The CHIEF JUSTICE. Do the honorable managers desire to cross-examine this witness? Mr. Manager BUTLER. We have nothing to ask of this witness, sir. Mr. JOHNSON. I move that the court adjourn. Mr. STEWART. On that motion I call for the yeas and nays. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The senator from Maryland moves that the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, adjourn until to-morrow at 12 o'clock. On this . question the yeas and nays are asked for. The yeas and nays were not ordered, one-fifth of the senators present not sustaining the call. The question being put on the motion to adjourn, there were, on a division, ayes 24, noes 18; and the Senate, sitting for the trial of the impeachment, adjourned until to-morrow at 12 o'clock. TUESDAY, April 14, 1868. The Chief Justice of the United States entered the Senate chamber at 12 o'clock and 5 minutes p. m., and took the chair. The usual proclamation having been made by the Sergeant-at arms, The managers of the impeachment on the part of the House of Representatives appeared and took the seats assigned them. The counsel for the respondent, with the exception of Mr. Stanbery, also appeared and took their seats. The presence of the House of Representatives was next announced, and the members of the House, as in Committee of the Whole, headed by Mr. E. B. Washburne, the chairman of that committee, and accompanied by the Speaker and Clerk, entered the Senate chamber, and were conducted to the seats provided for them. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the journal. Mr. STEWART. I move that the reading of the journal be dispensed with. The CHIEF JUSTICE. If there be no objection the reading of the journal will be dispensed with. The Chair hears no objection. Mr. SUMNER. I send to the Chair an order. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the order. The Secretary read as follows: Ordered, In answer to the motion of the managers, that, under the rule limiting the argument to two on a side unless otherwise ordered, such other managers and counsel as choose may print and file arguments at any time before the argument of the closing manager. The CHIEF JUSTICE. If there be no objection the order will be considered now. Mr. CONNESS. I object, Mr. President. The CHIEF JUSTICE. Objection is made. The order will lie over for one day. Mr SUMNER. I beg leave most respectfully to inquire under what rule such an objection can be made. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Chief Justice stated on Saturday that in conducting the business of the court he applied, as far as they were applicable, the general rules of the Senate. This has been done upon several occasions, and when objection has been made orders have been laid over to the next day for consideration. Mr. SUMNER. Of course it is not for me to argue the question; but I beg to remind the Chair of the rule under which this order is moved. The CHIEF JUSTICE. It will lie over. Gentlemen of counsel for the President, you will please proceed with the defence. Mr. EVARTS. Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, it is our misfortune to be obliged to state to the court that since the adjournment yesterday, and not com ing to our knowledge until just before we came into court this morning, our associate, Mr. Stanbery, is prevented by illness, which confines him wholly, from attending upon the court to-day. I have seen him, and have learned the opinion of his physician that he will undoubtedly, in expectation, be able to resume his duty within forty-eight hours, and there may be some hope that he will be able to do so by to-morrow. In the suddenness of this knowledge to us, and in the actual arrangement in reference to the proofs, it would be very difficult for us, and almost impossible with any proper attention to the justice of the case, to proceed to-day; and we suppose that an indulgence, at least for the day, would lessen the chance of longer procrastination. The gentlemen of the Senate and the Chief Justice will be so good as to bear in mind that much of the matter to be produced in evidence is within the personal knowledge of our associate, Mr. Stanbery, and not within our own, and we have to say that the conduct of the proofs has been accorded to him. It is, of course, not pleasant for us, and not pleasant for Mr. Stanbery, especially, that such an occasion as this should arise for the introduction of personal considerations; but in our best judgment we can only present it to the court in the aspect I have named, and submit it to their discretion whether the facility and the indulgence that may be needed on our part should be limited to this day or whether it should extend over the two days that we suppose would assure the restoration of Mr. Stanbery to health. I saw Mr. Stanbery last evening, and, although he had been a little affected by a cold which he had contracted, I supposed him to be, as he supposed himself to be, in a condition of health that would permit him to go on as usual; and it was only as we were preparing to come to court this morning that he himself was obliged to submit to the confinement of his physician and to inform us of his situation. Mr. DRAKE. Mr. President, I would ask a question of the counsel for the defence. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the question proposed by the senator from Missouri. The Secretary read the question, as follows: Cannot the day be occupied by counsel for the respondent in giving in documentary evidence? Mr. EVARTS. It cannot, as we understand the situation of the proofs and our duty in regard to them. Mr. Howe. Mr. President, I move that the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, adjourn until to-morrow at 12 o'clock. The motion was agreed to. