THE BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS
TENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
THURSDAY, JANUARY 14, 1869.The Senate met at ten o'clock a. m., the Lieutenant Governor in the chair.
Mr. CRAVENS suggested that the journal did not set forth the whole of his motion--the the last one made yesterday--to refer the Governor's message and accompanying papers and documents to the Committee of the whole Senate.
The PRESIDENT (Mr. Robinson of Madison in the chair.) upon the principle that they were not before the Senate, the Chair decided they could not be referred.
Mr. RICE proposed to lay before the Senate a communication from the Lieut. Governor.
The PRESIDENT, pro tem. said the time for the special order had not arrived.
Mr. FISHER remarking that the special order was for the consideration of this subject by the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, insisted that in order to bring the communication from the Lieutenant Governor before the Senate it is necessary that it should be read first to the Senate and not in Committee of the Whole.
GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE.
By unanimous consent, the order of business was suspended and Mr. BELLAMY, from the select Committee appointed to refer the different portions of the Governor's messsage to appropriate committees made the following report:
The part refering to the late Ex-Governor Joseph A. Wright, to a select committee of three.
The public debt of the State, State Debt, Sinking Fund, and assessment and taxation, to the Committee on Finance.
Adjutant General's report, Quartermaster General's report, State Paymaster's report, and war claims against the United States, to the Committee on Military Affairs.
Building for Supreme Court and State offices, to the Committee on Public Buildings.
Morgan Raid Commission, to the special committee on that subject.
Benevolent Institutions, to the Committee on Benevolont Institutions.
Soldiers' and Seamen's Home, to the Committee on Rights and Privileges of the Inhabitants of this State.
House of Refuge, to the Committee on House of Refuge.
Penitentiaries, to the Committee on State Prisons.
Criminal Law and Practice, to the Committee on Judiciary.
Courts, to Committee on Organization of Courts.
Agriculture and the Agricultural Colllege, to the Committee on Agriculture.
Common Schools, Normal Schools, and education of colored children, to the Committee on Education.
Portraits of Ex-Governor's to the Committee on State Library.
A MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE.
A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that the House had passed the bill [H. R. 32] to provide for specific appropriations for Legislative expenses. Also, that the House has passed, without amendment, the concurrent resolution of the Senate concerning the printing of the Governor's message.
page: 78[View Page 78]THE BAKER-CUMBACK CORRESPONDENCE.
Mr. RICE laid before the Senate the following communication from Lieutenant Governor Will Cumback, enclosing a copy of his letter to Governor Baker, dated January 6, 1868, to wit:
SENATE CHAMBER, Jan. 14, 1889.
GENTLEMEN OF THE SENATE:
I herewith place at the disposal of the Senate a copy of the only letter I ever wrote Governor Baker containing any suggestion touching my appointment to a prospective vacancy in the United States Senate. While I do not deny that Governor Baker did not accede to the suggestion contained in said letter, yet I do not deem it "proper" to lay before the Senate the private letter received from him.
I am, gentlemen, Your obedient servant, WILL. CUMBACK.
[Copy of letter of Cumback to Baker. Ea-velope endorsed "private."]
GREENSBUGH, IND., Jan. 6, 1868.
Gov. BAKER:
DEAR FRIEND:--If I had not a thousand things to demand my attention this week, I would come up and see you. I will therefore venture to make this suggestion: I think Hendricks will be chosen by the Democrats, and he will certainly (if he intends to inspire hope of success among his friends) resign his position. The person appointed by you will, other things being equal, stand the best chance to be chosen by our Legislature. If you will assure me of the appointment, I will withdraw from the contest for any position on the State ticket and take the position of elector at our State Convention. If this proposition does not meet with your opprobation, please return this letter to me. Let me have your reply at an early day. I do most earnestly hope for the unity of the Republican party.
I am, as ever, your friend, WILL. CUMBACK.
Mr. FISHER. That does not embrace the whole of the correspondence, as it shows upon its face. I have received a communication from the Governor, with authority, in the event of a part of the correspondence being suppressed, to lay it before the Senate. I will ask that the communication from the Governor to me be read.
The Secretary read as follows:
INDIANAPOLIS, Jan. 13, 1869.
HON. STEARNS FISHER:
DEAR SIR: As it is possible that a part of the correspondence called for by the Senate may be produced without producing it all, I think it due to myself that some Senator should be informed of the number of letters comprised in the entire correspondence. I therefore, without indicating the contents of any of the letters, say to you that there were four in all, dated as follows, viz: One from Col. Cumback to me, dated January 6, 1868; my reply thereto, dated January 8, 1868, One from Colonel Cumback to me, dated February 21, 1868, and my reply thereto, dated February 22, 1868. If Colonel Cumback's letter to me of January 6, 1868, should be read without my reply being produced, I shall not insist (as its language might be deemed harsh) on its production; but in that case you will please say that my reply was an indignant rejection of the proposition. I enclose, in a separate envelope, copies of the letters of February 21 and February 22, before mentioned. This envelope you will please return to me unopened, unless a part of the correspondence is produced without producing it all. In the last named event you will, in addition to saying for me what I have before indicated, lay before the Senate the copies of the letters of February 21 and February 22, 1868, enclosed in the separate envelope.
If all the correspondence shall be produced, or if none of it shall be submitted, you will have no occasion to act in the matter, and in either case will return the envelope containing the copies to me.
If it becomes necessary for you to take any action you can either read this communication to the Senate, or make your own statements of its contenis.
Yours truly, CONRAD BAKER.
Mr. HUGHES. I suppose these letter will be read in Committee of the Whole, and I will move that these papers be referred t that committee, and that we proceed to take up the special order.
The motion was agreed to.
It now being half past ten o'clock, the Senate resolved into a Committee of the Whole the President pro tem, having called Mr. Bellamy to the chair.
Mr. HUGHES. As a basis of action in this committee, I ask for the reading for all the correspondence.
The CHAIRMAN. The message will first be read, and then the correspondence.
The Secretary read the message of the Governor, printed in yesterday's proceedings, the letter addressed to the Senate from the Lieutenant Governor, printed above, and then the letters from Lieutenant Governor Cumback to Governor Baker, dated January 6th, 1868, and then Governor Baker's letter to the Senator from Wabash, (Mr. Fisher) printed above and then the following:
GREENSBURGH IND., Feb. 21, 1868.
GOVERNOR BAKER:
DEAR SIR:--As we are engaged in a common cause and on the same ticket, it is of the utmost importance that our relations should be friendly.
If, therefore, you will return the note I wrote yon January 6, and withdraw the reply you made, I will then, if you desire it, make a full explanation of the reasons that induced me to write it, that I will hope may mend the breach between us.
No one, as yet, knows from me that there is any feeling of an unpleasant character between us.
I am your obedient servant, WILL CUMBACK.
(Copy.)
INDIANAPOLIS, Feb. 22 1868.
Hon. WILL. CUMBACK, Greensburgh, Indiana
SIR:--Your communication of yesterday is before me. In reply, I beg leave to say that the relations of the parties alluded to are not such, in my judgment, as to prevent either of them from doing his whole duty to the public in the position assigned him. If the matter proposed to be explained is believed to be susceptible of explanation, the explanation should be made without the conditions suggested. For such a purpose opportunity be afforded, if desired.
The return of the one paper and the withdrawal of the other, could not change the facts, but would be pregnant with an implication that the party who really, thinks he did no wrong had changed his opinion.
I have the honor to be Your obedient servant, CONRAD BAKER.
(Copy.)
page: 79[View Page 79]Mr. HUGHES. As a basis for the action of the Committee I will offer a resolution, I hastily written and in a very crude form. I am willing to modify it to suit the pleasure of the committee. I have endeavored to express in the mildest form possible, such disapprobation on the part of the Senate as will relieve the Senate from any implication of approval of this matter. If other Senators desire to improve upon it they can do so, but some proposition mus be before the committee, and I submit this one as a basis for some remarks:
RESOLVED, That the message of the Governor concerning the correspondence between Lieutenant Governor Cumback and himself, with such other papers relative thereto, be reported to the Senate with a recommendation that the following resolution be passed by the Senate:
RESOLVED, That in the opinion of this body the propositions contained in the letter of Lieutenant Governor Cumback to Governor Baker were improper and corrupt, and merit condemnation.
RESOLVED, That in the judgment of the Senate the conduct of his Excellency Governor Baker in the correspondence in question merits approbation, and was highly creditable to the Governor.
Mr. HUGHES. I will ask leave to strike out the word "corrupt" in the second resolution as I wish to put it in the mildest terms possible.
There being no objection, the word was stricken out, and the resolution was read as amended.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman: I feel compelled, by the fact that I was the accuser in this body in this case, to offer this resolution and state the reason upon which it is based. The committee will observe that the statements I made in the Senate are sustained by the letters just read--that the letter of the Lieutenant Governor sustains precisely every thing I alleged against him. I am greatly relieved by the motion of the Senator from Jefferson [Mr. Cravens] refering this matter to a Committee of the whole Senate, from this consideration: that by the rules of the Senate the Lieutenant Governor (who is present) may participate in the discussion, and that his case may suffer no prejudice from his being denied a fair hearing.
This matter has at length assumed a shape, Mr. Chairman, which brings us to this question, and beyond that I do not desire to go: Do we approve or disapprove of a proposition of this nature made to the Governor of the State to influence him in the discharge of official duties? What ideas of morality will govern or influence the Senate upon a question of this kind? and what the majority upon this floor, who are responsible to the people for the character of the present State government in ail its branches? That is the question: and in discussing it I desire, as far as it is possible, to deal with it with perfect judicial fairness; for I must be permitted to say that in a matter of this sort I cannot consent to the understanding that one side of this question is to be regarded in a light of persecution nor the other of defense. We sit here as judges in this case and ought to discharge every prejudice and every feeling that could influence our action except the desire to be just to all parties and to ourselves as well as the constituents we represent. We may differ about this matter and we may differ honestly. All I propose to do is to give my views, and support them by the reasons upon which, they are founded. I do not seek to guide the course of any other Senator in this matter. I speak only for myself, and I know there are many Senators in this body who are my seniors in age and legislative experience as well as inability; and I recognize every Senator upon this floor as as independent peer one of the other.
I regard this proposition, Mr. Chairman,--the proposition contained in the letter of the Lieutenant Governor--considering all the circumstances, that he was at that time the acting Lieutenant Governor of the State, and that the proposition was addressed to the Governor of the State, intended to influence him in the exercise of a high official duty by motives of personal advancement to each of the contracting parties;I say I regard that proposition as highly improper if not corrupt. Propositions of that nature are calculated to corrupt the sources of patronage and of power; to lower standard of morality and honesty among the public servants of the people, and cannot, in my judgment, fail to receive the condemnation of every honest man either within or without these walls. That is my opinion. And as we have this matter before us in an official character the duty devolves upon us to say whether we will clear our skirts of whatever odium may attach to this proceeding and leave the blame to rest upon its author, or whether we will assume the responsibility and the blame and stand between its author and our constituents and the enlightened public opinion. I am sorry to see, sir, that one of the newspapers in this city--the recognized organ of the party to which I profess to be an humble member of, the Union party--has hastened to come forward and treat this matter lightly; to relieve the Lieutenant Governor of all blame, and to assume the responsibility for the party of which he is and has been an honored member. In the State Journal of yesterday morning is the following article:
"THE CORRESPONDENCE."
