The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-04-15

Tne FaAiure OIL lmpeachment-Th0d stevens
Confession and the Vote on sherman's
Testimony.
Impeachment is in trouble. Its originators
feel that they have no case, as the only boldly
honest one Of the NUMBER Old Stevens, prac-
tically admits in appealing to the Senate to
an exposition of his personal sentiments and
motives, aside from the legal points of the
case. He ays:-'T confess that feel in that
awful condition that I owe it to myself and the
country to give the reasons why insisted, with
what is called obstinacy, on having that article
introduced" These words were uttered by
Stevens before the Senate on Monday.
The article he refers to forms no part
of the charges made against the Presi-
dent on the trial, and to hear his explana-
ton would therefore be to travel far beyond
the proper business of the court yet he appeals
to be heard, to have the opportunity to lay
before the country the reasons that moved him
in his violence. Here is the fact, then, that
one of the LEARNED Managers" on the part of
the House actually asks that the impeachment
case may stand still-be pushed aside, in fact
while he stands up before the country and
explains his connection with it-while he
unbosoms himself and tells with energetic
honesty how he came to hold the President
guilty in his own mind of acts that he now
finds it impossible to prove. He strikes his
colors he sees that the persons who are likely
to be found guilty on this trial are those who
moved it, and anticipating such result he
wishes, for one, to have the opportunity to show
that he acted from honest, however erroneous
convictions.
That other impeachers feel themselves in an
equally lawful condition." though they do not
so honestly declare it, is plain. It is seen In
| the course Of the Senate on General Sherman 5
testimony. Regarding strictly the rules of evil
dence, II can be seen that this testimony might
have been justly ruled out. There is in oil
the rules of evidence general spirit of ten
derness toward the accused, and in this spirit
the rules exclude all testimony not strictly
touching the particular points Of the accusa-
tion. Thus, If the prosecution, charging that
the President had certain motives In appoint
ing General Thomas, had then proceeded TO
show by his conversations with General Sher-
man that bis purposes were bloody and viclent
when he was disposed to appoint this gentle
man. the defence could rightly object that his
motives in the case of Sherman we're not pro-
per evidence TO show his motives in appointing
Thomas SO simple fairness would point ont
that the same evidence would be equally
incompetent in his favor. But there were all
reasons why the Senate should not strictly
apply these rules; and the strongest of these
reasons Is the claim Of the prosecution itself
and the apparent admission of the Senate that
the body trying this case is not simple court
of LAWS not bound by the ordinary rules of
ordinary tribunals of justce-but stands higher
and on broader grounds as a constitutional
inquest into the conduct Of the national Execu-
tive. Not admitting this to be the true char
acter Of the court, still II is notorious that the
prosecution and the Senators who so obviously
J sympathize with the prosecution claim this :;
and making the claim, that they should act upon
Its obligations. Therefore they should try the