210 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. APRIL 6,

ised to assume an equitable share of the whole Virginia debt; I do know that republican legislation i!t West Virginia provided a com­mission to go to Richmond and see what should be assumed as ·west Virginia's portion of that debt; and I do know that when the demo­cratic party got control of West Virginia, in 1872, it made a new con­stitution and wiped out that paragraph, and the democracy of West Virginia has never to my knowledge undertaken to carry out the pledges made by the republicans of We'3t Virginia to take an honor­able share of the <lebt.

Bnt, sir, I do not care to enter into the details of an argument con­cerning the greater or less merits of the several plans for paying the debt of Virginia. It seems to an outsider, casually glancing at it, that the Senator from Virginia who sits on this side [Mr. MAHoNE] now desires actually to pay a large portion of it and the others are willing to owe the whole and pay none. That is the general view of it to a stranger.

This movement, I say, is not for Virginia, but for the whole South; and no man in the land shall be ahead of me in embracing cordially, politically the man who stands here like the Senator from Virginia defying the Bourbon democracy and declaring that there shall be a free vote, an unpurohased vot-e, and a fairly-counted vote. Yon tell me that that has been in your platform ! So it has after a fashion ; but, my dear friends of the South, you and I know perfectly well that there is one way of saying it and there is another way of saying it; and when one man says it, it is all quite right, and yon are at peace with him, and when another man says it and when for an in­stant he dares to doubt the maJesty of that mysterious divinity called "the South" he is a dead man politically, socially, ·and sometimes physically.

Now you and I know that. Yon know that when Martin Van Bu­ren made a whisper, a very sigh oi a doubt of yon upon the Texan question, he was gone; he stood no more chance of being President of the United States again than my venerated grandmother. And when Stephen A. Douglas faltered for an instant upon your demand that we sbonld open the Territories to slavery, and he, with the in­stincts of a freeman in him, begged that yon would leave the ques­tion to the people of the 'rerritories, Stephen A. Douglas for that doubt was a dead man, and the oath was registered that he never should be President of the United States. I comprehend all this; so do yon, men of the South, better than some of those on this side do. I do not say it to reproach yon.

I say it comes down to yon from that inevitable compactness of organization and will and despotic power that the great slave sys­tem imposed upon yon; and the mistake yon make now is in apply­ing to a day of universal freedom the tactics, the compactness of organization, the despotism of discipline which your party needed in old times, and which the great pecuniary and social interests and prejudices of slavery made necessary. The day ha.a gone by for that too; and all over your South are young men and middle-aged men, confederates and non-confederates who are waiting for the good time to break down this social and political ostracism, and open the South to a generosity and a fraternity of treatment of all political and pub­lic questions to which yon have been a stranger.

God bless every man that comes to do that; and, whether I agree with him upon his State ta-ctics or not, when he comes of his own free accord, without promise, without pledge of any description, and takes his seat upon this side and tells yon that he does not care for your caucus, that what yon do in there is a·matter of total indifference to him, I shake hands with him, MA.Ho~"E or anybody else, and the more of them the more welcome.

Mr. McPHERSON. Mr. President-Mr. COCKRELL. I want to know whether cheering in the galle­

ries is to be kept up or not. Have we any xnl.es at all f Mr. HILL, of Georgia. I think they are behaving very well. The PRESIDING OFFICER. We have a rule on that SJlbject.

The Chair did not hear any cheering after the Senator from Con­necticut took his seat. The Chair has recognized the Senator from New Jersey.

Mr. McPHERSON. Mr. President, the honorable Senator from Connecticut [Mr. HAWLEY] appears to talk in a very earnest way, and I do not know but that I may say as much of a good many Senators on that side of the Chamber. However, I shall have the privilege of thinking as I think without saying anything as to the motive of his remarks. He made use of one remark which I should like to have explained more minutely. Speaking of Mr. George C. Gorham, who he said was to be the Secretary of the Benate, he declared that that gentleman's election would be the :ilnangnration of a new era; that parties were to be revolutionized, that this was to happen and that was to happen. Now, I wish to ask that honorable Senator if he has become so dissatisfied with the workings and the action of his own party that he is willing to reward men who bolt from its organization. Is that to become the theory and the practice of the republican party Y

Then in the same connection perhaps that Senator will inform me who is Mr. Gorham and who is responsible for Mr. Gorham's appear­ance in the Senate Chamber. If report be true-and I have no reason to doubt it- it is not that honorable Senator or any of his co-labor­ers upon his sideof the Chamber; not one single republican member that holds a seat on that side of the Chamber is responsible in any sense or form for the appearance of Mr. Gorham's name here as a can-

didate for Secretary of the Senate. It was announced in the repub­lican papers and in the democratic papers, all over this country, that Mr. MAHoNE, the honorable Senator from Virginia, when he took his seat upon the floor of the Senate was to insist upon it that George C. Gorham should be made Secretary of the Senate, and we find thirty­seven republican Senators here simply recording the will of the hon­orable Senator frqm Virginia.

It is said-with how much truth I do not know; perhaps the hon­orable Senator from Illinois will inform me-that that same Senator occupied a room in close proximity to the republican caucus and that messages were pa.ssing backward and forward between that caucus and the Senator from Virginia. Then, lo and behold, the prediction that had gone forth to the people of this country until it had become a fact was simply recorded at the dictation of the Senator from Vir­ginia!

We were further told that the gentleman who has :filled the posi­tion in this Chamber for the past two years of executive clerk, having given expression to something during the canvass in Virginia. that was not at all pleasing to the Senator from Virginia with regard to his undertaking to pay the public debt of that State with the lowest possible amount of money, must forfeit his place. Why, Mr. Presi­dent--

Mr. LOGAN. The Senator will allow me--Mr. McPHERSON. One moment. What was then done' Instead

of our executive clerk being continued in office a gentleman was placed in nomination who was supposed to be more in accord with the sentiments of the Senator from Virginia. What further was done f The Senator from Virginia dictates to a republican canons the name of Mr. Riddleberger, from Virginia, as the Sergeant-at-Arms of this body. Now, will the honorable Senator from Virginia or any other Senator on that side of the Chamber tell me that if they had insti­tuted a searchoverthewhole UnitedStatesofAmerica withasearch­warrant and a lantern, they would have resurrected Mr. Riddleber­ger, of Virginia Y I wish to know whether it is the readjnster or the republican party that is running this Government f For my part, I have a great deal of admiration for the power of that Senator from Virginia, if I have not much respect for his party.

