i t, 8 IiADD EMI STI Vi NS'S SPEECti Leoptinurdfrom the Ping page.] or removal, the, officer shall be considered re ;nevi d from his r hut if the Senate shall not deem the reasons sufficient for such suspension or removal, the officer shall forthwith resume the functions of his office, and the person .appoint in his place shall cease to discharge such duties. Ou the 12th day of August. 1867, the Senate then not being in session. the President suspend ed Edwin M. Stanton, Secretary of the. Depart ment of War, and appointed V. S. Grant, Gene ral. Secretary of War od interim. Oa the 1201 day of Deeember, 1867, the Senate being then In In session,che reported, according to the require ments of the act, the causes of such suspension to the Senate. which duly took the same into consideration. Before the Senate had concluded its examination of the question of the sufficiency of such reasons, he attempted to enter into ar rangements by which lie might obstruct the due execution of the law, and thus prevent. Edwin 31. Stanton from forthwith resuming the func tions of his office as Secretary of War, accordirrz to the provisions of the act, even if the Senate should decide in his favor. And In furtherance of said attempt, on the 21st day of February, 1868, lie appointed one Lorenzo Thomas. by letter of authority or commission, Secretary of War (Id interim, without the advice r-1 consent of the Senate, although the same was then in session, and ordered him (the said Thomas) to take possession of the Department of War and the public property appertaining thereto, and to discharge the duties thereof. We charge that, in defiance of frequent warn ings, he has since repeatedly attempted to carry those orders into execution, and to prevent Edwin M. Stanton from executing the laws ap pertaining to the Department of War, and from discharging the duties of the office. :cry able gentleman who argued this case for the respondent has contended that Mr. Stan • -n's case is not within the provisions of the act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices," and that therefore the President cannot be con licted of violating that act. His argument in demonstrating that position was not, I think, quite equal to his sagacity in discovering where the great strength of the prosecution was lodged. 1 Ile.contended that the proviso which embraced the Secretary of War did not include Mr. Stan ton, because he was not appointed by the President in whose term the acts charged as misdemeanors were perpetrated; and in order to show that, he con teuded that the term of office mentioned during which be was entitled to hold meant the time during 'which the President who appointed him actually did hold, whether dead or alive; that Mr. Lincoln, who appointed Mr. Stanton, and under whose commission he was holding indefinitely, being dead, his term of office referred to had ex pired, and that Mr. Johnson was not holding during a part of that term. That depends upon the Constitution, and the laws made tinder it. By the Constitution, the whole time from the adop tion of the Government was intended to be divided into equal Presidential periods, and the word " tern" was technically used to designate the time of each. The first sec tion of the second article of the Constitution provides "that the executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. Ile shall hold his office daring the term of four years,. and together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected as follows." Sc.,: Then it provides that "in case of removal from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the duties of said office the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and Congress may by law provide for the case of re moval, death, resignation, or Inability both of the President and Vice President, designating what officer shall then act as President, and such offi cer shall then act accordingly until the disability be removed or a President shill be elected." The learned counsel contends that the Vice President, who accidentally accedes to the duties of President. is serving out a new Presidential term of his own, and that, unless Mr. Stanton was appointed by him, he is not within the provi sions of the act. It happened that Mr. Stantoa was appointed by Mr. Lincoln in 1862 for an in definite period of time, and was still serving as MS appointee, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Mr. Johnson never appointed him, and, unless he held a valid commission by virtue of Mr. Lincoln's appointment, he was act ing for three yeartk,dut log which time he expended billions of money and raised hundreds of thousands of men, within)t any commission at all. To per mit this to by ''• ine without any valid commis sion would have been a inisdeameanor in itself. But if he held a valid commission, whose com mission was It? Not Andrew Johnson's. Then in whose term was he serving, for he must have been in somebody's term? Even if it was in Johnson's term; he would hold for four years unless sooner removed, for there is no term spoken of in the Constitution of a shorter period for a Presidential term than four years. But it makes no difference in the operation of the law whether he was holdinmiu Lincoln's or Johnson's term. Was it not in Mr. Lincoln's term? Liu coin had been elected and re-elected, the second term to commence in 1865, and the Constitution expressly declared that that term should be four years. By virtue of his previous commission and the uniform custom of the country, Mr. Stanton continued to hold during the term of Mr. Lin coln, unless sooner removed. Now, does any one pretend that from the filth of March, 1865, a new Presidential term did not commence? For it will be seen upon close examination that the word "term" alone marks the time of the Preis's •dential existence, so that it may divide the different periods of office by a well-recognized rule. Instead of saying that the Vice President shall become President upon his death, the Constitution says, "in case of the .re moval of the' President from office or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on• the Vice President ?" What is to devolve on the Vice President? Not the Pre sidential commission held by Ids predecessor, but the "duties" which were incumbent