history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第30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！


g　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　of　this　vote　was　very　much　the　same　as　on　the　previous　proposition。

The　rule　proposed　by　Mr。　Henderson　was　then　adopted。　The　conference　closed　shortly　after；　and　the　session　of　the　Senate　was　resumed。

The　next　day；　April　1st；　Mr。　Sumner　renewed　in　the　Senate　his　proposition　submitted　at　the　Conference　the　day　before　but　not　acted　upon；　to　change　the　rules　of　the　Senate　in　the　following　form：

It　appearing　from　the　reading　of　the　Journal　yesterday　that　on　a　question　where　the　Senate　were　equally　divided；　the　Chief　Justice；　presiding　on　the　trial　of　the　President；　gave　a　casting　vote；　it　is　hereby　ordered　that；　in　the　judgment　of　the　Senate；　such　vote　was　without　authority　under　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States。

The　proposition　was　put　to　vote　with　the　following　result：

YeasMessrs。　Cameron；　Chandler；　Cole；　Conkling；　Conness；　Cragin；　Drake；　Howard；　Howe；　Morgan；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morton；　Norton；　Ramsay；　Stewart；　Sumner；　Thayer；　Tipton；　Trumbull；　Williams；　Wilson2110　Republicans　and　1　Democrat。

NaysMessrs。　Anthony；　Bayard；　Buckalew；　Corbett；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Frelinghuysen；　Grimes；　Henderson；　Hendricks；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Ross；　Sherman；　Sprague；　Van　Winkle；　Vickers；　Willey2616　Republicans　and　10　Democrats。

So　the　proposed　order　was　rejected。　The　trial　then　proceeded。　The　answers　to　a　very　large　proportion　of　the　interrogatories　propounded　to　the　witnesses；　on　both　sides；　were　unimportant；　having　very　little　bearing；　either　way；　upon　the　case。　Twenty…eight　of　those　interrogatories；　however；　were　more　or　less　important；　and　were　challenged；　seven　by　the　defense；　and　twenty…one　by　the　prosecution。　For　convenience　of　reference；　these　interrogatories　are　numbered　from　one　to　twenty…eight；　inclusive；　with　the　answers　thereto；　when　permitted　to　be　answered；　as　follows：

Question　submitted　by　Mr。　Butler；　of　the　prosecution；　April　1st；　1868；　to　Mr。　Walter　A。　Burleigh；　witness　on　the　stand；　called　for　the　prosecution：

No。　1。

You　said　yesterday；　in　answer　to　my　question；　that　you　had　a　conversation　with　General　Lorenzo　Thomason　the　evening　of　the　21st　of　February　last。　State　if　he　said　anything　as　to　the　means　by　which　he　intended　to　obtain　or　was　directed　by　the　President　to　obtain　possession　of　the　War　Department。　If　so；　state　all　he　said；　as　nearly　as　you　can？

Mr。　Stanbery　objected。

Mr。　Drake　called　for　the　yeas　and　nays；　which　were　ordered；　and　the　vote　was　as　follows：

YeasAnthony；　Cameron；　Cattell；　Chandler；　Cole；　Conkling；　Conness；　Corbett；　Cragin；　Drake；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Frelinghuysen；　Grimes；　Henderson；　Howard；　Howe；　Morgan；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Morton；　Nye；　Patterson　of　New　Hampshire；　Pomeroy；　Ramsay；　Ross；　Sherman；　Sprague；　Stewart；　Sumner；　Thayer；　Tipton；　Trumbull；　Van　Winkle；　Willey；　Williams；　Wilson39all　Republicans。

Nays…Bayard；　Buckalew；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Hendricks；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Norton；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Vickers　11all　Democrats。

So；　the　Senate　decided　that　the　question　should　be　answered。

General　Butler　repeated　the　interrogatory；　and　Mr。　Burleigh's　answer　was　as　follows：

