The Cadiz sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1864-1911, 1868-04-29

Of bis minister, -
Mr. Curtis declined to FOLLOW the houora-
bic manager in anticipating questions which
were fir subject only for final argument,
hut would confne himself to the point at
is;,;c. He proceeded to claim that testi
mony hearing on the question of intent was
called for in rebuttal Of allegations in the
articles. which charge evil intent ard will
ful violation of the Constitution. The
honorable manager had argued an hour on
the question OF assumption or to show that
the question of intent was immaterial, in
tie face Of this fact that several articles
not yet Withdrawn make the question OF in
tent the gravcman of their charges.
In answer to Mr.. Howard question, he
said the members Of the Cabinet would be
placed on the stand, not as experts in con>
stituional law, but to prove that they ad.
viScd the President to a course OF action
which counsel claim win thereby purge Of
the charge Of malice.
Replying to Mr.. Johnson
Mr. Curtis stated that they did not un>
derstaEd the Managers to deny the asser-
ton IN the President message that he had
been advised ~ his Cabinet III the matter
and wished to produce oral testimony to the
same effect
The Chief Justice read articles charging
evil intept. and expressed his opinion that
tht evidence offered was applicable to those
points. re..5F
The yeas AMI nays were taken and resul.
ted 20 to %, SO the decision Of the Chief
Justice was overrulcd, and the evidence not
admitted. s.. .st
Mr.. Wcllps, Secretary of the Navy, was
then recalled aud counsel proposed to ask
him whether the questions Of the applica~
bility Of tho Tenure-of.ofhce bill to Stanton
was considered in Cabinet meeting previous
to its return with the objections Of the Pre-
sidcnt, and whether the opinion was expires
sed that IRE law dil not apply to any Of
the Secretaries appointed by Mr. Lincoln?
Mr. Butler objected, contending that it
was excluded by the last ruling
Mr. Evarts said this testimony was in res
ference to the constitution. not to the cons
stitutiopaIity Of the law, and held it was
admissible Of other reasons.
Mr.. Butler read from the veto message
to show that the President vetoed the bill
on the ground that it did not apply to ali
the members Of his Cabinet. He also held
that the President did not pretend to he
lieve that Stanton would acqIicsce in his
removal, bccauSe he felt him.elf not cover
ed by the Iaw--the President put it on the
ground Of c0wardice. ~ sun
Mr.. Evarfs referred to the pnr@ons otSthe
message read by Mr.. Butler, and said they
made part of general gument as TO the
consttutionality of the bill, and had no
reference to the special case of President
Johnsan's Cabinet. .a.- -..
The Chief Justice submitted the question
to the Senate, and the evidence was refused
aamission-g2 to 20.
Mr., Evarts then asked if at any Cabinet
meeting held between the time OF the pas
sage Of the Tenure of Office bill aud the
removal Of Stanton, the suGirctof how the
public service nss affected by it was consid-
cr, 1, and witness replied that it had bc,n
cc':eijertd repeatedly. .a
Tie counsel then offered to prove that on
such occa,i ions the President and Cabinet
dtrtcynins9 that proper regard tnT public
interest redniSad that case should be ar
ranged in some way so as to the consltu-
tlonaity Of tie law. ...
Mr.. BntIer said the managers wou|d like
to have the Senate. in accordance with their
previous votes, decline all such evidence, 1t
is immaterial, and wo1ld stop the trials TO
their patience Of attempts to Introduce It,.
Mr.. Eyagts briefly rcjOined that the learn
cd Maragers from the frequency ard !'ngth
Of his remarks, seemed to think the par
ticrce Of the Senate immaterial, aud capa>
bic receiving impressions only from one
side.
Mr.. Henderson asked whether this evi-
dence might not be published with dcposl-
ton, but not necessarily with disqualhca-
ton from nfliCe,
Mr.. Butler replied it could not be offer
ed with any such design to this court, but
if it.could be, this was not the proper time
ior mitigating testimony, which was always
offered on conviction and before Judgment
The question was submitted to the Sen
ate, and by a vote of l9 TO 30 decided in
the negative. So the evidence was not ad-
nitted
Senate took recess.
On reassemblng at 2:25.
Mr.. Evarts asked if within the period
mentioned IN the Cabinet discussion, there
was anything suggested or said about using
force in order TO bring about settlement
Of the question at issue?
Mr. Butler objected for the rea7ou that
it was covered by the ruling, and the SEN
ate sustained the objection.
Mr. Welles on cross-eXamlnatlon, said
he had received but one commission as Sec
retary OF the Navy which was from Abra-
ham Lincoln. He called on the President
February 22nd. before II O'Clock. The
nouinatio~ of Mr.. Ewing was then made
out. He testified yesterday that Mr.. Stan
berry had an engagement at the supreme
Court at l2 O'Clock, but it was only his in
ference Do not know why officers under
Gen. Emery command we're called from
the party to 90 to Headquarters; did not,
hear it WAS to warn them not to go to u
masquerade; does not know whether he sta
ted to the President anything but that the
officers we're called for aud that the War
Department was unusually lighted up,
Edgar Nellps, n son OF the Secretary, and
Chief Clerk in the Navy Department, was
the next witness for the, defense. He testi-
fed to the form of commissions tor navy
agents He then stated what he heard at
the party, which he communicated to his
father the same night. The lady of the
house told him about the call for the Off
GERS to go to headquarters.
Mr. Evarts then stated that the counsel
had in attendance the Secretary Of the
Treasury, Secretary of State, Secretary OF
Interior and Postmaster General, who were
prepared to give the same evidence they
wished to elicit from the Secretary of the
Navy. but which he should not now attempt
to introduce in consequence Of the later rul-
ing.
Alexander Randall, Postmaster General,
was then called, and testified that Foster
Bloogett was removed from the office OF
Postmaster at Augusta, il Consequence Of
complaint in writing, of misconduct He
produced papers and which effected the re-
moval. im a.t o
MIR, Evarts offered to put them in evi-
dence. 40 r.4 "a. Si7
Mr.. Butler objected, unless The conl-