New-York tribune., 1868-04-07
CAN THE CHIEF-JCSIICE. PRESIDING IN
1HE SENATE, RULE OK POTEi

SENATOR SUMMERS ARGUMENT AGAINST TINS
CLAIM
The Hon. Charles Sumner has made an ex-
hau.'tye argument upon the question Of the right to vote
assumed by ChefJusce Chase in the Senate during the
Impeachment trial. OF which the following is brief suiu
mary:
In determining the relations OF the Chief Justlce 10
trial OF impeachment, must look rst To the COnstn
tOn for IL Is solely by virtue OF the Constitution that
this eminent magistrate is transported irom hs own
natural field 10 another, where he s for the time an e1
otc OF course the ChefJustice in his court Is at
home; but II Is equally clear that when he comes INTO
welcome aud honor he cannot expect membership or
anything beyond those powers which are derived direct
rly occupies the chair.
Repairng 10 authoritative text we find the only ap
The Senss shall haze the soe power :" W all impeiehHra
Wheu Prein, Of lh United State tei the thiefJu'tce sha
preside and person shall he convicted without TIE concurrence OF
This is all The ChefJustce shall presde; but this is
subject to two limitations specifically declared First
the trial Is To be by the Senate SOLELY and nobody oSe
thus carefully excluding the presiding officer from AL
participation except far Is implied in the power 20
preside and secondly. Judgment OF convection eau pe
only by vote OF twothrds O the members, thus again
excluding the Presiding Officer unless 1t is assumed that
he is n member OF the Senate.
on the face Of this text, 1t is difficult TO find any amb
guilty. Nobody questions that the ChefJustice must
preside Can body question the trial he by
ourenent is to ny in the face of the Constitution Can
anybody question that the Judgment OF conviction must
Now since the ChieJustlce Is not member OF the
senate, IL is plain that he is positively ex'
cluded from any vote the hna question.
IL only remains that he should preside" The
powers OF presiding officer, where not specifically
declared must lie found in parliamentary law The very
term O prsSde is parliamentary. It belongs to the
tecnicaltles OF this branch Of law as much as 10 dlc
belongs 10 the technicalties of common law In deter
mnuig the signihcatbn OF this ten II Will be o little
avail show some local usage, or perhaps some decision
court IL must be the usage or the decision OF PatLA
mont, which uilist be shown Against this all vague
speculation ~ dyinaon OF reason is futile viii NOT
encunber this discussion by superduous authorities In
now insisting that this question must be determined ny
parliamentary law, coutent myself with citing the
ofieCed words OF Lord Coke IN his Fourth Institute:
A,t - ery OF justice hah Laws and customs 100 s drseop
br ne conmoa ,w TIE ,l ui eauon laws aud customs
t Court 81 Parliament rfy'is digib sfeirdsibts
svhsE ., wsshy matters Parliament moved eaaeerag ,ie
Lords PAhame1t assembled
10 srmiAd aHgsj and dipad by ue tOngi Of Parliament
10. t Law by the iN of this used
in eours' fCok.. 9Th Instltutr. IL
al begin with the familiar authority mean the
eminent commentator aud Judge, RT William BlackstQne
La his cOnInentariesghe g1l be found In elegant
form. the complete body OF English law have this
whole matter stated ia a few words
rtr Ageher OF ihe bou,s o iors io'd o. Pea">nf
g- bi, opinion Or quesi'oi M ibs HOa,s"
- .,ey ala,sa ~ As.skekSAiSX GF. utyfa V0y< A