The Wyandot pioneer. (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1853-1868, 1868-05-21


Of Fessenden's speech in the secret
session of the Senate:
Mr.. Fessenden reviewed the whole
case, article by article. He opposed
the construction put by the Mana
gers upon the first article, which
charges the President with attempt
ing to evade the Tenure of Office
bill, as leading to a life tenure-of-
office, arguing that the power of re-
moval belonged to the Executive,
and contending that having been ap-
pointed by President Lincoln, Mr..
Stanton did not come within the
scope of law in question, and that
the President had clear right to
remove him, and consequently. can
not be held guilty under the first ar
ticle. Even, however, if were not
satisfied Of the construction given
herein Of the act of March I'd, 1867
l should still hesitate to convict the
President ofhigh misdemeanor for
what was done by him on the 21st
Of February. The least that could
be said of the application of the
first section of that act to the case of
Mr.tStanton is, that its application
is doubtful.
If, in fact, Mr. Stanton comes
within it, the act done by the Presi-
dent does not remove him, and he
is still Secretary of War. 1t was at
most an attempt on the part Of the
President which he might well be-
lieve he had a right to make. The
evidence utterly fails to show any
design on part of the President to
effect his purpose by force OF vio-
lence. 1t was but the simple issu
ance of a written order, which fail
ed of its intended effect. To dispose
a constitutional Chief Magistrate of
great nation, elected by the people,
on grounds SO slight, would, in my
judgment, be an abuse of the power
conferred upon the Senate which
could not be justified to the country
or the world. To constru such an
act as high crime or misdemeanor
in the meaning of the constitution,
would, when the passions of the
hour had come to cool, be looked
upon with wonder, if not derision ;
worse than this, it would infict a
wound upon the very structure of
our Government which time would
fail to cure, and which might event
fully destroy it. Mr.. Fessenden
next argued against the second ar
ticle, showing that, vacancy hav-
ing been legally made, the President
had legal right to make temporary
appointments, even without the con-
sent ef the Senate. If, consequently
Stanton does not come within the
first section of the civil tenure act. a
legal vacancy existed, and the ma
terial part of the accusation in the
second article is gone. The first
two articles failing, the third, fourth,
fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth must
fail with them. Article nine is, in
my judgment, disproved by the evi-
dence in regard to the speeches OF
the President. Mr.. Fessenden held
that the President could not be con
victed for an assertion of even ar
| unconstitutional doctrin, # he has
not mad; any attempt to give pract
ical effect to that doctrine by actor
on it,
He then proceeded to discuss some
of the points made in the arguments
saying there was a great diversity
Of opinion relative to the nature OF
what constitutes crimes and misde
meanors, and the power of Impeach-
ment as conferred by the constitu-
ton is il very general terms consid-
ering the cases of impeachment, and
is vaguely provided for by law.
He thinks the case of impeachino
the elective Chief Magistrate of a
great nation, for political causes, an
unnecessarily harsh measure, and
one hardly worth resorting to, ex-
eept upon clear and unquestionable
grounds. There is more at stake
than the fate of the individual al
which tends to weakon the respect
Of the people for the Office Of Chiel
Magistrate, and break down barriers
surrounding that office, to make il
the mere sport of temporary major
tiles, tends to the great injury OF
our whole Government, and wounds
constitutional liberty. He does not
consider the charges against the
President sufficient to justify his re
moval, especially as the Office is tc
be transferred to the hands of those
removeing him. He eontended thai
the offenses justiiying the remova.
from offics should be of such a char
acter as to commend themselves tc
the people The removal should be
free from taint of party, and should
leave no reasonable grounds of sus
picion upon the motives of those in
ficting the penalty. Anything less
than this, where the offense is moi
defined by any law, would not, il
his judgment, be justified by con
siderate public opinion, and its ten
dency would be to shake the faith Of
the friends Of constitutional liberty
in the performance of our free in
stitutions. In reply to the sugges
ton that popular opinion demands
the conviction Of the President, he
said the people have not heard the
evidence as we have heard it. The
responsibility is not upon them but
upon us. They have not taken al
oath to do impartial justice I have
taken that oath. I can not render
| judgment upon their convictions mol
can they transfer to themselves my
punish ment if | violated my oath
l should consider myself undeserv
ing the confidence of my people ano
unworthy of place among honora
BILE men. The consequences are no
] T., Tbo f,t,,ro