Yesterday the resolution of Mr. Turner, of Daviess, in the Senate, calling for certain alleged correspondence between Lieutenant Governor Cumback and Governor Baker, was amended by Judge Hughes, of Monroe, who, page: 80[View Page 80] in proposing bis amendment stated what he understood to be the character of Mr. Cumback's proposition, which Governor Baker declined. Mr. Cumback's friends accepted the statement substantially correct, and thus I made the adoption of the resolution, in any form, necessary. All that it could accomplish, even in the unlikely event that Governor Baker would recognize the right of the Senate to command his private correspondence, was accomplished by the statement of Judge Hughes.
Mr. Cumback's proposition, it appears, was one of the kind made by all men, at least by all politicians, in pursuit of office, and of which about every member of the legislature, at every session affords a specimen. 'You vote for my man and I'll vote for your's, or do something else that will oblige you as much as your consent will oblige me. ' This is the whole case. Mr. Cumback suggested to Governor Baker that, if the latter would appoint him to the vacancy which it was anticipated Mr. Hendricks would make in the United States Senate, in order to carry on the campaign for the Governorship, he would withdraw from the contest for the Republican nomination for Governor. Governor Baker declined. If no politician had ever made or entertained any proposition more corrupt than this, we should have as clean a bill of political morality in Indiana as can be found in any country where offices are obtained by votes, and votes by personal influence or interest."
That is the political morality of the Indiana State Journal, as expressed in that article. It is due to some of the principal personages connected with that establishment, to say that they themselves disclaim the article, and disclaim its morality; but it would be much better, in my judgment, if they had said so in their paper of this morning. That has been said in private, but the public declaration goes before the world. Is that the morality of the Republican Union party? Are the majority upon this floor with whom I have the honor to act, ready to stand up here and echo back the sentiment of that article? If not, it behoves us in justice to ourselves--our duties as Senators; for our own credit and for the credit of the State, and more especially the duty of the majority who are to be injured by this thing, to disclaim in the most solemn manner all responsibility for this act, and further than that I do not desire to go.
The constitutoin provides that the Lieutenant Governor or the Governor may be impeached or may be removed from office by the concurrent action of the two Houses upon a two thirds vote. There was a time in the history of this country when, in my humble opinion if a case like this had arisen that removal would have taken place. I do not desire to press matters in this direction but I do desire that the majority should clear its skirts from all responsibility in this matter. What! "If no politician had ever made or entertained any proposition more corrupt than this, we should have as clean a bill of political morality in Indiana as can be found in any country where offices are obtained by votes, and votes by personal influence or interest." Is that so? I do not take that view of that subject, neither would any other honest man. What do our constituents think of matters of this kind? They have in the most solemn form, in the Constitution of the State, fnrnished an answer for that question on page 35, first volume of the statutes, Article II section 6 of the Constitution we find the voice of the people of Indiana expressed in the following language:
SEC. 6. Every person shall be disqualified from holding office during the term for which he may have been elected, who shall have given or offered a bribe, threat, or reward, to procure his election.
If you or I, Mr. Chairman, Lad procured a single vote to send us to this body, by just such a proposition as is contained in that letter of the Lieutenant Governor, the Constitution of the State--the highest will of the people--would have made us ineligible to sit here, and is not the moral obligation the same in reference to procuring the appointment to a Federal office? Undoubtedly it is, and we must lower the standard of political morality expressed in the Constitution, and come down to the standard of morality expressed in the Indiana State Journal, or repudiate this transaction and condemn it.
Mr. Chairman, there are circumstances connected with this matter which transpired in full view of the Senate, in the progress of the discussion on this subject, which to my mind throw a strong light upon this question. The proposition to inquire into this matter was met by the most determined opposition, protracted through several days discussion. Senators speaking in the presence of the Lieutenant Governor, and by his authority, showing a reluctance to let the light of Heaven shine upon this matter and to let the world know its contents--a reluctance that does not indicate a consciousness of integrity, but does indicate a consciousness of impropriety. And when this correspondence was finally brought forth, after a severe contest, on a vote of ayes and noes, the Senator from Parke, [Mr. Rice,] from what instigation I know not, opened upon the persons engaged in pursuing this investigation impugning their motives and denouncing them on every hand. Such choice epithets as "sore heads," "bolters," &c., have been freely used to deter Senators from discharging their duty. And when at last the correspondence came to us delivered in custody of a page: 81[View Page 81] Senator upon this floor, time for reflection was required to determine what portion of it if any, or whether any of it should be surrendered for our consideration. Then it appears that only the preceding day the same newspaper which has brought this letter to light, had denied that the friends of the Lieutenant Governor admitted the charge. And this morning we find, instead of handing us the whole correspondence, the Lieutenant Governor selects one single letter from the mess and gives it to us--throwing upon the Governor the responsibility of giving us the rest.
I must be permitted to say, Mr. Chairman? that I regard the public writing of that letter and the publication of it in the papers, pending this investigation, as a very indecorous act, approaching nearly to a breach of the privileges of the Senate. And I do not believe, sir, that according to the proprieties of parliamentary law it was right in the Lieutenant Governor, the very documents he was holding under advisement whether or not he would lay before the Senate. And I must entirely condemn the selections of one of his own letters to be presented without the rest of the correspondence. True the reasons he gives are that the Governor's letters are private; but it turns out when the Governor speaks that there is another letter from the Lieutenant Governor which he does not choose to give the Senate, which constitutes part of the correspondence. Now what does all this mean? Does this indicate guilt or innocence? Which of the two? What is the judgment of the Lieutenant Governor by his acts in the presence of the Senate? What is his judgment upon himself?
Why, a reference was made the other day to Henry Clay; and Henry Clay, who was only charged with an attempt at a political bargain walked into the House of Representatives of the United States and demanded an investigation and demanded that the committee should be composed of his political opponents. And yet our Lieutenant Governor, for whom it is claimed he is, at least, (and probably he is in ability,) the peer of Henry Clay, the Christian orator and Christian gentleman, and the immaculate stateman, yet he stays here day after day while a species of pettifogging is being carried on to cover up the truth in this transaction; and finally, when the responsibility of giving it to the world is cast upon himself, doles it out to us by piece meal and gives us only half of our own correspondence. I cannot see much paralelism, sir, between the course of Henry Clay under similar circumstances and the line pursued by our Lieutenant Governor. Perhaps we may have progressed since the days of Henry Clay and since the days of
I desire to say, Mr. Chairman, in this connection that I do not wish to assume any responsibility, in this matter, or that the majority of the Senate should have any responsibility, or the minority either, for they are aa much the representatives of their constituents and have in charge the character of the State as we are.
I do not desire to pursue or annoy the Lieutenant Governor in reference to this matter, but I desire that the State shall stand fair before the world in reference to a transaction of this kind; therefore, I simply recommend that, in the mildest form, the Senate disclaim the immorality of this transaction, and that they do say to that pure and honest man who the people of Indiana have made Governor, and who indignantly repelled this bribe--that they say to him in their resolution, "Well done good and faithful servant." Both these gentlemen can not be right about this matter. This Senate cannot sustain and whitewash the Lieutenant Governor without casting odium and disgrace npon the Governor. They are at issue. The Governor pronounces the proposition improper and indignantly repelled it. The next effort on the part of the Lieutenant Governor, as is shown by the letter which he kept back, was an attempt to recover the written evidence of what he had done. And why did he do it? That, also, the Governor declined. This matter is before us and shall we slur it over? I have heard parties say that it is a quarrel between the Lieutenant Governor and the Governor, in which one has his partizans, and the other his partizans. No sir! Governor Baker in the course he took in this transaction has dona his duty as an honest man, and in his reluctance in sending the correspondence here has been actuated by motives of the highest honor and delicacy; he sir, comes nearer to the standard of political morality expressed in the Constitution--much nearer the standard exemplyfied in the conduct of Henry Clay than the Lieutenant Governor. And in these resolutions I used the mildest language to relieve ourselves and the people of the State and this body from the responsibility of this act.
I now propose to say a word of approbation in regard to the conduct of our most excellent Governor and then, sir, as far as I am concerned I hope to be done with this matter forever, I think, sir, that when we go farther than that, as to what is to be done in connection with other affairs, we probably transcend the proprieties of this discussion here. This is no public meeting--no caucus--and not the fit place, in my judgment, to discuss the merits of candidates for office, except as they are connected with gentlemen before the body. page: 82[View Page 82] I wish to read again from the letter of the Lieutenant Governor, reading from the State Journal--the copy printed by him. And to my mind I must say that on its face the letter shows, from the conception of this matter, a consciousness of wrong. Let us look at this thing: "GOVERNOR BAKER--DEAR FRIEND--If I had not a thousand things to demand my attention this week, I would come up and see you. I will, therefore, venture to make this suggestion: I think Hendricks will be chosen by the Democrats, and he will, certainly, (if he intends to inspire hope among his friends,) resign his position. The person appointed by you will, other things being equal, stand the best chance to be chosen by our Legislature. If you will assure me of the appointment, I will withdraw from the contest."--What was the contest? He was at that time a candidate for Governor, against Governor Baker, pressing him hard and laboring with characteristic energy and ability to take the nomination from him: and it was a pretty strong pressure. "If you will assure me of the the appointment, I will withdraw from the contest for any position on the State ticket, and take the position of elector at the (State Convention. If this proposition does not meet with your approbation, please return this letter to me. Let me have your reply at an early day. I do most earnestly I hope for the unity of the Republican party. I am, as ever, your friend, WILL. CUMBACK." Well, I say, may that good providence which has ruled over the Republican party for the last seven years and carried it successfully through scenes of blood and ruin, party strife and rancour--may that good providence preserve us from unity that is to be secured by such means as this. And I say further, that that large element of the Republican party which came to it from principle alone, who were driven out from the other party organization, because it seemed to halt and hesitate as to a great question; men who severed long cherished and dear personal and political associations to come and labor in the cause of the Union party, these men can never be tied down to a proposition of this sort. And the charge of bolting has no terror for these men--none whatever. There is not a sound and qualified and prominent member of the Union Republican party in this State that would and could not cheerfully receive my vote, if properly brought forward by a caucus; but ask me not to dishonor myself and my constituency by saying that that kind of a thing is right. That is all the bolt I propose. That I do propose, and upon that proposition I will stand or fall. Neither will I under any circumstances give my vote to confer a high political official office and trust upon a party who will make such a proposition, nor will I permit him to avail himself of the high character and love of the people for another, to make room for him and make him Governor of the State.
This is a slight digression, but this much may I be permitted to say, in view of the facts I have stated, in order to make my defense before the public press, for I never or seldom go into that forum to protect myself. When the Governor indignantly repelled the proposition another letter comes, which he has not laid before this body, and for which we are indebted to the Governor, and another request "Send me back my letter." "Send me back my proposition." "Give me up the evidence that I tried to buy you and buy the way into the Senate of the United States." "Give me up that, and take back your indignant expression of the sentiments of an honest man in which you repel that proposition so discreditable to me and to you." "Take that back," The Governor with characteristic delicacy and modesty suggests to the Senator from Wabash [Mr. Fisher] that it will be sufficient to say to the Senate that the contents of that letter was an indignant rejection of the proposition, and he suggests that this statement be made without reading it as its language might be considered harsh. I can well imagine, Mr. Chairman, that harsh language might be employed by as pure a man as Governor Baker, in rejecting such a proposition as that. I can well understand that. But I say that the obligation rested upon the Lieutenant Governor by the terms of the Governor's message, and the position in which he stood required him to furnish this Senate with both his own letters, yet he failed to do it.
