history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第53章

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！


ic　assault　upon　the　dissenting　Republican　Senators；　and　the　insult　to　the　Senate　itself。

The　demand　for　adjournment　and　delay　seemed　to　have　been　understood　by　the　impeaching　majority　of　the　Senate；　and　was　of　course　promptly　granted　and　further　voting　postponed；　and　the　Senate　adjourned　to　May　26th。

The　next　ten　day　were　days　of　unrestof　anxiety　to　all　who　were　involved　or　in　any　way　interested　in　the　impeachment　proceeding。　While　the　result　of　the　16th　gave　hope　and　comfort　to　the　opponents　of　impeachment；　it　caused　little　or　no　perceptible　discouragement　to　its　more　radical　friends。　They　were　more　active　and　persistent　than　ever。　The　footsteps　of　the　anti…impeaching　Republicans　were　dogged　from　the　day's　beginning　to　its　end　and　far　into　the　night；　with　entreaties；　considerations　and　threats；　in　the　hope　of　securing　a　reversal　of　the　result　of　the　16th。　The　partisan　press　of　the　States　represented　by　the　anti…impeaching　Republicans　came　daily　filled　with　vigorous　animadversions　upon　their　action；　and　not　a　few　threats　of　violence　upon　their　return　to　their　constituents。　But　it　was　in　vain。

The　Senate　reassembled　on　the　26th　of　May　to　complete　the　vote　on　the　articles　of　impeachment。　After　the　usual　preliminary　proceedings；　Mr。　Williams　moved　to　begin　the　voting　on　the　Second　Article；　which　was　had　with　the　same　result　as　on　the　11thand　then　the　Third；　and　still　with　the　same　result。　It　then　became　manifest　that　it　was　useless　to　go　farther；　as　all　the　balance　had　been　rendered　certain　of　defeat；　and　by　still　more　decisive　votesa　considerable　number　of　those　so　far　voting　for　impeachment　having　committed　themselves　in　the　previous　conference　against　all　the　balance。　So；　to　save　themselves　from　being　forced　to　vote　against　impeachment　on　any　of　the　articles；　there　was　a　unanimous　vote　of　the　impeachers　to　abandon　the　case　and　adjournand　with　it　went　glimmering　the　visions　of　office；　and　spoils；　and　the　riotous　assaults　on　the　public　treasury　that　had　for　months　been　organizing　for　the　day　when　Mr。　Johnson　should　be　put　out　and　Mr。　Wade　put　in；　with　the　political　board　clear　for　a　NEW　DEAL。

An　analysis　of　the　Eleventh；　Article　shows。　that　it　comprised　four　distinct　counts；　or　accusations。

FirstThat　Mr。　Johnson　had　said　that　the　Thirty…Ninth　Congress　was　not　a　Congress　of　the　United　States；　but　a　Congress　of　only　part　of　the　States；　and　therefore　had　no　power　to　propose　amendments　the　Constitution。

The　latter　clause　of　this　accusation　was　the　only　portion　of　the　first　count　that　received　any　consideration　during　the　trial；　and　the　only　testimony　brought　in　its　support　was　the　Parsons…Johnson　telegraphic　correspondence　set　out　in　Interrogatory　No。　5。

In　that　dispatch；　referring　to　then　pending　Constitutional　amendment　（the　14th）　Mr。　Johnson　referred　to　Congress　as　〃a　set　of　individuals。〃　Mr。　Manager　Boutwell　declared　this　expression　to　be　〃the　gist　of　the　offense　of　this　particular　telegraphic　dispatch。〃

Counsel　for　defense　objected　to　this　testimony；　but　it　was　received　by　a　vote　of　yeas　twenty…seven；　nays　seventeen。

As　the　Fourteenth　Amendment　was　not　declared　adopted　or　a　part　of　the　Constitution　for　more　than　a　year　after　the　transmission　of　that　dispatch；　and　as　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States　prohibits　any　abridgment　of　the　freedom　of　speech；　and　as　this　remark　was　unaccompanied　by　any　act　in　violation　of　law；　it　is　difficult　to　see　how　it　could　be　construed　into　an　impeachable　offense。　Moreover；　saying　nothing　of　the　good　taste　or　propriety　of　that　dispatch；　Mr。　Johnson　was　opposed　to　the　proposed　amendment；　and　had　the　same　right　to　oppose　it；　or　to　characterize　it　or　the　members　of　Congress　favoring　it；　as　had　any　private　citizen；　or　as　had　the　members　of　Congress　to　characterize　his　action　in　the　premises；　without　being　called　to　account　therefor。

The　second　count　of　that　article　was：

Violation　of　the　Tenure…of…Office　Act　of　March　2nd；　1867；　in　seeking　to　prevent　the　resumption　by　Mr。　Stanton　of　the　office　of　Secretary　of　War。

