The New York herald., 1868-03-31

the law and the action Of the senats in other words
he intended to make, and did make, executive re-
sstance TO the law duly enacted. The consequences
OF such resistance he has told as In his messages.
Where an act has been passed according To the
forms OF the constitution by the supreme legislative
authority and regularly enrolled among the public
statutes Of the country executive resistance to ii,
especially IN tunes of high party excitement,
would be likely to produce violent collision
between the respective adherents OF the two
civil war, and civil must be resorted to only
the last remedy for the worst evils IL Is true that
compelled to stand on Its rights and maintain them
regardless o. all consequences He admits, in sub
stance, that he told Emory that the wholly un
as.Comnander IN Chief Was IL not such law as he
had declared he would resistY Do you not believe
that " General Emory had yielded In the least to
his suggestions the President would have offered
him promotion to bind him to his purposes as he
ia sherman and Thomass Pray remember that
this : not the case OF one gentleman conversing
with smother on nooted questions OF law but II is the
pfesidcat che Commander-in-Chef "the fountain OF
eyc ia military @ 0"'os oilcer, M teaching s that Z oi M
Ger o dlscbey law which he himself
=, IA delsrpiaed h aos Is Va void Win M the power
Is /. not a high misdemeanor for the President TO
assume to instruct the officers OF the army that the
laws of Congress are not TO be obeyed?
Article ten alleges that, intending TO set aside the
rightful authority and Powers OF Congress. and to
bring into disgrace and contempt the Congress Of the
United States and to destroy confidence in and to
excite 0dium against Congress and its laws, he,
Andrew johnson, President OF the United States
made divers speeches set out therein, whereby he
brought the ONCE OF President into contempt ridcule
and disgrace. To sustain these charges there will be
put in evidence the shorthand notes OF reporters in
each instance, who took these speeches examined
the sworn copies thereof, and one instance where
the speech was examined and corrected by the
private secretary OF the President himself To the
charges Of this article the respondent answers that
convention OF delegates. OF whom he does not say,
mentioned, and appointed q committee to wait
upon the respondent as President OF the United
States; that they were received and by their
chairman, the Hon. Reverdy Johnson, then and now
q Senator OF the United States, addressed the re-
spondent In speech, copy OF which the respond
ent believes from substantially correct report, is
made a part Of the answer; that the respondent
made reply to the address OF the committee.
While, however, he gives us in his answer copy OF
the speech male to him by Mr.. Reverdy Johnson,
taken from newspaper, he wholly omits to
give US an authorized version OF his own speech,
as much, and thus saved us some testimony. nmls
He does not admit that the extracts from his speech
in the article are correct does he deny that they
are so. In regard to the speech at Cleveland, he
agau does not admit that the extracts correctly or
justly present his speech; but, again, he does not
deny that 1t does so so far rs the Is set out As
to the speech at st Louis he does not deny that he
made it-says only that ne does not admit 1t, and
REQUIRES N eacn n case @ nas the whole speech shall be
Senate his wishes shall De gratifed to their
fullest fruition. The Senate shall see the perform
ance, 80 far as is in our power to photograph the
scene by evidence all those occasions, and shall
hear every material word that he said. His Defence
duty bound to express opinions OF and concerning
the public character, conduct views, purposes, mo-
tives and tendencies Of all men engaged In the public
service as well In Congress as otherwise and that for
anything he may have said on either of tlese
occasions he is justified under the constitutional
right OF freedom of opinion and freedom OF speech
and is not subject to question, inqus lion impeac.
