IN SENATE.
TUESDAY, April 27, 1869.AFTERNOON SESSION.
[SEE PAGE 114-FIRST COLUMN.]
Mr. RICE (Mr. Gray in the Chair) called up the special order for this hour-two oclock-being his resolution offered last Friday to expunge from the journal the resolutions and proceedings of the Senate in relation to the correspondence of Lieutenant Governor Cumback with Governor Baker.
Mr. RICE. I have no desire to discuss this resolution. I am prepared to vote upon it and I suppose every other Senator is. I therefore move the previous question although I do not wish to cut off any remarks any Senator may wish to make. And I make this motion with the expectation that any Senator may embrace the opportunity of explaining his vote when the roll is called.
Mr. FISHER. I would like the Senator to explain his reason for demanding the previous question if he does not wish to cut off debate.
Mr. RICE. I do not wish to cut off any Senator from an opportunity to explain his vote. I repeat my demand for the previous question.
The demand was seconded by the Senate-20 to 7-and under its operations the resolution was passed, by yeas thirty-five, nays eight, as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Andrews, Bellamy, Carson, Case, Caven, Church, Denbo, Eliot, Gifford, Gray, Hadley, Hamilton, Hanna, Henderson, Howk, Huey, Huffman, Humphreys, Jaquess, Johnson of Spencer, Johnson of Montgomery, Laselle, Lee, Montgomery, Morgan, Rice, Robinson of Madison, Robinson of Decatur, Scott, Sherrod, Smith, Taggart, Turner, Wolcott and Wood-35.
NAYS-Messrs. Beardsley, Cravens, Fisher, Fosdick, Hess, Hooper, Kinley and Reynolds-8.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. CRAVENS, in explanation of his vote said: I believe the Senator from Parke, [Mr. page: 310[View Page 310] Rice,] gave all parties who desired to make any statement the opportunity, when their names were called, to do so. I do not know but what it is better for this matter to go without discussion. I have only to say that I suppose no Senator was taken by surprise by the introduction of some such resolution as this. It certainly has been as clearly foreshadowed as the setting of the sun indicates the state of the weather on the following day: or the administration of an emetic the coming of a vomit.
But there is one thing in which I think the friends of this matter have overleaped themselves. The proposition is to expunge from the records a vote of censure. Now if these Senators desire really to get clear of this matter I do not think they have taken the right course, for the sinple reason that we have no record from which the resolutions can be expunged. The two Houses composing the Congress of the United States each preserves a written record, and upon occasion they can go to the files and get hold of the records and expunge therefrom, as was in the case of the resolution concerning General Jackson. This body has no preserved record. The journal of the last regular session is now entirely beyond the control of this body. It has got to be a part of the legislative history of the State of Indiana. We have no more control of this journal than we have of the journal of twenty or thirty years ago; and how any thing can be effected by this resolution I cannot see. If it is a resolution to relieve the Lieutenant Governor from a vote of censure, it seems to me this mode will not reach it at all. I shall therefore content myself with voting "no" upon this proposition, for I consider it a very absurd one.
Mr. FISHER when his name was called said: It is very well known to the Senate that I voted in favor of the resolutions which are sought by this resolution to be expunged from the Senate journal. Whatever may have been the fact,whether it was right to pass the original resolutions or not,in voting for them I acted conscientiously as to what I believed to be right. By voting for this resolution I would say by my act in just as plain terms as by anything I could express, that I voted for the original resolutions for the purpose of injuring the reputation of Col. Cumback and damaging his prospects for United States Senator; and having accomplished that object I am willing to take back what I said before. This would be the language of my vote, clear and distinct. I deny that imputation. I had no such object-no such purpose, and however damaging these resolutions may have been considered by Col. Cumback as to his own character I would rather have the stigma already placed upon his character placed upon mine than the stigma of the infamous act of stabbing a man for the purpose of -
Mr. RICE (interrupting.) The Senator certainly has brought up an allusion that does not apply. No one could make that charge against the Senator because his action shows to the contrary, for he voted to bestow the office United States Senator on Col. Cumback after the resolutions referred to were passed.
