THE BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
TENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
MONDAY, January 11, 1869.The Senate met at two o'clock p. m., pursuant to adjournment,--President pro tem., Cravens in the Chair.
The journal of Thursday was being read, when--
Mr. SHERROD made an ineffectual motion to dispense with the further reading thereof.
Thursday's journal having been read and corrected
The Secretary's journal of Friday's proceedings was read.
THE CURRENCY OF THE COUNTRY.
Mr. TURNER introduced a joint resolution [S. 1] requesting our Representatives, and instructing our Senators in Congress to use their influence to secure the passage of a law to increase the volume of currency to the same extent that it has been reduced by the retirement of greenbacks and compound interest notes.
Mr. BELLAMY moved that the resolution lie on the table and be referred to the Committee on Finance when that Committee is appointed.
Mr. TURNER desired to have a test vote on the resolution, because both parties in the late canvass announced themselves in favor of its provisions and now, of course, should be ready to vote in favor of this proposition.
Mr. JOHNSTON, of Montgomery, moved to amend the motion so that the resolution be referred to a select Committee of five.
The motion was agreed to.
Subsequently--
The PRESIDENT appointed Messrs. Turner, Wolcott, Johnston of Montgomery, Fisher and Scott said Committee.
OFFICERS FEES AND SALARIES.
Mr. CARSON introduced a Joint Resolution [S. 2] directing the Auditor of State to prepare a list of the several officers of this State who have filed a statement of their fees, perquisites and emoluments in his office in obedience to the provisions of an act entitled "An act to ascertain the amount of the fees and salaries of the Clerks of the Supreme, Circuit and Common Pleas Conrts of this State, of the Sheriff of the Supreme Court and of the various counties of this State, of County Auditors, Treasurers and Recorders, of Circuit and Prosecuting Attorneys, and to provide punishment for a violation of its provisions," approved June 3, 1861, with a succinct statement of the aggregate amount of fees reported by each of said officers for the years 1867 and 1868. He said he was not aware of any of these reports ever being made, and the resolution was intended to call out information which might serve as a guide to future action of the General Assembly in this matter.
The joint resolution was agreed to by yeas 41, nays 3.
PRINTING OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS.
Mr. BELLAMY offered a concurrent resolution, authorizing the printing of eight thousand copies of the Governor's message, one thousand five hundred in German, and ow thousand copies of Quartermaster General Stone's final report, and five hundred copies of the report and the supplemental report of the Morgan Raid Commission.
Mr. GREEN moved to amend so that the Governor's message sent to Senators [the Sen- page: 35[View Page 35] ate's share of six thousand five hundred copies] shall be enveloped and stamped.
Mr. BELLAMY thought we had voted ourselves a sufficient amount of sationery and stamps; and, if not, more can be voted. He was not in favor of increasing our pay in that way.
Mr. HUGHES inquired what would be the probable size of the Quartermaster General's report? He would not vote for that part of the resolution, unless he knew something about the extent of the work. He referred to the fact that the Adjutant General's report cost some one hundred thousand dollars, and made six or seven volumes.
Mr. BELLAMY replied that he moved this parr of the resolution on the strength of the recommendation contained in the Governor's message.
Mr. SCOTT called for a division of the question.
The Senate agreed to that part proposing the printing of the Governor's message.
On motion by Mr. HUGHES that part of the resolution referring to printing the Quartermaster's report was laid on the table till the Committee on printing be appointed, and then it is to take that reference.
Mr. GREEN moved to amend by providing that the seven thousand copies of the Governor's message furnished to members of the Legislature be wrapped and stamped.
Mr. CHURCH opposed the amendment, though he favored postage stamps when got in the regular way.
On motion by Mr. GIFFORD the amendment was laid on the table.
The part of the resolution proposing the printing of five hundred copies of the Morgan raid Commissioner's report took the same course as the proposition to print the Quartermaster General's report.
THE BAKE-RCUMBACK CORRESPONDENCE.
Mr. TURNER, in offering the following, said: touching the matters and things in it he knew nothing. He presented it at the request of other Senators, through he proposed at all times to take the responsibility of presenting any resolution he might see fit.
WHEREAS, It has been published in one of the newspapers of this city that the Hon. Will. Cumback, Lieutenant Governor elect, made certain corrupt and dishonorable propositions to his Excellency Governor Baker, which were promptly declined: and
WHEREAS, This charge is injuriously affecting the reputation and prospects of Mr. Cumback, now a prominent candidate for the U. S. Senate; and
WHEREAS, It is due to the Senate and the parties implicated that the facts of the case be known; therefore,
RESOLVED, That his Excellency the Governor, be requested to furnish the Senate the letter or paper containing such propositions, and all correspondence relating thereto, if any such have been made, if no such corrupt propositions have been made, that he authoritatively contradict the charge.
