it was stated by my associate manager, Mr. Butler, in the hearing of the Senate, that we considered our case closed, reserving our right to call rebutting testimony or to offer some documentary testimony that might have escaped our notice. Some such statement, I believe, was entered upon the journal.

Mr. JOHNSON. I am not sure that I heard correctly the honorable manager. I rise merely for the purpose of inquiring whether the managers desire to have the privilege of offering evidence after the argument begins?

Mr. Manager BINGHAM. Not as at present advised, although on that subject, as doubtless is known to honorable senators, in proceedings of this sort, (though I am not prepared to say that it has happened in this country; I am not sure but it did, however, in the case of Justice Chase,) such orders have been made after the final argument has been opened. I am not advised, however, that the managers have any desire of that sort. I wish it to be understood simply by the Senate that there are one or two witnesses who were deemed important on the part of the managers who were early subpoenaed to attend this trial, and neither of whom we have been able yet to see, although we are advised that they have been in the capital for the last 48 hours, or 24 hours at least.

Mr. YATES. I do not still understand--I could not hear the manager-whether he proposes to introduce evidence after the examination is closed and after the argument begins.

Mr. Manager BINGHAM. As at present advised, we have no purpose of the sort. I only made the remark I did in response to the honorable gentleman from Maryland. I do not know what may occur in the progress of this trial, and I do not wish to be concluded by any statement I have made here touching the rights of the people under the usage and practice in proceedings of this kind.

Mr. JOHNSON. I do not think there is any such practice in the United States. After a pause,

Mr. Manager BUTLER. I desire, Mr. President, to offer the Journal of Congress of 1774-75, of the first Congress, pages 121, 122, which is a report of the committee appointed to draught a commission to the General, George Washington, who had just been theretofore appointed:

The committee appointed to draught a commission to the General reported the same, which, being read by paragraphs and debated, was agreed to as follows:

IN CONGRESS.

The delegates of the United Colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the counties of New Castle, Kent, and Sussex on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, TO GEORGE WASHINGTON, Esq.:

We, reposing special trust and confidence in your patriotism, valor, conduct, and fidelity, do, by these presents, constitute and appoint you to be General and Commander-in-chief of the army of the United Colonies, and of all the forces now raised or to be raised by them, and of all others who shall voluntarily offer their service and join the said army for the defence of American liberty, and for repelling every hostile invasion thereof. And you are hereby vested with full power and authority to act as you shall think for the good and welfare of the service.

And we do hereby strictly charge and require all officers and soldiers under your command to be obedient to your orders and diligent in the exercise of their several duties.

And we do also enjoin and require you to be careful in executing the good trust reposed in you, by causing strict discipline and order to be observed in the army, and that the soldiers be duly exercised and provided with all convenient necessaries.

And you are to regulate your conduct in every respect by the rules and discipline of wars, (as herewith given you,) and punctually to observe and follow such orders and directions, from time to time, as you shall receive from this or a future Congress of these United Colonies or committee of Congress.

This commission to continue in force until revoked by this or a future Congress.

By order of the Congress.

The point to which I offer this is that this is the only form of commission ever prescribed by law in this country to a military officer, and in draughting

commissions under the Constitution of the United States "the pleasure of the President" was inserted instead of the pleasure of Congress."

The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there any objection?

Mr. CURTIS and Mr. EVARTS. No objection.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. I now offer, Mr. President and senators, a letter from the Treasury Department in answer to what has been put in as the practice of the government to appoint officers during the recess. [The letter was handed to the counsel for the respondent.] It is one of a series of letters which were not brought to your attention in the schedules which you allowed to come in. Only so much of the practice, as I charge, as would make on one side was put in. [The letter was returned to the manager.]

Mr. EVARTS. The letter we do not consider as applicable to any point that we have made, either in argument or in evidence; nor do we regard it as an act of the Treasury Department, but simply as an expression of an opinion of the then existing Secretary of the Treasury. It is simply an immaterial piece of evidence; it is not worth while to occupy time in discussing it.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. I only ask whether you object?

Mr. EVARTS. I have stated all I have to say.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. You do not.

Mr. EVARTS. No. I have stated what it applied to:

Mr. Manager BUTLER. Very well. I will read the letter:

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, August 23, 1855.

SIR: Your letter of the 18th instant, recommending William Irving Crandall for the appointment of surveyor of the customs at Chattanooga, Tennessee, is received. The office not having been filled before the adjournment of the Senate, it must necessarily remain vacant until its next session, when your recommendation of Mr. Crandall will receive respectful consideration.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

Hon. J. H. SMITH, Charleston, South Carolina.

After a pause,

JAMES GUTHRIE,
Secretary of the Treasury.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. If the President will grant me a moment.

Mr. Randall

did not bring the papers which I called for to me until since we have come into the Senate, and I want to examine them to see what I will and what I will not offer. [After an examination of the papers.] Mr. Randall, you will take the stand.

ALEXANDER W. RANDALL examined.

By Mr. Manager BUTLER:

Question. Had you any copy of the indictment against Foster Blodgett on file in your office?

Answer. What purported to be.