Mr. FISHER. It is well known that I voted for Col. Cumback in obedience to the behests of party. He was not my choice; and the matter stands as though I voted against him. Those resolutions are just as they were then. No new light has dawned upon me; - not a particle;and now to vote for expunging them after having voted for them in good faith would be an acknowledgement of ah attempt to injure a brother Republican for the purpose of defeating his political asperations. If it will not be taking up too much of the time of the Senate I would like to refer to some transactions at the time.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair will say that by unanimous consent of the Senate the Senator can proceed.
SEVERAL SENATORS-"Consent, consent"Mr. FISHER. I will say that when the resolution was first introduced by the Senator from Daviess [Mr. Turner] calling for this correspondence I supposed it to be a Democratic trap. I had heard of this correspondence and had seen newspaper accounts of it but supposed the Senator from Daviess introduced that resolution with the confident expectation that the Republicans would vote it down, and that was his hope and desire:-this was my supposition at that time;-and that then the charge could be reiterated by every Democratic press in the State and from every stump with the added charge that a corrupt Senate had covered up this corruption. And I thought then, as now, that the withholding, the covering up or the refusal to call for that correspondence would be more damaging to the Republican party and Col. Cumback himself than the bringing of it to light and showing what it was. I did not anticipate that that correspondence was of so damaging a character as to affect either him or the party;-but I did suppose a refusal to bring it to light would damage both. When that correspondence came on:-but preceding that I will say I was astonished that every particular and intimate friend of Col. Cumback opposed bringing forth that correspondence; and when it came I found it different from what I anticipated. I supposed the desire of Col. Cumback for a seat in the United States Senate had induced him on the spur of the moment in a thoughtless manner to address a letter, perhaps improper in itself, but that it could be easily and satisfactorily explained, page: 311[View Page 311] and the thing pass away. But it was of a little different nature, for it asked the Governor that in the event of not comploying with the propostion that he should return the ltter. This showed deliberation, this showed thought, this showed consciousness on this part that the letter was improper; because if it had been an entirely proper letter he would not have asked its return. And then in the concluding sentance he says: I hope the unity of the Republican party may be preserved; which interpreted means that unless this proposition is accepted the unity of the Republican party cannot be preserved. This showed a kind of deliberation which placed him in an awkward position. No man ever heard me express the opinion that there was a corrupt purpose on the part of Col. Cumback. The question was upon the correspondence itself, and the only question was: Did those resolutions properly characterize that correspondence? That was the question; and after being amended as they were upon my own motion I thought they did properly characterize that correspondence; and thus I voted. I have seen no occasion to change my opinion. I believe they did characterize that correspondence as it should be. I believe no milder language could characterize that correspondence as it should be, and thus believing I can see no reason why I should vote for this expunging resolution. I had nothing to care about reputation; the question was upon the paper itself and upon that paper I voted.
I suppose this resolution is to be psssed. I understand it to be a foregone conclusion. I am raising no opposition to it. I am only stating reasons proper for myself. I suppose our Democratic friends who voted with us for those resolutions are prepared to vote for this resolution. Were I a Democrat with the view I have of their political ethics I should probably vote for expunging the resolutions. Their object is the upbuilding of their own party. Col. Cumback is a prominent leader of the Republican party and they think he is sufficiently laid upon the shelf by the action of last session. Now they are willing to take it back in the hope that indirectly they will lay Governor Baker upon the shelf and thus two prominent Republicans will be out of the way in their estimation. I give them notice that they are mistaken in the effect of their action, either Colonel Cumback nor Governor Baker are on the shelf, nor will they be by any action 'hey can take. With this explanation I vote "no" upon this resolution.
Mr. HAMILTON, when his name was lied said : It is very well known to Senators how have stood upon this question. All I have got to say in explanation now is that I know I should not be representing the wishes of my constituents, both Democratic and Republican, if I did not vote in favor of this resolution. Consequently I think that is explanation enough without reference to my former course; and I vote "aye."
