IMPEACHMENT
The report of the majority
of the Judiciary Committee recommending impeachment of the President has unquestionably
surprised and disappointed the country; nor are the temper and reasoning of the part of
the report which has been published likely to inspire general confidence. In alluding to
the subject some two months since, we said that "technically and verbally up to the
present moment the President has not violated the law." We were reminded that he had
issued an Amnesty Proclamation in defiance of the law which forbade him. But he held that
his authority for such an act was derived from the Constitution, and that the law itself
was in violation of that instrument. That is, his action was but another illustration of
the difference of constitutional interpretation between himself and Congress. What we had
in mind was that no law of undoubted constitutional sanction had been violated by him; and
that however unwise, for example, his removal of Sheridan and Sickles may have been they
were both acts strictly within the reconstruction law.The charge of usurpation made by the majority
of the Committee is, in a certain sense, valid. There is no doubt that the subject of
reconstruction belongs properly to Congress; and we can all now see that it would have
been better to assemble Congress before beginning the work. But there is equally no doubt
that the action of the President was at the time justified by the country, for the reason
that it was felt to be necessary to do something to restore civil government, and because
it was supposed that his action was temporary and provisional. It was an assumption of
power condoned by the conscious necessities of the situation. But it was not felt to be
then, nor do we believe any large number of persons now suppose it to have been, a
usurpation with treasonable or injurious intention. It was in no proper sense a high
crime, or even a misdemeanor.
When Congress assembled and it became
evident that the President meant to insist upon his theory of Reconstruction as final the
hostility between him and Congress began. His theory was undoubtedly both false and
foolish. But he maintained it within his constitutional prerogative. His spirit was
hateful, as his understanding is mean. But when his theories were confuted and his
Constitutional efforts through the veto were overborne; when the Freedmens Bureau
was continued; when the civil rights of the freedmen were declared; when the
Reconstruction bill was passed; the President retained General Howard as Chief of the
Bureau; he did not formally resist the extension of civil rights, although he was morally
guilty of the New Orleans massacre; and he appointed under the Reconstruction bill the
very commanders who were most agreeable to its framers. He has opposed the whole
Congressional policy of reconstruction; he has vituperated Congress and publicly insulted
eminent citizens; he has in express terms denied the authority of Congress as now
constituted; and his conduct has incalculably prolonged and deepened the difficulty of
reconstruction. But while as a stump orator he has denied the authority of Congress, as
President he has recognized it; and the encouragement which he has given to the spirit of
disaffection is that which a President in opposition may always give to the party opposed
to Congress.
The charge of usurpation is the only
really grave charge, and that this was criminal can not be proved. The report of the
majority has not revealed, so far as published, any thing new upon the point; and if there
were anything new of importance it would have been published in the abstract of the
report. The vague charge of complicity in the assassination of President Lincoln wholly
disappears; and we do Mr. Johnson the justice of saying that we do not believe it was ever
seriously believed by any body. Indeed we feel more strongly than ever that the
impeachment project sprang from the hot impatience of those who felt that the President
was an "obstruction" to the rapid success of their views of the true policy of
reconstruction; and was not the result of a profound conviction that he was clearly guilty
of impeachable offenses. Yet if Presidents are to be impeached because they obstruct or
oppose the will of the Congressional majority, it is very evident that it will become an
ordinary party measure.
As we have often said, there can be no
doubt that in extreme cases, when the great powers of the government come into conflict,
Congress will prevail. However cunning a system of "checks and balances" and
"co-ordinate powers" there may be, the supreme authority of every government
resides somewhere, and extreme pressure will develop it. It is none the less true,
however, that in our system the Executive is a well-contrived check upon the Legislative
Department; while, if it transcends its restraining powers, it is submitted by the same
system to trial and removal by the Legislature. The Legislature, however, is again and
radically checked by the popular vote which elects it; and therefore its indictment and
possible punishment of the Executive becomes also a question of expediency. To impeach and
fail to convict would destroy the impeaching party. This consideration should not, of
course, restrain any party when the positive guilt of the President is conspicuous and the
national injury plain. But a party which believes that its possession of power is
essential to the wise and permanent settlement of the most vital public questions ought to
hesitate long before it impeaches the President under circumstances like those at present
existing in the country.
It has been lately said
with great vigor that a party must be plucky if it would succeed. Undoubtedly; but what is
pluck in a party? It is invincible fidelity to principle. It is not obstinate tenacity of
a measure merely because it is extreme. This kind of "pluck" in George III. lost
England the American colonies. The same "pluck" in Charles X. of France lost him
his crown; and Charles I. of England his head. What principle is involved in the
impeachment of a President upon doubtful grounds? What principle is involved in straining
the interpretation of evidence to reach him? The principle by which the dominant party in
this country is solemnly bound is equal rights; and the policy to which it is pledged is
reconstruction upon that principle. It holds to that policy because it believes it to be
of the highest expediency. But impeachment has never been more than the whim of a few. It
has never been sanctioned by the intelligent judgment of the country to which all the
facts are familiar; and we do not believe it will be sustained by Congress.
Articles Related to Overt
Obstruction of Congress:
Congress
February 2, 1867, page 67
February 16, 1867, page 99
March 16, 1867, page 163
How Long?
June 29, 1867, page 402
Reconstruction and Obstruction
July 6, 1867, page 418
The Summer Session
July 6, 1867, page 418
The Fortieth Congress
July 17, 1867, page 467
Thanks to the District Commanders
July 27, 1867, page 467
Impeachment Postponed
July 27, 1867, page 467
A Desperate Man
August 13, 1867, page 546
The Secretary of War
August 24, 1867, page 530
Samson Agonistes at Washington (cartoon)
August 24, 1867, page 544
The Stanton Imbroglio (illustrated satire)
August 24, 1867, page 542
Secretary Grant
August 31, 1867, page 546
Southern Reconstruction
August 31, 1867, page 547
The Political Situation
September 7, 1867, page 562
General Thomas
September 7, 1867, page 563
Southern Reconstruction
September 7, 1867, page 563
The General and the President
September 14, 1867, page 578
General Sickles Also
September 14, 1867, page 579
Southern Reconstruction
September 21, 1867, page 595
The Presidents Intentions
September 28, 1867, page 610
Impeachment
October 5, 1867, page 626
The Main Question
October 5, 1867, pages 626-627
Suspension during Impeachment
October 19, 1867, page 658
"Disregarding" The Law
November 2, 1867, page 691
Impeachment
December 14, 1867, page 786
General Grants Testimony
December 14, 1867, page 786
The Presidents Message
December 14, 1867, page 787
General Grants Letter
January 1, 1868, page 2
Secretary Stantons Restoration
January 25, 1868, page 51
Reconstruction Measures
January 25, 1868, page 51
The President, Mr. Stanton and General Grant
February 1, 1868, page 66
Romeo (Seward) to Mercutio (Johnson) (cartoon)
February 1, 1868, page 76
The War Office
February 1, 1868, page 77
Secretarys Room in the War Department (illus)
February 1, 1868, page 77
The New Reconstruction Bill
February 8, 1868, page 83
|