history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第35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！


net　in　regard　to　the　same　was　asked　by　the　President；　and　given　the　Cabinet；　and　thereupon　the　question　whether　Mr。　Stanton　and　the　other　Secretaries　who　had　received　their　appointments　from　　Mr。　Lincoln　were　within　the　restrictions　upon　the　President's　power　of　removal　from　office　created　by　said　act；　was　considered　and　the　opinion　expressed　that　the　Secretaries　appointed　by　Mr。　Lincoln　were　not　within　such　restrictions。

Mr。　Johnson：　I　ask　that　the　question　propounded　by　the　Senator　from　Ohio　（Mr。　Sherman）　shall　now　be　read。

The　Secretary　read　the　question　as　follows：

State　if；　after　the　2d　of　March；　1867；　the　date　of　the　passage　of　the　tenure…of…office　act；　the　question　whether　the　Secretaries　appointed　by　President　Lincoln　were　included　within　the　provisions　of　that　act　came　before　the　Cabinet　for　discussion；　and　if　so；　what　opinion　was　given　on　this　question　by　members　of　the　Cabinet　to　the　President。

The　yeas　and　nays　were　ordered；　and　being　taken　resulted：

YeasAnthony；　Bayard；　Buckalew；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Grimes；　Hendricks；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Ross；　Saulsbury；　Sherman；　Trumbull；　Van　Winkle；　Vickers；　and　Willey209　Republican　and　11　Democrats。

NaysCameron；　Cattell；　Chandler；　Cole；　Conkling；　Conness；　Corbett；　Cragin；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Frelinghuysen；　Harlan；　Howard；　Howe；　Morgan；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Patterson　of　New　Hampshire；　Pomeroy；　Ramsay；　Stewart；　Thayer；　Tipton；　Williams；　Wilson；　and　Yates26all　Republicans。

So　the　proffered　testimony　was　rejected。

No。　28。

The　Prosecution　proposed　to　put　in　evidence　the　nomination　of　Lieutenant　General　Sherman；　to　be　General　by　brevet；　sent　to　the　Senate　on　the　13th　of　February；　1868；　also　the　nomination　of　Major　General　George　H。　Thomas　to　be　Lieutenant　General　by　brevet；　and　to　be　General　by　brevet；　sent　to　the　Senate　on　the　21st　of　February；　1868。

The　question　being　taken　by　yeas　and　nays；　resulted：　YeasAnthony；　Cole；　Fessenden；　Fowler；　Grimes；　Henderson；　Morton；　Ross；　Sumner；　Tipton；　Trumbull；　Van　Winkle；　Willey；　and　Yates14all　Republicans。

NaysBuckalew；　Cameron；　Cattell；　Chandler；　Conkling；　Conness；　Corbett；　Cragin；　Davis；　Dixon；　Doolittle；　Drake；　Edmunds；　Ferry；　Frelinghuysen；　Harlan；　Hendricks；　Howard；　Howe；　Johnson；　McCreery；　Morgan；　Morrill　of　Maine；　Morrill　of　Vermont；　Patterson　of　New　Hampshire；　Patterson　of　Tennessee；　Pomeroy；　Ramsay；　Sherman；　Sprague；　Stewart；　Thayer；　Vickers；　Williams；　and　Wilson3526　Republicans　and　9　Democrats。

So　the　proffered　testimony　was　refused。

GENERAL　EMORY'S　TESTIMONY。

The　Ninth　Article　of　the　Impeachment　was　based　upon　alleged　military　changes　in　the　City　of　Washington　whereby　the　number　of　troops　on　duty　there　was　rumored　to　have　been　largely　increased；　with　a　view　to　their　use　in　the　controversy　between　the　President　and　Congress；　and　more　especially　for　the　expulsion　of　Mr。　Stanton　from　the　War　Office　in　case　of　his　resistance　to　the　order　of　the　President　for　his　retirement。　The　wildest　rumors　of　that　character　prevailedthat　Mr。　Johnson　proposed　to　throw　off　all　disguise　and　assume　direct　military　control　and　the　establishment　of　practically　a　military　dictatorship。　Congress　had　some　months　previously　enacted　that　all　military　orders　from　the　President　should　be　issued　through　the　General　of　the　Armythe　Congress　thereby　assuming　to　practically　abrogate　a　constitutional　function　of　the　Chief　Executive。

There　was　considerable　confidence　among　the　supporters　of　the　impeachment　that　they　would　be　able　to　prove　these　allegations　by　General　Emory；　then　in　local　command　of　the　troops　and　Department　of　Washington。　General　Emory　was　called　by　the　prosecution；　and　the　following　was　his　testimony。