Mr. LOGAN. Will the Senator now allow meT Mr. McPHERSON. In one .. moment I will listen to the Senator and

answer his question. Mr. LOGAN. No, I do not desire to ask a question, but to answer

yours. Mr. McPHERSON. For the last ten years I, for one, in my humble

way, have been earnestly contending against the power of a party that I believed were doing all they conld to subvert our form of gov­ernment and to bring the Government into discredit and disrepute; against a party whose policy and principles I believed not to be con­ducive to the best inte:r;ests of this country; but my efforts have been without avail; election after election the republican party have been successful. Now, however, we find here that one man, humble though he may have been in the past, comes into the Senate of the United States and dictates the policy of even the republican party!

FoUJ and a half million voters have been unable to put down, or control,, or curtail the power of this party, and yet now it is put down simply by the power of one man. I wish to know whether the read­juster tail wags the whole republican dog or not. If that be so, then I certainly have a great respect for the power of that man, and I hope that he will do what the democratic party have been unable to do, regenerate and reconstruct the whole party. The honorable Sen­ator from Ohio, who for a long terms of years has been trying to maintain thecreditofthis Government, stands to-day in perfect accord with, gives the right hand of fellowship to, a man who has been un­dertaking, and has partially succeeded, not to maintain the credit of his State, but to destroy it.

Mr. President, it does seem to me as though this is a concentration of agencies that will not work very long together in harmonious accord. If we are to understand that the republican party in the future iB to be controlled by the readjnster element in Virginia, then we shall know exactly what we have to fight.

Now I yield to the Senator from illinois, who wished to interrupt me.

Mr. DAWES. Mr. President, I move t1rat the Senate do now ad­journ. ·

The motion was agreed to; and (at five o'clock and thirty-eight minutes p. m.) the Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, .April6, 1881 ..

Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. J. J. BULLOCK, D. D. The J onrnal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair lays before the Senate the

unfinished business of yesterday. Mr. McPHERSON. I call the attention of the Chair to Rule 8 and

ask most respectfully why it is that the Chair omits to call for that kind of business which is provided for in the rule. I ask the Sec~ tary to read Rule 8.

1881. CONGR-ESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 211 Mr. DA. WES. I should think a sufficient answer to the Senator is Mr. FERRY. I think debate cannot be limited on that. The

that no business has been presented except the unfinished business. Senator from New Jersey has raised a point in the discussion of that Mr. McPHERSON. Very well. Then it is the duty of the presiding resolution.

officer, according to Rule 8, to call for business in the following oraer:

1. The presentation of petitions and memorials. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair decides that during a called

executive session of the Senate there is no morning hour. That has been repeatedly decided by the Senate.

Mr. McPHERSON. Then I wish to know, sir, why we are not in executive session. Thi& is an open seSBion of the Senate; it has been so considered by the Senate; and business of all kinds has been con­ducted by the Senate. Resolutions of different characters have been presented here, have been received by the Senate, and are now lying upon the Secretary's table; petitions have been sent here and are now before the Senate for its action. This is an open session of the Sen­ate; and the Chair, I respectfully submit, cannot avoid the necessity of complying with the rules of the Senate ; and until the Senate re­vokes it-s own action by a resolution of the Senate changing its rules, the Chair is compelled in duty to call for the presentation of petitions and memorials. The Chair is furthel' compelled to call for "reports of the standing and select committees" of the Senate, to call for "the introduction of bills and joint resolutions; " to call for " concurrent and other resolutions; " and until the expiration of the morning hour the unfinished business cannot come up, which is not until one o'clock, in accordance with the same rnle which states, and clearly states, this proposition:

The :first hour of daily sessions sha.ll be designated as the morning hour, during which the order of business shall be as follows.

The Chair having already confessed that there is no business upon the table as required by the first clause of Rule 8, which is, "Mes­sages from the President, reports and communications from the heads of Departments, and other communications addressed to the Senate," then the second clause of Rule 8 comes in order, and I submit it is the duty of the Chair to call for "the presentation of petitions and memorials," as required by that rule of the Senate.

Mr. FERRY. I have only to remind the Senator of the practice in executive session, which I am not at liberty to divnlge, in order to answer fully the Senator from New Jersey, and demonstrate that he is taking a strange and unprecedented position. The Senate is now called in executive session, not in legislative session. The Chair has properly stated that there is no morning hour. The rnles cited apply to legislative sessions of the Senate when both Houses of Congress are assembled. The other branch of Congress is not now in session. The rules apply to the executive sessions so far as they are applica­ble to the business of an executive session. There being no morn­ing hour, as there is no legislative business, the Chair would not out­step his duty in presiding over this body by calling business up that would apply to a legislative session. Therefore .the Chair has ruled that all the matters of business to which the Senator has referred are not applicable to an executive session.

Mr. McPHERSON. I aak the honorable Senator from Michigan then to reconcile the action of the majority, or what is claimed to be a majority, of this Chamber in respect to the resolution submitted by the honorable Senator from Massachusetts. Three or four resoln­tions·have been introduced by that Senator, first for the disorganiza­tion and then for the reorganization of the Senate. A resolution was submitted a few days ago by whicll the attention of the Senate was called to the death of tlie Emperor of all the Russias. That resolu­tion was submitted to the Secretary of State, and we had upon the desk of the Vice-President yesterday morning a report from the Sec­retary of State respecting that matter. A resolution was submitted by the hon01;able Senator from Indiana calling the attention of the country, and quite right, too, to the action of the national banks in preventing the passage of the refunding bill. That resolution was permitted without objection to find its way to the Vice-President's table. I should like to have the honorable Senator reconcile, if he can, the action of the majority in respect to those matters.

Mr. FERRY. If the Senator will remember, I objected myself to the introduction of the resolution of the Senator from Indiana. That answers. that point.

Mr. McPHERSON. I do not understand the answer of the Senator. Mr. FERRY. I said that the Senator from Michigan objected to

the introduction and discussion of that question by the Senator from Indiana.

Mr. MORRILL. I rise to a question of order. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from Vermont will state

his point of order. Mr. McPHERSON. If what is claimed to be a majority on that

side of the Chamber had objected as it.now objects to the introduc­t ion of the petition which I had the honor to offer, that resolution never would have found its way to the table of the Secretary of the Senate.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from New Jersey -will sus­pend. The Senator from Vermont will state his point of order.

Mr. !tiORRILL. I desire to know whether debate is in order. Is there any question pending before the Senate 7

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Debate is not in order. The question pending before the Senate is on the resolution <lf the Senator from Massachusetts, [Mr. DAWES.]

