Year: 1868

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COURT.


>o~~~~~~~o~~.>~~~~~-~-~


Thirteenth Day.


UNITED STATES SENATE CHAMBER,


WASHINGTON, April l3, 1868.


The court was opened in due form and the Mama
gers were announced at I'VE minutes past twelve,
Messrs Bingham, Butler and Williams only appear
ing. Mr.. Stevens was In his chair before the court
was opened. The other Managers entered shortly
afterwards.
DEBATE ON THE LIMITATION OF THE CLOSING ARdU


MENTS.


The CHIEF JUSTICE stated that the first business in
order was the consideration Of the following order
OF Senator Frelinghuysen, being an amendment Of
rule twenty-one:-


Ordered, That as many Of the Managers and the
counsel for the President be permitted to speak on
the final argument as shall choose to do 80.


Senator suMNER-I send to the Chair an amend
ment to that order, to come In at the end.


1t was read, as follows


Provided that the trial shall proceed without any
further delay or postponement ON this account


Senator FRELNGHUYsEN accepted the amendment.
Mr.. Manager WILLIAMS rose and asked the indul-
gence of the Senate for moment He said he did
not propose to contest the right Of the Senate to
adopt rule reasonably limiting the debate on the
final argument Of this question, in conformity with
the universal rule in the trial Of civil actions and
criminal indictments. He was not here to oppose
such reasonable Limitation as the interests Of JUS
tice may require or as may be necessary
to facilitate inst decision. He thought, how
ever, that the rule was calculated In some
degree to embarrass the gentlemen sent here to con-
duct this case on the part Of the people, The House
having devolved this duty upon seven Of Its men,
bers, in which they had not departed from the ordi
nary course. the effect Of the rule would be to ex
clude from the final debate on the articles submitted
by them at least four Of the Managers. He was not
opposed to reasonable limit. 1t would have been
in accordance with the rule In regard to interocutory
questions, and would have avoided the diflculty II
the Senate had said that the public convenience and
the interests OF the people required that GER
tain limited time should be divided among the
batoa Of the Managers s in the rst 'n
They thought unusual and they had directed their
chairman to make tn is application. There had been
United States. Mr.. Williams recited the crcum-
stances attending each Of the impeachments Of
Claiming Ss IN All snaoeoas so G
present, all the Managers were allowed to speak on
the final argument save in one instance, where there
speak, Mr.. Randolph, their chairman, spoke twice.
He (Mr. Wiliams) might be mistaken but he thought
through all its Managers had never been questioned.
One case in British history was familiar to the school
boy recoections OF every man In this nation, or who
is familiar with the English language-a case made
yolved as by this fact as that it was illustrated by
ever produced and that it had continued for seven
years. In the latter respect he hoped this would not
81 IT. but would pe that M the the
Managers The present case was not an ordinary
one Nothing in our history compared with it, They
ciate the magnitude OF the interests involved. He
felt the difficulty Of realizing Its magnitude and rising





but Of Chief Magistrate Of great people, and its
Importance was felt from sea to sea, with mil
limitation could be accounted for in only
only one way, namelySThat the case was
81 f &c or a = @ %ss SO pa s
from anybody. He had not, In what he had said
been moved by any considerations personal to him
ton to be heard did not rest heavily upon him Or at
all events he had lived too long to attempt to press
allowed an extension S OF time he did not know
whether he would speak on the final argument or
not; It would depend upon his strength and upon
what was said by others. He concluded by warn
ing the Senate that IL they placed such limit upon
case Of such magnitude 1t might hereafter be used
the number Of the counsel to one, or perhaps dis
pensing with them altogether.


Mr.. STEVENS, one OF the Managers, rose and sad:-I
have but few words to say and hose are OF very little
Importance do not expect, II the rule be relaxed
tos Say many words in the closing. argument. There
is single article which am held somewhat respon
sible for introducing, on which wish to address
the Senate for very brief space; but do desire
a s SsV may a ey Deem IN the
argument. have no objection Il do not speak for my
coleagues) IL the Senate should limit the time that
the Managers may have and let them divide 1t among
themselves. However, this Is q mere suggestion.
merely wish to say that trust that some further
give the re reasons sons Why | 50 pertinacionsIy in.
sisted upon the adoption OF an article that
the Managers had @ reported eayng that article ,s
l owe 1t TO myself and the country to give the
reasons why insisted with what is called Obstinacy
on having that article introduced; but am willing
TO be confined to any length OF time which the Senate
may deem proper. What have to say, can say
very beieny. Indeed, cannot, as matter Of fact,
suggestion, and beg pardon OF the Senate Tor having
infruded so long upoh its time.


Senator SHERMAN moved to amend the order SUBJ
mtted by Senator Frelnghuysen by striking out the
last proviso and inserting In lieu Of II another which
he sent TO the Clerks desk.


Senator FgELINGHUYsEN desired TO modify his own
resolution by adding another proviso that only one
counsel on the part OF the Managers shall be heard at
the close. He said II was not his purpose TO change
the rule excepting as to the number who should
speak.


fed by Senator Frelinghuysen, to be read, as fol-
Ordered rha. Managers and Of counsel for the
be to s6ssk , s The % aps .s
Without ry any further delay Or provided
Senator Sherman's amendment was to add to the
order the following g:-"But any additional time
allowed by this order to each side shall not exceed
three hours"


Mr.. BOUTWELL,, one Of the Managers rose and
said:-Mr Chief Justice and Senator's, should not
have arisen to speak this occasion had II not been
for the qualification made by the honorable senator
from New Jersey. ask the Senator to consider that
In the case of Judge Peck, after the testimony was
submitted to the Senate, 1t was first summed up by
two Managers on the part OF the House; that then
the counsel for the respondent argued the case for
the respondent by two OF their number, and that
then the case closed the part Of the House OF
Representatives by two arguments made by the
Managers. I ask the Senate TO consider that In the
trial or Judge Chase the argument on the part
of the House OF Representatives and the people or
the United States was closed by three Managers