Q. When was it made?

A. That I cannot tell you; I suppose about the time the original copy was filed there.

Q. Have you produced it here?

A. No, sir.

Q. What did you do with it?

A. It is in the office.

Q. Have you produced copies here?

A. Yes, sir; there is a copy there before you.

Q. A copy from where?

A. From the Treasury Department.

Q. Why did you not produce the copy from your office, as I asked you? A. Because that would not prove anything; I could not certify that it was a copy without having the original.

Q. Have you produced the original?

A. I understand it is here. The reason I did not produce it was, I understood it was here.

Q. Where?

A. Before some committee. It was sent up here with the case. The letter of Mr. McCulloch there explains that.

Q. The letter of Mr. McCulloch explains about Mr. Hopkins's case, which I do not mean to put in; but I mean now to deal with Mr. Blodgett's case.

A. You will find the copy of two indictments fastened together in the original as they are there, and I understand they are here. That is the reason I did not bring that, for I could not, without the original, certify that it was a

copy.

Q. And you got a copy from the Treasury Department this morning?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Which you produce here, but do not from your own office?

A. No, sir; I do not produce that because I could not certify without having the original that it was a true copy; and, understanding the others were here in the Senate, I did not bring it.

Q. But you brought this copy?

A. I had forgotten how the case came here.

Mr. Manager BUTLER, (to the counsel for the respondent.) Gentlemen, I will detach these, or only put in one paper, just as you please.

Mr. EVARTS. Of course, we understand.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. I do not care to go through detaching the copy in this

one case.

Mr. EVARTS. It is Mr. Blodgett's indictment?

Mr. Manager BUTLER. Yes, sir. I now offer simply the indictment in Blodgett's case, which I will read, without detaching it from the other paper: United States of America, southern district of Georgia. District court of the United States for the southern district of Georgia.

NOVEMBER TERM, 1867, A. D.

The grand jurors of the United States, chosen, selected, and sworn, in and for the southern district of Georgia, being good and lawful men of the said southern district of Georgia, and being charged to inquire for the United States and for the body of the said district, upon their oaths,

Present: that heretofore, that is to say, on the 27th day of July, in the year of our Lord 1866, one Foster Blodgett, of the city of Augusta and county of Richmond, in the State of Georgia, and in the southern district of Georgia aforesaid, was appointed by the President of the United States to the office of deputy postmaster at Augusta aforesaid, the said office, that is to say, the office of deputy postmaster, being an office of profit under the government of the United States aforesaid, in the civil department of the public service, and that after said appointment and before entering upon the duties of the said office, and before he, the said Foster Blodgett, was entitled to any salary or other emoluments arising from the said office, to wit, the office of deputy postmaster aforesaid, he, the said Foster Blodgett, was then and there required by law to take and subscribe the oath hereinafter set forth, the said oath being by law made material and necessary to be taken and subscribed by him, the said Foster Blodgett, before entering upon the duties of the office aforesaid, to wit, the office of deputy postmaster at Augusta aforesaid; and being so required by law, he, the said Foster Blodgett, came in his own proper person before David S. Roath, a judge of the court of ordinary for the county of Richmond, in the State of Georgia and within the district aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of this court, on the 5th day of September, in the year of our Lord 1866, at Augusta aforesaid, within the county, State, and district aforesaid, and then and there was duly sworn and took his corporal oath before the said David S. Roath, a judge of the court of ordinary for the county of Richmond, in the State of Georgia and district aforesaid, he, the said David S, Roath, being then and there duly authorized by law, and having then and there sufficient and competent power to administer the said oath to the said Foster Blodgett in that behalf, and that thereupon the said Foster Blodgett having so sworn as aforesaid, and not having the fear of God before his eyes, but having been moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil, then and there, to wit, on the day and year aforesaid and at the place last aforesaid, before the said David S. Roath, judge of the court of ordinary as aforesaid, (he, the said Roath, having then and there competent authority to administer the said oath as aforesaid,) upon his oath aforesaid, sworn to before the said David S. Roath, on

the 5th day of September, in the year of our Lord 1866, falsely, wilfully, and corruptly did swear to the purport and effect following; that is to say:

