New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1868-04-22
THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL.

The telegraph informs us that the coun-
sci on both sides announced on Monday
that the testimony in the impeachment case
was closed. The Chief Justice thereupon
directed the managers to proceed with the
argument. But as Mr.. Boutwell, was not
prepared the high court of impeachment
adjourned until Wednesday. To-day,
therefore, will begin the forensic struggle
between the opposing counsel.
The testimony introduced has been more
Of formal than of an important charac-
ter. Scarcely any Senator derived any
information from the witnesses not known
to him before. For the very offense for
which the President is arraigned was
known officially to the Senate before the
House preferred articles of impeachment.
But little more depends upon the argu-
ments of counsel than upon the testimony,
for the main and notorious fact remains
despite all argument that the President did
remove an officer in opposition to the terms
of the tenure of Office bill, which was
passed by Senate composed largely of his
triers. He does not deny but admits the
removal. His defense rests upon three
points. First, that Mr.. Stanton's case does
not come within the law. Second, that the
law was unconstitutional. And third, that
if he did violate the law he did 20 with
good intentions.
The assumption that Mr.. Stanton's case
does not come within the law is certainly
an afterthonght, If not bubble. For the
President has always before the trial acted
upon the hypothesis that Mr.. Stanton was
covered by the tenure Of office act. There
can not in truth be any serious doubt in
the mind of any that DIR. Stanton was
actually appointed Secretary of War by
Mr. johnson. The whole Cabinet was
formally retained. After having reeog
nized him as an officer for nearly three
years, IT was too late in February, 1865,
to say that he was not so by Mr.. Johnson's
ewn appointment constructiyely 50 at
least. .es
As to the validity of the law, we ques-
ton whether the Presidents counsel can
prevailnpOa the Senate to reverse their
very recent decision. Mr.. johnson once
returned this law TO the Senate with veto
message, where, after consideration, il was
again passed By two-thiras vote. And II
seems 20 be reasonable that If any Senator.
or even the Presidsnt's counsel, entertained
any doubts as To the validity Of the law
dsfning the oifense for which the respond
ent is tried, that question shOuld have been
raised and the point settled before the trial
proceeded. Il will be asking much Of the
Senate Of the United States to require il to
set aside law passed under the circum-
stances that surrounded he tenure of Office
act.
lAa strongest e1ort win be made upon
the pclat of intention. Ana YET, in order.
e nlnhe ept case, counsel viii
hase to plead that their client was
ignoEant Of uhat ~ masAoing. For to
eay that 4 man Gun knswingit disregard a
~ Az q tie face IS la sovereign Il thor-
Il ihealAnd Be eailfIe.s 81
wouid be e eAH c6ntfsdietion
s Tae well-kRQwn ~ 4 that 4
nan presumes the consequences a Is acls.
One q lhq equaness d the aet Of re-
moving NJ Stanton vas a. lnffaeton "a
the law Tbs President thtselore ihsanasa
70 vlolate ne law NhicA ean oni bs dsn6
e the peril a q elsnasr. lt.Wiil genain
fer ths Senate tpazelsls p dssernias the
naaaltpde q re psa nearrea b tie
Il 0ndent Ana W. shiak DIS win 81
"a 4 lob.