The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1868-05-08

lIdu, Cdll any OIt uOuOG lilde liiS
managers would have put it in evil
dence against him, and yet the facts
which would have proved just the con-
trary state of the case, were excluded
from testimony. What was Mr.. John
sons condition in the whole matter
He had a Cabinet officer who was un-
friendly to him personally and pOliti-
cally. All confidential relations be-
tween them had been broken off, and
Mr.. Stanton himself had admitted, in
a message to Congress, that he had no
communication with the President
since August II, 1867. He proposed
to be an executive department of him
self and to carry on his department
without even recognizing the name of
the President. In that contingency
the President communicated with Gen
eral Thomas relative to change in
the Department. Mr.. Groesbeck
here read General Sherman's testimony
to show that the Presidents sole pur-
pose was to have the War Office well
administered.
Resuming, Mr.. GRoEsBECK said a
change was necessary because the du-
ties of the office could not be properly
performed while this wrangling was
going on. 1t was the necessity of the
cOse that impelled Mr.. Johnson to act.
1t is we'll known that if the President
had attempted to get possession of the
office by quo 1CuTdatO he would have
been laughed at, because it would have
taken at least year to determine the
case in that manner. All the PreSi-
dent wanted was to get the question
before the Courts. He therefore issued
his letter of authority to Thomas, and
Thomas was arrested. Here was the
Presidents opportunity, and it is in
evidence how eagerly he clutched at
it; and it is also in evidence how
quickly the opportunity was snatched
away from him. He resOrted to no force
to obtain possession of the Department.
All of the force used was the cordial
embrace of Stanton and Thomas when
they drank together, and when STAN
ton afiectionately ran his fingers
through the old mans grey locks, and
that was all. Vet upon this point the
Court would not hear the Presidents
Cabinet officers, who could have shown
that no force was ever attempted, and
all of the force intended was left to
conjecture upon the testimony of the
man from Delaware, and the street
and midnight masquerade converse
tions of an old man clothed with a lit
tie brief authority. The Senate was
asked to let in the testimony of the
Cabinet officers upon the point of force,
but it was not admitted, and there is
no rescuing this trial from the mani
fest mperfections of the testimony up
on that point. The President could
do nothing less than give the letter OF
authority to Thomas, because there
was no other way, as nomination to
the Senate would have left the case just
as it ha been before. In this whole
movement the Presidents sole intent
and purpose was to get rid Of his un-
friendly, defiant Cabinet officer. That
this was the purpose, Mr.. Groesbeck
referred to the fact that the President
had applied in turn to Sherman and
George III. Thomas, the men of all 9TH
ers who could command the respect
and confidence of the nation. You
cannot, said Mr.. GrOesbeck, make a
crime of this, Senators. The President
had but one purpose in view, and that
was to change the head of the De-
partment, and it would have delight
ed him to make the change and 10 put
there permanently any competent
man.
Mr.. GROEsBECK then referred to 3
message to Congress in relation TO Mr.
StantOn's case, to show that the Presi-
dent had to some extent recognized
the law, and had not, as was charged
torn it to pieces and trampled it under
foot. lie (Mr. Groesbeck) had care
fully listened to all the testimony in the
case and he could not see how the Pres
ident could possibly be convicted O
any criminality. Where is the evi
dence of force? Where is the threat
Or the intimidation used? Is he Grim
inal because he did not surrender the
convictions Of his mind Or his cOnsti
tutionaI rights and make them con
form to your Interpretation of the act
of 1867? Then so were Washington
and Adams and all the earlier Presi
dents criminal, for they had interpre
ted their powers just as andrew John
son interpreted his.
Referring to the right to make al
al interim appointment, Mr.. GroeS
beck said the President found his war
rant for that in the act of February
18th, 1895. And the act of February 20
1868, partially covers some of the
ground of the act first referred to-
But the latter does not repeal the
former, and there cannot be a repeal O.
a law by implication. Now, in the
law of1S63 thAcases provided for wher
the President may make I'D interim ap
pointments are those of death, resig
nation, or absence from the city,
Two cases are not provided for, ant
these are removal from Office and eX
,,iration of fern of service. These arr