New-York tribune., 1868-03-31
THE ClSE FOR IMPEACHMENT.

The long address In which Gen. Butler yes
terday opened the case of the people against
| Andrew johnson is an exceedingly forcible ex-
position of the law and the facts upon which
the Representatives of the United States de-
mand the removal of the President. Gen.
Butler refers briefly to the constitutional right
of impeachment and the nature Of the Offenses
which are properly impeachabe. He argues
that the tribunal before which the present
question is under debate is not q court OF law,
but simply the Senate of the United States
bound only by the rules of the Senate, and
not subject to the restrictions of ordinary
judicial bodies that no member is disqualified
or indeed ought even to be excused on the
plea of prejudice; and that the proceeding is
not so much trial as an "inquest of office"
Having laid down these principles, which may
prove highly important tho trial goes on,
Mr.. Butler takes up each Article, and shows
that the question is not so much whether An
drew johnson is fit to retain office as whether
the Presidency itself, with tho powers and pre-
negatives which Mr.. johnson elhisS, for it, is
consistent with the safety of FREQ republican
government. The President demands a moro
than kingly privilege of removing an
civil officers at will, and thus virtually
takes into his hands the control OF the State.
He claims this by virtue of the constitutional
Executive pOwer-as If that power were not
only unlimited, but illimitable-as IL the funda-
mental law which places bounds to the author
ity Of the legislative and judicial departments
could have designed leaving the coordinate
branch Of the Government entirely without re-
striOton. 1t is claimed that the action Of the
first Congress settled the point that the power
of removal was a necessary part Of the Execu-
tive power; but Gen. Butler shows that
Congress has never actually decided the
question, and that in any event o resolution of
the LIST Congress has no force as against an
opposing resolution of the XXXIXth. More
over, since the beginning Of the Government
the power Of removal has invariably been
recognized in practice as q concomitans not Of
simple executive authority, but Of the power OF
appointment. The same limitations which
restrict the one have been held to restrict the
other No President has ever before asserted
the right to remove an officer by his ewn sim
ple will. The records of the departments con-
tain no mention OF tho displacement of any
appointee, except IN the undoubtedly legal and
regular way Of sending in to the Senate q new
nomination by the confirmation OF whiOh the
old appointment was held to terminate. Thus
the advice ard consent of the Senate has
always been deemed essential for the removal
Of an officer whe by their advice and consent
had been appointed ~ 4s.s-.-
Bnt even granting that the Executive power
OF removal is not limited by the Constitution,
1t does not follow that Congress cannot limit it
by legislation. On the contrary, the clause pro-
- &lok pholt haUa IN
make all laws which shall be necessary and
"proper for carrying into execution -,
"al powers vested by this Constitution
"in the Government Of the United States
"or in any department or Office thereof
expressly cOnfers this power, and it Ina:
! been several times executed without be-
| ing called In question. The Act Of July IL
1862, authorized the President to dismiss offcer
of the army navy, marine corps, and volun
teers, thus implying that he had not the power
before. The Act of July 10, 1865, forbade hin
to dismiss officers of the army and navy in time
! of peace and this bill received the approva
of Andrew johnson. The Act of Feb rs. 1859
| providing for O national currency, stipulated
that the Controller Of the Currency should bt
removable only with the advice and consent
the Senate. Beside all this, the Managers o
the Impeachment arc prepared with evidence
to show that the President has admitted TIN
validity of the very Tenure Office bill whicl
he now declares unconstitutional, and that y
never had word 70 say against It until h
wanted to get rid Of Mr. Stanton. Nay, h
plainly admitted its binding force when b
first Mspehded Mr.. stanton. and sent his rea
sons for so doing to the Senate; and it wa
only when the Senate refused TO concur tha
| he rnddnnIr dircnvered the law Nas void AM