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！
t he might contribute to save his country from what he deemed the stain of a partisan and unsustained impeachment of its Chief Magistrate。 Men often perform； in the excitement and glamour of battle； great deeds of valor and self sacrifice that live after them and link their names with the honorable history of great events； but to deliberately face at once inevitable political as well as physical death in the council hall； and in the absence of charging squadrons； and shot and shell； and of the glamor of military heroism； is to illustrate the grandest phase of human courage and devotion to convictions。 That was the part performed by Mr。 Grimes on that occasion。 His vote of 〃Not Guilty〃 was the last； the bravest； the grandest； and the most patriotic public act of his life。
Mr。 Henderson of Missouri； was the fourth Republican Senator to vote against the impeachment。 A gentleman of rare industry and ability； and a careful； conscientious legislator； he had been identified with the legislation of the time and had reached a position of deserved prominence and influence。 But he was learned in the law； and regardful of his position as a just and discriminating judge。 Though then a young man with a brilliant future before him； he had sworn to do justice to Andrew Johnson 〃according to the Constitution and law；〃 and his verdict of 〃Not Guilty〃 was given with the same deliberate emphasis that characterized all his utterances on the floor of the Senate。
Mr。 Ross； of Kansas； was the fifth Republican Senator to vote 〃Not Guilty。〃 Representing an intensely Radical constituencyentering the Senate but a few months after the close of a three years enlistment in the Union Army and not unnaturally imbued with the extreme partisan views and prejudices against Mr。 Johnson then prevailinghis predilections were sharply against the President； and his vote was counted upon accordingly。 But he had sworn to judge the defendant not by his political or personal prejudices； but by the facts elicited in the investigation。 In his judgment those facts did not sustain the charge。
Mr。 Trumbull； of Illinois； was the sixth Republican Senator to vote against the Impeachment。 He had been many years in the Senate。 In all ways a safe legislator and counsellor； he had attained a position of conspicuous usefulness。 But he did not belong to the legislative autocracy which then assumed to rule the two Houses of Congress。 To him the Impeachment was a question of proof of charges brought； and not of party politics or policies。 He was one of the great lawyers of the body； and believed that law was the essence of justice and not an engine of wrong； or an instrumentality for the satisfaction of partisan vengeance。 He had no especial friendship for Mr。 Johnson； but to him the differences between the President and Congress did not comprise an impeachable offense。 A profound lawyer and clear headed politician and statesman；； his known opposition naturally tended to strengthen his colleagues in that behalf。
Mr。 Van Winkle； of West Virginia； was the seventh and last Republican Senator to vote against the Impeachment。 Methodical and deliberate； he was not hasty in reaching the conclusion he did； but after giving the subject and the testimony most careful and thorough investigation； he was forced to the conclusion that the accusation brought by the House of Representatives had not been sustained； and had the courage of an American Senator to vote according to his conclusions。
The responses were as follows：
GuiltyAnthony； Cameron； Cattell； Cole； Chandler； Conkling； Conness； Corbett； Cragin； Drake； Edmunds； Ferry； Frelinghuysen； Harlan； Howard； Howe； Morgan； Morton； Morrill of Maine； Morrill of Vermont； Nye； Patterson of New Hampshire； Pomeroy； Ramsay； Sherman； Sprague； Stewart； Sumner； Tipton； Thayer； Wade； Williams； Wilson； Willey； Yates。
Not GuiltyBayard； Buckalew； Davis； Dixon； Doolittle； Fessenden； Fowler； Grimes； Henderson； Hendricks； Johnson； McCreery； Norton； Patterson of Tennessee； Ross； Saulsbury； Trumbull； Van Winkle； Vickers。
Not Guilty19。 Guilty35one vote less than a Constitutional majority。
CHAPTER XI。 THE IMPEACHERS IN A MAZE。 A RECESS ORDERED。
THE FINAL VOTE TAKEN。
The defeat of the Eleventh Article was the second official set…back to the Impeachment movementthe first being the practical abandonment of the First Article by the change in the order of voting。
The vote had been taken on what its friends seemed to consider its strongest proposition； the Eleventh Article having been so framed as to group the substance； practically； of all the pending ten Articles。 The impeachers had staked their cause upon that Article； and lost。 They seemed not to have contemplated the possibility of its defeat。 So confident were they of its success； in which event it would be immaterial what became of the other Articles； that they apparently had agreed upon no order of procedure after that should have been defeated。 They were in the condition of a flock of game into which the sportsman had fired a shot and broken its ranks。 They were dazed； and for a moment seemed not to know what next to do； or which way to turn。 They did not dare now go back to the fated First Article； according to the program agreed upon； as Mr。 Sherman and Mr。 Howe had demonstrated its weakness； and they were fearful of going to the Second or Third； as in the then temper of the anti…impeachers it was manifest there would be little hope for either of them； and the other eight had been already beaten without a vote； at the conference previously held； and by Republican commitals。
The Chief Justice ordered the reading of the First Article； according to the order agreed upon； but before that could begin； apparently to gain time for recovery； Mr。 Williams moved that the Senate take a recess of fifteen minutes； but the motion was not agreed to。
The Chief Justice again ordered the reading of the First Article； but again； before the clerk could begin the reading； Mr。 Williams intervened to move an adjournment to Tuesday； the 26th day of the month。
After numerous conflicting motions relating to the date of the proposed reassembling； and several roll calls thereon； the anti…impeachers generally insisting on proceeding at once to vote on the other articles of impeachment； the motion of Mr。 Williams to adjourn to June 26th； prevailed。
Of course the purpose； and the only purpose then apparent； of that adjournment； was to gain time； apparently in the hope of more favorable developments in the next ten days。
The supposably strongest count of the indictment having been beaten； it was apparent that it would be folly to hazard a vote on any other at that time。 There was a possibility that changes might occur in the personnel of the Senate in the interim。 As but one article had been put to vote； and as that was beaten by the lack of a single vote； there seemed a further possibility that influences could be brought to bear； through the industry of the House； as was very soon after developed； to secure the support of an anti…impeaching Senator on at least one of the articles of impeachment yet to be voted upon。 A vacancy in the ranks of the anti…impeaching Republicans to be filled by an imp