It is unnecessary to pursue this subject further. The case is a plain one to my mind, and we have a plain duty to perform to say to the world that we do not approve of what Lieutenant Governor Cumback has done, but we do approve what Governor Baker has done. That is all; and I hope now, sir, as the facts are out and the correspondence is published, that those who have been instrumental in bringing them out, instead of receiving denunciations and having their motives impugned, will be thanked by all sincere members of the Union party and all sincere members of the Democratic party and all true lovers of the credit and the honor of the State, for having done a simple act of justice--deciding in favor of virtue and against vice.
Mr. WOLCOTT. I offere the following resolution:
RESOLVED, That this committee rise, and report that, in the opinion of this committee, the Senate of Indiana has no jurisdiction of the subject matter of this correspondence.
Mr. CRAVENS. I rise to a point of order. There is resolution pending. This does not even profess to be an amendment or a substi- page: 83[View Page 83] tute for that resolution, and consequently is out of order.
Mr. WOLCOTT. This whole subject is out of the jurisdiction of the Senate. Nothing in the constitution, the laws of the State or the rules of the Senate give us jurisdiction of that subject.
Mr. HUGHES. I will call the attention of the Senator to the fact that the Legislature has unlimited power, for any good cause, to recommend the removal of the Lieutenant Governor, granted by the Constitution itself.
Mr. WOLLCOTT. So far as I am cognizant rules governing proceedings of this kind, no member of this Senate is subject to the censure of the body except for some act performed while a member or while endeavoring to become a member. This case is certainly outside of the Senate in every particular.
The CHAIRMAN. The chair will state that in his opinion the resolution of the Senator from White [Mr. Wolcott] is not in order, for there is a resolution pending before the Committee. If offered as an independent proposition the resolution of the Senator is not in order, but if offered as a substitute or amendment it will be entertained.
Mr. WOLCOTT. I offer it as a substitute.
Mr. HANNA. Mr. Chairman I belong to that old class of politicians, if you please, ho look upon all efforts to obtain office by intrigue as dishonorable. That may not be the modern notion; but still it is the old fashioned notion I was educated in. I cannot see precisely what good end is to be attained by the resolution offered by the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes.] It may be possible that this case may prove to be one of some celebrity. Not long since the Senate of the United States adopted a resolution that certain acts of the President were improper; and then articles of impeachment followed. This may be followed by other articles of impeachment, not offered by any member of the Senate belonging to the same political faith with the dirty accused, but it may be followed up by articles of impeachment. I know not. I can't say, what would be the effect of the mere passage of a resolution of censure for an act he committed before he was even a candidate for the office of Lieutenant Governor. I cannot understand that it would have any legal binding force or effect. This whole matter ought to have been discussed in another forum--in a caucus of his political friends, and there they ough to determine how far questions of immorality will bind them: there they should determine whether improper propositions would disqualify him for any office. But as it is before us we must act upon it.
I cannot vote to approve the conduct of Mr. Cumback, at that time a private citizen, perhaps acting Lieutenant Governor, because if his elevation to that position by the Senate at a previous session, but certainly not elevated there by the voice of the people. I cannot vote that I approve of his act in proposing to the Governor in the discharge of official duties, under the obligation he takes upon him to discharge those duties faithfully, that he should be swerved from his duty by a selfish proposition. What is it? If you reduce it down it is this: "I, Will. Cumback, am a candidate for the office of Governor, before the Convention; I am pressing you and perhaps will beat you, but I will withdraw my claims if you will appoint me to another office." That is the whole thing. I belong to that political faith which decries that way to office, and the reason the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] comes up here in opposition to it, is because, he too, was educated in the same political faith, though he has wandered from it in late years.
The leading organ of the Republican party in this State [the Indianapolis Daily Journal] makes light of this thing; and says that is the mode of getting office now-a-days. That is too much the case. It has become quite common to say "you help my man and I will help yours." But here is an appointment not for one Congressional District of the State, but for the whole State; and not an appointment to advance the self interest of Conrad Baker--
Mr. WOLCOTT (interrupting.) I rise to a point of order. The resolution before the Committee is not being discussed. We find ourselves in the position of a court which is trying a case not known to the laws, and, of course, the court must dismiss the case.
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. Another goint of order is that a motion for the Committee to rise (which is embodied in the pending substitute) is equivalent to a motion to adjourn and is therefore not debateable.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will decide as this is offered as a substitute for the original resolution, that it is competent for Senators to discuss the merits of the proposition.
Mr. HANNA (resuming.) That office does not belong to the Governor. It is one he cannot dispose of to advance his own self interest, nor one any man ought to ask him to dispose of in that way. The contents of this letter to him, as I was going to say amounts to this; "I, Will. Cumback, being a candidate against you before the Convention for Governor, will probably beat you, but I will withdraw my claims if you will appoint me United States Senator." Is not that a proposition for a bargain and sale of office? Why, it would be indictable under the old English law for Conrad Baker to sell the office in that way, and it is indictable for a man to attempt to pursuade him to sell it, and yet we are told by the page: 84[View Page 84] organ of the Republican party that that is all right!
Mr. CHURCH (interposing.) I understand that the Indianapolis Daily Journal is not a subject of discussion in this hall.
Mr. HANNA. I am willing to strikeout the State Journal. But on yesterday, I think, the honorable Senator from Porter, [Mr. Church,] took occasion to denounce a paper called the Mirror.
Mr. CHURCH. The point of order is that this is not the place to discuss articles from newspapers, while descussing this resolution. The other resolution did bring in an article from a newspaper and this does not.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is not disposed to curb the will of any man in this discussion. The Senator will please confine himself to the resolution before the Committee.
Mr. HANNA (resuming.) If I were a young man I would feel considerable embarrasment, but as I am an old man it is pretty hard to scare me down. As it is I was here twenty years ago, perhaps before the Senator from Porter was born. I set out by saying that I belong to a school of politicians who regard all contracts for the purpse of obtaining office from a man in whom power was vested to appoint; or contracts to advance the personal interests of a trustee (for the Governor is the trustee of the people to bestow this office,) and all attempts to bribe him to swerve from the line as trustee, are breaches of trust at least improper:--I will not characterize them too severely--they are at least improper. We must dispose of this thing now that we have it here. I regret exceedingly that it is here because of the manifest disgrace it brings to the State of Indiana. We have elevated to a high position--the second office in the gift of the people of the State--a man that is making this proposition; and a man, too, whom I believe personally to be a man of strict integrity and honesty.
I cannot agree with the proposition of the Senator from White [Mr. Wollcot] that we should rise and report that this is a matter beyond our jurisdiction. I cannot agree with that. I said I think it a matter that ought not to be thrust upon us, but as it is here--as it concerns our presiding officer, and is brought before us in a manner which I exceedingly regret, (no personal friend of his regrets it more than I,) I saw we cannot swerve--we cannot say we have no jurisdiction over it. We must say we approve of it, or disapprove of it. We cannot get round it. When we say we approve of the act of the Lieutenant Governor, we say thereby that we disapprove of the act of the Governor in rejecting the proposition. I shall vote in favor of the resolution offered in condemnation of the act of the Lieutenant Governor--while at the same time I cannot vote for the second resolution which says that we approve of the conduct of the Governor. What was that? We are left the dark as to what that was. Let us see the reason he gives. Did he reject it on the broad ground that it was improper? If he does we approve it. If he places it upon the ground that it might not subserve his interest we don't approve it. We must have his letter before I can approve of his action. In view of the letter of Mr. Cumback, nothing that can be said by the friends of that gentleman can change the letter. It is a simple plan, straight forward proposition [Mr. H. here read Lieutenant Governor Cumback's letter dated January 6, 1868, as printed on page 78 of these Reports.] "I offer you a bribe:" is not that the amount of it? "You can serve me and be advancing your interests, for you and I are candidates for Governor in the great Union party in the State of Indiana--and I am pressing you--but will withdraw if you will give me a high appointment." "You have taken an oath to discharge your duties as Governor, you must not set down and consider the interests of the whole people, but the interests of Conrad Baker and Will. Cumback." I say the proposition is improper and we cannot vote to justify it.
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. Mr. Chairman. It seems to me if the interests of the State of Indiana, of these Senators, of the Governor, or of the Lieutenant Governor, had been considered previous to the introduction of these resolutions and of the subsequent amendment of these resolutions by the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] these there days occupied in discussing these questions would have been devoted to the interests of the State, and not in an attempt to destroy the the reputation of a rising young man of the State. I put the question to you, Mr. Chairman, and to these Senators to-day, if this contest for United States Senator was not pending would these resolutions be before this body? I am not here to question or impugn the motives of gentleman but I say they cannot lecture me on the subject of morality when perhaps in every effort of that lecture you may see an interest in the presentation of that question.
Mr. HUGHES (interrupting.) I call the Senator to order and want his language taken down at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Senator will repeat.
Mr. HUGHES. His language was substantially this: that it was plain to be seen from the interest taken in this--
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison (resuming.) I say there is an evident interest manifested here, but the gentleman did not let me explain. There is where I stopped, sir.
Mr. HUGHES. I do not intend in this discussion to impugn the motives of any Sena- page: 85[View Page 85] tor, nor will I submit to have mine impugned.
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. I am impunging the motives of no Senator. The Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] may be interested on this subject. I have a right as a Senator to say what I believe to be the interest in this case. I have a right as a Senator to say upon this floor that I believe the public interest is involved in this case and I have the right to say that I do not believe the public good is involved in this case, but that I believe it is a mere political interest brought into this Senate for the purpose of reflecting upon the claims of a candidate for the United States Senate. And that is what I was going say.
Mr. HUGHES (interposing.) I will ask the Senator if he will put the defense upon the same ground?--if he is defending from a similar motive?
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. Do I put my defense upon similar motives? No, sir. I have no concealments. I advocate the claims of Lieutenant Governor Cumback for the United States Senate because I believe the loyal people of Indiana stand at my back. [Applause in the lobbies.] Because I believe he a pure, upright, honest, patriotic man, who will rise above party in his devotion to the interests of the country; and in the last campaign, by his services the flag of the Republican party was carried in triumph to victory. [Renewed applause in the lobbies.]
The CHAIRMAN. Any demonstration of applause in the lobbies will be promptly suppressed by the Doorkeeper.
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison (resuming.) In the substitute offered by the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] in the first place he uses the word "corrupt." He says there was corrupt and dishonorable proposition made to the Governor. What is his resolution before the Senate to-day?
Mr. HUGHES (in his seat.) I think it light to pass the Senate.
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. I now have the Senator's resolution. He says: "WHEREAS, One of the newspapers taken by this body, And daily laid upon the desks of its members, has specifically charged that some written correspondence of an improper and corrupt character has taken place between the late acting Lieutenant Governor, and now presiding officer of this body, Hon. Will. Cumback, and his Excellency, Governor Conrad Baker."What is the difference between corrupt and improper and improper and corrupt? I fancy the difference is like that between tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum--a difference without a distinction. But what is his resolution to-day? Does he arraign him for corrupt conduct? No. After he introduced the resolution he strikes omit the word"corrupt" and now he will have the Senate to condemn Col. Cumback for improper conduct. That question of improper conduct is simply a question of fancy and imagination. What one Senator might regard as improper from one stand point,another Senator might regard as perhaps not improper. I venture this prediction, that notwithstanding the predictions submitted here, there is not a Senator who occupies a seat in this body, I care not how short or long, but would be subject to be arraigned before the Senate for something similar to this transaction. Now what is it? Before this correspondence came forth we imagine that there was some effort, some premeditated intention on the part of Colonel Cumback to corrupt Governor Baker by securing from him an appointment. But what is it? A simple proposition; and there is nothing appearing before this Senate to show that Col. Cumback was seeking any office or place at that time. He simply says to him: In the event of a resignation by Mr. Hendricks "the person appointed by you will, other things being equal, stand the best chance to be chosen by our Legislature." Does he make this as a proposition? He makes a suggestion. I suggest this, and, "if you will assure me of the appointment, I will withdraw from the contest for any position on the State ticket and take the position of elector at our State Convention. If this proposition does not meet with your approbation, please return this letter to me. Let me have your reply at an early day. I do earnestly hope for the unity of the Republican party."