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, stands adjourned until to-morrow at 12 o'clock. WEDNESDAY, April 15, 1868. The CHIEF JUSTICE of the United States took the chair. The usual proclamation having been made by the Sergeant-at-arms, The managers of the impeachment on the part of the House of Representatives and the counsel for the respondent, except Mr. Stanbery, appeared and took the seats assigned them respectively. The members of the House of Representatives, as in Committee of the Whole, preceded by Mr. Washburne, chairman of that committee, and accompanied by the Speaker and Clerk, appeared and were conducted to the seats provided for them. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the journal of yesterday's proceedings. The Secretary read the journal of yesterday's proceedings of the Senate sitting for the trial of the impeachment. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The first business in order is the consideration of the order submitted by the senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Sumner] 'yesterday. Mr. SUMNER. I should like to have it reported. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the order. The Secretary read as follows: Ordered, In answer to the motion of the managers, that, under the rule limiting the argument to two on a side, "unless otherwise ordered," such other managers and counsel as choose may print and file arguments at any time before the argument of the closing manager. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question is on agreeing to the order. Mr. EDMUNDS. I move to amend the order so that it will read, "May print and file arguments at any time before the argument of the opening manager shall be concluded," in order that the counsel for the defence may have an opportunity to see what arguments they are to reply to. Mr. SUMNER. I have no objection to that. Mr. JOHNSON. I ask for the reading of the order as proposed to be amended. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the order. The SECRETARY. The order submitted reads as follows: Ordered, In answer to the motion of the managers, that, under the rule limiting the argument to two on a side, unless otherwise ordered, such other managers and counsel as choose may print and file arguments at any time before the argument of the closing manager. It is proposed to strike out the words "argument of the closing manager," and insert "argument of the opening manager shall be concluded." Mr. EVARTS. Mr. Chief Justice, may we be allowed to make a suggestion in reference to this order? The CHIEF JUSTICE. Certainly. Mr. EVARTS. The amendment offered and accepted places, I suppose, the proper restriction upon the arguments to be furnished in print on the part of the managers. That puts the matter in proper shape, I suppose, as regards the printed briefs that may be put in on the part of the managers; that is to say, that they shall be filed before we make our reply. On our part, however, it would be proper that we should have the liberty of filing the briefs at any time before the closing manager makes his final reply, as a part of our new briefs may be in reply to the new briefs that are put in on the part of the prosecution. Mr. Manager BINGHAM. Mr. President and senators, I desire to say, in regard to the remark which has just been made by the honorable gentleman on behalf of the accused, that it would seem, if the order be entered as he suggests, that additional arguments made by counsel on behalf of the President need not be filed until the close of the arguments on behalf of the accused made orally to the Senate, the repliant on behalf of the Congress of the United States and of the people would have no opportunity to see those arguments not delivered, and therefore could not reply to them. I would suggest that the order as it stands is right. It gives the counsel for the President the opportunity to review what may be filed before they argue, and it gives the counsel for the people the opportunity to review before he argues whatever may be filed here on behalf of the President. Mr. EVARTS. Undoubtedly there are inconveniences in this enlargement of the rule, however applied; but there seems to be an equality in requiring each side to furnish its arguments in time to have replying counsel answer them; and the same rule upon my suggestion would be applied to us that by this present amendment is applied to the managers for the impeachment, for they are not required to file their additional briefs except at the very moment that they close their oral argument, and then we are obliged to commence our oral argument. Mr. NELSON. Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, I desire to say on this motion that it was agreed between the counsel for the President that the three of our number who have hitherto managed the case should take upon themselves the continuous management and the argument of the case before the Senate. In consequence of the imputation made by the managers, that we desired unnecessarily to consume the time of the Senate, those of us who, under this arrangement, had not intended to argue the cause did not intend, either by ourselves or through others, to make any application to the Senate for an enlargement of the rule; but, inasmuch as that application has been made in behalf of the managers, I desire to say to the Senate that if we are permitted to argue the cause I think it would be more fair to the two counsel who did not expect to argue the case to permit us to make an extemporaneous argument before the Senate. We have not made any preparation whatever in view of written arguments. We suppose, though we do not know how the fact is, that the managers on the part of the House, who have had this subject before them for a much longer period than we have had, are much more familiar with this subject and are better prepared with written addresses than we are, so that if the rule is to be extended I respectfully ask the Senate to allow us to address the Senate in such mode, either oral or written, as we may desire. I beg leave to say to the Senate that while I do not, speaking for myself, expect to be able to interest the Senate as much as the learned gentlemen to whom the management of the cause has been hitherto confided on the part of the President, yet, as I reside in the President's own State, as I have practiced my profession in his town, the town of his domicile, for the last thirty years, and as he saw proper to ask my services in his behalf, and as I fully concur with him in the leading measures of his administration, I desire, if I am heard at all, to be heard in the mode which I have suggested. Mr. CONNESS. I offer the following as a substitute for the order now pending. