New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1868-04-12

tlcle sixth charges that the president con
spired with Thomas to seize and possess the
property under the control of the war de.
partment by force, in cOntravention to the
act OF July 81, 1861, and with intent to dis
regard the civil tenure act. Article seventh
charges the same conspiracy, with intent
only to violate the civil tenureof-othce act.
Articles third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and
seventh may be all considered together as
to the proof TO support them. 1t will be
shown that having removed Stanton and
appointed Thomas, the president sent
Thomas TO the war Office to obtain posses
sion; that having been met by Stanton with
denial of his rights, Thomas retired, aud
after consultation with the president,
Thomas asserted his purpose to take posses
sion of the war office by force, making this
boast in several public places of his inten-
ton SO to do, but was prevented by being
promptly arrested by process from the
Courl.
The counsel for the President, in their
answer, admit the main facts, but deny that
the acts of the executive were violatiYe of
law. The President sets up a claim to high
prerogatives in the matter of removals and
appointments, Independent of congress.
To this Mr.. Butler replies:
This, then, is the plain and inevitable
issue before the senate and the American
| people: Has the president, under the cou.
| stitution, the more than single prerogatiye
| at will to remove from office and suspend
from Office indefinitely alleXecutive officers
| OF the United States, either civil, military,
| or naval, at any and all times, and fill the
/ vacancy with creatures of his own appoint
ment, for his own purposes, without any re-
stralnt whatever or possibility OF restraint,
| by the senate or by congress, through laws
duly enacted. The house of representatives,
in behalf of the people, Join this issue by
affirming that the exercise of such powers
is high misdemeanor in Office. II
the affirmative is maintained by the re-
spondent, then, so far as the first eight arti
Giles are concerned-unless such corrupt
purposes are shown as Will of themselves
make the exercise of legal power crime
the respondent must go, and ought to go,
quit and free. Therefore, by these articles,
ana the answers thereto the momenJuus
question here and now is raised, whether the
presidential office itself Qf it has the pre-
negatives and powers claimed for it) ought,
in fact, to exist as part of the constitutional
government of u free people? while by the
last three articles the simpler and less i'm
portant inquiry is to be determined, whether
Andrew johnson has so conducted himself
that he ought longer to hold any constitu-
tional Office whatever? The latter sinks to
merited insignitiCance compared with the
grandeur of the former. If that is sustained,
then right and power hitherto unclaimed
and unknown to the people of the country
is engrafted on the constitution, most
alarming in its extent, most corrupt.
ing in its influence, most dangerous in its
tendencies and most tyrannical in its exer-
cises. Whoever, therefore, votes mot
guilty on these articles votes to enchain
our free institutions and to PROSTATE them
at the feet OF any man who being president
may chance to control them. For this most
stupendOus and unlimited prerogative the
respondent cites no line aud addresses no
word OF constitutional enactment. Indeed,
he could not, tor the only mention of re.
moyal from office in the constitution is as a
part OF the judgment in a case of impeach-
ment, and the only power of appointment
IS by nomination to the senate of officers to
be appointed by their advice and consent,
save qualified and limited appointment by
the president when the senate is not in SEES
sion, Whence then does the respondent by
his answer claim to have derived this
power? give him the benefit of his own
words, that it was practically settled by
the hrst congress of the United States"
In reply to this position assumed by the
defense Mr.. Butler shows that whatever
force there may have been in it is destroyed
by the emphatic act of a succeeding con.
gress, and even by many congresses since
1888. He takes the ground that no pro.
vision OF law exists which provides for the
removal of an officer except by the ap-
pointment of a successor, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate. Mr..
Stanton was authorized, and it was his duty
to hold his office until his successor was
duly qualified. The attempt to GUST him by |
force was therefore a high misdemeanor, as
it was subversive of the power of the Sen. |
ate, and palpable violation of law. The
President is not even permitted to appointa !
to a Secretary whose office NAV
become vacant, but the duties of the de.
partment devolve upon the chief clerk
thereof.
The acts OF Mr.. Johnson for the past two |
years are grouped together with great force. |
showing that he has been striving to BELT, |
tie congress and bring it into contempt be.
fore the people in order the moro easily to
execute his revolutionary and unlawful de-
signs. His veto messages, his disgraoeful /
speeches in the West, and HE sseription Of |
the New Orleans massacre, and other rebel |
outrages, to the result of laws passed by |
congress are reviewed in the most pupgent |
and scathing manner. The following is the /
up:
Thus we charge that Andrew johnson.
president Of the United States, not only en-.
deavors to thwart the constitutional action
of congress and bring it to naught, but also
to hinder and oppose the execution of the
will of the loyal people of the United States
expressed in the only mode br which II can
be done, through the ballot box in the elec.
ton Of their representative. Who does not
know that from the hour he began these his
1surpahons OF power he everywhere de-
nounced congress- the legality and constitu.
.ionality of its action, and defed its legiti.
mate powers and for that purpose announced
and carried out his purpose as
lar as he was able, Of removing every true
nan from office who sustained the con0reas
If the United States? And 1t is to carrv
Sut this plan Of action that he claims the
power of removal, for the illegal
exercise Of which he stands before you tRis
lay. WHO does not know that, in pur-
uane9 Of the same plan, he used his veto
lowers Unfortunately TO prevent the pas.
age OF wholesome laws, enacted for the pa.
'incati0n OF the country, and when laws
we're passed by the constitutional majority
'ver his vetoes, he made the most deter
mined opposition, both open and covert 10
hem, and Tor the purpose Of making that
md did array all the people lately in rebel. .
ion against congress and against the true
nd loyal men, their neighbors, so that nur.
ers, assassinations, and messacres were
ipe all over the Southern states which he 4.
encouraged by his refusal TO consent that
single muEcerer be punished, though
aousands OF good men have been slain; and
nrther, that he attempted BY military or ]
era 70 prevent the execution of Nets ofeon. Z
reGH ~ che mi itarV c0nlTaauflers zfl,a 49,.