The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1868-05-01
BY TELEGRAPH.
CONGRESS.


| r..
had made some remarks, disayowing
any Intentional disrespect for the Sen
ate, but admitting that he referred TO
duel, Mr.. johnson moved to lay the
resolution on the table, which was
agreed TO; IS to 10.
| MIR. Cameron'S order Tor night ses-
sions was considered.
Mr.. Sumner offered to amend by
making the hours from 10 o'clock to o.
On motion of Mr.. Trumbull, the
whole matter was tabled; 81 to IL.
Mr.. Evarts resumed his argument.
He held that 1t was grave re-
proach upon the wisdom and fore
sight OF the trainers of our Government.
To claim decision in this case in IA
vor of the President would result in
monarchy. In his view, the danger
was to another OF the balances of the
Constitution, namely, the relations OF
the weight of numbers and equality OF
States, irrespective OF population.
From the principles of the Constitu-
ton and the utterances of the foremost
distinguished statesmen, it was evident
| that to make the Senate executive in
stead of advisory, was to rob the peo-
ple's majority OF their rightful power.
| In this manner the small and thinly
populated States would control the
working OF the Government against the
will OF those who cast the overwhelm-
ing majority OF votes, and the Presi-
Dental election would become farce.
In support of this position he quoted
writings of the elder Adams, Roger
| Sherman and others, and enforced 1t
by considering various emergencies
which might arise under the tenure OF
Office act, which makes certain offices
permanent, and render removal during
| The session of the Senate dith-
cult, II not impracticable. He pro-
ceeded to quote from debates in
| II Nyh
under consideration, the language OF
Messrs. Williams, Howard and others,
to show its effect was TO revolutionize
the practice of tho Government, and he
quoted an expression 10 the effect that
while the legislative construction had
| little weight, yet the decision of the
constitutional questions by the supreme
laws were authoritative.
Mr.. Evarts contended however that
| the decision of Congress Of 17S9 were
not only authoritative, because confirm
ed by the Supreme Court, but carried
immense weight of themselves. He re-
ierred to the debates of 17S9 as exhaus-
tive OF the subject ofpower of removal,
and claimed that the point at issue was
settled and firmly established then by
the ffamers of our government and by
| the practice OF successive adminislra-
tions afterwards. he also referred to
| Mr.. Websters declaration in 1885 that
1
dorse ment of President Jackson's re-
moval OF Duane by the people, the su-
perior power of all. In regard to the
suggestion that the Congress of 17S9
was influenced by the high confidence
/ in President Washington. Mr.. Evarts
asked If il were not possible that the
present Congress had been influenced
| in an opposition by its opinions on the
| incumbent, the President. He read
from various cotemperaneous writers
to show that the Importance OF the
question was deeply felt at the time,
and that the effect the decision reached
| in 1883 was thoroughly understood. He
claimed that the recent law had been in
direct contravention of the doctrine
and practice of the Government for
eighty years and having, in itself no
binding effect on constructing the Con-
stitutional doubts as to its constitution
ality, which might naturally arise In
the mind OF the President, for which
he could not rightfully be impeached.
| Referring to his argument or yester-
day respecting the right and power OF
| the President to resist unconstitutional
laws SO to bring them before the Su-
preme Court, he read from debates in
The fugitive slave law, in 1852. the
Language of Mr.. Sumner, in which he
quoted and endorsed President
jackson's declaration that the
department of the Government had
right to Judge of the constitutionality
| OF all injunctures not already covered
by Supreme Court decisions. To dis
miss and depose the President for an
attempt to maintnin the supremacy OF
the Constitution, would mako him the
| Victim of Congress and a martyr OF the
| Constitution. Recess.
On reassembling Mr.. Evarts consid-
cred the attitude which Senators held
| in reference to this subject, and said
nothing was more abhorent to a sense
| of Justice than that q man should be
Judge in his case, or decide question
which he had already preijudged. He
held If the Senate in passing the reso-
| luton of censure on the 2lst OF Feb
ruary, had pronounced on the subject Of
the constitutionality of the law as a po-
litical action, then they could not con:
slider it as a judicial question. 1t would
Il be extraordinary, almost inconceiva-
| BILE, 10 suppose they did not SO consider
It with the prospect OF having TO try the
matter. II Il were judicial as a Court
they did not regard It as
political question. He reminded
Them that the largest votes for convic-
ton in Humphreys case were on
the articles charging him with having
prejudiced a case and having allowed a
a juryman to sit who acknowledged
that he had formed an opinion; again,
they had an interest in the result,
twenty millions dollars of the patron
age and powers of the executive office
were the prizes offered them for con-
Yiction, Their political prejudices, too,
he argued, Joined with other consider
ations, cause them to cast out as inn
proper for their decision, charges al
feging a violation of their own law.
Passing then to the general considera-
tion OF the evidence introduced in sup
port of the articles Of Impeachment, he
characterized 1t as absurdly insufficient,
although the Managers had possessed
every considerable advantage in the
preliminary privileges of examining
witnesses and in u hundred other
ways, In support of the charges
of obstructing reconstruction. There
was the Parsons dispatch, while Wood.
the oflice-seeker, was the only witness
| to uphold the accusation of the abuse
! of the appointing power. The staple of
their speeches consisted OF matter twice
rejected by the House not warranting
| impractable. Yet Mr.. Stevens thought
the introduction of the 11th article in
dispensable to conviction, as he said
the court would be green not to acquit
on the other ten. MIR. Butler now con-
tended that IL conviction failed on the
| first Il would be useless to look to the
lIth. The articles aboutthe Presidents
speeches Mr.. Evarts held there were
two fatal objections, first, the speeches
| had reference only to a defunct Con-
gress, and second, they were offenses
against rhetoric and good taste. he
| then adverted in sarcastic terms to the
language and conduct Of the champion
| of propriety and decorum in the cause,
and said as he and Mr.. Butler had
claimed that the practice OF this tribu-
4 = Il f.