on Lim: If he were to take Mr. Lincolu's term he would serve for four years, for term is the only limita tion to that of defined in , the Constitution, as I have said before. But the learned counsel has contended that the word "rerun" of the Presiden tial office means the death of the President. Then it w ould have been better expressed by saying that the Prtsidet shall hold his office dur ing the term between two assassinatious, and Ilea the assassination of the President would murk the period of the operation of this law. If, then, Mr. Johnron was serving out one of Mr. Lincoln's terms, there seems to be no argu ment against includink , Mr. Stanton within the meaning of the law. He was so included by the President in his notice of removal,in his reasons therefore given to the Senate,and in his notifica tion to the Secretary of the Treasuryrand it is too late,when he is caught violating the verylaW under which he professes to act, to turn round and deny that that law affects the case. The gentleman treats lightly the question of estoppel; and yet really nothing is more powerful, for it is au argu ment by the party himself against himself, and although not pleadable in the same way,la just as potential in a case L, poi:; as when pleaded in a Case Of rr, Thtjtspondent. in violation of this law, ap pointed General Thomas to office, whereby, ac cording to the express terms of the act, he was guilty of a high misdemeanor. But whatever may have been his views with regard to the ten ure-of office act, he knew it was a law, and so re corded upon the statutes. 1 disclaim all neces sity, M a trial of impeaehment, to prove the wicked or unlawful intention of the respondent, and it is unwise ever to aver it. In impeachments, more than in indictments, the averring of the fact charged carries with it all that it is necessary to say abut intent. In indictments vou charge that the defendant, "in stigated by the devil," and so on: and you might as well call on the prosecution to prove the pres: enee, shape, and color of his majesty, as to cell upon the managers in impeachment to prove in tention. L go further than some, and contend that no corrupt or wicked motive need instigate the acts for which impeachment is brought. It is enough that they were official violations of law. The counsel has placed great stress upon the nemsity of proving that they were wilfully done. If by that he means that they were vol untarily done, I agree with him. A mere acci dental trespass would not be sufficient to convict. But that which is etitunturilp done is ?Willy done, according to every honest 'definition; and what ever malfeasance is willingly perpetrated by an office-holder is a misdemeanor in office, whatever he may allege was his intention. The President justifies himself by asserting that all previous Presidents had exercised the same right of removing officers, for cause to be judged of by the President alone. Had there been no law to prohibit it when Mr. Stanton was re moved," the eases Would have been parallel, and the one might be adductd as an argument in itIN or of the other. But, since the action of any of Lt PI4 Fidente to which he refers, a law had bees paused by Congress, after n a stubborn controversy ith the ENi eutive, denying that right and pro hihning it in future,and Imposing a severe penalty ntorf any executive officer who should cx , . mist, it. And that, too, after the President had himself made issue on its constitutionality and been de feated. No pretext, therefore, any longer exist that such right was vested in the President by brute of his office. Hence the attempt to shield I,imsell under such practice is a most lame eva ien of the question at issue. Did he "take ears lhat this late should be faithfully" executed lc ansmers that, acts, that would have violated the law had it existed, were practiced by his pro• derrssors. How does that justify his own mal feasance .? The President says that he removed Mr. Stan ton simply to test, the constitutionality of the tenure of °thee law by a judicial decision. He has already seen it tested and decided by the votes, twice given, of two-thirds of the Senators and of the Mouse of Representatives. It stood as a law upon the statute books. NO case had arisen under that law or is referred to by the President, which required any judicial interposi tion. If there had- been, or should be, the courts were open to any one who felt aggr!eved by the action of Mr. Stanton. But instead of enforcing' that law, be tales ad van :age cif the name and the funds of the United States to resist it, and to induce others to resist it. Instead of attempting, as the Executive of the United States, to see that that law was faithfully executed, he took great pains and perpetrated the acts alleged in this article, not only to resist it himself, but to seduce others to do the same. He sought to induce the General-in-chief of the army to aid him in an open avowed obstruction of the law, as it stood unrepealed upon the statute book. Ile could find no one to unite with him in perpetrating such an act., until he sunk down upon the unfortunate indlYidual bearing the title of adjutant-general of the army. Is this taking care that the laws shall be faith fully executed? Is this attempting . to carry them into e fleet, by upholding their validity, according to his oath? On the other band, was It not a high and bold attempt to obstruct the laws and take care that they should not be executed? He must not excuse himself by saying that he bad doubts of its constitutionality and wished to test it. What right bad be Iola: bunting up excuses for others, as well as himself, to violate this law? Is not this confession a misdemeanor in itself? The President asserts that he did not remove Stanton under the tenure-of-Wince law. This is a direct contradiction of his own letter to the Sec retary of the Treasury, in which, as be was bound by Jaw, he communicated to that officer the Met of the removal. This portion of the answer may, the relore, be considered as disposed of by the non-existence of the fact, as well as by his subse quCtit report to the Senate. 'The lollowing is the letter just alluded to, dated August 14. 