history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第33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！



YeasAnthony；　Bayard；　Buckalew；　Cole；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Frelinghuysen；　Grimes；　Henderson；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Morton；　Norton；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Ross；　Sherman；　Sumner；　Trumbull；　Van　Winkle；　Vickers；　Willey1616　Republicans　and　10　Democrats。

Nays…Cattell；　Chandler；　Conkling；　Conness；　Corbett；　Cragin；　Drake；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Harlan；　Howard；　Howe；　Morgan；　Nye；　Pomeroy；　Ramsay；　Stewart；　Thayer；　Tipton；　Williams；　Wilson；　Yates22all　Republicans。

The　question　was　decided　to　be　admissible；　and　the　anawer　was　〃yes。〃

No。　16。

The　next　question；　in　immediate　connection　with　the　last；　was：

If　he　did；　state　what　he　said　his　purpose　was？

The　yeas　and　nays　were　ordered　and　the　vote　was：

YeasAnthony；　Bayard；　Buckalew；　Cole；　Cobertt；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Frelinghuysen；　Grimes；　Henderson；　Hendricks；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Morton；　Norton；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Ross；　Sherman；　Sumner；　Trumbull；　Van　Winkle；　Vickers；　Willey2615　Republicans　and　11　Democrats。

NaysCameron；　Cattell；　Chandler；　Conkling；　Conness；　Cragin；　Drake；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Harlan；　Howard；　Howe；　Morgan；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Nye；　Patterson　of　New　Hampshire；　Pomeroy；　Ramsay；　Stewart；　Thayer；　　Tipton；　Williams；　Wilson；　Yates25all　Republicans。

So　the　question　was　permitted　to　be　answered；　and　General　Sherman　said：

The　President　told　me　that　the　relations　between　himself　and　Mr。　Stanton；　and　between　Mr。　Stanton　and　the　other　members　of　the　Cabinet；　were　such　that　he　could　not　execute　the　office　which　he　filled　as　President　of　the　United　States　without　making　provision　ad　interim　for　that　office；　that　he　had　the　right　under　the　law；　he　claimed　to　have　the　right；　and　his　purpose　was　to　have　the　office　administered　in　the　interest　of　the　Army　and　of　the　Country；　and　he　offered　me　the　office　in　that　view。　He　did　not　state　to　me　then　that　his　purpose　was　to　bring　it　to　the　Courts　directly；　but　for　the　purpose　of　having　the　office　administered　properly　in　the　interest　of　the　Army　and　the　whole　Country。　I　asked　him　why　lawyers　could　not　make　a　case；　and　not　bring　me；　or　any　ofcer　of　the　Army；　into　the　controversy。　His　answer　was　that　it　was　found　impossible；　or　a　case　could　not　be　made　up；　but；　said　he　〃if　we　can　bring　the　case　to　the　Courts；　it　would　not　stand　half　an　hour。〃

Mr。　Butler；　of　the　Prosecution；　objected；　and　after　debate；　General　Sherman　continued：

The　question　first　asked　me　seemed　to　restrict　me　so　close　to　the　purpose　that　I　endeavored　to　confine　myself　to　that　point　alone。　On　the　first　day；　or　first　interview；　in　which　the　President　offered　me　the　appointment　ad　interim；　he　confined　himself　to　very　general　terms；　and　I　gave　him　no　definite　answer。　The　second　interview；　which　was　on　the　afternoon　of　the　30th；　was　the　interview　during　which　he　made　the　points　which　1　have　testified　to。　In　speaking　he　referred　to　the　constitutionality　of　the　bill　known　as　the　civil　tenure…of…office　bill；　I　think；　or　the　tenure　of　civil　office　bill；　and　it　was　the　constitutionality　of　that　bill　which　he　seemed　desirous　of　having　tested；　and　which；　he　said；　if　it　could　be　brought　before　the　Supreme　Court　properly；　would　not　stand　half　an　hour。　We　also　spoke　of　force。　I　first　stated　that　if　Mr。　Stanton　would　simply　retire；　although　it　was　against　my　interest；　against　my　desire；　against　my　personal　wishes；　and　against　my　official　wishes；　I　might　be　willing　to　undertake　to　administer　the　office　ad　interim。　Then　he　supposed　the　point　was　yielded；　and　I　made　this　point？　〃Suppose　Mr。　Stanton　do　not　yield？〃　he　answered；　〃Oh！　he　will　make　no　objection；　you　present　the　order　and　he　will　retire。〃　I　expressed　my　doubt；　and　he　remarked。　〃I　know　him　better　than　you　do：　he　is　cowardly。〃　I　then　begged　to　be　excused　from　giving　him　an　answer　to　give　the　subject　more　reflection；　and　I　gave　him　my　final　answer　in　writing。　I　think　that　letter；　if　you　insist　on　knowing　my　views；　should　come　into　evidence；　and　not　parol　testimony　taken　up；　but　my　reasons　for　declining　the　office　were　mostly　personal　in　their　nature。

