The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1868-04-03

zRS0SAsessteAs eeAS
own high trust
Strengthening this view, We ind ~ W.
in ten years afterward impeac4@snt 80
plied by the very men who framed the Conse
fn,;on - The acts Of public officers, which
,nas- M cnmmon-law definition c61l4 ~
;n,tlv called crimes or misdemeanorSt either
h;aL q Low. Leaving. however, the cqrrest-
nsss 81 our proposition to Be sustained BY the
authorissN yme furnish, We are naturally
brought % fhec06slderation of the method Of
~ aaoadnxos md The nalure Of the proced.s
inRs in caseS Of impeachment, and the cher.
acter aal yovers of shs tribupli b which
high csimesAnd misdemsAsoss ase 70 be adj
Judged or determined.
NATURE OF lMPEAcHNEsr PROCEEDINGS.
One Of the important questions which meets
rs ut the outset is Is this proceeding . triai,
\, that term is understood so far as relates 70
.sb~riRh a AID ds&iaeofs court end jury npon
Al Ind q ent for crime ls 4 not rAther
more IN the nature Of an irquest-of offfre
The Constitution seems to have determined
il to be The latter, because, under its provis-
ions the right TO retain and hold ONCE Is the
only subject that can be finally adjudicated,
all preliminary inquiry being carried on solely
to determine that question and that alone.
all Investigations Of fact are 10 so1s sense
trials. but moi in the sense ia which the word
is used by courts.
THE SENATE NOT COURT.
Again, as a correlatiYe question:
Is this body, now sitting to determine the
accusation Of the House Of Representatives
against the President of the United States,
the Senate of The United Statea, or a Court
trust Mr.. President and Senators, may
be pardoued for making asoRs suggestions
~ kan IN if
these are questions not of forms, but of sub
stAoce., If This body here is > Court in any
manner as contraais.inguishef from the Sen
ale. then We agree that many if not all the
analogies OF the procedures OF courts must
obtain that the cUmmon-law incidents oil 9
trial in court mnst have place THAT sou may
be bound in your proceedings and adjndicA-
ton BY. The rules aud precsdents Of the COM
mon or statute law that the interest, bias or
preeopceived opinions or affnities to the party
of theiudges may be open to inquiry, and
even the rules or order and ptecedents ia
courts eheutd have effect thar abe managers
of the House OF Representatives must con-
form TO those rules as they would be applica-
bie to public or private prosecutors OF crime
in courts, and that the accused may claim the
benefit. of.the rule N erin,uaiE eases, that be
may only be convicted when the evidence
makes the fact clear beyond reasonable doubt,
instead Of By prepondersnce Of the evidence.
We claim and respectfully insist that this
Tribunal has none OF the attributes OF ia
dlcial Court ss they are commonly received
and understood. Of course, this question
must be largely determined by the express
provisions OF the Constitution, and in It there
is no word, as is well known to you, Senators,
which gives the slightest coforing to the idea
that this is court. save that IN the trial OF
this particular respondent the Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court must preside. Y But
even this proyision can have NO determining
effect upon the question, because, IL not this
the same Tribunal in all Its powers, incidents
and duties, when other civil officers are
brought to its bar for trial, when the Vice
President moi Judicial officer mus, pre-
side? Can it be contended for moment that
this is the Senate Of the United States when
sitting on the trial of all other officers, and q
Court only when the President is at the bar 7
solely bscause ia this case the Constitution
has designated the Chief Justice as the presi-
ding officer
The fact that Senators are sitting for this
purpose on oath or affirmation does no, in
fuence the argument, because it is we'll un-
derstood that that was bat q substitute
for the obligation of honor under which, by
the theory of the British constitution. the
peers Of England were supposed to Sit IN like
cases.
of ahsnosrv nro, honar wben = common ,,s,.
son must answer upon oath. But our faith
ers, sweeping away all distinctions OF caste.
require every man alike, acting in a solemn
proceeding like this, to take an oath. Our
Constitu ion holds all good men alike honor
able, and entitled to honor.
900 - h.va ..s,,. = hao.n.s ,f nc ano nor
- e;r,,lsr ,,ocsad,nos ~ ,r;si. hsfors th es
HE ~ Iards
Analoo;ss have avar baen found dece,,;va
ard ,Ilusorv BEFORE sucb an.loov il ;ovoked
90 ,,n., NO, for,at-tbo, tho u.,a..s of pr.
,,s,,ar, q, 6,s, md 1at,e,l, ths House ,f
I'D. cia;nad nd srsrn;.ad ;nr;sd,o,;on
avar al crimes sysn whsrs III, ,,,,nis liner,
srtanda5 10 l,es and ,;mh n, arnrsss 10
v,s,on If onr carsr;,u,;on eli such ;r, sd,,.,;a,
/. taten from, tba Sena,e and the ;nd;e,sl
,owo, ne ,hs Tn;,sd S,s,ss ! vss,ad n ono
Snnrema Com, and snch ;n,sr;or Cent. "a
8 an time - ,;ns C.,ngr..s ,nsx ords;n snd
as,ahl;sb'., We suaos., ,hsr.f,ra he, a..
&c = ,bs nres.n.s 81 she Ssns,s s,he Ifn;,sd
S,s,es convened az a con,,i,n,,ons Ia ,,hnnsi
=, ;,,q,;s. ;s,,and aa,a.a,;na -. a.
a. ''h.,se,, saa.,,.a &c ra,,a.,,a af
e.. y ,asr (, ). :. No So ~ o. "
;aa,'t ,r ~ Hn;,a5 S,a,aa ~ ~,
Ia a. afsa "
n1 aa5 - IN " -. y. P.oa -,
ID Il 49, sao ha ."a ,nus a you
.n 90. - ~, na' nu ana,os, 70 .na. o.
a.snanSan. nn W &c 10 anaa on na ~ sne .ue
III, W. A. NJ, sa W. sn,e nas asaanss
do NO, raaa,rs b;s ,srsonal .nnsars,aa 80 ~.
~, $500 aa.;,,s, H., III - - - j..
iermns h;s cans. n b,s shsenn. ~ "a !" ~
GnsJ 80 ,hsrs;n How d;ga.a a. - 80
s,sn from those If ordinsrv cr;m;r i nrocaaJ 1
~ a cons,;,n,;onsi ,r,hanai .nlai. -
90 honn, hv M lou a;,ha.s,.,,,,a o,,' o w
No, ub;oh ~. :, /; ~, ,on. -, s,;,,,,;....t
-ora,;,a W, aoa.s,l, - ..asas..a
thesa of I.v and cn.tom II ,..l;.rsn,.,s
hodas VI, orc law nntp ,onrsaira.
hound oni, =, na,,rat r-;rc;rIas of .a,,,,a.d
;.,.,;a. "a ,ba, s,,i,,. go, s,,,r.,,a
iT 49, ss n n ~. - W.
NO Ind eas caa aid yp,,- and ;ndsso - ta,a
indaas - lsaaisod i ,r;aia - sh,
decline to sneak 10 a nuest;on of n.rlismen,a.
~ law, even at the request Of the House of
Peers, although they attended on them in
their robes OF office. Nearly five hundred
years ago. in 1888, the House of Lords re
solved, in the case of Belknap d.other
Judges. that these matters, when brought be-
fore them, shall be discussed and adjudged By
the course OF Parliament, and not by civil law,
nor BY the common law Of the land used in
other inferior courts. And that resolution
which was in contravention of the opinion Of
1n0Re8 EnQfAnn ra-