317 The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are, Messrs. Anthony Bayard, Buckalew, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Fowler, 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, Willey. Those who voted in the negative are, Messrs. Cameron, Cattell, Chandler, Conkling, Conness, Cragin, Drake, Edmunds, Ferry, Frelinghuysen, Harlan, Howard, Morgan, Morrill of Vermont, Nye, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Stewart, Thayer, Tipton, Williams, Wilson, Yates. So the Senate decided the question to be admissible; and On motion by Mr. Conness, at 15 minutes past 2 o'clock p.m., The Senate took a recess for 15 minutes; at the expiration of which The witness was cross-examined by the managers. Richard T. Merrick, a witness on the part of the President, was called and sworn, and while under examination. The counsel for the President proposed to the witness a question which was objected to by the managers; and The question having been reduced to writing was read by the Secretary, as follows: We offer to prove that about the hour of noon, on the 22d day of February, upon the first communication to the President of the situation of Gen. Thomas's case, the President or the Attorney General, in his presence, gave the witness certain directions as to obtaining a writ of habeas corpus for the purpose of testing, judicially, the right of Mr. Stanton to continue to hold the office of Secretary of War against the authority of the President. The Chief Justice ruled the question to be admissible; and The counsel for the President proposed the following question to the witness: What, if anything, did you and Mr. Cox do in reference to accomplishing the result you have spoken of? The managers having raised objection to the question, The Chief Justice ruled the question to be admissible; and The witness having made answer thereto, He was cross-examined by the managers and dismissed. Ewin O. Perrin, a witness on the part of the President, was called and sworn, and while under examination a question was proposed to him, by the counsel for the President, to which objection was made by the managers. The counsel for the President being required to reduce their question to writing, it was read by the Secretary, as follows: We offer to prove that the President then stated that he had issued an order for the removal of Mr. Stanton and the employment of Gen. Thomas to perform the duties ad interim; that thereupon Mr. Perrin said, Supposing Mr. Stanton should oppose the order? The President replied. There is no danger of that for Gen. Thomas is already in the office. He then added. It is only a temporary arrangement; I shall send in to the Senate at once a good name for the office. After argument by the managers against the admissibility of the question, and by the counsel for the President in favor of it, 318 The Chief Justice submitted the question to the Senate, viz: Is the question admissible? And It was determined in the negative.. On motion by Mr. Conness, Yeas... 9 Nays_-_- 37 The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are, Messrs. Bayard, Buckalew, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Hendricks, McCreery, Patterson of Tennessee, Vickers. Those who voted in the negative are, Messrs. Cameron, Cattell, Chandler, Conkling, Conness, Corbett, Cragin, Drake, Ferry, Fessenden, Fowler, Frelinghuysen, Grimes, Harlan, Howard, Howe, Johnson, Morgan, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Morton, Nye, Patterson of New Hampshire, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Ross, Sherman, Sprague, Stewart, Thayer, Tipton, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Wiley, Williams, Wilson, Yates. So the Senate decided the question to be inadmissible; and The examination of the witness being closed, and no cross-examination proposed, he was permitted to retire. Mr. Evarts, of counsel, stated that counsel had now reached a point in their defense where they would desire not to be required to proceed further with their evidence in the absence of their associate counsel, Mr. Stanbery. After argument by Mr. Manager Butler in favor of proceeding with the trial at once, and a reply by Mr. Evarts, of counsel, Mr. Conness submitted the following order for consideration: Ordered, That on each day hereafter the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, shall sit at 11 o'clock a.m.; And An amendment having been proposed by Mr. Summer, Mr. Trumbull objected to the present consideration of the order. On motion by Mr. Ferry, The Senate, sitting for the trial of the President upon articles of impeachment, adjourned to 12 o'clock m. tomorrow. FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 1868. The United States v. Andrew