Mr. RICE. Mr. President: In anticipation of a resolution of this kind being introduced in this body and judging it would come from persons inimical to the Lieutenant Governor elect, I am authorized to say, in behalf of him, that Governor Baker is authorized to publish any and all the correspondence now in his possession respecting any such propositions as are named in the resolution. I do this injustice to him, and at his request. At the same time I am distinctly and decidedly opposed to the adoption of the resolution, because it drags before this Senate and the people of the State the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, upon a charge that any man may make through the columns of a newspaper, I shall have to have more evidence that any such correspondence ever occurred than that resolution discloses before I shall permit my vote to be cast in favor of dragging the reputation of both of these gentlemen before the people of the State in this way. At the same time, as I am a friend to both, if there is any thing affecting the public weal, Governor Baker is distinctly authorized, on the part of Lieutenant Governor Cumback, to publish any such correspondence if any exists.
Mr. TURNER. Mr. President: When I presented this resolution, I distinctly stated that I knew nothing of the matters and things therein contained, and that I presented it at the request of other parties. But I think it should pass, and I think now more so than before the gentleman made his remarks. He has furnished me a reason why it should be adopted. If the Lieutenant Governor were willing such correspondence should be published, perhaps Governor Baker might have some delicacy in doing so without being called upon. If I stood in Governor Baker's position I should have a delicacy in doing so unless the proper authorities called upon me to do so. As far as I am concerned I have no personal feeling in regard to this question, and no vindictiveness to indulge in with regard to either of these gentlemen, but I think it due to the people of the State that they should know whether or not such a correspondence has passed. If Governor Baker says it has not, we all know that he is an honorable gentleman, and that no such thing has happened. If he says it has, let it go to the world and let it be published in the papers.
Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. I am a friend of Governor Baker's, and can say if he has in his hands any corrupt correspondence it requires no act of this body to bring that matter before the people; and when we by resolution, call upon him to bring before this body a correspondence that may have passed between him and the Lieutenant Governor or any other person it is a reflection upon Governor Baker as well as on the other parties interested in it. Governor Baker is a page: 36[View Page 36] gentleman well known as an honorable man, has recently been elected Governor of this State, and I think he is not the man to withhold any communication that should come before us until that communication is brought out of his hands by an act of the Legislature of Indiana. On the other hand, sir, there is more in this resolution than the simple fact of getting before this body a letter from the Lieutenant Governor to the Governor. In reference to this communication I hold that while Governor Baker is an honorable man and would not be connected with a dishonorable practice; that the Lieutenant Governor is alike entitled to the same credit by the people of Indiana. If there are communications, and those of a political character, and they are desired for any political purpose to advance the interests of any party or class of men in this body--if they are desired for that purpose, it is a matter that should not come before this Senate. If on the other hand, Senators desire to connect Lieutenant Governor Cumback or Governor Baker with engaging in a matter disgraceful, or in its tendencies corrupt, Lieutenant Governor Cumback has authorized his friends to say that he relieves Gov. Baker of any responsibility or restraint whatever, and that he can place these letters in the hands of these gentlemen without seeking by any act of this body to extract them from the Governor. I hope this resolution will not pass.
Mr. TURNER, (interposing.) Suppose we get the consent of the Lieutenant Governor that Governor Baker may produce this correspondence, and Governor Baker sees cause to decline, he has the right to do so, unless called upon by the proper authorities. Is that not so?
Mr. ROBINSON. To some extent that may be true. But if such a thing exists--in a matter that the people have an interest in knowing--one of public interest or public necessity--Governor Baker would not withhold that correspondence. He is too honest a man to do it; he would not ask the Senate of Indiana to call upon him to expose it.
THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR TAKES HIS SEAT AS PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE.
Here a message from the House of Representatives was announced by the Doorkeeper, which invited the Senate to repair to the Hall of the House instanter, to witness the counting of the votes cast at the late October election for Governor and Lieutenant Governor for the State of Indiana.
A constitutional provision requiring it, the Senate proceeded at 10 minutes after 3 o'clock in a body to the performance of this duty.
When Senators returned to their chamber--The President, pro tempore, said: Gentlemen of the Senate, I have the honor to introduce to you the Hon. Will Cumback, Lieut. Governor, elect, the Constitutional presiding officer of the Senate.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. Senators: I believe I have no further remark to make, only to renew the hope I expressed that our relations may be pleasant and agreeable; that the business of the Senate may progress with rapidity, and that all we may do may be well done. The Senate will now come to order.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR then called the Senator from Porter [Mr. Church to the chair, as the resolution pending was one of personal nature to himself.