MICHAEL BOYTON.

Mr. McPHERSON. I rise in my place to offer, as is my right under the rnles of the Senate, a petition from certain residents and citizens of the States of New Jersey and New York respecting the case of one Michael Boyton, who is alleged to be confined in an English dungeon without right, arbitrarily and unjustly. I claim that I have the right under the rnles of the Senate to present the petition for the consideration of the Senate.

Mr. FERRY. I make no objection to the introduction of the peti­tion, but I desire to reply to what has fallen from the Senator's lips.

Mr. McPHERSON. The Senator will have abundant opportunity to reply when the matter comes properly befote the Senate. I now ask for the reading of the petition for information.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair decides that this debate is out of order. The point of order made by the Senator from Vermont [Mr. MoRRILL] is well taken. The pending question is on the motion of the Senator from Missouri [Mr. CoCKRELL] to lay the resolution of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES] on the table.

Mr. SAULSBURY. Does the Chair decide that the petition cannot be received f

Mr. DA. WES. Mr. President--The VICE-PRESIDENT. Senators will allow the Chair to state

the attitude of the business before the Senate. Mr. DA. WES. I beg the pardon of the Chair. · The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from New Jersey now pre­

sents a petition, and in that he is in order, if no objection is made, and the petition will be received.

Mr. DA. ~ES. I hope there will be no objection to the reception of the petition.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair rnles that the petition can­not be received at this time except by unanimous consent, as the rule in reference to the morning hour does not apply to an execut ive session of the Senate. The Chair understands that no objection is made to the reception of the petition. The Chair hears no objection, and the petition will be received.

Mr. HOAR. Is the -proposition to receive the petition and refer it to the Committee on Foreign Relations Y

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from New Jersey has not moved that the petition be referred; be has simply presented the petition. ·

Mr. McPHERSON. I ask that the petition be received by the Sen­ate and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Mr. HOAR. I hope there will be no objection to that. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the

petition will be-received and so referred. Mr. McPHERSON. Let the petition be read. Mr. FERRY. What is the pending question f The VICE-PRESIDENT. The pending question is on the motion of

the Senator from Missouri [Mr. CocKRELL] to lay the resolution of the Senator from Massachusetts on the table.

Mr. HA.RRIS. The Senator from New Jersey asks that the petition be read.

Mr. HOAR. I understand that the petition has been received and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. The rule forbids the reading of petitions, but requires that the Senator presenting a­petition shall make a brief statement of its contents, which the Sen­ator from New Jersey has done. If the Senator, however, desires. that the rule shall be waived and the petition read, I make no objec­tion. Let it be understood, however, that it is done on his request. and not of right.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from New Jersey re­quest that the -petition be read f

Mr. McPHERSON. I was about to remark, if the Senator from Massachusetts-- .

Mr. HOA.R. I object to the Senator's debating; he is out of order. The pending motion is to lay on the table the resolution of my col­league. I object to debate, as I have a right to object.

Mr. FERRY. Mr. President--The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from New Jersey has the

floor. Does he yield t Mr. McPHERSON. I am not conscious that I have yielded the floor­

at any time since I took it. I am not conscious of having surren­dered the floor to permit any other Senator to make a motion.

Mr. HOAR. Then I rise to a question of order, on which I pray the­rnling of the Chair, that the pending motion to lay on the table the. resolution of my colleague iB not debatable, and the Senator from New Jersey is out of order when he attempts to hold the floor for debate.

Mr. McPHERSON. I say with all due respect, not having yieldecL the floor, that no motion of such a character could have been made. I rose in my place and asked that I might be permitted to present a­petition.

Mr. HOAR. That ha-s been done. Mr. McPHERSON. It is a petition of citizens of New Jersey re­

specting the case of one Michael Boyton. I ask that the petition be read.

Mr. HOAR. Nobody has objected to the reading. Mr. McPHERSON. I ask that it be read for the-information of

,,

212 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. APRIL 6,

the Senate, and then that it be referred to the Committee on Foreign .Relations.

Mr. FERRY. That was done. . The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection to the

etition being read. The Secretary will read it. Mr. McPHERSON. Pending which the Senator from Massachu­

.setts rose in his place and says that the Senator from New Jersey may <ln1y state the purport and object of the petition- .

Mr. HOAR. I object to further debate. Mr. McPHERSON. If Senators are desirous of having me state the

eontents, I will do so. If not, then let the petition be read. Mr. ALLISON. Let it be reported. Mr. HOAR. Let the petition be read. My objection is to the

speech, not to the reading. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The petition will be read. The Chief Clerk read as follows:

.!Io the Senate ana House of Repruentatives of tke United States: Whereas one Michael Boyton, a citizen of the United States, has been arrested

.and thrown into prison by the British Government on vague charges of inciting to

.orime and nolence; and Whereas the said Mioha~ Boyton has been denied the right guaranteed even to

British subjects, the right to a frial before a jury of his peers: Resolved, That we, as American citizens, call upon our represent.ath·es in Con­

gress to demand that the United States Government interfere for his protection. MICHAEL DOWNEY,

Jo~ McCARTHY, Secretary, cfc. President of the Garfield .Association.

Mr. McPHERSON. I suppose my original motion that the petition be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations- -

Mr. HOAR. That has been done already by unanimous consent. The VICE-PRESIDENT. If there is no objection, the petition is

.so referred. OFFICERS OF THE SENATE.

.Several Senators addressed the Chair. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair will state the question before

;the Senate. The pending question is on the motion of tha Senator .from Missouri [Mr. CocKRELL] to lay the resolution of the Senator lrom Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES] on the table.

Mr. VANCE. Mr. Pfesident-.Mr. ALLISON. That is not a debatable motion. Mr. VANCE. I a.Bk the Senator from Missouri to withdraw his

,motion for a moment. Mr. HARRIS. I suggest io the Senator from North Carolina to let

the vote be taken on that motion. I believe the yea.s andnays have been ordered upon it, and it can only be withdrawn by unanimous consent .

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The yeas and nays have been ordered upon the motion of the Senator from Missouri.

Mr. HARRIS. Let the vote be taken, and then the Senator from North Carolina can proceed. .

Mr. DAWES. I wish the President of the Senate would state the -question. We have been across the sea since it was stated, and I .think we had better know what we are to vote on.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The pending resolution is that of the -Senator from Massachusetts providing for the appointment of certain: officers of the Senate. The question now is on the motion of the

-Senator from Missouri, [Mr. COCKRELL,] that the resolution of the Senator from Massachusetts be laid on the table, and upon that .motion the yeas and nays have been ordered.

