The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-06-02
The Articles Of Impeachment Again
Before the Senate.
UECISION ON 7HE JURISDICTION QUESTION
Technical Questions 1ntersposed
by Defendants Counsel.
ANOTHER PLEA FOR DELAY.

articles OF impeachment against william W. Bciknap
late Secretary Of War.
Tho accused. with Mr. Carpenter, Of his counsel,
being present. well q managers on the part OF
the House Of Representatives, proclamation was male
BY tho Sergeant Arms the usual FORM and the
journal OF the session OF Monday last was read
The President pro tenn then announced the decision
Of the Senate the question Of jurisdiction as fol.
lows
DECISION or THE SENATE
II 10 ordered by tho Senate, sitting for the trial OF
the articles OF Impeachment preferred by the House OF
against W. " Belknap, late Secretary
Of War; that the demurrer OF said William W. Bcknap
70 the replication Of tho House Of Representa-
tives 10 the plea to the jurisdiction hled by SAID
Bcikuap be and tho Same hereby is ovcrruled
And being tho opinion Of the senate that said ca 10
insufficient in law and that saia articles OF mpeach-
II is therefore further ordered and adjudged that said
plea be tho hereby overrulcd and held for
uaught
Mr.. WHITE, Of Maryland, submitted the following
Ordered, That W. w. Belknap is hereby ordered TO
plead further articles Of impeachment within
ten days from this date.
ARGUMENT CARPENTER.
Mr. CARPENTER OF counsel for tho accused, said no
regarded tho order submitted by the Senator from
Maryland as in tho nature OF . mandamus This court
gave counsel two days prepare tor the argument Of
question which It had taken the three weeks to
decide Considering the .nfability Of the Senate like
al judicial tribunals and that they must know all law
and that counsel only knew littlc he had no doubt
the court would give counsel little time for reflection
The order just read by the President pro tcnL and
entered upon tho record tho judgment, so
unlike any order which would be entered by
. court Of law that he WAS at loss 10 know
what to do. One OF his associates mr. Blairl was
necessarily absent from the city md the other Judge
Black was nc cessarily his back with rheumatism
and could not get up and he r Carpenterl desired to
the order everything the plea as TO jurisdiction and
SAID IL good order for the Senate but not good
order for court, and ut the proper time he would
claim that not valid not having been concurrcd
in by the constitutional majority Of two-thirds, and
therefore II could not hurt the defence Mr.. Carpcn-
ter then argued that the accused could demur to
the articles of impeachment. although his plea to tho
jurisdiction had been ovcrruled and said II It was him
plead again. but would stand upon the law without
any further peadings, and let the honorable managers
move LOT judgment wncn .nsy moved move. LOT Juaemens
power vested the Senate to order the defence
10 do anything more. The defence had been sum
moned here and had plcsded They could stand on
pleas already filed. OF course there court to
review the findings of this court; its jurisdiction
n1a But the defence had right to stop here, and
could not be valid, and he protested against II beng
made He desired to consult with his colleagues as to
whether would ask permission to plead moro
whether they would stop at the point now reached
He claimed That the defence instead OF answering the
articles of impeachment, had the right to dcmur TO
them.
The second time he came In the Senate chamber 10
plead this lie came with demurrer TO tho or
cles OF impeachment in hts pocket but preferred to
plead to Jurisdiction Al the proper time he would
call tho atentien OF the Senate to the fact that
crime set forth In any one oil these articles The
facts stated those articles II stated in
dctmeut before court OF law. would result in II being
qnashea The mrs. question was as 70 whether the art
whether they wcrc true. Tho mere rhetoric OF the
articles would not do
the high crime must be SET out fact He commended
that the articles OF impeachment would not stand tue
assumed that the Senate would much Of tho
order adopted Monday assumes that the articles
Of impeachment are sufficient IN law. He lMr Car
pcner) asserted, lawyer his honest belief that not
OF the articles would stand the test put upon them
by tho court OF law, and he entitled TO be heard
upon this question before the senate said they werc
sufficient. II would DO policy for tho defendant
to lot the judgment come with tho certainty he had
that he would be acquitted. These Senators who be.