Mr. HANNA, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: I did not intend to say any thing, if it had not been for the declaration of the Senator from Wabash, [Mr. Fisher.] professing to point out motives of members of the Democratic party who are here, with reference to their action. Now it may be sufficient for me to say for myself, and I speak only for myself, that when I voted upon this question before, (and I voted for the resolutions,) the Senate will recollect there were several of them. One was a resolution of censure towards the Lieutenant Governor coupled with a resolution white washing the Governor in reference to his action. Now there was more or less mixed up in the action of every Senator, an estimate of the personal qualities of these men. I must say for myself, that my opinion of the personal qualities of these men has changed since I have been here in an official capacity, and that will be sufficient for me. The gentleman says we voted for the purpose of, in some manner advancing or forwarding the interests of the Democratic party. Well, that may be so, but I do not see how we can benefit the Democratic party only as we bring disruption upon the Republican party. We have nothing to do with the personal fight between these men. It is true the Republicans fell out among themselves and showed up their own action, and such action as the people did not approve. I believe I voted then as my views indicated, but my official intercourse with these men has changed my opinion, and that is sufficient for me to vote to expunge these resolutions.
Mr. HOOPER, when his name was called, said: I desire to say in connection with my vote, that in my view of this question it stands-to-day precisely as it stood when I voted on the original resolutions;-that so far as the question involved in the resolution is concerned, there has been no change. I voted for these resolutions. I did so from principle and from no ether motive. While they stand precisely as they stood then, I surely cannot change my vote. Several allusions have been made here in explanation of votes. One Senator said that his constituents, both Democrats and Republicans would sustain him in his vote for this resolution, and that of itself would be sufficient. I might say in the same direction that as far as I am concerned my constituents, both Republicans and Democrats, will sustain me in the vote I shall give on this question, which will be right the reverse of the other. But that does not control my action. It is because the situation, as far as these resolutions are concerned, is unchanged. The correspon page: 312[View Page 312]dence and the facts developed stand precisely where they did; and viewing it in that light, I of course, vote in the same direction I did then.
I trust the Senate will pardon me for alluding to it, but I must allude in passing to the position of some of the Senators over the way who are reversing their votes. It does seem to me that ihe record was clearly made up upon this question. It will not be forgotten that all the facts in the case and the correspondence was before us, and the question was freely discussed pro and con. The storm blew over, as it were, and this question was settled. We then came to act upon another important question; and that was the election of a United States Senator. Then almost to a man they voted for a Republican for the high office of United States Senator, and voted for him simply because he had been prominent and the main instigator in the management of this case, So the official organ of the party came out afterward and placed it upon that ground. But that matters,not as far as my duty is concerned. While I have no malice toward any one, and think that it does not dispose of enemies either one way or the other, this question was brought before us as an abstract question, and it was our duty to pass upon it; and there I stand to-day. I have no personal matter against any one-not by any means. I vote "no."
Mr. HUMPHREYS, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: I am a man of few words. I say but little, but think considerable,-sometimes more. I confess when this matter came before us last session it did not affect my conscience very seriously. I looked upon it merely as a political question the only question 1 asked was, can we make anything out of it? Whether we continue to make anything out of it is a matter of our own decision. At all events we have made all we can; and I look upon it now as I did then, as a question of policy; and if we can make nothing we take the chances. I therefore vote "aye."
Mr. JOHNSTON, of Montgomery, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: When the original resolutions were up I voted for them, and I am very willing to admit I done it with some reluctance. There was one part I did not like to vote for, and I am very glad of an opportunity to vote to rescind that resolution. There was certain things said to be corrupt and indecent--
Mr. FISHER (in his seat.) Not in the resolution.
Mr. JOHNSTON, of Montgomery. Well, in the Senate chamber. My opinion was then and is now, and I expect it will continue to be, that the man who instigated the thing was the most corrupt and indecent of the two, and hence I vote now to rescind the resolution. I vote "aye."
