history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第30节

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！


f　the　United　States；　or　of　any　law　thereof；　or　of　his　oath　of　office。　He　denies　that　the　said　order　was　issued　with　an　intent　to　violate　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States　or　any　law　thereof；　or　this　respondent's　oath　of　office；　and　he　respectfully；　but　earnestly。　insists　that　not　only　was　it　issued　by　him　in　the　performance　of　what　he　believed　to　be　an　imperative　official　duty；　but　in　the　performance　of　what　this　honorable　court　will　consider　was。in　point　of　fact。　an　imperative　official　duty。　And　he　denies　that　any　and　all　substantive　matters；　in　the　said　first　article　contained；　in　manner　and　form　as　the　same　are　therein　stated　and　set　forth；　do；　by　law；　constitute　a　high　misdemeanor　in　office；　within　the　true　intent　and　meaning　of　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States。

ANSWER　TO　ARTICLE　II。

And　for　answer　to　the　second　article；　this　respondent　says　that　he　admits　he　did　issue　and　deliver　to　said　Lorenzo　Thomas　the　said　writing　set　forth　in　said　second　article；　bearing　date　at　Washington；　District　of　Columbia；　February　21；　1868；　addressed　to　Brevet　Major　General　Lorenzo　Thomas；　Adjutant　General　United　States　army；　Washington；　District　of　Columbia；　and　he　further　admits　that　the　same　was　so　issued　without　the　advice　and　consent　of　the　Senate　of　the　United　States；　then　in　session；　but　he　denies　that　he　thereby　violated　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States；　or　any　law　thereof；　or　that　he　did　thereby　intend　to　violate　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States　or　the　provisions　of　any　act　of　Congress；　and　this　respondent　refers　to　his　answer　to　said　first　articles　for　a　full　statement　of　the　purposes　and　intentions　with　which　said　order　was　issued；　and　adopts　the　same　as　part　of　his　answer　to　this　article；　and　he　further　denies　that　there　was　then　and　there　no　vacancy　in　the　said　office　of　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War；　or　that　he　did　then　and　there　commit　or　was　guilty　of　a　high　misdemeanor　in　office；　and　this　respondent　maintains　and　will　insist：

1。　That　at　the　date　and　delivery　of　said　writing　there　was　a　vacancy　existing　in　the　office　of　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War。

2。　That　notwithstanding　the　Senate　of　the　United　States　was　then　in　session；　it　was　lawful　and　according　to　long　and　well　established　usage　to　empower　and　authorize　the　said　Thomas　to　act　as　Secretary　of　War　ad　interim。

3。　That　if　the　said　act　regulating　the　tenure　of　civil　offices　be　held　to　be　a　valid　law；　no　provision　of　the　same　was　violated　by　the　issuing　of　said　order　or　by　the　designation　of　said　Thomas　to　act　as　Secretary　of　War　ad　interim。

ANSWER　TO　ARTICLE　III。

And　for　answer　to　said　third　article；　this　respondent　says　that　he　abides　by　his　answer　to　said　first　and　second　articles　in　so　far　as　the　same　are　responsive　to　the　allegations　contained　in　the　said　third　article；　and；　without　here　again　repeating　the　same　answer；　prays　the　same　be　taken　as　an　answer　to　this　third　article　as　fully　as　if　here　again　set　out　at　length；　and　as　to　the　new　allegation　contained　in　said　third　article；　that　this　respondent　did　appoint　the　said　Thomas　to　be　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War　ad　interim；　this　respondent　denies　that　he　gave　any　other　authority　to　said　Thomas　than　such　as　appears　in　said　written　authority　set　out　in　said　article；　by　which　he　authorized　and　empowered　said　Thomas　to　act　as　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War　ad　interim；　and　he　denies　that　the　same　amounts　to　an　appointment；　and　insists　that　it　is　only　a　designation　of　an　officer　of　that　department　to　act　temporarily　as　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War　ad　interim；　until　an　appointment　should　be　made。　But　whether　the　said　written　authority　amounts　to　an　appointment　or　to　a　temporary　authority　or　designation；　this　respondent　denies　that　in　any　sense　he　did　thereby　intend　to　violate　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States；　or　that　he　thereby　intended　to　give　the　said　order　the　character　or　effect　of　an　appointment　in　the　constitutional　or　legal　sense　of　that　term。　He　further　denies　that　there　was　no　vacancy　in　said　office　of　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War　existing　at　the　date　of　said　written　authority。

