The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1868-04-16
CONGRESSIONAL.
WASHINGTON, April Is.
SENATE.

pumeLts of the Managers shall be hled
before the conclusion Of the closing ar
gument.
Mr.. CONFESS offered a substitute, al
lowing as many to speak on both sides
as desire, provided only four days be
consumed by each side. Lost-l9 toH'
Mr.. Doolittle offered an amendment,
that the opposing counsel speak, alter
nately until all finished.
Mr.. Drake moved to postpone the
subject indefinitely. Agreed to-a to
Is.
Mr. Eyarts said although Mr.. Stan
berry was not yet able to be present, yet
wishing to avoid delay, counsel would
proceed to offer documentary evidence
to-day and hoped they could tomorrow
90 on with oral testimony.
Mr.. D. C. Clark, Executive Clerk OF
the Senate, verified the message noml-
mating Thomas Ewing as Secretary oil
War. received February I'D.
Mr.. Curtis then offered the. message
dated February 2ith, in response to the
Senate resolution, concerning the re-
moyal of Mr.. Stanton.
Mr.. Butler objected.
Mr.. Butler said the article Of proof is
not objected to, but proof itself Is, FOL
slain reasons. This message was sent
after the President was impeached by
the House, and, of course, his declara'
lions, put in or attempted to be put IN
after his impeachment, whether directed
to the Senate sr anybody else, cannot
be given in evidence. The exact order
of the time may not be in the minds OF
Senators. will therefore state 1t: On
the 2lst of February a resolution was
offered in the House looking TO the i'm
parchment of the President, and 1t was
referred to committee on the I'D OF
February. The committee reported and
the impeachment was actually voted
Then INTERVIEWED Sunday, the 23d. Any
message sent on the oath of February
must have been known to the Presi-
dent to be after his impeachment.
Mr.. Curtis-It will be recollected that
the honorable Managers put III evil
dence q resolution OF the Senate to
which this message is response. So
the question is whether the Managers
can put in evidence a resolve of the
Senate transmitted to the President
with reference to the removal of Stan
ton, and refuse tOreceive reply which
the President made to that resolve.
Mr.. Butler-I have only to say that
this is an argument to prejudice and not
to law. Will my learned friends Oppo.
site dare to say that they have read OF
q case where after indictment of a GRIM
inal the respondent was allowed to put
In evidence his statement of his own
defence, if so, when does that right
ceasei We put in the resolution refer
red to, because it is part of the trans
action of Mr.. Stanton; it was made be-
fore impeachment was determined up
on, and now we are asked TO admit a
criminals declarations after that day.
/ only ask the Senate to consider it as
a precedent hereafter, as well as being
q great wrong upon the people; that
after Indictment and after impeach-
ment the President can send in a mes
sage which shall be taken as evidence.
~ Nr. Evarts-The learned Manager
asks whether we dare to do somethingi
We are not in the habit of considering
measures for the conducting Of loren
sic disputation to be question
of daring. We are not in the
habit of applying such epithets to OPP
ponents; not hitherto in the habit OF
receiving them from them. The meas.
ure of the duty of the counsel is the
measure which We shall strive to obey,
and not the measure of daring, if for nc
other reason than that. On the ques-
tion of law, of fact, and of evidence, we
may, perhaps, expect some superiority,
but on measures of daring (laughter) is
the learned Manager entirely right in
saying that impeachment was voted on
the 22d of February? The 22d was Sat
Hrday, and, unless am mistaken, a vote
was net taken until the following Mon
day.
Mr.. Butler-The vote was taken on
Saturday, the 22d of February.
Mr.. Evarts-That IS that the articles
of impeachment shall be brought inf
Mr.. Butler-Yes sir.
Mr.. Evarts-The articles, however,
were not voted on until the 9th. Now
it is said that because the vote that
impeachment should proceed was taken
on the 22d of February, it impugns
the admissability of evidence proposed
to be laid before the Senate. Ny learn
ed associate has distinctly stated the
situation of the matter. Perhaps both
of these traRsactions-the vote in the
Senate and this message-may be with
in the range of the argument. But the
Managers have put in evidence this
transaction of the Senate, and exactly
what bearing that has as part of the
res gesta, the removal of Mr.. Stanton,
which took place before the resolution
was passed by the Senate, it is not easy
to see. 1t was, however, received as
proper evidence, and the reason we did
not consider it objectionable was we
supposed as q matter of course that this
message, which IS in answer to that
resolution on the introduction of the
topic by the resolution before offered
in the evidence, would be admissible
in the testimony. We submit, there
fore, that in every principle of law and
of discussion in reference to the CON-
pleteness of the record in point this
message of the President should be al.
lowed to be read and given in evidence.
Mr.. Butler-I simply desire Ito call
the attention of the Senate to the fact
that, whether as a matter of daring or
professional knowledge-neitheT of the
q counsel having stated any possible rea-
son why this paper should be received
il syidence-we put in the resolve of
the Senate to show that, notwithstand-
ing that resolve was served on the
2lst of February, he still went On and
treated this Lorenzo Thomas as Secre-
tary of War ad interim; that Lorenzo
Thomas was then recognized by him af-
ter that as Secretary ad interim, and
that after that Lorenzo Thomas was
carrying out his design to take posses
sion of the Office by force. We offered
it in order to show that the President
was determined on disObeying the law
of the land, and the notice was served
on him for the purpose of having him
know the action of the Senate, so he
might stay his hand. Now, can pre-
pared article, made after that and af-
ter he W aBimpeached By the House of
Representatives, be put in as evid, acct
One ounce of action in obedience to.
law aud the resolution of the Senate
would have been a great deal better
than pages of argument. Twill not use
the word "darc," for / know that the
counsel would dare do all that good
lawyers would dare do in favor of their
client, but / win say that the gentle
men have not shown any sound reason
on which fhis,can be DONE