Mr. KINLEY, when his name was in explanation of his vote, said: I believe I never since I have been a member of th^ * ate, cast a merely personal vote. I did not come into the Senate with any prejudice against the Lieutenant-Governor or the Governor. I voted for the original resolutions and in casting my vote now I shall be governed by the same principle I was then. It was simply an abstract proposition. A certain letter written by the Lieutenant-Governor to Governor Baker making certain propositions. These propositions were or they were not corrupt. I believed they were corrupt and the fore voted for the resolutions; and having th same opinion now I am compelled to take the same course now I did then. I shall vote " no."
Mr. LEE, when his name was called, said: I see it is the fashion here for men to make explanations of their votes, or give explanations for the changing of their votes as I am concerned about the changing of vote it is a very little sacrifice. I doubled the propriety of that vote when I gave it; and like the Senator from Green, [Mr. Humphreys] I don't see it in any light so that we could make much out of it. I had much rather at the time of my vote elected the Lieutenant Governor Senator than D. D. Pratt; and if my vote would have done it I would give it to Cumback in preference to Pratt. I did not feel, under the circumstances, like voting fop either of them, but laying aside prejudice I would vote for Cumback instead of Pratt. I have no sacrifice to make whatever, sir, in voting "aye," because I doubted the propriety of the vote when I gave it.
Mr. MORGAN, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: At the time I was called upon to vote upon this question before, I look upon it and I decided to vote as I conscientiously believed was right at the time. I however felt at the time I cast my vote that the censure was greater than the crime but I could not see that it was not indecent and corrupt, and therefore I had to vote that it was. But I would have been very glad at the time if I could have compromised the matter, and put it in more decent terms, according to my own views and feelings on the subject. I am a very young politician and I had no idea it would have the effect it did have; or that it would have caused the injury that it has; and as I endeavor at all times when left to myself to try and deal honorably and justly with every person, I feel that I can do no better at this time than to vote to expunge these resolutions. As for my constituents I care not whether it is in accord with their views and feelings or not. They have sent me here and page: 313[View Page 313] I expect to do exactly what I think is right; and not do any thing I know to be wrong. But that I shall always do right; that is another question; or that I may at some times-are my endeavors; and I never vote for policy or to please my constituents. I do not know how my constituents I belong to the same city with Governor Baker. The Governor and myself have always been personal friends, as my votes on record here I believe will show. I do not wish do to wrong to one person or another; and from the standpoint I now look from, I can do no other way in justice to myself, and in justice to all than to vote "aye."
Mr. RICE, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: I approach this question with a great deal of pleasure. I have nothing to refer to with regret, in my course heretofore. I am glad to hear the feeling expressed, on the part of members who voted for the resolutions before, and that they are desiroius of setting this matter right as far as it can be.
As to what the Senator from Jefferson [Mr. Cravens,] said about our having no record; it is the first time that ever I knew we had no record; and I never knew that our record was destroyed immediately after the adjournment of each session. I did not know that the journal of the Senate was destroyed. If that is the case, then it is time this Senate was setting about instituting means for preserving that record. It is news to me to learn that this Senate has no record. These printed volumes on our desks are copies of the journal; and, if the original journal is destroyed, however that may be, we are making a record that will go on the sot journal, which reflects the sentiment of the Senate, and that is what we are at. When you throw these resolutions of censure in our face and in the face of the Lieutenant Governor, he will throw back the record for the expunging of those resolutions, and that is the point we are trying to make.
In reply to the Senator from Whitley [Mr. Hooper,] who says there has been no new light shown upon this question, I take it from that, that he has not read the letter of Mr. Burson which came in two days after the vote was taken and was published in the daily papers, in which he states upon his honor that the general precepts in effect came from Governor Baker, and were placed before the Lieutenant Governor so as to draw from him a letter. If that was the case, as his subsequent worse showed;-he preserved every scrap of a pen; even preventing him from the right of making public;-if that was the case, this letter was drawn out and sought for by Governor Baker; and after he received it he put it in his pocket; and when the letter, asking for its return and stating that an explanation would be made, was sent, he hauled off: and I say he is in an infinitely worse position than the Lieutenant Governor is. I say there has been new light on this question, And I say again I take pleasure in recording my vote "aye."