I am not here to arraign the purity of Governor Baker; to question his integrity, his veracity, or his motives, but I do maintain before the Senate and people of Indiana, that if Governor Baker did not accede to the matter set forth in that letter he should have returned it to Lieutenant Governor Cumback agreeable to his request, and in that I maintain that Governor Baker made the mistake. Does this effect Governor Baker if he is a pure man, an upright man, a man of integrify, honesty and morality? What effect had this letter upon Governor Baker? And why did the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Huges] desire that the letter of Governor Baker should be before the Senate? I presume I have a right upon that point, from the facts in the case, to determine what his motives were. Governor Baker treated this letter in an indignant light and his having so decided that it was corrupt and indecent would answer the purpose of the Senator from Monroe and be very valuable in determining the question before the people if not with Senators upon this floor. The opinion of the Governor has no business with this investigation. It is the construction that the Senators of the State of Indiana will put upon it in this trial before the Senate upon the message and ac- page: 86[View Page 86] companying papers. Whatever Governor Baker's views may have been upon that letter, whether he regarded it as indecent or corrupt or not, that has nothing to do with the determination of the question here as to whether it was corrupt or indecent or not. The Senator from Monroe says we could not sustain and whitewash the Lieutenant Governor without casting disgrace upon the Governor of Indiana. Who is proposing to sustain and whitewash the Lieutenant Governor? I want to know who it was that indorsed this proposition?
Mr. HUGHES (interposing.) I will answer that he is one of them.
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. The Senator answers that I am one of them. While that may be so, I will ask the Senator from Monroe, and he can answer if he wishes to, what demand is there upon the part of the people of the State or Governor Baker that we should adopt a resolution approving his conduct in this matter?
Mr. HUGHES. I have already answered that question in the remarks I made to the Senate. I think we could not well cover this whole ground without expressing condemnation of this act of the Lieutenant Governor's, and consequently approval of the course pursued by the Governor. But that is only my individual opinion.
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. Has any one made an attack upon the Gov.? The first resolution in reduced declared that it was demanded as a vindication of the reputation of Col. Cumback that this matter should come before the Senate. I believe, and I have a right to my belief, that the purpose of the resolution is to raise ' an issue between Col. Cumback and Governor Baker. But I say who is proposing to whitewash him? We go before the Senate upon the letter he wrote to Governor Baker and we say that in this letter there is nothing that is corrupt--there is nothing indecent. Such a letter is written upon almost every occasion when there is a political contest for office.
Now, Mr. Chairman, another fact. The Senator from Monroe would have you to understand that this correspondence has been dragged out by the action of the Senate. That is true. We have it before the Senate, and the message of the Governor that transmits the correspondence of Col. Cumback informs this Senate that it is strictly of a private nature. We have dragged it out. How? By a resolution. Lieutenant Governor Cumback presents the letter he himself had written and throws the responsibility upon the Governor to publish his.
The case of Henry Clay is referred to; and what was it? An attempt to censure him; an attempt to draw out private correspondence. The Senator from Monroe says he demanded a committee of investigation. Only after the proposition had been voted down. Has this Senate voted down one proposition? Have they given to the Lieutenant Governor the privilege of calling for an investigation if wanted to? No, you have pursued it from the introduction of the resolutions up to this time, and there has been no opportunity for him with propriety to demand an investigation, am not going to occupy the time of the Senate much further. It is not a question between Republicans and Democratic members of this Senate, and it is not a question between the two parties. It is a question between certain Republicans and other Republican members this Senate. As far as the question is concerned the responsibility of it rests with the Republican party. And I am not here the purpose of attempting to cast any odium upon the opposite party, or to arraign them here for the introduction of this resolution, is only brought up and introduced as I believe because the question for United States Senate is pending before the people of Indiana effect that question and for no other purpose. It is a question of a political character a, not a political family quarrel originating in that family to create divisions.
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. Chairman: I would prefer that some of these older persons, who were familiar with parliamentary tactics long before I was born would take up these questions and settle them. But it strikes me it is necessary that we should all take a part. If my constituents had wanted to send a man to represent them who was here twenty years before I saw the light of day they should have sent him, but they have sent me, and I am here upon the floor as a Senator, and take it as a great privilege at this time to act and speak upon the question before the Committee, As to this debate assuming the phrase of prosecution and defense, I am glad there is nothing of this kind in it. I am glad that the parties who are prosecuting this resolution have not in their minds the United States Senator-ship, but I regret much, for the credit of those concerned that it has that appearance. I know they are honorable gentlemen, some of them better qualified than any person in the State, almost, to discuss a question of morals; and I know they are indifferent to it, for I am satisfied when they tell me so that it is a fact. But it is crawling into my mind that some of the parties are candidates themselves. Yet we know it is not so because they say so. [Laughter.]
Mr. HUGHES (interposing.) I believe I am the only Senator who has prosecuted these resolutions and, of course, I take that to myself.
Mr. CHURCH. It would be more pleasant to my mind--
page: 87[View Page 87]Mr. HUGHES (interrupting.) I want to make a declaration. There is no capital of that sort to be made in this discussion as far as I am concerned, because it is a fact known to all Senators that my candidacy hangs simply upon saying that I would accept the office. I have not manifested half the zeal for that office that the Senator from Porter [Mr. Church] has for the Lieutenant Governor, whose advocate he has been throughout this whole matter. And if it would gratify the Senator from Porter very much, and end that whole subject to-day, I would do so by saying that I would not under any circumstance accept the office of Senator. There is just one set of circumstances that would make me an active candidate, and that would be to beat i he Lieutenant Governor for that office.--[Laughter.]
Mr. CHURCH (resuming.) The Senator being an honorable man would not be influenced by any other than an honorable motive. I was assured by a Democrat that if fifteen Republican members of the Legislature would vote for the Senator he would go in.
Mr. HUGHES (interposing.) I avow it, sir. He has told the truth. [Laughter.]
Mr. CHURCH. I say these things come up in our minds; and I now speak for the benefit or rather the good of the public, the people and the Senate, that the Senator has no aspirations in this direction. But he informs is that there was an element in the old Democratic party that drove him into the Republican party, and that now he has found an element that is about to drive him back. I have been in the Republican party from the start and I can inform every one that, like the doors of gospel grace, the doors of that party have been open for men to come in and go out as they please, and for my part when a man threatens to leave the party, "Go, depart in I peace" is my language to him. I feel some Interest in this Republican party, for I was raised in it, and I have sometimes been glad I was of age before this party was organized. All I have to say is this: while I will not say here are such insinuations, it looks to me as if,--I know it can't be possible but I say it looks so,--when he is speaking in the interest if every Democratic paper in the country; when he drags that party organ before this Senate unnecessarily, as I think, and endeavors to rebuke the editors of that paper before his body, not for anything contained the in resolution discussed; and when he travels out of the State and goes to Cincinnati to find that somebody in Indiana has been called "bolters," I say I am believing, because I can't help it, that gentlemen find something in the Republican party they don't like, and propose to get out of it. I don't suppose my arrows reach across the aisle there, but I take it for granted that when a Senator makes an assertion he means it. When he says that under no consideration, however much the State might be glad to avail itself of his services--under no circumstances for the good of the State would he be a candidate for United States Senator except to defeat Will. Cumback, I am inclined to think he speaks what he means.
The Senator thinks it highly commendatory of the Governor to insist upon his reply being printed. I do not know but it is, but I have this to say; in getting this correspondence the Lieutenant Governor put that part of it before this House that he wrote himself; and if the Governor desired his communications before the Senate he should put then here. The Governor is not charged with anything improper, and the Lieutenant Governor is. Does it make any difference to the Senate what the Governor had in his letter if he is not under charges? But because of his modesty the Governor desires his letter read! It would seem that there is modesty with some Senators as well as modesty with the Governor although I do not charge it. The Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] is proud to say that if fifteen Republicans in the Legislature will vote for him he will accept the position of United States Senator in order to defeat Col. Cumback. I suppose some newspaper correspondent has been silly enough to presume that after the party had a caucus and made their nomination that fifteen men were to bolt that nomination. But of course that is not what it means; for the Senator says not and we believe him.
They say this correspondence was a proposition for a bargain and sale; and that it was a corrupt proposition. The Senator over yonder--the old gentleman who was here so many years ago--has tried to show that both men were candidates for the same office. My friend over the way there, will call this pettifogging. But what is the evidence? Is it not the letter? And what is the proposition? It is a suggestion on the part of Col. Cumback to be appointed United States Senator. Need he put in there that he would not be a candidate for any other office? The duties of the office would prevent it. It was unnecessary to have that in the letter at all. He could simply have said that the place would be desirable. But he proposes to be put upon the electoral ticket. That is to say; I propose to get out of the way; it shall be my business to canvass the State for the unity of the Republican party. Then some of our old Democratic friends that have been in the Republican party awhile propose to get out of it We are just as pure as before they came into it--they have not added to the purity of the party.
Mr. TURNER (interposing.) Mr. Chairman: I do not know how much latitude is allowed in Committee of the Whole; but I regret page: 88[View Page 88] that this debate has taken a personal turn, and propose to call the gentleman to order. While I am up I will say that, as far as this Senatorial discussion is concerned, he had better ascertain if there is a candidate within the limits of the Republican party that can get a Democratic vote.
Mr. HUGHES. I hope the Senator from Daviess [Mr. Turner] will not press his point! of order. The Senator from Porter [Mr. Church] has manifested a disposition to expend himself, and I hope the Senate will permit him to unloose himself.
Mr. CHURCH (resuming.) Whether I have the approbation of the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] or not; no man stands upon this floor to assail Republican journals and to assail the integrity and intentions of Republican members on this floor, but I shall do my duty to my constituents and stand up and defend them. I shall do it, and not ask the permission of the Senator. When he tells you that he has no organ in the State, and when I know that no Democratic paper but some way gets some things in it--
Mr. HUGHES (interrupting.) I want to ask the Senator if he charges me with bargain and sale.
Mr. CHURCH. No sir, I think not.
Mr. HUGHES. You had better not.
Mr. CHURCH. No, sir; that language was uttered with reference to Col. Cumback, and I believe from the bottom of my heart that as strong language emenated from that Senator as from any others. I do not speak of this as a bargain and sale. It was a proposition to be appointed if a vacancy occurred in the future--it was a proposition to accept the appointment. There was no more bargain and sale about it than there would be for me to approach the Senate of the United States and say that I am qualified to act as the Governor of some territory. But because he says "I will withdraw from the canvass", they say it is a bargain and sale. Don't any body with any sense know that if he accepts the position of United States Senator, he is not a candidate for a State office? Of course he would not be. He would have a great deal better thing. He says, "I will take a position upon the electoral ticket." What for? Why, to canvass the State for the unity of the Republican party. It may look like a bargain and sale to the Democracy, but I have always been glad to get men to canvass the State having the ability of the Lieutenant Governor. Men who have successfully traveled over the State and who have ; been received as good exponents of the party, have sometimes been elected to the position of Agent of State, Treasurer of State, &c., because they have been useful men in the party. These things do work in that way. Now what? "I would like to be appointed Senator." Do he offer any bribe? Is there anything of that kind? Not a particle.
