, who testified regard
ing his removal from the postmastership OF
that place by the President. He knew nothing
beyond the fact that he had been sus-
pended. Butler asked for certificate from
the Senate that no reasons had been given BY
the President for the suspension Of Blodgett.
The defence made point that Blodgetts case
was outside of the charges made against the
President
At q quarter to one O'Clock Judge Curtis
began his argument in behalf Of the President,
and sroke until near four O'Clock, when, at hls
REQUEST, the hall being larger than he was ac-
customed to, the court adjourned without
division.
Judee Curtis was listened to throughout
with marked attention, especially By the mem
hers OF the court. Some Of his points we're
startling. He left it with the Senator'S to say
whether they were acting in Legislative or
iudicial capacity, He said that the substance
of the first Of the eight charges against the
President was based upon the statement that
the removal of Stanton and appointment Of
Thomas was, or was intended to be, viola-
tiou of the Tenure-of-of6ce act and of the con-
stitution. He denied both propositions, and
among other authorities quoted the statements
of members Of the Conference Committee.
Schenck, in making the report to the House.
used the words ''term Of service" It might as
well be said that king completed the term OF
his predecessor who had died as to say that
Mr.. Johnson was serving out Mr. Lincoln's
term.
Judge Curtis proceeded to show that the
heads Of departments were the voice and hands
of Presidents. he argued that heads OF de-
,partments did not, in fact, and could not, con-
stitutionally, come under the provisions of the
Tenure-of-of6ce act, and that their exception
was we'll understood by senators. he noticed
the absurdity of charging the President with
high crimes and misdemeanors for having act
ed in accordance with the publicly expressed
views of senators themselves. His argument
that the Presidents action was in accordance
with precedent and the constitution is too COM
pact in its elaboration to admit of condensa-
tion. Arguing the necessity Of the power
claimed by the President, Judge Curtis IN
stanced the displacement of Mr. Floyd by
President Buchanan, when any delay would
have led to the most deplorable -esults. In
arguing that it was the Preside. ..l's duty to
maintain his prerogative, he said that trustee
would combat any unconstitutional law which
worked injurious to those whose rights he had
in trust, and that it was much moro the Presi-
dents duty to guard the trust placed in his
hands byan the people. Such was the duty
nobly fulfilled by Hsmpden when he opposed
the payment Of ship money.
RecepitulAtng his arguments to prove that
the President could not be impeached for an
act designed to produce judicial decision, ne
quoted General Butler, to show that the
managers admitted this view Of the case.
General Butler had said that the impeachment
in itself was perhaps not an impeachable
offence, if made 'or the purpose of producing
such decision, and not accompanied by de-
FAINT message to the Senate. Curtis said that
it was matter of taste how the Senate should
be notified. BE then, until the adjournment,
argued to prove that, under the rule Of estopel,
the things the President had said and done in
these matters did not apply in this case.