THE BAKER-CUMBACK CORRESPONDENCE.
Mr. GIFFORD called for the reading the resolution, and it having been read--
Mr. BELLAMY. Mr. President: I see that this resolution makes charges of a character that injure the prospects of the Lieutenant Governor for an election to the Senate the United States; for instance, it says, that this report in the newspapers is injuring his prospects. What have we to do, as a Senate with his prospects? Why should we have resolution introduced here referring to his prospects? What have we to do with the prospects of any man? It is not a subject proper for legislation, or fit for us to spend our time and attention upon, If there are charges of criminality against the Lieutenant Governor--if there are such charges as this let us impeach the Lieutenant Governor if he has been guilty of any dishonorable thing. I can conceive of but one state of circumstances that will justify any such resolution as this.
Mr. TURNER, (interposing.) If the Senator will permit, I would ask him this question: How can we impeach the now presid-inn officer of the Senate until we have evidence furnished upon which to impeach him. The object of this resolution, if I understand it, is to draw forth the evidence. No man charging this party with being criminal. I dare not do it. I would not do it for the sake of my own reputation until I knew what I proofs were; and this resolution only a upon Governor Baker to furnish us with the facts.
Mr. BELLAMY. If I understand the a let him prefer articles of impeachment, ti send for persons and papers, bringing in the evidence, and get it in the right shape. I say the only state of circumstances that can justify such a resolution is some criminal proceeding. This correspondence purports to be private correspondence between the Governor and Lieutenant Governor elect. That is much a private correspondence as one between myself and any other Senator here. We have no more right to call for a private correspondence between them than for my correspondence. If it is anything that their official du- page: 37[View Page 37] ties have to do with, then we can call upon them for such correspondence, otherwise we have no right to call upon them for it. As a friend of Governor Baker, while I am a friend of Colonel Cumback, I will not on this floor vote to drag out this private correspondence that we have no right or interest in seeing. Again, if we had anything to do with this correspondence at all, it is something that should come before our caucus, and if we should introduce a resolution asking as a favor that this correspondence should be laid before us, I have no doubt that they would send up the correspondence without any hesitation.
Mr. TURNER (interrupting) I will ask the gentleman whether he is contending upon this floor that a political caucus should act upon this case that the whole people are interested in? This is a matter for the people, as I understand, and not for those interested in the action of a political party.
Mr. BELLAMY. I am not aware or never was before, that the people had any special interest in Governor Baker and Colonel Cumback's private correspondence. I thought every man had a right to manage his own correspondence in a manner he saw proper unless it came in conflict with the laws of the State, and then we have courts of justice that will bring offenders before them. I believe the Senator from Daviess [Mr. Turner] said that Governor Baker dare not give the people this correspondence--
Mr. TURNER (interrupting) The gentleman is mistaken. I said I dare not make the charge that the matters and things in this declaration were not true until I had proof that they were. I said Governor Baker might have a delicacy about producing this correspondence without being called up on in this way. There are precedents for this course in the Hall of the House of Representatives of Congress, in the Senate of the United States, and in the Representative Halls and Senates of every Legislature in this Union, sir.
Mr. BELLAMY. I do not understand that there are any such precedents in any State of this Union or in Congress. Legislative bodies call upon public officers for their official correspondence, but do gentlemen pretend that this is an official correspondence? Does it pertain to official duties? Is there any charge of malfeasence in office, or in corruption in office or any thing of the kind? It is not even charged that this is a public correspondence. As I understand it the gentleman thinks that Governor Baker will be compelled to produce his private correspondence. You have a right to call for my correspondence in the same manner, and show it up to the Senate in like manner.
I will not detain the Senate in the further discussion of this question. I hope the Senate will not do Governor Baker and Lieutenant Governor Cumback the injustice to pass this impertinent resolution.
Mr. CHURCH. [Mr. Rice in the Chair.] Mr. President: In addition to what has been said to gentlmen opposing this resolution, I disire to say a few words. I do not know from whence this resolution comes. The Senator from Daviess, [Mr. Turner,] says, he is not aware of the truth of the contents of it, but it has been presented to him by certain Senators that he might be the instrument of presenting it to the Senate. By this I infer that there is a sort of an arrangement--that there is a clique--
Mr. TURNER (interrupting.) The Senator will allow me to correct him. I made no statment touching any arrangement. I enter into no arrangement on this floor with any one sir, that differs with me in politics. Let that be understood now and forever. I said this, sir: that I was requested to present the resolution by Senators; that I had no knowledge of the matters and things and charges therein contained, but that I was always prepared, and I am, sir, now to say, that I will forever, as long as I am a representative of the people in this Senate, or any other assembly--I am always prepared to take the responsibility of calling for such papers as will justify any public servant of the people.