Mr. ROBINSON, of Madison, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: I wish to say but one word sir. As a matter of course, occupying the position I did at the time my vote was cast against these resolutions, I voted at that time upon the strength of a longer acquaintance with the Lieutenant Governor, than any gentleman upon this floor. It was my fortune to be raised in the County, in which he had long lived. I knew his constituents;-I know the confidence they repose in him, and I know he could not be guilty of an act, to say the least of it, improper; much less dishonorable and corrupt. I voted against these resolutions then and today I am gratified to be able to record my vote in favor of this resolution.
Mr. SHERROD, when his name was called, said : I wish to make a single remark in explanation of my vote. With the lights that were before me when the resolutions censuring the Lieutenant Governor, were under consideration I voted for them, sir; but I am free to admit to-day, having admitted it before, that I voted for those resolutions with reluctance. I care not what Senators may say or intimate, or throw out intimations as to my motives for the vote I may give. No Senator, sir, has a right to impugn my motives. He has no right to hurl to the country the influences that he may think are brought to bear to influence my vote. I will not impugn the motives of any Senator who may see proper to differ with me upon this or any other question. I might make some severe comments, sir, but I shall refrain from doing it at this time. I simply wish to give the reason for the vote I am going to give. I want to do right, sir, and I want to do justice to all. It has been charged that the Lieutenant Governor was guilty of an indiscretion, and so this Senate voted. I think, sir, there are degrees in punishment; and I believe somewhere in the Scriptures it is said, "Blessed are the merciful." Now, sir, with the lights before me to-day, I am convinced, sir, that the impeacher is the man that should be impeached. I shall therefore vote "aye."
Mr. SMITH, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: It affords me a great deal of pleasure to give the vote I am now about to cast. I did not act on this thing in a political light. Had I been acting on it as a political matter, I should have voted to censure the Lieutenant Governor and thereby distract the Republican party, but I had formed my opinion of this under an honest conviction of the transaction, and I would have done page: 314[View Page 314] an injury knowingly to a man I resprct as a gentleman; and although a political opponent I take the liberty to say that while the blood courses through my arms I will never do wrong to a man because he is politically opposed to me. I did not vote for the censure I parted from my political brethren, and they acted for themselves. Now it is thrown in our teeth that we voted for a man that took a bold stand for the censure of the Lieutenant Governor. I done so under a caucus vote. It was not my own free accord, but a vote in accordance with a vote of our caucus; and as I profess to be a Democrat, and have been for a long time, and expect to be, I expect to abide the action of a Democratic caucus. It is also said that I voted in favor of reconsidering those resolutions. * Since I gave that vote I came before my constituents, and there was a point made on me in a Republican meeting on that very vote. I attempted to tell my Democratic friends what I had done, and gave them the whole circumstances as we had it; in effect that the Governor sent a man down to the Lieutenant Governor to make a proposition and that he got the proposition, betrayed confidence, broke the seal of secrecy put upon it; and that I had voted to sustain the Lieutenant Governor, and would do so again: and in all the canvass I made there was never so much applause from first to last. I have no fears of my Democratic friends on that. And I will say if my election depended on my voting wrong against a man I would not do it. In conclusion, I have this to say; it takes this vote of mine to make my record a bee line right straight through. I vote "aye."
Mr. TURNER, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: As I introduced the original resolution out of which grew the resolutions now upon record, and as I voted for them, and as the intimation has been thrown out here, that there was inconsistency and stultification proposed by this vote, I deem it necessary to give my reasons. On the contrary, sir, instead of being inconsistent and instead of stultifying myself by voting to expunge these resolutions, I should deem myself stultified if I did not vote to expunge them. While I make this declaration, sir, I acknowledge no inconsistency in the vote which I gave in the first place for the resolutions. What was the State of the case, sir? The representatives of two great pasties in the State of Indiana were assempled here; one stung by defeat and the other rejoicing in success. The one in the minority having charged upon the party in the majority throughout the late canvass that it was reeking with corrup
* NOTE.-Mr. Smith's name should appear in the affirmative vote on page 582, Senate Journal, of the regular session, 1869.