181;7: "Sin: In compliance with the requirements of the act entitled "An act to regulate the tenure at certain civil (Alice s," you are hereby notified that on the nth instant the Hon. Edwin M. Stun an] was suspended from his office as Secrebiry Of War. and General U. S. Grant authorized and empowered to act as Secretary ad interim. "Hon. SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY.' Wretched man ! a direct contradiction of his solemn answer! How necessary that a man should have a good conscience or a good mem ory! Both would not be out of place. How lovely to contemplate what was so assiduously inculcated by a celebrated Pagan into the mind of his son: "Virtue Is truth, and truth is virtue." And still more, virtue of every kind charms us, vet that virtue is strongest which is effected by justice and generosity. Good deeds will never be done, wise acts will never Lc executed, except by the virtuous and the conscientious. May the people of this Republic remember this good old doctrine when they text meet to select their rulers, and may they select only the brave and the virtuous! Has it been proved, as charged in this article, that Andrew Johnson in vacation. suspended from office Edwin M. Stanton, who had been duly appointed and was then executing the du ties of Secretary of the Department of War, without the advice and consent of the Senate; did he report the reasons for such suspension to the Senate within twenty days from the meeting of the Senate; tlnd did the Senate proceed to con sider the sufficiency of such reasons? Did the Senate declare such reasons in sufficient, whereby the said Edwin M. Stanton became authorized to forthwith resume and exercise the functions of secretary of War, and displace the Secretary ud interim, whoa° du ties were then to cease and terminate; did the said Andrew Johnson, in his official character of President of the United States, attempt to ob struct the return of the said Edwin M. Stanton and his resumption forthwith of the functions of his office as Secretary of the Department of War; and has he continued to attempt to prevent the discharge of the duties of said office by said Ed win M. Stanton, Secretary of War, notwithstand ing the Senate decided in his favor? If he has, then the acts in violation of law, charged in this article, are full and complete. TLe proof lies in a very narrow compass, and depincls upon the credibility of one or two wit nesses, who, upon this point, corroborate each other's evidence. Andrew Johnson, in his letter of the 31st of -January, 3868, not only declared that such was his intention, Dut reproached U. S. Grant, Gene ral, in the following language : "You had found in our first conference 'that the President was desirous of. keeping Mr. Stan ton out of office, whether sustained in the suspeu sien ur not.' You knew what reasons had in duced the President to ask from you a promise; you also knew that in case your views of duty did Dot accord with his own convictions, it was his purpose to fill your place by another appoint ment. Even ignoring the existence of a positive understanding between us, these conclusions were plainly deducible from various conversa tions. It !ft certain, however, that even under these circumstances you did not offer to return the, place to my poSsession, but, according. to our own statement, placed yourself in a position el here, could I have anticipated your action, I would have been compelled to ask of you, as I was compelled to ask of your predecessor in the. War Department, a letter of resignation, or else to resort to the more disagreeable expedient cf suspending you by a successor." Ile thus distinctly alleges that the General had a lull knowledge that such was his deliberate in ter:Lon. Hula words and injurious epithets can do nothing to corroborate or to injure the cha racter °I a witness; but if Andrew Johnson be not wholly destitute of truth and a shameless falsifier, then this article and all its charges are clearly made out by his own evidence. _ - Whatever the respondent may say of the reply of U. S. Grant, General, only goes to confirm the fact of the President's lawless attempt to obstruct the execution of the act specified in the article. If General Grant's recollection of his converse lion with the President is correct, then it goes affirmatively to proVe the same fact stated by the Fresh;OA, although it shows that the President persetered in his course of determined obstruc tion of .the law, while the General refused to aid in its consummation. No differences as to the main fact of the attempt to violate and prevent the exention.of the law exists in either state ment; both compel the conviction of the respom dent, unless he should escape through other means than the facts proving the article, lie can not hope to escape by asking this high court'to decline the "law for regulating the tenure of certain, civil offices" unconstitutional and void; for it ~so liappens, to the hope less misfortune of the respondent, that, al most every member of this high tribunal has mole than once,—twice, perh*pa three times, declared, upon his official oath, that law consti tutional and valid. The unhappy man is in this cordition : He has declared himself determined to obstruct that act; he has, by two several let ters of authority, oidered Lorenzo Thomas to violate that law; and he has issued commissions during the session of the Senate, without the ad vice and consent of the Senate, in violation of law, to said Thomas. He Must, therefore, either deny his own solemn declarations and falsify the testimony of General Grant and Lorenzo Thomas, or expectthat verdict whose least punishment is I removal from office. liut the President denies in his answer to the filet and the eleventh articles (which he intends as a joint answer to the two charges) that he Lad attempted to contrive means to prevent the due execution of the law regulating tenure A certain civil offices, or had violated his oa , ii "to lake care that the laws be faithfully execu ted." Yet while he defiles such attempt to de feat the execution of the laws, in his letter of the nit of January, 1868, he asserts and reproaches Gen, Grant by the assertiomthat the General knew that his object was to prevent Edwin YI. StaWou tom forthwith resuming the functions of his office, notwithstanding that the Senate might THE DAILY EV ENINGj'BULLETIN.