Mr. RICE (interposing.) If the Senator will give way I will move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. CHURCH. I will give way for that motion but for nothing else.
Mr. RICE. I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. CRAVENS. That is accumulate motions. The Senator from White [Mr. Wolcott] made a motion to rise, connecting another motion with it.
The CHAIRMAN. The Senator from Jefferson [Mr. Cravens] will remember that there is no statement in the resolution to report progress.
Mr. CRAVENS. It amounts to the same thing.
The CHAIRMAN. I will decide the motion of the Senator from Parke [Mr. Rice] in order.
The motion was agreed to, and accordingly--
The Committees rose [Mr. Robinson of Madison resuming the Chair] reported progress and asked and obtained leave to sit again.
Mr. HUGHES. I desire to have a paper not in possession of the Committee called for and referred to that Committee by the Senate; and that is the letter of the Governor. We are in the dark about that, and Senators, who appear to have copies before them are commenting upon it.
Mr. CHURCH. I have no such copy before me.
Mr. HUGHES. I was referring to the Senator from Madison.
Mr. CHURCH, I do not think Senators are alluding to any such reply. We only say that we are defending the Lieutenant Governor wherein he is charged with producing only a part of the correspondence. He left it for the Governor's to produce his if he saw fit.
Mr. HUGHES. The Governor has placed his reply at the disposal of the Senate as I understand it. The Senator from Sullivan [Mr. Hanna] said he could not vote for the resolution because he did not know what the Governor reply was.
Mr. FISHER. The letter referred to--the first letter--was not placed in my hands.
Mr. HUGHES. Something of the contents of that letter has been stated. I move that the Senate request the Lieutenant Governor to present that paper to the Senate, so it may be referred to the committee and we will then have the whole subject before us.
Mr. CHURCH. I move to amend by requesting the Governor to present it.
page: 89[View Page 89]Mr. HUGHES. I accept that.
Mr. RICE. This question has been settled. \Ve asked the Governor for the correspondence. He reports back the whole matter and refers the whole thing to Lieutenant Governor Cum-back, and he comes, in response to a resolution and does all the Senate asks him to do--he reports the letter they alledge is corrupt. He has Governor Baker's letter in his posession and he refers that back to Governor Baker. He is not going to disclose private correspondence whatever Governor Baker does. We have a communication through the hands of the Senator from Wabash [Mr. Fisher] that it is not the wish of the Governor to give it, but he gives the substance of it.
Mr. HUGHES. I ask for the reading of the letter.
Mr. CHURCH. I am candidly of the impression that this Senate does not bring charges against Governor Baker. Whatever may be the answer it don't make any difference. I Know that is was the outburst of an honest heart, and that it was honest and right; but until we have charges against Governor Baker I don't care what his reply was, and until he is the subject of censure I do not think it necessary to pass a resolution commendatory of his course. I have no objection to the letter being produced, but to set here discussing questions and moving resolutions that have no more interest to the people of the State than ten thousand other things not thought of, I think is the utmost foolishness. I am opposed to the resolution because we can be in better business.
Mr. HUGHES stated the history of the action of the Senate in the matter, and concluded by saying, Let the letter come or let not gentlemen allude to it.
Mr. GRAY. Mr. President. I will just pay that I favor the amendment of the gentleman from Porter [Mr. Church.] There has been a good deal said in this body in regard to why the Lieutenant Governor did not produce all the papers when called upon. I think he had good and sufficient reasons for not producing them. That correspondence had the stamp of privacy upon it; and the question was who should break that stamp of privacy--and expose the correspondence to the public gaze? There has been an attempt made to compel the Lieutenant Governor to break the confidence of that private correspondence. It has been an attempt forced upon him from the start. He has had no objection to the full exposition to all the correspondence, but the question with the Lieutenant Governor was who shall break the privacy of that correspondence? Now I say inasmuch as the Governor has placed copies of the correspondence in the hands of the Lieutenant Governor, the Lieutenant Governor has done his duty as far as his part was concerned by giving it to the Senate. If the gentleman from Monroe wishes the other part, the amendment of the Senator from Porter is correct; the Governor himself should be called upon for it. The friends of the Lieutenant Governor are not afraid of that correspondence, or any part of it.
And then--
On motion by Mr. SHERROD at 12:40 o'clock the Senate took a recess till 2o'clock p.m
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Senate met at two o'clock p. m.--the Lieutenant Governor in the Chair.
Mr. STEIN offered a resolution directing the printing with the rules of the Senate a letter from Governor Baker, addressed to O. M. Wilson, touching the constitutional provisions of legislation in reference to bills and joint resolutions, etc.
Mr. CHURCH regarded it as unnecessary.
The resolution was adopted upon a division--affirmative 22, negative 11.
STATE PRINTING INVESTIGATION.
Mr. GREEN, by consent, offered the following:
WHEREAS, The Daily Evening Mirror, a newspaper published in the city of Indianapolis, has, at various times, asserted that the State Printer has charged more for work done than is contemplated by the law or laws authorizing the same, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That a committee of three be appointed to investigate the accounts of the State Printer, and that said committee have power to send for persons and papers.
Mr. CHURCH moved that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Printing. He did not believe in raising a special committee on every rumor started by the Evening Mirror.
Mr. SHERROD favored the appointment of the Committee, and sent up the Mirror article to be read. [The charges found in the evening Mirror, were read by the Secretary.] Mr. Sherrod knew one of the editors to be a printer, a soldier and a gentleman.
The resolution was adopted, and the President appointed Messrs. Green, Robinson of Madison, and Turner.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the Senator from Madison, [Mr. Robinson,] to the Chair that the Senate may proceed to the business before it.
The PRESIDENT pro tem, stated the question to be on the motion of Mr. Hughes, pending at the adjournment to call on the Governor for certain letters.
Mr. RICE said the Governor has declined to comply with the request proposed to be again made upon him. This is asking too much page: 90[View Page 90] for the sake of carrying out a programme of some kind.
Mr. HANNA did not want to do injustice to Governor Baker by voting against the second resolution of Mr. Hughes, and could not vote for it without knowing upon what grounds the Governor has acted in this correspondence. He wanted light upon this subject and had no other means of obtaining it than by the adoption of the motion now pending. He wanted to vote understandingly, and understood that the Governor transmitted the whole correspondence to Col. Cumback, with permission to lay it before this body.
Mr. GRAY. When the amendment was offered by the Senator from Porter [Mr. Church] I said I was in favor of it, simply for the reason that the Senate had called on the Governor for this correspondence. The Governor did not comply with the call of the Senate but placed the correspondence in the hands of the Lieutenant Governor. Many seemed to think the Lieutenant Governor should then place the correspondence in the hands of the Senate. The Lieutenant Governor did not feel like taking more responsibility in the matter than the Governor. He has now surrendered his part of the correspondence, and if the Senate want that part written by the Governor, I am perfectly willing the Senate shall have it. But what does the Senate want with it now? I ask--
Mr. HANNA (interrupting.) The friends of Governor Baker in this resolution are complimenting him, and I want to know whether we can do so or not.
Mr. GRAY. The Senator does not want it for any other purpose than to see what the Governor's opinion is of the Lieutenant Governor for having written that kind of a communication to him. Is the Senate particularly interested in that? I ask again, what does the Senate want with it? What matter is it to the Senate what Governor Baker's opinion is of the communication? Is it a question of such serious consideration that this Senate must take up its time day after day for the purpose of ascertaining what may be the opinion of Governor Baker in regard to a communication he may have received from the Lieutenant Governor? Will it exercise a great influence upon the views of Senators? I undertake to say that is the very purpose for which the communication is called for, and I am willing that the Senate should have the communication.
Mr. STEIN stated the question as it stands before the Senate--complimenting the action of the Governor in the matter, and had no doubt the Governor would respond to this call promptly, therefore he would vote for the mo-ion.
Mr. CHURCH insisted that the Senate had in its possession the substance of the letter, and could not see the necessity of having its particular wording.
Mr. HUGHES objected to resolving this matter into a question of etiquette between the Governor and Lieutenant Governor. The Senate has asked for all the letters--this is the order of the Senate, and we want the order executed. A copy of the letter we are talking about is in the pocket of the Lieutenant Governor--so we are officially informed. He wanted nothing more nor less than the information asked for. Whose fault is it that we have it not? It is the fault of the Lieutenant Governor. The declarations are here that both parties have removed the veil of secrecy. At every stage we have been met with profession of fairness; but we have also been met with quibbles to keep back the correspondence, There is no man connected with this mate that is hunting down the Lieutenant Governor. It is an unpleasant duty and any zeal he had shown should not be imputed to unjust and unfair personalities from the other side. The Senator from Porter [Mr. Church] is making speeches and is going to vote against his own motion.
Mr. GRAY sustained the Lieutenant Governor in refusing to surrender the private letters of the Governor.
Mr. CUMBACK. Mr. President: I rise not with a view to make a speech on the merits of this question, but simply to respond to some misrepresentations with reference to my course in this thing--not willfully made, I trust--to refer to what is plain history in this case and cognizant to every Senator. As soon as the Senator from Daviess introduced the resolution, I told the Senator from Porter to proclaim, that as far as any private character of the letter is concerned--the only letter contemplated in the resolution offered by the Senator from Monroe--I was willing that it should be laid before the Senate. He now insists that I kept one letter back. Sir, I responded to every point in the resolution. This one letter is the only one to which the resolution was directed. I told the Senator from Porter te say to the Senate that I remove the seals of secrecy, and was willing that the Governor of Indiana should publish that letter, The Governor sent in his message yesterday, not publishing his private correspondence, but casting the responsibility upon me. I at once availed myself of what I deemed to be my right, to publish my letter in one of the morning papers, and upon the assembling of the Senate, laid it before the body. Now, I am to be told, day after day, and hour after hour, that I am trying to cover something up. I published the letter written by myself, but as far as publishing letters from others are concerned, I never will break the seal of privacy of letters page: 91[View Page 91] directed to me, so help me God. [Applause in the lobbies.]
Mr. HANNA. If we are going to turn the Senate into a town meeting, let us go out into the State House yard.
Mr. SHERROD. I think this action is indecorous, and a disgrace to the Senate. I move, if repeated, that the Doorkeeper be directed to clear the galleries.
Mr. HUGHES. I hope the Chair will simply admonish citizens outside, who may be ignorant of their duty.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. Any repetition of applause will be suppressed, and such measures resorted to as will prevent it again.
The motion of Mr. Hughes for a request of the Governor was adopted.
On motion of Mr. RICE, the Senate resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole--Mr. Bellamy in the Chair--for the consideration of the Cumback correspondence--the question being on the adoption of Mr. Wolcott's substitute for Mr. Hughes' resolutions.
Mr. CHURCH being entitled to the floor, continued to oppose the resolution, because there was no necessity for such action. He could see nothing wrong in Lieutenant Governor Cumback's letter. With reference to personalities, he desired to say that when Mr. Hughes takes such a prominent part in this debate, he could not help referring to that gentleman. He esteemed that gentleman highly, but feared he had allowed his zeal for the United States Senatorship to lead him further than he would have been led otherwise. The prospects of office might move the zeal of most any man. He paid a neat compliment to Republican newspapers, and was ready to defend them when assailed on this floor, or elsewhere.
While Mr. Church was speaking
Mr. HUGHES interposing said: I want the author of the resolution to stand up and state where it comes from. It did not come from me.
Mr. TURNER. I made the statement that the resolution was handed to me by a Democrat. If I had known it had its paternity in the Republican party I might not have presented it.