1\lr. PENDLETON. In order that we may avoid the waste of time .nece_sary to call the yeas and nays on that motion, I move that the Senat e proceed to the consideration of executive business.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from Ohio moves that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. [Putting .the question.] The Chair is in doubt as to the result.

Mr. PENDLETON. I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to

eall the roll. Mr. HAMPTON, (when Mr. BUTLER's name was called.) My col­

league [Mr. BUTLER] is paired with the Senator from Pennsylvania, [Mr. CAMERON.)

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania, (when his name was called.) On this question I am paired with the Senator from South Carolina, [Mr. 'BUTLER,] who is absent from the city because of ill health. I state ..once for all for to-day that I am paired with him during the day.

Mr. HARRIS, (when his name was called.) I agreed with the Sen­ator from New York [Mr. CO:NKI.lliG] to pair with him during his

..absence. The Senator from Indiana [Mr. VoORHEES] being confined to his home by indisposition, I have transferred the pair to the Sen­

.ator from from Indiana. I vote "yea." Mr. COKE, (when Mr. MAxEY'S name was called.) My collea~gne

. .[Mr.llix:EY] is paired with the Senator from Colorado, [Mr. TELLER.] I make the announcement for the day. If my colleague were here, he would vote "yea."

Mr. SAUNDERS, (when his name was called.) On all political questions I am paired with the Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. WILL­

~IAMs.] The roll-call was concluded. Mr. GROOME. I am paired temporarily with the Senator from

·Louisiana, [Mr. KELLoGG.] Were .that Senater in the Chamber, he :would vote '"nay" and I should vote "yea."

Mr. FAffi. I am paired with my colleague, [Mr. JONES, of Nevada.] Mr. BECK. My colleague [Mr. WILLIAMS] is still absent, and is

paired with the Senator from Nebraska, [Mr. SAUNDERS.] I make that announcement for the day.

Mr. TELLER. On this question and all questions of this oharacte1 I am paired with the Senator from Texas, [Mr. MAxEY.] If he were present, I should vote ''nay."

The result was announced- yeas 30, nays 31; as follows :

Bayard, Beck, Brown, Call, Camden, Cockrell, Coke, DavisofW. Va. ,

Allison, Anthony, Blair B~ide, Cameron of Wis., Conger, Dawes, Edgerton,

YEAS-30. Farley, Johnston, George, Jonas, Gorman, Jones of Florida, Grover, Lamar, Hampton, McPherson, Ha.rns, Mor~:m. Hill of Georgia, Penrueton, Jackson Pugh,

NAYS- 31 . Ferry, Frve, Ha1e, Harrison, Hawley, Hill of Colorado) Hoar, Ingalls,

Logan, McDill, McMillan 1

Mahone, Miller, Mitchell, Morrill, Platt of Conn.,

ABSENT-15.

Ransom, Saulsbury, Slater, Vance, Vest, Walker.

PlattofN. Y., Plumb, Rollins, Sawyer, Sewell, Sherman, VanWyck.

Butler, Edmunds, Jones of Nevada, Teller, Cameron of Pa., Fair, Kellog(!, Voorhees, Conkling, Garland, 'Maxey, Williams. Davis ofDlinoll!, Groome, Saunders,

So the Senate refused to proceed to the consideration of executive business .

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question recurs on the motion of the Senator from Missouri, [Mr. CoCKRELL,] that the pending resolution be laid on the table, on which the yeas and nays have been ordered.

Mr. BAYARD. I know that motion is not debatable, and I ask the Senator who made it to withdraw it for the time being .

Mr. COCKRELL. I will withdraw it if it can be done by unani­mous consent.

Mr. BAYARD. I will renew the motion, or I will give the floor to the Senator to renew it.

Mr. COCKRELL. I withdraw the motion if there is unanimous consent. The yeas and nays have been ordered upon the motion and it can only be withdrawn by unanimous consent.

Mr. ROLLINS. There will be no objection to the 1Se'nator from Delaware proceeding.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. If there is no objection the mot ion of the Senator from Missouri is withdrawn. The question recurs on the mo­tion of the Senator from Ohio [Mr. PENDLETON] to postpone tlJe pending resolution indefinitely, on which the yeas and nays have been ordered.

A message in writing was received from the President of the United States by Mr. 0. L. PRUDEN, one of his secretaries.

Mr. B~AYARD. Mr. President, yesterday when I entered unex­pectedly and for the first time into what may be called the debates not upon the pending question but upon the present condition of public business before the Senate, and urged thereto by my personal respect for the Senator from Rhode Island, [Mr. BURNSIDE,] whose obviously candid and manly tone in dealing with this subject invited me to join with him to endeavor to continue it upon the same plane, I then said that I believed there was a justification for the thirty-ei~ht democratic Senators, of whom I am one, on this floor in maintaimng the attitude before the country which we have held for about ten days. I said I should like to try the tenability and justice of thai position by the light of law and of reason, so that when I and others shall be called to that court of last appeal, the bar of public opinion of the American people, we shall be willing to submit to them the case we are making up now.

Let me as as a preliiiri.I;lary state the facts as to which I do not in­tend there shou1d be ·dispute, if submission to the record can secure agreement between the two sides of this Chamber. We were brought into this session of the Senate by the extraordinary proclamation of the ex-President, Mr. Hayes, dated on the 28th of February last, in the words following:

Whereas objects of interest to the United s&.tes require that the Senate should be convened at twelve o'clock on the 4th of March next, to receive ana act ttpon such communications a.s may be made to it on the part of the Eucutive.

I have read all of that paper which describes the purpose and ob­jects and the business for which we were convened. The present point of difference between the thirty-eight Senators on that side of the Chamber and the thirty-eight on this side of the Chamber is as to what this proclamation means, and how far it restricts or controls our action. during this session when with the aid of the casting vote of the Vice-President the republicana may claim to have the consti­tutional majority. I do not feel that is the exact phrase; but under the casting vote of the Vice-President a tie vote on an affirmative question is permitted to prevail with the aid of his vote under the Constitution which is not a majority of the votes of the Senate. It is best to be accurate on this subject. A law can be passed constitu­tionally by one-half of tJ:e Senate aided by the casting v:ot~ of .t~e Vice-President, but t hat 1S not called the vote of the maJonty, It IS the casting vote to prevent a dead-lock and a tie.

~. ···~·· ,,- ..

