New-York tribune., 1868-04-20


That Fl is S'''sS qneston cannot nS l answer sn
SSsts Se%seTss n: S Il Ss Senate sEOad md
that Mr. santons case was not within TINS law, w.
faen such question then there IS no question IN
tins particular Of conflict between this law and me
Constitution the Senate should find that in these arr
clcs charged against the President Il necessary for tne
Senate to believe that there some act OF Oh
his part connected with this mattersome maats"es,
some bad intent and that he DID not honestly believe a.
lie states In his answer that this was an unconsttutona
law; that case having arisen when lac must act acc2ru
ngy under his oath Of Oce II the Senate comes To haI
conclusion II is immaeral whe e'her this was constIu
onal or an unconstitutional law. BE Il one or be IL lhe
other be t true false that the Iesdent committed an
ocnse by his Interpretation OF the law ne mas not cOi
tted an impeachabIe oense as charged S the Ho9se %
OF Representatives; and must advance tIs
question before reach the third question thas e
ator propouds there IS no necessity Ior @ une c ia
"Do they consider that the opinions OF CaDues oped
touching that question-that Is the @ NJ
OF the Senate ought TO be in1uencedP certainly not
We do not put them on the stand as experts on
questions Of constitutional law; the judges Wll deter
mine that out Of their own breasts. we P9t .ne,n
state what advice in point Of fact they gave him with
view TO show that he guilty OF no improper @
honorable Senator from Michigan lsr Howard to
why we should put members OF the Cabinet on Tue
would say that put them on the stand for the same
purpose the Senator, when practcng law, has IRE,
quently put lawyers on the stand man Is proeeeuea
against by another for an improper arrest for mall
cous prosecution and 1t is necessary 30 prove mSuVe
II no proper cause is proved motive imposslDe Dnt II
is perfectly well settled when the defendant can sVW
that he fairly laid his before counsel and that e
counsel advised him that probable cause the
inference of motive is oyerthrown We wish to SHOW
here that the President called for the opinions OF ms
advisers and acted upon that advice In response s
to the question OF the honorable Senator from
Maryland (Ar. Johnson he will allow me TO say
that this is question which the Managers i conla
answer much better than the Presidents counsel
The question is, "Do the counsel for the Presi-
dent understand that the Managers deny tae
statement made by the President III ms Wessagv % Ol
Dec II, 1861 given In evidence by the 1lan,
ayers page as official report, that the members Oi
the Cabinet gave the opinion there stated as 10 tne
Office actl and Is the evidence offered corroDQ
atve OF that statement, or for what other o9ect ~ ~
offered now understand from what the honorable
Manager has said this morning that the House Oh hepre
sontatyes has taken no issue on that part OF our MT
The honorable Manager does not understand tnaI lat
view conroverts denies that part OF our argument,
We do also understand that the honorable
themselves put in evidence the Message OF the redeht
To the Senate OF the 18th OF December In wlcn ne sas
that he was advised BY the members 9i ms SaDe' ua
stitutiona Nevertheless, Senators, this Is an aua Oh
the utmost gravity n any ASPECT Tv Tr IN IN any ea or abstain
from Offering the members OF the Presidents CaDaei 20
that they might state 10 you, under the sanction OF e
oaths, what advice was gwen to the fresuen' ny ''
u senator WILLIAMS submitted the following question
the advice given to the President by BIZ, Cabinet with view Of
preparing veto message pertinent to pIoye 'ae rEh o Tue
enough that the President received such advice but he
show that occasion arose Tor MN 10 S upon IT,
which, in the Judgment OF the senate ws 1 w. & Rut
the Arst step To show that ho honestly DeleNeu hat
was unconstitutional law w,s, & III CLOSING da tRRs
view which have presented TO the senate Is rom any
claim OH the part of the President that ne may disregard
a law simply because he thinks 1t unconstitutional lie
makes no such claim. -, a..to.,
The CHIEF il USTICE-Senators, the only question
winch the ChiefJustcc considers as before the senate
resecs not the weight hut admissbty OF the evil
de6ce offered To determine that question: ~ necessary
10 show what charged In the Articles OF Impeachment
The frat article charges that on the 2lst Oh to
President issued an order for the removal OF Mr stanton
from the office OF Secretary OF War; that That order was
made unawully, and that 1t was made WIN the Inen!
thcn and there 10 violate the Constitution OF the Unlteu
States The same charge is repeated IN the articles
which relate 10 the appointment OF MI IhOmas, ahu
which were necessarily connected with THIS transactO
The intent then il the subject 10 which much OF thee eV
dcnce on both sides has been directed and the thSI
us,ce conceiyes that this testimony adlSabe LOT me
purpo,e of showing the intent with which the Piesdeht
has acted In this transaction lie VIII submit inc ques-
tIon 10 the senate II any senator desires
Senator HOWARD called for the Yeas ana Nays.
The vote rcsultcd-Ycas, ~; Nays, E-as follows;