-YIIILAD..ELPHIA, MON Q.AI( APRIL , 1868. decide in his favor; and the President and U. S. Grant, General, In their angry correspondence of the date heretofore referred to, made an Issue of veracity—the President asserting that the Getieral bad promised to aid him in defeating the execu tion of the laws by preventing the immediate re *sureption of the .functions of Secretary of War by Edwin M. Stanton, unit that the General vio lated his promise; and U. S. Grant, General, deny lug ever having finally made such promisa, although he agrees with the President that the Po silent did attempt to induce hint to make such promise and to enter into such an arrangement. Now, whichever of these gentlemen may have lost his nit mory, and found in lieu of the truth the vision which issues from the Ivory Gate— though who can hesitate to choose between .the wools of a gallant soldier and the pettifogging of a political trickster—is wholly immaterial, so far us the charge against the President is con cerned. That charge is that the President did attempt to prevent the due execution of the tetrun -of-e flee law by entangling the General in the arrangenu nt; and nukes both the President and the General have lost their memory and mis taken the truth with regard to the promises with each other, thee this charge is made out. In short, if either of these gentlemen has correctly stated these facts of attempting the obstruction of the law, the President has been guilty of violating the law and of misprision tve official i•( 7:1 . 717 y . But, again, the President alleges his right to violate the act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices, because be says the same was in open alive and void, as being in violation of the Constitution of the United States. Does it lie in his mouth to interpose this plea? He had acted under that law, and issued letters of authority, both for the long and short term, to several per sons under it, and it won't! hardly lie in his mouth after that to deny its validity, unless he confessed himself guilty of law-breaking by issu ing such commissions. Let us here look at Andrew Johnson accepting the oath "to take care that the laws be faith fully executed." On the 2d of March, 1867, he returned to the Senate the "tenure-of-office bill," where it origi nated and had passed by a majority of more than two-thirds—with reasons elaborately given why it should not.pass finally. Among these was the allegation of its unconstitutionality. It passed by a vote of 35 yeas tall nays. In the House of Representatives it passed by more than a two 'birds majority; and when the vote was an nounced, the Beaker, as was his custom, pro claimed the vote, and declared,in the language of the Constitution, "that two-thirds of each House having voted for it, notwithstanding the objec tion's of the President, it has become a law." I DM supposing that Andrew Johnson was at , 1 this moment waiting to take the oath of office as President of the United Slates, "that he would obey the Constitution and take care . that the laWs be faithfully executed." Having been sworn on the Holy Evangels to obey the Constitution, and being about to depart, he turned to the person adm nistering the oath, and says: "Stop; I have a further oath. Ido solemnly swear that I will not allow the act entitled, 'An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices,' just passed by Congress over the Presidential veto, to be exe cuted; but I will prevent its execution by virtue of my own constitutional power." Bow shocked Congress would have been—what would the country have said to a scene equalled only . by the unparalleled action of this same official, when sworn into office on that fatal fifth day of March, which made him the successor of Abraham Lincoln ! Certainly he would not have been pet mitted to be inaugurated as Vice-Presi dent or President. Yet such in effect has been his conduct, if not under oath, at least with less excuse, since the • fatal day which inflicted him upon the people of the United States. Can the President hope to escape if the fact of his violatirg the law be proved or con fessed by him, as has been done? Can he ex pect a sufficient number of his tryers to pro nounce that law unconstitutional and void—those same tryers having passed upon its validity upon, several occasions? The act was originally passed by a vote of 29 yeas to 9 nays. Those who voted in the affirmative were Messrs. Anthony,rown, ()relict), Chandler, Conness, Cragin, Fdmuuds, Fogg, Foster, FrelinghuYien, Grimes, Harris, Henderson, Howard, Howe, Lane Morgan; Mor rill, Poland, Ramsey, Sherman, Sprague, Sum ner, Van Winkle, Wade, Willey, Williams, Wil son, Yates-29. Subsequently the House of Representatives trussed the bill with amendments, which the Senate disagreed to and the bill was afterward re ferrer] to a committee of conference of the two houses, whose agreement was reported to the Senate by the managers, and was adopted by a vote of 22 yeas to 10 nays. Those who voted in the affirmative were Messrs. Anthony, Brown, Chand ler, Conness, Fogg, Fowler, Henderson, Howard, Howe, Lane, Morgan, Morrill, Ramsey, Ross, Sherman, Stewart, Sumner, Trumbull, Wade, Williams. Wilson and Yates-22. After the veto, upon reconsideration of the bill in the Senate, and after all the arguments agains4 its validity were spread before that body,it passed by a vote of 35 yeas to 11 nays. It was voted for by the following Senators: Messrs. Anthony, Cana, Chandler, Conness, Cragln, Edmunds, Fessenden, Fogg, Foster, Fowler, Frelinghuysen, Grimes, Harris, Henderson, Howard, Kirkwood, Lane, Morgan, Morrill, Nye, Poland, Pomeroy, Ramsey, ROES, Slamn :le, Sprague. Stewart, Sum ner, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Wade, Willey, Wil liams, Wilson, Yates-35. lint there is a still more conclusive answer. The first section provides that seer!, person hold ing civil office who has been appointed with the advice and consent of the Senate, and every per son that hereafter shall be appointed to any such office, shall be entitled to hold such office until a successor shall have been iu like manner ap pointed sad duly qualitied,extept as herein other wise provided 'then comes the proviso which the defendant's counsel say does 'not embrace Mr. Stanton, because he was not