New-York tribune., 1868-04-23

naV6\netn Ia ~,
wasbllston BY another statute entitled An set ,ss
special pansSsns are s1sSp priceS 10 Yar,aSs naSsA
ba. But conspiracy is nos Of the crimes meatonns
The 18th section Of that act provides 60 =
this and shah !. punished s.p.a .1ss n
Ss ss',s Zee cJ sr =. hi. 1A;s e =,
the county jail isrs period nss exceeding assths
And the 10th section provides:
j. deinItOu, descriptions ehu.. all sa.. o,.
.ss .s ss sSs& S Z. pSse s q @ pSfs S
aus shall remain s heretofore
There can be no doubt that under the EngiIsh e,mn
o the 81 Gnsd states the Dist o eb ss It,
and seventh articles SGT forth sfenses which are p.s
Article six s laid under the statute Of 1884, and cha,
that the respondent did uDsgfuIly conspire yiss
property OF the United States in the Department OF NJ
and this with intent TO violate and disregard the act en-
ices The words used IN the conspiracy act Of I s.
room for argument upon the point Raised by the learned
Columbia is not included by specific desgnaon but tss
justify the view that the sct apples TO ne DE-
tret sLan refer to single authority upon The POINT
D. s2D suects IN express terms the several Ieritor
of the United States aud the District OF Columbia 70 As
payment OF the taxes imposed upon which the question
arose whether Congress has power to impose direcs ss
the District OF Columbia Ia view OF the fact that bY
the Constitution representation and direct shsh
be sppertioned among the several States. which mag
be included within the union according to their respective
In the case of Loughborough agt Blake the supreus
Court OF the United States unanimously decided in
that although the Language Of the Constitution apparent
y excepts the District of Columbia from the imposition
consider the District being conprehendsd in this ~
speot, within the intention Of the Constitution LouA
Tho resoning Of the Supreme Court and its conclusion
In this satisfactory TO the bar and the country
and no person has deemed IL worth while 10 raise the
question anew under the direct tax Of August s, S
(sts. xiii 29SJ which also comprehends tie Territens
| .,,.If fhan nfafrf afnfE IA
But the logical rules OF construction applicable 10 -
act Of ConGressar the same as those applicable 70 The
are both awsnonlns more morning. IS ss TIA,
ton of the Constitution, may be satisfactorily maa
ained that the District Of Columbia 70 De deemed b.
Of the OF things 10 be compfehenaed pa
provision OF Constitution which In words and In their
supe hcia construction, excludes H. must NOT tue sane
rule OF construction produce the same Le IN tne dete
miaton of the legal and import of an act Of Gen
gress when obscurity exists III the latter ior sans
The seventh article laid upon the common Law. ana
charges substantially the same oirensss as IN tho sl1
article The result Them is that the ffth and seventh
articles which based upon the common law set forA
substantially the same onenses which are set orth N tn.
fifth and sixth articles which are laid In the statute
July 81 1885, and there can be no doubt OF the validity
the nth and seventh articles II s practically linmA
teria whether the suggestion made By the counsel for the
respondent that the Conspiracy act OF 1851 does not In
cude the District OF Columbia IS valid suggestion
net. Not doubling that the senate VIII hld that ne
charge VI conspiracy is sufficiently laid under existing
laws, proceed to an examination of the evidence
II should always be borne in mind that the evidence ia
proof OF conspiracy will generally from the nature
the crime crcumstantal; aud this case IN this par
tioular exception 70 the usual experience IN ciin
nal trials. We End in the first place, Il tne ansssuoes
Ia tue trst second and third articles nave Deeh esIae
lshed. that the President was engaged IN an unasid
act II find Lorenzo Thoinse or other persons co
| operating with him upon agreement, or an under
standing assent ON the part OF such otner
the prosecution OF such unlawful undertang an se'u
conspiracy proved The existence OF the conspiracy
being established, IL is then competent 70 mttoease
the sstements OF the parties to the eonspaey msas
aud done while the conspiracy was pending aha IA uf
therance OF this design; and upon THIS Rouhu lns