On　the　evening　of　February　21st　last；　I　learned　that　General　Thomas　had　been　appointed　Secretary　of　War　ad　interim；　I　think　while　at　the　Metropolitan　Hotel。　I　invited　Mr。　Leonard　Smith；　of　Leavenworth；　Kas。；　to　go　with　me　up　to　his　house　and　see　him。　We　took　a　carriage　and　went　up。　I　found　the　General　there　ready　to　go　out　with　his　daughters　to　spend　the　evening　at　some　place　of　amusement。　I　told　him　I　would　not　detain　him　if　he　was　going　out；　but　he　insisted　on　my　sitting　down　and　I　sat　down　for　a　few　moments。　I　told　him　I　had　learned　he　had　been　appointed　Secretary　of　War。　He　said　he　had；　that　he　had　been　appointed　that　day；　I　think；　that　after　receiving　his　appointment　from　the　President　he　went　to　the　War　Office　to　show　his　authority；　or　his　appoiniment；　to　Secretary　Stanton；　and　also　his　order　to　take　possession　of　the　office；　that　the　Secretary　remarked　to　him　that　he　supposed　he　would　give　him　time　to　remove　his　personal　effects；　or　his　private　papers；　or　something　to　that　effect；　and　the　answer　was　〃certainly。〃　He　said　that　in　a　short　time　the　Secretary　asked　him　if　he　would　give　him　a　copy　of　his　order；　and　he　replied　〃certainly；〃　and　gave　it　to　him。　He　said　that　it　was　no　more　than　right　to　give　him　time　to　take　out　his　personal　effects。　I　asked　him　when　he　was　going　to　assume　the　duties　of　the　office。　He　remarked　that　he　should　take　possession　the　next　morning　at　ten　o'clock；　which　would　be　the　22nd；　and　I　think　in　that　connection　he　stated　that　he　had　issued　some　order　in　regard　to　the　observance　of　the　day；　but　of　that　I　am　not　sure。　I　remarked　to　him　that　I　should　be　up　at　that　end　of　the　avenue　the　next　day；　and　he　asked　me　to　come　in　and　see　him。　I　asked　him　where　I　could　find　him。　and　he　said　in　the　Secretary's　room　up　stairs。　I　told　him　I　would　be　there。　Said　he；　〃be　there　punctually　at　10　o'clock。〃　Said　I；　〃you　are　going　to　take　possession　to…morrow？〃　〃Yes。〃　Said　he；　〃suppose　Stanton　objects　to　itresists？〃　〃Well；〃　said　he；〃I　expect　to　meet　force　by　force。　Or　use　force。〃

Mr。　Conkling：　〃Repeat　that。〃

The　witness。　I　asked　him　what　he　would　do　if　Stanton　objected；　or　resisted。　He　said　he　would　use　force；　or　resort　to　force。　Said　I；　〃Suppose　he　bars　the　doors？〃　His　reply　was。　〃I　will　break　them　down。〃　I　think　that　was　about　all　the　conversation　that　we　had　there　in　that　connection。

No。　2。

The　next　disputed　interrogatory　put　by　General　Butler　to　the　witness　was：

Shortly　after　this　conversation　about　which　you　have　testified；　and　after　the　President　restored　Major　General　Thomas　to　the　office　of　Adjutant　General；　if　you　know　the　fact　that　he　was　so　restored；　were　you　present　in　the　War　Department；　and　did　you　hear　Thomas　make　any　statements　to　the　officers　and　clerks；　or　either　of　them；　belonging　to　the　War　Office；　as　to　the　rules　and　orders　of　Mr。　Stanton　or　of　the　War　Office　which　he；　Thomas；　would　make；　revoke；　relax；　or　rescind；　in　favor　of　such　officers　or　employes　when　he　had　control　of　the　affairs　therein？　If　so；　state　as　near　as　you　can　when　it　was　such　conversation　occurred；　and　state　all　he　said；　as　near　as　you　can。

Mr。　Howard　demanded　the　yeas　and　nays　and　they　were　ordered　and　were　as　follows：

YeasAnthony　Cameron；　Cattell；　Chandler；　Cole；　Conkling；　Conness；　Corbett；　Cragin；　Drake；　Henderson　Howard；　Howe；　Morgan；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Morton；　Nye；　Patterson　of　New　Hampshire；　Pomeroy；　Ramsey；　Ross；　Sprague；　Stewart；　Sumner；　Thayer；　Tipton；　Trumbull；　Wilson28all　Republicans。

