The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1876-01-25
The Imncncllment TrlaI.


Tile Impeachment Trial.
At IL O'Clock yesterday morning Man
ager Stuart resumed his argument for the
State against John S. Burdctt, Treasurer.
He occupied the attention OF the Senate
both morning and afternoon. j.,
OF the trial, SO far as it has progressed
before the Senate, 1t may be said that
only in one or two respects does it differ
from the course which it took in the
House OF Delegates pending the action OF
that body upon the report Of the lnvesti-
eating Committee and the finding OF arti-
cles Of impeachment.
At the close of the consideration OF the
articles Of impeachment by tho House, we
took occasion to say that the case had
been virtually tried. All that was
involved in the case, whether OF
law or Of morals was fully and ably
discussed, and the argument on both sides
fully exhausted. There was really moth
ing left for the Senate sitting as court
Of Impeachment, except the formal ex-
animation Of Witnesses and the rehearsal
of the arguments made before the House
Of Delegates.
OF the debate as it progressed in the
House we gave very full reports, and since
the examination OF witnesses has closed
before the Senate we find that the line OF
argument pursued has been exactly the
same as that adopted in the House. So
far as we now rccollect tho counsel for
the respondent has not advanced single
new plea, has not occupied an inch OF new
ground, unless perhaps the plea advanced
that the Senate had no right TO sit as
court to try the party, has not
produced new or more eX-'
plicit authority upon the subject OF I'M
peachable offenses more than was brought
to the attention Of the House. OfcOurse,
then. We may say that nothing new has
been developed on either side at this wri-
ting, and those who attentively watched
the proceedings in the House arc just rs
well up in the history OF the case as 1t
now stands before the Senate, Us il they
had been present during the two weeks
which have been occupied by the Senate
in the reinvestigation Of the case. We
shall merely state the points discussed
by Manager Stuart yesterday. He began
by assuming that an ofFcnse may be i'm
peachable which is not indictable, and that
the purpose Of an impeachment was to
inquire whether the accused party was
guilty OF such moral turpitude as to rem
der him unfit to hold Office. Ii it were
not the province Of court Of impeach-
ment to try cases Tor which there was no
other remedy, there would be no use for
such n court. Impeachment would be
but an empty puradeif common court
would answer all its purposes.
He quoted the conviction OF Judge Ad-
olson, of Pennsylvania, to show that
gross immortality or imbcCility sulh-
cient cause for removal from Office.
He next considered the point made by
the counsel for the respondent that an
officer could not be impeaclIed for an
oflense committed during prior term oil
office.
He quoted numerous pFccedents TO
show that ex.ollicials may be impeached
and rendered ineligible to Office in the
future for acts committed in term Of
office long since expired. The Barnard
case in New York was late and notable
instance OF this character. Even the
people have no right TO condonc impeach-
able offences. :.
As 10 the legal point attempted to be
made by the counsel for respondent that
two or more charges or articles could not
be framed upon one offence, there was
nothing in it; for the counsel knew that
it was common thing to frame indict-
ments in several forms in order to meet
the evidence, and that such an indictment
was never ridiculcd in court OF law.
At this point the Senate took recess
until 2P.M.
At this hour Mr.. Stuart commenced the
consideration Of the articles OF impeach-
ment, referring to the first article charG-
ing a corrupt agreement with n. B.
Csbell, the defense had claimed that
Burdett had no power to control deposits
and vet Mr.. Cabell had given him n
thousand dollars. What did he give It to
him for? II the Senators would analyze
that old mans (Cabells) head phreno-
logically they would find him neither such
fool nor yet such philAntropist as to
give John S. Burdett thousand dollars
Tor nothing. Manager Stuart then took
up the articles Of impeachment scriatim,
or SO many Of them as embraced the
charges which he wished to discuss. He
subjected the articles and testimony
direct and Indirect to the closest analysis,
then Joined them together link by link
, showing the interest OF the Burdctts,
. father and son, in all the transactions
covered by the charge Of conspiracy. As
to article 10, charging neglect Of duty,
Mr.. Stuart said that the law clearly
made it the duty OF the officers composing
the Board Of Public Works to look after
the advantage OF the State in the matter
Of interest on deposits, but John S. Bur
iett had kept back certain information
, from his co.members OF the Board, so as
, TO lead them to believe that the banks
were paying the State all the interest
that they were willing to pay on deposits
while in fact they were paying the State
r 9 per cent and another 3 per cent to
Bnrdett, and this, John s. Burdelt inter
pre,ed to be the meaning OF the law
5 per cent for the State and 3 per cent fol
himself.
At this point in the argument Of the
Manager a motion to adjourn prevailed