appointed by the President in whose term he was removed. If he was not embraced in the proviso, then he was now here specially provided for, and was conse quently embraced in the first clause of the first section, which declares that every person holding any civil office not otherwise prorated for comes a ithin the provisions of this act. The President contends that by virtue of the Constitution he had the right to remove heads of departments, and cites a large number of eases where his pre de cessor had done so. It must be observed that all those cases were before the pas sage of the tenure-of-olllee act, March 2, 1867. Will the respondent say how the having done an act when there was no law to forbid it justifies the repetition of the same act after a law has brew passed expressly prohibiting the same? It is not the suspension or removul of Mr. Staute , ii that is complained of, but the manner of the suspension. If the Presi dent thought he had good reasons for suspending or removing Mr. Stanton and had done so, sending those reasons to the Senate; and then obeyed the decision of the Senate in their finding, There would have been no complaint; but instead of that he suspends him in direct defiance of the tenure-of-office law, and. then enters into an arrangement, or attempts to do so, In which he thought lie had succeeded, to prevent the due execution of the law after the decision of the Senate. And when the Senate ordered him to re store Mr. Stanton, he makes a second removal by virtue of what be calls the power vested In him by the Constitution. The action of the Senate on the message of the President, communicating his reasons for the suspension of E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War, under the net entitled an act to regulate the tenure of certain civil offices, was as follows: IN 11'...\ Ec DTI VP: 81 , SSION,"tSENATE: 01' THE UNITED STAI ES, Jantrary 33, 1868. .116/red, That having considered the evidence and reasons given by the President iu his report of amber 12,181;7, for the suspension from the (Alice of Secretary of War of Elwin M. Stanton, the Senate do not concur in such suspension. And the Rime was duly certified to the Presi dent, hi the face of which he; with an impudence and brazen determination to usurp the powers of the it:nnie, again reumeed Edwin M. Stanton, at d upp(iuted UM:IIZ° Thomas Secretary keive 113 109 e ked. The Senate, with calm manli ness•, rehuhid the usurper by the lotto.. lug reso lution : 1N Exiirii‘ SEssioN, SI.,!;;ATE OF THE U. S., F inns' y 21, liAlB. Irlur«ls, The Senate has received and consi (lcr«l the vow munication of the President stating that fie bad feuioved LA win M. Stanton, Secre tary of War, and had designated the Adjutant itt.ral of the artily to trt as Secretary of War utl i'tdr.7 : then i, re, li~.,olrcd Gib flu , Senate of m o t es That ut der the (Muetitation and laws of the United the PRIAM ut has no power to remove the e,, c roary of War, and to designate any other OWI r to perform the duties of that office ad ;Jill, in, Yet be continued him in office.. And now this offspring of usaaFsluatiou turns upon the Senate, who have thus rebuked him In a conaLltatiaa it manner, and bids them defiance. Row can he escape the just vengeance of the law T Wretched man, Maiming ut bay, surrounded a cordo,i of living men, cacti with the axe of an executioner uplifted for .leis.-just pun iehreent. Every. Senator now tying him, exec' t such as had already adopted his policy, voted for this same resolution, pronouncing hi aileron doom. Will - any one of them vote fur his acquittal on theground Oita unconstitutionality? I know that Senators would venture t(34110 any nc ceesary act ifendoreed by an honest conscience end an enlightened public opinion; but neither for the sake of the President nor of any one else, would one of them suffer himself to be tortured On the gibbet of everlasting obloquy. How long and dark would be the track of infamy which must wait ilia name, and that of his posterity' Nothing is therefore more certain than that it requires no gift of prophecy to predict the fate of this unhappy I have now discussed but one of the numerous articles, all of which I believe to be fully EalA whit d, and few of the almost innumerable of fences charged to this wayward,unhappy I have alluded to two or three others which I could have wished to have had time to present and discuss,'not for the sake of, punishment. but for the benefit of the country. Oue of these .was an article charging the President with usurp-• log the legislative power of the nation, and at tempting still his usurpations. With regard to, usurpation, one single word will explain my meaning. A civil war of gigantic proportions, covering suflicient territory to con stitute many States anti nations, broke out, and embraced more than ten millions of men, who formed an independent government, called the Confederate States of America. They rose to the dignity of an independent belligerent, and were SO acknowledged by all civilized nations, as well as by ourselves. After expensive and bloody strife, we conquered them, and they submitted to our arms. By the law of nations, well un derstood and undisputed, the conquerors in this unjust war had the right to deal with the van quished as to them might seem good, subject only to the laws of humanity. They had a right to confiscate their property to the extent of in demnifying themselves and their citizens; to annex them to the victorious nation, and pass just such laws for their government as they might think proper. This doctrine is as old as Grotius, and as fresh as the Dorr rebellion. Neither the President nor the judiciary had any right to in terfere, to dictate any terms, or to aid in recon struction, further than they were directed by the sovereign power. That sovereign power in this Republic is the Congress of the United States. Whoever, besides Congress, undertakes to create new States or to rebuild old ones ' and fix the con dition of their citizenship and union, usurps pow ers which do not belong to him, and Is danger ous or not dangerous, according to the extent of his power and his pretensions. Andrew Johnson did usurp the legislative power of the nation by building new States, and reconstructing, as far as in him lay, this