Valley Spirit: April 29, 1868Go To Page : 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
The Pressure for Conviction
(Column 01)Summary: Gives a view of the impeachment trial of Johnson. Predicts the Senate will convict because Radicals had gone into the trial determined to convict regardless of evidence. Says Johnson has no chance of justice with Republicans from all over the country descending on Washington to pressure for a guilty verdict. Ends by saying impeachment should not be carried out in the Senate at any time because partisan feelings prevent impartial justice.
Full Text of Article:In the Hands of the Black Man
The trial of the President will soon be ended. All the immense machinery of the Radical party is now in motion to procure his conviction. Orators upon the hustings, Editors in their papers, and carpet-baggers in the privacy of Senatorial closets are bringing every possible argument and influence to bear upon the minds of the judges who constitute the "High Court," so as to insure a verdict of guilty. Radical Senators are now under the pressure of partisan clamor. They are asked to disregard the law and testimony, if they are not sufficient to convict, and to look to the effect which a verdict of not guilty would have upon the interests of the Radical party. It is boldly avowed that the deposition of Andrew Johnson is a political necessity.
We have frequently seen, in trials in the Court of Quarter Sessions of our own county, the rights of the most notorious criminals, charged with the most trivial offences, more carefully and jealously guarded, then have been the rights of the Chief Executive of this great nation, in the impeachment trial now nearly concluded. How extremely careful are our judges to so act as that no suspicion of the slightest partiality, or prejudice shall attach to their conduct. With what precision does the Court lay down the rules of law which govern the facts of each particular case. How earnestly is the jury instructed as to the presumption of innocence with which they must credit the prisoner at the beginning of their deliberations! How widely is the door thrown open for the admission of evidence as to the intent with which the offence has been committed!--With what marked solemnity is the jury instructed, that the testimony must satisfy them beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the prisoner! And, at the last, with what caution are our jurors admonished to allow no person to speak to them upon the subject of his guilt, or innocence, or upon any matter pertaining to the issue which they have been sworn to try!
But how stands the case against the President? It is an unquestioned and unquestionable fact, that a large number of the Senators, now sitting as the judges of the President, entered upon this trial with their "minds made up." The extreme Radicals of the Senate have never entertained, for a single moment, a thought of voting for the acquittal of the President. They saw then, and still see in him an obstacle in the way of their political schemes. Some of them, doubtless, secretly advised the impeachment agitators in the House to prefer their articles of impeachment, assuring them that the movement would be successful in the Senate. And now, although they may be convinced that the testimony does not warrant his conviction, yet, having pledged themselves in advance to vote against him, they will do it regardless of law, testimony, and their oaths. They imagine, and truly too, that, in so doing, they will find favor in the eyes of their Radical supporters, and thus secure their hold on power for a long time to come.
Thus having prejudged the case, their subsequent action is no matter of surprise. They have not hesitated to disregard the decisions of the Chief Justice as to the admissibility of testimony, when they thought that it might bear in favor of the President. The rules of evidence were not binding upon them, they being, in their own opinion, "a law unto themselves." Men who have taught the "higher law" doctrine so long, could not be expected to be slow about acting upon it themselves. They have, therefore, overruled Mr. Chase whenever his opinions militated against their preconceived actions of the President's guilt. What possibility was there of an impartial trial when a large portion of the Court had predetermined the case?
No presumption of innocence weighed in the President's favor. To each man, a presumption of innocence was an impossibility. In their speeches they had denounced him, by their votes they had condemned him, and by their resolution of disapproval of his action in regard to Stanton, they had officially prejudged him. Their minds were surely not, at the commencement of the trial, like a blank sheet of white paper.
