Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-03-17
,mr.ocnmcnt of the President.

Impcachment of the President.
Some Of the papers which have been
arguing the question whether the Presi-
dent should or should not be impeaoheu
by the House Of Representatives. ana
tried by the Senate claim that under the
circumstances now existing impeachment
could profitably be resorted to. ana 'he
trial OF the case by the Senate could De
proceeded with without resulting In harm
to the President or TO any OF the great
interests OF the country. They argue '""'
Impeachment amounts TO nothIhg i'o'
than presentment by a grand jury ana 10
no more conviction OF misdemeahor III
office than the finding OF true Dill pS
n grand jury Is a conviction OF crime
seeing that both may be disproved Dy
the evidence on the actual trial.
But the papers referred 10 do not loon
at the matter In the right light Inc I'M
peachment Of the President would pe-
smirch his character, damage his repu'"-
ton. and place him before posterity III
n wrong light. 1t would infict upon MN
nm injury from which he would never
fully recover. If the best man IN inc
United States were indicted for ielohy'
and he were tried for that ohence anu
acquitted. his acquittal would leave him
in n totally different position in the COM
nunity from that which he occupied be-
fore his indictment. A wrong would have
been done to him which all the waters OF
the ocean would not wash out.
Rut for what offence is the President
10 be impeached? The one now most
prominent is his habit. as his opponents
charge. of practically overriding that sec
tion az the Federal Constitution which
provides that appointments shall be maze
by and with the advice and consent OF
the Senate. The charge. therefore, is that
in renewing appointments after the SEN
ate rejecting them has adjourned ne
virtually sets aside the organic law ana
makes amendments which he has no
right to make This is question when
ought to be settled. but surely can be
settled without putting stain upon the
reputation Of our country. We have
heretofore referred to this subject, and eX-
dressed an opinion upon it. The habit
with which the President is charged did
no: become his habit until after he had
had full consultation with some or the
ablest constitutional lawyers in the land
1t would. therefore. be becoming IN the
House of Representatives to investigate
the whole matter and ascertain whether
or not Mr.. Cleveland has committed any
offence against law or not. One thing Is
certain, and this Is that he has simply
followed a precedent set for him by Presl-
dent Grant and President Harrison.
1t is also suggested that President
Cleveland might be impeached for various
other offences. Among these is the adop-
ton of a policy which has led the pubic
to hold him responsible for the tremen-
dous losses which this country has suf-
fered during his term-losses in business
losses in values. depreciation of prices OF
products, &c. &c, &c.
These last charges read as II the origi-
nator Of them might have been "poking
fun" at the men who bring the charge
first above-named. However this may be,
we can safely repeat on this subject what
we said yesterday-namely. that II such
n charge or charges were brought against
him by the House of Representatives ana
sent to the Senate for trial, the anti
Democratic members OF the latter body
would themselves vote to dismiss SAID
charges and TO discredit the act Of i'm
parchment.