New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1868-04-24
THE TRIAL OF ANDREW JOHNsON,

Illus luI luC NOuuSCt AOl 1AhuAO" NSA@
son have sought, in the introduction of
testimony in his behalf, to show that the
intent" with which he violated the laws
of the land was righteous one. They
claimed, in their argument, first, that he
had not violated the law at all; second,
that although he violated the law be was
not worthy of condemnation, because he
was above the law. But for the present.
at least, they have laid these two pleas
aside, and have confined themselves to an
effort to show that the Intention with which
their client set himself in opposition to
Congress and the laws was praiseworthy,
and not criminal This is all very natural,
and it is only what every lawyer called to
defend criminal seeks to do. The intent
to commit a crime must accompany an act
in order to make of that act a crime.
Without an intent to kill there can be no
and carry away" there can be no theft
and every indictment for felony is faulty
if it does not allege felonious intent on
the part Of the person arraigned. But as
the intent of man is known only to him
self, and is hid within his own bosom, the
jury are compelled to infer what it
was by his acts-not by his words,
but by his deeds. The counsel of
the President are not willing that this
plain, wise, and Just rule should be applied
to their client. They demand that he shall
not be judged by his acts as other men
are, but that he shall be allowed to send
into the court ell the people with whom he
has talked for the last three months, and to
prove by them that he has always said that
he intended to do nothing that was wrong.
Suppose this principle were applied to pro-
ceedings in ordinary criminal courts. A
man is indicted for the seduction of his
neighbours wife. The fact of the seduction
is proved-it is admitted by the defendant.
But he now produces his witnesses. One
swears that the seducer told him that he
did not mean to ruin the woman; he was
oDly amusing himself, he was making love
to her, besieging her with fattery, seeking
to win her affections, but he did not intend
to seduee her. Another swears that the
seducer told him that he did not intend to
seduce this woman for his own qualification,
but in order to make up a case for the
courts in which the legality Of the laws
that forbade Sc luction might be tested
And on testimony like this the counsel for
the seducer would ask the acquittal of his
client, because he had not intended to do
wrong, 1t is scarcely possible that an % in
telligent jury would allow such evidence
to weigh with them-itis scarcely possible
that any judge would allow the time of the
court to be taken up with such trifing.
But this is precisely what has been going
on in Washington ever since the defense
commenced the examination Of witnesses
The only thing they have sought to show is
that the President said to Tom, Dick, and
Harry that bis intentions in this business
were pure, that he intended to do nothing
wrong, that he only wanted to make up a
case for the courts, and all that sort of
thing. The testimony Of General Thomas,
of General Sherman. of Colonel Moore, Of
W. S. Cox, and of Richard 7. Merrick
was all produced for this purpose and for
nothing more. With a patience that has
ceased to be a virtue the Senate has al
lowed its time thus to be fooled away, day
after day. True, even these Witnesses did
the President quite as much harm as good
nearly all of them revealed truths
that told against Mr.. johnson quite |
as powerfully as their statements |
of his pretended intentions told in
his favor. But the whole Of this evidence |
is worthless, because it is irrelevant to the |
issue, and can not be weighed at all when
the final decision comes to be made up. |
The only good excuse for its reception is |
that If the Senate had refused 70 hear it the |
friends of Mr.. johnson would have raised |
the cry that his defense was not heard, and |
that justice was not done him. As they
will be quite certain to do this in any event,
should Mr.. johnson be convicted. it is a
question whether for the sake Of attempt
ing to satisfy people who are determined to
be dissatisfied it is worth while to spend SO
much precious time in listening to evidence
that amounts to nothing.
On Thursday last, however, the Senate !,
to come to the conclusion that it
had fooled long enough in this way, and
put its foot down in a manner that at
least promised better things for the
future. The whole of this day
had been spent in listening TO the
evidence Of Walter S. Cox and Richard t.
Merrick, two lawyers Of Washington, the
latter Of whom will be remembered as the
counsel for the assassin John Surratt. Cox
wanted TO prove that Mr.. johnson had en-
ployed him to defend General Thomas,
when the latter had been arrested at the
snit Of Mr., Stanton, and 70 take such pro.
ceedings in that case as would bring ii IN
10 the Supreme Court, 50 that the constitu-
iionality Of the tenure Of of1ce bill might
be decided. General Sherman had sworn
hat the President had told him that the
awyers could not make up case, but Cox
vas now ready 30 swear that the President
lad employed him to do that which be bad
old Sherman could not be done. However,
he Senate by vote Of % to q allowed
. a - 4