|
decision will be regulated more by the
comparative strength of the parties than
by a real demonstration of innocence or
guilt."
I think this probably sums it up better
than I could. A trial by the judges might
remove it from the political arena more
than if we had a trial by the Senate which
may be more heavily weighted one way
than the other and I know not and care not
but the principal purpose of the trial by
judges is to lessen the likelihood of the
results being determined by political
strength. For that reason and by reason of
removing it from the political arena, we
would seriously urge you to vote for the
General Provision Recommendation and re-
ject this amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion?
Delegate Hanson.
DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. Chairman,
I think to place a trial for impeachment in
the hands of the judiciary, although the
judiciary is normally conceded to be the
place to try cases, is the most unwise
decision. An impeachment trial, if you look
at the history of impeachment in the vari-
ous states or the federal impeachment
trials, is uniquely a political proceeding.
The charges or conditions which may cause
an impeachment to be brought are normally
political. They are beyond the normal reach
of the law. A man cannot be touched in
some instances by the normal reach of the
law and consequently the lower house must
feel that his conduct is so grievous against
the public interest that he should be tried
on charges of impeachment.
If this goes before the court, it will still
be a political trial. There will be tre-
mendous pressure brought on the Court of
Appeals by the partisans of the governor,
for example, to make sure that a tribunal
is selected that will be favorable to his
cause and the House will certainly want to
see that a tribunal is selected that will be
favorable to its cause, and it might put
the Court of Appeals, it seems to me, under
the most unfortunate kind of political pres-
sure from the two contending sides.
The trial will not be less political in the
true sense of that term solely because it is
held before ten judges than it would be if
it were held before the Senate of the State
and finally be a political trial. This is a
case in which the judgment must be, by the
nature of the case, a political judgment,
|
that is, to remove a high elected official
from office. It seems to me, then, that the
people of the State should be the place
where the buck stops and if they feel that
this was a good decision by the body, they
have a way to demonstrate that they believe
it to be; if they believe it to be an unwise
decision, they have through the election
process a means for demonstrating that
they believe it was an unwise decision. If a
governor or a lieutenant governor or comp-
troller or attorney general or another im-
peachable officer has committed a serious
offense or is alleged to have committed a
serious offense, then he should be tried in
a court of law as any other citizen would
be tried for committing a crime. If he has
only done something for which he can be
impeached then he should be tried politi-
cally.
THE CHAIRMAN : Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition to the
amendment?
Delegate Winslow.
DELEGATE WINSLOW: Mr. Chair-
man, it seems to me that my brother Dele-
gate Hanson has forgotten some of his
history.
One of the ills of impeachment as it has
been known in this country in one case, in
Oklahoma, has indicated that legislatures,
both lower house and senate, have been
controlled not by the mere politics but by
the most terrible partisan politics. This
was what was true in the most famous im-
peachment trial in America, that of Presi-
dent Johnson, where he was not convicted
only because a lawyer appeared before the
United States Senate and insisted that they
could not convict President Johnson save
in a judicial sense, that the case must be
decided as if the Senate were a court. There
is a confusion here, it seems to me, in this
debate as to what the purpose of this trial
is. This is not a trial, as Delegate Hanson
suggested, which is to replace an action by
the court. This is a trial to determine
whether an individual can be removed from
office. He is still subject to action by a
court if accusation be made against him
according to law.
By all means, it seems to me we should
remove the trial of impeachment cases from
the political atmosphere of the Senate and
put it where it belongs in a commission of
judges.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion?
|
