New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1868-04-01
THE PRESIDENTS PLEA.

lohNs W. WI AOlit Nu N4N oASN
toiled in the preparation of the presidents
plea in answer to the indictment exhibited
against him. To this labor they gave up
themselves, forswere all other pursuits
denied themselves to clients, and did moi
even 90 to church on the Intervening sun
day, and when the precious paper tnHs
produced was read to the expectant senate
it reminded one of the famous plea OF the
pettifogger who defended client sued for
the value of a missing slop-bucket borrow
ed of a neighbor. He never had borrowed
If After he borrowed it he returned it;
finding that be had lost it he had paid for
#. when he borrowed it there was no bot
tom to it; and there was no such bucket
Too much learning has caused the presi'
dents counsel to make just such plea as
this for their distinguished client. He has
not violated the tenure of Office bill; he
violated the tenure of office bill so that a
case might be made up to test its constitu-
tionality; there is no such law as the
tenure of Office bill, because that law con-
| ficts with the constitution, and is therefore
null and void. He did not try to induce
General Emory to violate law OF con
gress when he tried to induce General
| Emory to violate that law. he was only
giving his opinion concerning it; and
there was no such law, since it, also, was
unconstitutional. He had not sought to
excite the public mind against congress
he had only said that its policy tended to
consolidation, despotism, and the perma-
Rent dsmemberment of the Union. He
had not denied the authority of congress /;
be had only said that congress was a body
composed of the representatives of all the
states, and that this body was composed OF
the representatives Of but a part Of the
states. He had never intended to do any
mischief; but if he had done any, he was
glad of it, and would do it again.
That is the substance Of the defense
which Mr.. JohnsoR's FIVE lawyers have pre-
pared fer him, and with this plea he puts
himself on bis trial. The answer is more
remarkable for what it does not say than
for what it says. What has become OF that
demurrer to the jurisdiction of the court
of which we heard SO much a short time
since Is it possible that Andrew john
son, who for the last two years has been
proclaiming that a congress which ex-
cludes from its deliberations the repre-
sentatives of ten states OF the Union is
nothing but body hanging on to the verge
of the government, is prepared tamely to
submit to trial and punishment by senate
of "a instead of IA members? Why
was it left to poor old Garrett Davis to
interpose this weighty objections and
how did it happen that all of the Dem
ocratic senators, except Davis and
McCreery, voted that senate from which
the representatives of ten states are ex-
cluded is legal and constitutional body
If the Democratic leaders are to desert their
colors in this manner at the very outset of
the campaign, what will be left of their
party by the end OF. the trial
So far as the accusations against the
president in relation to the tenure of Office
act are concerned, his plea is twofold. Mr..
StantOn's case was not covered by the law,
and therefore in removing Stanton the
president did not violate the law; and the
law itself is unconstitutional, and the VIC
lation of it is no crime. Now it is clear
that If the first plea is true it is the best of
the two; but the presidents counsel say
less concerning it than Of the other, and
seem to be rather ashamed of it. It is
quite true that the law provides that
cabinet minister shall be entitled to hold
his Office only during the term of the presi-
dent by whom he may be appointed, and
one month thereafter. 1t is quite true that
Mr.. johnson never appointed Mr.. Stanton,
and that the term of the president who did
appoint him was cut short three years ago
by the bullet of Booth. But there is such
thing as implied as well as expressed ap-
pOintments. For two years and three
months Mr.. johnson recognized Mr.. Stan
ton as secretary Of war. He sat with him
in cabinet meetings; he issued orders
through him he required from
him advice and opinions in his
official character; he allowed his requisi-
tons for money to be honored at the
treasury. The pretense that all this did
not constitute an appointment, and that
Mr.. Stanton was not invested with all the
rights that would have been his had he
held written commission under the hand
and seal Of the president, is subterfuge !;
and the presidents counsel evidently feel
that 1t is SO, since they make this plea only
in an incidental and halfapOlogetic man
ner For the remaining pretense, that
although the law was broken Mr.. johnson
can not be punished for it, since he was ad-
yissd and believed that it was unconstitu-
tional, still less can be seriously said. Mr..
johnson and his advisers are not the su-
preme court. They have no more right or
power to pass upon the cOnstitutionality Of
a law than burglar has to decide that
the law against burglary is null and void.
i was perhaps unfortunate for Mr.. Johnsea
that he was 80 situated that be could not
get up a ease to test the constitutiOnality Of
the tenure q ogiee act by any other means
than By violating it in his own persen
but this viii not iqHsliy him in bis course.