The Cadiz sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1864-1911, 1868-04-22


objected to it as being outrageousy leading,
and said it was designed TO gain time
Stanbery remarked that this was too grave
and solemn proceeding to allow Of low
personalities, and he repeed with seO-n
the insinuation that be had resJIfed to the
tactics of old Bailey practitioners; and with
regard to leading questions, Butler had put
hundreds of them until they were tired of
objecting. The question he Stanbery, had
put were not as the managers admitted, in
tended to elicit any thing the witness was
not about to say without their leading form.
Henderson offered question whether in
any interview the President had expressed
any intention with regard to making the APP
pointment. Objection made. Yeas and
nays being taken, question was not admits
ted, IS to 27.
Senate refuses to adjourn, 25 to 81
Stanbery asked if either interview there
wa> anything said in reference to the use Of
force, intimidation or threats to get posses
sion of the War department, to the contrary.
! Objection made and sustained without divi
| sion.
Senate again refuses to adjourn, 20 to 80.
Stanbery said that under these ruling
counsel were not prepared at present to ask
further questions of Gen. sherman, but
| perhsps would desire TO recall him Monday,
wler upon, at 400 the Court adjourned.
WASHINGTON, April 1s, 1868.
SENATE Reading of Journal dispensed
with Chier Justice stated questions before
Court to be on motion allowing as many
Managers and Counsel to participate in gen
eral debate a. many wish to do so Mr..
Sumner offered amendment that no further
postponement should be saused thereby. =
Accepted. Several amendments relative to
the nun bers who should close any length Of
time to be occupied by each were made.
Mi. Stanbery said Counsel for defense were
strongly opposed to limitation Of time the
final argument. Mr.. Butler intimated that
he would not take advantage Of chance to
| speak. Mr. Evars said result Of proposiN
ton as now stood, would give six mana ers
agast four counsel on closing argument.
Mr. Drake rails 1 point Of order, that Senate
setting as Court could not take such action,
Point overruled, vote taken, resulting 50 to
| 10. So the rule remains unchanged
The examination vf Gen. Sherman resum
! ed. Sanbery asked if after restoration Of
| Stanton did you form an opinion as to desi-
arbility or as to good of the service OF the
office Of Secretary of War be filed byanother
than Stanton, il so did you express your
opinion to the President. Objection made
snd argued by Bingham. Stanbery replied
that the question Of intent was OF vital i'm
portance, they did not offer this testimony
as an abstract opinion, but as the Judgment
formed and expressed by the second officer
in the service for its good, hereferred to res
lations existing between the President and
Stanton, and claimed it was competent to
prove that distinguished Generals like
Grant and Sherman believed change should
be made in the interest of the Government;
he appealed earnestly to the Senate torrthe
| sake of Justice to admit the evidence But
Her feioined that by Introducing irreveant
testimony the law would be broken to defend
"a breaking OF the Jaw, and said there would
be no limit to the inquiries which Wonld be
Put to wines The managers could ask
hlln il be had quarrel with Stanton, il
that influenced his opinion so that field
would be boundless; it seemed to be assum-
ed by the other side, that the evil intent
must be proved by something. The Presi-
| dent had said whereas as it was proved by
his act in breaking office. Evil could not
be done that good might come referring to
remark Of Staubery that Mr.. Stanton did
not take part in Cabinet Councils. lie
said it was no such a thing as contemplated
by The Constitution. Members OF Cabinet
were to be called on foF reasons respecting
affairs of their own Departments. The Pre-
sident must show il ever he could on Stan
ton for written opinion or that he had
given him an order which he had disobey
ed. Senator Conkling inquired if Counsel
proposed to prove Gen. Sherman had advls,
| ed the President to secure change in any
particular way. ftanbery replied in mega
tive witness had only expressed an oElnion
as to desirability Of some change. Evarts
! said it was not merely qut stion OF having
committod a violation OF the law which was
minis hable in another Court, by so small a
ienalty IS six cents fine or few days inn
prlsonment, but wss question on commis.
sion OF an impeachable offense. Furnishing
by deposition from the highest othce. which
| question all evidence relating to motive was
| of the most vital Importance.
Mr.. Evarts interrupted to say he had IN
his remarks supposed the President to be
on trial for petty ofFense, and repeilcd IN
sinuation he would mete out justice acr
cording to rank. Bingham continued IN an
earnest appeal against admission OF test'N
mony, and at the conclusion Yeas and Nays
were taken, resulted Is to 35. so 1t was
admitted.
Mr.. johnson offered question, whether
before the removal, Stanton had advised
the President that he should be removed
and replaced. Chief Justice se1d the
Court must decide whether the question
should be put; Senate decided In the negaN
tive Vote IS to 32.
Mr.. Stanbery said he had no more ques-
tions to ask Gen. Sherman. The Managers
| 4 and tho iplIrf
took a reces at 2:10,
On re assembling, r. j. Meigs Clerk of
the District Supreme Court, testified that
he affixed seal to the warrant for the ar
rest of Gen. Thomas, about 2 o'clock on
| the morning of February 22Dd. Pile Of
Missouri brought it to BIN at his house -
| In answer to Butler. he said he had been
called IN at such hours before, in case OF
pressing necessity. Stanberry then offered
TO nut In evidence the warrant and affidavit
of stanton. Butler objected to the reccp-
tor. Eyarts said they related to the same
subject on which managers had Introduced
the testimony and that the President S
counsel intended to show that he took ads
vantage of the proceedings commenced by
Stanton as the speediest method OF bring
ing the question before the Supreme Court.
Butler argued that the effect OF lntrodnc~
ing these papers would be to open up new
regions Of controversy irrelevant to the
case Stanberry referred to the fact that
the declarations of Gen. Thomas had heen
, admitted as declarations of the President
to prove his design in employing force, and
went to recite circumstances attending the
discharge of Thomas, which he said ttey
would show was in order to prevent the
President from testing the question. The