The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1868-04-10
BY TELEGRAPH
CONGRFSS.
WAsH1EeToN, April 9.

.
The Court of Impeachment opened
at u o'clock with the usual prociama
tion. All the Managers were presen
except Mr.. Stevens. The counsel 10
the President was also present. A
| 1915 the members of the House of Rep
/ representatives. entered, In larger mum
jbers than on recent occasions.
The Chief Justice Inquired whether
the Managers had any further evi
dence to introduce, and Mr.. Butler re
1 sponded In the affirmative. ll.I.
The reading of the Journal was dis
/ pensed with.
Mr.. Butler, on the part OF the Man
| ayers, then called W. II. Wood, who
| was sworn. Mr.. Butler stated that thC
design was TO prove by this witness the
Presidents hostility to Congress. The
witness was from Alabama. He testi
ned that he served In the Union army
and in December, 1866, he called on the
PRESIDENT, seeking Government em.
ployment. The President told him he
could do nothing for him, as his influ.
ence was on the side Of Congress, while
those he appointed must be with him.
roster Btodgett testified, that he was
appointed post master at Augusta, Ga.
IN 1865, was suspended in 1865 by the
Prestdent, and does not know as the
Senate has been notified of this actisn,
The letter OF Gen. Thomas accepting
the appointment of Secretary OF War
Gd i1Ite1'int, was then put In evidence,
and Alr. Butler gave notice that the Man
ayers would file certificates with pro-
per officers, to show that no reason for
the suspension of Mr.. BlOdgett had
ever been sent to the Senate.
MIR. Butler then announced that the
case on behalf of the House, was closed.
Mr.. Curtis then rose and commenced
the opening argument for the defence.
OIluF1fVOrr
and the oath-taken by the Senators in
the capacity of judges he, Curtis, said
the only appeal he should make would
be to the conscience and reason of every
Judge, basing his argument solely on
the questions of law and fact. He inti-
mated that he would subsequently,
combat the position taken by the
Managers, that this body was not es-
senttally- and in fact u court, but at
present he would consider the articles
separately in their order and substance.
The graVamen OF thecharges OF the first
article was that of the removal of Stan
ton and that 1t was intended to be in
violation of the tenure of office act, and
ofthe constitution. He argued to show
that the case of Stanton did not come
within tho scope and provisions of the
tenure-of-Othce act, maintaining that
the description of his Office and its
tenure differed materially in the seq
eAOA4 ALA PAOf464Os AlEs SUMMON WAS
appointed BY Mr.. Lincoln in
1862, to hold the Office dur
ing the term for which he was
elected, not to hold during a subsequent
term for which he might'be elected. 1t
could not be said that Mr.. Johnson was
serving out the term of Mr.. Lincoln,
The term for which a President is elect
ed is not absolutely four years, but is
limited by life and ability; his condi-
ttoual term expiring the Vice President
| succeeds to new term which consists
\ of the remainder of the term for which
the yice-President was elected. AS
| well might it be said that one sovereign
served out tie term of another whom
| hesucceeded. There was a purpose in
the difference of the phraseology o.
the section and Its proviso. The Con,
stttution authorizes the President tC
call upon the members of his Cabinet
for advice respecting matters concern
ing his own duties, as we'll as respect
ing matters connected with their prac
tice. Since the foundation of the Gov
/ ernment they were the voice and thu
hands of the President, in them he wal
to repose confidence, and for them h
was to be responsible. For this reason
they were placed by the tenure of of1ct
IN the same position as the Presiden
by whom they We're appointed. Thel
were to serve out his term of office, bu
as to the others holding over the cas-
was different. A
\ Mr.. Curtis proceeded to show tha
the feeling and intention of botI
Houses of Congress was in the framin
II and passage Of this bill, maintainin
that they were in accordance with tn
views he just expressed. He quote
from speech explaining the report {
the Committee of Conference made. b
Mr.. Schenck, also from speeches {
II MaaSPa ShnrTnon TVi1lioTr,o
in the Senate, in which they denie
that either the purpose or effect OF tn
bill was to keep Stanton in Office. 81
read these not as expressions of ind
, vidual opinion, but as an explanatio
of the report of the Committee of Cor
ference. Returning to the considers
ttonS OF the articles, he said the Ct
section forbids any removals contrar
to the provisions of the act; but as NJ
Stanton did not yield it was no remoT
al, and IL ithad been it would not haV
violated the act since he had just show
that Stanton did not come within it
provisions. The House of Represents
tives charged the President with inter
tional violation of this section, whic
unquestionably admits of differeu
, constructions, but fail to prove b
concurred in their Interpretation, an
then wilfullY acted in cOntraVention G
1t. The first duty of the President Is t
/ du E1CbH duO AGGA00 WAhI ID II
true meaning; this. duty he performe,
as the Constitution provided, by con
sultationi with his constitutional ad
visers, and they all put the same con
struction on the act in question as haI
been assigned to 1t by It's trainers. Tn
: case of Stanton Is, OF actually holding
Office under the law of 1859. Withou
J expressly giving the President poWe
to remove him, It implies 1t by direct
ing what shall be done by the Presi
dent after removal. Nothing in tn
Constitution forbids the exercise OF tbL
. power by the President independently
of the Senate. The decision of Con
that such power was grantee
to the President by the Con
stltution, and neither subsequen
legislation nor amendments Il
the Constitution denied 1t. The prac
tIce Of the Government also was II
break Of civil war the War Department
was in disloyal hands. President Bucha
nan told Floyd he must give itup, ant
Floyd had TOO much good sense o
something else to refuse. Without thi
immediate action there is no tellini
what disastrous consequences nigh
have ensned.
Having argued the right OF removal
} Mr.. Curtis proceeded TO argue its pro
lpriety and necessity in this case. n
recited the circumstances Rttendingth
first correspondence with Stanton ant
J his suspension, and went on to claIu
: that there might be instances in whicl
the highest patriotism and duty re
i qutred a citizen to raise q question o
; validity and the binding force of Law
Such would be the duty of q trustee Il
: the protection of the right Of third par
ties, who were unable to assert them
and assist them. Such was the dut-