The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1868-05-18


day. Whether conviction will be
stronger at q future day remains TO be
seen.
WEST yIKGINIA's BETRAyER.
We desire To say to our Republican
exchanges In The other States that the
betrayal ofthe Republican cause which
was accomplished in the Senate OF the
United states last Saturday by the vote
OF a West Virginia Senator, Peter G.
Van Wrinkle, was also betrayal of the
trust reposed i'll him by the loyal peo-
ple Of this State, who ara covered
with ahamu and filed with indig-
nation aL his trcnChery. There Ia not
"A man from The an-llandle 10
the Big Sandy and from the Big
Sandy TO the Potomac, heartily loynlto
the Government, who WIS not misrep-
resented by the vote OF that Senator on
the %Ith Article.
To all his other offences Mr.. Van
Wrinkle has added the blacklist ingrati-
tude. 1t was the party upholdinE the
great Cause whichihe now stabs like an
assassin, that gave West Virginia leave
To place two men on the floor Of the
United Suites Senate; and The spokes-
man OF that pariy who plead for us
then and there was Benjamin f. Wade.
Now our loyal Representatives Mt
Washington arc overwhelmed with the
reproaehes OF the Republicans in both
Houses, whose confidence In West Vlr-
giniu loyalty is almost destroyed. But
for these men five years ago, West Vir-
ginIa would to-day be but an outlying
province of ruined old Virginia, gov
erned like her by the sword. Yet Van
wnIkle had scarcely warmed his seat in
the Senate before he began to show his
antipathy to their principles and his
hatred TO the men who alone have ever
bofriended us. But the browning act
of treachery and malignity was re-
served for this crisis, chosen by him
and his coadjutors with II belief that
the life of the organization they sought
TO destroy might no taken Mt single
blow.
Whatever men may say of FessondGn
or Grimes. or any one else, their con-
duct is Hs fair us the sun compared with
that of Van Wrinkle, who seems to have
been deRd TO every sentiment of honor
or gratitude or duty 10 his people and
his friends.
1t seems impossible that man with
the sense of honor which we have hith-
erto attributed to him could have done
what he has done. We confess, we
have been somewhat mistaken in the
man. When appealed TO by our Repre-
sentatives not to join our enemies in
declnring Johnson blameless, they
were reminded of his "oath," which
like ShyIock he had registered in heav-
en-. Let us see how this was. On the
2Ist OF February, 1865, when the obliGa-
ton ot his oath as Senator of the
United States WINS resting upon him,
lie voted for tho following declaration:
WHEREAS, The Senate have read and
considered the communication of the
President, stating That he had removed
lion. Il. NJ. Stanton. Secretary OF War,
aud had designated the Adjutant Gen
"rnl OF the army to act AS Secretary of
War al iIltcIim; therefore,
RcSotrcd by The Senate Of The UHited
States, That under the Constitution
and laws OF the United States, the
President hts no power 10 remove the
Secretary OF War and designate any
other officer TO perform the duties of
that oilice at iiiferiH.
ON the 10Th OF May, lsGS, when rest
ing under the obli gation OF his oath as
a member of the Court of Impeach-
meut, he voted against the XIth Arti.
Gle which nrraigued tho President
among other oGenses for doing what
Iheresolution of February 2lst declared
was Il violation of the Constitution and
laws, tho doing of which was proved
beyond controversy by documentary
evidence, and not denied Ivy tho Presi.
dent or his counsel. Ii is impossible,
for Mr.. Van Wrinkle to reconcile tiles,
votes, and his constituents want Il
know which oath it was that bound Ills
conscience TO declare: Andrew johnson
Euiltless.
Further than This. Mr.. Van Wrinkle
has openly declared his purpose to vot,
against all the other articles before TIL
senate, two of which were drawn Will
special reference TO the resolution
above quoted.
Further than this, we have unques
tionable authority for stating that MI
Van Wrinkle, on Tuesday the 18th Inst
lust before the vote was to be take
on the Impeachment articles, stated t
one of our Representatives that h
should vote for the SIth Article bu
against all the rest. On Friday, tn
18th, the day before the vote was taken
he told his colleague, Mr.. Wiley, tina
he had had an interview with the Chic
Justice, and that the opinions whicl
the Chief Justice expressed concerning
the XIth Article had changed his IMr
Van winlle's) views to such an extern
that he intended now to vote against 1t
(Mr. Wiley remarked TO the Repre-
sentative above referred to that thu
opinions of Mr.. Chase, as reiterated by
Mr.. Van Wrinkle, seemed to him lik'
an additional argument why that arti
Gle should be adopted.)
And still further, the newspapers in
form us that the night before the vote
was taken, Mr.. Trumbull was at Mr.
80. p 1870