(单词翻译:单击)
听力文本
Welcome to THE MAKING OF A NATION -- American history in VOA Special English. The Civil War ended in eighteen sixty-five. After that, tensions grew between Congress and the new president, Andrew Johnson. The Republican Party was still new. It was formed to oppose slavery. Radical members of the party controlled Congress. They wanted strong policies to punish the southern states that left the Union and lost the war. Standing in the way of the Republicans was Andrew Johnson, a Democrat. The president opposed radical efforts to force solutions on the South. He vetoed a number of programs that he thought interfered with rights given to the states by the Constitution. This week in our series, Kay Gallant and Harry Monroe continue the story of President Andrew Johnson.
In the congressional elections of eighteen sixty-six, radicals won firm control of both houses of Congress. They were able to pass a number of bills over the president's veto. But Johnson refused to stand aside in the face of radical attempts to seize all powers of government. This conflict between Johnson and the Congress caused much bitterness. Finally, the radicals decided to get him out of the way. For the first time in American history, Congress would try to remove the President from office. Under the United States Constitution, the House of Representatives has the power to bring charges against the president. The Senate acts as the jury to decide if the president is guilty of the charges. The chief justice of the United States serves as judge. If two-thirds of the senators find the president guilty, he can be removed from office. Radicals in the House of Representatives brought eleven charges against President Johnson. Most of the charges were based on Johnson's removal from office of his secretary of war. Radicals charged that this violated a new law. The law said the president could not remove a cabinet officer without approval by the Senate. Johnson refused to recognize the law. He said it was not constitutional.
Radicals in the House of Representatives also charged Johnson with criticizing Congress. They said his statements dishonored Congress and the presidency. The great impeachment trial began on March fifth, eighteen sixty-eight. The president refused to attend. But his lawyers were there to defend him. One by one, the senators swore an oath to be just. They promised to make a fair and honest decision on the guilt or innocence of Andrew Johnson. A congressman from Massachusetts opened the case for the radicals. He told the senators not to think of themselves as members of any court. He said the Senate was a political body that was being asked to settle a political question. Was Johnson the right man for the White House? He said it was clear that Johnson wanted to overthrow Congress. Other radical Republicans then joined him in condemning Johnson. They made many charges. But they offered little evidence to support the charges. Johnson's lawyers called for facts, instead of emotion. They said the Constitution required the radicals to prove that the president had committed serious crimes. Andrew Johnson had committed no crime, they said. This was purely a political trial.
They warned of serious damage to the American form of government if the president was removed for political reasons. No future president would be safe, they said, if opposed by a majority of the House and two-thirds of the Senate. The trial went on day after day. The decision would be close. Fifty-four senators would be voting. Thirty-six votes of guilty were needed to remove the president from office. It soon became clear that the radicals had thirty-five of these votes. Only seven senators remained undecided. If one of the seven voted guilty, Johnson would be removed. Radicals put great pressure on the seven men. They tried to buy their votes. Party leaders threatened them. Supporters in the senators' home states were told to write hundreds of letters demanding that Johnson be found guilty. A senator from Maine was one who felt the pressure. But he refused to let it force him to do what others wished. He answered one letter this way: "Sir, I wish you and all my other friends to know that I, not they, am sitting in judgment upon the president. I, not they, have sworn to do impartial justice. I, not they, am responsible to God and man for my action and its results."
A senator from Kansas was another who refused to let pressure decide his vote. He said, "I trust that I shall have the courage to vote as I judge best." In the final days before the vote, six of the seven remaining Republican senators let it be known that they would vote not guilty. But the senator from Kansas still refused to say what his vote would be. His was the only vote still in question. His vote would decide the issue. Now, the pressure on him increased. His brother was offered twenty thousand dollars for information about how the senator would vote. Everywhere he turned, he found someone demanding that he vote guilty. The vote took place on May sixteenth. Every seat in the big Senate room was filled. The chief justice began to call on the senators. One by one, they answered guilty or not guilty. Finally, he called the name of the senator from Kansas. The senator stood up. He looked about him. Every voice was still. Every eye was upon him. "It was like looking down into an open grave," he said later. "Friendship, position, wealth -- everything that makes life desirable to an ambitious man -- were about to be swept away by my answer."
