The Van Buren press., 1868-04-10
FROM WASHINGTON.
WAsnlNGroN. March 81.

were only half full Mr. Wilson offered
some documentary evidence Including
the Senate resolution Of JANUARY 18th,
and an extract from the Senates journal
showing its action thereon. Also copy
of Mr.. Stanton's commission from Lin.
coin under which only Mr.. Wilson AMI
Mr. Stanton claimed TO hold. Mr.. w. j.
Mcdonald was called and attested to the
notification of the President of the action
of Congress, ard also attested to the SER
vice of aresolution Of non occurrence
in the removal of Mr.. Stanton by the
President.
Mr. Van Horn, member ofthe House
stated that he was present at the War De
partment on Saturday the 22d day of
February, 1868, at two minutes past ii
a. m, when Lorenzo Thomas demanded
of Mr.. Stanton the possession of the Of
flee of the Secretary of War. He test
fed that General Thomas after exchang-
ing salutations said to Mr. Stanton: "
am Secretary OF War ad interim appoint
ed and authorized by the President to
take possession of this Office and Mr..
Stanton ordered him to repair TO his room
and perform his duties us Assistant Ad-
jutant General, which he refused to do,
saying that he intended to exercise the
functions of Secretary of War and would
receive the mail of the department.
Walter A. Burleigh, delegate from
Daketah, was then examined. SIr Stan
berry wanted to know the object of the
examination, whether it was as to con
versation between witness and General
Thomas. Mr. Butler replied that it was
to show that the intent and purpose Of
Thomas was to take possession of the
War Department by force, Mr. Stan
berry objected to the testimony and the
objection was sustained by the Chief
Justice Mr., Drake said the question
should be submitted to the Senate, and
appealed from the decision of the chair.
The Chief Justice said it was his duty by
the rules Mr.. Drake said there was no
thing in the rules to give the Chief JUS
tice that right bir. Johnson called Mr.
Drake to order on the ground that he
could not debate the question: The Chief
Justice arose and said that he, as Chief
Justice Of the United States, was dele
gated by the Constitution to preside over
the Court of Impeachment when the
President of the United States, was to be
tried, and while presiding here he became
President of the Senate sitting as a High
Court of Impeachment, and when point
Of evidence, Of form, or of law came be-
fore the court in the first instance, the
Chief Justice was the proper person to
decide it, and then the Senate, on its be-
ing submitted to them. At the suggestion
Of a member Mr Batter proceeded To-
quote from varlons cases Of impeachment
to show that the presiding officer of the
impeachment Court has no right to de-
eide questions of law or evidence. Mr.
Butler said the managers of the House
would be bound hand and foot by this de-
cision, and would be unable to get in ex
cept by the courtesy of the members of
the Senate. The Chief Justice then
stated that the point raised was for the
decision Of the Senate, After much dis
cussion the ayes and nays were taken on
q motion to retire for consultation, re
sulting in tie vote when the Chief Jus
tlce voted in the affirmative and the Sen
ate retired at ten minutes to 3 p. M.
AT twenty minutes past six the Senate
returned The Chief Justice having cal
led the body to order, said "The Sen
ate has had under consideration the oues
ton discussed before it retired, and has
directed me to report the following rule y
Rule 7. The presiding officer Of the
Senate shall direct all necessary prepara.
tions in the Senate Chamber, and shall
direct all forms of proceedings, when
sitting for the purpose oftrying impeach
ment, and all forms during trial not 9th
erwise specially provided for. The pre-.
siding officer, in trial, may rule on all
questions of evidence and on incidental
questions, which decision 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 II vote of the
members Of the Senate. ..... 'a
The Senate then adjourned.
In the Supreme Court, to-day, it was
decided to postpone further argument il
the McArdlc case until next term, which
commences on the first Monday in De.
cember of the present year. After som,
colloquy between Justices Chase, Field
and Judge Black, the venerable Judge
Greer said he desired to submit the fol
lowing paper, viz: 4 ..a
Er parte William II. McCardlc. Til.
case was fully argued in the beginning o
this month. 1t is a case which involve.
not only the liberty and rights Of the ap
pellant in this issue, but of millions o
our fellow citizens.
The country has right to expect tha
it would receive the immediate and solemn
attention Of this court BY the postpone
ment of this case, this Gourtwill subjec
themselves, whether justly or miustly,tC
the imputaton that we have evaded tn,
performance of n duty imposed upon u
by the Constitution, and waited for leg
islation interposing to supercedc our ac
ton and relieve us from our responsible
ity lean only say Padethaec opproJriun