The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-03-17

ssI II the construction which the managers O
fnneachment place on this rule is correct, thu
connse] for the President have been entirely
mislead. They have construed the rule as the
practice provides IN COURTS 81 equity. IL hae
he he announced on the day Of appearance. The
dav In appear and answer is either fixed b.
some General rule, or there Is TO be specia
order in the case. The counsel for the Presi
dent contend that the part of the 9th rule re-
latino to the answer has reference to future
proceeding, as We have assumed.
The counsel for the President therefore sub
init that the. Interpretation OF the BIB rule, as
construed by by the managers OF mpesch-
ment, is not correct.
Mr.. Wilson briefly endeavored to controvert
the position of Mr. Curtis. He expressed his
great Surprise that it was possible for the
learned counsel to go construs the rule.
MIR. stanbery said the objection on the part
OF the managers was Of 90 singular character
that he had not, in the whole course Of his
practice, ever heard anything Like it. In a
csse like this, when the President Of the Uni
ted States is araigned by the House of Repre-
sentatYes, it is proposed to treat it as an ordi-
nav case before police court, and to put it
throueh with railroad speed Where do the
gentlemen find o precedent for such action as
is proposed in this case? We have been sum-
moned 10 appear here on certain day, and We
have appeared, but say ne are not prepared to
| answer, and we ask time. We have appeared
to ans9er, and do not wish the case to 90 by
default, but al We ask is reasonable time.
II has not been many days Slice the President
received his summons. Two OF his counsel are
not now present, and one, at least, has not yet
arrived in the city and We say, therefore, that We
are not prepared TO proceed with the trial. Now,
let us see whether the rule, II construed to the
letter, would operate to prevent this postpone
| ali of q
| follows: "At twelve o'clock and thirty minutes
afternoon Of the day appointed for the return
| Of the summons against the person lmpeached,
&C." Article 10 says ssthe person impesched
shall then be called to appear and answer, &c. !"
Now, construe the letter Of the rule, and this is
but the return day, and the person impeached
| has appeared, by his counsel, to answer, and
asks further time to prepare that answer. By
another rule, the 18th, it is prescribed that 'at
| twelve o'clock and thirty minutes afternoon of
the day appointed tor the trial Of the impeach-
ment, &C." It seems, therefore, that the rules
| themselves recognize two days-one of trial
and one Of apswer, and this is the day for the
return Of the sunmors and not the trial
| day, and the letter Of one rule threfore
answers the letter of the other. The Presi.
dent has not yet had sufficient time to pre-
rare an answer to the charges. His time has
| been fu1g occupied in getting counsel and in
consultation with those whom he proposed
should be his counsel. All of the latter have
not yet had time or opportunity to fully exam
inc the charges, and had no reason to expect
that such great haste would be urged. Now,
| if the honorable managers will go back to i'm
| peachment trials in the very worst days and
under the very worst phases, they will find
that English fair play always prevailed, and
ample time was given to answer all charges.
Another reason why this postponement should
be allowed was that no witnesses had yet been
summoned; and, indeed, the defence did not
well know yet who 10 summon. And now will
the managers still insist that We must be fore
ed to proceed? ''Strike, but hear me-" Give
us the same opportunity and the same advan-
tages allowed in common civil cases, where at
least thirty daysis allowed for an answer. give
us reasonable time and tair hearing, and
there will then be no cause. Thate7er for dis
satisfaction. For one, he would say that ne
could not, in justice, proceed with so impor-
tant a trial IN such speed-sucn haste-Wlth-
out giving it more harsh term.
The Chief Justice said he was somewhat en-
barrassed with the construction OF come Of the
rules. The 21st rule prescribed that the case
on each side should be opened BY one person,
but be understood that to apply when the tes-
timony. was all IN; and he construed another
rule to mean That all preliminary questions
should be argued not to exceed one hour on
that was to apply the house rule to each side
or 10 each counsel who chose to speak. In
view Of an embarrassment upon those .ques-
tons. therefore, he had allowed considerable
latitude to debate, and would continue to do 80
unless otherwise ordered by the Senate.
. Mr.. Bingham said the rules adopted by the
Senate were q law to themselves, and no com.
mon law principles could be properly applied
70 the case. The Senate had presented rules
for the government OF the trial, and be wanted
A. 80 TUba%bar Oh tho COW fhr6ehNld of the
business, very plain rule was to be disregard
ed. He was surprised at the manner in which
his learned friend had argued this matter. He
seemed to couple together in one link the an
swer to the summons and the trial. No one
pretended that this was the day for the trial.
the time Of the trial Until the pleas be plead
ed; for it depends upon the plea whether
there will be q trial. If plea Of guilty, for
instance, were entered, there would be no ne.
cessity for discussing the question Of the trlal
at ali. 1t will be time enough to talk
about the trial when the pleas are in and the
issue is made up. The rule adopted, 6y the
Senate is plain one, and there ls nothing IN
the 10th and 11th rules to limit the opera
ton Of the other rule which requires an
answer upon this day. AL the managers ask
on the part Of the House OF Representatives is
that plain rule shall be strictly enforced, and
that the case shall not be postponed for forty
days, and at the end OF that time to be met,
perhaps, By dilatory plea as to whether this
Is the Senate of the United States. The sum-
mons was issued six days ago, and the Presl-
dent has had ample time 10 reply. The action
OF this body does not limit the plea 10 be en-
tered, and under a general plea OF not guilty
every conceivable defence may be made: Hs
saw 10 reason, therefore, Why the rule Should
not be enforced and the accused be compelled
to answer.
No other gentleman rising. to speak, the
Chief Justice said the counsel Tor the Presi'
dent had asked continuance OF forty days IN
which to prepare their answer. Inc rue re-
quires that the question shall oe taken without
debate. AL II favor OF the molon say eye,
and
| consultation.
This motion vas agreed 20, and at o'clock
the senator's retired to The marble room 1or
consultation.
AT four o'clock the senators re-entered the
Senate chamber, and the Chief Justice resumed
his chair.
The Chief Justice then addressed the coun-
sci for the President and notified them that the
Senate had declined to grant TIE request Tor
forty DAYS lime in which TO prepare 20 answer
| the articles OF impeachment, ana then directed
the secretary to read the order agreed upon oy
| the Senate.
The secretary then read the order, which re-
ouires the respondent to file his answer on or
before tine 23d day Of March instant.
Mr. Bingham SAID he vas nstruc:ei Dy the
managers OF the impeachment on me part OF
the House OF Representatives, 10 oner tae io!-
lowing order: -,....
';Ordered that tupon the fins Of srspecetlon