48 take care that the laws be faithfully executed, did unlawfully Article I concluded that President Johnson had committed " a high misdemeanor in office." 43 Articles II and III characterized the President's conduct in the same terms but charged him with the allegedly unlawful appointment of Stanton's replacement. Article IV charged that Johnson, with intent, unlawfully conspired with the replacement for Stanton and Members of the House of Representatives to "hinder and prevent" Stanton from holding his office. Article V, a variation of the preceding article, charged a conspiracy to prevent the execution of the Tenure of Office Act, in addition to a conspiracy to prevent Stanton from holding his office. Article VI charged Johnson with conspiring with Stanton's designated replacement, "by force to seize, take and possess" government property in Stanton's possession, in violation of both an "act to define and punish certain conspiracies" and the Tenure of Office Act. Article VII charged the same offense, but as a violation of the Tenure of Office Act only. Article VIII alleged that Johnson, by appointing a new Secretary of War, had, "with intent unlawfully to control the disbursements of the moneys appropriated for the military service and for the Department of War," violated the provisions of the Tenure of Office Act. Article IX charged that Johnson, in his role as Commander in Chief, had instructed the General in charge of the military forces in Washington that part of the Tenure of Office Act was unconstitutional, with intent to induce the General, in his official capacity as commander of the Department of Washington, to prevent the execution of the Tenure of Office Act. Article X, which was adopted by amendment after the first nine articles, alleged that Johnson, unmindful of the high duties of his office and the dignity by making "certain intemperate, inflammatory, and scandalous harangues." In addition, the same speeches were alleged to have brought the high office of the President into "contempt, ridicule, and disgrace, to the great scandal of all good citizens." Article XI combined the conduct charged in Article X and the nine other articles to allege that Johnson had attempted to prevent the execution of both the Tenure of Office Act and an act relating to army appropriations by unlawfully devising and contriving means by which he could remove Stanton from office. 43 For text of articles, see CON. GLOBE, 40th Cong., 2d Sess. 1603-18, 1642 (1868). c. Proceedings in the Senate 49 The Senate voted only on Articles II, III, and XI, and President Johnson was acquitted on each, 35 guilty-19 not guilty, one vote short of the two-thirds required to convict." d. Miscellaneous All of the articles relating to the dismissal of Stanton alleged indictable offenses. Article X did not allege an indictable offense, but this article was never voted on by the Senate. 7. DISTRICT JUDGE MARK H. DELAHAY (1873) a. Proceedings in the House A resolution authorizing an inquiry by the Judiciary Committee respecting District Judge Delahay was adopted by the House in 1872.45 In 1873 the committee proposed a resolution of impeachment for "high crimes and misdemeanors in office," which the House 46 adopted. b. Subsequent Proceedings Delahay resigned before articles of impeachment were prepared, and the matter was not pursued further by the House. The charge against him had been described in the House as follows: The most grevious charge, and that which is beyond all question, was that his personal habits unfitted him for the judicial office, that he was intoxicated off the bench as well as on the bench.47 8. SECRETARY OF WAR WILLIAM W. BELKNAP (1876) a. Proceedings in the House 48 In 1876 the Committee on Expenditures in the War Department unanimously recommended impeachment of Secretary Belknap "for high crimes and misdemeanors while in office," and the House unanimously adopted the resolution." b. Articles of Impeachment Five articles of impeachment were drafted by the Judiciary Committee 50 and adopted by the House, all relating to Belknap's allegedly corrupt appointment of a military post trader. The House agreed to the articles as a group, without voting separately on each.si Article I charged Belknap with "high crimes and misdemeanors in office" for unlawfully receiving sums of money, in consideration for the appointment, made by him as Secretary of War.52 Article II charged Belknap with a "high misdemeanor in office" for "willfully, corruptly, and unlawfully" taking and receiving money in return for the continued maintenance of the post trader.53 Article III charged that Belknap was "criminally disregarding his duty as Secretary of War, and basely prostituting his high office to CONG. GLOBE SUPP., 40th Cong., 2d Sess. 415 (1868). 45 CONG. GLOBE, 42d Cong., 2d Sess. 1808 (1872). CONG. GLOBE, 42d Cong., 3d Sess. 1900 (1873). Id. The Committee was authorized to investigate the Department of the Army generally. 13 CONG. REC. 414 (1876). 14 CONG. Rec. 1426–33 (1876). 50 15 CONG. REC. 2081-82 (1876). 1 Id. 2160. 12 Id. 2159. 50 his lust for private gain," when he "unlawfully and corruptly" continued his appointee in office, "to the great injury and damage of the officers and soldiers of the United States" stationed at the military post. The maintenance of the trader was also alleged to be "against public policy, and to the great disgrace and detriment of the public service." 54 Article IV alleged seventeen separate specifications relating to Belknap's appointment and continuance in office of the post trader.55 Article V enumerated the instances in which Belknap or his wife had corruptly received "divert large sums of money." c. Proceedings in the Senate 99 56 The Senate failed to convict Belknap on any of the articles, with votes on the articles ranging from 35 guilty-25 not guilty to 37 guilty-25 not guilty.57 d. Miscellaneous In the Senate trial, it was argued that because Belknap had resigned prior to his impeachment the case should be dropped. The Senate, by a vote of 37 to 29, decided that Belknap was amenable to trial by impeachment.58 Twenty-two of the Senator voting not guilty on each article, nevertheless indicated that in their view the Senate had no jurisdiction.50 9. DISTRICT JUDGE CHARLES SWAYNE (1903-1905) a. Proceedings in the House 60 The House adopted a resolution in 1903 directing an investigation by the Judiciary Committee of District Judge Swayne. The committee held hearings during the next year, and reported a resolution that Swayne be impeached "of high crimes and misdemeanors" in late 1904. The House agreed to the resolution unanimously. 