Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1868-04-25
LATEST 1'ELEGRAMS.
MIDNIGHT DISPATCHES.
THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL.
Speech Of Hon. I. A. Il. Nielsen.
CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS.

first business was the order offered for con
sideration yesterday by Mr.. Gaines, that
the hour for the meeting Of the Senate
shall be II O'Clock. Adopted by vote Of
twenty-one against thirteen.
Mr.. Edmunds offered an order to admit
official reporters TO report the speeches on
the final deliberstion Of the Senate
II was objected to by Mr.. Sumner, and
went over under the rule.
Mr.. Nelson resumed his speech, aud
concluded his argument of yesterday in
support of the proposition that no ofenses
are Improbable except those which were
deemed crimes aud misdemeanors, by the
common law at the time the Constitution
was passed Referring TO the portion of
Mr.. BoutwelPs speech which illustrates the
Presidents alleged peryerse nature by his
| treatment of a gentleman who was to have
been one of his counsel Mr.. Nelson made
statement that Judge Black withdrew
| from the cause simply because the Presi-
dent refusedto send vessel to seizeAl Villa
"a refusal made on the ground of public
duty, against the solicitation of friends and
implied threats of enemies Quoting the
expressions Of Mr.. Boutwell,, that the adj
vice given to the President BY the Cabinet
was that Of serfs to their Lord or COUNSEL,
in fear of losing their places, he re-
minded the managers that they had put in
evidence in a message that showed that
their friend Stanton had prodered the adj
vice thus characterized, and now might
cry, save me from my friends. II they
made him out aservileserf He alluded to the
high commentator of the President,
written by Mr.. Stanton in 1865, and to the
strangeness of the fact that the President
is only now impeached for an ofense
against the defunct thirty-ninth Congress.
Mr.. Nelson proceeded to consider the arti-
cles Of impeachment separately. He held,
in the first place, that there was a distinc-
ton made, by both common and statute
laws, between crime aud an attempt 10 COM
nit crime, and as the civil tenure bill
relates only to actual removals from Office,
and the President made none, the charges
made in most of the articles fail. But
aside from this objection, which, though
technical, should still be claimed to have
weight, he would maintain three PROPOSE
tions. lst. That the tenure of Office bill
is void; if it is not, Mr.. Stanton is not COW
cred by it, and even if it is legal and appli-
cable the President is not guilty of crime,
because he acted from laudable motivea.
He quoted at great length from the
debates on the formation of the Constitu-
| ton, and on the passage of the act of 1889,
from numerous legal authorities, to show
that the question of the Presidents power
of removal was definitely settled by the
action of Congress at that time; he claimed,
therefore, that he had grounds for honestly
| forming the opinion on which he acted
| from the constitutional requirement, that
| the Attorney General is to furnish the Pres
ident with opinions in writing, and the fact
| that such opinions are collected and bound
| by authority Of Congress. Mr.. Nelson ar
| gued that they had a quasi authoritative
character for the Presidents action. He
then cited a large number of opinions by
various Attorney Generals since the forma-
| ton of the government, in which they
place the same construction on the law of
1889, and express the same views regarding
| the power of removal as President John
son. He referred also to the opinions of
| Mr.. Jefferson, to the action of PIesi-
| dent Jackson, and to that of the SEN
ate in expunging its resolution of CEN
| sure on him, and then recapitulating the
| authorities and precedents for Mr. John
| sons course and policy, insisted that the
presumption of honest intent was clearly
made out. He next considered the posi-
ton that Congress has by implication
superior power to the Executive, and
maintained that no greater powers were
granted in that way to the legislative than
| executive branch of the government.
At this point the Senate took recess of
| fifteen minutes.
On re-assembling, Mr.. Nelson continued
the citation of authorities in support Of the
Presidents views on the question of his
power of removal, and proceeded to argue
| that the President had the same power to
construe the acts of Congress as Congress
itself, again supporting his views bynumer-
GUS quotations. All the proceeding argu-
ments he held, proved the tenure of Office
law unconstitutional and void, at consid-
cradle length.
Mr.. Nelson then elaborated on the pro-
position that no charge can be maintained
which does not allege criminal intent,
which he said was not done except in the
fifth article. In the course of his remarks
he spoke of the friendly embrace of Mr..
Stanton and Gen. Thomas, and the equal
division of the spoonful of liquor between
them, as the most remarkable exhibition
Of force on record. Great laughter. And
while eulogizing the honesty and simpli-
city of Gen. Thomas, explained his Ian
guage to Mr.. Burleigh and others, as caused
not only by the pride of Office but by the
enlivening effect Of the good liquor then
consumed on the appearance of the supple
mental bottle, he proceeded to give hu
morous and satirioal account Of the arrest
and subsequent discharge Of Gen. Thomas,
ridiculing the idea that any one believed he
designed TO use force.
Passing to the consideration of the %
and Sd articles, he adopted the statement
of the Presidents answer as a sufficient re-
ply to them. With regard to the fourth arti-
Gle, which charges that conspiracy soughtt to
obtain possession Of the War Office By in
timidation and threats, he claimed it was
not covered by the act of 1861, which, he
claimed was violated in the 5th article, al
leging the intended employment of force.
He held it was not supported BY testimony
of the 9Th, in which violation oftbe tenure
of the office law is also alleged. He con-
sidered, he disposed of the argument ofthe
constitutionality of that law the 7th arti-
Gle was passed over with denials; that the
Presidents oath Of office was violated by
the ofiense charged in the 9Th article, he
deayor to obtain possession of monies ia
the War Department, even if made, was not
10 violation Of thecivil tenure law as stated
In reference 10 the 9th article, be held that
the President was in the line Of bis duty
when comforting with Gen. Emory about
the disposition of forces, and that no evil
dence whatever had been adduced to prove
his purpose in that interview was evil, con-
sidering the 10th article He claimed it
was based on the principles which underlie
the sedition law, which ever since its pass
age had stunk in the nostrils Of the Ameri-
can people. He held that the President
had followed the example OF certain mem
bers Of Congress in disregarding the amen
tiles Of expression, and was excusable for
using strong language in reply to the abuse
which had been heaped upon him.
Mr.. Nelson insisted that the preservation
to the right Of freedom Of speech, was in
dispensible 10 maintain our liberties.
After a brief consideration Of the llth
article. which he said was sufficiently an
swered BIZ his remarks, concerning the pre-