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.