testimony has been offered ana receyeu Oh tne oeeS
tons made by Lorenzo Thomas Of the parties 20 tns
conspiracy subsequent TO the 18th OF January, ~,
perhaps the 18th OF January SSo.tne Gay On m S
was restored to the office OF AdjutantGeners OF We
Army United States by tue action OF tue
ana hich appears to nave been an l,s
sg-the removal O1 Mr.. stanton from Tue once Oi cesf
| Agreement between the respondent and Thomss
| Is found IN the order of the alst oil FcDfuar! inS
appointing Thomas, and in the conversation Wmes
| took place at the time the order placed u
| Thonas's hands. The counsel Tor the IespVhaenl
thus poLt was involved Ia a very serious difficulty ne
had admitted (which he took not 70 dol that ns
order purely military one. ne saw tnat his enns
taVv order which did not pass through Of tho
| Army and would be liable TO impeachment andts
2d of Aarrn, 1867. entitled An act making appropnr
support Of the Army for the fiscal year enc
ing June 1865, and for other purposes he had 20
cared that it not military order then the ansaS
ton oOncssedly IN the nature oi an agreenent
| tween tae President aud Lorenzo Thomas; aud
| the act contemplated BY that agreement Was ~
unlawful act, II the act were lawful ana tne meas
| employed Tor accomplishing 1t were unlawiu, inca
clearly tie charge oi conspiracy would De mahtaneL
Hence he was careful to say IN denying at Ine VS Ss
Was military order that IL nevertheless ln'okeo has
spirit ot ntary obedience which constitutes the sens
faithful Adutant General of the Army of the United
States, interested, personally, professionally ana pa.
icay TO have the ohce of secretr! oI ue ~ s
OF War performed IN temporary vacancy, Was ~ ~
his duty to accept the appointment uniss nc hue uss
1t unlawful " accept III lhe Submissions anu s.
whole. that the order not military order nor 90 W
claim that /, was military order Dut Was ie..sr
| I'm
altogether, without snbJeetng himself 70 any lus',ss ~
nlent by military tribunal This s tue critical tes
tie character OF the paper which he received ana "a
which he proceeded 70 act. IBnoranee VI the law
cordiug 10 che old MAXIM excuses man and whether
Gen Thomas at the interview he had with the frss
ient, On the ioth ot January. 100, or nt MS h
with him the day when he received the letter OF ~
poiutment knew that the President engaged IN ~
unlawful act is material 10 this inquiry ihe ftea
then aad there introduced Gen. Thomas to coop pera.
with him in the prosecution OF the unlawful design
Cen Thonas as ignorant OF the Illegal nature o the
that fact furnishes no legal evidence ior hln
though morally 1t might be AN excuse Tor ms eOhuuee
But certainly President, who did know Tue Illegal ma
of the proceedny cannot excuse himself Oy assert
ing that cOconspIrator was AT the time Ignorant vi t
illegal business in which they were engaged
1t being proved that the Respondent Was ehSased n An
unlawful undertaSng IN ms attempt 10 remove MI s,aa
War that, by an agreement or Understanding DetseeA
Gen. Thomas and himself they were to cooperats u
carrying this purpose into execution an DeIhg pfONee
also. that the purpose Itself Was unlawful al TIC eienen'
of conspiracy fully established; and II only reuahs
10 examine the testimony III ordcr tat lhe nature o S
conspiracy may more clearly appear, and the means W
which the purpose Was 10 be accomplished may w '''
| fully understood. -.
The statement Of the President in his message to the
Senate date Dec. H. looi GsciOSes tue deD VI
his feeling the intensity VI his purpose Ia REGARD
the removal OF Mr.. stanton In that message ne pess
OF the bill regulating tenure or certain el' onices
the time before him for consideration lie sys.
The bill bad not then become law; tue nIni.a'es
upon the power of removal was not yet Imposed a.
there was yet time make any changes III an! Vnes,
these gentlemen (neaning the members OF MS .av,s
had then said to that he would avail h!iseh " W
PROVISIONS that bill in II should become m".'
suoud not have hesitaed moment as 10 ms m.
When In the summer OF o6, the respondent oes' 80
satisfied Mr. stanton not only did not enter lho
Presidents schemes, but opposed TO theln anu ~
determined upon his suspension and inal rehloIM ~
the Office of secretary Department Uf war