Mr. HUGHES. I was attending to my business when the matter came before the Senate. I had heard that such a resolution was going to be introduced, in a talk upon the streets. The resolution came up and I heard it discussed that day. The Senate adjourned. I made some inquiry into the matter and satis-isfied myself that there was a serious matter in it, but not as the charge was made in one of the newspapers. When the subject came up before the Senate again, I offered an amendment, and that was sufficient evidence that I was not the author of the original resolution. The charge contained in my resolution is different from the charge contemplated in the first resolution, as the Senate must know. When the resolution was brought to my desk it seemed to be a reflection against the Lieutenant Governor, and I put it aside. I believe I handed it to my friend here [Mr. Sherrod] supposing that it came from that side of the House. I would not endorse that charge against the Lieutenant Governor, belonging to my own political family, and thought it should be presented by a Democrat. That is the last I knew of it till it came from the Senator from Daviess [Mr. Turner.] I then looked into it and thought there was good ground for a charge which I embraced in my amendment. I hope the original author will get up on this floor and avow his resolution.
Mr. SHERROD regarded the resolution as contradictory in its terms.
Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman: I desired that so much of this correspondence as would enable the Senate to judge of its character should be brought forth; and sufficient has been presented to put the whole subject before the people. The resolution of censure is an attempt on the part of the Senate to pass a measure of disapproval of a subject matter over which it has no jurisdiction. According to parliamentary law every body has jurisdiction to inquire into the conduct of its members during a certain period of time. If the Lieutenant Governor committed any disgraceful act during the recess of the session or in getting a seat in this body it is competent for the body to inquire into the act. What is called here an improper act, is an act which transpired before the election of members to this body. I am opposed to the resolutions as much as I would be to have a man on trial for an offence unknown to the laws of the land. The only course would be for the court in such a case to pass an order dismissing the case.
Mr. CRAVENS. Mr. Chairman: I regret that my position is such as to require me to say one word. I have refrained thus far today for two reasons: it is exceedingly distasteful to me; and, suffering from a bad headache, which prompts me to be as quiet as possible. But I have now to give a vote and that is not my private property. That vote I hold as a sacred trust on behalf of twenty-five thousand people of Indiana. I do not give my vote on my own behalf. I regret that correspondents a class of people I have a high respect for have placed me, perhaps unintentional on their part, in a false position. I have been spoken of in the papers of this State, and other papers, as an enemy of Mr. Cumback. I occupy an anomalous position. I say I am not and never have been an enemy of Mr. Cumback. I appeal to former relations, and I doubt not that page: 92[View Page 92] Col. Cumback himself would bear witness that there has been nothing that would warrant the supposition that he and I have been personally unfriendly. What is my position with reference to him? I wish to-day, sir, that I was a private citizen at home. I never sought this office. I never asked mortal man for political honor or political dignity. I am here at the request of a few citizens of Indiana to serve them as best I may. But what is my anomalous condition? I am opposed to the election of Lieutenant Governor Cumback to the Senate. Why? Is it because I entertain for him personal hostility? He could rise and exhonorate me from that. I made a record here two years ago, and taking my stand on the Constitution of the State, said in the language of that Constitution when it says neither the Governor nor the Lieutenant Governor shall be eligible to any office in the gift of the General Assembly during the term for which they are elected. When I held up my hand here and in the presence of Almighty God, of the people of Indiana and of this Senate, I swore to support that Constitution
Mr. RICE (interrupting.) Was not your vote recorded for Henry S. Lane?
Mr. CRAVENS. It was, and no man regrets the necessity for that more than your humble servant. But if I did wrong on that occasion it is no reason I should repeat that wrong; much less that a Senator should urge it as an argument that I should repeat the wrong. For this reason I oppose the election of Col. Cumback. Not because he is a popular man or a gifted orator, but because I think he is prohibited by the terms of the Constitution from being voted for for any public office. I hold that the Senate of the United States would not care for this prohibition; but I have taken an oath to obey the Constitution, and I hold that the people of Indiana have a perfect right to impose whatever qualifications they please, provided they are not inconsistent with the qualifications prescribed by the Constitution of the United States. Therefore I recorded my vote against the elevation of Oliver P. Morton to the United States Senate; therefore I am opposed to the election of Will. Cumback, and for that reason alone. I say I am opposed to him and I have said so on different occasions. Now what more can I or could I say with reference to that matter? I have done what an honorable man could do to seek out a man. I could vote for Col. Cumback if he were not prohibited by the Constitution. I could vote for the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] but not under this constitutional prohibition. I could vote for the Senator from While [Mr. Wolcott] if he were not a member of this body. The language of the Constitution is that no Senator or Representative shall be elegible to any office within the gift of the General Assembly during the period for which they ware elected. This is the sum and substance of my offense. This is the reason why I am arraigned and charge with being the enemy of Lieutenant Governor Cumback. I am not his political friend so far as his aspi-ations for success in that line are concerned. With this explanation I propose to come back to the question before the Committee.
What is that question, sir? The Senator from White has seen proper to offer an amendment to the resolution of the Senator from Monroe. The correspondence, except one letter, is all before this body. Whether it is suppressed for reasons prudential or otherwise I am not able to say. The question has bed asked, Why do we want that letter? The reason I want that letter is because other Senators on this floor have alluded to the contents of that letter, saying it was the opinion of Governor Baker. He has been appointed by the people their executive officer. Why do I want his opinion in the matter? The reputation of Conrad Baker, whether as an individual or Governor is above and beyond reproach. No man in the broad State of Indiana enjoys a reputation for morality, propriety, or purity of character and integrity of purpose of a higher character than does this same man, Conrad Baker, Governor of the State. If he has pronounced an opinion with reference to a public functionary, I shall take his opinion for an honest pronunciation upon the facts as they are, I shall regard the opinion of Conrad Baker as the voice of the people of Indiana. That is the reason why I want this letter. I want to be placed upon an equality with those men who have all the lights that can be had by this correspondence. We are to say whether we approve of this contract for a high office by two great functionaries of the State.
The CHAIRMAN (interposing.) Will the Senator give way and allow the Senator from Madison [Mr. Robinson] to take the Chair and let the Senate receive a message from the Governor?
Mr. Cravens gave way for a motion that the Committee rise; which was agreed to.
Whereupon--
A message from the Governor was announced and read as follows:
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
INDIANAPOLIS, January 14, 1869.
GENTLEMEN OF THE SENATE:
In response to a resolution of the Senate, a copy of which has just been delivered to me, I herewith respectfully transmit a copy of the letter alluded to in that resolution.
CONRAD BAKER.
INDIANAPOLIS, Jan. 18, 1868.
Hon. WILL. CUMBACK, Greensburgh, Indiana:
SIR: Your communication of the 6th inst. was received, and absence from the city prevented an immediate reply. The proposition is corrupt and in-
page: 93[View Page 93]decent, and I feel humiliated that any human being should measure me by so low a standard of common morality as to make it.
I have the honor to be Your obedient servant, CONRAD BAKER,
(Copy.)
On motion of Mr. CRAVENS, the message was referred to the Committee of the Whole.
The Senate then again resolving itself into a Committee of the Whole--Mr. Bellamy in the Chair--resumed the consideration of the Baker-Cumback correspondence question.
Mr. CRAVENS in continuation of his remarks stated the exact position of the question. If these two gentlemen did not occupy distinguised places in the State, then this inquiry would not be demanded at our hands. Mr. Cravens read Lieutenant Governor Cumback's letter to show that it contained a proposition covering a consideration to the Governor, for a compliance with the request for an appointment to the United States Senate. He put it to every Senator: do you approve of the fact that your Governor and Lieutenant Governor should engage in a traffic for this office? He did not ask a verdict for its criminality. No wonder that the Governor, with his refined sense of honor and pure morality used harsh language, and no wonder he would not insist on the publication of that answer. These officers ought to be high above the dirty pool of political trading. Now we are called upon to approve or disapprove of these acts. Do we approve of that sort of dickering for the high offices of the State? Our own political family should utter a rebuke in this case that will be heard in all time. If you approve the act on the part of one, you must disapprove the act on the part of the other.
Mr. CHURCH asked if Lieutenant Governor Cumback withdrew from the contest for governor on account of receiving the nomination for United States Senator?
Mr. HUGHES replied: I think it was on account of receiving that letter.
Mr. CRAVENS continued his argument at length, arguing that the proposition of the Lieutenant Governor was a corrupt one, and in answer to a question by Mr. Hughes, said that if Mr. Cumback had made an offer to pay the Governor five thousand dollars it would differ from the present one only in amount of consideration.
It has been said that this is a common thing. It has been endorsed by a paper calling itself the organ of the Republican party of Indiana. If that which assumes to be an organ utters that as the morality of the party, that organ shall not either speak for me or my constituents. Now then shall I say in behalf of my people that they approve of this sort of a contract? When the Lieutenant Governor fixed his eye upon the Senate, there was a glittering attraction that took him from his high sense of propriety. I am warranted in saying this from the fact that after some time--time enough for mature reflection he writes to the Governor and asks him to give up these letters. Why, if there was no wrong in it? Why, if there was a consciousness of right? Why, if it could not be construed into evil? Had there been no fears of this kind then there would have been no call for this letter. Here is a confession that he regarded the thing as, in the language of the resolution, at least improper. And I honor him for it because he had the perception to apprehend the fact, and the honesty to acknowledge it, and he desired the evidence to be removed. I have looked at this thing simply as it presents itself to my mind. We have the whole correspondence before us now; can we withhold our declaration of disapproval? I have got to say in this Senate that I either approve or disapprove it. If I vote to approve it I would be false to those who intrusted me with their honor in this body; therefore I shall vote against the resolution of the Senator from White [Mr. Wolcott] in order that I may come to a direct vote upon the proposition, and at the same time it is the mildest and the only mild course that can be pursued. We cannot escape from this question by the proposition of the Senator from White, or any other proposition. The record will stand either for or against me, either for or against those who vote different different from me. Now Mr. Chairman I leave this question with the Committee.
Mr. RICE. Mr. Chairman: The question of jurisdiction is the only, one now before the Committee. The resolution of the Senator from White, [Mr. Wolcott] states the position the friends of Mr. Cumback have occupied ever since the introduction of the first resolution. Whether feebly or forcibly, with sagacity or not, that is the position we have assumed all along--that the Senate had no jurisdiction of this matter.
A great deal has been said about the approval or disapproval of this proposition. All the interests of the State requiring action by this body have been delayed and pushed off by the Senate of Indiana deliberating upon the morality or immorality of an officer before he was elected. Just as well you might go back ten years and call into question the morality or immorality of any other act of this officer. Then the idea that the morality of the great Republican party should be called in question on this floor by the Democratic party and those who learned their principles under the old Democratic party is perfectly preposterous. A resolution of this kind, the only object of which is to settle a question of morality or immorality, ought never to have been in this body.
page: 94[View Page 94]Senators now have in their hands a correspondence, which was private, dragged from the first officers of the State. The Republican party bring before the people of the State their high functionaries and catechise them on the subject of morality. I say it is foreign to the question. Gentlemen may disguise it as they please there is a mover behind the scenes. How comes it that in this discussion gentlemen express their preference for United States Senator? It is none of our business to investigate the character of any man for that high office. We are trifling with the demands of the Constitution to legislate for the good of this people.
