Carson daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1873-1877, 1876-08-04
THE CASE OF BELKNAP.

KNAPP case decided lnat IL DeiHS Il
fact las they regarded it,, that the
Senate had no jurisdiction in the
said case--uo matter how strong
soever the proofs of respondent S
guilt might be---they had no power
to decide upon his guilt or innocence
of the alleged crimes. They be-
lieved. in short, that they had no
more jurisdiction over him than over
any other private citizen. The Con-
stitution provides, very explicitly,
that the power of Impeachment shall
be exercised against persons in Of
flee. Here, as follows is what the
Constitution says with regard to i'm
parchment. Wequote from Section
.. Article One of that instrument,
as follows:
The House of Representatives shall
choose their speaker and other officers;
and shall have the sole power of i'm
peachment.
And again from Section ;, Article L:
The Senate shall have the sole power
to try all impeacbments. When sitting
for that purpose they shall bs on oath
or affirmation. When the President of
the United States is tried, the Chief
Justice shall preside: and no person
shall be convicted without the concur
renee of txo-thirds of the members
present.
Judgment in cases Of impeachment
shall not extend further than to removal
from office, and disqualification to hold
and enjoy any Office OF honor. trust or
profit under the United States; but the
party convicted shall nevertheless be
liable and subject to indictment, trial.
Judgment. and punishment. according
to law.
This. and two or three incidental
mentions of the power and conse-
quences of impeachment is all the
Constitution says upon the subject.
Now if Senators are to lie guided
by the letter of the Constitution,
how can they have jurisdiction over
any other class of cases than those
in which judgment "shall not ex-
tend further than to removal from
Office" etc? Belknap resigned and
was therefore ont of Office when the
House of Representatives preferred
articles of impeachment against
him. How, then, could he be re-
moved from office by any act Of the
Senate?
Furthermore, at this time General
Belknap is not only in not office but
he was explicitly referred to in the ar
ticles of impeachment, as 1.-THE LATE
Secretary of War; and the official
fact hardly needs recital that since
he held that place in the Cabinet
there have been two incumbents
thereof TAFT and Cameron.
Mr.. Eaton, one of the Senators
from Connecticut, as hard-headad q
Democrat as exists, and as implaca-
BILE an opponent of the Republican
party as can be found anywhere, not
only voted against Belknap's being
guilty by the Senate, but
in the secret consultation of the Sen
ators upon the subject of jurisdic-
ton. made a powerful argument
against the Senate's possession OF
that power in this case. In the
course of that argument Mr.. Eaton
quoted as follows from the Consti-
tuition:
The President. Vice President and nj!
civil officers of the United States, shall
be ren,ored from, office on Impeachment
for aud conviction o., treason, bribery,
o- other high crimes and misdemesnors.
"Here," said the Senator, Il find
the full, perfect, absolute grant of
power, explicitly announcing the
persons who are subject to i'm
parchment.
First. The person clothed with
the office and exercising the powers
of President of the United States.
Second. The person exercising
the powers of Vice President of
tho Tinted States
Third. Each, every and ALL of
the civil officers of the United
States"
"The PERSONS who, not by
the law and precedent of Great
Britain, but by the Constitution of
the United States. may be subjected
to the ordeal of impeachment, are
here definitely named and classified:
Persons in office, not out of office"
''Can there be two opinions
obouf ITO Certain1y not. And