history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第32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!
ort of Mr。 Seward and asked the President to review his decision。
According to the best information I can obtain; I state that ON THE 9TH OF MARCH; 1868; General Benjamin F。 Butler addressed a letter to J。 W。 Shaffer; in which he stated that he was 〃clearly of the opinion that; under the claim of the United States its citizens have the exclusive right to take guano there;〃 and that he had never been able to understand why the executive did not long since assert the rights of the government; and sustain the rightful claims of its citizens to the possession of the island IN THE MOST FORCIBLE MANNER consistent with the dignity and honor of the Nation。
The letter was concurred in and approved of by John A。 Logan; J。 A。 Garfield; W。 H。 Koontz; J。 K。 Moorhead and John A。 Bingham; on the same day; 9th of March; 1868。
This letter expressing the opinion of Generals Butler; Logan and Garfield was placed in the hands of the President by Chauncey F。 Black; who; on the 16th of March; 1868; addressed a letter to him in which he enclosed a copy of the same with the concurrence of Thaddeus Stevens; John A。 Bingham; J。 G。 Blaine; J。 K。 Moorhead and William H。 Koontz。
After the date of this letter; and while Judge Black was the counsel of the respondent in this cause; he had an interview with the President; in which he urged immediate action on his part and the sending an armed vessel to take possession of the island; and because the President refused to do so; Judge Black; on the 19th of March; 1868; declined to appear further as his counsel in this case。
Such are the facts in regard to the withdrawal of Judge Black; according to the。 best information I can obtain。
The island of Alta Vela; or the claim for damages; is said to amount in value to more than a million dollars; and it is quite likely that an extensive speculation is on foot。 I have no reason to charge that any of the managers are engaged in it; and presume that the letters were signed; as such communications are often signed; by members of Congress; through the importunity of friends。
Judge Black no doubt thought it was his duty to other clients to press this claims but how did the President view it?
Senators; I ask you for a moment to put yourself in the place of the President of the United States; and as this is made a matter of railing accusation against him; to consider how the President of the United States felt it。
There are two or three facts to which I desire to call the attention of the Senate and the country in connection with these recommendations。 They are; first; that they were all gotten up after this impeachment proceeding was commenced against the President of the United States。
Another strong and powerful fact to be noticed in vindication of the President of the United States; in reference to this case which has been so strongly preferred against him; is that these recommendations were signed by four of the honorable; gentlemen to whom the House of Representatives have intrusted the duty of managing this great impeachment against him。
Of course exception was taken to this statement; and to the revisal inferences therefrom; and the authenticity of the signatures mentioned at first denied; and then an effort made to explain them away; but it is unsuccessful。
The incident left a fixed impression; at least in the minds of many of the Senators; that an effort had been made to coerce the President; in fear of successful impeachment; into the perpetration of a cowardly and disgraceful international act; not only by his then Chief of Counsel; but also by a number of his active prosecutors on the part of the House。
It would be difficult to fittingly characterize this scandalous effort to pervert a great State trial into an instrumentality for the successful exploitation of a commercial venture which was by no means free from the elements of international robbery。
Yet to Mr。 Johnson's lasting credit; he proved that he possessed the honesty and courage to dare his enemies to do their worsthe would not smirch his own name and disgrace his country and his great office; by using its power for the…promotion of an enterprise not far removed from a scheme of personal plunder; let it cost him what it might。 It was a heroic act; and bravely; unselfishly; modestly performed。
CHAPTER IX。 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES AND THEIR TESTIMONY。
The initial proceedings to the taking of testimony; while to a degree foreshadowing a partisan division in the trial; also demonstrated the presence of a Republican minority which could not at all times; be depended upon to register the decrees of the more radical portion of the body。 The first development of this fact came in the defeat of a proposition to amend the rules in the interest of the prosecution; and again on the examination of Mr。 Burleigh; a delegate from Dakota Territory in the House of Representatives and a witness brought by the prosecution on March 31st。 Mr。 Butler; examining the witness; asked the question:
Had you on the evening before seen General Thomas? * * * Had you a communication with him?
