Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1868-04-16
IMPEACHMENT,
WASHINGTON, April Is, 1868.
SENATE.
.adinu the Journal.

arguments OF, managers shall be filed be.
fore the conclusion of the closing argu-
ment.
Mr.. CONNESS offered a substitute al
lowing as many to speak on both sides a;
Idesire, provided only four days be consum-
ed by EACH side. Lost--9 to "a. 's ~
MIR. DOOLITTLE offered an amendment
that the opposing counsel speak alternate
ly by twos until all is finished.
Mr.. DRAKE moved to postpone the sub
! ject definitely. Agreed to-34 to 15.
Mr.. EVARTS said although Mr.. STAN
berry was not yet able to be present, yet,
wishing to avoid delay, counsel would pro-
ceed to offer documentary evidence to-day,
and hoped they could Tomorrow go on with
oral testimony.
| DC. Clark, Executive Clerk of the SEN
ate. verified the message nominating Thos
Ewing for Secretaryo of War, received Feb
ruary 22d.
Mr.. CURTIS then offered message,
dated February "a, in response to the Sen
ate resolution concerning the removal OF
| Stanton. rrar arc, .S.Tss.ssgvs- sr.,,.
/ Mr.. BUTLER said the article of proof is
not objected to, but the proof itself is. For
a very plain reason, this message was sent
after the President was impeached by the
House, and of course his declarations put
in or attempted to be put in after his inn
peaehment. whether directed to the Senate
or any body else, cannot be given in evil
dence. The exact order of time may not be
in the minds of Senators. l will therefore
state that on the 2lst of February, reso-
luton was offered in the House looking to
the impeachment of the President, and it
was referred to committee. On the 22d
of February, the committee reported. and
the impeachment was actually voted. Then
interviewed Sunday, 23d. Any message
sent On the, 24th of February, must have
been known to the President to be after his
Impeachment. '-} a'l --E &
| Mr.CURTIS-It will be recollected that
the Honorable Managers put in evidence
! a resolution of the Senate to which this
message is a response. The question is
whether the managers can put in evidence
8 resolve of the Senate transmitted to the
President with reference to the removal of
Stanton, and refuse to receive a reply
which the President made to that resolve.
g Mr.. .BUTLER-I have only to say that
this is an argument to prejudice and not
to law Will my learned friends opposite
'lafe to say that they have read of case
where, after the indictment of a criminal,
. respondent was allowed to put in evidence,
! his statement of his own defence? If so.
when does that right cease? We put in
the resolution referred to because it is part
of the transaction of Stanton. 1t was
made before impeachment was determined
upon, and now we are asked to admit the
criminals declarations after that day.
only ask the Senate to consider it as pre-
cedent hereafter, as well as being great
wrong upon people, that after indictment,
after impeachment, the President can send
in message which shall be taken as evil
dence. 'aa
Mr.. EvARRTS-The learned manager
asks whether we dare to do something. We
have not been in the habit of considering
measures Tor the conducting of forensic
Hisputation to be question of daring. We
are not in the habit of applying such epi-
thets to opponents; not hitherto in the
habit of receiving them. The meas
ure of duty of counsel is the measure
which we shall strive to obey, and not the
measure of daring, if tor no other reason
than that on the qoestion of law of fact
and of evidence we may perhaps. expect
some superiority; but on measures of dar-
ing aughterl, is the learned manager en-
tirely right in saying that impeachment
was voted on the 22d of February? The
22d was Saturday, and unless L am mis-
taken vote was not taken until the IOl-
lowing Monday.
Mr.. BUTLER-The vote was taken on
Saturday, 22d Feb. - .,..-. ......-,.r
Mr.. EVARTS-That is, that articles OF
impeachment shall be brought in.
Mr.. BUTLER-Yes, sir. ."+
Mr.. EVARrS-The articles, however.
were not voted until the 24th. Now, it is
said that because the vote that impeach-
'nent should proceed was taken on the 22d
If February, that impugns the admissible
ty of the evidence proposed to be laid be-
ore the Senate. My learned associate has
distinctly stated the solution of the matter.
Perhaps both of those transactions, the
vote in the Senate and this message, may
be within the range of argument, but the
managers have put in evidence this transac-
ion of the Senate and exactly what bearing
hat has as part of the removal of Mr..
stanton, which took place before the reso-
ution was placed before the Senate, it is
,lot easy to see. 1t was, however, received
IS proper evidence, and the reason we did
iOt consider it Objectionable was, that we
opposed, as a matter OF course, that this
Message, which is in answer to that resolu-
ion, on the Introduction of the topic by
he resolution before offered in evidence,
would be admissible in testimony. We
ubmit therefore, that in every principle
f law and of discussion in reference to the
ompleteness of the record on the point,
his message of the President should be al
lowed TO be read and given in evidence.
Mr.. BUTLER-Is simply desire to call the
| attention of the Senate to the fact that
whether as matter of daring or of profess
| ional knowledge, neither counsel having
tated any possible reason why this paper
/ ,.hould be received in evidence; we put in
tanding that resolve was served on the
| President on the night Oh the 21st OF Feb
ruary, he still went on aud treated this Lo-
renZo Thomas as Secretary of War, ad in
| serim; that Lorenzo Thomas was then rec
Ognized by him after that as Secretary, ad
interim, and that after that Lorenzo Thorn
as was carrying out his design to take pos
session OF the Office by force. We offered
it in order to show that the President was
determined on disobeying the law of the
land, and notice was served upon
him for the purpose of having
him know the action of the Senate, so he
might stay his hand. Now can prepar-
ed article, made after that and after he was
| impeached by the House of Representa-
tives, be put in evidence? One ounce O
action in obedience to the law and resolu
! tion of the Senate would have been great
I deal better than pages of argument. will
| not use the word dare, for l know tina
counsel would dare do all that good law
yers would dare do in favor of their client
but will say that the gentlemen have moi
shown any sound reason on which thi:
can be done.
The CHIEF JUSTICE directed the coun
sci for the President to put in writing wha
they proposed to prove. ---
r While they were engaged in doing so,
Mr.. BUTLER said that in order to pre-
vent mistakes he had sent the Clerk of the
House for the record of proceedings on i'm
peachment.
Mr.. Mcpherson, Clerk of the House, hav
/ sng come in soon after and handed thu
House journal to Mr.. Butler,
Mr.. BUTLER said-I find, upon exam
ination, that the state of the record is this
On the 2lst of February resolution OF i'm
peachment was prepared and referred to {
committee. On the 22d the committee re
ported, and that report was debated
| i, tba lop nd inf Mnp6au 0lth mr.
the actual vote taken Monday, oath.
Mr.. EVARTS-Late in the afternoon!
O'clock So l was correct. O., ,-sr--.-r
Mr.. BINGHAM-I rise to state furthe
reason why we insist upon this objection
The House, as appears by the journal, vo
ted OH the oath of February, that Andrew
johnson be impeached of high crimes anC
| I,,;sdopaannrS IN tho 91l of EahrtIarv