evcd the senate had jurisdiction to try the accused
must vote mot guilty. on the hnal judgment
THE RISK
the defendant would run by stopping hero would be
that some senator who thought there was no juris-
dction might change his mind, but no (Carpcnter)
assumed that the opinion OF Senator'S would not bs
who believed no had not Jurisdiction in a
case would hold TO the opinion that he bad right
10 convict The Senate had decided that tho
trial must 20 on, but II was Tor his cliont
10 saw whether hc would stand upon hts legal rights
or whether he world go throael the trial on the mat
Counsel ought to hLvo reasonable time for solemn
reflection. They wanted IL AMI asked for It.
ARGUnySr oY MANAGER LORD
Manager LoRp aid the plea OF the defendant had been
overruled and the articles Of impeachment were held
to &c no s Inc as Inc rSa
gers did not feel called upon to discuss the order until
motion made 10 change It, or question raised
by counsel for tho defence that twothirds vote
necessary on the question OF jurisdiction and
that the Senators who voted against Jurisdiction
must vote mot guilty. on tho ANAL question. The
managers would at the proper something 10
say They would show that the whole practice OF courts
OF impeachment had been in contradiction OF that argu
IT. I.fo. had rnttt hta f. fhn
articles, and all the managers could do TO to
proceed trial. Tho counsel for the defence pro-
posed another dlaory plea Here stood MS defendant
accused of high crimes and BY diIatory plea had oc
cupied all the time OF the Court Now, when the Court
held his plea amounted to naught and the articles Of i'm
parchment were sufficient learned counsel wanted the
Court 10 60 back and vacate part OF it's order. II
would be a most extraordinary proceeding IN tho Judg
of tho managers for the Court to open the pro-
rccdngs again instead Of compelling tho defendant
60 to trial.
Mr. Manager McMAHAy argued that tho counsel for
the defence had invited the ruling OF tho Senate the
very shape given and read from the argument OF
that he commended then that tho Senate must mako such
ruling in the II took jurisdiction.
Mr. Caruentcr to reply
rule OF tho Senate in regard 10 discussion He
did not think there should be unlimited discussion ~
the counsel and managers upon every order submitted
BY Senator In his Judgment u was all wrong
The CHAIR replied that the discussion had been al
lowed under the rule allowing hour 10 each side.
REPLY or MIR. CARPENTER
Mr.. CARPENTER said tho Honorable Managers had
argued that this court was not bound by rules OF
practice He Carpentcr thought every rule IN force in
criminal court had been derived IRON experience and
was binding here as much as in any court he Claimed
that in his former argument no had never
alluded to the sufcicncy OF the articles OF mpcach
and he denied thai the articles could be declared
sufficient by the Senate determining the question
" jurisdclion He knew how the senate was pressed
by legislative business and short time ago he sought
10 relieve that pressure by moving 70 have the trial
continue until September next, but the senate unani-
mn atv ucaAs nj I'M Vuotio ion
said tho trial must go on, but they were all honorable
men, and certainly they meant to give the counsel
chance to discuss all questions freely. Tic
asked that the counsel be allowed until Mon
day next 10 determine what they would do
They could by that time determine whether they
would ask TO have the order vacated because had not
been passed by the constitutional two.thrds VOTE or
whether they would dcmur to articles OF mpcach-
ment A. one OF his colleagues was out OF town and
the other sick in bed no thought tho request
NOT unreasonable.
Nr. WRIGHT, Of Iowa, moved that tho Senate, sitting
Is a court Of impeachment, adjourn until Monday
next at one O'Clock y. NJ
Mr.. KEENAN,, OF New York, moved an amendment as
foli