The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1868-04-25
The Impeachment TRIAL.
e. Argument of Mr. Nelson Continued.

WASHINGTON, April 24-Mr. Crime order
for commencing the court at IL o'clock was
adopted-2l to IL.
Mr.. Nelson resumed his speech and conclud-
ed bis argument OF Yesterday, in support of the
proposition that no off-nces were impeachable
except those which were deemed crimes and
misdemeanors by common law at the time the
constitution was framed. Referring TO that
portion Of Mr.. Bouiwelfs speech which will
illustrate the Presidents alleged perverse nature
by his treatment of gentleman who was to have
been one Of his counsel, Mr.. Nelson made the
statement that Judge Black Withdrew from
the case SIMPLY because the President refused
to send vessels TO seize Alta Vela. The refusal
was made on the ground Of public duy against
the solicitations of friends and implied threats
Of enemies. Quoting the expression of Mr.
Boutwell, that the advice given to the Presi-
dent by his Cabinet that of serfs to their
loId or counsel offered in fear of losing their
places. He reminded the manager that they had
put in evidence a message which showed that
their friend, Stanton, had proffered advice thus
characterized, and that he now might cry,
"save me from my friends they made him
out the servile serf. Abiding briefly to the
high commentator of the President written by
Stanton in 1865. and 10 the strangeness of the
the fact that the President is only now I'M
peached for offences against the defunct 80 h to
Congress, he proceeded to consider the arti-
cles Of impeachment separately. He held in
the first place that there was distinction made
BY both common and statute law between
crime and an attempt to commit crime, and as
the civil tenure bill related only TO actual re-
movals from Office, and the President made
none, the charges made in most of the ar
ticles fail; hut aside from this objection, VIII ich
though technical should still be claimed to
H. 10 Il H.
sitons, namey That the tenure of Office law
is void; fit is not Stanton's case is not COW
cred by it, and that even if it is legal and APP
plicable the President is not guilty of crime,
because he acted from laudable motives. He
quoted at great length from the debates on the
formation of the constitution and on the pas
sage from the act of 1889 and from numerous
legal authorities to show that the question of
the Presidents power of removal was definitely
settled by action of Congress at that time, and
claimed therefore he had grounds for honestly
forming the opinion on which he acted.
From the constitutional requirement that the
Attorney General furnish the President with
opinions in writings, and the fact that such
opinions are collected and bound by authority
of Congress, Mr.. Nelson argud that they have
n quasi authoritative character for the Pres
idenL's action. He then cited large number
of opinions in writing by various Attorneys
General since the foundation of the govern
ment, in which they place the same construc-
ton on the law Of 1899 and express the same
views regarding the power of removal as Pres
ident Johnson. He referred also to opinions
of Jefferson, to the action of President Jack
son and to that of the Senate in expungmg
its resolution of censure on him, and then,
reeapitulating the authorities and presidents
for Mr.. JOhnsons cause and policy, insisted
that the presumption of honest intent was
clearly made out.
He next considered the position that Con-
gress has, by implication, superior power TO
the executive and maintained that no greater
powers were granted in that way to the Leg
islative than to the executive branch OF the
government. At this point the Senate took
recess 10 minutes.
On reassembliug at 220 P. NJ Mr.. Nelson
continued the citation OF authorities in sup
port of the Presidents views on the question
of his power of removal and proceeded TO ar
que that the President had the same power to
constru tie acts of Congress as Congress it.
self again supporting his views by numerous
quotations. All The preceding arguments he
held proved the tenure OF Office law unconsti.
tutional and void.
At considerable length, Mr.. Nelson then
elaborated the proposition that no charge can
be maintained which does not allege criminal
intent, which he said was not done. except IN
the 9th article. In tie course OF his remarks
ne spoke of the friendly embrace OF Mr. Stan
ton and Gen. Thomas, and the equal division
Of the spoonful OF liquor between them as
the most remarkable exhibition of farce on
record" (Great laughter) While eulog zng
the honesty and simplicity Of Gen. Thomas
he explained his language TO Mr.. Burlegh and
others that afternoon as caused not DULY 5y
pride Of office but by the eulivenine eff Of
the good liquor then consumed on the annear-
anee Of the supplemental bottle He proceeded
to give humorous and satrical account of he
arrest and subsequent discharge of Gen
Thomas, ridiculing the idea that o,y onc
should believe that he designed to use 'forcn
Passing to the consideration of the ID anl
Sd articles he adopted the statements in the
Presidents answer as sufficient reply f.
ITEM.
With record to the fourth article which
changes conspiracy to obtain possession of thC
War Office by intimidation and threats, he
claimed it was not covered by the act of 1856
which it claimed was violated
The fifth article, alleging the intended en-
ployment of force, he held was not supportet
by the testimony; the speech in which vic
Iat1on OF the tenure of Office law is also aleg
ed, he considered disposed of by the argumen
against the constitutionality of .hat law. Til
seventh article was passed over with denia
that the Presidents oath OF off e was violate,
by the offence charged. The eighth article b