Year: 1868

.--a.
country Sensation IN Court asked him why lawyers
could not make the case did not wish 70 be brought
an officer of the army, into controversy.


Senator CONKIISG-Please repeat that last answer


witness-I asked him why lawyers could not make
case anu NOT Dig me- an TEe Sd ,U 1 f6 t6at
could not b> made up: "but" said he II We could
bring the case into the courts II would not stand Tor an


Mr. sTANBERY- Have yOu answered as to both occa
siOns


wtncss-The conversation very long, and covered


Mr.. BUTLER-I object to this examination being re-
newed by the counsel President whatever may be
the preense under which t. renewed hold with due
order, that this cannot be allowed See how ~ is at
tempted; counsel had dismissed the witness. He
gone and brought back at the request Of one Of the


Mr.. sTANBERY--I must interrupt the learned gentle
to say that did not dismiss the witness on the
contrary both sides asked TO retain him, the learned
Manager r Butle saying at the time that he wanted


to M y9 m aenV tbs xaa exam


nation say that the witness was dismissed from tne
That not in court wherin have practiced allowed
after the question put by the Judge FOR the counse OF
either side TO resume the examination OF the Witness ef


Senator JOHNSON asked for tho reading Of the qaes,


ons as proposed BY himself and they were reau W 'no


The srICE-Nothing is more usual in courts
tion especially at the instance Of any member q the
Court il frequently done at the instance OF counsel


o The Court If the ssSate desire It. Will put
the question the Senate whether the witness shall be
Mn EyARTs we be heard upon the subocl


The CHIEFJUsTlCE-Cert


Mr. EYARTS-The question. Mr, fJustlce and Sen
ators whether witness may be RECALLED is always
question within the discretion Of the Court and It is al
lowed unless theTe be suspicion Of bad faith, or unless
there be special circumstances where cousion Is sus
neither party shall call witness who has been dis
missed from the stand and or course we sha Oby what
rule the Senate adopt In this case but we are
not aware that anything has occurred showing neces
sity for the adoption OF such rule 49, a.. ...,, -.


Mr.. BUTLER-When the witness was on the stand on
saturday.


81 At that Interview what Conversation ,Soi place e'e the f


That question was objected TO-, and, after argn-
ment the senate solemn decided that it should not be
put. That exactly the same question IA this Then
other proceedings were had and after considerable
permission TO recall this witness this morning The
Senate gave that permission This morning hey recaed
pleased Then the witness away and then one
OF the Judges decided 10 put question to satisfy MS own
mind OF course he was not acting as counsel Tor the


Senator JOHNSON (risingj-what does the honorable


Mr. BUTLER-I mean precisely what I say-that it
cannot be supposed that the Senator was acting Tor the


Senator JoHNsoN-Mr Cbef.Justce, # the honorable
Manager means 20 mpute that IN anything have done
in this trial have been acting counsel or IN the spirit
Of counsel he does not know the man Of whom he speaks


am here to discharge duty and that duty propose 10
discharge. Il know the Law AS wen AS he does


Mr. BUILEk again TepSs 80 tnst my Se .pnossG
that he was acting for the President Having
put the question TO satisfy his mind upon something
which he wanted know how 1t DO that that opens
the case allow the Presidents counsel TO go on to
q new examinatiOnS How do know that he Is not
acting counsel for the President and that there not
some understanding between them. which do not
chargef How can the Presidents counsel Know vidal
satisfies the Senator's mind He recalls witness for
the purpose of satisfying his own mind agree that
common TO recall witnesses for somethng overlooked
or forgotten but have known that where meIn
ber Of the Court wants 20 satisfy himself by putting some
question that opens up the case to the counsel on t
other side to other questions The Court ahoWed
put questions, because Judge may want TO satisfy
bis mind particular point; but having sausned Dln
self on that particular point there Is end OF the mat
ter, and II does not open the case trust that nave
answered the honorable Senator from marylnnd that
make NO implication on him, but AIN putting 1t rlsht the


rise say that did not know that the counsel pro
posed 20 ask any questions OF the witness, and agree
do any such thing. lSepsation in COurtl


Mr.. BINGHAM-I desire, OH behalf OF the Managers TO
dsclan once for ALL that there intent by my
sociate has Just taken h seat any intent by the
right and the entire proprety Of Senators calling any
witness and putting any question which saey may sSe , MT
but recognize bis perfect rght 10 90 so ana tne ene
NJ EvARTs-A moments consideration, think, must
satisfy tho Senate and the that the question
70 WIetLer witness having been recalled TO answer the
question Of OF the judges the counsel on either sde
Obliged TO leave that portion Of the evidence incomplete
Some evidence might be brought out which, II stood
naked might be prjudics to one side or the other and
rules of examination, that the counsel should be per
med TO place the matter before the Court within the


MI. sT1NBERY-The Honorable Senator from Mary.


hand sy2s ps f s upon Ts
evidence has been INTO which was concealed book
examine II closed ~ by decision OF the
Court, Saturday; but i is nov opened 70 us by the
question Of the Senator Now IL possible that we must
take an answer, for better for worse TO question
which we did not puts IT, ia that answer the matter had
been cOndemnatoy 10 the Presidents II the answer had
been that President told the witness expressly that
he Intended violate the awthat he was acting m bad
fath-that he meant be told that.
because the fact brought out by Senator and not
by ourselves we caunot put question 20 elicit the
yhnla fVnfh IL tgstlm
ing. Suppose IL had been brought out by
Senator, the secretary Of War sacred
ton Does the doctrine Of estOppel in here that
whenever question il answered ON the prerogatory OF
nifty testing furtheri II then estOpped
not BY our own act not by the testimony which we called
out from the truth because Senator has chosen to put
question We hold that the door has been opened that
new testimony has been introduced Into the case ana
that we have q right crosse Samne the witness 70
plain the testimony to contradict we eau 10 impeseh
titled 10 every weapon which defendant has put
hso nis TS At,bopoh the Senate cannot fail 70
baye observed the extraordinary remarks which have
Just fallen from the bps of the honorable counsel for the
President, IL IL perfectly apparent TO Intelligent men,
the floor OF the Senate or in the galleries thar
the counsel for the President have attempted TO OBTAIN
through this witness the naked declarations OF the
accused 10 rehut the legal presumption OF Ms g aIs


ing from his having done an unlawful act am not sur
has discussed this question. III heard Alright the tes


Ony winch fen from the witness J: 50 testimony which % ut
eused. What 1t Nothing was said said the witness
In the nTst conversation ABOUT an sRpes u ba se wa
impossible 10 make case by wch 10 appear 70 the
courts These declarations of the President standing n
due form yet not satisfactory the counsel brought
up, DO question from te hOnOlaDle censof
sell and now they tell the Senate that they have right
10 crOss-esalnDe To crOssexanlne wHOnt 10 cioss
examine their own witnesses. For what purpose IN
search OF the TRUTH they soy. Well II IN pursuit OF
the truth under difficulties Laugher The witness mas
of no def iuff