The enemies of the President have charged all along that he attempted to remove Stanton with intent to violate the Constitution. How important, therefore, did the question of the intent become! This, his Counsel offered to show. They attemped to introduce the testimony of his Cabinet Officers as to their advice to him in relation to the constitutionality of the Tenure-of-Office-Bill. This the Senate refused to hear.--They well knew that, if it were admitted, the fact would be disclosed that Stanton had advised Mr. Johnson to veto that bill on the ground of its unconstitutionality, and he would thus be placed before the country in the position of seeking to protect himself, and retain his office, under a law which he had himself declared was in violation of the Constitution. And more, that he had agreed that the officers appointed by Mr. Lincoln were not placed by that bill beyond the power of the President to remove, even if it should be held to be constitutional. And thus he would have been put before the country as seeking to hold his office under a law which he admitted would not protect him in endeavoring to retain it. The evidence as to the question of the intent was therefore excluded.
In our Courts, so careful are jurors not to convict unless satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt, that they frequently conjure up an unreasonable doubt in order to acquit, preferring to err upon the safe side, upon the principle that it is better that ninety and nine guilty men should escape than that one innocent man should suffer. There need be no apprehension that the Senate of of the United States will hunt long for a reasonable, or unreasonable doubt for the purpose of acquitting the President. In making up their verdict, there is no danger of them examining the evidence critically. They have made up their minds to convict, and they will convict. We are of this opinion, for the reason that we give the Radicals in the Senate no credit for any honesty in this matter whatever. The whole scheme was devised to further the interests of the Radical party, and a failure to convict would be ruin to that organization.
And yet, the outside Radicals are evidently alarmed. Since the testimony has been concluded, intimations have been thrown out that certain Radical Senators can not be counted as sure to vote for conviction.--Whereupon, the "highways and by-ways" of New England have been lined with Yankees, carpet-bags in hand, hurrying on to Washington to exert their influence upon weak-kneed Senators. The nutmeg-grater manufactures, and wooden-clock vendors, who have squatted in the Southern Sates, are rushing to the Capital, claiming to represent the people of that section, and are loud in their exclamations of horror at the hopeless condition of "the Union men of the South" if the impeachment project should prove a failure. All these fellows--many of whom are fit subjects for the penitentiary and the gallows--are closeted with Radical Senators, urging the imperative necessity of convicting the President.
What a farce, what a lamentable farce is the trial of a President by a Senate composed of his political enemies! The power to try a President, charged with high crimes and misdemeanors, ought to be lodged somewhere else than in the Senate. If the Constitution is defective in any particular, it certainly is in this. At a time when party feeling runs high, no man can expect impartial justice to be meted out to him by his political foes. And so, too, the ends of justice cannot be attained when the Senate is composed of the political friends of the President. The bias in favor of the accused would then be so strong that it would preclude the probability--perhaps, indeed, the possibility--of a conviction.
(Column 02)Summary: Responds to Republican newspapers rejoicing in the adoption of a new Constitution in South Carolina. Asks Republicans if they are now happy to share their party and power with "ignorant negroes". Stirs up race hatred by predicting the Republicans will nominate a black man for President in four years unless they are defeated in the next election.
Full Text of Article:A Temperance Meeting
The Philadelphia Inquirer--Radical, of course--says "the returns from South Carolina justify the belief that the new Constitution proposed in that State has been adopted, that officers have been elected, and that the government will be in the hands of the Republicans." It adds, jubilantly, that "The future of South Carolina is in the hands of the black man."
The government of South Carolina "will be in the hands of the Republicans" because South Carolina "is in the hands of the black man." The black man has become a very important element in the Republican party. The Inquirer rejoices in it--the Press rejoices in it--and hundreds of other Republican journals rejoice in it. But what say the masses of the Republican party? Does it gratify them that some hundreds of thousands of ignorant negroes have been admitted to membership in their party? Does it gratify them that these ignorant negroes will henceforth rule the destinies of States that have heretofore been ruled by white men? Does it gratify them that these ignorant negroes will be represented in Republican National Conventions? Does it gratify them that there is a prospect of a negro being nominated some day for President or Vice President?
Let no man laugh at the idea of a negro being nominated for President or Vice President by the Republicans. To reach that point the Republicans have only to advance as rapidly in the next four years as they have advanced in the last four. And they will advance if not checked by a defeat at the coming Presidential election. The only safe course for any member of the Republican party who does not wish to be called upon to vote for a negro four years hence is to vote with the Democracy now.
