history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第14部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


　the　next　Congress；　whether　adjourned　or　regular。

The　Resolution　was　adopted　by　a　vote　of　85　to　48；　whereupon　Mr。　Stevens　dejectedly　remarked　that；　〃after　the　vote　which　had　been　taken　on　this　resolution；　indicating　the　views　of　a　majority　of　the　House　in　regard　to　it；　I　am　willing　to　abandon　it。　I　therefore　move　that　the　Resolution　as　amended　be　laid　on　the　table；〃　which　motion　was　agreed　to。

On　the　15th　of　July；　1867；　Mr。　Farnsworth；　（Rep。）　of　Illinois；　offered　the　following　resolution　and　demanded　the　previous　question　thereon：

Resolved；　That　the　Committee　on　the　Judiciary　be　discharged　from　the　further　consideration　of　the　question　of　the　Impeachment　of　the　President　of　the　United　States；　and　that　the　testimony　already　taken　by　said　committee　be　printed　for　the　use　of　the　House。

The　resolution　was　not　seconded；　and　went　over　under　the　rules。

On　the　25th　of　Nov。　1867；　Mr。　Boutwell　（Rep。）；　on　behalf　of　the　Judiciary　Committee；　submitted　the　report　of　the　majority　of　that　committee；　of　the　testimony　taken　in　behalf　of　the　proposed　impeachment　of　the　President。　The　report　recommended　his　impeachment。

Mr。　Wilson；　submitted　the　report　of　the　minority　of　the　Committee　（himself　and　Mr。　Woodbridge）；　and　moved　the　adoption　of　the　following　resolution：

Resolved；　That　the　Committee　on　the　Judiciary　be　discharged　from　the　further　consideration　of　the　proposed　impeachment　of　the　President　of　the　United　States；　and　that　the　subject　be　laid　upon　the　table。

Mr。　Marshall；　on　behalf　of　himself　and　Mr。　Eldridge；　the　two　Democratic　members　of　the　committee；　stated　that　though　they　had　not　signed　the　minority　report　submitted　by　Mr。　Wilson；　they　joined　in　support　of　the　resolution　submitted　by　him；　and　asked　leave　to　introduce　and　have　printed　separate　views。

This；　the　first　session　of　the　Fortieth　Congress；　then　adjourned；　Dec。　2nd；　1867。

The　second　session　of　the　Fortieth　Congress　was　begun　on　the　same　day；　and　on　the　5th；　the　impeachment　question　came　up　in　its　order　in　the　House；　on　the　resolution　reported　from　the　Judiciary　Committee：

That　Andrew　Johnson；　President　of　the　United　States；　be　impeached　of　high　crimes　and　misdemeanors。

After　a　brief　discussion　of　the　order　of　business；　the　House　adjourned　for　that　day。

The　debate　was　closed　on　the　6th；　by　Messrs。　Boutwell　and　Wilson；　the　members　of　the　Committee　on　the　Judiciary　having　Charge　of　the　impeachment　measure。　The　closing　passages　of　Mr。　Boutwell's　speech　were　as　follows：

What　is　our　position　to…day？　Can　this　House　and　the　Senate；　with　the　knowledge　they　have　of　the　Presidents　purposes　and　of　the　character　of　the　men　who　surround　him；　give　him　the　necessary　power？　（to　remove　alleged　dishonest　officials。）　Do　they　not　feel　that　if　he　be　alloyed　such　power　these　places　will　be　given　to　worse　men？　Hence；　I　say　that　with　Mr。　Johnson　in　office　from　this　time　until　the　4th　of　March；　1869；　there　is　no　remedy　for　these　grievances。　These　are　considerations　why　we　should　not　hesitate　to　do　that　which　justice　authorizes　us　to　do　if　we　believe　that　the　President　has　been　guilty　of　impeachable　offenses。

