The Evansville journal., 1868-04-20
CongressLonal Proeegdingg
SENATE


SENATE. $50. .-... W AsHINeToN, April Is.
The Court opened At Ii o'c ock. The
Managers and members or The EIouse were
successivsiy announced. stevens was not
present at the opening. tA
BY direction of the Chief Justice, the
question pending yesterday was read
We, the counsel for the Prsident. offer to
prove that the President, 1T a meeting o
the Cabinet, while the bill was before the
President for his approval, laid before
the Cabinet the }Fenure-Ot-O t-Office Act for
their cOnslderdti IN and advice to he
President respecting his approval OF the
Dill, and thereupon the members of the
the President, that. the bin wa uncOnStf-
tutional, and should be returned to Com
gfess WIN. hls oWectioasi anu that tn.
duty OF preparing a ne ssage setting forth
his AFFECTIONS to the cOnstitutionality of
the bi was delvoved upon MesSrs. sew
ard and Stanton to be followed up bv the
proof Of what was done By the President
and Cabinet up to the time of the sending
in OF the message BY the President.
. Manager Wilson rose TO speak. when
Senator john on submiLted tue following
questtOnatO the counsel of the President in
Writing " DO the counsel understand that
the Managers deny that the statement
made by the President in his message of
December 18th, 1867, in. the eyi Ience gIven
by the Managers at page 10, No 8, of the
Omcial Report of the trial, that the meTfl-
bers OF the Cabinet gave the opinion last
as evidence offered to corrObOrate their
statement, or for what other purpose is 1t
OHEIGQ
Senator Howard submitted the question
to the Presidents counsel: " Do the
counsel Tor the accused not consider
Ii at the validity of the Tenure of
Office Law was purely question of law to
be determined in this trial by the 5enaie? 4
II so. do they consider that the opinions or
Cablnet officers touching that question, is
competent evidence. by which the judg-
ment Of the Senate ought to be influenced? ? (
Senator Edmunds asked whether the ar 4
sument on the part ofthe Managers might /
not be continued while the counsel Were /
the questions.
The Chief Justice replied In the afIirma- ]
i've, and Mr.. Curtis said they ould pre- /
Ter that course.
Mr.. Wilson. speaking from the manu- !
nat the testimony was irrele want for the z
eaSons that advice from mem Ders ot the
Jabinet has no weight except In reference
o matters relating exclusively to their
DWn department and that if IL were the 1
tcvfce gwen in this instance, il was not
,lVen at such Time as 10 render II aVaiIa- /
lie for defense. He then went into the gen
raj question of the relative powers OF the
and legislative branches main
aiming at great length that the CHECKS
within the power of the executive to i'm
'ose upon the legislative branch, were ex-
tive, whereas, on the other hand all his
ctions were still subject to supervision by
ne Two AouseS OF Congress, whose meas
res he was required to carry out.
Mr. Wilson cited numerous aut hOrities
nj referred to cases in Eogllsl history
mere the King himself had deferred 10 /
ne viii of Parliament. He held that If /
ne President had the right TO challenge
~ laws Of Congress, his sub 3rdinateS
)uld call IN question the orders of the
res dent. and anarchy would ensue. Re-
3ptulating, he said the President cOuid
OF assume the prerOgative of a King, who
lhld do no wrong, and consequently ( {
luId not shelter himself behind a FeSDOn- /
bility of his Minister. )
Mr.. Curtis declined to follow the Honor-rt
Die Manager in anticipating the ques-
onS which were a fit subject only for the G
4al argument, but he would cOnfine him [
II TO the point at issue He proceeded TO ( a
aim That the testimony bearing on the /
les on of intent was called for IN rebut-
1 In the allegations of the articles, which 7
large evil intent and wtlfuu violation Of 4
e Constitution. The Honorable Man
Ier had argued an hour on the assump-
IN to show that the question of intent
rs lmmateFtaI IN the face OF this fact that
veral articles, not yet withdrawn, make
e quest OF intent graYamen of their i
argeS. In answer to Mr.. HoWard's ques- 1 \
IN. he said the members Of the Cabinet /
Juld be placed on the stand, not as eX- q
rts in Constitutional law, but to prove
at they advised the President to a course -
action which the counsel claim will
ereby purge him o. the charge ofinalice.
Replying 70 Mr. Johnston. Mr. Curtis
ted that they did not understand the
luagers to deny the assertion in the N
esident's message, that he had been ad- -
ed by his Cabinet in the matter, and n
wished to produce oral testimony to
same effect.
he Chief Justice read the articles charg-
an evil intent, and expressed this ar