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2l:l Therefore I recognize, (at least I did not dispute, nor do I know how

it well can be prevented, although it may be denied,) the right upon the organization of this body in matters not legislative, but where the Senate is equally divided, of the Vice-President by his vote to decide in favor of one equal side against the other equal side under the Con­stitution.

The Senate, when we met, found itself numerically under the ad­mitted control of a democratic majority. Three members of the ~en­ate bad been displaced by their acceptance of places in the Cabinet of the incoming Executive, and one had been removed by the hand of God. The majority claimed that it was our duty not to delay but go on and organize as we then stood; having a constitutional quorum present that that quorum should be governed by a constitutional majority and that business should be attended to, for which we gave ovary earnest in our power by acting with promptness, courtesy, and justice upon the nominations that were sent to us to start the new Administration fairly on its way; and without a question or objection on this side of the Chamber or from the majority, the chosen coun­cilors of the President were confirmed and placed in office.

We considered it then, I consider it now essential for the orderly pro­secution of business that the committees of the Senate should be organ­ized, that we could not consider measures or nominations without their previous reference to appropriate committees. Therefore those com· mittees must be reorganized. They had fallen with the end of the last session. We proposed to renew them, if only temporarily. We were met by objections by the minority and the RECORD discloses the fact that for more than two weeks we were for this reason able to do nothing. The resolution was regularly brought forward by my honorable friend from Ohio,.[Mr. PENDLETON,] a.a the represent­ative of the majority, to form the committees and proceed in the usnal and orderly manner to organize the committees for the trans­action of business, a democratic majority of the Senate promptly and efficiently proposing to assist a republican Executive in the confirma­tion of men of his own party to high and important offices, but by the action of the minority we were obstructed. The rnles of this body permitted dilatory motions, the calling of the yeas and nays, on the motion to go into executive session, on the postponement o£ resolutions to a day certain or indefinitely. All those dilatory mo­tions, well-known, admitted, accepted, of ancient origin and long practice_, were resorted to by our friends on the other side ; and when their motive was disclosed that they deliberately intended to prevent the consideration of a resolution which waa an essential preliminary to the avowed objects for which the session was called- when that was made known, in good temper and obedience to the rules, with­out impeachment of motive, without useless and tedious struggles, the majority yielded to the obstruction and consented daily to early adjournments. That is the history of the proceeding, and the REcoRD bears me out in all that I have said. ·

But after the loss of two weeks' time, within which all the public business for which this session was expressly convened could have been transacted, and would have been transacted satisfactorily I be­lieve-at the end of the two weeks the vacancies in the Senate were filled and the numbers then stood, and as I said yesterday upon the public records of the country accepted by all previous and public declaration, there were still here thirty-nine supporters open and public, professed and avowed supporters of the democratic standard­bearers and of the party which those standard-bearers represented­thirty-nine, a majority of two in this Chamber. The real status of those votes did not declare itself finally until the thirty-seven recog­nized and avowed republican Senators who had openly supported the candidates of t he republican party brought forward a resolution assuming that they held a majority in this body.

A great amount of mystery had been suffered to envelop the vote of one Senator in this Chamber-! care not by whom or for what pur­pose created- but a mystery which he could have dispelled at pleas­ure, but he did not see fit to do so. He finally did dispel the mystery a.a to whether he would vote in accordance with his avowals up to and after the election of November last, or whether he would vote in favor of that party to whom he had publicly avowed his opposition, and he decided it for himself, and the mystery waa solved, but it remained uncertain and it remained a mystery until he had, by voting with those whom heretofore he had professedly opposed, thrown the organ­ization of the committees of this Senate under the control of the cast­mg vote of the Vice-President of the United States, ex o.Qicio the pre­siding officer of this body, but not a member of it.

What else does the record disclose J That when the democrats of this body discovered, by this surprise, by this studiously concealed intention, change of heart, or whatever you may choose to call it, the power of -we casting vote of the Vice-President was to control the organization of the committees of this body- ! appeal to the record­was there one moment of delay in a.ccepting the situation f Was there one motion made to adjourn f Was there .one motion for an execu­tive session Y Was there a suggestion that, surprising as was the result, narrow and fractional as waa the majority- was there, I ask yon, the slightest delay in accepting and in bowing to the will of the majority without asking how it was obtained, or questioning its very slight numerical weight f

Appealing to the record; I state here that which no man can rise and deny, that when the essential organization of the Senate, which we had besought yon for two weeks to accomplish for public busi-

ness, was by that casting vote decided to be in the hands of thirty­seven old and one remarkably new republican, we asked not the date of his party birth nor the period or nature of his party service, but we submitted at once, and with a good grace handed over to you the control of the thirty-nine committees of this body. These are the

'facts. No question then about our ready recognition of the principle that now ha.s become so sacred and unqualified in your eyes, but which, permit me to say, you seem to have discovered the inviolability of only when it passed into your own hands, and to which you paid such scant respect when we held it.

And now what is the question It i3 simply t his, whether that majority which we recognize and which we obey as giving you the control of all the committees of the Senate, which hands over to. your discretion entirely what is properly the organization of the Senate, binds us to-day in the face of all the facts which surround us as promptly, as unquestioningly, as unqualifiedly to submit to your present motion ' What is that · To proceed not to the business essential for the public, not to the business which, to use the language of the President, is among the "objects of interest to the United States," and "to receive and act upon such communications as may be made to it on the part of the Executive;" because I say t o-day that you are and for ten days have been evading those objects, you are intentionally and willfully disregarding the true objects for which this session was convened; you are proposing to do that which the public business does not require; you are not seeking t o perform an essential duty but you are doing something' for which you find your only justification in the doctrine that it is your will. Sic volo, sio jubeo, stat p1·o 1·atione volwztas j that is the answer we get when W6 appeal to you to go into executive session and transact the only business for which we were convened.

Now I feel as strongly to-day the principle of majority rule and its necessary recognition as when I stood t o urge it in this Chamber un­availingly four weeks ago. I will agree to that; but majority rule is not unqualified or unregulated. The Constitution contains provis­ions and is so framed that he who wonld carry it into execution justly must give construction and force to all its parts in oruer t o bring all its objects inte harmony, and make it that which it was in­tended to be, a homogeneous system of government designed to ecure liberty and establish justice.

