Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1876-03-09

cases of Warren Hastings and Lord Francis Ba-
con, both of whom had been impeached after
they had ceased to hold the offices in which they
committed crimes and misdemeanors.
. Mr.. Bass, Republican) of New York, another
member of the committee, questioned the state
ment Of the chairman Mr.. Clymer, as to this case
having no parallel, and said that he would not
have to leave his own borders in order to find
not only parallel for it. but that he could find
cases compared with which this case was as white
as the driven snow. He admitted that mere
statement of this case as presented by the testi-
mony was sufficient to justify every member to
vote for the resolutions presented.
Mr.. Lamar, (Democrat) Of Mississippi, inquired
from Mr.. Bass his opinion as to the impeachabll-
ity of resigned officer.
Mr.. Hoar, (Repubican) of Massachusetts,, in
reference to casual remark of some member as
to this being political question, entirely dis
claimed and repudiated such an idea On the
point of the impeachability of person not in Of
flee, he referred to the case of Whittemore, of
South Carolina, in which the House had deter
mined that formal, actual remuneration of an
officer terminated the office and that any Ameri-
can citizen could lay down an office held by him
without any acceptance of his resignation. Judge
Story laid down the doctrine that it could not be
done in England, but there any citizen could be
impeached; therefore, the English cases of War
rem Hastings and Lord Bacon did not apply in
America. No man could be impeached but
civil officer and when he ceased to be civil Off
Ger he ceased to be within the literal description
of the Constitution. In this country the only
| judgment that could be rendered in an impeach-
'ment case was removal from office and future
disqualification from holding Office but by the
statutes, person guilty Of such offences could
be indicted, tried and sentenced by the criminal
courts of the country. He protested against hot
haste in this matter without having the testimony
printed Hethought such haste unworthy of the
grave question, and If he stood alone he would
still stand here to say 80.
Mr.. Blackburn, '(Independent) Of Kentucky,
another member of the committee, expressed his
satisfaction that the report which had been read
by his colleague (Clymer) showed to the world
| that nothing had been left undone by the COM
| mittee to shield and shelter from dishonor every
person except the one whom it was the duty OF
the committee to investigate and report upon.
He would not consent that the gentleman from
Massachusetts, should make this political or
partisan question. He would not consent that
his side of the House should be placed in the po-
stion of prosecutors and the other side should
take up the position of defenders. 1t was
member of the House. He regarded the case as
al unprecedented one in more respects than one.
The action of the President in accepting Secretary
Belknap's resignation under the circumstances
was un precedented, and this was the first instance
! in the history of the country where any man,
claiming manhood and holding an exalted sta
ton, had sought to shelter himself from legiti-
mate investigation by interposing the dishonor OF
the impeachablity of Mr.. Beknap he suggested
that the question, as Judge Story had intimated,
might properly be left to the decision of the SEN
ate. On such state of facts would the House be
asked to shrink from the performance of its duty
| because there might be the mist or shadow Of
doubt on that point? The House could not do
3d. 1t would not be admissible. He quoted
| from the impeachment case of Lord Bacon, In
which it was stated that when the Lord Chancel-
| lor had sought to save himself by q resignation
of his high Office the attempt was vain, as the
King did not and could not interpose. Was the
House to be told that the man in power at the
other end of the avenue was able to rob an Amer
lean Congress Of right and power which the
| King of Great Britain could not take from Par
| lament? [Sensation and applause.] It used to
be the theory that the King could do no wrong,
but no man had ever been bold enough in this
country to say that the President could do no
wrong. If the man who had uttered the memo
rable sentence, "Let no guilty man escape" held
it in his power to rob an American Congress OF
its right to intlict punishment or to pronounce
censure on publicly convicted criminal, where
was the barrier to be found beneath whose shell
ter the liberties of the people could rest secure?
Mrr. Hoar. Does the gentleman say that Con-
gress has the power to punish any man In this
country? ..'1 ....I
| Mr.. Blackburn. I will not submit to Interrupt
| tions am the last man who would introduce
atom of politics into this discussion. 1t is not
admissible here The Republican members of
| the committee were as earnest and honest in the
prosecution of this inquiry, and in the presenta-
ton of this report, as the members representing
the majority Of this House. We have seen no diff
ference in the committee room. / appeal to the
members of the House that there shall be no diff
ference manifested here. If fraud has been per-
pertrated, if crminality exists, if corruption has
been proved, let the representatives Of the people
in this House 80 declare it and send the issue to
the court, where it may finally be tried and five
confessed let the responsibility for that failure
rest on other shoulders than ours.
Mr.. Danford, (Democrat) ofOhio, another mem
Nf fho oyr,ttt
ment that the acceptance of Mr.. Belknap's reslg.
nation in no manner changed the position OF that
officer to the country. He disagreed, however,
with the statement of the Chairman (Mr. Clymer)
that the conduct of this officer was the legitimate
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 resolution. a.. ..n
Mr.. Kasson, (Republican) of Iowa, of the COM
mittee, said that 2 few years ago there had gone
from his State young, well educated and gallant
gentleman to fight the battles of his country. He
had gone through the war, and the President had
afterward called him to seat in his CaDlnet, pla
cling 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 gentle
man, who had been so much respected In his own
State and so much honored by the nation, had
been found guilty of receiving compensation for
some act of official duty, and that that compensa
ton had been continuous. The House would
Judge of the emotion with which the members
from that State had listened to the reading of the
evidence. He had never heard anything read
with greater interest than that report, and when,
at the close of the reading, he had made an appeal
to his friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Clymer0
not orhimself aaone but for his colleagues, whose
pride and honor were so touched by the character
of the report, for moments delay, that they
might find whether there might not be in the ev-
idence one extenuating circumstance, he had
been met by the demand for the previous ques-
k;o uo n NJ 1opir fo a1air
for Mr.. Belknap from all the penalties to which
his acts entitled him, but he found the most pain
ful feature disclosed by the evidence to be the
fact that not one word of 1t touched the officer in
question until the death which broke heart had
occurred [Sensation.] Was he to be blamed
that he and his colleagues wanted night to as
certain the extent of that officers guilt by read
ing the evidence in print? Was he to be blamed
that when he found the most delicate relations in
human life involved in this proceedings rela-
ton so delicate that he dared not allude to it in
detail-he. asked an opportunity to consider
whether there was anything to be said in extenu-
alton OF so high and so greata mlsdemeanGT3 bu5
it was too late to 60 back to that now. He and
his colleages had been refused that opportunity
and now he only asked the attention of the House
to the question whether the House did not need
more time to ascertain whether this officer was
impeachable. After quoting from Judge Story
on this point he argued that the powers of Con-
eress 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 office. Ifhe
were liable to impeachment let it be understood
that they we're all, without exception, for i'm
peachment but if the House was establishing
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 Commit
tee the question of its right to make this mpeach
ment. 1fthe House could impeach man not in
office it might 60 back and impeach Jefferson Da-
Wis and John B. Floyd for conspiracy.