The weekly Ottumwa courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1857-1872, 1868-04-02

have the sole power to try impeach
ment settled the whole question. -
Rulings of parliament decided that
the presiding officer had no part in
passing in questions of law, and in
fact, but was there only in a minis
terial capacity, with no right to make
a decision. He contended it was
matter of great Importance whether
the House could reach the Senate d.
rectly or wether the Chief Justice
could stand between them. Unless
some Senator offered the managers
courtesy, he protested against the
House being bound and laid
before the feet of any man, however.
high or pure he might be. If the
precedent were established we might
some day have a Jeffries in the chair
We have had al ohnsonin the White
House and may have Jeffries in the
chair of the Chief Justice.
The Chief Justice put the question
whether his decision should be sus-
tanned by the Senator
Drake said the presiding officer
had made decision, which he had
no right to talk about before he fin
ished.
Wilson moved that the Senate re-
tire for consultation, but withdrew
it.
Boutwell, said the Chief Justice
did not preside Us member of tri.
bunal, for to the Senate is given the
solepower to try impeachment, which
gave it the right to decide all guess
tons as well as questions of guilt or
innocence. He (Boutwell) did not
object to the Chief Justice giving his
opinion or ruling, but it should be
subject to the decision ofthe Senate.
Bingham read an abstract of author
tiles which he had collected, touching
this question.
Butler read from the report of q
trial of Judge Chase, an instance
where the presiding officer had put
question to the Senate, for decision
without expressing his opinion.
Evarts referred to Boutwel!'s ac-
acknowledgements, that great inconven-
fence would result if the Senate
were decided in the first instance on
interlocutory questions, but said that
the counsel did not admit that this
was merely matter of convenien ee
or a matter of right.
Yeas and and nays were then ia
ken on motion to retire for consul
tation, resulting in tie vote, when
the Chief Justice voted in the affirm
alive, and the Senate retired a 200.
Soon after the Senate retired the
galleries began to thin out. Mems
bers of the Senate gathered in knots
and INDUCED in boisterous converse
ten and the counsel for the Presi-
dent consulted together. Three hours
passed and still the Senators did not
return to their chamber. The gen.
eral appearance of things was list
less and uninteresting. At last at $40
the Senate returned.
The Chief Justice having called
the body to order said The Senate
has had under consideration the ques-
ton which was discussed before it
retired, and has directed me to report
the following rule:
! Rule 18th The presiding officer of
the Senate shall direct all necessary
preparations in the Senate Chamber;
and the presiding officer of the Senate
shall direct all the forms of proceed
ing when the sitting is for the pur-
pose of trying an impeachment, and
all forms during the trial, not other
wise provided. The presiding officer
on the trial may rule on all questions
of evidence, and on incidental ques-
lions. Which evidence will stand
as the judgment of the Senate for
decision. Or he may at his option in
the first instance submit any such
question to vote of the members eff
the Senate.
Mr. Butler intimated that the man.
ayers wanted to retire for consulta-
ton.
Mr. Trumbull said unless the man.
ayers desired the Senate to continue
IN session, he would move adjourn
ment.
Washington, April l.
SENATE.
| At a few minutes past IL o'clock
the managers of the House in Com
mittce Of Whole, and the Counsel for
President, having taken their usual
places, the court of Impeachment was
called to order by Chief Justice Chase
and the minutes Of the last days trial
read up to the mention of the vote
cast by Chief Justice Chase to decide
the tie vote on the question of retir::
ing for elaboration, when Sumner
mado motion to correct the journal
by inserting an expression of the
Senate's opinion, that said vote ofthe
Chief Justice was unauthorized, and
of no effect on this motion.
He demanded the yeas and nays
of the Senate, which was taken.-
Yeas 81, nays q The motion was
disagreed to.
The question as to the admisability
Of Burleigh's testimony about the
conversation between him and Gen.
Thomas, was submitted to the Senate
by the Chief Justice.
Before taken Frelinghuysen enquir-
ed if the managers intended to con-
meet the testimony Of the witnesses
with the respondent.
Butler answered affirmatively.
Heavy argument ensued.
Stanberry stated the question to
be whether or not the declarations of
Gen. Thomas were to be used against
the President, though not proven to
be authorized by him, the Presidents
intent could be shown only by the
orders themselves, the order and let
ter of authority given to Gen Thorn
as did not make him general agent
of the President, they authorized
him to do only certain specified
things
When proper foundation of the
proof of conspiracy is laid, then
the declaration Of one of the sup.
posed conspirators may be deemed to
implicate, even if it were admit
ted that the letter of authority con-
stituted relation between the Pres.
ident and Gen Thomas as principal
and general agent, it could not be