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！
ould refuse it。 Article 8 charges that the appointment of Thomas was made for the purpose of getting control of the disbursement of the moneys appropriated for the military service and Department of War。
In addition to the proof already adduced； it will be shown that； after the appointment of Thomas； which must have been known to the members of his cabinet； the President caused a formal notice to be served on the Secretary of the Treasury； to the end that the Secretary might answer the requisitions for money of Thomas； and this was only prevented by the firmness with which Stanton retained possession of the books and papers of the War office。 It will be seen that every fact charged in Article 1 is admitted by the answer of the respondent； the intent also admitted as charged； that is to say； to set aside the civil tenure…of…office act； and to remove Mr。 Stanton from the office of the Secretary for the Department of War without the advice and consent of the Senate； and； if not justified； contrary to the provisions of the Constitution itself。
The only question remaining is； does the respondent justify himself by the Constitution and laws？
On this he avers； that by the Constitution； there is 〃conferred on the President as a part of the executive power； the power at any and all times of removing from office all executive officers for cause； to be judged of by the President alone； and that he verily believes that the executive power of removal from office； confided to him by the Constitution； as aforesaid； includes the power of suspension from office indefinitely。〃
Now； these offices； so vacated； must be filled； temporarily at least； by his appointment； because government must go on； there can be no interregnum in the execution of the laws in an organized government； he claims； therefore； of necessity； the right to fill their places with appointments of his choice； and that this power can not be restrained or limited in any degree by any law of Congress； because； he avers； 〃that the power was conferred； and the duty of exercising it in fit cases was imposed on the President by the Constitution of the United States； and that the President could not be deprived of this power； or relieved of this duty； nor could the same be vested by law in the President and the Senate jointly； either in part or whole。〃
This； then； is the plain and inevitable issue before the Sehate and the American people：
Has the President； under the Constitution； the more than kingly prerogative at will to remove from office and suspend from office indefinitely； all executive officers of the United States； either civil； military or naval； at any and all times； and fill the vacancies with creatures of his own appointment； for his own purposes； without any restraint whatever； or possibility of restraint by the Senate or by Congress through laws duly enacted？
The House of Representatives； in behalf of the people join this issue by affirming that the exercise of such powers is a high misdemeanor in office。
If the affirmative is maintained by the respondent； then； so far as the first eight articles are concernedunless such corrupt purposes are shown as will of themselves make the exercise of a legal power a crimethe respondent must go； and ought to go quit and free。
Therefore； by these articles and the answers thereto； the momentous question； here and now； is raised whether the PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE ITSELF （IF IT HAS THE PREROGATIVES AND POWER CLAIMED FOR IT） OUGHT； IN FACT； TO EXIST AS APART OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT OF A FREE PEOPLE； while by the last three articles the simpler and less important inquiry is to be determined； whether Andrew Johnson has so conducted himself that he ought longer to held any constitutional office whatever。 The latter sinks to merited insignificance compared with the grandeur of the former。
If that is sustained； then a right and power hitherto unclaimed and unknown to the people of the country is engrafted on the Constitution most alarming in its extent； most corrupting in its influence； most dangerous in its tendencies； and most tyrannical in its exercise。
Whoever； therefore； votes 〃not guilty〃 on these articles votes to enchain our free institutions； and to prostrate them at the feet of any man who； being President； may choose to control them。
A few days after this； Judge Curtis； of the President's counsel； spoke on behalf of the President。 The first and principal Goverment of the Articles of Impeachment against Mr。 Johnson was violation of the Office…Tenure Act； which had been passed the year before for the undisguised purpose of restricting the President's power to remove his Cabinet officers； particularly； his War Minister； Mr。 Stanton。 It was apparent that Mr。 Butler had been embarassed in his plea by the proviso of that Act； that members of the Cabinet should hold 〃during the term of the President by WHOM THEY MAY HAVE BEEN APPOINTED and for one month longer。〃
Mr。 Butler had askedBy whom was Mr。 Stanton appointed？ By Mr。 Lincoln。 Whose presidential term was he holding tinder when the bullet of Booth became a proximate cause of this trial？ Was not this appointment in full force at that hour。 Had any act of the respondent up to the 12th day of August last vitiated or interfered with that appointment？ Whose Presidential term is the respondent now serving out？ His own； or Mr。 Lincoln's。 If his own； he is entitled to four years up to the anniversary of the murder； because each presidential term is four years by the Constitution； and the regular recurrence of those terms is fixed by the Act of May 8； 1792。 If he is serving out the remainder of Mr。 Lincoln's term； then his term of office expires on the 4th of March； 1869； if it does not before。
Judge Curtis struck his first blow at the weak point of General Butler's speech。 He said：
There is a question involved which enters deeply into the first eight Articles of Impeachment and materially touches two of the others； and to that question I desire in the first place to invite the attention of the court； namelywhether MR。 STANTON'S CASE COMES UNDER THE TENURE…OF…OFFICE ACTS？ * * * I must ask your attention therefore to the construction and application of the first section of that act； as follows： 〃that every person holding an official position to which he has been appointed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate； and every person who shall hereafter be appointed to any such office and shall become duly qualified to act therein； is and shall be entitled to hold such office until a successor shall have been in like manner appointed and duly qualified； except as herein OTHERWISE PROVIDED。〃 Then comes what is otherwise provided。 PROVIDED； HOWEVER； That the Secretaries of State； Treasury； War； Navy； and Interior Departments； the Postmaster General and Attorney General； shall hold their offices respectively for AND DURING THE TERM OF THE PRESIDENT BY WHOM THEY MAY HAVE BEEN APPOINTED。〃
The first inquiry which arises on this language； is as to the meaning of the words 〃for and during the term of the President。〃 Mr。 Stanton； as appears by the commission which has been put in the case by the Honorable Managers； was appointed in January； 1862； during the first term of President Lincoln。 Are the words 〃during the term of the President；〃 applicable to Mr。 Stanton's case？ That depends upon whether an expounder of this law； judicially； who finds set down in it as a part of the descriptive words； 〃DURING THE TERMS OF THE PRESIDENT；〃 HAS ANY RIGHT TO ADD； 〃AND DURING ANY OTHER TERM FOR WHICH HE MAY BE AFTERWARDS ELECTED。〃
I respectfully submit no such judicial interpretation can be put on the words。 Then； if you please； take the next step： 〃During the term of the President by whom he was appointed； 〃At the time when this order was issued for the removal of Mr。 Stanton； was he holding the term of the President by whom he was appointed？ The Honorable Managers say yes； because； as they； say； Mr。 Johnson is merely serving out the residue of Mr。 Lincoln's term。 But is that so under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States？ * * Although the President； like the Vice President； is elected for a term of four years； and each is elected for the same term； the President is not to hold the office absolutely during four years。 The limit of four years is not an absolute limit。 Death is a limit。 〃A conditional limitation；〃 as the lawyers call it； is imposed on his tenure of office。 And when the President dies his term of four years； for which he was elected and during which he was to hold provided he should so long live； terminates； and the office devolves upon the Vice President。 For what period of time？ FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM FOR WHICH THE VICE PRESIDENT WAS ELECTED。 And there is no more propriety； under the provisions of the Constitution of the United litates； in calling the term during which Mr。 Johnson holds the office of President； after it was devolved upon him； a part of Mr。 Lincoln's term。 then there would be propriety in saying that one sovereign who succeeded another sovereign by death； holds his predecessor's term。** They （the Cabinet officers） were to be the advisers of the President； they were to be the immediate confidential assistants