This　clause　had　been　very　effectually　disposed　of　by　Messrs。　Sherman　and　Howe　several　days　before　the　vote　was　taken　on　the　Eleventh　Article；　when　they　pointed　out　the　fact　that　the　language　　cage　of　the　first　section　of　the　Tenure…of…Office　Act　clearly　excepted；　and　was　intended　by　the　Senate；　to　except　Mr。　Stanton　and　all　other　persons　then　in　Mr。　Johnson's　Cabinet　who　had　been　originally　appointed　by　Mr。　Lincoln　and　were　still　holding　over　under　Mr。　Johnson　without　having　been　recommissioned　by　him；　and　that　Mr。　Johnson　had　therefore　the　legal　right　and　power　to　remove　them　at　his　pleasure。

And　so　convincing　had　been　the　argument　of　those　gentlemen　at　that　time；　that　there　was　unanimous　consent　on　the　pro…　impeachment　side　of　the　Senate；　on　two　different　occasions；　to　set　aside　the　First　Article；　of　which　the　alleged　unlawful　attempt　to　remove　Mr。　Stanton　was　practically　the　principal　accusation。　Not　illogically；　that　unanimous　consent　to　abandon　the　First　article　by　thus　setting　it　aside；　and　afterwards　refusing　to　put　it　to　a　vote；　may　be　said　to　have　been　equivalent　to　a　vote　of　its　insufficiency。

It　is　pertinent　to　suggest　here　that　the　President　believed　the　Tenure…of…Office　Act　to　be　unconstitutional；　as　it　was　clearly　an　attempted　abridgment　of　his　power　over　his　Cabinet　which　had　never　before　been　questioned　by　Congress。　The　only　method　left　him　for　the　determination　of　that　question　was　in　the　course　he　took；　except　by　an　agreed　case；　but　it　is　manifest　from　the　record　that　no　such　agreement　could　be　had；　as　an　effort　thereto　was　made　in　the　Thomas　case　in　the　District　Court；　but　failed；　the　prosecution　withdrawing　the　case　at　the　point　where　that　purpose　of　the　President　became　manifest。

The　third　count　was：

Attempting　to　prevent　the　execution　of　the　Army　appropriation　Act　of　March　2nd；　1867。

The　means　specified　in　this　alleged　attempt　was　the　appointment　of　Mr。　Edward　Cooper　to　be　Assistant　Secretary　of　the　Treasury；　with　power　to　draw　warrants　on　the　Treasury　without　the　consent　of　the　Secretarythe　purpose　being　to　show　that；　with　General　Thomas　acting　as　Secretary　of　War；　and　Mr。　Cooper　as　Assistant　Secretary　of　the　Treasury　to　honor　General　Thomas'　drafts；　and　thus；　in　control　of　expenditures　for　the　support　of　the　Army；　a　conspiracy　was　sought　to　be　proven　whereby　the　President　intended　and　expected　to　defeat　the　Reconstruction　Acts　of　Congress　by　preventing　the　use　of　the　Army　for　its　enforcement。

Mr。　Johnson；　of　the　Court；　asked　this　question：

The　Managers　are　requested　to　say　whether　they　propose　to　show　whether　Mr。　Cooper　was　appointed　by　the　President　in　November；　1867；　as　a　means　to　obtain　unlawful　possession　of　the　public　money；　other　than　by　the　fact　of　the　appointment　itself？

Mr。　Manager　Butler　answered：

We　certainly　do。

Mr。　Butler　read　the　law　on　this　subject；　passed　March　2nd；　1867；　as　follows：

That　the　Secretary　of　the　Treasury　shall　have　power；　by　appointment　under　his　hand　and　official　seal；　to　delegate　to　one　of　the　Assistant　Secretaries　of　the　Treasury　authority　to　sign　in　his　stead　all　warrants　for　the　payment　of　money　into　the　public　Treasury　and　all　warrants　for　the　disbursments　from　the　public　Treasury　of　money　certified　by　the　accounting　officers　of　the　Treasury　to　be　due　upon　accounts　duly　audited　and　settle　by　them；　and　such　warrants　signed　shall　be　in　all　cases　of　the　same　validity　as　if　they　had　been　signed　by　the　Secretary　of　the　Treasury　himself。

Mr。　William　E。　Chandler；　who　had　been　Assistant　Secretary　of　the　Treasury；　was　on　the　witness　stand；　called　by　the　prosecution。　Mr。　Butler　asked　whether　it　was　the　practice　of　the　Assistant　Secretary　to　act　as　Secretary　in　case　of　removal　of　the　Secretary。

Answer：　I　am　not　certain　that　it　is；　without　his　appointment　as　Acting　Secretary　by　the　President。

Mr。　Fessenden；　of　the　Court；　propounded　this　interrogatory？

1stHas　it　been　the　practice；　since　the　passage　of　the　law；　for　an　Assistant　Secretary　to　sign　warrants　unless　especially　appointed　and　authorized　by　the　Secretary　of　the　Treasury？

2ndHas　any　Assistant　Secretary　been　authorized　to　sign　any　warrants　except　such　as　are　specified　in　the　Act？

The　witness　answered　as　to　the