"I, Foster Blodgett, (meaning the said Foster Blodgett,) being appointed deputy postmaster at Augusta, in the county of Richmond, and State of Georgia, do swear that I will faithfully perform all the duties required of me, and abstain from anything forbidden by the laws in relation to the establishment of the post office and post roads in the United States; and that I will honestly and truly account for and pay over any moneys belonging to the said United States which may come into my possession or control; and I do further solemnly swear that I have never voluntarily borne arms against the United States since I have been a citizen thereof; that I have voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel, or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility thereto; that I have neither sought nor accepted nor attempted to exercise the functions of any office whatever, under any authority or pretended authority, in hostility to the United States; that I have not yielded a voluntary support to any pretended government, authority, power, or constitution within the United States hostile or inimical thereto; and I do further swear that to the best of my knowledge and ability I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God." Whereas in truth and in fact the said Foster Blodgett before the time of taking the said oath as aforesaid, had voluntarily borne arms against the United States aforesaid, he, the said Foster Blodgett, having been at that time, that is to say, at the time when he bore arms as aforesaid, a citizen of the United States aforesaid; and whereas in truth and in fact, he, the said Foster Blodgett, being a citizen as aforesaid, before that time, that is to say, before the time of the taking of the oath, voluntarily had given aid to persons engaged in armed hostility to the United States aforesaid, and had voluntarily as aforesaid given countenance, counsel, and encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility to the United States aforesaid; and whereas in truth and in fact, he, the said Foster Blodgett, being a citizen of the United States as aforesaid, had before that time, that is to say, before the time of the taking of the said oath as aforesaid, accepted an office, to wit, the office of the captaincy of an artillery company in the service of and under the authority of the so-called confederate States, the so-called Confederate States being then and there an authority or a pretended authority in hostility to the United States aforesaid; and whereas in truth and in tact, he, the said Foster Blodgett, being a citizen as aforesaid, had before that time, that is to say, before the time of the taking of the said oath, yielded a voluntary support to a pretended government of Georgia, the same being at that time, that is to say, at the time he, said Foster Blodgett, yielded a voluntary support thereto, a pretended authority in power within the United States and hostile thereto. And so the jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do say that the said Foster Blodgett, by his oath aforesaid taken and subscribed on the day and year aforesaid, by David S. Roath, a judge of the court of ordinary as aforesaid, falsely, wilfully, and corruptly, in manner and form aforesaid did, in the southern district of Georgia, and within the jurisdiction of this court, commit wilful and corrupt perjury, contrary to the forms of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the United States.

[Indorsement.]

HENRY S. FITCH,
United States Attorney for Georgia.

United States of America, southern district of Georgia, United States district court, November term, 1867.

Witnesses: James A. Bennett, Ambrose R. Wright, Dr. M. J, Jones, John N. Wray, Avera D'Antiquac, George W. Vennurey, Allen Phillips, John L. Ellis. A true bill:

Filed November 29, 1867.

HENRY BINGHAM, Foreman.

SAVANNAH, November 27, 1867.

JAMES MCPHERSON, Clerk.

Mr. JOHNSON. Does it charge that he was a captain in the rebel service? Mr. Manager BUTLER. He was charged with being a captain in a volunteer company. (To the witness.) Now, Mr. Randall, upon notice which you have put in as given to Mr. Blodgett being sent to him, did he return an answer, aud is this paper that answer or a copy of it? (Handing a paper to the witness.)

A. These are copies of the papers that are on file. I can only swear to them as copies of papers on file. I believe these are correct copies.

Q. And that is a copy of his answer? Will you look at it?

A. Yes, sir. I have read it all over; I think it is.

Q. The notice left here on the 3d of January, we have learned by the paper which was put in on Saturday?

A. I think it was the 3d of January.

Q. And on the 10th he returned this answer?

A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. I propose to offer it. It is :

Hon. A. W. RANDALL:

SIR

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 10, 1868.

Mr. EVARTS. One moment, Mr. Manager. We suppose that there is no inquiry before this Senate sitting as a court of impeachment as to the truth of the charges against Mr. Blodgett, nor as to his defences. We put in evidence nothing but the official action of the government through the Post Office Department, and that only in answer to an oral statement concerning it which Mr. Blodgett had himself given. Now, the manager brings in the indictment, and having got that in, claims the right to repel it and thus produce evidence on both sides of the question of the reason of Mr. Blodgett's suspension. We submit to the Senate that the proof is irrelevant.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. Mr. President, the case stands thus: Mr. Foster Blodgett, who is mayor of the city of Augusta, appointed by General Pope, and a member of the constitutional convention

Mr. EVARTS. No part of that statement is in evidence.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. I propose to put it in evidence, and am stating my I have got it all here. He was a member of the constitutional convention and an active Union man———

case.

The CHIEF JUSTICE. The honorable manager will please reduce his offer to prove to writing.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. I will after I state the grounds of it. I will put The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Chief Justice thinks it ought to be reduced to writing now, in order that the Senate may pass upon the question whether they will receive the evidence.

Mr. Manager BUTLER. They cannot until I make the statement, sir.

The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Chief Justice thinks that the same rule which was applied to the counsel for the President yesterday ought to be applied to the honorable managers to-day. The managers should state in writing the nature of the evidence which they propose to introduce, and the Senate can then pass upon the question whether they desire to hear that class of evidence.

Mr. JOHNSON. Does the manager propose to offer that paper in evidence itself? Mr. Manager BUTLER. I do.

Mr. JOHNSON. And nothing else?

Mr. Manager BUTLER. I propose to offer something else besides. present I propose to offer this, and it is the first time any counsel has been thus stopped. I assume, Mr. President-I never have assumed any different-that the same rule will be applied to-day as yesterday. I do not want to be understood as asking anything different.

The CHIEF JUSTICE. The honorable manager appears to the Chief Justice to be making a statement of matters which are not in proof, and of which the Senate has as yet heard nothing. He states that he intends to put them in proof. The Chief Justice therefore requires that the nature of the evidence that he proposes to put before the Senate shall be reduced to writing, as has been done heretofore. He will make the ordinary offer to prove, and then the Senate will judge whether they will receive the evidence or not.