empire. Ile directed the defunct States to conic forth and live by virtue of his breathing into their nostrils the breath of life. He directed them what constitutions to form, and fixed the quallficationSof electors and of office holders. lie directed them to send forward members to each branch of ,Congress, and to aid him in representing the nation. When Congress passed a law declaring all these doings unconstitutional, and fixeki a mode for the adniission of this new territory Into the nation, he proclaimed it unconstitutional, end advised the people not to subthit to it, nor to obey the commands of Congress. I have not time to enumerate the particular acts which con stitute his high-handed usurpations. Suffice it to say., that he seized all the powers of the Gov ernment within these States, and, had he been permitted, would have become their absolute ruler. This be persevered in attempting, not withstanding Congress - declared more than once all the governments which he thus created to be 1 void and of none efiect. But I promised to be brief, and must abide by the. promise, although I should like the judg ment of the Senate upon this, to me, seeming vital phase and real purpose of all his misde meanors. To me this seems a sublime spectacle. A nation, not free, but as nearly approaching it as human institutions will permit of. consisting of thirty millions of people, had fallen Into con• filet, which among other people always ends in anarchy or despotism, and had laid down their arms,tbe mutineers submitting to the conquerors. 'rho laws were about to regain their accustomed sway, and again to govern the nation by the punishment of treason and the reward of virtue. Her old institutions wore about to be reinstated so far as they were applicable, according to the judgment of the con querors. Then one of their inferior servants, in stigated by unholy ambition, sought to seize a. portion of the territory according to the fashion of neighboring anarchies, and to convert a land of freedom into a land of slaves. This people spurned the traitors, and have put the chief of them upon his trial, and demand judgment upon his misconduct. He will he condemned, and his sentence inflicted without turmoil, tumult, or bloodshed, and the nation will continue its ac• customed course of freedom and prosperity, without the shedding any further of human blood and with a milder punishment than the world has been accustomed to see, or perhaps than ought now to be inflicted. Isow. even if the pretext of the President were true and not a mere subterfuge to juatify the chief act of violation with which he stands charged, still that would be such an abuse of the patronage of the Government as would demand nis impeachment for a high misdemeanor. Let us again for a moment examine into some of the circumstances of that act. Mr. Stantoa was ass points d Secretary of War In 1862, and continuel to bold under Mr. Johnson, which, by all usage is considered a reappointment. Was be a faithful officer, or was he removed for corrupt purposes? After the death of Mr. Lincoln, Andrew Johnson had changed his whole code of politics and policy, and instead of obey ing the will of those who put him into power, be determined to create a party for himself to carry out, his own ambitious purposes. For every honest purpose of the Government,and for every honest purpose for which Mr. Stanton was ap pointed by air. Lincoln, where could a better cone be found? Nono ever organized an army of a million of men and provided - for its subaistence, and efficient action more rapidly than Mr. Stan ton lied his predecessor. It might, with more propriety, be said of this officer than of the celebrated Frenchman, that lie "organized vic tory." Ile raised, and by his requisitions dis tributed more than a billion of dollars annually, without ever having been charged or suspected with the malappropriation of a single dollar; and when victory crowned his efforts he disbanded that immense army as quietly andAleacefully us if it had been a summer parade:. He would not, I suppose, adopt the personal views of the Presi dent; and for this he was suspended unti/reetored by the emphatic verdict of the Senate. Now if we are right in our narrative of the conduct of these parties and the motives of the President, the very effort at removal was a high handed usur pation as well . as a corrupt misdemeanor, for which of itself he ought to be impeached and thrown from the place he was abusing. But he says that he did not remove Mr. Stanton for the purpose of &leeting the tenure-of-office law. Then he forgot the truth in his controversy with the General of the Army. And because the neral did not aid him and finally admit that be had agreed to aid him in resisting that law, he railed upon him like a very drab. The counsel for the respondent allege that no removal of Mr. Stanton ever took place, and that therefore the sixth section of the act was not vio lated. They admit that there was an orderof re moval and a recision or his commission; but as he did Dot aibey it, say it was no removal. That suggests the old saying that it used to be thought that "when the brains were out the man was dead." That idea is proved by learned counsel to be absolutely fallacious. The brain of. Mr. Stanton's commission , was taken out by the order of removal--the recision of his commission--and his head was absolutely cut off by that gallant soldier, General Thomas, the night after the masquerade. And yet, according to the learned and delicate counsel, until the mortal remains, everything which could putrify was shovelled out/ and hauled into the muck-yard, there was no removal. ' But It is said that this took place merely as au experiment to make a judicial ease. Now, suppose there is anybody who, with the facts before him, can believe that this was' not an afterthought, let us see If that palliates the offence. The President la sworn' to take care that the laws _be faithfully executed. In what part . of the Constitution or laws does lie find it to be his duty to search oat for defec tive laws that stand recorded upon the statutes, in order that he may advise their infraction? Who was aggrieved by the tenure Of office bill that he was authorized to' use the name and the funds of the Government to relieve? Will