The principle of majority rule lies inherently at the basi of all councils; it is the rule and it is the underlying rule of our form; but not an unchecked and unbridled majority. The very word "govern­ment" means restraint and restraint upon whom 7 Upon the strong. It is upon power that checks are needed; and therefore it is that checks and balances upon power, framed in the very spirit andes­sence of liberty, run all through and are interwoven with every grant of powq in the charter that we have all sworn to obey, the fnndamen tal and higbest law of this land.

The separation of this Government into departments, the segregation of powers to each which none of the rest may invade or infringe-such instances fill this charter and help to make and keep it free; and in regard to our rules and the control of the business of t his body we have constitutional provisions, as wellaarulesand regulations adopted and revocable by the body itself. The first article, section 3 of the Constitution provides:

The Senate shall choose their other officers-Having before prescribed who should be their presiding officer.

And section 5 provides that-Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings. That is another constitutional right and duty which no other hous~

and no other department of the Government may inv-ade or infringe. The same section further provides :

And the yeas and nays of the members of either Honse on any question ~hall, at the de!lire of one-fifth of tho e present, be entered on the J ournal.

Such are a few of tbe constitutional provisions fundamental to the Government, in subordination t o which this Senate has framed the rnles of its proceedings. Oue of those rules following out t he rigllt secured to one-fifth of the Senn,tors present that on an.y question the yeas and nays shall be ordered, is found in Rule 16:

When the yeas and nays shall be called for by one-fifth of the Senators present~ each Senator, when his name is called, shall, unless for special reasons he be c:;;:­cnsed by the Senate, declare openly and without debate his assent or dissent to t h& question; and in taking the yeas and nays upon any question, the names of tl..te Senators shall be calledalphabetically.

And Rule 17 was intended to provide a means of enforcing Rule 16. That wa.s a rule founded on the Constitution in its hltter. Rule 43, which is an ancient rule, declares:

When a question is pending­Any question-

no motion shall be received but- . Th~~ .

ceJ:m adjourn to a day certain, or that, when the Senate adjourn, it shall be to a day

To t~ke a recoo~, To proceed to the consideration of executive b.nsiness.

And after that are motions deferred in their order of precedence. Now, what I mean to say is this: I will agree that these rules were

made for the orderly prosecution and ultimate decision of questions and of business; but they were not made for the instan t, unques­tioned, instantaneous control of questions by a majority. They were.

\

214 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATEs APRIL 6,

made to give time; they were made to compel a majority to pause before a tinal decision was reached which bound all, the willing and the unwilling, alike. They are emblements of freedom, because they are checks and were intended to be checks upon the onward and un­questioning strides of power. And in proceeding under these rules which are privileges to the minority, birthrights of freedom to the minority1 what is the measure of their employment 'I It is the check of consmence; it is the check of a sense of duty; it is the check of honest judgment and a high sense of pu blio responsibility whether or no the proposed action of the majority justifies in the conscience of a Senator a resort to the delaying power upon final decision which these rules have unquestionably given him, and were intended to give·him.

I do not think it fair in any argument to state extreme cases; and yet instances have occurred since I have been a member of this Sen­ato when I felt it was my duty, and would be my duty if life was left in my frame, to delay and prevent the decision of questions and issues raised in the heat of party and in the frenzy of political excitement which I believed were fatal to the welfare of my country that I felt it would have been my duty to interpose every bulwark that the Con­stitution and the rules made in accordance with it supplied in order that the question might stand over for "the sober second thought" of another Congress.

Senators, no man dreads and abhors more than I the pernicious doctrine of that which has been announced as a" law higher than the Constitution." I know no law higher than the Constitution to bind my action as a citizen and legislator. I must find my warrant under it or I cannot act. But there is, and yon will perceive that there is, a necessary and a conscientious discretion as to how far these very checks upon an aggressive majority shall be enforced by those who have their duties as much to protect the rights of a minority as have the majority the duty to insist upon . their responsibilities and powers. And then should this issue ever be raised, should we by rea­son and argument and justico in our own minds be unable to settle it, we must send it back to those who are our masters and whose opinion duly expressed at the polls becomes, after all, onr law, for public opinion does mold the action of Congress and Executives.

But I say that on these questions of delay, of invoking the aid of rul~s that were made to check the otherwise impetuous and nnre­lent~ng progress of the power of a majority, there· must be a justifi­cation, the circumstances of the case must justify, they must be such that a man can fairly turn to those whom he claims to represent and t~ay "I interposed this delay and I did obstruct the passage of this resolution because I felt there was an interest at stake greater and infinitely more important than possibly could be accomplished from allowing the majority to have their own way unimpeded. Now judge yon betwt?en us. It is in that spirit, and tried by the rule which I have ende.i>vored to lay down, that I propose to test the question as to whether we ought not to continue, under the long and well-estab­lished rules of this Senate in strict accordance with the constitutional right, as I consider it, the spirit and the letter of those rnles, to pre­vent you from postponing or defeating the objects, and the only ob­jects for which the Senate was convened, and doing that which has in it, as I believe, consequences fatal to the principles of morality and right upon which this Government was founded.

Now, first as to precedents. It has been cited to us that two years ago, coming into a majority in this Chamber, the democrats did at that session elect a new set of officers. The answer is that onr com­ing into power was long known in advance, and, in justice to those officers who were here, there was ample notice given of the change, for it is known, Senators, that the most conspicuous of the gentlemen removed had, in accordance with his own sense of right, embarked as an active and aggressive partisan in the political canvass, had been the chief officer of one of the organizations of your party, and having risked his office upon the ebb and flow of party success, he naturally drifted out with ·the tide that carried out that which had been a ma­jority in this Chamber. But I wish to show yon that the session of 1879, beginning March 18, was no snob session, and for no such objects, and restricted to no such propositions, as that which we are now called upon to perform. The proclamation of March 4, 1879, convening that session, said:

By the President of the United States of America. A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas the final adjournment of the Forty.fifth Congress without making the usual and necessary appropriations for the legislative, executive, and judiciru ex· penses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1880, and without makin~ the usual and necessary appropriations for the support of the Army for the .same fiscal year, presents an extraordinary occasion, requiring the President to exercise the power vested in him by the Constitution to convene the Houses of Congress in antici:Q_ation of the day fixed by law for their next meeting:

Now, therefore, I, Rutherford B. Hayes, President of the United States do by virtue of the power to this end in me vested by the Constitution, conve~e both Houses of Congress to assemble at their respective Chambers at twelve o'clock noon ~~sday, tlie 18th day of March instant, then and there to consider and deter-

Not" objects of interest to the United States" and" such commu­nications as may be made to it on the part of the Executive," but to consider ::wd determine such measures as, in their wisdom, their duty and the welfare of the people may seem to demand.

