New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-03-13
PROC EEDINGs OF THE SENATE
WHEN SITTING As A COZ "a OF
IMPEACHMENT.
WEDNESDAY, March 2, 1870.
Argument Of M. s. MINES, of Counsel FOR
the Defens ant.

WEDNESDAY, March 2, 1870.
Argument Of Mr.. S. MINES, of Counsel for
the Defendant.
Mr.. Chief Justice and Senators /: I
must, in the name of my client, thank
this tribunal, or whatever it may be, or
whatever may be its nature, for the kind
ness and courtesy which have been ex-
tended throughout this trial to the accused
and to those who represent him. We
have nothing to complain Of, and all we
ask in bringing this trial to final deter
mination is a calm investigation into
the facts, combined with the law, for the
purpose of arriving at a correct conclu-
sion. If, after having given us that fair
impartial consideration, you should come
to the conclusion that The Auditor of Pub
lie Accounts has been guilty of crimes and
misdemeanors, which will justify you upon
your oaths in Furnishing him, not only by
removal from Office, but by
afiixing to him the brand,
under the constitution of this State, that
he shall not in future be ever allowed to
hold an office'of trust or profit. If, say,
after this investigation you shall come to
that conclusion, of course we have nothing
to do except to bow in humble submission
to your judgment being conscious that
we have done our duty for his defense.
II, on the other hand, as we hope and ex-
pect. you will come to the opposite con-
clusion, we will not only feel that our
duty has been done, but we will realize for
the first time in this infant government, on
public prosecution like this, that justice
has been vindicate d, Notwithstanding the
efforts of influence and of political feeling
to produce a conviction. l say "infant
government" and call your attention to
the term, for it is not used without
reflection.
The government to-day is infant
In its nature, because it IS COM
posed of an element totally differ
ent from that which composed it be-
fore the war. It is the new government,
under the new regime, with new princi-
pies, a new system of civilization, and an
organization totally different from that
which existed prior to the war, and which
we recognize and which is regarded by
some as forward step in the progress of
civilization. Therefore, charge you who
are the representatives of the new civill-
cation, called upon the first time to try an
officer elected under this new organiza-
toni charge you before you convict him,
give him justice and a fair hearing, and
not condemn the very system you have
built up under the influence of the war, by
showing it's inefficiency in the selection of
proper agents for the administration OF
your government. Therefore the condem-
nation of Mr.. Wickliffe is the condemna-
ton of yourselves-'he manifestation OF
your incapacity to select the agents tor the
administration Of your government. Bear
that in mind in the consideration of this
important trial. 1t is trial of the old
against the new civilization. 1t is the
trial of the old state of things against the
new state of things, and, to certain eX-
tent though I admit not necessarily,
Judgment against him bears along with it
the confession that, to O certain extent,
your first experiment as to your capability
for selecting your own agents has proved
defective. do not stand here to defend
this Legislature, which mas been go much
accused by the managers who are repre-
senting ii, because | am not retained for
that purpose. do not stand here to con-
denim the legislation which the learned
manager has termed an enormity-the
printing bill. Nor do stand here to de-
fend the legislation with regard to the
pension law The only object I have in
aluding to that subject is--1on't condemn
my client for your bad legislation. If you
pass bad laws, don't say your agent
ia bad who executes them; don't make
him the scape-goat upon which you will
hold him up to the public as convict and
q criminal because he has executed that
which you have ordered him to do. This
seems to be sort of Methodist class meet
ing where the managers are coming before
you to make confession of their sins to
one another laughter, and asking you
because OF their sins for which they pray
God to forgive them, that therefore you
must condemn the party who is arraigned
before you for trial. 1t is not necessary
for me to defend the legislation, for | had
nothing to do with it, and because you
have now passed out of your position of
legislator and become a judge, and you
are to judge my client not by your own
delinquencies in the passage Of laws, but
by his administration of them, be they bad
or good. Now, therefore, it seems to be
great difficulty to ascertain what aud who
you are. What are you is the question
we have been discussing here two weeks.
We had supposed that this was tribunal
instituted by the constitution for specific
purpose, judicial in its nature, and to carry
into effect part and parcel of the Judicial
power reserved by the constitution from
the ordinary tribunals of the land to be
vested here, as it is in every other State,
in the Senate in part and in part in the
House of Representatives.
You have noticed the great difficulty
that counsel on both sides have had in
regard to this subject. Account, is it
court of chivalry, where questions OF honor
are to be determined? If a court of law,
is it criminal or civil court? All these
questions had to be examined to enable
Us to arrive at the proper principle appli-
cable 10 the determination of the case.
For if you are not court Of law, if you
are not to be governed by legal principles
if you are merely political machine,
operated on by political motives, regardless
of all rules of evidence regardless of the
law of the land, then we stand here before
a political caucus, whose judgment is to
be rendered. not according tol any we'll
known and settled principle, but according
to your partialities or your prejudices,
your interests or your feelings, and dis
cussion becomes unnecessary, because |
can not penetrate the breast of each individ-
ual, aud argue with him that this prejudice
or that feeling is right or wrong.
Now, I understand the managers to ad-
NIT this to be a court, and they could not
well deny-because, as have stated in
previous argument, the difference between
the constitution of this State and the con-
stitution of the United States upon this
subject is, that the constitution of this
t4S~ IL, Nyvy1 MI