National Republican., 1876-03-03
1HE 1NPEAcHhENT OF W. ". BELKNAp.

The preliminary proceedings Tor the I'M
peachment of W. w. Belknap, late Secre-
tary of War, which transpirec in the House
of Representatives yesterday afternoon,
very naturally provoked, in the more
strictly legal and political gatherings where
the subject was discussed, the expression Of
various opinions The excitement caused
by General Belknap's misfortune, and the
interest felt in final results as personally
applicable to himself, warrants an examlna-
ton of the law Of impeachment. Asevery
one knows, the power Of impeachment is
vested exclusively in the House of Repre-
sentatives. In such cases it calls itself I" the
grand inquest Of the nation. Its articles
of impeachment assume the vitality of an
indictment upon which the Senate as a
court, having for its Ipresiding officer the
Chief Justice of the United States, hears
the testimony and renders the verdict. Ga
the part of the House the trial is isconducted
by managers" selected from its own
membership. The accused is represented
by counsel, and the court is governed by
the rules of common law and the ordinary
practice of courts, but possibly with more
reference 10 parliamentary usage than in
an ordinary trial. At the close of the
trial the Senate-each Senator indiVidu-
ally-is called upon to declare whether the
accused is guilty or not guilty of a high
crime and misdemeanor as charged in the
first article of impeachment. Concerning
each article the same question follows, and
in order TO convict two thirds of the SEN
ate must say yes to at least one of the
articles. Herein between such a trial and
an ordinary one there is great difference.
In order 10 convict in court of law
the jury must be agreed. If the
court of Impeachment convicts the
Senate imposes the punishment.
In an ordinary court the judge
declares the sentence. For pan
ishment the Constitution provides,
in the first place, that the guilty party
'tshall he removed from Office simply; and
secondly, that there may be added "dis-
qualification to hold any Office of honor,
trust, or profit under the United States.
1t follows from this that the guilty party
must be removed from Office, and that he
may be disqualified from holding an Office,
but we think it will be hard to find either
in English or American annals Of jurispru-
dence case where the first penalty was
not imposed before the imposition of the
second. The latter naturally follows the
first, but never precedes it; and it Isl well
settled idea that the fathers only looked upon
Impeachment as remedy for keeping bad
men out of Office. There is another pro-
vision in the Constitution, however, which
leaves a guilty political offender 10 the
liability of Indictment trial, and punish
ment according to law. Right here, as
most pertinent to this discussion, the
fact of resignation is interposed. How
will this affect the imposition of the first
grade, of punishment, and, if the first can
not be imposed, can jump be made to the
second! We believe it to be well settled
construction of the Constitution that all
civil officers can be impeached who receive
appointments from the National Govern
ment, executive and judicial, of high or
low place. In this sweeping generaliza-
ton the Senate of the United States is not
included. No Senator ever has or ever
can be impeached: it is enough that it has
the power of expulsion and adding the
punishment of disqualification. Now, it
could not disqualify without first exer-
cising the power OF expulsion. How
can civil officer be disqualified without
first being removed from office! Then
again, it must be remembered, in such a
legal situation, that the Constitution pro-
vides for the trial by impeachment of civil
officers, but nowhere has it made provision
for the trial by impeachment of private
citizens, and the idea that a private citizen
can be so tried seems, at first thought
wholly absurd. Some go so far as to con-
tend that member of the House of Repre-
sentatives cannot be impeached, because,
like the Senate, the House has the power
of expulsion, ard because, as the argument
goes, members of Congress are not SO civil
officers of the United States, but officers
of the people of the States. Civil officers
are impeached according to the Constitu-
tion only for "treason, bribery or other
high crimes and misdemeanors. The
definition of "high crimes and mis-
demeanors must of necessity be found in
the common law. Congress in its wisdom
has never declared a definition; but it
stands to reason that a civil officer must
commit some high crime or some high
misdemesuor before ho can properly be