So that we were met for this purpose; notice in advance was given, and an unconfined field of action was open to the Senate, and all men expected when they came here, and all men agreed and acted when

they came here, on the theory that it was a session for the transac­tion of all public business, and the sequel proves that they acted on that idea.

Mr. HOAR. May I ask the Senator from Debware a. question! Mr. BAYARD. Will my friend ask it when I get through Y Mr. HOAR. It was with reference to his opinion on the precise

point he is now making. If it is disagreeable, I will not put it; but I will put the question and if the Senator finds he would rather not answer it, I will withdraw it at once.

Mr. BAYARD. I will say to the Senator that it will embarrass me a little to stop to answer a question now, but I will answer it when I get thTOngh, if he will allow me to answer it in my own time. I feel that I am occupying the time of the Senate longer than I desire and at some inconvenience to myself, for I am not in very good condi­tion. ["Go on!" "Go on!"] Now considering these facts, I hope the honorable Senator will not think it is any discourtesy on my part, for I should be very glad to continue the debate and answer the ques­tion if able.

Mr. HOAR. I will not certainly press the question against the in­timation of the honorable Senator. My belief is that after hearing the question he would prefer to answer it now rather than later; but I will not put it unless he wishes.

Mr. BAYARD. I will hear it. Mr. HOAR. I wish to ask the Senator's opinion upon this question,

and if he will permit rue to put two questions in succession instead of one it will save a request to put another. I desire to ask the Senator if he thinks that when Congress is called together it is in the least limited by the President's description of the occasion which led him to call it; whether it has not all its constitutional powers a-s a Con­gress; and if he answers that in the affirmative, as possibly he may, I then desire to ask him whether he conceives that the Senate, when it is called by the President to sit alone, is limited or restrained by the call from doing anything whatever_ which it sees fit which does not require the concurrence of the other Honse I will not ask the Senator to turn aside from the argument to answer that now unless he should prefer to answer it as he is upon the point.

Mr. BAYARD. That would necessarily lead to a debate upon a very interesting subject that was raised here at the commencement of this session by proposing to consider a question, which to have any practicability would have to become a legislative question in relation to the national finances, and which was I think very sensibly ob­jected to on the other side; not but what the Senate had the power to consider it, but because it was inappropri:::.te, I will not sa.y unlaw­ful, I will not say unconstitutional, but I sa.y inappropriate at a ses­sion called for a special purpose, to embark upon other and variant subjects that could not result practically ; that is to say in the absence of the other House of Congress, no such thing us practical legisla­tion can be begun here, because it cannot be considered by the Honse of Representatives at the same session of the same Congress. That is all I can say.

I read the proclamation convening us and restricting our action, or notifying us that we were to consider only certain things, and the proclamation of two years ago which shows that the doors were thrown open to the discretion of both Houses of Congress at a gen­eral legislative session to do that which they saw fit under the Con­stitution, to show that there was a difference between suddenly dis­placing the essential officers of this body for the purpose of replacing them with others. And now on that point let me ask does any man say that the displacement of the present officers and their replacement by others constitutes anything that is essentially of interest to the Government of the United States? I heard the honorable Senator from Ohio [Mr. SHERMAN] yesterday speak of the displacement and reappointment of these officers as essential to the organization of the Senate. Why surely the honorable Senator wa.s mistaken in tha,t. The organization of committees to consider nominations referred to them was essential for the transaction of the business of the Senate and did become part of its essential organization; but so far as the clerical force of the Senate is concerned, it is to-day perfectly organ­jzed. Yon would have to disorganize it in order to accomplish the result of your resolution .

.Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. President, I thinktheSenatorfromDelaware is mistaken in saying that I said the election of these officers was essen­tial to the organization; indeed I have read my remarks within a short time this morning and what I said was this--

Yr. BAYARD. I had the impression from hearing what the Sen­ator from Ohio said and from reading to-day in a very cursory man­ner his remarks in the RECORD, that he spoke of the fact of its being the duty and the responsibility of the majority to organize the Sena.te, and a part of that duty was the appointment of these officem, and therefore that they were proceeding to the execution of what he Gon­sidered an essential duty by turning ont four men and putting in four others .

.Mr. SHERMAN. I said this: that it was the clear right of the Senate in its own way, at its own time, and in its own manner, to elect its officers. That is all. I do not consider it essential to the organization of the Senate, but it is for the majority to say when it will do it.

Mr. BAYARD. Of course the Senator knows best what he said, and anything that he says he said I accept; but I had the impression that he spoke of this resolution as being in the line of the proper organi·

-

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 215 zation of the Senate. I merely mean to say the Senate is organized as to its officers to-day efficiently and well, and when we handed over to you by virtue of the casting vote of the presiding officer, without the slightest demur, the control of the committees, then the organi­zation of the Senate became complete and we were ready from that instant to attend to business under the control of the thirty-eight­! so speak of them ?lOw-republican Senators and the Vice-President.

But, Mr. President, I said in view of our duty we must weigh the facts that surround us, treat this question as one of great public in­terest before the American people, whether there are circumstances to justify us in insisting upon that privileged motion provided for by the rules which has precedence over other motions of going into ex­ecutive session, or whether we should stop and allow this <llsplace­ment and then replacement of officers in our official corps. Weighed fairly in the scales of a sound discretion and the public exigency, which action ought to prevail, which is the weightiest in its interest to the United States, the displacement of four confessedly accurate and faithful clerks and officials, or the public business that we are told cannot and shall not be considered at all, and shall stand arrested and paralyzed until the majority have proved and vindicated their abstract power in the minor instance referred to? Weigh them in the scales of common sense; weigh them in the interests of our conn­try in every branch of the public service, and which shall kick the beam, the action of the thirty-eight republican or the action of the thirty-eight democratic Senators T

