Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1868-04-15

never called on Mr.. Stanton for a written
opinion or that he had given an opinion which
he had disobeyed.
Mr.. Conkling inquired if the council pro-
posed to prove that Gen. Sherman had ad-
vised the President to procure charge in
any particular way.
witness had only expressed an opinion as to
the desirability of some change.
Mr.. Evarts said it not merely ques
ton of having committed violation of law,
which was punishable in another court by so
small a penalty as six cents fine, few
days imprisonment; but it was a question of
the commission of Improbable offense pun
ishable by deposition from the highest office,
in which the question of all evidence relating
ance.
Mr.. Bingham held that the rules of the evil
dence were the same for beggar as for a
President.
Mr.. Evarts interrupted, to say he had IN
his remarks supposed the President to be on
trial for petty offence and repealed the in
situations that he would mete out Justice
according to rank.
Mr.. Bingham continued in an earnest ap-
peal against the admission of testimony, and
at the conclusion of his remarks the yeas and
and so it was not admitted.
Mr.. johnson offered the question whether
before the removal, Gen. Sherman had adj
vsed the President that he would be removed
and replaced.
The Chief Justice said the Court must de-
eide whether the question should be put, and
the Senate decide in the negative-lS to 81
Mr.. Stanbery then said he had no more
questions to ask Gen. Sherman.
The Managers declined to cross-examine,
and the court took a recess at 2:l0
After the recess, r j. Meigs, the Clerk of
the District Supreme Court in the District OF
Columbia was called as witness. He was
examined in regard to the warrant issued on
an ftidavit made by Secretary Stanton, and
on which Gen. Thomas was arrested for
viola ton of the tenure-of- Office law His
test imony objected to by the Managers,
but was admitted by the Senate. The object
of the examination to show that the
President had no intention of using force to
remove Stanton, but was only endeavorlng to
get the question before the Court. Mr.
Meigs testimony was wholly In relation to
the proceedings in the District Court, and
wa documentary.
Gen. Sherman was again put upon the
stand and after great deal of skirmishing
between the counsel and the managers, the
Senate permitted him to testify to his in
L
as follows
Witness | intend to be very precise in
nv statement of the conversation, but 1t APP
peared TO me necessary to state what began
to state, that the President told me that the
relations between himself and Mr.. Stanton,
and between Mr.. Stanton and other members
of the Cabinet were such that he could not
execute the Office which he filled as the Presi
dent of the United States without making
\ 10 nT
tary of War, and that he had right under
the law, and that his purpose was to have
the office administered in the interests of the
army and of the country and he offered me
the Office in that view. He did not state to
me that his purpose to bring it into the
courts directly, but for the purpose of hav
ing the Office administered properly in the
interests of the country and of the whole
country (Sensation in Court.) q | asked
him why the lawyers could not make a case.
| did not wish TO be brought, as officer of
the army, into the controversy.
Senator Conkling-Please repeat that last
answer, General.
Witness-I asked him why the Congress
could not make a case and not bring me. an
officer, into the controversy His answea
was that it found impossible, for that
such case could not he made up, but said he,
if we could bring the case into the courts it
would not stand for an hour.
The second interview Ton the afternoon of
the Both, not 3lst the question puts it,
was the point which have testified to, end
in speaking referring tr the constitution
atty of thu bill known hs the Tenure OfOf-
fee Act" was the constitutionality of that
bill which he seemed DESTROYS of having de-
cided when he said if it could be brought be
fore the Supreme Court properly it would
not stand half an hour. He also spoke of
force
inst said that II Nj. E.o1ato., would sim
ply retire, although it was against my desire.
against my personal wish and my official
wishes, | might be willing to undertake TO
administer the office dd interim Then he sup
posed the point yielded and | made this
point Suppose Mr.. Stanton will not yield
lie answered Oh he will make no opposi-
ton. You present the order and he will re
tire.
| expressed my doubt and he remarked
Il know him better than you do. He is cow
ardly.'' daughter in Court.) | then begged
to be excused from answer. gave the
subject more reflection. and gave him my IL
nal answer in writing. | think that letter,
if you insist on knowing my views, should
come in evidence and not parole testimony
taken of it. But my reasons for declining
the Office were mostly personal in their nature.
/ Senator Henderson submitted in writing
the following question . Did the President
on either of the occasions alluded to express
To YOU conviction. resolution or determi-
nation to remove Mr.. Stanton from his Office -
Witness - If by removal is meant remov-
al by force. he never conveyed to my mind
such an impression. but he did most unmis-
takably say that he could have no more inter
views with him in the relation of President
and Secretary of War At AS F. the
+ Court adjourned