ANSWER　TO　ARTICLE　XI。

And　in　answer　to　the　eleventh　article；　this　respondent　denies　that　on　the　18th　day　of　August；　in　the　year　1866；　at　the　City　of　Washington；　in　the　District　of　Columbia；　he　did；　by　public　speech　or　otherwise；　declare　or　affirm；　in　substance　or　at　all；　that　the　thirty…ninth　Congress　of　the　United　States　was　not　a　Congress　of　the　United　States　authorized　by　the　constitution　to　exercise　legislative　power　under　the　same；　or　that　he　did　then　and　there　declare　or　affirm　that　the　said　thirty…ninth　Congress　was　a　Congress　of　only　part　of　the　States　in　any　sense　or　meaning　other　than　that　ten　States　of　the　Union　were　denied　representation　therein；　or　that　he　made　any　or　either　of　the　declarations　or　affrmations　in　this　behalf；　in　the　said　article　alleged；　as　denying　or　intending　to　deny　that　the　legislation　of　said　thirty…ninth　Congress　was　valid　or　obligatory　upon　this　respondent；　except　so　far　as　this　respondent　saw　fit　to　approve　the　same；　and　as　to　the　allegation　in　said　article；　that　be　did　thereby　intend　or　mean　to　be　understood　that　the　said　Congress　had　not　power　to　propose　amendments　to　the　Constitution；　this　respondent　says　that　in　said　address　he　said　nothing　in　reference　to　the　subject　of　amendments　of　the　Constitution。　nor　was　the　question　of　the　competency　of　the　said　Congress　to　propose　such　amendments；　without　the　participation　of　said　excluded　States。　at　the　time　of　said　address　in　any　way　mentioned　or　considered　or　referred　to　by　this　respondent。　nor　in　what　he　did　say　had　he　any　intent　regarding　the　same；　and　he　denies　the　allegation　so　made　to　the　contrary　thereof。　But　this　respondent；　in　further　answer　to；　and　in　respect　of；　the　said　allegations　of　the　said　eleventh　article　hereinbefore　traversed　and　denied；　claims　and　insists　upon　his　personal　and　official　right　of　freedom　of　opinion　and　freedom　of　speech；　and　his　duty　in　his　political　relations　as　President　of　the　United　States　to　the　people　of　the　United　States　in　the　exercise　of　such　freedom　of　opinion　and　freedom　of　speech；　in　the　same　manner；　form　and　effect　as　he　has　in　this　behalf　stated　the　same　in　his　answer　to　the　said　tenth　article；　and　with　the　same　effect　as　if　he　here　repeated　the　same；　and　he　further　claims　and　insists；　as　in　said　answer　to　said　tenth　article　he　has　claimed　and　insisted；　that　he　is　not　subject　to　question；　inquisition；　impeachment；　or　inculpation；　in　any　form　or　manner；　of　or　concerning　such　rights　of　freedom　of　opinion　or　freedom　of　speech　or　his　alleged　exercise　thereof。

And　this　respondent　further　denies　that　on　the　21st　day　of　February；　in　the　year　1868；　or　at　any　other　time；　at　the　City　of　Washington；　in　the　District　of　Columbia；　in　pursuance　of　any　such　declaration　as　is　in　that　behalf　in　said　eleventh　article　alleged；　or　otherwise；　he　did　unlawfully；　and　in　disregard　of　the　requirement　of　the　Constitution　that　he　should　take　care　that　the　laws　should　be　faithfully　executed；　attempt　to　prevent　the　execution　of　an　act　entitled　〃An　act　regulating　the　tenure　of　certain　civil　offices；〃　passed　March　2；　1867；　by　unlawfully　devising　or　contriving；　or　attempting　to　devise　or　contrive；　means　by　which　he　should　prevent　Edwin　M。　Stanton　from　forthwith　resuming　the　functions　of　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War；　or　by　lawfully　devising　or　contriving；　or　attempting　to　devise　or　contrive；　means　to　prevent　the　execution　of　an　act　entitled　〃An　act　making　appropriations　for　the　support　of　the　army　for　the　fiscal　year　ending　June　30；　1868；　and　for　other　purposes；〃　approved　March　2；　1867；　or　to　prevent　the　execution　of　an　act　entitled　〃An　act　to　provide　for　the　more　efficient　government　of　the　rebel　States；〃　passed　March　2；　1867。

And　this　respondent；　further　answering　the　said　eleventh　article；　says　that　he　has；　in　his　answer　to　the　first　article；　set　forth　in　detail　the　acts；　steps；　and　proccedings　done　and　taken　by　this　respondent　to　and　toward　or　in　the　matter　of　the　suspension　or　removal　of　the　said　Edwin　M。　Stanton　in　or　from　the　office　of　Secretary　for　the　Department　of　War；　with　the　times；　modes；　circumstances；　intents；　views；　purposes；　and　opinions　of　official　obligation　and　duty　under　and　with　which　such　acts；　steps；　and　proceedings　were　done　and　taken；　and　he　makes　answer　to　this　eleventh　article　of　the　matters　in　his　answer　to　the　first　article；　pertaining　to　the　suspension　or　removal　of　said　Edwin　M。　Stanton；　to　the　same　intent　and　effect　as　if　they　were　here　repeated　and　set　forth。

And　this　deponent；　further　answering　the　said　eleventh　article；　denies　that　by　means　or　reason　of　anything　in　said　article　alleged；　this　respondent；　as　President　of　the　United　States；　did；　on　the　21st　day　of　February；　1868；　or　at　any　other　day　or　time。　commit；　or　that　he　was　guilty　of；　a　high　misdemeanor　in　office。

And　this　respondent；　further　answering　the　said　eleventh　article；　says　that　the　same　and　the　matters　therein　contained　do　not　charge　or　allege　the　commission　of　any　act　whatever　by　this　respondent；　in　his　office　of　President　of　the　United　States；　nor　the　omission　by　this　respondent　of　any　act　of　official　obligation　or　duty　in　his　office　of　President