The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-04-29
Failure of Another Effort at Delay
by the Defendant.
QUESTIONS OF LAW And ISSUES OR FACT.
Animated Debate on the Question of
Who Speaks Last
DECISIONS BY THE COURT.
WASHINGTON, d. c., April %, 1876.
The Chaplain, In his opening prayer this morning,

The Chaplain In his opening prayer this morning
SAID
ALMIGHTY and Everlasting God before Whom the secrets
n deep humiliation aud yer Thou art our refuge o.
Of all these spessaees Of Time hrobsns With much lie
calling Thyser Oh, God help Thy ca.
and hide in Thy embrace.
The hour OF hali-past twelve O'Clock p NJ having
arrived, the President pro tenn announced that
legislative and executive business would be suspended
aud the Senate would the consideration
articles Of impeachment against William w. Boknap,
late Secretary OF War.
ExSccretary Belknap entered the Senate Chamber
with Mr.. Carpenter, OF his counsel and was fol
lowed by Mr.. Blair. After the usual proclamation by
the Sergean-at- Arms the Secretary directed to
notify the House OF Representatives that the Senate
was ready to proceed with the trial.
The managers soon aiterward appeared and were es
corted TO their seats.
The proceedings OF Yesterdays session then
read after which the pending motion submitted by the
House managers yesterday was reported as folows:-
MOTION or THE MANAGERS
That the evidence the question pertaining the plea
sng thereto are heard AMI such plea is that
wSn Ss and The House
reply they deem 4 necessary within two days and that
Mr. LORD stated that the managers had present ed
yesterday all that they desired to present in the way
OF argument on the pending question.
Mr. CARPENTER said that the counsel for the defence
since the Senate had decided deny tho motion for
postponemeni, desired to proceed with the trial us
speedily possible and before tho furnace Of the
Presidential campaign grew hotter than 1t already
But still they could not be ready TO present their
OF the question Of jurisdiction, ms the mporai the
demanded, III less than Two weeks He therefore
asked Tor postponenent Tor that period
Mr. Lord called the attention OF the Court TO the
statement of the counsel ior the accused the 18th
Inst. that they would be ready proceed to-day. AS
10 the questions involved he did think that their
discussion need involve delay. Tho defendant had ad
mitted his reply the replication he had re-
ngncd to avoid impeachment, and therefore there
dispute that part OF the The questions OF
evasion dividing the day into fractions and the effect
OF the proceedings oil the House OF Representatives.
we're questions with which all lawyers
less familiar The facts pertaining to those questions
we're within u very narrow compass. The managers,
therefore. asked the Court TO with The testimony
wearing the question OF jurlsdicton and after that
testimony IN to grant olc, Two, three days delay
Or any longer term that might be deemed proper.
Mr. CARPENTER denied that his statement that he
would proceed could iarly be interpreted meaning
that inc would be ready TO tho question OF ur-
ascop Every step III trial was technically pro.
secdns The managers had been al work this ques-
lion Tor weeks, and he understood have been cx-
from work in the House. The counsel for the
accused, the other hand, had been engaged other
professional duties which they could not postpone
and TO insist q mt they should now 20 with argu-
mcnt upon question winch they had had no opportu-
nifty 10 examine was to deny them practically any hear
ing ut all The Almighty Himself employed means and
Instruments to carry ON His designs, and Mr Bclknap
could do no better. He had to rely upon mortal man.
and II IL expected that he was To get a lawyer
WHIP would be able TO devote his entire time
to him he could only get lawyer who had
other employment, aud such men not a general
thing the lawyers 10 whom a would wish 10 intrust
his case They asked only Tor reasonable delay sucn
delay only counsel in the Supreme Court granted
each other under ordinary circumstances a
matter OF courtesy. The best reply that could
by Coke 10 the King"When the question rises and is
debated will do What IS III aud proper tor Judge to
do and further decline 10 pledge myself 10 Your Ma
esty' IL was impossible AT present to SAY what the
circumstances Of tue would DO when the question
nf .fn1 LnE ala, .l.f
might no, then dcmur. Even the managers
tai, aud they might want longer delay than
arbitrarily liked upon IN the pending motion.
Mr. LoRp SAID IL certainly the iault Of the
sci and not OF the managers that The counsel had mis-
supposed when he announced that be was ready to
proceed that he meant ''rcaey TO proceed with the
trial. and not the mere filing OF formal paper. which
any clerk might draw up. This not where
lawyer could extend courtesy 10 another The CIR
cnms,snces surrounding the case made proper that
tie managers should urge all reasonable diligence.
Mr.. CoskLiSG presented the following notion
uo ere a n ss.ss @ TO he hear and s.s
ainenabie trial by for
AR q War ~ his Of said ses
such resignation and touching the motive and purpose
question above stated has been considered
Mr.. LoRD said he thought the course contemplated
entirely unnecessary. The question Of Jurisdiction
was but single question, and ought not to be sub
divided The evidence too he thought should be pre-
sentcd before the judgment OF the Court taken
the legal question involved Very great cmbarrass.
ments would arise If the question divided. Mr.
Lord cited the Barnard In New York afording
decision that controlled the matter at issue.
Mr.. CARPKNTkR SAID .,hc honorable managers had
Teen 1T To nc two Implications instead OF The
counsel for the accused had followed them and had
zone little better and had sd four Eve rcjondcrs
He had never heard Of his life where
. single plea had led TO an issue OF law aud fact or
where declaration or any proceedings whatever
sncnmoered oy ixo issue ,h .ne court a,d not DC
part OF Mr. Bclknap there 81 objection
The suggested by the managers but u seemed
IA hktp that .,lA In fur
Inc motion Of tho senator rom Now York
settled. II the defence had wished TO be captious
about pleadings they might have asked tho Court
strike out the second replication being improperly
filed without Of Court reply douby to the plea.
But they had not done this. or course II tho Senate
had no power over man who was not IN once ut the
time the impeachment commenced the proceeding was
II an end The defence would also contend that an
officer Of the government had night TO resign At any
moment, and that The motives which governed him
in making his resignation should not be
considered and could not affect the case
Tue Supreme Court had held this doctrine IN q case
nearly parallel They had held that II IL were
proved that man had changed hts residence from
State another for the purpose OF taking suit INTO
federal the elect OF the lie had thus per-
formed was not disturbed In any way. The question
was whether this In Office at the time he
impcached by the House OF Representatives. n tho
Senate thought that their jurisdiction did depend
upon the fact whether the man was In oifoe or out
then the other guesion-how he got out Y--mighl be
material In every point OF view The suggested
BY tho present motion was, In his view, the most
Mr. LoRp said that ne evidence which the managers
proposed TO offer in the question OF jurisdiction would
occupy he expected, only about hour and would
be mainly documentary IL seemed to him that the
resolution offered by the Senator would only create
delay, IL involved that discussion Of the
esract question whether citizen could be peached.
That was BY no means the only question IN the
The thought they had conclusive authorities
show that person had no right TO resign for the
purpose Of evading an impeachment. Even
II the Senate adopted this resolution. heard
arguments this abstract question and deter
mined that the managers had still the right TO
be heard the question whether man, after his sin
had found him out had legal right 70 resign and
defeat the constitution and cvAde the disqualification
which the constitution had PROVIDED as the penalty
OF his crimes the fact stood admitted the record
that the accussd had resigned expressly for the pur
pose Of evading impeachment What would the
10 OOO0 600 OF people OF the United States think OF
Shs House managers Il they allowed such an &C, as