61 b. Articles of Impeachment After the vote to impeach, thirteen articles were drafted and approved by the House in 1905.62 However, only the first twelve articles were presented to the Senate.63 Article I charged that Swayne had knowingly filed a false certificate and claim for travel expenses while serving as a visiting judge, "whereby he has been guilty of a high crime and misdemeanor in said office." Articles II and III charged that Swayne, having claimed and received excess travel reimbursement for other trips, had "misbehaved himself and was and is guilty of a high crime, to wit, the crime of obtaining money from the United States by a false pretense, and of a high misdemeanor in office." Articles IV and V charged that Swayne, having appropriated a private railroad car that was under the custody of a receiver of his court 51 and used the car, its provisions, and a porter without making compensation to the railroad, "was and is guilty of an abuse of judicial power and of a high misdemeanor in office." Articles VI and VII charged that for periods of six years and nine years, Judge Swayne had not been a bona fide resident of his judicial district, in violation of a statute requiring every federal judge to reside in his judicial district. The statute provided that "for offending against this provision [the judge] shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor." The articles charged that Swayne "willfully and knowingly violated" this law and "was and is guilty of a high misdemeanor in office." Articles VIII, IX, X, XI and XII charged that Swayne improperly imprisoned two attorneys and a litigant for contempt of court. Articles VIII and X alleged that the imprisonment of the attorneys was done "maliciously and unlawfully" and Articles IX and XI charged that these imprisonments were done "knowingly and unlawfully." Article XI charged that the private person was imprisoned "unlawfully and knowingly." Each of these five articles concluded by charging that by so acting, Swayne had "misbehaved himself in his office as judge and was and is guilty of an abuse of judicial power and a high misdemeanor in office." c. Proceedings in the Senate A majority of the Senate voted acquittal on all articles.64 10. CIRCUIT JUDGE ROBERT W. ARCHBALD (1912-1913) a. Proceedings in the House The House authorized an investigation by the Judiciary Committee on Circuit Judge Archbald of the Commerce Court in 1912.65 The Committee unanimously reported a resolution that Archbald be impeached for "misbehavior and for high crimes and misdemeanors.” and the House adopted the resolution, 223 to 1.66 b. Articles of Impeachment Thirteen Articles of impeachment were presented and adopted simultaneously with the resolution for impeachment. Article I charged that Archbald "willfully, unlawfully, and corruptly took advantage of his official position ... to induce and influence the officials" of a company with litigation pending before his court to enter into a contract with Archbald and his business partner to sell them assets of a subsidiary company. The contract was allegedly profitable to Archbald.67 Article II also charged Archbald with "willfully, unlawfully, and corruptly" using his position as judge to influence a litigant then before the Interstate Commerce Commission (who on appeal would be before the Commerce Court) to settle the case and purchase stock.68 Article III charged Archbald with using his official position to obtain a leasing agreement from a party with suits pending in the Commerce Court. 69 52 Article IV alleged "gross and improper conduct" in that Archbald had (in another suit pending in the Commerce Court) "secretly, wrongfully, and unlawfully" requested an attorney to obtain an explanation of certain testimony from a witness in the case, and subsequently requested argument in support of certain contentions from the same attorney, all "without the knowledge or consent" of the opposing party.70 Article V charged Archbald with accepting "a gift, reward or present" from a person for whom Archbald had attempted to gain a favorable leasing agreement with a potential litigant in Archbald's court."1 Article VI again charged improper use of Archbald's influence as a judge, this time with respect to a purchase of an interest in land. Articles VII through XII referred to Archbald's conduct during his tenure as district court judge. These articles alleged improper and unbecoming conduct constituting "misbehavior" and "gross misconduct" in office stemming from the misuse of his position as judge to influence litigants before his court, resulting in personal gain to Archbald. He was also charged with accepting a "large sum of money" from people likely "to be interested in litigation" in his court, and such conduct was alleged to "bring his... office of district judge into disrepute.” 72 Archbald was also charged with accepting money "contributed... by various attorneys who were practitioners in the said court"; and appointing and maintaining as jury commissioner an attorney whom he knew to be general counsel for a potential litigant.73 Article XIII summarized Archbald's conduct both as district court judge and commerce court judge, charging that Archbald had used these offices "wrongfully to obtain credit," and charging that he had used the latter office to affect "various and diverse contracts and agreements," in return for which he had received hidden interests in said contracts, agreements, and properties." c. Proceedings in the Senate The Senate found Archbald guilty of the charges in five of the thirteen articles, including the catch-all thirteenth. Archbald was removed from office and disqualified from holding any future office.75 11. DISTRICT JUDGE GEORGE W. ENGLISH (1925-1926) a. Proceedings in the House The House adopted a resolution in 1925 directing an inquiry into the official conduct of District Judge English. A subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee took evidence in 1925 and recommended impeachment. In March 1926, the Judiciary Committee reported an impeachment resolution and five articles of impeachment." The House adopted the impeachment resolution and the articles by a vote of 306 to 62.78 70 Id. Ti Id. 76 72 Id. 8906. T3 Id. 74 Id. 76 S. Doc. No. 1140, 62d Cong., 3d Sess. 1620-49 (1913). 76 H.R. Doc. No. 145, 69th Cong., 1st Sess. (1925). 67 CONG. REC. 6280 (1926). TB Id. 6735. |