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.