Mr。　Speaker；　all　rests　here。　To　this　House　is　given　by　the　Constitution　the　sole　power　of　impeachment；　and　this　power　of　impeachment　furnishes　the　only　means　by　which　we　can　secure　the　execution　of　the　laws；　and　those　of　our　fellow　citizens　who　desire　the　administration　of　the　law　ought　to　sustain　this　House　while　it　executes　that　great　law　which　is　in　its　hands　and　which　is　nowhere　else；　while　it　performs　a　high　and　solemn　duty　resting　on　it　by　which　that　man　who　has　been　the　chief　violator　of　law　shall　be　removed；　and　without　which　there　can　be　no　execution　of　the　law　any　where。　Therefore　the　whole　responsibility；　whatever　it　may　be；　for　the　non…execution　of　the　laws　of　the　country；　is；　（in　the　presence　of　these　great　facts）　upon　this　House。　*　*　*　I　think　that　we　can　not　do　otherwise　than　believe；　that　he　has　disregarded　that　great　injunction　of　the　Constitution　to　take　care　that　the　laws　be　faithfully　executed；　that　there　is　but　one　remedy。　The　remedy　is　with　this　House；　and　it　is　nowhere　else。　If　we　neglect　or　refuse　to　use　our　powers　when　the　case　arises　demanding　decisive　action；　the　Government　ceases　to　be　a　Government　of　law　and　becomes　a　Government　of　men。

Mr。　Wilson；　Chairman　of　the　Committee；　closed　the　debate　in　the　following　remarks：

The　gentleman　from　Massachusetts　has　remarked　that　the　President　may　interfere　with　the　next　Presidential　election　in　the　Southern　States；　that　he　may　station　soldiers　at　the　voting　places　and　overawe　the　loyal　people　of　those　States；　especially　the　colored　vote：　and　we　must；　I　suppose；　guard　against　the　possibility　of　this　by　his　impeachment　and　removal　from　office。　This　position；　if　I　state　it　correctly；　is　startling。　Are　we　to　impeach　the　President　for　what　he　may　do　in　the　future？　Do　our　fears　constitute　in　the　President　high　crimes　and　misdemeanors？　Are　we　to　wander　beyond　the　record　of　this　case　and　found　our　judgment　on　the　possibilities　of　the　future？　This　would　lead　us　beyond　the　conscience　of　this　House。

Sir；　we　must　be　guided　by　some　rule　in　this　grave　proceedingsomething　more　certain　than　an　impossibility　to　arraign　the　President　for　a　specific　crimeand　when　the　gentleman　from　Massachusetts；　in　commenting　on　one　of　the　alleged　offenses　of　the　President；　that　we　could　not　arraign　him　for　the　specific　crime；　he　disclosed　the　weakness　of　the　case　we　are　now　considering。　If　we　cannot　arraign　the　President　for　a　specific　crime；　for　what　are　we　to　proceed　against　him？　For　a　bundle　of　generalities　such　as　we　have　in　the　volume　of　testimony　reported　by　the　committee　to　the　House　in　this　case？　If　we　cannot　state　upon　paper　a　specific　crime；　how　are　we　to　carry　this　case　to　the　Senate　for　trial？

At　the　close　of　his　speech；　Mr。　Wilson　moved　to　lay　the　subject　of　impeachment　on　the　table；　and　the　yeas　and　nays　were　ordered。

Several　motions　were　then　madeto　adjourn；　to　adjourn　to　a　day　certain；　etc。which　with　roll　calls　practically　consumed　the　day；　and　the　motion　of　Mr。　Wilson　went　over。

The　next　day；　Dec。　7th；　the　question　again　came　up　in　its　order；　and　after　several　unsuccessful　attempts　to　procure　a　vote　on　Mr。　Wilson's　motion　to　lay　the　Impeachment　Resolution　on　the　table；　Mr。　Wilson；　by　agreement；　withdrew　his　motion；　and　called　for　the　yeas　and　nays　on　the　adoption　of　the　resolution：

That　Andrew　Johnson；　President　of　the　United　States；　be　impeached　for　high　crimes　and　misdemeanors。

The　yeas　and　nays　were　ordered；　and　the　vote　was　yeas　57；　nays　108。

So　the　resolution　to　impeach　the　President　was　rejected　by　the　very　emphatic　vote　of　67　to　108nearly　two　to　oneand　by　a　House　two…thirds　Republican。