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the substitute proposed by the senator from California. The Secretary read it, as follows: Strike out all after the word "ordered," and insert: That the twenty-first rule be so amended as to allow as many of the managers and of the counsel for the President to speak on the final argument as shall choose to do so: Provided, That not more than four day's on each side shall be allowed; but the managers shall make the opening and the closing argument. Mr. DRAKE. On that question I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. Manager BoOUTWELL. I should like to have the substitute read once more. The CHIEF JUSTICE. Does the honorable manager desire to address the Senate? The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question is on the substitute proposed by the senator from California. The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted-yeas 19, nays 27; as follows : YEAS-Messrs. Cameron, Conness, Cragin, Dixon, Doolittle, Fowler, Harlan, Henderson, Hendricks, McCreery, Patterson of Tennessee, Ramsay, Sherman, Stewart, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Willey, Wilson, and Yates-19. NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Buckalew, Cattell, Chandler, Cole, Conkling, Davis, Drake, Edmunds, Ferry, Frelinghuysen, Howard, Howe, Johnson, Morgan, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Morton, Patterson of New Hampshire, Pomeroy, Ross, Saulsbury, Sumner, Thayer, Tipton, Vickers, and Williams-27. NOT VOTING-Messrs. Bayard, Corbett, Fessenden, Grimes, Norton, Nye, Sprague, and Wade-8. So the substitute was rejected. Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chief Justice, I prefer altogether oral arguments to these printed ones, and I submit the following as a substitute, understanding that there are six managers on the part of the House and four counsel for the respondent. ["Order!" Order!"] I have drawn an order which["Order!" "Order!"] 66 The CHIEF JUSTICE. Order! Order! There can be no debate. Mr. DOOLITTLE. Which I ask to have read. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the amendment proposed by the senator from Wisconsin. The Secretary read as follows: Strike out all after the word "ordered," and insert: That upon the final argument two managers of the House open, two counsel for the respondent reply; that two other managers rejoin, to be followed by two other counsel for the respondent; and they in turn, to be followed by two other managers of the House, who shall conclude the argument. Mr. DRAKE. I move the indefinite postponement of the whole proposition, together with the substitute. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The senator from Missouri moves the indefinite postponement of the order and the proposed substitute. Mr. SUMNER. Let us have the yeas and nays on that. The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted—yeas 34, nays 15; as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Buckalew, Chandler, Cole, Conkling, Conness, Corbett, Davis, Dixon, Drake, Edmunds, Ferry, Fessenden, Grimes, Harlan, Henderson, Hendricks, Howard, Howe, Johnson, Morgan, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Morton, Patterson of New Hampshire, Pomeroy, Ross, Saulsbury, Sherman, Stewart, Thayer, Tipton, Williams, and Yates-34. NAYS-Messrs. Cameron, Cattell, Cragin, Doolittle, Fowler, Frelinghuysen, McCreery, Patterson of Tennessee, Ramsey, Sumner, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Vickers, Willey, and Wilson-15. NOT VOTING-Messrs. Bayard, Norton, Nye, Sprague, and Wade-5. Mr. FERRY. I now submit an order on which I desire action. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Secretary will read the order proposed by the senator from Connecticut. The Secretary read as follows: Ordered, That the twelfth rule be so modified as that the hour of the day at which the Senate shall sit upon the trial now pending shall be, unless otherwise ordered, at 11 o'clock forenoon; and that there shall be a recess of thirty minutes each day, commencing at 2 o'clock p. m. The CHIEF JUSTICE. This order is for present consideration unless objected to. The CHIEF JUSTICE put the question, and declared that the noes appeared to have it. Mr. THAYER, Mr. DRAKE, and others called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered; and being taken, resulted-yeas 24, nays 26, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Cameron, Cattell, Chandler, Cole, Conkling, Conness, Corbett, Cragin, Drake, Ferry, Frelinghuysen, Harlan, Howard, Howe, Morgan, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Ramsey, Sherman, Stewart, Sumner, Thayer, Williams, and Wilson-24. NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Bayard, Buckalew, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Edmunds, Fessenden, Fowler, Grimes, Henderson, Hendricks, Johnson, McCreery, Morton, Patterson of New Hampshire, Patterson of Tennessee, Pomeroy, Ross, Saulsbury, Tipton, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Vickers, Willey, and Yates-26. NOT VOTING-Messrs. Norton, Nye, Sprague, and Wade-4. So the order was rejected. The CHIEF JUSTICE. Gentlemen of counsel for the President, please proceed with the defence. Mr. EVARTS: Mr. Chief Justice and Senators, although I am not able to announce, as I should be very glad to do, that our associate, Mr. Stanbery, had, according to his hopes, been able to come out to-day, yet I am happy to say that he is quite convalescent, and cannot be long interrupted from giving the |