Johnson, President. At 12 o'clock m. the Chief Justice of the United States entered the Senate Chamber and resumed the chair; and, The Sergeant at Arms having made proclamation, The managers appointed to conduct the trial of the President of the United States upon articles of impeachment exhibited against him by the House of Representatives, to wit, Mr. Bingham, Mr. Boutwell, Mr. James F. Wilson, Mr. Butler, Mr. Thomas Williams, Mr. Logan, and Mr. Thaddeus Stevens, entered the Senate Chamber and took the seats assigned them. The Sergeant at Arms announced the presence at the door of the Senate Chamber of the House of Representatives; and The House of Representatives, as in Committee of the Whole House, preceded by its Chairman, Mr. Elihu B. Washburne, and 319 accompanied by its Speaker and Clerk, entered the Senate Chamber and took the seats provided for them. The counsel of the President, to wit, Mr. Curtis, Mr. Evarts, Mr. Nelson, and Mr. Groesbeck, appeared at the bar of the Senate and took the seats assigned them. The Chief Justice having directed the Secretary to read the Journal of the proceedings of the Senate sitting for the trial of the President upon articles of impeachment of yesterday, On motion by Mr. Stewart, The reading of the Journal was dispensed with. The Senate proceeded to consider the motion submitted by Mr. Conness yesterday fixing the hour of the daily meeting of the Senate sitting on the trial of the President upon articles of impeachment hereafter at 11 o'clock a.m.; and The question being on the amendment proposed by Mr. Summer, to wit, strike out all after the word "Ordered," and insert: That considering the public interest which suffer from the delay of this trial, and in pursuance of the order already adopted to proceed with all convenient dispatch, the Senate will sit from 10 o'clock in the forenoon to 6 o'clock in the afternoon, with such brief recess as may be ordered; It was determined in the affirmative... On motion by Mr. Sumner, Yeas____ 13 Nays 30 The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are, Messrs. Cameron, Chandler, Cole, Harlan, Morrill of Maine, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Stewart, Sumner, Thayer, Tipton, Yates. Those who voted in the negative are, Messrs. Anthony, Cattell, Conness, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Drake, Ferry, Fessenden, Fowler, Frelinghuysen, Grimes, Hendricks, Howard, Howe, Johnson, Morgan, Morrill of Vermont, Morton, Patterson of New Hampshire, Patterson of Tennessee, Ross, Saulsbury, Sherman, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Vickers, Wiley, Williams, Wilson. So the amendment was not agreed to; and On the question to agree to the motion of Mr. Conness, It was determined in the negative-- On motion by Mr. Conness, 29 Yeas - The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are, Messrs. Cameron, Cattell, Chandler, Cole, Conkling, Conness, Corbett, Cragin, Drake, Ferry, Frelinghuysen, Harlan, Howard, Howe, Morgan, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Patterson of New Hampshire, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sherman, Stewart, Sumner, Thayer, Tipton, Willey, Williams, Wilson, Yates. Those who voted in the negative area, Messrs. Anthony, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fowler, Grimes, Hendricks, Johnson, Patterson of Tennessee, Ross, Saulsbury, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Vickers. So it was Ordered, That on each day hereafter the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, shall sit at 11 o'clock a. m. 320 Mr. Ferry submitted the following resolution for consideration: Whereas there appear in the proceedings of the Senate of yesterday, as published in the Globe of this morning, certain tabular statements incorporated in the remarks of Mr. Manager Butler upon the question of adjournment, which tabular statements were neither spoken in the discussion nor offered or received in evidence: Therefore. Ordered, That said tabular statement be omitted from the proceedings of the trial as published by rule of the Senate. The Senate proceeded, by unanimous consent, to consider the resolution; and The resolution was agreed to. The Chief Justice directed the counsel for the President to proceed with the defense; and William W. Armstrong, a witness on the part of the President, was called; and having been sworn, was examined by counsel for the President and cross-examined by the managers. Barton Able, a witness on the part of the President, was called; and having been sworn, was examined by the counsel for the President and cross-examined by the managers. George Knapp, a witness on the part of the President, was called; and being sworn, was examined by the counsel for the