Mr。　Henderson　（of　the　Court）　asked　this　question：

Did　the　President；　on　either　of　the　occasions　alluded　to；　express　to　you　a　fixed　purpose　or　determination　to　remove　Mr。　Stanton　from　his　office？

General　Sherman　answered：

If　by　removal　is　meant　a　removal　by　force；　he　never　conveyed　to　my　mind　such　an　impression；　but　he　did　most　unmistakably　say　that　he　could　have　no　more　intercourse　with　him　in　the　relation　of　President　and　Secretary　of　War。

Mr。　Howard　（of　the　Court）　asked　the　General：

You　say　the　President　spoke　of　force。　What　did　he　say　about　force？

General　Sherman　answered：

I　enquired；　〃Suppose　Mr。　Stanton　do　not　yield？　What　then　shall　be　done？〃　〃Oh；〃　said　he；　〃there　is　no　necessity　of　considering　that　question。　Upon　the　presentation　of　an　order　he　will　simply　go　away；　or　retire。

Mr。　Henderson　（of　the　Court）　asked　the　question：

Did　you　give　any　opinion；　or　advice　to　the　President　on　either　of　those　occasions　in　regard　to　the　legality　or　propriety　of　an　ad　interim　appointment；　and　if　so；　what　advice　did　you　give；　or　what　opinion　did　you　express　to　him？

Mr。　Bingham　of　the　prosecution；　objected；　and　the　Chair　put　the　question　to　the　Senate　whether　it　should　be　answered。　The　Senate；　without　a　division；　refused　answer　to　the　question；　and　the　examination　of　Gen。　Sherman　closed　for　that　day。

No。　17。

Wednesday；　April　15th。　The　defense　offered　several　extracts　from　records　of　the　Navy　Department；　to　prove　the　practice　of　the　Government　in　cases　of　removal　from　office　by　different　Presidents　prior　to　Mr。　Johnson。　of　which　the　following　are　samples：

NAVY　AGENCY　AT　NEW　YORK。

1861。　June　20。　Isaac　Henderson　was；　by　direction　of　the　President；　removed　from　the　office　of　Navy　agent　at　New　York；　and　instructed　to　transfer　to　Paymaster　John　D。　Gibson；　of　United　States　Navy；　all　the　public　funds　and　other　property　in　his　charge。　Navy　Agency　at　Philadelphia。

Dec。　26；　1851。　James　S。　Chambers　was　removed　from　the　office　of　Navy　Agent　at　Philadelphia　and　instructed　to　transfer　to　Paymaster　A。　E。　Watson；　U。　S。　Navy；　all　the　public　funds　and　other　property　in　his　charge。

The　prosecution　objected　and　the　yeas　and　nays　were　ordered。

YeasAnthony；　Bayard；　Buckalew；　Cole；　Conkling；　Corbett；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Frelinghuysen；　Grimes；　Henderson；　Hendricks；　Howe；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Morton；　Patterson　of　New　Hampshire；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Ross；　Saulsbery；　Sherman；　Stewart；　Sumner；　Trumbull；　Van　Winkle；　Vickers；　Willey；　Wilson；　Yates3625　Republicans　and　11　Democrats。

NaysCameron；　Cattell；　Chandler；　Conness；　Cragin；　Drake；　Harlan；　Howard；　Morgan；　Nye；　Pomeroy；　Ramsay；　Thayer；　Tipton；　Williams15all　Republicans。

So　the　evidence　was　admitted。

No。　18。

Thursday；　April　16；　Mr。　Walter　S。　Cox　on　the　stand。　The　defense　offered　to　prove：

That　Mr。　Cox　was　employed　professionally　by　the　President。　in　the　presence　of　General　Thomas；　to　take　such　legal　proceedings　in　the　case　that　had　been　commenced　against　General　Thomas　as　would　be　effectual　to　raise　judicially　the　question　of　Mr。　Stanton's　legal　right　to　continue　to　hold　the　office　of　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War　against　the　authority　of　the　President；　and　also　in　reference　to　obtaining　a　writ　of　quo　warranto　for　the　same　purpose；　and　we　shall　expect　to　follow　up　this　proof　by　evidence　of　what　was　done　by　the　witness　in　pursuance　of　the　above　employment。

