history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第20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！


ing　its　party　to　approach　the　House　itself　in　a　united；　and　therefore　in　a　more　solemn　form；　and　to　demand　the　impeachment　of　the　President　of　the　United　States。

Sir；　we　have　long　been　in　the　midst　of　a　revolution。　Long；　long　has　our　country　been　agitated　by　the　throes　of　that　revolution。　But　we　are　now　approaching　the　last　and　the　final　stage　of　that　revolution　in　which；　like　many　revolutions　that　have　preceded　it。　a　legislative　power　not　representing　the　people　attempts　to　depose　the　executive　power；　and　thus　to　overthrow　that　constitutional　branch　of　the　Government。

There　is　nothing　new　in　all　this。　There　is　nothing　new　in　what　we　are　doing；　for　men　of　the　present　but　repeat　the　history　of　the　past。　We　are　traversing　over　and　over　again　the　days　of　Cromwell　and　Charles　I　and　Charles　II；　and　we　are　traversing　over　and　over　again　the　scenes　of　the　French　revolution；　baptized　in　blood　in　our　introductory　part；　but　I　trust　in　God　never　again　to　be　baptized　by　any　revolutionary　proceeding　on　the　part　of　this　House。

I　have　not　and　never　have　been　a　defender　of　all　the　opinions　of　General　Jackson；　but　those　on　the　other　side　who　pretend　to　hold　him　as　authority　and　those　on　this　side　who　have　ever　held　him　as　authority　will　find　that　in　uttering　the　opinions　which　I　have　I　but　reutter　the　opinions　which　he　advanced　in　his　veto　of　July　10；　1832；　when　he　said：

〃The　Congress；　the　Executive；　and　the　court　must　each　for　itself　be　guided　by　its　own　opinion　of　the　Constitution。　Each　public　officer　who　takes　the　oath　to　support　the　Constitution　swears　that　he　will　support　it　as　he　understands　it；　and　not　as　it　is　understood　by　others。〃

The　President　of　the　United　States　has　given　his　opinion　upon　the　official　tenure…of…office　act　and　upon　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States　by　the　appointment　of　Adjutant　General　Thomas　as　Secretary　of　War　ad　interim。　and　because　of　the　exercise　of　that　Constitutional　right　we　are　called　upon　here　at　once　to　pronounce　him　guilty　of　high　crimes　and　misdemeanors　and　to　demand　his　deposition　and　degradation　therefor。　*　*　*　*　*

Mr。　Spalding；　（Rep。　of　Ohio）。　Mr。　Speaker；　I　feel　myself　to　be　in　no　proper　frame　of　mind　or　heart　to　attempt　rhetorical　display　on　this　occasion。　I　can　appreciate　the　sentiments　of　the　gentleman　from　New　York　＇Mr。　Brooks＇　when　he　says　the　question　before　us　is　filled　with　solemnity；　but　when　he　attempts　by　gasconade　to　deter　members　on　this　side　of　the　House　from　the　conscientious　discharge　of　their　duty　I　say　to　my　friend　that　he　has　：。mistaken　his　calling。〃　Sir；　no　more　important　duty　could　be　devolved　upon　this　House　of　Representatives　than　that　of　considering　the　question　whether　articles　of　impeachment　shall　be　preferred　against　the　Chief　Magistrate　of　the　United　States；　and　for　long　months；　ay；　for　more　than　a　year；　sir。　I　have　resisted；　with　all　my　efforts　and　all　my　personal　influence；　the　approach　of　that　crisis　which　is　now　upon　us　and　before　us。　The　President　has　clone　many；　very　many；　censurable　acts：　but　I　could　not；　on　my　conscience。　say　that　he　should　be　holden　to　answer　upon　a　charge　of　〃high　crimes　and　misdemeanors〃　until　something　could　be　made　tangible　whereby　ha　had　brought　himself　in　open　conflict　with　the　Constitution　and　laws　of　the　Union。