President and cross-examined by the managers. Henry F. Zeider, a witness on the part of the President, was called; and being sworn, was examined by the counsel for the President and cross-examined by the managers. The counsel for the President submitted in further evidence a statement prepared by Henry F. Zeider, showing the differences in the language used by the President in the speech he made at St. Louis, September 8, 1866, as published in newspapers, the Missouri Repub lican and the St. Louis Democrat; which was admitted. The counsel for the President submitted in further evidence a copy of the commission issued by John Adams, President of the United States, to George Washington, appointing him Lieutenant General of the Armies of the United States, in the year 1798; which was read and admitted. The counsel for the President submitted in further evidence a statement prepared at the Department of the Interior, showing the names and dates of removals of superintendents of Indian affairs and Indian agents from the year 1849 to 1866, inclusive; also the names and dates of removals of registers of land offices and receivers of public moneys; also of surveyors general of the public lands; and also miscellaneous removals for the same period, made during the session as well as during the recess of the Senate. Frederick W. Seward, a witness on the part of the President, was called; and having been sworn, was examined by the counsel for the President and cross-examined by the managers. The counsel for the President submitted in further evidence a schedule of appointments of vice consuls during the sessions of the Senate from the year 1838 to the year 1865, inclusive; which was admitted. Gideon Welles, a witness on the part of the President, was called and sworn; and while being examined a question was proposed by the counsel for the President which was objected to by the managers. 321 By direction of the Chief Justice the counsel reduced their question to writing, which was read by the Secretary, as follows: What passed between you and the President after you made that communication and in reference to that communication? The Chief Justice ruled the question admissible; and The witness having made answer thereto, On motion by Mr. Conness, at 20 minutes past 2 o'clock p. m., the Senate took a recess for 15 minutes; at the expiration of which The examination of Gideon Welles was resumed; and a question being put to the witness by the counsel for the President, which was objected to by the managers, the counsel for the President, by direction of the Chief Justice, submitted in writing a statement of what they offered to prove by the testimony, which was read by the Secretary as follows: We offer to prove that on this occasion the President communicated to Mr. Welles and the other members of his Cabinet, before the meeting broke up. that he had removed Mr. Stanton and appointed Gen. Thomas Secretary of War ad interim, and that upon the inquiry by Mr. Welles, whether Gen. Thomas was in possession of the office, the President replied that he was; and upon further question of Mr. Welles, whether Mr. Stanton acquiesced, the President replied that he did; all that he required was time to remove his papers. After argument by the managers against the admissibility of the proposed evidence, and by the counsel in favor of it, Mr. Howard submitted the following question to counsel, In what way does the evidence the counsel for the accused now offer meet any of the allegations contained in the impeachment? How does it affect the gravamen of any one of the charges? And The counsel for the President having made answer thereto, The Chief Justice ruled the evidence proposed to be offered by the counsel admissible. Mr. Cragin requested that the question be submitted to the Senate; and it was accordingly submitted. Shall the evidence offered by the counsel for the President be admitted? It was determined in the affirmative__. On motion of Mr. Cragin, (Yeas 26 Nays---- 23 The years and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are, Messrs. Anthony, Bayard, Buckalew, Cole, Conkling, Corbett, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Fowler, Grimes, Hendricks, Johnson, McCreery, Morton, Patterson of Tennessee, Ross, Saulsbury, Sherman, Sprague, Sumner, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Vickers, Willey. Those who voted in the negative are, Messrs. Cameron, Cattell, Conness, Cragin, Drake, Edmunds, Ferry, Frelinghuysen, Harlan, Howard, Howe, Morgan, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Patterson of New Hampshire, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Stewart, Thayer, Tipton, Williams, Wilson, Yates. So the Senate decided the proposed evidence admissible; and |