The Portland daily press., 1868-04-16
XLth O0NGRESs-seoond Session.
The Impeachment Trial.
TWELFTH DAY.

&AC IN DA&
WASHINGTON, April l5-After the reading O
the journal Mr.. Edmunds offered an amend
ment to Mr.. Summers order, SO framed as t.
require the additional arguments of the man.
ayers to be filed before the conclusion of thu
closing argument for the defence.
Some discussion ensued as to the effect of the
amendment, IN the course of which Mr.. Nelson
expressed the desire that he and one of his as
sociates should be permitted to make oral argu-
ments.
Mr.. CONFESS offered substitute, allowing as
many to speak on both sides as may desire
provided that no more than four days are con-
sumed by each; which was not agreed to BY
lS to 81 votes. "S
Mr.. Doolttle offered an amendment provid.
ing that the opposing counsel should speak By
twcs alternately until all had finished
Mr.. Drake moved to postpone the whole in
definitely, which motion was agreed to by a
vote of "a to IL. Bog
Mr.. Ferry offered an amendment to the rules
changing the hour of meeting to eleven o'clock
and providing for recess of thirty minutes at
two O'Clock each day, which was lost by vote
of "a to &c.
Mr.. Evarts then rose and said that although
Mr.. Stanbery was not yet able to be present.
1S1 "AohAAS W "NOAN ACiaJ thC COuISeI WUulu
proceed to offer documentary evidence to-day
and hoped they could tomorrow go on with
the oral testimony. &3
Mr. Dewitt c. Clark, the executive clerk of
the Senate was sworn end verified the message
nominating Hon. Thomas Ewing, as Secretary
of War, received Feb. %, 1868.
MIR. Curtis then offered message dated
Feb. 24th, in response to the Senate resolution
concerning the removal of Mr.. Stanton.
Mr.. Butler objected, arguing the message
was in the nature of a criminal defence made
after accusation brought, saying he wondered
the counsel dared to offer it. tlt
Mr. Evarts replied, criticising sharply the
words last used, which he said he had never
been accustomed to hear applied to opponents
in judicial arguments. and proceeded to main
tain the legal admissibility of the document.
Mr.. Butler rejoined, and question of fact
arising as to the date of certain impeachment
action by the House, after some delay the jour-
nal was referred to, and Mr.. Evarts shown to
be right.
The objection beng still maintained, Mr..
Bingham followed in its support again insist
ing that the message was merely declaration
of an accused criminal. ~
Mr.. Evarts once more took the floor and re-
ferred to a remark Of Mr. Bingham, that there
was no colorado excuse for the attempt to in
lIOuuCS IIlS eNtuOuC0, WHICH remark ne cnar-
acterized as unwarrantable and uncalled for;
he held that the Senate resolution coDdemning
MIR. Stanton's removal, which had been offered
in evidence, was, equally, with its rejonder
mere declaration" but that both were entitled
to admission; what sheriff said to one whom
he arrested, without the reply, was made at
the same time.
Mr.. Butler said that in the Presidents case
four days interviewed.
Mr.. Eva1ts said that it was not so: the reso-
luton was served on the President late on Fri
day night; the Senate sat only few moments
on Saturday; Sunday interviewed, and on Mon
day the anSwei was sent.
Mr. Bingham spoke at some length in reply
when the Chief Justice rose and expressed his
opinion that the resolution OF the Senate did
not call for reply; the answer volunteered
was not properly admissible as evidence.
His ruling was not called in question,
and MIR. Curtis offered table showing the
names, character and tenure of almost all the
civil officers of the government.
Mr.. Butler objected that its correctness was
verified.
Mr.. Evarts explained. 1t was not introduced
as primary evidence, but only for convenience
of reference.
On motion OF Mr.. Trumbull it was ordere
TO be printed as part of the proceedings
The counsel then offered transcript of the
proceedings in the case of Pickering, removed
by Elder Adams; an attested copy OF Presi-
dent Tyler's designation OF John Nelson to act
as Secretary of State Gd interim, and one of
the Senate's concurrence in the appointment
of his successor, were then put in evidence.
