The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1868-04-17

From time to time the telegramnic htera-
ture distributed from Washington City dis
penses q morsel of consolation to the anti
radical sentiment of the country by announc-
ing that the impeachers, by reason of some
unexpected turn in the evidence or in the
legal aspect of the case, appear to be losing
confidence and energy. For example, we are
told that ''the impeachers show palpable
signs of discouragement," the Presidents
counsel having "had it pretty much their
own way; that San immense mass of doc
umentary evidence was admitted" for the
defense, Buffers continued objections having
been demolished one by one by the persist
ence of his antagonists reinforced by the
ruling of the court and that Stevens
informed the House "that the Senate was
determined not to hear the impeachers fully"
and thereupon, and therefore, announced his
purpose to move for night sessions, in order
that they might relieve themselves, in a
timely .tIar de bouche, of the perilous stuff
with which they are fearfully
distended. 1t would seem, indeed, to be the
conviction of the considerable and tender
hearted author of this motion that these tur-
gid patriots must either speak or burst; and,
whichever event might be the more probable,
there would be cheering prospect that they
would soon be shriveled to condition of coll
lapse which would cause the country, if not
them, to feel easier. A sanguine fancy might
draw from the same class of dispatches host
of other solacing differences. 1t could see
discouragement competing with deaths pale
banner in giving Internal ghastliness to the
cadaverous face Of Stevens, and could see
silent dependency corroding the brass of
Buffers shameless brow. But let us not in
dulge too far in this imaginative and exhllar-
ating manner of constituting Washington tele-
grams that happen to look the least encour-
aging to the antradical interests. Like all lead
ing spirits in progressing revolution, the i'm
peachers are spasmodic and irregularly strong,
rather than equally vigorous. The fever
which consumes them is, like all other fevers,
more or less intermittent They have their
spells of WEAKNESS and fabbiness, as we'll as
of intensity and power. What progress they
make is by series of paroxysms, during
the intervals of which all appearances of
weakness or of utter encouragement are de-
ceptive. Marat and Robespiere had their
fits of cowardly misgiying as well as of diaboli-
cal audacity. And they were never more ter
rible than when they magniied the strength
of their enemies and whined about the inau-
spicious aspect of their cause. Their inactiv-
ity at such moments was only that of tiger
for another leap and bloodier
feast.
Nor should we give unreseryed credence to
occasional signs of moderation and fairness
on the part of the Senate sitting as a court of
We should remember that
the large majority of the senators were poll
ticians and partisans before they were called |
to sit as temporary judges; and that. as poll !
ticians and partisans, they were bitterly hos
tile to the public functionary who is arraigned
before them for trial. Is there any
reason to count upon their displaying more
impartiahty in this case than the English
Peers or Commons have displayed in like
cases? History leaves no question that the
Commons took off King Charles's head, not
because they believed him guilty of capital
crime, but because they wanted his Office,
and his life was in the way of that object
And what does Macaulay say of the Peers
Speaking of the impeachment of Warren
Hastings, he says; Whatever confidence
may be placed in the decision of the Peers on
an appeal arising out of an ordinary litigation,
it is certain that no man has the least conf
dence in their impartiality, when great
public functionary, charged with great State
crime, is brought to the bar. They are all
politicians. There is hardly one among them
whose vote on an impeachment may not be
predicted before witness has
been examined" /
If, as politicians and partisans, two-thirds
Of the senators deem it inexpedient to acquit
the President, nothing in the evidence or the
law of the case can save him from deposition
Democrats vote early and vote against the
Black Crook Constitution.