(Column 03)Summary: A temperance meeting will be held at the Court House in Bedford. John Cessna, Chairman of the State Committee appointed to draft a Prohibitory Liquor Law, will be present to explain why no such law was drafted. "We wonder whether he will be candid enough to say that the reason why he did not draft the bill and press its passage, was because he feared to put the Radical members of the Legislature on record on that question."
(Names in announcement: John Cessna)
(Column 01)Summary: The "Democratic and Conservative citizens of Chambersburg" will meet in the Court House to nominate a ticket for borough offices.Whitesy
(Column 01)Summary: The renowned magician will perform at Repository Hall. He will combine magic displays and science experiments.Frescoed
(Column 01)Summary: The Chambersburg Lodge of the International Order of Odd Fellows was painted and frescoed. William Elmer of Carlisle did the work.Presbyterian
(Names in announcement: William Elmer)
(Column 01)Summary: The Presbytery of Carlisle met at Greencastle. Rev. Dr. Creigh, of McConnellsburg, announced his intention to step down from his ministry. Churches in Cumberland and Fulton counties dissolved their ties.Town Officers
(Names in announcement: Rev. H. M. Kerr, Rev. Creigh, Rev. Crawford, Rev. Kennedy, Rev. Rex, Rev. Hays, Rev. Blair, Rev. Howland, Rev. Keel, Rev. Austin)
(Column 02)Summary: Chambersburg's Republicans made the following nominations for town office: Burgess, L. S. Clark; Town Council--South Ward, S. F. Greenawalt, Dr. J. L. Snesserott, P. Kreichbaum; North Ward, F. S. Gillespie, T. B. Wood; Auditor, A. D. Kaufman; High Constable, M. W. Houser.Officers Elected
(Names in announcement: L. S. Clark, S. F. Greenawalt, Dr. J. L. Snesserott, P. Kreichbaum, F. S. Gillespie, T. B. Wood, A. D. Kaufman, M. W. Houser)
(Column 02)Summary: The Orrstown and Mercersburg Lodges of Odd Fellows elected officers.The Franklin County Bible Society
(Names in announcement: John Powders, D. E. Kendig, H. J. Stewart, S. C. Golden, Samuel Knisely, Thomas Metcalfe, Henry Waidlich, David McConnell, A. S. Frederick, C. Waidlich, S. L. Tabler, George Myers, Andrew Myers, George W. Wilkins, A. W. Black, I. Y. Atherton, John K. Shatzer, William Selser, Henry Spangler, David Long, M. J. Silck, O. G. Pensinger, A. M. Whetstone)
(Column 02)Summary: All the churches in town closed to attend the meeting of the Franklin County Bible Society in the Presbyterian Church. The Rev. J. Agnew Crawford, pastor, addressed the group. The paper complains that though the society is one of the oldest of its kind in the state, its work has been rather slow and sparse of late.Court Proceedings
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. Agnew Crawford)
(Column 02)Summary: Summary of proceedings of the county court.
(Names in announcement: Frederick Foreman, Isaac Cushwa, Sharpe, Brewer, Kimmell, Samuel Baker, John Miller, W. S. Everett, David Everett, John W. Skinner, Oliver S. Brown, Cessna, Stenger, C. B. McCormick, Joseph Lochbaum, McClure, Stewart, John S. Wallach, William M'Neal, Jacob Wentling, John G. Miller, James Null, Charles W. Stise, Joseph Sickell, M'Gowan, Joseph Snively, Jacob Shank, Jacob Hagelroad, Adam B. Wingerd, Henry Sellers, Kennedy, William P. Weagly, C. T. Weagly, McClellan, Mary Eyster, Charles W. Eyster)Full Text of Article:Col. McClure's Lecture
The first day of last week was taken up entirely with hearing motions of counsel, and disposing of cases upon the argument list. On Tuesday morning the jury trials began, and continued until Saturday afternoon. The following cases were disposed as follows.
Frederick Foreman vs Isaac Cushwa. Capian and respondendum. The jury failing to agree was discharged. Sharpe for Plff; Brewer and Kimmell for Deft.