Also similar papers relating to the appoint
ment of Secretaries dd interim by Presidents
Fillmore, Buchanan and Lincoln, and the con-
frmation by the Senate of their successors.
Mr.. Curtis next offered documents which
effected the removal of Assessor and Collector
in Philadelphia by Acting Secretary of the
Treasury Young in 1871.
Their reception was opposed by the manag-
ers, but the Chief Justice ruled that as Mr..
Young was acting by discretion of the Presi-
dent, the evidence concerning his acts were
ruled out.
Mr.. Clark, Executive Clerk, desired to cor
rect his statement that the Senate received the
nomination of Mr.. Ewing on the 22d; it was
brought to the capital on that day, but the
Senate had adjourned. Col Moore carried it
back.
Ia answer to Mr.. Butler-Did mt see the pa
per, was told what it was by Col. Moore.
Col. Moore was then called by the counsel,
and testified as to bringing it to the capital
and finding the Senate adjourned.
The Senate thereupon took recess Of fif-
teen minutes.
Upon the re-assembling of the court Mr..
Butler objected to the admission of the docu-
ment ON the ground that it was not a copy
from the records of the Department under the
head of memoranda, but was statement made
up by the chief clerk of the Navy Department
of the matter, and that he had been asked or
had volunteered to furnish it, leaving out many
things that would be necessary to show the
bearings of the case; everything of value was
left out. Mr.. Butler proceeded to argue at
considerable length the insufficiency of the
document rendered as evidence, contending
that the counsel for the President should pro-
cure transcript of the records of the State
Department, where all the attending circum-
stances were recorded.
Mr. Curtis in reply, called attention to the
n a re nf a irnl1 A.
ture presented by the managers was one from
the Office of the Secretary of State, precisely
similar in form, and proceeded to read it to
demonstrate the fact; it, however, on techni-
cal grounds or because in the opinion of the
Senate ii was proper that the full records
should be presented instead of taking names,
dales and other particulars from the records in
this form, counsel must procure them.
In reply to Mr.. Curtis allusion to the char
acter OF the docume ntary evidence presented
by the managers, Mr.. Butler reminded coun-
Sc that he asked if he had any objection to
the evidence; if they had objected the manag-
ers would, perhaps, have been more formal; he
proceeded further TO argue against the admis-
sa iity of the document as evidence.
The Chief Justice stated he would submit
the question to the Senate.
Senator Hendricks asked whether the man.
ayers objected on the ground that the paper
should be given in full SO far as they relate to
any particular question.
MT. buLler replIeu III tlc dlAI H1I'NO'
Mr. Conkling sent the following question to
the Chair: "Do the counsel for the respondent
rely upon any statute other than that referred
TOP"
Mr.. Curtis said they didn't mean that any
officer was authorized to state what he pleased
as evidence; they did not offer those docu-
ments as copies of the records relating to the
cases named IN the documents themselves;
they were documents of the same character as
those which the managers had put in
Mr.. Edmunds asked whether the evidence
was offered as touching any question or final
conclusion of the fact, or merely as giving the
Senate history of the practice under consid-
e,ation.
Mr.. Curtis argued for the last purpose.
Mr. Boutwell, also argued against the admis-
stability of the evidence, saying that it related
to a class of officers-navy agents-who were
and are appointed under special provision Of
the law creating the Office of the year 1920 in
which tenure of office was established tor the
Office go created for four years, removable al
pleasure; counsel would see that it was no ey
idence relative to removals not made under
tlaG statute.
Mr.. Curtis said the counsel might have beer
under misrepresentation respecting the views
of the managers in conducting this prosecu
ton; this evidence was offered to show tina
whether the Senate was in session or not tn
President could make an dd interim appoint
ment - '-i'a
The Chief Justice put the question to tn