El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1913-01-11
IMPEACHMENT
IN CONGRESS
IS RARE
Archbald's Case Is But the
Ninth Since the Govern
ment Started.
TENNESSEE SENATOR
FIRST ON THE LIST
~ Frederie J. HaskIn.)

washington. d. c., Jan. 1l.-Arch-
balds case is the ninth impeachment
trial in the history of the United
States There have been three Whlch
did not affect the Judiciary, two OF
them dealing with the executive
branch Of the government and the
third with the legislative branch The
first case established the precedent
mat 2. senator or representative can
not be impeached. Whether this also
would apply TO an official of congress,
like. the secretary Of the senate, say,
has never been determined.
William BlOunt, senator from
Tennessee, was the first object Of this
form of judicial Indignation. The gov
eminent had been in existence only
nine years when the house of repre-
sentatives passed the articles of i'm
peachment against him. He was
charged with conspiring to set on foot
within the United States, and to con-
duct and carry on with the United
states as a base of operations, hos
tile military expedition against the
territory of Spain IN Louisiana and
Florida, with a view to conquerlng
them for Great Britain, which was at
war with Spain. He was further
charged with stirring up the Creek and
Cherokee indians TO revolt against
Spain. with striving to handicap the
work of the United States indian agent
among the Creeks and Cherokees' ana
with attempting to corrupt the Of
fetal interpreter representing the
United States among them. Further
more, he was charged with 1mpalrlnS
the confidence of these tribes IN the
United States and making them as
cOntented with reference to the boun-
darv lines laid down by the govern
ment at Washington
IuDeached and Acquitted.
The house impeached Blount, but
before it could get its case into the
senate that body Investigated him
upon its own motion, and voted 10 eX-
peI him When the Impeachment trial
began the principal defense was that
BIOunt was not civil officer OF the
United States. In spite Of the TACT tnat
he was no longer a senator, and that
impeachment could carry no 1urtner
penalty than already had been admin
istered, the senate took up the Ques-
fiOn and acquitted him, not upon the
ground that the evidence of his i'm
Deachable behavior was wanting, out
upon the ground that a senator or a
representative is not an officer OF the
government within the meaning OF the
constitution
Pickering Impeached.
The second impeachment trlaI N the
senate and the first successtuI one,
was that of John Pickering, judge OF
the United States district court for the
district of New Hampshire The trlaI
was held in 1903. Judge Pickering was
charged with disObeying the law IN the
course of proceedings TO condemn
the customs laws. He delivered the
ship to the claimants without pond IN
the face of an attachment by the
United States marshal He refused 10
United States, and further refused TO
grant an appeal from his decision 70
! the circuit court In addition to TINS
! he was charged with being drunk
while on the bench The tourth aha
/ last article Of impeachment set IOrtn
/ that he being man of loose morals
J and Incorporate habits" appeared On
] the bench in a state of total 1ntoxlca-
J ton, and frequently in a most proIane
/ and indecent manner invoked the
name Of the Supreme Being to the EVIL
example of all good citizens
Pickering never answered the sum
! mons to appear before the par OF tn5
! senate His son appeared and repre-
/ gented that his father was insane. The
/ senate heard the evidence in the case,
! and the jurist was removed from OF
/ flee. His was the only case, but one
! in the history Of American impeacE-
ments where judgment practically was
confessed by the impeached official
Chase Third on List.
The next impeachment trial was
against Samuel Chase, an associate JUS
tice of the supreme court OF the
United tSates, and it stands as the
only time when a justice of that court
1 has had the breath of suspicion SO
| strongly against him. Chase was
charged with prejudicing the cases Of
| the defendants in the trials of John
Fries for treason and Thompson Cal
| lender for seditiOn. He was charged
! with trying to invade the sacred pre-
| cincts Of the grand jury room for the
! purpose Of inducing a Delaware fed
/ eraI grand jury to return an indict-
/ ment against a newspaper editor for
/ violation of the seditiOn laws He was
also charged with delivering as in
! temperate, inflammatory, and seditious
harangue to a jury from the bench in
Maryland. Party feeling was running
CONTINUED on next page.)