So　ended　the　first　effort　to　impeach　the　Presidentthe　first　formal　action　to　that　end　having　been　taken　on　January　7；　1867；　and　the　final　vote　at　the　close；　and　its　abandonment；　December　7；　1867。

For　eleven　months　the　overwhelming　Republican　majority　of　the　House　had　been　vigorously　active　in　its　search　for　evidence　of　criminality　on　the　part　of　the　President　that　would　warrant　the　basing　of　an　impeachment。　No　effort　was　left　untriedno　resource　that　promised　a　possible　hope　of　successful　exploitation　was　neglected。　Republican　partisans　were　set　to　the　work　of　sleuth…hounds　in　the　search　for　testimony　in　maintenance　of　the　charges　preferred；　and　an　ever　ready　partisan　press　teemed　from　the　beginning　to　the　end　of　that　time　with　animadversions　upon　Mr。　Johnson's　administration　and　denunciation　of　his　alleged　desertion　of　Mr。　Lincoln's　plan　of　restoration；　of　treachery　to　the　party　that　had　elected　him；　and　a　demand　for　his　impeachment。

To　be　lukewarm　in　that　controversy；　or　even　to　fail　to　join　in　the　popular　denunciation　of　Mr。　Johnson　was　to　put　one's　self　at　once　under　suspicion　with　the　great　mass　of　the　dominant　party；　and　without　the　pale　of　its　consideration。

For　eleven　months　the　country　was　kept　in　the　throes　of　partisan　turmoiland　for　what？　Simply　to　depose　a　President　who　had　disappointed　the　partisan　and　personal　expectations　and　schemes　of　a　rule　or　ruin　faction　which　was　able；　under　the　peculiar　conditions　of　the　time；　to　subordinate　to　its　purposes　a　large　proportion　of　the　dominant　party　of　that　day。

The　following　are　the　material　portions　of　the　testimony　taken　by　the　House　Committee　on　the　Judiciary　under　authority　of　the　resolutions　passed　by　the　House　of　Representatives　on　March　7；　1867；　for　the　impeachment　of　Andrew　Johnson。


Eighty…nine　witnesses　were　summoned　before　the　committee。　All　of　them　were　rigidly　examined；　and　several　of　them　were　called　and　examined　the　second　and　third　times。　Their　testimony　fills　more　than　twelve　hundred　octavo　pages　of　print。

The　first　witness　was　Gen。　L。　C。　Baker；　of　the　War　Department。　His　testimony　related　principally　to　a　certain　letter　alleged　to　have　been　written　by　Mr。　Johnson；　in　1864。

The　first　question　propounded　to　him　by　Mr。　Ashley；　was　as　follows：

I　wish　you　to　state　to　the　committee　the　contents；　as　nearly　as　you　can；　of　a　letter　which　you　have　in　your　possession；　written　by　Andrew　Johnson；　some　time　in　the　early　part　of　1864；　to　a　Southern　man；　giving　information　as　to　the　troops　about　the　Capitol　and　elsewhere；　and　advice　to　Jefferson　Davis。　State　where　that　letter　is；　and　give　the　contents　as　nearly　as　you　can；　the　history　of　it。

Mr。　Baker　answered　that　he　knew　there　was　a　letter　of　that　kind；　purporting　to　have　been　written　by　Andrew　Johnson；　when　he　was　acting　Governor　of　Tennessee。　That　the　letter　was　dated　at　Nashville　and　directed　to　Jefferson　Davis；　and　related　to　some　declared　policy　that　had　been　adopted　by　the　Confederacythat　the　letter　was　being　used　to　secure　an　appointmentthat　reference　was　made　to　troops；　but　nothing　about　localities　where　stationed；　or　numbers；　and　nothing　about　shipment　of　armor；　and　that　the　letter　was　stolen　from　Andrew　Johnson's　table　and　never　sent。

The　question　was　then　asked　of　the　witness　by　Mr。　Ashley：

State　whether　the　whole　import　of　the　letter　written　by　Mr。　Johnson；　was　not　to　turn　the　whole　power　which　he　possessed　in　Tennessee；　in　a　certain　contingency；　over　to　the　rebel　cause？

AnswerNo。　I　did　not　have　that　opinion　of　the　letter　exactly。　From　what　I　rec