The New York herald., 1868-04-28

n0u0KCES
ment to prove intention. 60 further than some,
and contend that no corrupt or wicked motive need
tn.igate the acts for which impeachment is brought
sty OF proving that they were wilfully done. II BY
agree with him. A mere accidental trespass would
not be sucient to convict. But that which ia vol
unfairly done u wtlfally done, according to every
honest definition; and whatever malfeasance is VIII
lingly perpetrated by an 0fiiceh0lder is . misde-
meanor In once, whatever he may alege was his n.
that all previous Presidents had exercised the same
right Of removing ofcers for cause to be judged Of
BY the President alone. Had there been no law to
would have been parallel, and the one might be ad.
duced as an argument IN favor OF the other. But
refers n VIC 0O law u Sad n bee been passed BY Con-
gress after q stubborn controversy with the
Executive, denying that right and prohibit;
upon any executive onacsr who should exercise
It: And that, too after the President had himself
No pretexs therefore, any longer existed that such
right was vested In the President by virtue Of his
ofice. Hence the attempt to shield himself under
at issue. Did he stake care that this law should be
faithfully" executedf He answers that acts that
practised by his predecsssors The Presdent says
that he removed Mr. Stanton simply to test the con-
stitutionaty OF the tenure OF ONCE law by judicial
BY the votes twice given Of twothlrds Of the sena-
tors and OF the House Of Representatives. 1t
csss cSsd a s~ s that aM Or OSGfs
cial interpretation. II there had been, or should
aggrieved by the action Of Mr. Stanton. But in
stead Of enforcing that law he takes advantage Of
the name and funds of the United States to resist
1t, and to induce others to resls. It. Instead Of
attempting, as the Executive Of the United States
to see that the law was faithfully executed he took
great pains and perpetrated the acts alleged in this
article not only to resist It himself but to seduce
others to do the same. he sought to induce the
avowed obstruction of the law, as it stood unre.
pealed upon the statute book. He could find no one
to unite with him 10 perpetrating such an act until
bearing the title Of adjutant general OF the
army. Is this taking care that the laws shall
be faithfully executeda Is this attempting to
lidity, according to his oaths On the other
hand, was 1t not high and bold attempt to 0bstruct
cutedf He must not excuse himself by saying that
ne mad doubts OF its constitutionaty and wished to
yes IT, waat @ rgns nad ne 70 be hunting up excuses
not this confession o misdemeanor in itselfP The
President asserts that he did not remove Stanton
dcton OF his own letter to the Secretary OF the Tea
sury, IN which, as he was bound by law, he commu-
norfeo ncateo 70 ina nst ocer the fact OF the removal This
as disposed of by the of the fact as well
as by his subsequent report to the Senate. The fol-
lowing Is the letter just alluded to, dated August H.
compliance with the requirements Of the act en-
you notified that the 18th inst the Hon Edwin NJ Stan.
rans h % Of w and
Hon. sECRErARY OF rnE TREASURY.
Wretched man direct contradiction of his
solemn answer How necessary that a man should
nave good conscience. or good memory Both
would not be out OF place. How lovely to con-
template what was SO assiduOusly inculcated by q
celebrated Pagan into the mind OF his son, virtue Is
truth and truth Is virtue.n And, still more virtue of
every kind charms us, yet that virtue is strongest
which Is effected by justice and generosity. Good
deeds win never be done, wise acts win never be
executed, except by the viruOus and the cOnscien-
nSs hen @ y TRsS nsss Nee, ses@ss e sssss
their rulers and may they select only the brave and
the virtuous. Has 1t been proved, as charged In
this article, that Andrew Johnson in vacation sus.
pended from office Edwin M. stanton, who had been
Secretary Of the Department Of War, without the
advice and consent OF the Senate; did he report the
twenty days from the meeting Of the senate; and did
the Senate proceed to consider the sunlciency Of
such reasonsi Did the Senate declare such
reasons insufficient, whereby the said Edwin NJ.
Stanton became authorized to forthwith re.
sumo and exercise the functions Of Secretary
us wePe es 1e 10 ae ama e
inmate; did the said Andrew Johnson, In
his oficai Character OF President United States
aftemrt TO obstruct the fetdfn OF the said Edwin NJ
stanton and his resumption forthwith of the func:
tons Of his olc6 Secretary OF the Department OF
Sso1alss %sg aaa ri dS S ss
Senate decided in his favorf IL he has, then the acts
N violation OF law charged In this article are full
pass and depends upon the credibility OF two
witnesses who, upon this point corroborate each
he slst OF January 1885, not only declared that such
was his intention but reproached U. s. Grant, General
IN the following language
You had found IN first conference hat the President
y the he Or not" You knew wha.
also knew that in views Of duty
snoher appointment Even Ignoring the poS
i've between these conclusions plainly
however, that under these you
% e ay out pSson 70
sould have anticipated action, would have been
20 81 9se G or
else to resort 70 the more dsageeabe expedsn OF suspend
lie thus distinctly alleges that the General had
full knowledge that such was his deliberate inten-
lion. Hard words and injurious epitnets can do
nothing to corroborate injure the character OF
but II Andrew Johnson be not wholly desti-
tute Of truth and shameless fasiner then this
tice and all its charges clearly made out by his
own evidence. Whatever the respondent may say OF
The reply Of U s. Grant, Genera only goes to confirm
The fact OF the Presidents lawless attempt to OBJ
struct the execution Of the act specified In the arti
Gle. II General Grants recollection Of his conversa-
airmatyely to prove the same fact stated by se the
President, although 1t shows that the Presi-
dent persevered In his course OF deter.
refused to aid In It's consummation. No differences
to the main fact Of the attempt to violate and pre-
vent the execution Of the law exists In either state
ment; both compel the conviction Of the respondent
nnless he should escape through other means than
The facts proving the article. He cannot hope TO es
cape by asking this high court to declare the "law
Tor regulating the tenure OF certain civil ofices un.
and void; for 1t SO happens-to the
hopeless misfortune OF the respondcnt-that almost
every member OF this high tribunal has more than
once, twice, perhaps three times declared, upon his
official oath, that law constitutional and valid. The
unhappy man is In this c0ndition:-He has declared
himself determined to obstruct that act; he has,
by two several letters OF authority ordered
Lorenzo Thomas TO violate that law, and he has
issued commissions during the session OF the Senate,
without the advice and consent OF the Senate In vio
atlon OF law, TO said Thomas. He must therefore
either deny his own solemn declarations and falsify
he testimony OF General Grantiand Lorenzo Thomas,
Dr. expect that verdict whose least punishment is re-
nova from Office. But the President denies In his
answer to the first and the eleventh articles (Which
ne Intends as joint answer to the two charges that
he had attempted to c0ntrlve means to prevent the
iue execution OF the law regulating the tenure OF
certain civil offices, or had violated his oath to take
are that the laws be faithfully executed.v Yet while
ie denies such attempt to defeat the execution