The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1868-04-18

Cabinet before the meeting broke mp
that he had removed Secretary Stanton,
and in answer to General Wells said
that General Thomas was IN possession
of the Office, and that Mr.. Stanton had
acouiesced, on requiring time to remove
his papers.
Mir. Butler argued against admitting
the testimony, and reiterated his views
regarding the duties of the members OF
the Cabinet; they could only give their
opinions in writing about matters con-
nected with their own Departments.
Also said the evidence of the witness
showed that the President had acted in
this instance without consultation with
his Cabinet, and held that the point at
issue was covered by the ruling in re-
gard to Mr.. Perrin yesterday.
Mr.. Evarts denied that tie testimony
of the witness warranted the statement
of Mr.. Butler. Witness had only said
he was then informed of :he actual
commission of the act, but he he did not
say that he and other members OF the
Cabinet did not know 1t was contem-
plated. He also denied of any analogy
with the case of Mr.. Perrin. Tue com-
munication of the President was not al
dressed to private individuals, put 70
members of the Cabinet at the meeting.
Mr.. Curtis followed on the same side
that they did not base their appiica-
tioh on the ground that his counseiiors
were then giving the President advice,
bu I because he was then performing an
official act in making communication;
he combatted Mr.. Buffers view, based
on an opinion of Mr.. Jefferson, aud
quoted from the Federalist and from the
history of the Constitution, to show
that the theory and practice of our Gov
eminent were totally opposed TO 1t even
during Jefferson's administration.
Mr.. Butler replied that no act is Of
fetal which is not eDjoined by some law
and held there was none requiring such
declarations as those in question. he
remarked the counsel did not assert
that the President had been advised by
his Cabinet to do what he had done
and went on to claim that if the Senate
admitted this evidence they would re-
verse the decision of yesterday.
I MIR. Evarts briefly rejoined that 1t
bore on the question of lntept.
The Chief Justice said this evidence
related to the removal of Mr.. Stanton,
whereas that offered yesterday referred
to the appointment Of successor, ana
he was clearly of the opinion that II
was admissible.
The yeas and nays being taken, his
ruling was sustained-26 to %.
Secretary Welles then testified that
the President told the Cabinet he had
removed Mr.. Stanton and appointed
| General Thomas, who was then IN pos
session, Stanton acquiescinG, requiring
only time enough to remove his papers.
This communication was made III con-
fornity with the regular routine, after
the other business was disposed oil.
The next day the witness saw the nom.
ination of Mr.. Ewing prepared and IN
the hands of the President. The tenure
of Office law was first brought before
the Cabinet in February, lo06. Secre-
tary Stanton was present.
The counsel al this point offered
TO prove that the President laid before
the Cabinet the tenure of office bill;
that they advised its return with OBJ,
iections as being unconstitutional, and
that Secretaries Seward and Stanton
undertook to prepare veto, ana also To
show what further action was taken
during the ten days following.
Mr.. Butler argued at length against
the admissability of such evidence,
taking the ground that the President
could not shelter himself behind the
opinions of his Constitutional advisers
Mr.. Evarts replied in an argument
which went into the question Of the
Presidents responsibility with consid'
cradle minuteness, and the Court ad'
iourned at AS.