I want a clarification about a text that appears in my son's Social Civics (U.S.) textbook.
"Senator Edmund Ross cast the deciding vote for acquittal in the Senate trial of President Andrew Johnson and thereby helped to preserve the historic powers of the Presidency."
The question is, does anybody understand why his vote would, in any way, be more significant than that of the other 18 senators that voted for acquittal?
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)
