Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, in the deliberations of the Convention by which the constitution was adopted the result was that it was supposed to be better for the public interest and for the public liberty that the appointing power oif.vested in the President alone. As far as the appointing power is concerned there has never.a doubt that the decision of the Convention was a correct one; and I have yet to learn that the Government by experience has been found to be less well administered, as far as its administration depends upon the manner in which the appointing power has been executed, by the fact that that power is vested in the President. I do not understand the honorable member from Massachusetts as denying that that theory is the wisest. His amendment is proposed, and he maintains it, upon the ground that it is called for by the particular character of the present incumbent of the presidential office; and he has thought Foto deal with that officer in terms which am sure upon reflection hereafter his judgment will not approve. He has almost in words said that it ought to be taken from him because he has proved himself to be an enemy of his country, because he has proved himself to be a usurper. In the particular condition in which we are placed for we are obliged to look at what is occurring in another branch of the legislative dept I should have hoped that the honorable member from Massachusetts would have seen that it was not proper at this time, if under any circumstances it could be proper, to indulge in such epithets as against the POTUS A formal resolution has been offered in that branch lookin to the impeachment of the President for hi E crimes and misdemeanors. If that impeachment shall be ordered by the House, we are to be the judges to decide whether he is guilty or innocent; and I should therefore have hoped that neither the honorable member from massachusetts nor any other member of the senate would in advance not merely express his ohypothetically, but express it decid edly, as justified by facts which are notorious. What sort of a trial, as far as that particular Senator is concerned, would the POTUS have should he be impeached for being an enemy to his country, for being a usurper, either of which, in the contemplation of the Constitution, is a high crime? If upon the trial of such an impeachment that right, which the common law secures to every citizen or subject where the common law prevails, of having a fair tribunal to decide upon his case applied, the honorable Senfrom jought to be, and I suppose would be, challenged for cause; and in what attitude would that place him, or either of us, if we were liable to be challenged upon the same ground? Suppose we all went on, following the authority of the honorable member from massachusetts, and expressed the same opinion: what would the world say? Suppose that without hearing the defense, in advance, without remembering the past conduct of the officer who is to be impeached, illustrated in the judgment of all until lately, at least, as perfectly patriotic, as evidencing a constant devotion to is country, we expressed an opinion that at least, he had fallen from the duty which he owed to his country and to mankind, and had become a usurper and an enemy of his country: might not, to use the language of the common law, the whole array be challenged, and ought it not to be? The Constitution, in the provision which says that a charge of that description is to be passed upon by the Senate of the }.States, supposes that every individual member of the Senate will bring to the consideration of that question a mind as white as paper, upon which nothing is written in the way of judgment; and yet my friendfrom Massachusetts, urged, as I think, by what has occurred in the past, unconsciously to himself, having been dealt with improperly upon one occasion by this officer, has suffered his feelings, in my judgment, to lead him astray, to pronounce sentiments in this Chamber today which will render it improper in him to sit as a judge upon such a trial. Sir, the POTUS has done things which I do not approve, and he has omitted to do things which I could have hoped he would have done.