two-thirds' it 'shall be a law.' (12) That if not returned 'within ten days after it shall have been presented' it shall likewise 'be a law,' 'unless' the legislature 'by their adjournment' prevent a return, in which case it shall not be a law. These twelve provisions, mutatis mutandis, were transferred to the Constitution, in ipsissimis verbis. The only material change which the convention made was in the two-thirds clause, from which they struck the words 'of the members present' and inserted in their stead, 'of that House.' It is manifest, then, that the convention turned from the constitution of England to the constitution of New York. When they did so the man did not live who regarded the council of revision as the successor of the Crown, or its approval and disapproval of bills as an exercise of the royal prerogative or a legislative power. But this is not left to inference or conjecture. On the 29th of May, 1787, Randolph, speaking on behalf of the members from Virginia, 'opened the main business' of the convention by commenting on the difficulty of the crisis' and presenting a sketch of the Remedy, which had been formulated in fifteen resolutions. These resolutions were used by the convention as the basis of discussion and action in determining the principles which should be embodied by proper committees in the formal instrument. 'It was then resolved that the House will tomorrow resolve itself into a committee of the whole House to consider of the state of the American Union, and the propositions moved by Mr. Randolph be referred to said committee.' The eighth resolution is in these words: 'Resolved, That the executive, and a convenient number of the national judiciary, ought to compose a council of revision, with authority to examine every act of the national legislature before it shall operate, and every act of a particular legislature before a negative thereon shall be final; and that the dissent of the said council shall amount to a rejection, unless the act of national legislature be again passed, or that a particular legislature be again negatived by of the members of each branch.' This paper, then, pro hac vice, was founded on the constitution of New York. At an early day, June 6, this question of legislative power was determined by two decisive votes. The convention adopted the principle of revision, but being 1 mindful, as Rutledge afterwards said, that 'the judges ought never to give their opinion on a law till it comes before them,' and that they ‘of all men are the most unfit to be concerned in the revisionary council,' struck out Randolph's 'convenient number of the national judiciary,' and left the power of revision in the President alone. At a later day, August 6, Rutledge 'delivered in the report of the committee on detail,' the committee which embodied the previously ascertained views of the convention in a draft of the proposed Constitution. This section was couched in the very words of the Constitution of New York: Every bill shall be presented to the President for his revision; if upon such revision' he approve it, he shall sign it; ‘if upon such revision it shall appear to him improper for being passed into a law,' he shall return it. On the 15th of August, with this word 'revision' three times repeated, 'the thirteenth section of article 6, as amended, was then agreed to' by all the States. It is this vote which is expressive of the final intent of the convention. The verbal form in which the provision stands in the Constitution was the work of the committee on style. This 'revisionary business,' as Madison calls it, came up again and again; appears and reappears in his journal from the 6th of June to the 16th of August; was considered and reconsidered, discussed and rediscussed. The views of members swung between the extremes of absolute affirmative power in Congress and absolute negative power in the President. The proposition of Hamilton 'to give the Executive an absolute negative on the laws,' identical with the legislative power of the Crown, was rejected by ten States and supported by none. The proposition of Madison to add the Judges of the Supreme Court in the 'revision' of bills was likewise rejected. At last the deliberations ended where they had begun. The convention held fast to the principle of a council of revision and left the duties of the council in the President alone. He was to be the council of revision. In the words of Madison, the convention 'gave the Executive alone, without the judiciary, the revisionary control on the laws, unless overruled by two-thirds of each branch.'" § 135. Impeachments.-Under the Articles of Confederation much of the judicial power belonging to the United States was vested in committees appointed by, and under the control of, Congress.79. Under the Constitution, however, no power of a judicial nature is vested in Congress, except that of Impeachment. The House of Representatives have "the sole power of impeachment,"80 while to the Senate is given "the sole power to try all impeachments."81 The House of Representatives here, thus acts in the capacity of a grand jury and the Senate in that of a trial jury. When the senators are trying an impeachment they are on oath or affirmation. In case the President of the United States is impeached the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the Senate instead of the Vice-President; it being considered unwise to allow a person having such an interest in the conviction of the President to preside at his trial. In the trial of Andrew Johnson, Chief Justice Chase delivered the following opinion as to the position of the Chief Justice in such a trial: "The Chief Justice states to the Senate that, in his judgment, it is his duty to decide upon questions of evidence in the first instance, and that, if any senator desires that the question shall then be submitted to the Senate, it is his duty to submit it. So far as he was aware, that has been the usual course of practice in trials of persons in the House of Lords and in the Senate of the United States." In the course of the same trial the Chief