Samuel Baker, use of John Miller, vs W. S. Everett Ex'r of David Everett dec'd. Summons in assumpsit. Deft. confessed judgement for $300 and costs. Brewer for plff.; Everett and Sharpe for Deft.
John W. Skinner vs Oliver S. Brown.--Summons for Covenant. Jury discharged, being unable to agree. Cessna and Sharpe for plff; Kimmell and Stenger for Deft.
C. H. McCormick & Bro. vs Joseph Lochbaum. Amicable Action. Settled by the parties. Sharpe and Kimmell for plff; McClure & Stewart for Deft.
John S. Wallach vs William M'Neal and Jacob Wentling. Summons in debt on promissory note. Verdict for the Defendant. Kimmell and M'Clellan for plff; Sharpe and Brewer for Defts.
John G. Miller's Executors vs James Null, Charles W. Stine, and Joseph Sickell. Summons in Debt founded on three single Bills. judgement for Plff. for $148.55. Sharpe and Stenger for Plffs; Kimmell and M'Gowan for Defts.
Same vs James Null. Summons in Debt. Plaintiffs suffer non-suit. Sharpe and Stenger for Plffs; Kimmell and M'Gowan for Deft.
Joseph Snively vs The School Directors of Antrim Township. Summons in assumpsit. Suit discontinued.
Jacob Shank vs Same. Summons in assumpsit. Suit discontinued.
Jacob Hargleroad vs Adam B. Wingerd & Henry Sellers. Summons case in deceit. Verdict for Defendants. Kimmell and Sharpe for Plff; Cessna and Kennedy for the Defts.
Wm. P. Weagly, for the use of the minor children of C. T. Weagly deceased. Summons case in assumpsit founded on promisory note. Judgement confessed for $774.39. Kennedy and Sharpe for Plff; Kimmell and McClellan for Deft.
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the use of Mary Eyster vs Chas. W. Eyster with notice to Chamb'g Woolen Manufacturing Company Terre Tenants Sci. Fa. Sur Recognizance recorded in Orphans Court Docket. The Woolen Co., confessed judgement for $2657.94. M'Clure & Stewart for Plff; Sharpe for Deft.
(Column 03)Summary: Col. A. K. McClure's Lecture on Mormonism and the Far West was enjoyed by a large audience.
(Names in announcement: Col. A. K. McClure)Origin of Article: Lancaster IntelligencerThe Bedford Inquirer
(Column 03)Summary: John Stewart of Chambersburg is the elector for the Radical ticket from this Congressional District. The article mocks Republican claims that he is one of the best campaigners in the area: "No doubt of it whatever. He stumped Franklin County last fall in favor of negro suffrage, the principal plank in the Radical platform, and succeeded in giving the county to the Democrats by nearly 200 majority. We hope Mr. Stewart will give us some of his stumping up this way."
(Names in announcement: John Stewart)Origin of Article: Bedford GazetteMarried
(Column 04)Summary: Michael L. Deihl and Miss Mary Grove, both of Chambersburg, were married on April 23rd by H. Y. Hummelbaugh in the home of J. McKaby.Married
(Names in announcement: Michael L. Deihl, Mary Grove, H. Y. Hummelbaugh, J. McKaby)
(Column 04)Summary: Peter Roseman and Miss Barbara Hale, both of Chambersburg, were married on April 23rd in the U. B. Parsonage by H. Y. Hummelbaugh.Married
(Names in announcement: Peter Roseman, Barbara Hale, H. Y. Hummelbaugh)
(Column 04)Summary: Daniel C. Lebernight and Miss Annie C. Shatzer were married on April 26th by H. Y. Hummelbaugh.Married
(Names in announcement: Daniel C. Lebernight, Annie C. Shatzer, H. Y. Hummelbaugh)
(Column 04)Summary: John W. Watson, of Cumberland County, and Miss Susan Foust of Roxbury, Franklin County, were married on April 23rd at the Pleasant Retreat Parsonage by the Rev. James M. Bishop.
(Names in announcement: John W. Watson, Susan Foust, Rev. James M. Bishop)
Description of Page: Advertisements and agricultural advice appear on this page.