Examined　by　Mr。　Butler：

Question：　Will　you　have　the　kindness　to　state；　as　nearly　as　you　can　what　took　place　then？　（Referring　to　an　interview　with　the　President　at　the　Executive　Mansion。）

Answer：　I　will　try　and　state　the　substance　of　it；　but　the　words　I　can　not　undertake　to　state　exactly。　The　President　asked　me　if　I　recollected　a　conversation　he　had　had　with　me　when　I　first　took　command　of　the　department。　I　told　him　that　I　recollected　the　facts　of　the　conversation　distinctly。　He　then　asked　me　what　changes　had　been　made。　I　told　him　no　material　changes；　but　such　as　had　been　made　I　could　state　at　once。　I　went　on　to　state　that　in　the　fall　six　companies　of　the　29th　infantry　had　been　brought　to　this　City　to　winter；　but　as　an　offset　to　that；　four　companies　of　the　12th　infantry　had　been　detached　to　South　Carolina　on　the　request　of　the　Commander　of　that　District；　that　two　companies　of　artillery　had　been　detached　by　my　predecessor；　one　of　them　for　the　purpose　of　siding　in　putting　down　the　Fenian　difficulties；　had　been　returned　to　the　command；　that　although　the　number　of　companies　head　been　increased；　the　numerical　strength　of　the　command　was　very　much　the　same；　growing　out　of　an　order　reducing　the　artillery　and　infantry　companies　from　the　maximum　of　the　war　establishment　to　the　minimum　of　the　peace　establishment。　The　President　said：　〃I　do　not　refer　to　those　changes。〃　I　replied　that　if　he　would　state　what　changes　he　referred　to；　or　who　made　the　report　of　the　changes；　perhaps　I　could　be　more；　explicit。　He　said；　〃I　refer　to　recent　changes　within　a　day　or　two；〃　or　something　to　that　effect。　I　told　him　I　thought　I　could　assure　him　that　no　changes　had　been　made；　that　under　a　recent　order　issued　for　the　government　of　the　armies　of　the　United　States；　founded　upon　a　law　of　Congress；　all　orders　had　to　be　transmitted　through　General　Grant　to　the　army；　and　in　like　manner　all　orders　coming　from　General　Grant　to　any　of　his　subordinate　officers　must　necessarily　come；　if　in　my　department；　through　me；　that　if　by　chance　an　order　had　been　given　to　any　junior　officer　of　mine　it　was　his　duty　at　once　to　report　that　fact。　The　President　asked　me。　〃What　order　do　you　refer　to？〃　I　replied；　〃To　order　number　17　of　the　series　of　1867。〃　He　said；　〃I　would　like　to　see　the　order；〃　and　a　messenger　was　dispatched　for　it。　At　this　time　a　gentleman　came　in　who　I　supposed　had　business　in　no　way　connected　with　the　business　I　had　in　hand；　and　I　withdrew　to　the　farther　end　of　the　room；　and　while　there；　the　messenger　came　in　with　the　book　of　orders　and　handed　it　to　me。　As　soon　as　the　gentleman　had　withdrawn；　I　returned　to　the　President　with　the　book　in　my　hand；　and　said　I　would　take　it　as　a　favor　if　he　would　permit　me　to　call　his　attention　to　that　order；　that　it　had　been　passed　in　an　appropriation　bill；　and　I　thought　it　not　unlikely　that　it　had　escaped　his　attention。　He　took　the　order　and　read　it；　and　observed；　〃This　is　not　in　conformity　with　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States；　that　makes　me　Commander…in…Chief；　or　with　the　terns　of　your　commission。〃　I　replied；　〃That　is　the　order　which　you　approved　and　issued　to　the　army　for　our　government；〃　or　something　to　that　effect。　I　can　not　recollect　the　exact　words；　nor　do　I　intend　to　quote　the　exact　words　of　the　President。　He　said；　〃Am　I　to　understand　that　the　President　of　the　United　States　can　not　give　an　order　except　through　the　General　of　the　Army？　Or　General　Grant？〃　I　said　in　reply；　that　that　was　my　impressionthat　that　was　the　opinion　that　the　Army　entertain；　and　I　thought　upon　that　subject　they　were　a　unit。　I　also　said；　〃I　think　it　is　fair；　Mr。　President；　to　say　to　you　that　when　this　order　came　out；　there　was　considerable　discussion　on　the　subject　as　to　what　were　the　obligations　of　an　officer　under　that　order；　and　some　eminent　lawyers　were　consulted。　I　myself　consulted　oneand　the　opinion　was　given　to　me　decidedly　and　unequivocally

that　we　were　bound　by　the　order；　Constitutional　or　not　Constitutional。　The　President　observed　that　〃the　object　of　the　law　was　evident。〃