He spoke softly. Many could not hear him. The chief justice asked him to repeat his vote. This time, the answer was clearly heard across the room: "Not guilty." The trial was all but done. Remaining senators voted as expected. The chief justice announced the result. On the first charge, thirty-five senators voted that President Johnson was guilty. Nineteen voted that he was not guilty. The radicals had failed by one vote. When the Senate voted on the other charges, the result was the same. The radicals could not get the two-thirds majority they needed. President Johnson was declared not guilty. Radical leaders and newspapers bitterly denounced the small group of Republican senators who refused to vote guilty. They called them traitors. Friends and supporters condemned them. None was re-elected to the Senate or to any other government office. It was a heavy price to pay. And yet, they were sure they had done the right thing. The senator from Kansas told his wife, "The millions of men cursing me today will bless me tomorrow for having saved the country from the greatest threat it ever faced." He was right. The trial of Andrew Johnson was an important turning point in the making of the American nation. His removal from office would have established the idea that the president could serve only with the approval of Congress. The president would have become, in effect, a prime minister. He would have to depend on the support of Congress to remain in office. Johnson's victory kept alive the idea of an independent presidency. However, the vote did not end the conflict between Congress and the White House over the future of the South. That will be our story in the next program of THE MAKING OF A NATION.
重点解析
1.stand in the way 阻碍；当道
The British government would not stand in the way of such a proposal.
英国政府不会阻止这样一项提议。
2.in the face of 面对；不顾
In the face of severe opposition and unrelenting criticism, the task seemed overwhelming.
在强烈的反对和毫不留情的批评声中，这个任务似乎让人难以招架。
3.call for 要求；提倡
It's a situation that calls for a blend of delicacy and force.
应付这种局面需要刚柔并济。
4.put pressure on 给......施压；增添压力
And then we use that information to put pressure on the government.
我们要用这些信息给政府施加压力。
参考译文
