The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1876-03-09
no difference manifested here. If fraud
has been perpetrated: if criminality ex-

no difference manifested here. If fraud
has been perpetrated; if criminality ex-
lists; if corruption has been proved, let
the representatives of the people in this
House so declare it, and send the issue to
the court where it may finally be tried;
and if we are unable to punish where
guilt is most openly confessed, let the re-
sponsibility for that failure rest on other
shoulders than ours.
Danforth, of Ohio, another member of
the committee, expressed it as his judg-
ment that the acceptance of Mr.. Belk-
maps resignation in no manner changed
the position of that officer to the coun-
try. He disagreed, however, with the
statement of the chairman (Clymer) that
the conduct of this officer was the legiti-
mate outgrowth of the principles of the
party in power, and he expressed the
hope that there would not be single
vote on the Republican side of the House
against the resolutions.
Kasson, of Iowa, said that few years
ago there had gone from his State q
young, well educated and gallant gentle
man, to fight the battles of his country.
He had gone through the war, and the
President had afterwards called him to
seat in his Cabinet, placing him at the
head of that army of which he had been
an humble but somewhat distinguished
member. This morning, for the first
time, the delegation from Iowa had heard
that that gentleman, who had been so
much respected in his own State and so
much honored by the nation, had been
guilty of receiving compensation for
some act of official duty, and that that
compensation had been continuous. He
did not desire to claim any exemption
for Mr.. Belknap from all the penalties
to which his acts entitled him, but he
found the most painful feature, disclosed
by the evidence, to be the fact that not
one word of it touched the officer in ques-
ton until the death, which broke heart,
had occurred. Sensation. He asked
the attention of the House to the ques-
ton whether the House did not need
more time to ascertain if this offense be
impeachable. After quoting from Judge
Storey on this point he argued that the
powers of Congress were limited by the
constitution, and that if Mr.. Belknap be
impeached, the Senate could not execute
the constitutional provision which de-
clares that he shall be removed from Of
flee. If he were liable to impeachment,
let it be understood that they were all,
without exception, for impeachment; but
if the House was establing precedent
which did not rest on the constitution,
and which was dangerous for the future,
he thought it right that the House should
pause and consider, by report from its
Judiciary Committee, the question of its
right to make this impeachment. If the
House could impeach man not in Office,
it might 90 back and impeach. Jefferson
Davis and John B. Floyd for conspira-
cy.
Robbins, of North Carolina, suggested
that there was great difference between
conviction on impeachment and con-
viction on indictment. In the latter case
the man might be pardoned by the Ex-
ecutive, but in the former case it could
not be. AS to the suggestion as to the
impeachment of Jefferson Davis, he re-
piled that it had been decided that Sem
ator could not be impeached, not being
an officer of the United States.
The debate being closed, the House
proceeded to vote on the resolutions,
which were unanimously adopted.
The Speaker appointed as the commit
tee to notify the Senate of the action of
the House Messrs. Clymer, Robbins,
Blacburn, Bass and Danforth. These
members compose the Committee on the
Expenditures of the War Department,
making the report.