Mr。　Drake　demanded　the　yeas　and　nays；　and　they　were　ordered：

YeasAnthony；　Bayard；　Buckalew；　Corbett；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Frelinghuysen；　Grimes；　Hendricks；　Howe；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morton；　Norton；　Patterson　of　New　Hampshire；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Ross；　Saulsbury；　Sherman；　Sprague；　Sumner；　Trumbull；　Van　Winkle；　Vickers；　Willey2917　Republicans　and　12　Democrats。

NaysCameron；　Cattell；　Chandler；　Conkling；　Cragin；　Drake；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Harlan；　Howard；　Morgan；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Nye；　Pomeroy；　Ramsay；　Stewart；　Thayer；　Tipton；　Williams；　Wilson；　Yates21all　Republicans。

So　the　testimony　was　received；　and　the　witness　proceeded　to　detail　the　steps　he　had　taken　by　direction　of　the　President　to　procure　a　judicial　determination　of　General　Thomas'　right　to　the　office　of　Secretary　of　War　and　to　put　him　in　possession；　till　the　following　question　was　asked。

No。　19。

What　did　you　do　toward　getting　out　a　writ　of　habeas　corpus　under　the　employment　of　the　President。

Prosecution　objected；　and　the　yeas　and　nays　were　ordered：

YeasAnthony；　Bayard；　Buckalew；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Frelinghuysen；　Grimes；　Hendricks；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morgan；　Norton；　Patterson　of　New　Hampshire；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Ross；　Saulsbury；　Sherman；　Sprague；　Sumner；　Trumbull；　Van　Winkle；　Vickers；　Willey2715　Republicans　and　12　Democrats。

NaysCameron；　Cattell；　Chandler；　Conkling；　Conness；　Cragin；　Drake；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Harlan；　Howard；　Howe；　Morgan；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Nye；　Pomeroy；　Ramsay；　Stewart；　Thayer；　Tipton；　Williams；　Wilson；　Yates23all　Republicans。

The　Senate　having　decided　the　evidence　to　be　admissible；

Mr。　Cox　proceeded：

When　the　Chief　Justice　announced　that　he　would　proceed　as　an　examining　Judge　to　investigate　the　case　of　General　Thomas；　and　not　as　holding　Court；　our　first　application　to　him　was　to　adjourn　the　investigation　into　the　Criminal　Court　then　in　session；　in　order　to　have　the　action　of　that　Court。　After　some　little　discussion　this　request　was　refused。　Our　next　effort　was　to　have　General　Thomas　committed　to　prison；　in　order　that　we　might　apply　to　that　Court　for　a　habeas　corpus；　and　upon　his　being　remanded　by　that　Court；　if　that　should　be　done；　we　might　follow　up　the　application　by　one　to　the　Supreme　Court　of　the　United　States。　*　*　*　The　Chief　Justice　having　indicated　an　intention　to　postpone　the　examination；　we　directed　General　Thomas　to　decline　giving　any　bail　for　further　appearance；　and　to　surrender　himself　into　custody；　and　announce　to　the　Judge　that　he　was　in　custody；　and　then　present　to　the　Criminal　Court　an　application　for　a　writ　of　habeas　corpus。　The　Counsel　on　the　other　side　objected　that　General　Thomas　could　not　put　himself　into　custody；　and　they　did　not　desire　that　he　should　be　detained　in　custody。　The　Chief　Judge　also　declared　that　he　would　not　restrain　General　Thomas　of　his　liberty；　and　would　not　hold　him　or　allow　him　to　be　held　in　custody。　Supposing　that　he　must　be　either　committed　or　finally　discharged；　we　then　claimed　that　he　be　discharged；　not　supposing　that　the　Counsel　on　the　other　side　would　consent　to　it；　and　supposing　that　would　bring　about　his　commitment；　and　that　we　should　then　have　an　opportunity　of　getting　a　habeas　corpus。　They　made　no　objection；　however；　to　his　final　discharge；　and　accordingly　the　Chief　Justice　did　discharge　him。

No。　20。

The　witness；　Mr。　Cox；　was　asked　by　counsel　for　defense：

After　you　had　reported　to　the　President　the　result　of　your　efforts　to　obtain　a　writ　of　habeas　corpus；　did　you　do　any　other　act　in　pursuance　of　the　original　instructions　you　had　received　from　the　President　on　Saturday　to　test　the　right　of　Mr。　Stanton　to　continue　in　the　office；　and　i