The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1868-03-19
vol. XXXVIII.s
IMPEACHM MENT!
President Johnson, by his Attornies,
Asks for the Same Time that Jonah
gave Nineveh for Preparation: Forty
Oaysp aaaeaa saosesxs .szs
SPEECHES BY BINGHAM. CURTIS.
~ BUTLER. and NELSON. as
TEN DAYS ALLOWED.

TEN DAYS ALLOWED.
Trial Commences March 23d.
In the Senate, on Friday, the 18th, the dis
cussion incident to the impeachment proceed
ings occupied she greater portion Of the day
We give'the following outlines of the debate
On the question Of postponemens for forty DAYS:
Mr.. Stanberry arose. and addressed the Chief
j Jus. ice, read the answer Of the President. ems
tering his appearance. and naming As his coun-
sci Messrs Ssanberry, Curtis. Nelson. Black.
and Evarts, and asking reasonable time for the
preparation of his defense. the period of forty
days. and citing various cases IN which PERI
DDS as long in proportion to the magnitude OF
the case had been granted.
Mr.. Bingham. on behalf of the Managers,
contended that the 8ih Rule provided that on
the appearance Of tho President, he was requir-
ed to file his answer, ard in case his answer
was not fied, the trial should proceed as on
plea # not guilty. He claimed, therefore, that
the trial should proceed forthwith.
There is no.hing clearer, nothing better
known to my learned and accomplished friend,
Mr.. Rtanberry. than that the making OF an is
sue before any tribunal of justice and the trial
are very distinct transactions. That is perfectly
understood. A very remarkable case in the
State Trials lies before me, where Lord Holt
presided, at the trial Of Sir Richard Brown.
Preston, and others, for high treason. When
counsel appeared. as thegentlemen appear this
morning. in the tourt to ask for continuance.
the answer which fell from the lips Of the Lord
Chief Justice was: I'VE are not to consider =
question OF the trial or time Of trial. until .
plea be pleaded" because. as his Lordship very
well remarked, ait may happen that no trial
L. ~h~v x,rsY ,nN0 MIA anA
guilty to the indictment. So the rule lying
before us contemplated, the last clause OF il
providing that if the defendant appears and
shall plead guilty. there may be no further pro-
ceedings in the case no trial about it. Noth>
ing would remain TO be done but to prnnouucs
Judgment under the Constitution. 1t IS time
for US to talk about the trial when we have an
issue. The rule is plain one, . simple one
and may be pardoned for saying that fait to
perceive anything in rules ten and eleven TO
which the learned counsel have referred. which.
in ary kind If construction, can be applied TO
limit the effect Of the words in rule eight to-
wit: .That If the party fail to appear. either
in person or counsel, on the day named in -shs
summons, the trial shall prucsed on the plea OF
not guilty, and further, that il falling On the
day named in the summons. either in person
or by attorn-y, 70 answer the articles. the trial
shalt nevertheless proceed as on the plea OF not
guilty." When words are plain in the written
law, there is an end Of construction; they shall
be followed. The Managers SO thought hen
they appeared 1t the bar. all they ask is that
the rule be eniorced-not he postponed Tor for
ty daysto be met 1T that time. perhaps. with .
di!atory plea and . motion. il you please, 70
quash the articles. or question raising the in>
uuiry whether this is the Senate OF the U1i'ed
States II seems to me i: / may be pardcned
in making one other remark, that. in prescri-
bing both these rules, thai the summons stall
issue to 10 returned on . day certain. giving As
in this case. SIX days in advance. 1t was intend
ed thereby to enable the President, on the day
fixed for his appearance. to come to tits bar
ard make his suswer to the articles. may 30
pardoned for saying further that it is doubtless
known 10 every one within the hearing ct my
voice, that technical rules do in no way control,
or limit or temper the action Of this body: that.
,uuder the plea Of mot guilty. every conceivable
defense which this party can make to these ar
iicles if they be articles 1t all. if they b. pre-
ferred by . competent tribunal IT all, can be
attempted. Why then. this delay of forty
DAYS to draw up An answer? What we desire
to know on behalf Of the House of Representa-
tives, by whose order we appear here. Is. wheth-
er an answer il TO be filed in accordance with
the rule and, if it be not filed, whether tie
rule itself is to be enforced by the Senate, and
. plea of not guilty entered upon the accused?
That 10 our inquiry. It is not my purpose TO
enter on the discussion at all, ~ TO postponing
the day for the progress of the trial. Ny de>
sire is for the tr sent, to soc whether, under
this rule. and by iorce OF this rule, we can Oh.
tain an issue.
Mr.. Curtis, in reply, referred TO the
cases of Judge Humphreys and others.
and argued the rule was susceptible OF
no such construction as that put on 1t
by Mr.. Bingham; and Mr.. Nelson fol-,
lowed, enlarging on the same views 40
his colleague.
Mr.. Stanberry expressed greater sur
claim put forward by the Managers. and
saying there seemed to be a disposition
to hurry through this momentous trial,
as if it were a case before a Police
Court He argued from the wording OF
not intended to be the day for answer.
ing, and the trial day lie said two Of
the Presidents counsel were not present
that no opportunity had been offered
for the preparation of defense, or the
calling of witnesses, and that in the
worst days Of the Star Chamber, such
an attempt to hurry through trial had
never been made. He spoke very
warmly, saying there seemed to have
been q trap set for the President aud
his counsel.
At the conclusion Of his remarks. the
Chief Justice stated the motion would be
argued for an hour, in accordance with
the rules.
Mr.. Bingham arose and said that he
had been greatly surprised in hearing
the hasty words that had been dropped
from the lips Of his learned friend
(Stanberry) J, and asserted that the only
motive OF the Managers was to enforce
the rule which the Senate had made,
and to prevent diiliatory line of de-
fense. s. 8 0# Ek.s ss
The Chief Justice was about to put
the question on Mr.. Stanberry's motion,