It　has　seemed　to　me；　sir；　for　weeks；　that　this　high　officer　of　our　government　was　inviting　the　very　ordeal　which；　I　am　sorry　to　say；　is　now　upon　us；　and　the　dread　consequences　of　which　will　speedily　be　upon　him。　He　has　thrown　himself　violently　in　contact　with　an　Act　of　Congress　passed　on　the　2d　day　of　March　last　by　the　votes　of　the　constitutional　two…thirds　of　the　Senate　and　two…thirds　of　the　House　of　Representatives　over　his　veto　assigning　his　reasons　for　withholding　his　assent。　Now；　it　matters　not　how　many　acts　can　be　found　upon　the　statute　books　in　years　gone　by　that　would　sanction　the　removal　of　a　cabinet　officer　by　the　President；　the　gentleman　from　New　York　numbers　three。　He　may　reckon　up　thirty　or　three　hundred　and　still　if；　within　the　last　six　or　nine　months；　Congress　has；　in　a　constitutional　manner；　made　an　enactment　that　prohibits　such　removal；　and　the　executive　wantonly　disregards　such　enactment　and　attempts　to　remove　the　officer；　he　incurs　the　penalty　as　clearly　and　as　certainly　as　if　there　never　had　been　any　legislation　to　the　contrary。　That　subsequent　enactment；　if　it　be　constitutional；　repeals；　by　its　own　force；　all　other　prior　enactments　with　which　it　may　conflict；　and　in　nothing　is　that　enactment　more　significant　than　in　this；　that　the　President　shall　not　remove　any　civil　officer；　who　has　been　appointed　by　and　with　the　advice　and　consent　of　the　Senate；　without　the　concurrence　of　that　body；　when　it　is　itself　in　session。

Mr。　Bingham；　（Rep。）　of　Ohio。　Mr。　Speaker；　all　right…minded　men　must　concede　that　the　question　under　consideration　is　one　of　supreme　moment　to　till　the　people　of　the　Republic。　I　protest　for　myself；　sir；　that　I　am　utterly　incapable　of　approaching　the　discussion　of　this　question　in　the　spirit　of　a　partisan。　I　repel；　sir；　the　intimation　of　the　gentleman　from　New　York；　Mr。　Brooks；　that　I　am　careless　of　the　obligation　of　my　oath　or　unconcerned　about　the　supremacy　of　the　Constitution　and　the　laws。　I　look　upon　the　Constitution　of　the　country　as　the　very　breath　of　the　nation's　life。　I　invoke　this　day　upon　the　consideration　of　this　great　question　the　matchless　name　of　Washington；　as　did　the　gentleman；　and　ask　him；　in　the　consideration　of　the　matter　now　before　us；　to　ponder　upon　those　deathless　words　of　the　Father　of　our　Country；　wherein　he　declares　that　〃the　Constitution　which　at　any　time　exists；　till　changed　by　an　explicit　and　authentic　act　of　the　whole　people；　is　sacredly　obligatory　upon　all〃upon　all　sir；　from　the　President　to　the　humblest　citizenstanding　within　the　jurisdiction　of　the　Republic。　Washington　but　echoed　the　words　that　himself　and　his　associates　had　imbedded　in　the　text　of　the　Constitution；　that　〃this　Constitution　and　the　laws　passed　in　pursuance　thereof　shall　be　the　supreme　law　of　the　land。〃　It　shall　be　supreme　over　every　officer；　it　shall　be　supreme　over　every　State；　it　shall　be　supreme　over　every　territory；　it　shall　be　supreme　upon　every　deck　covered　by　your　flag　in　every　zone　all　round　the　globe。　Every　man　within　its　jurisdiction；　official　and　unofficial；　must　bow　to　the　supremacy　of　the　Constitution。

