Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1868-04-01

lbe allowed, as in the case of jurors, because
of ,such opinions, no trial could 20 forwa I'd,
| becs susc every intelligent senator could be
= bt,cted to upon one side or the other.
The first eight articles of impeachment al.
In e that the acts of the respondent in remov-
-, Mr.. Stanton from Office, and apnointnc
Nj Thomas adj interim, were in contraven-
h;sa , of his oath of Office, and in disregard of
the duties thereof. The President NAV have
tho power under the law, to do acts in con-
trss, ntion OF his official oath, but, when they
are } done, they are acts of official miscon-
duct, ana are imPeachable. In support OF
tcstinm my of Hon. Mr.. Van Horn and of
Hon. N r. Burleigh will be introduced, also
that Of, persons who heard Gen. Thomas boast
at villa rd's Hotel that he should call on
Gen. Gr1 MT for military force to put him in
possession OF the office, and also the fact that
the PresSa ,nt formally notified the Secretary
of the Ere. 'sury to answer Thomas requisi-
ton for mon ey. The respondent admits both
the facts ant the intent charged in article
first, but ella inns the power under the Con-
stitution ofre moving from Office all executive
officers on hi own Judgment of grounds,
and the questi on then, upon which the first
ei cht articles lust stand or fall, is simply
this Has tho resident, under the Consti-
tuition, the mort than kingly prerogative, at
will to remove from Office indefinitely, all
civil. military, or naval, at any and all times,
and III the vacant les with creatures of his
own appointmens, for his own purposes
and without any rea traint whatever, or posi-
biity of restraint b y the Sen ate or Congress
through laws duly enacted These eight
articles and the answers thereto raise the
momentous cues ton whether the presidential
office itself, If ii had the provocative and
mower claimed it, ought in fact to exist
as a mart of the, Constitutional government
Of a free people, while by tho last three arti-
cles the simpler and less important inquiry
is To he detormiz ed, whether Andrew John,
son has so cosdia cted himself that he ought
Ionaar to hold al ~ Constitutional Office. Tn,
R1rmer of these questions is of transcendant
lmporLonce ans whoever votes q not guilty ,
upon the first cay hit articles, votes to enchalI
our free instituU ons, and to prostI alto them a
the feet of any nan who, being President,
NAV choose to c 0ntrol them.
The President claims that this prerogative
was practically 50 titled by the first Congress
of the United Sta ties, but the power which
he claims from til legislative construction
of our Congress b. a vote of "a to 20 in the
House. and tie v, tie in the Senate. has beer
denied by another House of more than three
times the number of members by vote o
1873 to 81 and by Senate of more thar
double the number of Senator'S by vote o.
IS tD 10, and this too, after the President haC
presented to them all the arguments in it:
favor that I've could find to sustain his claim
OF power.
So far as abe executive powe of remova
is found at asl in the Cons.itr ition, it is al
!, inferred one, either from t'se power of APP
1 poirstment or because " the executive power
! is vested in til e President As the powe
of appoin tment is restrained by certain lin
itations, is it T, asonable to, suppose that the
power of removal is unlin iited. Now if the
earlier Presidents ever ella imod any such un
Il limited power of removal as has beer
set up by the Presiden in his most re
markaSIe and even cri minal answer. the
power of regula ton of he tenure of office
and the manner of remoN raj, has always beer
exercised by Congress unquestioned unit
now. and no bill was ever vetoed upon thi,
account until now. recedents show that
Congress has on ditfere mt occasions author
lied the Preside ut to move military or ma
val officers for CT rtain reasons plainly indi
eating that the reside 1t himself has not the
constitutional 20 wer to dismiss such officers
at Measure Bui SO far as removal and dis
missals are concer ned, the Constitution makes
no difference betw cen these officers and thos,
in the civil servlc o
If the tenure of Office bill affected Mr.
Stanton's commiss ion at all it must have beer
vacated either Apr 4th-, 1865. on the pas
| sage of the act March I'd, 1867 But the
/ President recocnI zed him as Secretary o
War after that, al I'd, he shall succeed il
convincing the Ser ate that Mr. Stanton ha!
been acting az Seer etal Y of War against thu
J provisions of the tenure of Office act. ther
the President CONT utted an improbable of
fence in recognizing Stanton as the incumben
of that office contraf v to law. But the Pres
. ia. -..sranded St~ 49,. .aA~ +la+ an.
! he is therefore estopped by his solemn oficia
2 acts from denying the legality and constitu
l tional propriety OF Mr.. Stanton's position
The dd interim appointm cant cf Gen Thomas
e was illegal, because Sc .Tetary Stanton had
/ not died or resigned, neither was he sicl
or absent from his post, and also becaus,
= Gen Thomas not the head of another
{ executive department Lieut.. Gen. Scott wa,
e once appointed Secret airy of Var dd interim
: before the restraining, act of 1868. which re
/ quires the detail of she head of another de
$ partmcnt and Gen. Grant was appointed "a
. interim upon the suspension of Mr.. Stanton
t under the provisions of the tenure of Office
q act But if the President did not suspend
n Stanton under that act, then his appointment
J. of Gen. Grant was unauthorized by law and
: violation of his oath of office.
T. The President urges that. believing tn,
f tenure of Office act TO be unconstitutional, he
had a right to violate it for the purpose OF
e bringing the matter before the Supreme Court
c for it's adjudication. Mr.. Butler claimed thai
9 the question of the constitutonality of any
Z law of Congress is an irrelevant one, because
all the power or right in the President to
b Judge upon any supposed conflict of an act
e of Congress with the paramount law of the
:. Constitution is exhausted when he has exam
9 ined bill sent him and returned it with his
objections. If it is then passed over his We
to, it becomes valid if in fact signed by
him. For the President to refuse to execute
law duly passed, because he thought it I'M
constitutional, after he had vetoed 1t for that
reason, would certainly subject him TO i'm
parchment for violating his oath of office
He then reviewed the whole history of the
\ action of the Supreme Court in deciding sup
- posed conflicts between laws and the Consti-
tuition, for the purpose of showing that since
> he first decision of the Supreme Court until
the day Of this arraignInent no law passed by
=, Congress affecting the general welfare has
ever, by the Judgment of that court, been
set aside or held for naught because of uncon-
: stitutionality the ground work of its deci-
sion. The Presidents claim that he violated
the law to test its constitutionality is a mere
subterfuge, for he had never taken any step
to submit the question to any court. although
! more than year has now elapsed since the
y passage of the act in question.
The ninth article was then commented
: upon, and the conclusion drawn from the
sending for Gen. Emory by the President
= and the conversation that TRANSFERRED between
i them, that the President designed to
= issue military orders in some other way than
= through the General of the Army. as has
- been provided by law of Congress.
: In substantiating the eleventh article, Mr..
e Butler said it would be shown that the au-
e thority of Congress had been denied that
u ba had opHaavora6 IN Induce Cen Grant r.,