The New York herald., 1868-04-11

nsss Pooc suouu nave been brought here under Sas'
OF THIS agent or actor himself to prove Whist the CO..
nection OF the President was When it has let 4
secondary evidence, and we Undertaking 70 shOv
really occurred between the President OF the Untte1
states ana himself, they say this Is of no conse
.nss nC part Of res 0e that Is no part
parties was. Why, Mr.. Chief Justice and Senators
| the learned Managers had objected that Genera
because he was q conspirator, co-orminai some o
those observations Of the learned Managers might
is not the claim which the learned Manager has pre-.
| sented to your notice II Is that General Thomas,
being competent witness to speak the truth here as
TO whatever Is pertinent to this case, Is not to be
was the instruction, what the concomitant
Of the President OF the United states at
every interview antecedent to the time about which
they nave given us evidence. The Managers have
given evidence as 10 what General Thomas had been
empowered Dy the President to say or do, something
which makes his statement pertinent to commit the
President M Now, II they can show through General
plicate the President In intent, then we
can certainly prove by General Thomas, up to any
all that did between the President and hum
self In order that II there has been the connection
II may De stated correctly and precisely and that IL
there mas been no connection between them that dis
connection may be made absolute ana complete.
:, Mr.. BINGHAM replied on the part OF the Managers
He said:-The Senators will notice that an attempt Is
now made for the first time in the course OF this
trial-and think may say for the first time the
presence Of any tribunal ofjustice in this country
by respectable counsel to introduce in the defence Of
an accused criminal his own declarations made after
the fact Before this second interview referred to in
the question the crime charged in the first article, II
crime II DC, was committed and cOmpleted. The
time mas not yet come, Senators, for the full dis
crime for Andrew Johnson on the the 2lst of Pcbru
ary 1865 with intent to violate the act regulating the
tenure or civil offices to issue an order for the re-
mOval as averred IN the first article, of Mr. Stanton
from the Department OF War; not only in contraven-
tion OF the express terms of the act ITSELF but In def
ance OF the act and Of the Senate tnen had ordered
the suspension under the same law and by the same
President and Of the same Secretary and whereof he
ln had due notice; For myself stand ready as the
learned counsel has seen tit to make the chal-
ienge In this stage of the case, to say that II
thenure OF ONCE act is 10 be considered valid act
OF the provision or that act, which declares re-
moval to be misdemeanOr, Is itself misdemeanOr,
United States am not " surprised that that & utter.
the learned counsel who closed his elaborate
had yentured on the bold declaration here
IN the presence Of the Senate that an
attempt to commit msdemeanOr, made such by the
laws of any sovereignty on earth, was not itself
crime consummated by the very attempt and was
not itself mlsdemeanor. pass from that question
have been referred to in the discussion. The only
que5ton before the Senate Is whether 1t ia competent
Official President or private citizen, after the fact
charged against him. to make evidence for himself
10 anybody else. That is all the point That is In
yolyed In this question; and ! reterate what was
said after due rejection, by my associate Manager,
That there Is not an authority fit to be brought into
court OF Justice that does not denOunce the PROPOSE
ton rs hearsay, and as a violation Of tho rules OF
evidence. am amused at the declaration Of
counsel that the Senate has attempted hearsay evi
denCe In behalf OF the constitution The declaration
OF co-conspirator made In the prosecution OF
held to be hearsay evidence On the contrary 1t Is
primary evidence, and In the language OF our
own courts Is In most instances the only ev
dence which the nature Of the offered
admits OF It rests upon the simple proposition
Of the law, which addresses itself TO the common
Judgment and common sense Of mankind, that
what man does by another he does BY himself.
II the President conspred with Lorenzo Thomas to
violate law OF the country, and made an agreement
with him for that purpose whatever Lorenzo Thomas
did in the prosecution Of that agreement Is evidence
not only against himself but against his principal II
Is the law not only in this country but OF every coun
try where the common law exists. II Is question
not open n TO discussion ana Us say tnat te question
every text book OF the law declares that the state
ments of the accused after the fact Is not admissible
on his own motion. This is D subsequent converse
his crime was completed; after he had sent
in %ad issued sseF his order for "Va the removal
Mr.. Stanton, and after the demand had been
between those co.consprators onered now before
the senate IN order t9 axcninas ths & prenia"ns
any to make evidence for himself after the fact.
How easy would it be for him to say to Thomas that
aae nst Ten N s he that inquiry M was Ssn
our our only object is peacefully and quietly
to apply to the courts OF Justice )" "Why
OF the secretary OF War;" "why Mr.. Thomas, we
both have the profoundest respect for the decision Of
served upon u.s." ''why, Mr.. Thomas we both rccog.
nize the Tenure Of Office act and we have no nen-
ton to violate that act at a" The law declares that
in the averment Is proof OF the fact itself. and
cannot be disproved by declarations. The rule
has been tried in the Senate Of the United States
heretofore that any general rules Of evidence up.
proceedings. II there Is an exception 70 be found to
that In trials OF this kind hitherto challenge Its
The CHIEF JUSTICE said he would submit the ques-
ton to the Senate and, the yeas and nays having
bean ordered, the question was taken upon allowing
am a ye Dv A. nays % ioas foilows 0 " '"'
cons1s GSTS DSys 6non Dos,s Ed%nds fsiy
RSSS;s, MSSISsn IoI1
iiS % Van ''a %nt: STVsss
o.%isU. ss chanScT crasn
SO the question was put to the witness folows:--
What occurred between the President and yourself
at the second interview on the 2lst OF February
Witness-I stated TO the President that had de-
livered the communication, and that he gave this
Mr.. STAYBERY-what answer
Witness-The answer, " DO you wish me to vacate
at once or will you give me time to take away my
private propertyf ?" and that ! answered, AT your
copy of the letter to him he said, 81 do not know
whether / will obey your instructions or resist
them;r this mentioned TO the President; his
swer was, "Very well, go on and take charge Of the
Office and perform the duties"
q. Was that all that passed. A. That was all that
passed.
o. What time In the afternoon was thatS A. This
was Immediately after giving the second letter to
Mr.. Stanton.
Mr.. BUTLgR-I withdraw my objection to that con-
yersation. General aughter.)
Mr.. STANBERY-That Is eI post Jdcto. To wit
ness-Was this before you got Mr. Stanton's order to
retire to your room or was afterwardss A. IL was
O. Did you see Mr.. Stanton again that afternoon
o. or the Presidenta A. Not after left him this
time.
o. What first happened to you the next mornings
A. The first thing That happened TO me next morning
was their coming to my h0use-the Marshal Of the
District with the Assistant Marshal and the consta
BILE and they arrested me.
q. What time in the morning was thata A. About
oght n,clock. II Waa before had breakfast.