Senators say this matter ought never to have been here, but as it is here we must hold on to it and compliment one officer and disgrace another. I say Out upon such a proposition. I'll tell you the simple reason is Governor Cumback comes here with the recommendation of a majority of the people of the State of Indiana for the high office of Senator of the United States; and other gentlemen are applying for it. I shall not arraign the Senator from Monroe or the Senator from White, but I see faces here in the interest of other candidates, who are pleased to see this go on even if it disrupts the party that has been triumphant under the leadership of the gallant Lieutenant Governor. The Senator from Daviess, who introduced this resolution here denies the authorship of it. What Senator is the author of it? The Republican who handed that resolution to the Democrats never had the courage to present it. I want to know if the Republican party is to be disorganized, and if so I want to know the man who attempts it as soon as possible; and if there is a party organizing here to thwart the will of the people, in carrying the great Republican party into power, I want that to stand out.
The idea has been held out to-day that sixteen Republican Senators can be used in this way. I don't believe it. How did this thing get out? Who ever heard of this correspondence before? However it may be the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] finds out on investigation that there was something in it.
Mr. HUGHES (interposing.) I used the means in my power, as a matter of course. The proper place to go was to the Governor, but the Governor promptly refused to let me see the correspondence or to tell me anything about it. It appears that I got it somewhere; but I did'nt get it there. [Laughter.]
Mr. RICE. If these gentlemen had not brought it up in no shape it would have slept. I was pleased to see the Senator from Monroe get up in his place and assume the place of public prosecutor in this body. I will tell you, without intending to arraign the motives of any man in this body--I tell you there are parties behind the scenes who move this thing and brought it in this body. The object of this motion is to cut Governor Cumback's political throat; and the Senator from Jefferson [Mr. Cravens] would have been glad to see us do it.
Mr. CRAVENS (interposing.) Upon what remark I made does the Senator found that assertion?
Mr. RICE. I can find no other reason why gentlemen should bring in this question than to get his throat cut politically.
Mr. CRAVENS. When the Senator from Parke [Mr. Rice] rose the other day, and on behalf of the Lieutenant Governor relieved the Governor, from obligations of secrecy I said I hoped that the resolution would be passed without further debate. I say it is my honest conviction that the Lieutenant Governor is more injured by discussion than by the production of the correspondence.
Mr. RICE. That would be a question of fact. But it would not be much of a wonder when we have such opponents to contend with as the Senators from Monroe, [Mr. Hughes,] Jefferson, [Mr. Cravens,] and Tippecanoe, [Mr. Stein.]
Mr. HUGHES (interposing.) The gentleman asserts that the object was to cut the throat of the Lieutenant Governor as a candidate for Senator of the United States. I have made a sufficient dischaimer of that; but, concede for the sake of argument that that is the purpose, and the truth of the charge, which is not denied, is substantiated, ought not his throat to be cut?
Mr. RICE No sir, it ought not. I do not place the same construction upon it that the Senator from Monroe does. The Senator has enough experience to know that such propositions or similar ones are made almost every day to persons in high positions. It is no anomalous thing. I am here to justify and maintain the dignity of this Senate in regard to these resolutions. They have no business here and the Senate should dismiss them as soon as possible. When a men is to be held up in the council of his friends to public scorn and derision, I will attack and strike any man that stands in the way. Governor Baker's whole course up to the time of the setting of the Legislgture proves that his opinion of the Lieutenant Governor has changed. He goes into the Convention and takes the hand of this demoralized politician. If that letter embodies the view Governor Baker had all this time his conduct is scrutable. I cannot see how a man could allow himself to go upon the State ticket with another, knowing his corrupt and debased nature; but I say it ain't Governor Baker's opinion of him to-day. His conduct proves it. Every body knows with what gallantry and manhood, from early dawn till late at night, the Republican banner was carried page: 95[View Page 95] in triumph by the eloquent tongue and bold oratory of this gallant leader; and along by his side was Governor Baker. I say Governor Baker's conduct in the canvass puts a different construction upon that letter to what the wording of it does. I can find no other reason for the introduction of Governor Baker's letter, save that it was thought it would have line weight with the Senate. For one, I am here to decide that question for myself, and the opinion of the Governor don't weigh a feather with me. If the Governor's acts are to be accepted as honest, his conduct in the campaign in jointly canvassing the State, and accepting a position on the State ticket, with this "corrupt, dishonorable and indecent man," shows that his construction of the letter has been materially changed. I make no warfare on Governor Baker; but when he is to be complimented for an act I deem improper, and the Lieutenant Governor is to be slaughtered by the very men who went out to political battle with him, I will oppose it with all my might. If the letter just received is the opinion of Governor Baker now, after his conduct in the campaign with Lieutenant Governor Cumback, I cannot understand it. And if it is I think Governor Baker today than I ever did in my life. Now our interests are to be jeopardized. Combinations are to be formed by the opposition who are sitting by and looking upon this inglorious warfare.
Mr. SHERROD (interposing.) I would ask the Senator by what authority he makes that declaration?
Mr. RICE. It was stated upon this floor and not denied that if a certain gentleman could get fifteen Republican Senators to vote for him he would be a candidate to defeat Lieutenant Governor Cumback.
Mr. HUGHES (interposing.) I only spoke for myself. The statement was made that I could be elected by their votes, and it was the only favorable opportunity that had presented so that I could announce myself as a candidate only on one condition:--to beat the Lieutenant Governor. I say so now; and would be glad to see it carried out. [Laughter.]
Mr. HANNA (interposing.) For myself, as Democrat, I was opposed to entering into such a combination. I believe I spoke for the party but said I would be governed by what they did. There is no determination on depart of Democrats to vote for any Republican.
Mr. TURNER (interposing.) At the time the Senator from Porter [Mr. Church] made his remark I called him to order, and in Etheline breath asking from whence he got his authority for saying that Democrats on this floor or in this General Assembly were to join the Republicans in electing any Republican. But I announce it here that we are ready to join with Republicans in electing a Democrat.
Mr. CHURCH. I can tell the gentleman of more than one Democrat who has said so.
Mr. RICE (resuming.) All I have got to say is if the Democratic party don't take up a man and run him against the nominee of the Repulican party they are failing in their party tactics. I suppose the principle of that party has always been to take half a loaf if they could not get a whole one.
I was pleased with the remarks of the Senator from Sullivan [Mr. Hanna] when he started out, and until he got nearly through he was right. He argued that there was no charge here; that all that was done before Mr. Cumback was elected, &c., but then he came round and said that after it had got in here he would not turn it out. * * *We have no right to take the time of the Legislature and fritter it away upon trifling matters of this kind. I have said about all I wish to say and will yield the floor.
Mr. HADLEY. In my judgment this debate has proceeded as far as it should. I move the previous question.
The CHAIRMAN. That is out of order in a Committee of the Whole.
Mr. STEIN. Mr. Chairman: This discussion has taken a wide and extravagant range. With the permission of the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] I present the following as an amendment or substitute for the resolutions of the Senator.
RESOLVED, That the appointing power vested by the Constitution of the State in the Governor is a high and sacred trust to be exercised exclusively for the honor and welfare of the whole people of Indiana; and that any attempt to prevent the honest discharge of this trust is in derogation of their rights and merits their severest condemnation.
RESOLVED, That in the opinion of the Senate the letter of Will. Cumback, the present Lieutenant Governor of this State, dated January 6, 1868, and addressed to Governor Baker, proposing a personal consideration for an appointment to fill a contemplated vacancy in the United States Senatorship, embodies a corrupt and indecent attempt to tamper with the integrity and destroy the independence of the appointing power vested in the Governor.
RESOLVED further, That in the opinion of the Senate the action of Governor Baker in promptly repelling the dishonorable proposition contained in said letter of Will. Cumback commends itself to all good citizens as a just example of conduct which should ever characterize the respositories of the appointing power in our system of government.
Mr. HUGHES by unanimous consent, withdrew his resolutions and accepted the foregoing as a substitute.
Mr. STEIN. Mr. Chairman: The question before the Senate is upon the resolution presented by me and upon the motion of the Senator from White [Mr. Wolcott] or, rather, in the reverse order. The Senator from White desires to cover this whole matter with a resolution denying the jurisdiction of the Senate page: 96[View Page 96] to inquire into the matter. I am considerable surprised at |the change of opinion that has come over the Senator from White in undertaking to deny the jurisdiction of the Senate. It is our right to know certain facts so that we may intelligently exercise our functions of electors next Tuesday; and founded upon this has been the prosecution of this entire inquiry. The information is before us in the shape of letters. What action is necessary under the circumstances? Shall we table the information and say no more about it? Is that the judgement we desire to pronounce upon these papers? It becomes us now to declare our opinion upon the evidence, and it is legitimate to do this in the shape of resolutions. We are not seeking to make ourselves the author of an error, but with due respect to ourselves and our constituents should express our opinion upon the case before us. Says Jefferson in his manual: When a House commands it is by an order, but facts and opinions are expressed in resolutions. The Senator from White has involved himself in a contradictory position. Only a few days ago he was voting for the resolution; now he says we have no jurisdiction in the matter. It is for him, however, to reconcile his inconsistencies.
In my resolutions I present three propositions. The first is the announcement of a general principle. I desire, if the Senate please, that the Secretary re-read the first resolution. [It was read.] While in the discussion of grave and solemn questions like this the debates are apt to run in the grooves of personalities, where motives are charged and paraded before the body, I do not propose to indulge in the practice. Legislative assemblies are inclined to them but it does not require an experience of years to know that such a line is improper in debate. It is with facts we have to deal, and not with the motives of those who may be bringing the facts to light. Does it take the weight of a hair from the consequences to say that parties backing this are interested in this or that man for United States Senator? It is with these facts that we have to deal and not with the motives of parties prosecuting the inquiry into facts, nor with the private prospects of any aspirant for the position of United States Senator. I desire to observe something in the way of due regard for the proprieties of this place. I do not desire my feet to press the sandals of partizan debate. I am, as a Senator of Indiana, to speak in that character, with due respect to all Senators.
I started out with the proposition that the appointing power in this land is a high and sacred trust to be exercised for the benefit and welfare only of the people. If this is a fact the appointing power certainly should be pure. As I understand it, it is the clamor of the present session that purity should prevail in all the departments of the government. How can purity prevail when the appointing power is beset with considerations personal to himself? All human temptations effect all men, and all are subject to temptation, but woe to the man who places temptations before the servant of the people. Shall we endorse solicitations of this kind addressed to the appointing power? Do we class that with the little private terms made with those running for little offices? We are talking about solitations addressed to the appointing power itself. It becomes the duty of the Governor, as the highest officer over the entire commonwealth to select the most meritorious man for the position of United States Senator. Here we have the case of a citizen, aye, more than a citizen, for by the laws of 1867 we gave the succession of the Governor to this very man, appealing to the throne. We find a letter from him begging the Governor to concentrate his eyes upon him alone, and in consideration of doing so he would do what would be pleasant and agreeable and of advantage to the Governor. What is this but offering an inducement to the appointing power? Would it have been morally any worse if accompanied with money, as far as the amount of the consideration was involved? As far as the moral question itself goes it is all the same whether you present an inducement of one kind or another, provided the inducement is personal to the appointing power.
Under the peculiarities of the constitution the appointing power is not alone vested in the Governor. It begins with the people who appoint by ballot. Let us hear what the Constitution says:
If any person shall use any threats, menaces or corrupt means at or previous to any election, towards any elector to deter, or directly or indirectly offer a bribe or reward to influence an elector, or give a public treat, the person so offending shall be fined not exceeding five hundred dollars and be incapable of holding office for two years.
