The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1913-09-25


stitutional convention, never submit
ted to any English speaking people.
"Unhappily a scant majority of the
assembly, prompted by what motive
we shall not attempt to guess are
now praying this august tribunal to
do away with the limitations with
which the wisdom of our fathers has
surrounded the exercise of the great
power to accuse of wilful misconduct
in office.
1T was to be expected that sooner
or later the popular branch of some
legislature, acting in the heat of po-
litical excitement possibly with a de-
sire to crafty the personal enmity of
some powerful political leader. might
seek to overstep the well settled lini-
tations Of their lawful authority.
I'VE cannot shut our eyes to the
fact that there is today large num-
Der of our fellow citizens led by dis
tinguished and popular leaders. whose
very political creed embodies an i'm
patience of constitutional restraint and
who demand that the final test shall
be. not a judicial Interpretation of the
constitution, but the duly ascerained
wish of the majority of the moment.
IF the view of the honorable man
ayers be correct. then, indeed, all
questions Of constitutional limitations
or construction is beside the mark and
this court should proceed to register
whatever decree it may be persuaded
will best please the present public de-
mand.
I'VE shall all do well. when urged
to disregard the principles established
by law, to recall the words of one of
the greatest judges to press forward
to a great principle by breaking
through every other great principle
that stands in the way of its estab-
lishment, is as little consonant to pub
lie morality as to public justice.
FLIGHTS OF oRAToRY.
Mr.. Fox's address was marked with
many fights of oratory. At its conclu-
sion. Presiding Judge Cullen gave his
opinion on the motion
II have a strong notion" he said,
as TO how we should deal with this
question-that we should reserve de-
cision upon it until the final decision
Of this case. It is not an unusual
practice and there are reasons why 1t
seems proper.
I'm my judgment you cannot char
acterize either the charges or the OBJ
jections as frivolous, Not only this,
0uI II mas D9en Almost the UNIV sal
custom so far as I know and so far
as my reading and familiarity with
proceedings by Impeachment goes, to
decide the question as to whether the
acts charged were Improbable Of
fenses or not, with the final submits
sion of the case to the court. In many
Of the cases. the most prominent. the
dispute has not been SO much as to
the facts as to that very question.
III the most momentous prosecution by
imp chment of which the books give
US any record. that Of President An
drew Johnson. the turning point, at
least the domino ting point, was the
question whether the removal of Mr.
Stanton was a violation Of the tenure
Of office act. and whether that act was
constitutional-the uniform current of
authority previous to that time having
been that the president under the
constitution had an unlimited power
of removal. The major part of the
argument in that case was addressed
to those questions.
Now, gentlemen. there is no subject
on which there has been more diverg-
ence of opinion than as to what con-
stitute Improbable offenses. On that
question the greatest advocates and
text writer's are not in accord That
constitutes strong reason for the
course | propose.
1t seems to me not wise to decide