91. The constitutional provision that when the Senate sits as a Court of Impeachment the Chief Justice of the United States shall preside,[234] in no way affects the judicial power vested in the supreme and inferior Courts of the United States. The reason for the provision is obvious. The Senate, which is the special Court of Impeachment, has ordinarily, and by the Constitution, two presiding officers: one, _ex officio_, the Vice-President; the other, the President _pro tempore_, who is a Senator.[235] The conviction of a President removes him from the office and the Vice-President (or whosoever by law is in line of succession) succeeds him. The President _pro tempore_ of the Senate, votes in the Court of Impeachment as a Senator. If either the Vice-President, or the President _pro tempore_ presided over the Court of Impeachment, when a President is on trial, the principle of freedom from official, or one may say, personal bias would be violated. The Chief Justice presides,—an official of high rank, disinterested, save to be fair to all parties, and capable of so ruling. But when the Court of Impeachment sits to try other officials (except the Vice-President) the Chief Justice does not preside. When he presides and makes rulings they are not comparable to rulings or decisions he renders as the voice of the Supreme Court. The finding of the Court of Impeachment is not analogous to the decisions of that Court. 92. It follows therefore that the executive power of the United States, vested in the President, is not subject to the legislative or to the judicial power. It is independent of either or both. Yet the people of the United States have provided for their relief from a faithless execution of the office of President by combining Congress and the Chief Justice of the United States as a special body, or agency, a Court of Impeachment through which to secure relief. 93. It is evident that the power of the President of the United States is very great. The scope of this executive power has never been realized [remarked President Hayes], and the practical use of power, even by an ordinarily strong President, is greater than the books ever described. The executive power is large because not defined in the Constitution. The real test has never come, because the Presidents, down to the present, have been conservative, or what might be called conscientious, men, and have kept within limited range. And there is an unwritten law of usage that has come to regulate an average administration. But if a Napoleon ever became President, he would make the executive almost what he wished to make it.[236] Practically the President has the nation in his hands.[237] 94. The principle, difficult to understand, regulative of the constitutional law of the executive power, is the principle of executive as distinct from ministerial power.