Year: 1868

First Judge Curtis, with an opening speech,
charged to repletion with law and compact
logical reasoning; then Nelson, with closing
argument of w estern fervor, Johnsonian
reckl ,ssness and more than Johnson's diffuse-
ness; Grossbeck with what is on all hands
acknowledged to be one of the most mastery
and eloquent addresses ever heard in the
Senate chamber; Evarts with an appeal occrl-
pying parts of four days in which grace of
style and felicity OF expression are not less
marked than profound learning and compre-
hension of the most abstruse problems of
law; and last of all, chivalrous Mr. Stanbery,
coming from sick-bed to give client with
whose fortunes he has completely identified
himself the benefit not only of his reason
ing but of his own personal testimony as to
the purity of motive and uprghtness of char
acter of the accused and the defence is
closed. H N.ra


But in spite of the fortunate selection of
counsel which has given the President tie
benefit of all this eloquence and learning, in
spite of the torrents of words that have been
poured over the acts of the criminal in the
attempt to wash away the deep stain of guilt
that a perverse and wicked heart has left up
on his official career, the accusation of the
American people stands with not an atom OF
its gravity abated. Not one of the counsel
has succeeded in so much as obscuring the
fatal fact that on the 21st of February the
President, in defiance of law and with intent
tn n afaat tho will M fha
thrnnoh their representatives, removed Ed
win NJ. Stanton from the War Office, so far
as any executive act could have efficiency in
doing so, and made Lorenzo Thomas Secre-
tary ad interim.


What does it matter that Nelson argues that
the President is entitled to "some considera-
ton" because he submits to be tried for this
crime instead of resorting to war, "as he
might have done ?"-or that the same coun-
sci, as the immediate representative of the
President, denies in his clients behalf the
Jurisdiction of the Senate, and the power Of
the House to present articles of impeach-
menr. This direct testimony that johnson
still clings with unwavering firmness to his
revolutionary ideas of the extent OF his pre-
negatives is not of nature to induce a le-
nient consideration OF his past acts. This
testimony completely undermines the other
wise effective words of the closing argument
of the defence. Mr.. Stanbery insisted that
he had made study of Johnson's character
and was sure that, like schoolboy detected
in mischief, he would never do so again, if
let off this once. But this can hardly avail
in defence of a man who sends an old and
intimate Tennessee friend into court to deny
once more the leg atty of the tribunal and to
express anew his contempt for the body
hanging on the verge of the government
and for the laws which it may enact.


1t is more than ever apparent that the
safety of the country will be gravely imperiled
by the acquittal of the President. Coming
out of the impeachment ordeal with the pres
tige of victory, with his antagonism infamed
by the attacks of his prosecutors and all the
vindictiveness of bis nature in the highest
state of excitement, all his previous exploits
might be expected to sink into comparative
insigniicance by the side of the unrestrained
lawlessness of his subsequent career. He is
not man whose natural recklessness can
safely be stimulated by allowing the senti-
mental appeal of Mr.. Stanbery's peroration.
or any consideration for his Senatorial action


in 1S6O-61. to shield him from the due con-
sequences of his crimes. Arnold did some
excellent fighting on the patriotic side befor e
bis treason, but this would hardly have saved
his neck after West Point, II he had fallen In.
to the hands Of the Americans.