The　following　is　that　portion　of　the　act　referred　to：

〃Section　2。　Be　it　further　enacted：　That　the　headquarters　of　the　General　of　the　Army　of　the　United　States　shall　be　at　the　City　of　Washington；　and　all　orders　and　instructions　relating　to　military　operations　issued　by　the　President　and　Secretary　of　War　shall　be　issued　through　the　General　of　the　Army；　and　in　case　of　his　inability；　through　the　next　in　rank。　The　General　of　the；　Army　shall　not　be　removed；　suspended；　or　relieved　from　command　or　assigned　to　duty　elsewhere　than　at　said　headquarters　except　at　his　own　request　WITHOUT　THE　PREVIOUS　APPROVAL　OF　THE　SENATE；　and　any　orders　or　instructions　relating　to　Military　operations　issued　contrary　to　the　requirements　of　this　section；　shall　be　null　and　void。　And　any　officer　who　shall　issue　orders　or　instructions；　contrary　to　the　provisions　of　this　section；　shall　be　deemed　guilty　of　a　misdemeanor　in　office；　and　any　officer　of　the　Army　who　shall　transmit；　convey　or　obey　any　orders　or　instructions　so　issued　contrary　to　the　provisions　of　this　section；　knowing　that　such　orders　were　so　issued　shall　be　liable　to　imprisonment　for　not　less　than　two　nor　more　than　twenty　years　upon　conviction　thereof　in　any　Court　of　competent　jurisdiction。〃

By　turning　to　the　Congressional　Record　of　that　day；　it　will　be　found　that　Mr。　Johnson　was　perfectly　aware　of　the　existence　of　the　foregoing　provision　of　the　Act　of　Congress　in　the　bill　referred　to；　at　the　time　he　returned　the　bill　to　the　House　with　his　signature。　His　reasons　for　so　signing　it　are　set　out　in　the　following　communication　to　the　House　accompanying　the　bill

The　act　entitled　〃An　act　making　appropriations　for　the　support　of　the　Army　for　the　year　ending　June　30；　1868；　and　for　other　purposes；〃　contains　provisions　to　which　I　must　call　attention。　There　are　propositions　contained　in　the　second　section　which　in　certain　cases　deprives　the　President　of　his　Constitutional　functions　of　Commander　in　Chief　of　the　Army；　and　in　the　sixth　section；　which　denies　to　ten　States　of　the　Union　their　Constitutional　right　to　protect　themselves　in　any　emergency；　by　means　of　their　own　militia。　These　provisions　are　out　of　place　in　an　appropriation　act；　but　I　am　compelled　to　defeat　these　necessary　appropriations　if　I　withhold　my　signature　from　the　act。　Pressed　by　these　considerations；　I　feel　constrained　to　return　the　bill　with　my　signature；　but　to　accompany　it　with　my　earnest　protest　against　the　section　which　I　have　indicated。

Andrew　Johnson。　Washington；　D。　C。；　March　2；　1868。


That　Congress　was　to　expire　by　limitation　at　12　o'clock　on　the　4th；　thirty…six　hours　later。　If　Mr。　Johnson　had　vetoed　the　bill；　as　under　ordinary　conditions　it　would　have　been　his　duty　to　the　Constitution　and　to　himself　to　do；　its　re…passage　through　the　two　Houses　in　that　limited　time　would　have　been　impossible；　and　the　appropriations　carried　by　the　bill　for　the　support　of　the　Army　would　have　been　lost。　To　save　them　Mr。　Johnson　submitted　to　the　indignity　put　upon　him　by　Congress　in　denying　him　a　guaranteed　and　manifest　Constitutional　right　and　power。　In　that　act　Mr。　Johnson　illustrated　a　magnanimity　and　a　consciousness　of　public　responsibility　that　was　most　creditible　to　himself；　and　in　marked　contrast　to　the　action　of　Congress　toward　him。



CHAPTER　X。　A　CONFERENCE　HELD　AND　THE　FIRST　VOTE　TAKEN。

A　few　days　prior　to　the　day　set　for　taking　the　vote　on　the　several　Articles　of　Impeachment；　and　after　the　conclusion　of　testimony；　it　was　proposed　that　there　be　a　private　session　for　conference　of　the　Senate　on　a　day　na