Year: 1868

dent to select tool to take possession OF the War
Grant, to take possession and next the most honored
soldier OF the army, General Sherman. The Manager
who opened the case charged that the President was
looking out for tool that he was looking to
brevet rank, and that he did ind such
officer" Well, II that was his INTENT then it must
have been with the same intent that the President
would put General sherman IN the oiiice before he
must have been with the same intent that he would
take Of the most honored officers In the land and
ask him to come In and take the ONCE, not to carry
It on as he had carried on the war-a trusted and
honored man-but to become tool and O subor-
dinate. win the Managers dare TO say that Would
Thomass II they raise presumption that he
pointing General Thomas, how does it happen
that they will not give him benefit OF the
presumption arising from ~ his intent to get
officer man who would not be made
toos Take the case for instance OF Lord George Cor
don, who was indicted for a reasonable speech made
upon certain day before certain association. He
was allowed to go into proof running through
period Of two years before to show that In meetings
rising and insurrectiOn he had set his face against
1t. Lord George Gordon went back two years; but
ayers have fixed. We do not ask to give testimony
as to the Presidents declarations or the Presidents
intent, except as to acts which the Managers have
brought forward to raise presumption OF his guilt.
the appointment Of Mr. Cooper. The conversation we
Fight in the middle Of this transaction Do we want to
show by the fact OF his declarations to General Sher
man at that time that ne was seeking for an honor
fulf No. but to do that which the President believed
to be lawful. We will show you that he asked Gen.
eral sherman to take that office on the removal Of


Mr. BUTLER rose to object to Mr.. Stanbery's relat
ing what he intended to prove.


Mr.. STANBERY, refusing to yield, sad-I insist
npOn It as right II the Senate choose to stop me
win stop; but hope shall be allowed to state
the bar not to know that have perfect right to do
It, The Manager may answer my argument; but


Mr.. BurLER~if You look in the book Of State
Trials, which you hold In your hand you will find
that Mr.. Erskino stopped an advocate, In the same
case who was proceeding to state what ne intended


Mr.. STANBERY-I have been saying what shall
expect to prove; but the gentleman, taking me up,
does not know what he says. He puts an intent IN
my mind which have not got, as he has very good
faculty for putting ntents In other mems minds. We


General Sherman to take this ofce and that he told
him distinctly what his purpose was and that 1t was
to put the office in such situation as to drive Mr..
to argue the case. ! ask any lawyer who
ever tried q case where the question was
client was to prove the facts on which presumption
was sought to be raised by the prosecution whether
he may not show contemporaneous facts, covering
the same time those used against him, and decla
rations within the same time as those used against
him. and whether he will not be allowed to rebut the
general presumption OF guilt and to show that the
Intent was fair, honest and lawfulP


Mr. BUTLER-Mr. President and Senators, was
quite willing to leave this case to the Judgment Of
both lawyers and laymen Of the Senate without q
word Of argument, and only speak now to lawyers
because the learned counsel for the President empha


@ as S S% ne d TO
the rules Of evidence are founded on the
good sense Of MANKIND Shows as
likely or most unlikely to be true and to elicit
the TRUTH They address themselves just as much to
laymen as they do to lawyers, because there are no
men anywhere-wh0 cannot understand the rules OF
evidence. agree that labor, not under any great
under great difficulty In the opinion Of the presiding
officer and in his deciding, without argument, that
On 1s a have
the Senate because have long since learned to bow
to all decisions Of the tribunal before which act;
but this Is entirely another and different case What
is the exact question: 1t Ia, In the nterview-tO
wit on the l4th OF January-what conversation took
place between the President and you in reference to
the removal Of Mr.. Stanton9 What conversation ?
They do not ask for acts. How is this offer OF evil
dence attempted to be supported ! agree that the
torney General was the very best one he ever made
in his life, because It consisted in his merely
to say 80 without any imm0desty because he adopted
all that said, which is one OF the highest compi.
paid to s ss ss made thought e


hoped to convince the Senate that right in it,
but failed. II the argument can do any better now
the result. was arguing about putting the Presi-
dents acts before the Senate, In his appointing Mr.
Cooper and tried in every way to G@t E0n
them, but the Senate decided BY an almost
solid vote that 1t would not. Ny argument failed to
the musical voice Of my friend from OhioS laugh
ter) l think not. The point then was that I was
trying to not a,v % s ol M Sns
Senate decided that could not put in any acts ex
cept such were charged In the articles. We do not
Johnson to bribe to find tool In the gentleman
now on the stand, for whom we all have such hga
respect do not % think that we have that appreca
that he used the man who was on the
same stand an hour before as O tool, and
Judge We whether he IL not on his appear
ance here, ft instrument. Judge ye, Judge
ye. You saw him weak, vaclating, vain old man.
Just fit to be pampered by little bribe to do the
thing which no brave man would dare do. Let me
call your attention for q moment to him aS he ap-
peared on the stand yesterday: He was going on to
fay fay but but Ie Re saw that did not put hm in dig
meant to have the 0fiice.


MIR. BUTLER-He said that he had made up his
mind to use force.


Mr.. EvARrs-No; but to break the door, and when
he thought of shedding blood he retracted.


Mr.. BUTLER-And he remained Of that mind till
the next morning. What he found ~ change his
mind In the masquerade ball or elsewhere he has
not told us, nor can he tell when he did change
his mind. Put pass from that Now, how Is the
attempt TO be supportedf The learned gentleman
from Ohio says that In counterfeit case you have
to prove the scienter acts. Howf BY showing the
passage OF other counterfeit bills. Yes but gentle
men, did you hear In the case OF counterfeiters
the counterfeiter prove that he did not know that
the bill was bad by proving that at some other time
he passed good one. We try the counteIlet ' DILL
which we nailed to the counter on the 2lst OF Febru
ary and In order to prove that Mr.. Johnson did not
issue It he wants TO show that ne passed
a good bill on the l4th OF January. IL
does not take any longer TO understand that that s
the exact proposition. What Is the next ground
that IL Is put uponS But before pass from that,
will say further we proved that the counterfeiter
passed bad bill. am following the Illustration of
the learned counsel before me, and he proposes To
prove that at some other time he told somebody else
a good man-that he would not pass bad money, and
YOU are asked to admit that evidence. s there any
authority brought for itf No. What Is the next
ground on which IL Is putt The next ground Is that
II il competent In order TO show Andrew JOhns0n's
good character. II they put that in testimony
I viii open the door wide. | nave no objection
whatever that they shall oner 1t. (Laughter) will
~ hto oh "a IN lnva ~