tion. "When we came here, a part of a ty in power-a fragment of the party party-came forward and charged one of its leading members with corruption. Sir, when I introduced that resolution, if it had not been backed and if the charge had not came from the party to which the Lieutenant Governor belongs no power would have induced me to do so. They brought the charge, there was no evidence against it, and there was but one witness that the informer. Mr. President we to this man upon trust. His party said he was honest, but that this other man was dishonest We took him upon trust, and in all probibility, as some have said here, we were influnced by motives of defeating their caucus nominee that we might elect some one more favorable. But my vote was put upon trust of this the impeaching witness; there being no witness to the contrary, and letters being produced having language upon the face of them that indicated in one sentence that the Lieutenant Governor felt he was something of a wrong doer in writing it. But the Democratic party, or, at least, I for one, acted upon the evidence we had before us at that time. Now, sir, what is the state of the case? We have found the man who was charged with bein6 corrupt and indecent, sitting in that chair for the last four months, eminently qualified and nobly doing always his duty, without stooping for party purposes to oppress a minority. And what have we found on the other side, sir? We have found the other man stooping to little, low, dirty acts to punish the minority. Know, sir, I voted to compliment him in the first place because his party said he was anxious and willing to drive corruption out of the Republican party; and if we could not defeat him it was to the interest of Democrats to have it made to appear that he was anxious and willing to drive out this corruption. We had no other evidence no evidence to the contrary, because the hands of one of these men were tied. I voted for these resolutions and voted consistently. Now I am here myself prepared to impeach the witness upon whose testimony he was condemned; therefore I am not inconsistent in voting "aye" for this resolution.The vote was then announced as above recorded-yeas 35, nays 8.
So the resolution was adopted.
Mr. CRAVENS. Mr. President: I desire to ask for the reading of the resolution just passed.
It was read by the Secretary.
Mr. CRAVENS. The voice of the Senate las been very decidedly given in favor of this resolution; and now in order to show that the point I raised a moment ago was not intended to be for anything like captious opposition to he resolution, I move that the Secretary proceed to execute the order in the paesence of the page: 315[View Page 315] Senate. If we have a record I want to see the voice of the Senate carried out; if we have not it simply illustrates the folly of the resolution.
Mr. BELLAMY. Does the Chair entertain the motion?
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. I do not suppose the chair could do otherwise.
Mr. BELLAMY. Then I move to lay the Senators motion on the table. The resolution instructs the Secretary to do so, therefore I presume he will without any further instructions.
Mr SHERROD. Will the Senator state-
Mr. CRAVENS, (interrupting.) Each House Of Congress preserves a journal so that they may be referred to in after times. Here has been the custom for time immemorial, after the session closes, to have it printed. It is printed under the direction of the chief clerks of the two Houses, and when it is so printed I understand and have understood for fears, the copy, or, rather, the original, goes into waste paper and is no longer preserved here.
Mr. CHURCH. I rise to a question of order, The Senator made a motion and the Senator from Switzerland moved to lay it on the table.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. The chair understands the Senator from Jefferson-
Mr. CRAVENS. When I desire the accomplished and able Senator from Porter to teach me what my duty is, I will let him know.
Mr. CHURCH. I rise to a question of order.
Mr, CRAVENS. I have a right to explain the reasons for making my motion, but I am very nearly done, so the chair might relieve itself of the necessity of deciding the question of order.
Mr. RICE. If what the Senator states in his explanation is true, and I suppose he states the facts, his motion carries in it the seeds of its own destruction. He is asking the Secretary of the Senate to do a thing he knows cannot be done. Most certainly it is but of order because the order cannot be excuted.
Mr. CRAVENS. When I made the statement originally the Senator from Parke [Mr. Rice] questioned the fact; and I said for the purpose of illustrating and seeing whether I was right or not, I would move, as was done in the case of General Jackson in the United States Senate, that the Secretary proceed to execute the order. If we have a journal let us have it done, and if we have not let us say so.
The motion to lay on the table, (Mr. Ballamy's) was agreed to.
Mr. BELLAMY. I move to reconsider the vote taken on the passage of this resolution, and I move to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
