Year: 1868

however,
It without prejudice to anybody that from the kind
attention he had received from the Senate In the
opening argument he did not intend to trespass
single moment IN the closing argument, but leave it
to the very much better augmentation OF his associ-
ates. He only wished, without any word on his part,
that such augmentation should be had as should
vince the country that the case had been fully stated
on the one side and on the other


Senator SUMNER moved to strike ont the last pro-
viso IN the order and insert in lieu Of II the follow
ing:-


And provided further That according the practice in
cases OF impeachment all the Managers who speak shall


senator CoNKLrNe begged to ask the counsel for
Manager Butler.


Mr.. EvARTs rose and said:-Mr Chief Justice and
the question when the Senator from Massachusetts
arose to ofler his amendment 1t will not be in the
power Of the counsel for the President L the rule
should now be enlarged to contribute the aid OF
more than two additional advocates the part OF
the President. The rule was early adopted and
counsel was accommodated to the rule. II the rule
should be enlarged, all OF would wish to take ad
vantage of the liberaty OF the Senate. In regard,
however, to the arguments Of six against four, as
would then be the odds, we naturally must feel some
interest particuaryif all our opponents are to speak
after we snail nave concluded. The last speech
hitherto has been made in behalf of the President.
II there is any value In debate 1t is that when 1t
that each, as fairly as may be, shall have an oppor
tnnity to know and reply to the arguments OF the


to and wSov IN peT wh as
precedents In all matters Of forensic debate-requres
that the Managers shall close by one Of their number
and that the counsel for the President shall be al
lowed to speak, and that then the second Manager,
appearing In their behalf shall close. So II the rule
II there is to be such disparity as that OF six against
four, that an equally just arrangement should be
made IN the distribution Of the arguments for the
Managers and for the President.


senator WILLIAMS moved to lay the order and
amendment on the table In order, he said to have
test vote as to whether the rule should be enlarged
Senator DRAKE, rising to question of order. said
that In the Senate, sitting for trial Of an impeach-
ment there Is no authority to move to lay PROPOSE
The CHIEF JUSTICE said he could not undertake to
limit the Senate In its mode Of determining ques-


ons ana tnat ne conceived the motion to lay on the


Senator WILLIAMS called for the yeas and nays,


The vote was taken and resulted-yeas ss, nays 10,
as fOllOws:-


yrAs-ssn.tos Bnctalsw, Cameron. Cstte, Chandler,
johnson, Sq11!i Mc.. Norton
Stewart Sumner hsyer yipon Van Wrinkle, vickers, VII,


NAyssenators Anthony Davis Dixon Doolittle, Fowler,
Grimes, McCreery, Patterson Of Tenn Trumbull and Will


So the order and amendment were laid on the
table.


During the vote Senator Anthony stated that his
colleague Mr.. Sprague, called away by telegraph
to attend the deathbed of friend.


TESTIMONY OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL SHERMAN.


Lieutenant General W. 7. Sherman was then re-
called to the stand.


Question by Mr. STANBERy-After the restoration
opinion as to whether the good OF the service re-
quired another man in that oillce than Mr. stanton


Mr. BUTLER-Stay moment. We object. we
want the question reduced to writing


Mr. SrANBERY said-T am perfectly willing to
be compelled to do 1t at the demand OF the learned
Manager. made similar request OF him more
than once, which he never complied with.


Mr.. BUTLER-I ask a thousand pardons.


The CHIEF JUSTICE said that the rules required
questions to be reduced to writing


Mr.. STANBERY said that his impression was that
that was request to be made by Senator, and not
by one of the Managers or one OF the counsel.


The CHIEF JUSTICE directed the fifteenth rule to be
read, and 1t was read as follows:-


All motions made BY the parties their counsel shnll be
addressed to the presiding ocer and he any Senator
s ssssay S be 10 writing


The question, having been reduced to writing by
restoration OF Mr. stanton to the War ONCE did you
form an opinion as to whether the good OF the service
required Secretary Of War other than Mr.. stanton,
and il SO, did YOU communicate that fact 10 the
President'''


Mr. BINGHAM objected to the question, and stated
the grounds OF his objection. The first few sentences
were entirely inaulible to the reporters. When he
did become aadibl6h he was understood to say:-It s
member Of the Senate who can entertain the opinion
that question OF this Kind now present.
be- admitted IN any Criminal proceedng Il
must occur to the Senate. that the ordinary
test Of truth cannot be applied to 4 at al and IN
saving that 1t has no relation at all to the truthful
ness vcracity OF the witness. But there Is nothing
ON which the Senate can pronounce any Judgment



opinions Of forty thousand or fifty thousand men as
to what might be for the good OF the serviceY The
the land Il Is question Of fact which is to be dealt
with by witnesses, and 1t Is question OF law and
fact which is to be dealt with by the Senate After
giving his opinion Is proposed by the question: the
next thing in order would be his opinion as to the
application Of the law, the restorations OF the
SUPPOSE aw s' SSs the senate would
such a question for moments 1t must
occur to the Senate that by adopting such rule as
hp mr. IN mi
end the investigation. II 1t be competent for this
witness to give his opinion, 1t is equally competent
their opinions TO the Senate, and when IL the inquiry
to endf We object to 1t as utterly incompetent.
Mr.. SrANBERY-Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, II
ever there was q case involving the question Of in
tent and how FAR acts which might be criminal or In
different or might be proper and actuated by intent,
this is that case; and Il is on the question OF intent
that propose to put this inquiry TO the witness.
With what intent did the President remove Mr..
stantonf The Managers say the intent was
to get possession Of the War ONCE, and to drive out
mertorous oflcer and put In a tool and slave In
his place. On that question what do we propose TO
oferY We propose TO show that the second olcer OF
the army, feeling the complications and difficulties
Stanton formed an opinion that the good Of the
service required 1t to be filled by some other man.
Who could be better Judge than the distinguished
what are his opinions more than any other mans
opinions II given merely as abstract opinions. We
do not intend to gv9them as abstract opinions. The
gentleman did not read the whole question, or he
would not have asked that. Il Is not merely what
opinion had You, General Sherman, but, having
formed an opinion did you communicate TO the Pres
dent that the good OF the service required Mr. Stanton
to leave the office and required some other man
to be put in his placer This IL communication
made Dy General Sherman TO the President to regu-
late the Presidents conduct and to justify t-indeed,
to call upon him. looking at the good OF the service,
TO get rid in way if possible OF this confessed
obstacle to the good OF the service. Look what ap
pears in Mr.. stanton's own staement-that from the
18th OF August 1857 he has the President,
has never visited the Executive Mansion, has never
sat at the board where the Presidents legal ad-
yisers-the heads OF departments-are supposed to
be- II may be SAID that the relations between him
and the President had got 10 the point that Mr. STAN
ton was unwilling to go there lest he might not be
admitted Mr.. Stanton says In his communication
to the House OF Representatives on the 4h OF March,
when the House sent for the correspondence between


the President and General Grant, that he only had
not seen the President, but had had ocial com
municaton with him since the 18th Of August.a How
waa the army along and how the service