he be so good as to tell us by what authority he became the,obstructor of an pnrepealed law instead of its . executor, especially alaw whose constitutionality he bad twice ti bte(l2 If there were nothing else than 111 F. own Mato:natty he deserves the contempt of the American people, and the punishinen6 of its highest tribunal. If lie wore not willing to exccuto the laws passed by the American Cou p( V+, and .unrepeali d, let him. resign the office which was thrown upon him by u horrible convul kiwi, and retire to his village obscurity. Lot him not be 60 swollm by pride and arrogance, which sprang from the deep misfortune of his country. as to attempt an entire revolution of Its internal Innehincrv, and the disgrace of the trusted ser vants of his lamented predecessor. CITY N oTic Es WIIEN AVILL QITAItEIt WEKIC END r—This is not a conundrum, only an anxiety about the continued wet a eat her makes lib sem eh around for some care of it. We have tried staying in the house, and tried eoine out; hut our only hope In in the dinhandment of the broad-brim hats and pine•bowl bonnets of the Arch street n eating We look forward to a day of Eettlement for everything, including the weather. When that cc Meb we can appear in our spring snits, purchased, we confess, rather prematurely at Charles titokea & Co.'s, under the Continental. A S TtiltitollN COUGH that will not yield to ordi nary le medlea, may be thoroughly cured by Jayne's rxpectorant, a moat effective medicine to all ltroa tdal anti Pulmonary Digordere. told everywhere. Smini6 brings unto us genial skies, budding dowers and all that , ors to make mother earth beau. tifni, but none of Ica blessing's are Molted for with more anxiety than the spring4ityles of Boots and Shoes sent forth by Bartlett, of 83 South Sixth street, above Chestnut. 'Exquisitey becoming in shape, unrivalled for finish, remarkable for comfort and durability. ALL first-class Family and Manufacturing flow ing Machines, sold on tamtallments, exchanged, and for rent, at the Searing Machine Exchange, No. 70t Chestnut street, Second floor. arniNG Hats. Spring Hots, Of the reweet and latest styles, at. The very lowest prices. Osirfords', Continental Hotel GIIOV7II & BAKER'S Highest Premium Sewing Machines, 730 Chestnut street. ALYXANDEICS SILMIKALT imparts with a single application a natural brown or black color to the hair, without staining the ikitt, and without any pre paration—et the same time giving it a lively, aoft and glolisy appearance. Sold retail by Frederick Brown, Fifth and Cheatnut Ilassard & Co., Twelfth and Chestnut; wholesale by It. and G. A. Wright, 624 Chestnut street. Sig nNo Elm's. Spring Hats, Of the newert and latent: Fiyles, at The very lovtest prices. Oak fords'. Continental Hotel A 31E1t N WA %YAW II En.—The Best. The Cheapest. Recommended by Railway Conduc tors, et gineers and exprehhmen, the most exacting class of ivatch.wearers, as superior to all others for strength, steadiness, accuracy and durability. 'Unscrupulous dealers occasionally sell, a worth. !et!B Swiss imitation. To prevent dell, muyers should always demand a certilleate or .iennineness. Fur halo by all respectable dealers. Pa fm , tir..—There are few operations more pain ful than Cl/ tung teeth. A title Of Bower's In fant Cor dial rubbed upon the guru of teething infants is a great soother. BrFcutunr.—Ali thos4 gent desiring elegant fitting pantaloons will find them at C. C. Dittrich cE Co., Continental Hotel, Ninth street. as this branch of Tailoring is made a specialty, and really warranty an invitation. Always a fine stock of goods on hand. FLOHENCE SEWING MACHINE. Florence Sew Log Machiee. Florence Sewing Machine. Office, 1123 Chestnut street, Philadelphia. DEAFNESS, BLIND:4E-8S MCI) CATA_RHI4 J. Isaacs, hi. D. Professor of the Eye and Ear. treats all diseases appert:aining to the above members with the utmost success. Testimonials from the most re liable sources in the city can be seen at his office, No. SOS Arch street. The medical faculty are invited to accompany their patients, as be has no secrets iu nis practice. ArthlcMl eyes inserted. No charge made for examination. SPRING HATs. Spring Hata, Of the newest and latest E.tylea, at The very lowest prices. °Words', Continental Hotel BURGICAL .13EiTRU/d.ENTS and druggists ' sundries Bnowntrt Earrnsa, Zit South Eighth street. BOWER'S 81.t.NNA FIGS, FOIL CONSTIPATION— fifty cents. Depot Sixth and Vine. FOR SALE. FOR SALE. • The Elegant BROWN-STONE HOUSE 2102 WALNUT Street. OPEN EVERYDAY. APPLY AT 129 South Seventh Street. gv.s6trpo E. FOR RALE BEAUTIFUL AND VALUABLE Estate at Olney. The undersigned offers for Mile the following pro- Perty at Olney, in the Tiventy•eecond Ward of the city of hiladelphia. elicit five miles north of Market street, on the Second Street Turnpike. Thie very desii able property embraces, frtita its pro:- in ity to biiiit.wo portion of the city. both town and coun try. and comprises a continuous front on the cast aide f the Turnpike of half a mile, and tends to the some di• T rection to the acony Creek. noutek to the Olney road. on which it fronts about t.eca feet. and contains nearly slot; eery e of land, which Is in a high state of improvement and cultivation. 1 he buildings belonging to the estate are .11 of the brat elate, and conelet of a inanition irntso of over 21.1 rooms, --circled under the s upervision of Samuel. Sloan. Req., ratted.—farm iIOtIPC, gardener's house, carriage home. ~pacioint barn, with stables underneath ; green house . Hocked with choice variety of grapee; hot•beda lee boure, corn.crib, &c., tie , and are new, built of atone, in the very heel manner. 'I fl iminrion horite and out-buildingm, with about 20 acre of land, g ill be N old aoparately, It deeired. SAMUEL, C. 101t0, nr.27.610 No. 127 S.intli courth street. 'FOR SALK FARM ANI) COEN. try Beat, late the residence of William U. Allen, Esq., President of Girard College --contatning acres, situate in Bensalem Towushio, Bucks county. eight minute's walk from Cornell's Citation. on the f'hltade!• phiaand Trenton Railroad, fourteen mites from the city. 't he improvements consist of a handsome residence, cots taining fifteen rooms, frame cottage, stone tenant house, barn, sc. Beautifully situated on the Delaware, on which it has a front of about 1,10.0 feet. LEWIS If. REDNER, al w2t) iii Walnut street cFOR BALE.