Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1873-02-25
Report Of the Judiciary Commit
tee Of the House on the I'm
peachment Of COlfax,
Minority Report by Mr.. Potter,
and Dissenting Report by
Mr.. Goodrich.
Sparring Match Between Butler
and Banks-The Question
Postponed Until
Wednesday.


clerk proceeded TO read the report IN
full. The only two impeschable officers
involved in the matter, the report says,
are the PRECEDENT of the United
States and James Brooks, in the capael-
" of Government Director of the Union
Pacific Railroad Company. The latter
having long since ceased to be such an
officer. the case against him have been
considered no further. The report then
cites facts and circumstances in the case
Of Colfax Assuming the fact as
alleged to be all proved, several
very important questions Of law
presented themselves TO the committee.
Among them was whether an officer can
be impeached except for acts done or
alleged TO be done while in Office. The
committee had not been able TO find any
instance of impeachment where the
accusation was not in relation TO the
act done or alleged to be done while the
officer was in office. It had always
been considered material that articles
should allege in substance that, being
such an officer, and while in exercise Of
the duties of office, accused committed
the sets alleged in the culpation. II
appeared evident 10 the committee
that the proceedings Of impeachment
were intended by Causter TO be wholly
remedial and not preventive, just 80
far as the penalty OF deprivation OF Of
fee, etc, is remedial. Proceedings OF
Impeachment should only be applied to
high crimes and misdemeanors while in
office, and which affect the officer in the
discharge of his duty as such, whatever
might be the effect Of these acts on the
officer as 8 man. Proceedings Of inn
peachment touched the Office only,
and qualifications for Office, and
not the man himself The report crid-
cises the view eunciated by the Poland
Corlmittee in drawing an analogy be
tween proceedings Of impeachment and
those Of expulsion, and asserts that no
authority can be found for sHch doc
trine. An expelled member may be re-
elected, but an impeached officer can
never be restored to Office. But even the
power Of expulsion for an act committed
before the election of q member was not
within the constitutional power Of the
House; less still could an officer be inn
peached for something done by him be-
fore he was in office. The English case
of John Wilkes, cited by the Credit No
bilier committee as authority for the
proposition that member could be eX-
pelled for acts done before he
was a member, could not properly
be cited for that purpose, for if anything
was settled in the Wilkes case il was
that such an act of compulsiOn was con-
trary to the liberties Of the House of
Commons of England, and the offensive
record was afterward eXpunged from
the journal of the House Of Commons, |
besides several acts for which he was
expelled that were done after the cleo |
ton, during that same session Of Parlis- |
ment. The case of o B. Mstteson, of
New York, cited by the Credit Mobilier |
in the same connection, furnished no
precedent whatever, because the resOlu- |
5iOn of expulsion for Rcts done by
him in the preceding. Congress
had been laid on the table.
The committee is Of opinion, therefore,
that the right Of representation Is the
right Of the constituency, but is not the
right Of the Representatives, and 50 long
a. he did nothing disorderly, or which
rendered him unfit to be in the House,
the House had no right or legal cOnsti-
tutiOnal jurisdiction, or power, TO exDel.
The committee argues, therefore, that
both the impeaching power and power
OF expulsion are remedial only, and not
primitive, and comes to the conclusion
that, so far as receiving and holding an
interest in Credit Mobilier stock is con-
cerned, there is nothing in the testimO-
nv submitted which would warrant the
Impeachment of the Vice-President. |
The committee therefore asks to be dis
charged from further consideration on
the subject.
The report is signed by all the men,
bers Of the committee except Aessrs. |
Potter, Wilson fof Indiana) and Good |
rich, all Of whom, however, concur in
the recommendation that the committee
be discharged.
Mr.. Potter presented & minority re-
mort, which was also read. He does not
admit the correctness Of the committees
finding, that a man cannot be inn
peached OF expelled for acts done before
he was in Office. he regards the q5es-
ton as unsettled and doubtful; bat con-
cludes that, under existing circum-
stances, where Impeachment could
not be followed by trial, the
decision Of the House in support Of the
power to impeach or eXpel, would only
be the determination of an abstract
question. He did not feel Rs justified |
in holding that Congress had the power |
Of impeachment SO as TO make him feel
willing TO recommend impeachment st
a time when Impeachment could not be
tried. He thought the matter could
now only be left to public opinion.
Mr.. Goodrich submitted his views
why he dissented from the report of the /
majority. He denied the doctrine that
an officer can not be impeached or |
expelled for acts done before he was IN
Office He believes that precedens
for his position could be found;
but even II they couldn't be, he was
prepared to make one, and plant 1t |
broad and deep in the history Of the !
country, for is purity and safety in the
future.
Tie reading of reports occupied one
hour aud a half, and was listened to with
great attention by the House.
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts,, then
moved that the resolution referring the
matter to a committee be laid on the
table.
Mr.. Poland desired to move its re-
committal 10 the Judiciary Committee.
Mn Cox suggested that, If recon-
mit,ed, all report referring TO the
expulsion Of members should be struck
out as irrelevant.
MIR. Banks-That is the proper mo-
tion.
Mr.. Butler replied 10 Mr.. Cox in de-
fense Of the report, claiming that that |
part of il was not Irrelevant, but was re-
ferred to in the report Of the Poland |
Commissioners.
Mr.. Banks said il was q most unwor-
thy act to undertake to commit the |
House to the atrOcious doctrines that |
the report brought before the House un-
expectedly, and without an opportunity |
Being given to discuss il. Applause ON |
the Democratic sidel
Mr.. Butler said: To that / answer
ar. Banks-I object to debate unless |
you Withdraw your motion to lay
Il on the table. Give US the right
10 discuss the motion to re-commit
and Withdraw your motion to lay on
the table.
Mr. Butler-Perhaps ! may.
Mr.. Banks-f the gentleman VIII
Withdraw his motion 70 lay on the table |
/ am sure the HOuse viii hear him al
any length he may desire.
Mr.. BUtler-I am only looking ct the 4
state of public business. should like
10 discuss this report, and the report Of
the Credit Mobilier Committee. That /
committee has nothing to complain OF; |
it has had the first word. should like TO /
discuss it for week, and am prepared TO /
discuss il as long as grass grows and |
water runs laughterli but the state Of |
plblic business will not permit it. The /
J Idiciary Committee has come to the
conclusion, on certain resolutions re-
ferred 10 It, that under the circumstances 4
It Ia not eXpsdient 20 recommend tm-
4aaaabmanf and II hna sdVam n tha L