Mr. CHURCH (resuming.) Mr. President: I see nothing that will change the course of my remarks in the explanation made by the Senator. I was about to say that I saw in his statement that there are some very hot chestnuts in there somewhere, and that the Senator from Daviess [Mr. Turner,] is employed to get them out of the fire.
[Mr. Turner interposed but Mr. Church declined to yield the floor.]
I do not know who these Senators are, but presume it is a party of Democrats', because I can not think there is any other class of persons who would make this sort of an attack. I wish the real parties in interest had presented this, because I would then know better how to speak of them.
Now, sir, what do I find? That during the last canvass Governor Baker and Lieutenant Governor Cumback were candidates of the Republican party for office. We all know that the contest was extremely close in this State. We know it was understood by Republicans and Democrats that every honorable effort should be put forth to secure that election, Now a gentleman comes up here--and I do not know by what kind of begging--and requests that the efforts put forth by the leaders of the Republican party be spread before the Senate. I ask if any thing more rediculous could come before the Senate? That resolution covers any plans that might have been page: 38[View Page 38] made for canvassing. The Senator says that he brings forth this resolution in order to smell out, find out or ascertain the truth of some matters he has seen alluded to in some of the public journals of this city. Is this Senate to be engaged as a sort of smilling committee, to go around and see what truth there may be in what the opposite party may say of our candidates? Every time we notice an attack upon any member of this body are we to appoint a Committee to investigate the matter? I tell you these Editors of papers must get a vast amount of religion before I believe what they say about their opponents is worthy of notice. This gentleman who was employed to present it--
Mr. TURNER (interrupting.) I rise to a question of privilege. I do not propose that it shall be charged upon this Senate floor that I am employed to do anything. I object to that word, sir. I did it because it was my right and my duty to the people of this great State of Indiana to do it. The gentleman only reflects upon himself and his own sense of right, and other words I might use, by making use of the expression "employed."
Mr. CHURCH. I do not desire to play upon words. I have no book of synonyms by which I can use a word that is less harsh. He was requested, then, [Laughter.] I will withdraw the word "employed" and say requested. He did not say whether they had the ability to present their own papers, or whether they had the courage to: of that I shall not enquire. But he was requested to present that paper. And now he did it to investigate what? Certain charges made a long time ago in opposition newspapers against some republican candidates for office. Now what are the facts? These charges are all with reference to what transpired before Governor Cumback was nominated for office. What has happened since he was nominated for the office of Lieutenant Governor? All of this time Governor Baker has made this race with him with that letter in his pocket. Governor Baker has revealed it somewhere, or these gentlemen never would have heard it; and they could get it, on going to him as for other information. Now shall we who have passed through this struggle and been successful, shall we assail the man who as the reports just read in your hearing show was five hundred votes ahead of any other on the ticket? Shall we spend the time of the Senate in a matter of this kind? I do not believe we will. As I sit down I will offer an. amendment to the resolution by striking out all that part which relates to calling on the Governor for information, and inserting a clause authorizing the appointment of a Committee to confer with the Indianapolis Sentinel and Mirror, and demand their authority for the charges preferred in their respective papers against Mr. Cumback.
Mr. TURNER. Mr. President: If the Senator who has just taken his seat would have allowed me to put my question it would have settled it as far as I am concerned. I have been drawn into this debate farther than I desire. I have no charges to make against any honorable gentleman here or in the State of Indiana. When I presented that resolution I explained myself, that I had been requested to offer it; that I was ignorant of the charges, but if they were true it was due to the public that the public should know it. I false it is due to the character of the honorable gentlemen which is impugned that the public should also know it and thereby aquit him.
The question I proposed to put to the Senator from Porter [Mr. Church] was this. He spoke of Democrats and supposed that this came entirely from the Democratic side of the House. I only want to ask him if he is afraid that a lot of Democrats would kick up a muss within the limits of the Republican party? If he is afraid there must be something behind the screens here and something that should be known not only to Democrats, but to the Republicans of the State of Indiana. It has been stated that the President of the Sanate--the Lieutenant Governor elect, when this resolution was offered--was perfectly willing that Governor Baker should give to the world all the correspondence that has ever passed between them. If so then why oppose this resolution? Why do his friends come here and say that they are willing that it shall go to the world, but they are opposed to this Senate) in the name of the people, asking that it shall be published? My idea is that the Senate asks it because Governor Baker is too delicate and refined a gentleman to publish any correspondence with him unless called upon in a public way and authorized to do so.