ment or inculpatiOn in any manner or form whatso-
ever;n he denies, however, that by reason Of any
matter in said article Its specifications alleged he
has said or done anything indecent or unbecoming in
the Chief Magistrate Of the United States or tending
to bring his high ONCE into contempt, ridcule or
disgrace. The issue. then, finally, is this:-That
those utterances OF his, In the manner and form in
which they are alleged to have been made and under
the circumstances. and at the time they were made,
are decent and becoming the President Of the United
States and do not tend to bring the Office into
ridicule and disgrace. We accept the issues. They
are two First that he has the right to say what he
did Of Congress In the exercise OF freedom Of speech;
and second, that what he did say in those speeches
were highly gentlemanlike and proper perform
ance In citizen, and still more becoming in Presi
dent OF the Unit States Ltt us first consider the
cOntumely upon Congress; to denOunce it US "b0dy
hanging on the verge OF the government;n pretend
20 Se In to Se %as for not
Union, when its every step and act tended to per-
pctuate disnnonn ..and make q disruption OF the
States nevitabe;' "a Congress In minority assum-
ing TO exercise power which, II allowed to be
summated, would result in despotlsm and monarchy
prevent the union Of the SatcsY' IA Congress fac
tious and domineering;" "a radical Congress, which
upon whose skirts was every drop Of blood
that was shed In the New Orleans riots.n
You viii ind these denunclations had deeper mean
ing than mere expressions OF opinion Il may be
taken as an axiom I'm the affairs Of nations that no
usurper has ever seized upon the legislature OF his
country until he has famlarzed the people with the
possibility Of so doing by ytupcrating and decryng
IT. Denunciatory attacks upon the legislature have
always preceded slanderous abuse Of the individuals
composing It have always accompanied seizure
by despot OF the legislative power OF the
country. Two memorable examples in mod
ern history will spring to the recollection OF
every man. Before Cromwell drove out by
the bayonet the Parliament. OF England he and his
partisans had denounced It. derided IT, decred it and
defamed 1t, and thus brought II into ridcule and
contempt He viliiied II with the same name which,
It is significant fact, the parsans of Johnson by
concerted cry applied to the Congress Of the United
States when he commenced his memorable Pilgrim
age and crusade against 1t. II Is still sign
and by Johnson for setting aside the au-
thority OF Parliament and Congress respect
tSey wens eseted By s part Of the people
When Cromwell, by his soldiers, finally entered the
hall OF Parliament to disperse its members, he at-
tempted to cover the enormty of his usarpation by
denOuncing this man personally az llbertine, that
as drunkard another as the betrayer OF the liberties
OF the people, Johnson started out precisely the
same course; but forgetting the parallel tco eary, ne
proclaims this patriot an assassin that statesman
an traitor, threatens to hang that man, whom
the people delight to honor and breathes out
'thrcatenlng and slaughter" against this man whose
services In the cause OF human freedom has made
his name household word wherever language
Is spoken. There s, however, an appreciable differ
ence between Cromwell and Johnson aud
there Is Ike difference In the results accomplished
by each. When Bonapartc eXtinguished the Legsla-
ture OF France he waited uni through his press and
his pariisans and by nis own denuuciations, lie
brought its authority into disgrace and contenpt
and when finally lie drove the council OF the
nation from their chamber like Cromwell, he justi-
fed himself by personal abuse Of the individuals
themselves as they passed by him. That the attempt
Of Andrew Johnson 10 overthrow Congress has failed
is because OF the want OF ability and power, not Of
magnIty and will. We are too apt TO overlook the
danger which may come from words. We are in
dnced to say that this Is only talk, wait tl some act
is done, and then IL will be time TO move
But words may be- and sometimes are, things
living, burning things that set world on fire.
As a most notable instance Of the power OF words
look at the inception of The rebellion through which
We have just passed. For quarter OF century the
nation took no notice of the talk OF dislniOn and
secession which was heard In Congress ana on the
"stump,i until in the south generation was taught
them by word, and the word suddenly burst forth
into terrible, awful war; Does any one doubt that
n Jackson had hanged Calhoun In 1s2 for talking
Dullifcation and secession, which was ctnbrlO
treason, the cannon Of South Carolina against
Fort sumter wOnld ever have been heard