The　gentleman　says　that　the　issue　involved　is　an　issue　about　an　office。　I　beg　the　gentleman's　pardon。　The　issue　involved　is　whether　the　supremacy　of　the　Constitution　shall　be　maintained　by　the　people's　Representatives。　The　President　of　the　United　States　has　assumed；　sir；　to　set　himself　above　the　Constitution　and　the　laws。　He　has　assumed　to　defy　the　law；　he　has　assumed　to　challenge　the　people's　Representatives　to　sit　in　judgment　upon　his　malfeasance　in　office。　Every　man　who　has　considered　it　worth　while　to　observe　my　conduct　touching　this　question　that　has　so　long　agitated　this　House　and　agitated　this　country　may　have　discovered　that　I　have　kept　myself　back　and　have　endeavored　to　keep　others　back　from　making　any　unnecessary　issue　between　the　President　and　Representatives　of　the　people　touching　the　manner　in　which　he　discharged　the　duties　of　his　great　office。　I　had　no　desire；　sir；　to　have　resort　unnecessarily　to　this　highest　power　reposed　by　the　people　in　their　Representatives　and　their　Senators　for　the　vindication　of　their　own　violated　Constitution　and　violated　laws。　Notwithstanding　there　was　much　in　the　conduct　of　the　President　to　endanger　the　peace　and　repose　of　the　country；　yet；　so　long　as　there　was　any　doubt　upon　the　question　of　his　liability　to　impeachment　within　the　text　and　spirit　of　the　Constitution；　I　was　unwilling　to　utter　one　syllable　to　favor　such　a　proposition　or　to　record　a　vote　to　advance　it。　*　*　*

Mr。　Beck；　（Dem。　of　Ky。）　The　single　question　upon　which　the　decision　of　this　House　is　now　to　be　made　is　that　the　President　has　attempted　to　test　the　constitutionality　of　a　law　which　he　believes　to　be　unconstitutional。　All　the　testimony　heretofore　presented　upon　which　to　base　an　impeachment　of　the　President　was　decided　by　even　a　majority　of　the　Republican　members　of　this　House　to　be　insufficient　to　justify　impeachment。　All　questions　growing　out　of　the　combinations　and　conspiracies　lately　charged　upon　the　President　were　ruled　by　the　Reconstruction　Committee　to　be　insufficient；　and　were　not　brought　before　this　House。　And　the　sole　question　now　before　us　is；　is　there　anything　in　this　last　act　of　the　President　removing　Mr。　Stanton　and　appointing　Adjutant　General　Thomas　Secretary　of　War　ad　interim　to　justify　his　impeachment　by　this　House？

I　maintain　that　the　President　of　the　United　States　is　in　duty　bound　to　test　the　legality　of　every　law　which　he　thinks　interferes　with　his　rights　and　powers　as　the　Chief　Magistrate　of　this　nation。　Whenever　he　has　powers　conferred　upon　him　by　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States；　and　an　act　of　Congress　undertakes　to　deprive　him　of　those　powers；　or　any　of　them。　he　would　be　false　to　his　trust　as　the　Chief　Executive　of　this　nation；　false　to　the　interests　of　the　people　whom　he　represents；　if　he　did　not　by　every　means　in　his　power　seek　to　test　the　constitutionality　of　that　law；　and　to　take　whatever　steps　were　necessary　and　proper　to　have　it　tested　by　the　highest　tribunal　in　the　land；　and　to　ascertain　whether　he　has　a　right　under　the　Constitution　to　do　what　he　claims　the　right　to　do；　or　whether　Congress　has　the　right　to　deprive　him　of　the　powers　which　he　claims　have　been　vested　in　him　by　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States；　and　that　is　all　that　he　proposes　to　do　in　this　case。　*　*　*

Mr。　Logan；　（Rep。　of　Ills。）　Now；　Mr。　Speaker；　let　us　examine　this　question　for　a　moment。　It　seems　to　me　very　plain　and　easy　of　solution。　It　is　not　necessary；　in　order　to　decide　whether　this　action　of　the　President　of　the　United　States　comes　within　the　purview　and　meaning　of　this　statute；　for　us　to　talk　about　revolutions　or　what　this　man　or　that　man　has　said　or　decided。　What　has　been　the　act　of　the　President　is　the　question。　The　law　is　plain。　If　the　President　shall　appoint　or　shall　give　a　letter　of　authority　or　issue　a　commission　to　any　person；　without　the　consent　of　the　Senate；　he　is　guilty　ofwhat？　The　law　says　of　a　high　misdemeanor。　And；　under　and　by　virtue　of　th