Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1868-05-20

II was rejected by the following vote
Guilty, IS
Not Guilty, 10
A change Of one vote would have convict
ed We give the record of the vote, all those
Senators voting guilty being Republicans, and
all those voting not guilty being Democrats,
except the six whose names are in Haiic
GriLn-A Anthony. Cameron, catten, Chandler Cole
Conkling CounCss Corictt Cmgiu, Drake Elmunds
Morton, morrill, tvtj Morrill, AfcJ Nye, Patterson Isl
H.. pameroy Ramsey sherman sprnguc Stevens, sum
and Yatcs.
Nor Gulr,-Bayaul, Buckalcw, Davis, Dixon Doolit-
uc, FtsgrHiG, Foieier, crimes, henderson Hendricks,
johnson. McCreary, Norton, Patterson lfennl, Ross,
salisbury YnunbuH Im WiHkie, Nickcr-.
Having taken this vote, the Senate, as a
Court Of Impeachment, adjourned to Tuesday
the Doth inst.
Thus it appears that the Senate failed to
convict on the eleventh article by exactly enc
rote. II has been said that the strongest vote
for conviction could be had on this article,
and the inference therefore, would be that
the Senate will fail on every article. This,
we presume, is not absolutely certain, since
it may happen that some of the other ten ar.
ticles will bring stronger vote On the
whole, we exreata failure to convict by ox-
actly one rote so that every Republican
Senator who has voted against conviction will,
in his own State, have the unenyiable posi-
ton Of being solely responsible for the I'M
fortunate result Maine, and indeed New
England, will put the sole responsibility upon
Senator Fessenden Illinois upon Senator
Trumbull; Iowa upon Senator Grimes Ten
nessee upon Senator Fowler; Kansas upon
Senator Ross, and West Virginia upon Sena-
tor Van Wrinkle. Nor is this the worst fea-
ture of the position public opinion of the
guilt of the President has been so universal
and strong on the published testimony and ar
guments in the case that not single one of
these Senators can escape the imputation of
bribery. That is already the popular solu-
ton OF the question, and no amount of pro-
testations or of arguments will avail against
it in public opinion.
| We have no doubt ourself of the perfect
integrity, for example, of Senator Fessenden
in our judgment there is not money enough
in the world to bride him; but that iudg-
ment il based, not on the circumstances of
this case as that of the public generally will
be, but rather upon good acquaintance not
only with his public character but in the
freedom of personal intercourse We have
indeed been in the family with Fessenden,
Ttumbull and Grimes and can account for
their opinions and votes without stain upon
their integrity. Grimes from the beginning
has, doubtless looked upon impeachment as a
thing impolitic and unnecessary, and his tenn
permanent is such that every effort towards it
and every argument for it has only strength
ened his obstinacy against it. Fessenden and
Trumbul are acute lawyers, self-reliant and
independent men and if they have had any
doubt of themselves, it has been that their po-
litical connections might swerye them from
the strict impartiality that becomes Judge,
They have strained so hard against Partially
to their party as TO bend the other way, and
launching their boat upon sea ofspecial plead
ings, they have wrecked it upon the sharp
reefs of professional techncalties But we
do not expect that the public will be satisfied
with such explanations, against what to the
multitude will be palmer solution.
On the 18th of January last, Mr. Fessen-
den voted " that having considered the evil
dence and reasons given by the President, in
his report of the 18th of December, 1867, for
the suspension of Edwin NJ Stanton, the SEN
ate do not concur in said suspension" This
report of the President was made under the
Tenure Of Office act, for which Mr.. Fessen-
den voted mot originally, butt against the
Presidents veto. Now when Mr.. Fesscnden
|, gave his opinion against impeachment on the
grounds that Stanton was not within the Ten
. ure Of Office act, and that there is no proof
I of guilty intent in the Presidents disregard
: Of it, the public will answer, first that both
the President and Fessenden treated Stanton
: as under the act and again that the Presi.
dents violation of the act was violation Of
I his oath of oihce-substantially perjury, which
in itself implies legal guilt Ofcourse Mr.
Fessenden may assert, and truly, that he
voted against the removal Of Stanton on
4 grounds entirely outside of the Tenure-of-Of
n flee act but the fact will still stand, that he
has affirmed the constitutionality of the act ;
and the public will firmly believe that the
President did understandingly and purposely
, defy that act, in the attempted removal ofStan-
4 ton. So we apprehend that public opinion
e will condemn the Senator, in spite of all
: excuses or explanations.
The case of Fowler, Ross, Trumbull, and
Van Wrinkle, is still harder of explanation, for
e on the 2lst Of February the last three, on the
C removal Of Stanton, voted 4" that the Presi-
> dent has no poloer to remove the Secretary of
! War, and designate any other officer to per-
form the duties of that Office ad interim, -
and, on the 10th Of January last, Fowler at
a meeting of Republican Senators, demanded
: the impeachment of the President, in the
a strongest terms. We cannot reconcile these
5 things to our own satisfaction, and much
S harder will it be for those who have less knowl-
edge of, or regard for, the character of the
men, II these Senators have indeed taken
their ground in perfect integrity, it has been
at terrible sacrifice If they save the Pres
ident from the penalty which all but one of
the requisite two-thirds of the Senate, and
more than two-thirds of the loyal people of
the country, believe he justly deserves it
will be at the loss Of the good will of the
public We believe that not one of these
Senators can stand in his own stats--not even
: the much revered Fessenden--unless it be by
h. ~ ~. .