Autobiography of Seventy Years, Vol. 1-2Hoar, George Frisbie
History
Autobiography of Seventy Years, Vol. 1-2
Hoar, George Frisbie
United States -- History -- 1865-1921; United States -- Politics and government -- 1865-1900
So General Belknap was acquitted for the want of the two-
thirds vote for his conviction. Every Democrat voted for
conviction except Mr. Eaton of Connecticut. The following
Republicans voted for conviction: Booth, Cameron of Pennsylvania,
Dawes, Edmunds, Hitchcock, Mitchell, Morrill, Oglesby, Robertson,
Sargent, Sherman, and Wadleigh.
It is difficult to believe that the Senators who voted for
acquittal were not, perhaps unconsciously, influenced by the
desire to shield a political associate from punishment. The
power to impeach public officers after leaving office had been
exercised in England from time immemorial. It is well settled
that when in the Constitution or legislation of the United
States a term of English law is used, that the meaning customarily
given to the term in English jurisprudence is to ascribed
to it here.
The history of this clause as found in the proceedings of
the Convention that framed the Constitution, makes very clear
the understanding of that body. They first inserted the words:
"The Senate of the United States shall have power to try all
impeachments, but no person shall be convicted without the
concurrence of two-thirds of the members present, which in
case of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal
from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office
of trust and profit under the United States." The framers
of the Constitution regarded the power of impeachment as absolutely
essential to the working of the Government.
That clearly gave the two Houses of Congress the common law
powers of impeachment, as exercised by Parliament. At a later
time there was added: "The Vice-President and all civil officers
of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment
and conviction." That was added as a limitation on the tenure
of office. It seems incredible that they should have intended,
without debate or division, to wholly change and so greatly
limit and narrow the clause previously adopted.
It is obvious that impeachment and removal from office will
be in many cases an insignificant and unimportant part of
the remedy as compared with perpetual disqualification from
holding office. It seems incredible that it could ever have
been intended that this judgment of perpetual disqualification
to hold office could only be rendered when the defendant is
willing, and can be avoided by his voluntary resignation.
The framers of the Constitution were very skilful Constitutional
mechanics. I am satisfied that the opinion of the majority
of the Senate will prevail hereafter, unless the case where
the question shall come up be, like that of Belknap, strongly
affected by party feeling.
President Monroe said: "The right of impeachment and of trial
by the Legislature is the mainspring of the great machine
of government. It is the pivot on which it turns. If preserved
in full vigor, and exercised with perfect integrity, every
branch will perform its duty."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account