Justice later said: "The Chief Justice will state the rule which he conceives to be applicable once more. He is so in virtue of his In this body he is the presiding officer. high office under the Constitution. He is Chief Justice of the United States, and therefore, when the President of the United States is tried by the Senate, it is his duty to preside in that body; and, as he understands, he is therefore the President of the Senate sitting as a court of impeachment." The Constitution further provides,82 "Judgment in case of impeachment shall not extend farther than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States; but the party convicted Articles of Confederation, Art. 81 United States Constitution, Art. I., Sec. III., Clause VI. 82 United States Constitution, Art. I., Sec. III., Clause VII. shall, nevertheless, be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment, according to law." The most famous impeachment has been that of President Andrew Johnson.83 IMPEACH ANDREW 83 ARTICLES OF MENT AGAINST JOHNSON VOTED UPON BY THE SENATE. ARTICLE I. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his office and his oath of office, and in disregard of the Constitution and laws of the United States, did heretofore, to wit: on the 18th day of August, 1866, at the city of Washington, in the District of Columbia, by public speech, declare and affirm in substance that the Thirty-ninth Congress of the United States was not a Congress of the United States authorized by the Constitution to exercise legislative power under the same; but, on the contrary, was a Congress of only part of the States, thereby denying and intending to deny that the legislation of said Congress was valid or obligatory upon him, the said Andrew Johnson, except in so far as he saw fit to approve the same, and also thereby denying and intending to deny the power of the said Thirty-ninth Congress to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States; and, in pursuance of said declaration, the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, afterward, to wit: on the 21st day of February, 1868, at the city of Washington, in the District of Columbia, did unlawfully and in disregard of the requirements of the Constitution, that he should take care that the laws be faithfully executed, attempt to prevent the execution of an act entitled "An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, by unlawfully devising and contriving, and attempting to devise and contrive, means by which he should prevent Edwin M. Stanton from forthwith resuming the functions of the office of Secretary for the Department of War, notwithstanding the refusal of the Senate to concur in the suspension therefore made by said Andrew Johnson of said Edwin M. Stanton from said office of Secretary for the Department of War, and also by further unlawfully devising and contriving, and attempting to devise and contrive, means then and there to prevent the execution of an act entitled 'An act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1868, and for other purposes, "approved March 2, 1867; and also to prevent the execution of an act entitled "An act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel States," passed March 2, 1867; whereby the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then, to wit: on the 21st day of February, 1868, at the city of Washington, commit and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office. And the House of Representatives, by protestation, saving to themselves the liberty of exhibiting at any time hereafter any further articles or other accusation or impeachment against the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, and also of replying to his answers which he shall make unto the articles herein preferred against him, and of offering proof to the same and every part thereof, and to all and every other article, accusation, or impeachment which shall be exhibited by them, as the case shall require, do demand that the said Andrew Johnson may be put to answer the high crimes of misdemeanors in office herein charged against him, and that such proceedings, examinations, trials, and judgments may be thereupon had and given as may be agreeable to law and justice. ARTICLE II. That on said 21st day of February, in the year 01 our Lord 1868, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his office, of his oath of office, and in violation of the Constitution of the United States, and contrary to the provisions of an act entitled "An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices," passed March 2, 1867, without the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States said Senate then and there being in session, and without authority of law, did, with intent to violate the Constitution of the United States and the act foresaid, issue and deliver to one Lorenzo Thomas a letter of au thority in substance as follows, that is to say: Sir: Executive Mansion, Washington, D. C., February 21, 1868. Hon. Edwin M. Stanton having this day been removed from office as Secretary for the Department of War, you are hereby authorized and empowered to act as Secretary of War ad interim, and will immediately enter upon the discharge of the duties pertaining to that office. Mr. Stanton has been instructed to transfer to you all the records, books, papers, and other public property now in his custody and charge. Respectfully yours, ANDREW JOHNSON. To Brevet Major General Lorenzo Thomas, Adjutant General United States Army, Washington, D. C. Then and there being no vacancy in said office of Secretary for the Department of War; whereby said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office. ARTICLE III. That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, on the 21st day of February, in the year of our Lord 1868, at Washington, in the District of Columbia, did commit and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office, in this, that, without authority of law, while the Senate of the United States was then and there in session, he did appoint one Lorenzo Thomas to be Secretary |