Answer。 Yes sir。
Mr。 Stanbery objected; and the Chief Justice ruled that the testimony was competent and would be heard 〃unless the Senate think otherwise。〃
To this ruling Mr。 Drake objected and appealed from the decision of the Chair to the Senate。 It appeared to be not to the ruling per se; that Mr。 Drake objected; but to the right of the Chair to rule at all upon the admissibility of testimony。 Mr。 Drake representing the extremists of the dominant side of the Chamber。 There seemed to be apprehension of the effect upon the Senate of the absolute judicial fairness of the rulings of the Chief Justice; and the great weight they would naturally have; coming from so just and eminent a jurist。 After discussion; Mr。 Wilson moved that the Senate retire for consultation。
The vote on this motion was a tie; being twenty…five for and twenty…five against retiring; whereupon the Chief Justice announced the fact of a tie and voted 〃yea;〃 and the Senate retired to its consultation room; where; after discussion and repeated suggestions of amendment to the rules; the following resolution was offered by Mr。 Henderson:
Resolved; That rule 7 be amended by substituting therefor the following:
The presiding officer of the Senate shall direct all necessary preparations in the Senate Chamber; and the presiding officer in the trial shall direct all the forms of proceeding while the Senate are sitting for the purpose of trying an impeachment; and all forms during the trial not otherwise provided for。 And the presiding officer on the trial may rule all questions of of evidence and incidental questions; which ruling shall stand as the judgment of the Senate; unless some member of the Senate shall ask that a formal vote be taken thereon; in which case it shall be submitted to the Senate for decision; or he may; at his option; in the first instance; submit any such question to a vote of the members of the Senate。
Mr。 Morrill; of Maine; moved to amend the proposed rule by striking out the words 〃which ruling shall stand as the judgment of the Senate;〃 which was rejected without a division。
Mr。 Sumner then moved to substitute the following:
That the chief justice of the United States; presiding in the Senate on the trial of the President of the United States; is not a member of the Senate; and has no authority under the Constitution to vote on any question during the trial; and he can pronounce decision only as the organ of the Senate; with its assent。
It is not insisted here that there was any sinister purpose in this proposition; yet the possibilities; in case of its adoption; were very grave。 Like the wasp; the sting was in the tail〃he (the chief justice;) can pronounce decision only as the organ of the Senate; WITH ITS ASSENT! Had that rule been adopted; suppose the Senate; with; its vote of forty…two Republicans and twelve Democrats; upon failure of conviction by a two…thirds vote had refused or refrained on a party vote from giving 〃its assent〃 to a judgment of acquittal?
The vote upon this proposed amendment was as follows:
For its adoptionMessrs。 Cameron; Cattell; Chandler; Conkling; Conness; Corbett; Cragin; Drake; Howard; Morgan; Morrill of Maine; Morton; Nye; Pomeroy; Ramsay; Stewart; Sumner; Thayer; Tipton; Trumbull; Williams; Wilson22all Republicans。
Against its adoptionMessrs。 Bayard; Buckalew; Cole; Davis; Dixon; Doolittle; Edmunds; Ferry; Fessenden; Fowler; Frelinghuysen; Henderson; Hendricks; Howe; Johnson; McCreery; Morrill of Vermont; Norton; Patterson of New Hampshire; Patterson of Tennessee; Ross; Sherman; Sprague; Van Winkle; Vickers; Willey2615 Republicans and 11 Democrats。
So the resolution was rejectedevery aye vote a Republican; and all but one; Mr。 Trumbull; afterwards voting to impeach the President at tHe close of the trialeleven Democrats and fifteen Republicans voting nay。
Mr。 Drake then offered the following:
It is the judgment of the Senate that under the Constitution the Chief Justice presiding over the Senate in the pending trial has no privilege of ruling questions of law arising thereon; but that all such questions shall be submitted to a decision by the Senate alone。
It would be difficult to formulate a proposition better calculated to taint the proceedings with a partisan bias than this one by Mr。 Drake。 The impeachment movement was in a very large sense; if not entirely; a partisan enterprise。 It had its origin in partisan differences; and was based mainly on differences as to public policies at issue between the two great parties of the countryand while it was expected that every political。 friend of the President would vote against the impeachment; it was DEMANDED; and made a test of party fealty; that every Republican Senator should vote for his conviction。 Therefore; and perhaps it was not illogical from these premises; party leaders of Mr。 Drake's inclination should not relish the influence the legal; unbiased and non…partisan rulings of the Chief Justice might have upon his more conservatively inclined fellow partisans of the body。
Mr。 Drake called for the yeas and nays; which were ordered; and the vote was yeas 20; nays 30。 The personality