The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1868-04-16

giving in evidence what a magistrate OF
sheriff had said to the accused concern
ing tine deed and then shut the mouth
of the accused to what ne had said
then and there in reply to the only
possible argument by which what
| was said to him could
be given in evidence is that
unreplied to it might be construed as
an admission If the sheriff was TO say
| to the prisoner ''you stole that watch;''
and If that could be given in evidence,
and the prisoners reply, SIT was my
| watch, and 1 took 1t because 1t was
mine," could not be given. Thatwould
| be precisely the same proposition
which is being applied here by the
learned Manager to this action had be-
tween the President and the Senate.
| Mr.. Butler-Ic the thief did not make
n reply until four days afterwards, and
then a written a statement as to whose
watch was stolen; also what his neigh
bors said that would be more appro-
PIRATE illustration. 1 take the illustra-
tion as good one, as an excellent one.
The sheriff says, "where did you get
that WatchP" Four days after the
prisoner sends to the sheriff, after he
had been in jail, after an Indictment
had been found against him, written
answer, and claims in the defence that
the answer may be read; not only that
but goes on to put in what every body
else said, or what four or five other men
said, and claims that that may be given
| in evidence, If it Is desirable TO know
what Cabinet said. Let the member of
the Cabinet be brought here, and let us
cross-examine them, and find ont what
they meant when the gave this advice,
and how they came to give 1t, and un-
der what pressure, but at present we do
not want the President to put in the
advice of the Cabinet.
| Mr.. Eval ts-Mr. Chief Justice and
Senators, every case shall, be regarded
according to its circumstances, and you
to judge whether a communication
| from the Senate to the President on
the I'D of February could well have
been answered sooner than the 24th of
| February.
Mr.. Butler-It was communicated on
the 21st of February.
Mr.. Evarts-I:understoo you TO say
you could not state whether 1t was the
2lst or 22d.
Mr.. Butler-IL was 10 o'clock at
night on the 2lst of February. The
Senate was not in session on the I'D
more than an hour, IL being holiday,
then Sunday intervening. ask
whether the answer to that communi-
cation, sent on the 24th, is not an an
swer according to the ordinary course
of prompt and candid dealing between
the President and the Senate. Concern
cerning the the matter of the d1thculty
as far as the simile about the President
being in prison goes, will remove
that by saying that he was not i'm
peached until 5 o'clock on Monday
the oath; but we need not pursue these
trivial Illustrations. The matter is in
the hands of the Court, and must be
disposed of by the Court.
Mr.. Bingham replied to Mr.. EvartI
at length, when the Chief Justice said
Senators, there is no branch of the law
where there is more difficulty to lay
down the precise rules than tina
which regards theintent with which ar
act is done. In the present case it ap
pears that the Senate, on the 2lst o
February, passed a resolution which
will take liberty of reading:
WHEREAS, The Senate have received
and considered the communication o.
the President stating that he had Temov.
ed E. NJ. Stanton, Secretary of War anC
had designated the Adiutant Genera
OF the army to act as Secretary of WA
ad interim; therefore
Resolved, By the Senate of the United
States that under the condition anC
laws of the United States, the Presiden
i, has no power to remove the Secretary
! of War and designate any other office
} to perform the duties of that office az
, interim.
That resolution was adopted on tn
, 2lst of February and was served on tn
! evening of the same same day. Th
( message now proposed to be offered II
> evidence was sent to the Senate on til
: oath of February. 1t does not appea
} to the Chief Justic that the resolution
) called for an answer, and therefore tn
Chief Justice must regard tn
r measure of the twenty-fourth Q
Z February as vindication of the Presi
dents act addressed to the Senate. /
does not appear to the Chief Justic
r that that comes within any rule of evt
3 dence which could justify its being re
9 ceiyed in evidence. The Chief Justice
{ however, will take the views of the Sen
i ate in regard to it.
], No vote being called for, the Chic
8 Justice then ruled the evidence inad
9 miSsable, .t5
;. MI. Curtis then offered to put in evi
i dence tabular statement compiled 6
: the office OF the Attorney General, cor
= tanning list of the executive offices
9 the United States with the new statu
: tory terms or acts of Congress creatin
9 the ofhceS the name or title of the otict
D showing.whether the tenure was for
!, definite period, at the pleasure of tn
9 President, or for a term indefinite.
3 After some interlocutory remarks b
? Mr.. Butler, the paper was, on motto
f of ME- Trumbull, ordered to be prlnte
3 as part of the proceedings
: Mr.. Curtis then offered papers IN IN
4 case of the removal of Mr.. Pickering b.
3 President Adams, remarking that the.
: were substantially the same as hat
been put in evidence by Mr.. Butler
r except that 1t was more formal.