But the Senator claims that this is a matter to be settled entirely within the limits of the Republican party. They may settle it just as they please, but the whole people of the State want to know how much there is of it. They don't want so much of it suppressed as might reflect upon Governor Baker or the Lieutenant Governor. And, sir, if there is nothing of it why oppose letting the world know anything about it; and if there is anything of it all of us have a right to know a little bit of it. We know nothing of it now. I know nothing of it, and I don't believe it. Some of the Republican party say it is true and some of the Democratic party say it is true, Some of the Republican papers say it is true, and some of the Democratic papers say it is true. I don't believe it and I want my disbelief confirmed.
page: 39[View Page 39]Mr. ROBINSON of Madison. I rise to a question of order: whether the Senate has any jurisdiction over private correspondence?
Mr. JOHNSON of Spencer. I move that the resolution and amendment be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. HOOPER. Before this vote shall be taken I desire to say one word, simply by way of explanation of my vote, and not for the purpose of influencing other Senators upon this question. While I would not myself have introduced this resolution before the Senate, and while I believe there are many other Senators who are in the same position precisely, yet we now find this question dragged before the Senate, and find ourselves in a position in which I we must vote upon it--either for or against it. The question is not now with us whether it was prudent to bring this question before the Senate or not. The simple question is: What disposition shall be made of it? A Senator of this body in the exercise of his legitimate right has seen fit to introduce this proposition before the Senate. That he had this right there is no question; and that it was due the Senator to hear his propostion and carefully consider and dispose of it is also clear. In my judgment we must come to a direct issue and must dispose of it. A distinguished citizen of our State, now Lieutenant Governor, is a candidate, as is well known, for the high office of Senator of the United States. This resolution brings before the Senate the fact that there has been a correspondence, out of which there has an inference grown that there has been something like bargain and sale; something corrupt--so the resolution expresses it. Now it will not do for us, under the peculiar circumstances to attempt to cover this matter up. In my judgment as Republicans we can not afford to do it. The friends of these gentlemen say they have no objection; then if that be true it seems to me it is conceding the whole ground. Let the correspondence come before the Senate, and if there is anything wrong no injury will be done, and I the public will be satisfied. This matter is before the public; we must not forget that; and if we attempt to cover it up the inference will be against us. It is always a fact, that let the motive be what it will, when we attempt to dispose of a matter in this way the public will made its own interpretation, and it will be against the correctness of this correspondence. Taking this view, and feeling that we have a right to call for this correspondence, and that it should come up, I will vote for this resolution. It is said that in voting for this resolution we drag this matter before us and before the people. I repeat that it is already before us, and the simple, practical question is how to dispose of it. It is not only before us, but before the people of the State. The contents of this resolution will be known in a few hours in all parts of the State. How then does the question stand? One of the most important trusts committed to our hands by the people of the State, is the election of a United States Senator. With intense interest and the greatest anxiety, they turn their eyes toward the Capital, watching our movements. If there is one thing they demand at our hands more emphatically than another, it is that we shall elect a man to that high office, of strict integrity, as well as honest party fidelity. Now, upon the eve of election, we have thrust before us this resolution, containing serious charges against the integrity of one of the prominent candidates before us for that high office-- the Lieutenant Governor elect. Not only this, but the resolution points us to the place where it alleges the proof of the truths of these charges exist, viz: In certain correspondence between the Lieutenant Governor and the Chief Executive of the State. Can we safely ignore this question,by refusing to call for the proof? In my judgment we cannot. Our right to call for this correspondence I do not consider an open question, under the circumstances, and if we fail to do so, the opinions and belief will go out, whether true or not, that there is something wrong.
Mr. SCOTT. I desire to hear the paper read, I desire to see whether the charge is in the resolution or in the article.
The newspaper not being at hand, before further debate--
Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to adjourn.
Mr. STEIN moved an amendment that the Senate adjourn until ten o'clock a. m.
The PRESIDENT pro tem decided the amendment out of order.
Mr. STEN appealed from the decision of the chair; but subsequently withdrew his appeal and his amendment.
Mr. TURNER, Mr. JOHNSTON of Montgomery, and several other Senators demanded the yeas and nays on the motion to adjourn.
The PRESIDENT pro tem, decided that one-fifth of the Senate (as required by the constitution) were not seconding the demand, and having put the question declared the Senate adjourned, under the rule, till two o'clock to-morrow afternoon.
