New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-03-17

pose an OiuCeE AZ tilco AoA SoN
becoming an officer and gentlemen. nen
he has committed robbery, IS not that on1cea
amenable to the law OF the State'
Can not he be arraigned before any
criminal court where the onease was
committed and to be tried, ana II lound
Guilty, punished? Will any one dare TO say,
BECAUSE an officer has been tried once ana
either acquitted or convicted before
criminal court that he is not still amenaois
to a court martial? How otherwise could
he be dismissed the service. Now, that,
saw is precisely parallel ease win Inc
case of an officer before Court OF IN
neachment. It Is like o court nartlal; IL
is a separate and distinct trial from trlai
before the courts established under tne
law of the State. We examine the trlais
of impeachment in the past, and bow are
the articles drawn? refer to the trial OF
Judge Peck, and l call the attention OF
the Senators to the language used IN the
articles of impeachment then. There Is
not single allegation that he had done
ANYTHING in violation of the law, or in
violation Of the constitution, or that he
had committed any crime. There IS no
allegation that he committed any high
crimes or misdemeanors, and it was ad-
Judged by she Senate Of the United States
that these articles were sufficient, be-
cause they presented the facts. and 1t
ia a right and the duty Of the Senate TO
examine into the facts, and it l.be found
tbat tho officer has trampled on the law
Tand violated the common justice, or done
ANYTHING wrong which renders him unht
and unworthy to hold the Office, you pass
mon it, and you have the only right and
! the onlv power known to the law OF the
| land TO remove such an officer. And you
Tell me that il George Nj. Wicklirfe should
have become such notorious drunkard
| as to render him incompetent to perform
the duties of this or any other Office, that
Won have not the power to remove MIN
| from Office. Pray tell me if you have not
the power, who has T? And ii there is no
power in the land delegated by any
specific law, are you to say that drunk
ard aud man totally inefficient and IN,
competent is to remain IN an once, ana
the whole interests of the State to be
ieopardNed because there is no express
law to remove him? Such a thing as thai
is nreposterous and in conflict with the
principles of our government. but,
thank God, we have remedy, and tina
remedy rests, gentlemen, with yon. glveI
YOU by the constitution and the common
practice of parliamentary court-to VII
Courts of impeachment
You are here to-day representing Inc
whole people for this very purpose. Now
I think that have shown satisfacIorll.
that YOU have the right to try this cast
whether the articles have been dfawI
specifically and carefully, and with tn
precision necessary, in an indictment o
{ not, think that 1 have shown that unde
| the constitution of this State it Is only ne
cessary that we impeach the officer, an
it is your duty to inquire into the Whoi
| length and breadth of his conduct sine
he has been an officer. In you, and upo
: YOU. rests the removing power. Then,
f YOU are competent to try the case wlthou
e the charges being in the form OF an IN
. dic,ment. next, comes the question az t.
g whether any improbable oitense has bee
committed, But, first, one word more i
: This connection. Unfortunately du.
ing this argument, the counsel 1o
: the respondent made an attack upo
). one of the Senators, and said that one
/, YOUR number. Senators, ought to recus
< himself, if he could not be ruled out
:. challenged. Now, sir, if you will exam
: inc the history of the trial OF lmpeac
. men;s in this country and in Eogland, yo
). will find that Senator Lynch can not recu
IS himself if he would. He sits here as
q member of the Senate, representing
> portion of the people of the State, an
.e hiking the rules laid down and establsh'
!. III imueachment cases heretofore. lie h
Re no right 10 recuse himself, even II ne q
is sired. He sis here not in his lndlVldu
capacity, but representing portion OF l.
b. people OF the State. He sits here as
N sworn officer OF the State TO discharge
% duties ia behalf OF tie State. l Will CT
le gentlemen, aulho ity to verify what
v have asserted, i'll the case OF the tIlai
al Judge Pickering, Judge ct Inc Onlt
States Court in New Hampshire. L
be was case not for any indictable otfen
D. not for any otfense known to the GRIMM
ne law, either common or s'atu
IS but he was tried for what
er exclusively, simply and purely politi'
~ offense. MIR. Smith, OF New York 70
itt when the question was presented IN
st Senate of the United States, and asked
be be excused from voting for the reason Il
er when this officer was impeached IN
he House OF Representatives,, be, Mr. SIM
,r- was member Of the House and voted
;or the impeachment, and afterward WI
to the trial came up he (Smith) had been
i'm turned by the people to the Senate.
We Smith, OF Maryland, occupied the sa
in position be was q member OF the ito
N? at the time the articles Of impeachm
of were adopted, and afterwards was cleo
an was elected to the Senate, and he said t
;es he would not be Influenced from dong
sci duty, and that he felt no delicacy In voll
nat and that the vote he gave III the OF
House would not influence his vote IN
he Senate, and his constituents had ri
IN. to his vote, and he would not consent
> q 6eprive them Of it. The vote being tai
is on the question 10 the Senate, 1t was
he termined that these gentlemen snousd
ed must vote, by q vote of 19-to Z. liner
re- an instance presented where Send
in rose and asked to be recused because
OF had prejudged the case, as expressed
mn the record, and the Senate refused to al
nd it, claiming that he represented not b
The self. but his constituents. There are
rts erai precedents OF the same character.
ia read from the opening argument of e
,ci- eral Butler in the case OF the lmpeacGnl
on of the President
nj Page ninety-two aud ninety-three
TO the trial OF Samuel Chase before
the Senate OF the UDied States, no challe
,ot was attempted. although the case was
ep- cided by an almost strict party vote
the high party times. ard doubtless man.
in the Senators had formed and EXPIRE
is opinions upon his conduct.
MS s.That arbitrary judge, but lea,
lin lawyer. knew too much to attempt
, 10 snch futile movement as challenge