欢迎收听VOA慢速英语之建国史话节目。内战于1865年结束。此后，国会和新总统安德鲁·约翰逊之间的紧张关系不断加剧。共和党仍然是一只新成立的政党，它的形成是为了反对奴隶制。政党内的激进成员控制着国会，他们想利用强硬的政策来惩罚那些脱离联邦并在战争中战败的南方各州。民主党人安德鲁·约翰逊阻碍了共和党的行动，总统反对采用激进的做法解决南方的问题。他否决了一些他认为会妨碍宪法赋予各州权利的方案。在本周的系列节目中，凯·格兰特和哈里·梦露将继续讲述安德鲁·约翰逊总统的故事。
在1866年的国会选举中，激进分子赢得了国会两院的控制权。他们通过了一些议案，否决了总统的否决权。但是，面对他们试图夺取政府所有权力的激进做法，约翰逊拒绝袖手旁观。约翰逊和国会之间的这场冲突引发了许多怨恨，最后，激进分子决定阻止他。在美国历史上，国会第一次试图罢免总统。根据美国宪法，众议院有权对总统提出指控。参议院充当陪审团决定总统是否有罪，美国最高法院首席法官作为法官。如果三分之二的参议员认为总统有罪，就会罢免他的职务。众议院的激进分子给约翰逊总统提出了11项指控。大部分指控都是基于约翰逊从作战部长的职位上被撤职，激进分子指控这违反了一项新法律。法律规定，总统不能在没有参议院批准的情况下撤换内阁官员，约翰逊拒绝认可这项法律。他说这不符合宪法。
众议院的激进分子还指控约翰逊批评国会。他们说，他的声明使国会和总统蒙羞。重大弹劾审判于1868年3月5日开始，总统拒绝出席，但他的律师到场为他辩护。参议员们一个接一个地宣誓将公正地参与审判，他们承诺将对安德鲁·约翰逊是否有罪做出公正且诚实的判定。一位来自马萨诸塞州的国会议员代表激进分子开始了本案的判决，他告诉参议员们不要把自己看作任何一方的成员。他说，参议院是一个政治机构，用作解决政治问题。约翰逊是入主白宫的合适人选吗？他表示，约翰逊显然想推翻国会。随后，其他激进的共和党人和他一起谴责约翰逊。他们提出了许多指控，但他们几乎未提供能支持这些指控的证据。约翰逊的律师要求他们提供事实，而不是表达情感。他们说，宪法要求激进分子证明总统犯下严重罪行。安德鲁·约翰逊无罪，这纯粹是一场政治审判。
他们警告说，如果总统因政治原因被免职，将严重损害美国政府的形态。他们表示，如果众议院多数人，以及参议院三分之二的人都反对，未来的总统将不会安全。审判日复一日地进行着，即将做出裁决。54名参议员将参加投票，如果罢免总统，需要36人投出有罪判决的投票。很快情况表明，激进分子中有35人投出有罪判决的投票，只有7名参议员未做裁决。如果7个投票中有1个投出有罪的投票，约翰逊将被罢免职位。激进分子对这7个人施加巨大的压力，他们试图收买这些选票。政党领导人威胁他们，并让参议员所在州的支持者书写数百封要求约翰逊被判有罪的信件。缅因州的一位参议员感到了这种压力，但他拒绝受别人迫使而行事。他这样回复了一封信件：“先生，我希望您和我所有的朋友都知道，是我，而不是他们，正在对总统进行审判。是我，而不是他们，发誓要保持公正。是我，而不是他们，要为我的行为和结果对上帝和民众负责。”
另一位来自堪萨斯州的参议员拒绝受压力驱使而投票，他说：“我相信我有勇气去投票，因为我是最优秀的法官。”在投票前的最后几天，剩下的7名共和党参议员中，有6名宣布他们将投票认为总统无罪。但是，堪萨斯州的参议员仍然拒绝透露他的投票结果，他是唯一待定的选票。他的投票将裁定此事。现在，对他施加的压力增加了。有人给他的兄弟两万美元，询问参议员的投票结果。他发现，无论他到哪里，都有人要求他投票认为总统有罪。投票于5月16日进行，参议院的大议事厅中没有空席。最高法院首席法官开始召集参议员，他们一个接一个地回答有罪或无罪。最后，他点出堪萨斯州参议员的名字。参议员站了起来，他环顾四周。议事厅内鸦雀无声，大家的目光都落在他身上。“那就像是俯视一个敞开的坟墓，”他事后说。“友谊、地位、财富，一切使一位充满雄心壮志的人所向往的生活，都将因我给出的回答而一扫而空。”
他说话轻声细语，许多人听不见他说话。首席法官要求他再说一次他的投票。这一次，议事厅里的人都清楚地听到了他的回答：“无罪”。审判几乎结束了。其余的参议员如预期那样进行投票，首席法官宣布了结果。第一项指控是，35名参议员投票认为约翰逊总统有罪，19人投票认为他无罪。激进分子以一票之差落败。当参议院对其他指控进行投票时，结果是相同的。激进分子无法获得他们所需要的三分之二的多数选票。约翰逊总统被宣布无罪。激进派领导人和报纸痛斥了一小群拒绝投票认为总统有罪的共和党参议员，称他们为叛徒。朋友和支持者谴责他们。这些人中无人再被选入参议院或任何其他政府部门就职。这是一个沉重的代价。然而，他们确信自己做了正确的事。来自堪萨斯州的参议员告诉妻子：“今天数以百万计的人诅咒我，他们明天将祝福我，因为我拯救了这个国家，使其免受前所未有的最大威胁。”他是对的。安德鲁·约翰逊的审判是美国建国史的一个重要转折点。他被撤职将确立这样一个观点，即总统只有在国会批准后才能任职。实际上，总统就成为了首相。他必须依靠国会的支持才能继续执政。约翰逊的胜利使独立总统的观点得以实现。然而，这次投票并没有结束国会和白宫之间关于南方未来的冲突。这将是我们下期建国史话节目要讲述的故事。
译文为可可英语翻译，未经授权请勿转载！
