A single senator changing against the President would give _thirty-six_ for conviction, and leave only _eighteen_ for acquittal.

This would be fatal to the President, as it would give the two-thirds necessary for conviction.

But it was not so ordained.

When the Senate re-assembled on the 26th, the vote was taken on the Second Article, and then upon the Third, with precisely the same results as was previously reached on the Eleventh Article.
When Mr.Ross of Kansas answered "_Not guilty_," there was an audible sensation of relief on the part of some, and of surprise on the part of others, showing quite plainly that rumor had been busy with his name as that of the senator who was expected to change his position.
Satisfied that further voting was useless, the Senate abandoned the remaining Articles, and as a Court of Impeachment adjourned _sine die_.
The great trial was over, and the President retained his high office.
In the ranks of the more radical portion of the Republican party there was an outbreak of indignation against the Republican senators who had voted "_Not guilty_." In the exaggerated denunciations caused by the anger and chagrin of the moment, great injustice was done to statesmen of spotless character.

But until time had been given for reflection on the part of the excited mass of disappointed men, it was idle to interpose a word in defense, much less in justification, of the senators who had conscientiously differed from the main body of their political associates.