Year: 1868

oaturday Morning, Msrch Z, 1903


The Eleven Ari,e,es of Inpeaebmtni.


The ten articles of impeachment as orr
gtnally reported charged the President with
substantially but one ofieIce-the attempted


removal of Stanton from the War Depart
ment. As collateral to the main charge he


was declared TO have conspired with Loren
20 Thomas 10 seize upon the War Office and
70 nave instructed General Emory that the


Id" oi congress requiring all orders relating


10 tue government Of the army TO be trans
mitted through the General in Chief was
unconstitutional. Afterwards the article
originally seventh was dropped as superfu-
Ous. As the articles then stood the prosaeu-
ton confined itself to very narrow limits, but
gained in directness and simplicity by so do
ing. The whole case was in nutshell. Here
is a law known as the Tenure-of Office act !;
and here is President sworn to see that law
faithfully executed. instead of observing his
oath, ii is alleged, with such legal amphfea-
ton and ''damnable iteration" as delight the
the souls OF lawyers, that the Executive DISC
beyed and set at naught the Law. All matters
OF fact alleged were such as the defence must
admit, and thus the tedious iormality of ex-
amining witnesses and adducing evidence
would be in great measure avoided.


Only one objection of serious import was
raised against placing impeachment on so
narrow basis, and with maturer reflection its
weight has been very much diminished The
objection is that if, before the conclusion of
the trial the Supreme Court should declare
the Civil Tenure act unconstitutional, the
prosecution must necessarily fail. Resting
upon single charge, the friends OF the Pres-
dent looked forward with great satisfaction to
judicial decision that should invaldate it.
But it has become clearer and clearer every
day that decision of the Supreme Court adj
verse to the constitutionality OF the Civil
Tenure act would have no effect whatever, in
protecting the President from the conse-
quences ofhaving violated it. A law duly
enacted by Congress, and passed by two
thirds vote in lieu of the Presidents approval,
needs no Judicial sanction to perfect it. 1t
has absolutely all the efficiency that can be
given it, subject of course to the liability of
becoming invalid subsequent to an adverse de-
cision OF the proper tribunal. To hold that the
Executive may indulge whatevermcrbid preiu-
dices he may chance to have, to the extent of
nullifying laws enacted by the representatives
OF the people until they have been subjected
to test that has never been held necessary
to perfect them, is to place the country at The
mercy OF single man. 1t is intrustine to
one individual powers that would constantly
threaten the safety of the Republic. This at
tempt to clothe the President with judicial
powers involves SO many absurdties that
there is not shadow of doubt that be would
be convicted on the articles originally report
ed, notwithstanding any action the Supreme
Court might take on the Tenure-ot-O Office act.


There is another important consideration
pertinent to this same branch of the subject.
The Senate organized as a court of impeach-
ment is higher judicial tribunal than the
Supreme Court itself. 1t is no longer leg
islative body requiring the cooperation of
other branches of the government, and liable
to have its work revised elsewhere. As a
court it becomes incapable of associating auy
other body with itself, and has absolutely no
superior except the constitution by which it
is authorized. In the matters which come
before it as court, its own Interpretation of
the constitution is final, and its decisoA can
not be reversed. No appeal lies to the Su-
preme Court. and the only ground upon
which decision of that tribunal can be held
binding upon the court of Impeachment
is the unauthorized assumption that the Sem
ate. when exercising its judicial powers, is a
subordinate court.


The additional article proposed by General
Butler and finally adopted must be consider
ed as chiefly valuable from the fact that it
will make the record of the trial more COM
plete exhibit OF the case Of the people of the
United States against Andrew johnson tor
the consideration OF posterity. The speeches
made by the President in Washington, and
during his Western tour, are explanatory of
his subsequent conduct in disobeying the
laws. They disclose the recklessness and
criminal disregard of the proprieties of his
position which have done so much to bring
the Office of President into contempt. All
these things are fully set forth in Gen. But
lers tenth article. He is of the opinion that
the proof to be adduced in support of the al
legations OF this article will not have a ten
dency to prolong the trial. The eleventh ar
ticle, adopted at the sug eston of Mr., Bing-
ham, is very comprehensive and embraces
charges ofviolation of various laws in pursu-
ance of a declaration made on the 18th of
August, 1866, that Congress is not a legal
body. Mr. Jenckes' proposition for an arti-
Gle alleging criminal intent on the part Of
the President has not been favorably receiv-
ed, but the House has reserved to itself the
power to present such further charges as
may, in the course of the proceedings, seem
advisable.