In 1824, Henry Clay, then speaker of the United States House of Representatives was page: 97[View Page 97] charged with nothing materially different from that of the Lieutenant Governor. An anonymous correspondent sent a letter to the Columbia Observer, published on the reserve, charging a corrupt coalition between Clay and Adams; Clay to vote for him for President, to be rewarded by an appointment as Secretary of State. On that occasion he thought the charge of sufficient consequence to come down from his Speaker's chair, and after denouncing the charge, begged that an investigation Committee be appointed to inquire into the matter. The House appointed the Committee and he saw that none but his political enemies were put upon the Committee and thus vindicated his honor. And yet that charge haunted that man to his death. You found no Senator from Porter or from Madison palliating the offense and seeking to make little of it. We of the majority stand as guardians and custodians of the honor of the Republican party, and unfortunately our championsh is within the four walls of this Senate Chamber as far as I can judge. Some members believe us to be soreheads, and disorganizes, whereas we have in charge the honor of the Republican party which will be stained unless we vindecate it. Although the correspondence had been made public in the morning prints and showed clearly and certainly that a proposition had been made and although the Governor advised us that he had repelled it, the moment the Senator from. Parke says that Mr. Cumback is the choice of the people the lobbies gave cheer after cheer. Corruption is swarming about us like a distemper. Notwithstanding the necessity of supporting the honor of the Republican party, whenever allusion is made to a supposed combination, and Senators said they would not]suffer this combination, cheers would break out, and this offense to good order had to be rebuked. Senators had better take heed because they are going back to their constituents and they may be found crying out "Save me Cassius or I sink." Let them remember that they stand in the presence of the Republican party--a party of righteousness,--a party whose right hand has been invincible in war. Let them beware. Let them see that the inquiry now before us does not go down with a mere sneer, but that the solemn judgment of the Senate is pronounced upon it, and that judgment thus pronounced be in accordance with the great overshadowing proposition that the appointing power of the many must be kept pure.
Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman: When I came into the Senate chamber I did not intend to speak, and the reason I now take the floor is on account of the supposed inconsistency that my friend thinks he finds me in. Because I voted for a resolution of inquiry, indefinite in its terms--a resolution which contained certain supposed facts;--because connected with which there are outside rumors--because I voted for that resolution, therefore the Senator says I am committed to this resolution of censure. Because I favored investigation, therefore I am committed to the finding of the Senate! I do not so understand it. Because I favored this resolution of inquiry, am I bound after investigation to find affirmatively to the resolution the gentleman introduced? I believe the Senate has the right to inquire into any question affecting the character of any member of this Senate--any charge of criminality is a proper subject of inquiry, but alter the investigation if it should turn out that there is nothing developed, then I deny that I am called upon to vote for a resolution of censure. I am not a supporter of Mr. Cumback. I am opposed to him, and expect to be all the way through, but it is a principle that whoever is charged with the defense is entitled to the benefits of all the forms of law, and especially of not having pronounced against him that which no law allows. There is no usage that renders the Lieutenant Governor obnoxious to that resolution.
Mr. HUGHES (interposing.) With the permission of the Senator from White I desire to call attention to the Constitution. On page 46 it reads as follows:
All State officers shall, for crime, incapacity, or negligence, be liable to be removed from office, either by impeachment, by the House of Representatives, to be tried by the Senate, or by a joint resolution of the General Assembly; two thirds of the members elected to each branch voting, in either case, therefor.
The act of Mr. Cumback is a crime, for we might make it the basis of a joint resolution for a removal from office of the Lieutenant Governor.
Mr. WOLCOTT. The provision of the Constitution which the Senator has read is a provision which I have had under consideration and one to which I have referred to before. He says a proposition made by the Lieutenant Governor--I will state the case strongly--to the Governor of this State for an appointment to an office that does not exist, is a crime in the eye of the law. I deny that it is a crime under the State law or under common law. I admit had there been a vacancy something to bargain for, then the proposition would have constituted a crime. It is the usage always to accord to known and desperate criminals (and I do not class the Lieutenant Governor with these) the benefits of all doubts. And especially the finding of a verdict or the pronouncing of a verdict unknown to the laws, should not be permitted. Inasmuch as there could be no bargain made for an office not vacant, there could be no crime in the case. There may have been a censurable thing in connection with this matter, but it is a pretty serious thing to place op- page: 98[View Page 98] probium of this sort upon any gentleman occupying the position of Lieutenant Governor, and I hold that all forms of proceedings should be used to protect him.
The CHAIRMAN decided that the question before the committee is on the adoption of the amendment of the Senator from Tippecanoe, [Mr. Stein] to the resolution of the Senator from White [Mr. Wolcott.]
Mr. RICE appealed from this decision of the Chair--Mr. Church joining in the appeal.
The point of order having been discussed at some length--
Mr. WOLCOTT said: in order to get the question in shape I ask consent to withdraw my resolution with the purpose to renew it. It seems to me more in order that the question should be determined here rather than go to the Senate for settlement.
Mr. FISHER. I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
This motion was agreed to. Accordingly--
Mr. Robinson, of Madison, resumed the chair, and the report of the Committee of the whole was agreed to.
So the Committee had leave to sit again.
Mr. JOHNSON of Spencer, made an ineffectual motion--yeas 7, nays 39--that the Senate adjourn.
On motion by Mr. HUGHES, the Senate again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole--Mr. Bellamy in the chair.
The question of order pending when the Committee rose a few minutes since was again discussed at length, the chair still adhering to his decision that the question should be first taken on the resolutions submitted by Mr. Stein.
From this decision Mr. RICE and Mr. CHURCH again appealed to the Senate.
Mr. HUGHES (in his seat.) The appeal is out of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The Senator from Madison [Mr. Robinson] will take the chair.
So the Committee rose and--
Mr. BELLAMY, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, reported that an appeal to the Senate had been taken from his decision in Committee.
The appeal having been read--
And the question being, shall the decision of the chairman of the Committee of the Whole stand as the judgment of the Senate?--
It was so ordered, by yeas 26, nays 20.
Mr. HUGHES. I move that the Senate resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to resume the consideration of the question pending at the time of the adjournment.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. BELLAMY resumed his place as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole and again stated the question to be on the adoption of the amendment of the Senator from Tippecanoe [Mr. Stein] to the resolution of the Senator from White [Mr. Wolcott.]
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison, demanded a division of the question.
The first resolution was read and agreed to.
The second resolution having been read--
Mr. CHURCH moved to strike out so much as assumes that there were corrupt propositions made.
Mr. STEIN accepted the modification.
Mr. CHURCH. The friends of Mr. Cumback deny that the letter embodies anything wrong--they deny that personal considerations were urged. I move the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
The motion was rejected upon a division--affirmative 19, negative 25.
Mr. GRAY. I move to strike out the words "corrupt and indecent."
Mr. HUGHES. These words are the exact words used by Governor Baker in his communication. In the original resolution I used milder language. Inasmuch as the language has been adopted by the mover of the resolution, though I am willing to dispose of this matter in the mildest form that will indicate the disposition of the Senate, I think we should stand by Governor Baker's language, and shall vote against the motion to strike out.
Mr. CHURCH. I do not know why it becomes necessary for this Senate to stand by Governor Baker any further than simply to refuse to comply with any suggestions made by him. I think his letter was written and couched in very bad language and very bad taste, and I think Governor Baker could signify non-assent in terms that very much better become a gentleman and a Governor. I do not think it was necessary that such a letter should be written.
Mr. HUGHES. I suggest a compromise by letting the friends of the Lieutenant Governor select from the two phrases,there must be an adjective there.
Mr. GRAY. Mr. Chairman: I object to the proposition of the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes,] from the fact that the words are almost inseparably connected, and I deny that it is necessary for this Senate to criticise the communication as corrupt and indecent, I take the position that the whole matter has no business in this Senate. This Senate has no more right to inquire into the private correspondence of the Lieutenant Governor and Governor, than it has to inquire into my correspondence. It is for the purpose of relieving the resolution of that objectionable feature that I made the motion. I do it in good faith and not for the purpose of continuing the issue before the Senate. I might speak at considerable length on this question, and this morning I thought I would do so, but I presume enough has been said already. I might say page: 99[View Page 99] a great deal about the purposes which I think are intended to be affected by the introduction of these resolutions. I think I could say, and say truly, and I don't know but that I ought to say--for the benefit of the great Republican party who hold a majority of twenty-four in this General Assembly, that I believe the integrity and unity of the Republican party depend upon the striking out of these two words. Why is it that some men, members of the Republican party were anxious to cast a stigma upon the Lieutenant Governor? Men have got up here as Senators and said that it was a sacred duty they were called upon to perform. I undertake to say in my place that the resolution originated with Senators of known ability, and for the sake of greater propriety it was carried over into the camp of the enemy and its edge sharpened and brought back into the Senate for the purpose of wounding the Lieutenant Governor, and in order to damage his prospects for the United States Senatorship. The resolutions were introduced by the Democrats and the first resolution asserted that these rumors were injuring the prospects of the Lieutenant Governor for the United States Senatorship. Is there a Republican Senator who believes there is any Democrat exercised about the prospects of Lieutenant Governor Cumback being elected to the United States Senate? This resolution has been brought in here not for the purpose of advancing the interests of the State of Indiana, and the best thing is to remove it of its objectionable bearings and throw it out of the Senate. Therefore I moved to amend by striking out the words "corrupt and indecent."
Mr. CHURCH. I think it would be courteous at this hour of the night to give a chance for this question to be passed upon by a full Committee. Several friends of the Lieutenant Governor are absent, and our opponents can now probably get enough Democrats to help them do as they please. Under the circumstances I think it better and more courteous to await a full Senate.
The amendment was rejected upon a division--affirmative 19, negative 22.
Mr. RICE. I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
The motion was agreed to upon a division affirmative 21, negative 20.
So the Committee rose (Mr. Robinson of Madison, resumed the Chair) reported progress, and asked and obtained leave to sit again.
Mr. CHURCH made an ineffectual motion to adjourn--yeas 22, nays 24.
Mr. HUGHES. I move that the Senate go go into Committee of the Whole and that the time for discussion be limited to twenty minutes.
Mr. GRAY. There is a Republican caucus of members of both Houses, called for tonight. I am inclined to think there is a disposition to continue this session to prevent the meeting of the Republican caucus, for I find the opposition vote solid against an adjournment. I move that we adjourn.
The PRESIDENT, pro tem. The motion is out of order as there has been no intervening business since a similar motion was passed upon.
Mr. SHERROD. I think if we will vote instead of talk we will get through with this matter pretty soon. We have had talk enough.
Mr. HUGHES. If it is their purpose to resort to parliamentary tactics we will let them out of here pretty quick. I withdraw my motion.
Mr. RICE. I think it is unfair to the Lieutenant Governor to--
The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Senator is out of order.
Mr. CUMBACK. I simply desire that when the votes are taken on these resolutions, we may have a full Senate. There are now some ten Senators absent. I ask, for that reason, and that only, that the consideration of this subject may be postponed until we shall all the Senators present, and then I desire have the vote.
Mr. CRAVENS. I am willing to have a call of the Senate. I know of but one Senator out of the city.
Mr. CUMBACK. I desire every Senator to be in his seat when this vote is taken.
Mr. CHURCH. We have no idea of making any more speeches. I have eat neither breakfast nor dinner to-day and I am anxious to get where I can eat something.
Mr. SHERROD. After hearing the remarks of the Lieutenant Governor I feel it to be an act of justice to him to move that the Senate adjourn.
The motion was agreed to.
So the Senate, at five minutes past 6 o'clock, p. m., adjourned till to-morrow at 2 o'clock, p. m., under the rules.