NaysBayard；　Buckalew；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Frelinghuysen；　Grimes；　Hendricks；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Norton；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Sherman；　Van　Winkle；　Vickers；　Willey；　Wilson2211　Republicans；　11　Democrats。

So　the　Senate　decided　that　the　question　should　be　answered。

Mr。　Butler：　With　the　leave　of　the　President；　I　will　put　this　question　by　portions。

Did　you　hear　Thomas　make　any　statement　to　the　officers　or　clerks；　or　either　of　them；　belonging　to　the　War　Office；　as　to　the　rules　and　orders　of　Mr。　Stanton；　or　of　the　office；　which　he；　Thomas；　would　revoke；　relax；　or　rescind；　in　favor　of　such　officers　and　employes　when　he　had　control　therein？

Answer：　The　General　remarked　to　me　that　he　had　made　an　arrangement　to　have　all　the　heads；　or　officers　in　charge　of　the　different　departments　of　the　office　come　in　with　their　clerks　that　morning；　as　he　wanted　to　address　them。　He　stated　that　the　rules　which　had　been　adopted　for　the　government　of　the　clerks　by　his　predecessor　were　of　a　very　arbitrary　character；　and　he　proposed　to　relax　them。　I　suggested　to　him　that　perhaps　I　had　better　go。　He　said；　〃no；　not　at　allremain；〃　and　I　sat　down　and　he　had　some　three　or　four　officersfour　or　five；　perhapscome　in；　and　each　one　brought　in　a　roomful　of　clerks；　and　he　made　an　address　to　each　company　as　they　came　in；　stating　to　them　that　he　did　not　propose　to　hold　them　strictly　to　the　letter　of　the　instructions；　but　when　they　wanted　to　go　out　they　could　go　out；　and　when　they　wanted　to　come　in　they　could　come　in；　that　he　regarded　them　all　as　gentlemen。　and　supposed　they…　would　do　their　duty；　and　he　should　require　them　to　do　their　duty；　but　so　far　as　their　little　indulgences　were　concernedI　suppose　such　as　going　out　across　the　street　or　something　of　that　kindhe　did　not　intend　to　interfere　with　them；　all　he　expected　was　that　they　would　do　their　duty。　I　waited　until　he　concluded；　and　we　took　a　walk；　and　I　came　away。

Mr。　Samuel　Wilkinson　testified　in　response　to　an　interrogatory　by　Mr。　Butler：

I　asked　him　（Thomas）　to　tell　me　what　had　occurred　that　morning　between　him　and　the　Secretary　of　War　in　his　endeavor　to　take　possession　of　the　War　Department。　He　hesitated　to　do　so　till　I　told　him　that　the　town　was　filled　with　rumors　of　the　change　that　had　been　made；　of　the　removal　of　Mr。　Stanton　and　the　appointment　of　himself。　He　then　said　that　since　the　affair　had　become　public　he　felt　relieved　to　speak　to　me　with　freedom　about　it。　He　drew　from　his　pocket　a　copy；　or　rather　the　original；　of　the　order　of　the　President　of　the　United　States；　directing　him　to　take　possession　of　the　War　Department　immediately。　He　told　me　that　he　had　taken　as　a　witness　of　his　action　General　Williams；　and　had　gone　up　into　the　War　Department　and　had　shown　to　Edwin　M。　Stanton　the　order　of　the　President；　and　had　demanded　by　virtue　of　that　order　the　possession　of　the　War　Department　and　its　books　and　papers。　He　told　me　that　Edwin　M。　Stanton；　after　reading　the　order；　had　asked　him　if　he　would　allow　him　sufficient　time　for　him　to　get　together　his　books；　papers；　and　other　personal　property　and　take　away　with　him；　that　he　told　him　that　he　would　allow　to　him　all　necessary　time　to　do　so；　and　had　then　withdrawn　from　Mr。　Stanton's　room。　He　further　told　me；　that　day　being　Friday；　that　the　next　day　would　be　what　he　called　a　dies　non；　being　the　holiday　of　the　anniversary　of　Washington's　birthday；　when　he　had　directed　that　the　War　Department　should　be　closed；　that　the　day　thereafter　would　be　Su