New-York tribune., 1868-03-04
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE.

THE COURT OF IMPEACHMENT AND THE SUPREME
COURT-wHAT If THEY SHOULD DIsAGREEi
To ne Editor Of TAs Tribune
SIR: In your leading editorial of Feb. A you
make Of the following language "a law is passed
which defines to be the duty of the President consult
with the Senate before removing certain officer The
law may may not be constitutional The President has
business with that 1t is constitutional until the su
inferposcs and inSslidates it, Now for information
Oud ask II the Presidents impeachment founded, for
instance solely his violation of tho TenureOf Office
law should result in his removal from Office, and the SUI
constitutional whether Mr. johnson would be rensated
in his Office on the decision being made known.
Susqoehanna Depot Pa. Feb. 2S, 1863
REPLY-In regard to Impeachment. and all ques-
tiOns connected herewith the Supreme Court is an
Inferior and subordinate tribunal whose Op Union
would influence the High Court of Impeachment, in
the same manner as would the opinion of any State
or foreign court, viz. just so far as the argument
accompanying its opinion carried conviction to the
minds of Senators. Our Constitution has vested the
power of deciding upon the consttutionaly of laws
in far may be necessary for purposes of mpeach
ment in the House. aud in the Senate sitting as a
High Court of Impeachment-not in the Supreme
Court. The latter may pass upon the constitution
aly of laws 50 far as may be necessary in cases in
law and in equity but the impeachment of the
President is not case in law or in equity, but in
politics and statesmanship-an altogether higher
field. His oifenses doubtless subject him to legal
punishment but that is not the constitutional object
Of impeachment The design of impeachment is not
to punish President, but simply to remove him from
Office in which his presence is deemed by the po-
litical branch of the Government dangerous to the
political welfare of the country With such ques-
tion the Supreme Court has nothing to do. If the
two courts should differ in their construction Of the
Constitution it would be no new emergency. Such
differences between courts have often occurred. So
long it seemed likely to result in no political dan
ger Congress might tolerate it, But should il seem
to threaten danger dissenson, Congress- after re-
moving the President, has either of two ways to
assert its constitutional supremacy the creator of
the Supreme Court the thing it has created and
as the immediate representative of the present peo
pie of the United States the representative Of
that generation whose bodies molder in the dust and
whose opinions rust the shelves of law Libraries
Congress can either impeach and remove the Judges
of the Supreme Court for constituting the COnstitu-
tOn differently from the construction placed upon it
by the High Court of impeachment, OF it can re-
organize the Supreme Court so as to make it con-
sst of thirteen Judges, or as many more as may be
necessary, of whom the required majority shall be
able to constue the Constitution in harmony with
the ideas which now reign in the United States of
America. Congress- in short represents the people of
the United States, and the powers of the people of
the United States to do whatever they make mp their
minds to do, are, under our present Constitution,
COnsidaroI1a