Year: 1868

! The Presidents answer to the Arti.
cles of impeachment presents no new
points, but places the issues of law anc
of tact So de.iait definitely before the Senate
that hardly any reply from tiie-4W
peachment Managers can be necessary


We can now separate the questions Of
fact from those of law, and see upon
what points testimony will be brought
and what will afford themes for argu,
ment merely. The answer to the first
article THAT based upon the attempted
removal of Secretary Stanton in vio-
lation of the Tenure-of-Office law
does not seem to deny any distinct
statement of fact contained in the ar
ticlc, but simply raises theissuc of law
whether the Tenure-of-Ofiice act is
constitutional. If this be correct, no
testimony can be necessary on either
side under the first article.


We Judge, also, that the answer to
the second and third articles denies no
statement of fact contained in them,
and therefore calls for no testimony.
The answer to the fourth article (charg-
ing conspiracy with Gen. Thomas to
employ force in obtaining possession
of the War Department. raises a
question of fact, upon which testimony
will be necessary. But the testimony
would be confined to the language and
acts of the President and Gen. Thom-
rs, and must necessarily be brief. The
answer to the fifth, sixth, seventh, and
eighth articles presents no issue of
fact whatever. In answer to the ninth
article, which charges an attempt to
induce Gen. Emory to violate the
Tcnure-ofOllicc law, the President
denies the fact, and states that he
merely designed to express his private
opinion that the law unconstitutional.
The answer to the tenth and eleventh
articles, based on his speeches made in
Swinging around the circle" raises
no issue of fact except upon the cor
rectness Of the published reports, and
no very serious question can arise on
that point, The testimony on the
trial, therefore, seems to be narrowed
down to the Presidents instructions to
or interviews with Gems, Thomas and
Emory relative to the employment of
force, and to the correctness of the
published reports of his speeches in
swinging around the circle. The
speeches will be proven by the report
ers, whose accuracy is unimpcachablc.
The interviews with Thomas and
Emory, and the evidence of intent to
use force, should occupy but few
hours. All the other issues are of
law, and rest O. argument merely, and
are mainly comprised in the single
point of the constitutionality of the
Tenure-ofO act.


The Senate having discussed the
whole question of the Tenure-of-O Office
law far more fully and ably before
passing it than the counsel for the
President are likely to do, it is abso-
lutely impossible that any argument
on this point can be brought before
the Senators with which they are not
already familiar. The Presidents
point, so frequently reiterated, that he
only desired to test the constitutional
ty Of the act, has no very great force,
as this end would be as fully accom-
plished by his conviction and removal
from office as by any other judgment.
As the Presidents counsel have shown
that they could prepare an answer in
eight days, for the preparation of
which they had asked forty, we trust
that the manifest simplicity of the
case, in all its issues of law and Of fact,
will cause the Senate to push the trial
to speedy conclusion. Delay can
really be ofno benefit to Mr.. johnson,
and must be seriously detrimental to
the progress of public business and
the interests of the country. The
course of the Opposition in the House
in raising a question as to the authori-
ty of the Managers to file their rcpli-
cation without previously submitting
it to the House, is but another effort to
obstruct the trial. But it will fail,
for nothing is clearer than that the
Managers have been clothed with full
powers in the premises.-Tribune.