-11ANDADIE RESIDENCE, No. 1.815 iF Spruce street. LEWIS E. NEDIYEIL HP27 In 731 Walnut street. REAL EST - ii k lE MAMAS. ELADMOIRSTRATRIX'S PEREMPTORY SALE— By order of the Orphans' Court. —Knot° of ilausitton Ciees,decetteed.—Thornas & Sons. Auctloneerc—Very deeirable 936-atory r tone itreidence, Stable and Carriage. house, 1 acre, Main ;street, Chestnut 11111, '1 wenty-socond w'utd, near the aoltgate.—Ptinuant to an order of the Orphans' Court los the City and County of Philadelahla, will be sold at public sale, on Tuesday, May 19th, 18ES, at 12 o'clock, noon at the Philadelphia Exchange, the fol. lowing described propert), late of Hamilton Crean. dec'd, ; All that 2.151-story double atone residence and lot of ground, situate on Chentnut , ii ill, in tho late township of blermontown, now in the Twt-nty-second Ward, city of Philadelphia ; beginning at a atone sot for a corner on the westerly aide of the Ot rmantown and Perldomen turnpike road, it being a corner of land of Christopher Y.akle; and thence by the PRWO south tl9 deg. 45 win., west 41 9.10 perebes so ;stone, and south 50 deg. 15 . east 3 perches, 13 feet 8 Wens to a atone in a lino of Abraham Ileydricke ; thence by the same north 39 deg. 45 win., east 41 9-10 Per , lee to another atone net for a corner on rho aforesaid rood; thence by the dame north 50 deg 15 win., west 3 percher, 13 Icet 6 inches to the place of beginning; cow mining 1 acre of land. The house is 40 feet front, suit Is Wyk building, and in good order; well and cistern under cover; hue 5 rooms on first floor; saloon parlor and eight chambers furnace, cooking-rouge, &c.; ice , heume, barn aI, d stabl i ng. ng. fruit tret &c rter" . Clear of all imam bronco. ale absolute. Immediate poegesslon. Sy the Court. JOSEPH ha:GARY, Clerk 0. C. ELIZA 11E'i H CltbsH, Administratrix. M. TUOMAS & SONS, Auctioneers, p27.my 9,16 139 std 141 South Fourth street. SALE OF A BEAUTIFUL COUNTRY REIM. Dit N LIE, 110E8 EB. CATTI,E, 110 Us ELIDED FUR ," NlTi RE, FARMING UTE' SIDI size. (MESTER COUNTY. Pao near Chadd's Ford Station. Ou Til CIto.DAY, May 7th, 1808, at 12 o'clock, M., on the prE mites situate la Pcnnsbury to wneldp, Chaster county, I'a.; will' het old without reserve, the beautiful country residence of Jacob Miles, Esq., containing 30 acres of excellent Brandywine land, very beautifully located, facint,lthe south, with au apple orchard, and largo Variety of other fruit trees, evergreens and shrubbery. Tho improvements are a large mansion house, with par lor. ball dining and sitting rooms, and tin' chambers mon, bathhouse, tenant house, barn, carriage and ice bouse—the placolute been recently fitted up .at groat ex pense. 1 here is an abundant suoph of excellent water, Mud for convenience, beauty of location, and its star. roondiugs is not ettrpaieed by any in the county. Irs.l - May Its examined previous f o sale. Aldo, immediately after the sale of the Real Estate, will be sold THE 1101;8E110ED FURNITURE, Ate., Ern bracing some very desirable articles, in excellent or. der, together with all the fawning utensils, agriculturel implsinsnts, bay I mo cart, douroorn , eke. Aldo, lot r o il f of valuable bay mares. two 'OMIT, one calf. " la a to the e Wks its. Tbe entire establishment will be so highest bidder. 'relics—Personal Property, Caeb ; Real Estate, one-half nit y remain on mortgage. bslance Cash; dye hundred dol. let H . to be paid at time of sale. • ' 371 - Immediate possession will be gi% N:B —Trains leave Thirty•flret from e n s:tnut streets for Chad d's Eord end West Chester, from which conveyance cony be had to theplace. ALFRED M. DEWINESS. Auctioneer, apll72D Ninth and k)antleln 1300 1 30, Vigiada. MD OIL ()LOT iato. 1868 CAUPETI NIGS. 1868 GLEN ECHO MILLS, Germantown, McCALLIIM I CREASE & SLOAN Reepectf oily invite the attention of THE TRADE to their largo Stock of CARPETINGS, of their own and other Manufacturer,, No. 509 CHESTNUT STREET. 1868. REMOVAL 1868. OF OUR RETAIL DEPARTMENT From 619 Chestnut Street, TO NO. 609 CHESTNUT STREET . Where we are now °Denizli AN IMMENSE NEW B'lOOlC oP FOREIGN CARPETING& Embracing all the latest and choicest etyles of AXMINSTER, ROYAL WILTON, onussms, TA. PEW' RY VEJNETS TAPESTRY BRUSSELS. DA. MASK,AND PALA 'T'INE: VENETIANS; ALSO, ENO. LIM OIL CLOTHS, together will a full Line of DOMESTIC CAR PETIN GS. untsams. TAPESTRY BRUSSELS and VENB TIAN ii, for BALLS and STAIRS, with extra liNdent. MoOALLOM CREASE & SLOAN. a m anlll4 CARPETS, OIL CLOTHS, CANTON MATTINGS, &0,, Just received per late wtenner. E. H.GODSHALK &CO. 723 Chestnut Street. GOMIALL TIIZO. L vriznautarim Ja2743cruv . 0 ! • JAMES H. ORNE, EON & CO., 626 Chestnut Street, Hare opened New Carpete, Oil Cloth, Muggetio. Canton and Cocoa Matting, Rum din. Bruise eb;, Wiltons, Velvets, The above are our own Patterns. English Ingrains, Three Pigs, Oil Clothe, Truggets, English Venetian, gonna Matting, OF OUR ORN ISPORTATIOS TRIO MEN , Some very eupcifor, till of which we offer at lowest prim. JAMES H. ORNE, SON & CO.; Chestnut, below Seventh. 9 2mro CANTON MATTING. Our Own Importation This Spring. SOME VERY SUPERIOR 3-4, 7-8, 4-4, 5-4; 6-4 Vf HITE AND RED CHECK STRAW MATTINGS. JAMES. hl. ORNE, SON & CO., 626 Chestnut St., below Seventh: ap92mrP) CARPETS, OIL C140,9C1ET 9 MATTINGS, 60., WHOLESALE AND RETAIL. p;S i edfo e s T e l ll7L c go vf al g re o tge7o r t i i n frora P igienlicv. LEEDOM. SHAW, 010 Arch street, Between Ninth and Tenth Street•. feirvamrPS CARPETS, OIL CLOTHS, MATTINOS, IMPORTATION OF 1868. Ail the Latest and, Best Styles AT REDUCED PRICES. rr °NV - NSF. ND Sr, CO" No 59 N. Second St , below Aroh, npl6 lnirpb `STOLEN—ON 711 E 22d INSTANT—NINE 83,000 13 bond. , of the Suequelumna ellnP 1 Company, numbered 520, 527 1043.20, 804, 42,7. 8. All poreona are warned. agate-i recetviug the above. ap27 2trP• . QTFAIYIBIIIP SAXON, FROH HOS rON. CO& I....)eigueee of mdse. per above eteatner will W n eave ed for the!' goods now landing at Pine St. Wharf, apnat • HENRY WINSOE & CO. - pox BALE.—To MERCHANTS, tribRESEEPIR4, Hotels and dealers-210 Case" Champagne and Cider. 260 bble. Champagne apd CEsiCider. .J. JORDAN. 1220 Pear street. Extra Tapestries. Straw Matting.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers