The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1868-05-02
BY TELEGRAPH.
CONGRFSS.
wAsHINaroN, May L


WASHINGTON, May 1.
SENATE.
Mr.. EVarts commenced with an apol-
ogy for having so long occupied the
time and attention OF the Senate, say
Ing that he would claim their indulg-
ence but a little while longer He pro-
ceeded to consider the power of the
President 10 fill vacancies under the
acts of 1872, 1895 and 1896. He admitted
the act of 1865 limited the choice for
appointments of Secretaries dd Interim
in certain cases to the heads of other
departments, but he argued that under
the act of 1913. which allowed him to
choose from all the officers employed
in the departments. the President had
full warrant for the appointment OF
General Thomas, who was then Adju-
tant General. Referring to the action
of Mr.. Lincoln in appointing an ud i1l-
teJinI successor to Mr.. Blair, POstmas-
ter General, he said that the appoint
ment was made under authority OF
only the implied acts OF I73
to the Presidents Office depart
meut at all. He asked why that
conduct was not considered an i'm
peachRble ofIense. He then maintained
IL made no difference either in the
theory or practice OF the government
"uelneE lu6
were made during session or recess
of the Senate, and instanced the four
examples, of Nelson in 1914, Scott in
1850, and Kelly and Holt in 1851, as
ample warrant for his assertion. Pass
ing to the first article he said he should
consider at the outset the nature of the
positions occupied by the members of
The Cabinet. He would not again refer to
the opinions of Mr.. Boutwell,, except to
say he might name three or more Sena-
tors before him who would share with
others what he had mentioned in the op-
probrium upon such positions by the
honorable manager. He then read
the address to President Lincoln,
signed by thirty Senators written in
1862 to urge his removal of Mr.. Blair,
so as to secure harmonious action. The
opinions therein expressed by fifteen of
the Senators now present, on the sub
| iect of Cabinet removals, he (Evarts)
fully endorsed. he further quoted
| from the speeches of Mr.. Sherman and
others in the debate on the passage of
the tenure of Office bill, and in eXplana-
ton of the report OF the Committee of
Conference various expressions and
arguments, which huncontradtcted opin-
ions and explanations, he claimed,
were accepted as proper interpretations
| of the bill as acted upon by the Presi-
dent. He held that It would be mon
strous to convict the President of a
crime by the same voices which gave
utterauce to or concurred in these au-
thoritative declarations that the bill
did not reach or effect the relations OF
Mr.. Stanton and the President. He
also read from the report OF Messrs.
Schenck and Williams on the subject,
which he claimed had bound the House
to the same conclusion as the Senate.
The argument of Mr.. Boutwell, that the
practice had always to be to send in the
name OF the appOintee before making
the removal he met by the considera-
tion that removals are generally made,
not because the incumbents are unht,
but because political favorites are to be
nut in; the instances of removal of
Cabinet officers are only two for the
simple reason that polite hint is
usually sufficient to induce resignn-
tion. He then referred to the instances
of the removals of various officers dur
ing session of the Senate, Which have
been put in evidence and went on to
argue the necessity for the existence
of such power of instant removal by
some suppositious cases, where delay
would lead to disastrous consequences.
Referring to the concessions in Mr..
Buffers speech, that IL the President
had properly notified the Senate or his
Intention his action would not proba-
blV have been deemed a sufficient
ground for Impeachment, Mr.. Evarts
said il appeared that the crime was not
found in his fortiter IN 7'e, but in the
absence of the S1LdUiteI' IN mod0. He
characterized the assertion of Mr.. Bout
well thar it made no difference whether
the law Is broken is constitutional or
not-as desperate attempt to escape
from the force OF the arguments OF
counsel for the President, which he
would not now repeat. de also quoted
the admission of MIR. Boutwell,, that the
4 sn1
he had acted with honest intent
in violation of the law which was
ambiguous or equivocal, and claimed
IL was all they needed after showing rs
thew had the act was fifty characterized
by those worry terms. Taking up the
question of the character of offence of
violating the tenure of office law. he
said there was no punishment provided
in the law for attempt to remove as for
the attempt TO appoint, and also that the
articles nowhere charged the removal,
hence there was no indictable or i'm
peachable offence committed by the
attempt TO remove Stanton. He then
maintained no tenure of office could be
given by legislation for any longer time
than for which the officer is appointed,
and applying this doctrine to the case
of Stanton he argued that he was not
appointed, but held his Office by suffer-
ance of the President from day to day,
and therefore could not in any case be
affected by the case in question in ref
erence to the argument that II Stanton
Is not protected by tho proviso he is by
the body of the section. Hs said we
must speak of the Office and not of the
man, and If this Office is covered by the
section we are led to the absurdity OF
admitting that its tenure can be made
perpetual if successive Senates adhere
to the same views. One OF the laws is
susceptible of two constructions: he
had the managers authority for claim
ing it would be abnorrent to the cause
of justice to convict the tFes-
ident. He further argued that
this was not an attempt to violate the
statutory right of Mr.. Stanton to hold
his Office, but merely to withdraw the
tenure which he held at pleasure OF the
President. Briefly reviewing the evil
dence he ridiculed its insumciency as
Instances in the testimony of harsner
the solitary witness TO prove the at
temnted coup d etdt, Mr.. Evarts then
reminded the Senators that they must
treat, the last article separately without
any reference to the character OF, or
force of the others, always upon the
presumption of entire innocence; they
must discard political considerations,
Judge OF Mr.. Johnson's separate acts as
they would of Lincoln's or Grants
He called attention to the former ser
| vices of the President to the clrculn.
stances of his early life and subsequent
stormy career which has maze nln
what he is, referring to his pontlcal
training, unfiinching loyalty IN tlnnes
of trial and un nWavering devotion 10 t9e
Constitution which he made the guiue
1T