It is publicly known that two treaties have been sent to the Government of the United States, and transmitted by the Execu­tive for the consideration and action of this body. One of those is the treaty with China. It is no secret of executive session. It was a matter of grave and open and deeply interesting public debate two years ago, whether we should abrogate an existing treaty with China by passing a statute, or whether we should wait the more tortuous and formal and dilatory action of the diplomatic agents of the Government. On this floor and in public records the settlement of that Chinese question was brought before the Sen­ate. I speak not now of this treaty; I speak not now of the con­sideration of its provisions ; J: violate none of the confidences of executive session; I speak of the great public facts, the great facts of history detailed here and found spread upon your public records of debate by Senators from the Pacific coast, in which they begged and besought then that action should be taken to define and establish the relations between the subjects of China and the citizens of the United States. Senators well remember the pictures drawn to us by the Senator from Nevada not now in his seat, [Mr. JoNEs,] by other Senators representing California and the Pacilic slope on this iloor. I remember the horror with which they held up to this approaching cloud of Mongolian invasion, and how they felt that Christian civil­ization upon the Pacific coast was in danger of being overwhelmed by the tide of pagan population from the Chinese Empire. That treaty is in our hands and ought to be promptly considered; but what are the million of onrfellow-citizens that line the Pacific coast, their interests and theirfeelings, compared to the mighty question, whether the Secretary of the Senate, accomplished, trustworthy, and excellent, shall give way instantly to another man, or that the able and efficient Sergeant-at-Arms shall be ejected in order that another person may take his place, draw his pay, and exercise his powers of appointment over the great body of twenty or thirty subordinate officers T How can the comparison be made f Can Senators stand for one moment to doubt that it is our duty without delay to attend to this great interna­tional question, so deeply interesting to the whole country and espe­cially to those citizens who inhabit the States of the Pacific slope f

But that is but one feature. What say yon to the Supreme Court of the United States 7 To-day it is broken as to its quorum; crip­pled in its numbers; the business brought before it of the gravest importance both to private suitors and to the public standing still until what Until the Senate of the United States shall displace four competent officials and place four others in their stead. The circuit courts of the United Stat-es, the district courts of the United States, with their thousands of suitors and millions of property stand­ing waitin~ judicial decision, all demand consideration of the nomina­tions to fill their vacancies, and all is postponed because the sheer and mere will of the majority declares that four clerks shall go out and that four others shall come in, before stagnation in bnsines and ruin to litigants shall be removed by prompt, regular, decorous action. District attorneys are needed to represent the justice of the United States in prosecutions, marshals of the United States, postmasters by the scoro in more or less important cities, collectors of revenue, and· among them the great port of collection, the chief port of entry of the commerce of the Union, the great port of New York, where more than two-thirds of all the merchandise that the Amercan people pay taxes on, all over the country by way of impost duties is entered.-a great office, demanding great qualities national in importance, second in influence and importance to the Secretaryship of the Treasury itself,-that office is postponed as to its incumbency, its functions em­barrassed in order that four subordinates of the Senate may be taken out and four others put in.

No, Mr. President, when yon stand and look at the facts, what I may call the business facts, those which the President of the United States appropriately termed'' objects of interest to the United States," I say to you they are all on one side of the question; they are all in

one scale of this balance. You cannot gravely-and may I say it without disrespect-you cannot conscientiously speak in the same breath of the performance of these two duties. It is Mount Olym­pus to a wart to talk of passing by these great and essential objects of public interest and stooping down into the recesses of this Senate to displa-ce four acceptable officials in order that you may show your power by replacing them with four others.

But, Mr. President, I think there is enough in that to give pause to the other side, whether they will, in the face of these facts which must be admitted and cannot be denied, still insist by virtue of mere nominal majority power in so conducting the public business of this country that objects of public interest shall be neglected and post­poned for such objects as these.

And what are the real objects Y I want to speak by the record; I want to speak of the facts. I do not pretend to read men's motives ; I do not intend to impugn them; but I do intend to state facts to which my eyes and the eyes of the American people cannot and ought not be closed. If the facta are innocent and honorable, they can bear recital and examination ; and if they be not, then an examination and recital are more essential in order that their proper public judg­ment may be awarded to them.

In this country we have many unwritten political laws. There is the law of party and party avowals perfectly well understood, created by no statute and found upon no constitution. Let me cite one. The Constitution of the United States intended that the e~ectoral college should be composed of a body of independent men, and that they in each State without combination with the electors in other States should themselves choose the President of the United States. He was not intended to be an officer of popular choice, but to be the in­dependent choice of a college of electors; yet what has public action and the unwritten law of this country brought to pass T That there is no such thing as freedom of choice and independence of action in an elector; but that if he having been nominated, unbound by oath, nnpledged by promise, but simply by silent acceptance of the nomi- -nation had allowed his name to be held forth as an elector favorable to one set of candidates and then should vote for the other or fail to vote for those for whom he was nominated, I ask yon would not the unwritten law of this land ring from one end to the other and blast him with popnlar execration f The foundation of that feeling and of that admitted law is in political morality generated in the minds of honest and honorable men, undefined by statute, but essential for the very existence of a government of laws.

Senators, as I said yesterday, thirty-nine members of tnis body each and all proclaimed their advocacy of the election of Hancock and English at the last election, all wrote of it, spoke of it according to their various habits of thought and modes of expression. That is undoubted and undeniable. When we came here it was rumored that one of those votes would be withdrawn from the party whose candidates he bad publicly supported and would be cast with the party of his opponents. Well, that fact was finally, after a long delay and much mystery, created by whom I know not, but which could have been dispelled by one word from the individual who wa~ the subject of so much accidental and unusual interest. He finally declared himself in a vote in this body voting with the republicans to postpone the consideration of the resolution which was offered on this side of the Chamber to organize the committees of this body. Following that fact the caucus of the republican Sena.tors was held, a series of resolutions was adopted unseating certain officers or rather seating others in their stead, vacating offices by the same resolution and refilling them.

Mr. RANSOM. The committees first. Mr. BAYARD. I have already referred to them. The committees

were first formed. Then, after the formation of committees and the organization of the Senate by the aid of the vice-presidential vote, came the proposal to unship these four elective officers, and we find that among those chosen by the republicans to take the place of Ser­geant-at-Arms the name of a gentleman from the State of Virginia who was a candidate for the post of elector for Hancock and Eng­lish. That is another fact. Well, I have not construed a motive as to his change, because it was with his consent that this was done, but we are not left in doubt as to the moving ca.use of his appoint­ment. In the first place we seo the fact that the Senator from Vir­ginia who of his own will and acting upon his own responsibility allied himself with that party whose candidates he had opposed at the last election, was, according to his statement, the originator and the cause of the nomination of Mr. Riddleberger, of Virginia, by the republicans. Let me read his language:

Mr. President, I must beg the indulgence of the Senate for a few minutes longer, to do justice by one for the introduction of whose name here I am responsible.

And further on : It is reported generally that some Senators of the democratic }>arty are ready

and willing to abandon opposition to the further organization of tliis Senate if the name of Mr. Riddle berger shall be withdrawn. If that be true, I ask Senators to confe e the fact and let it go to the country, that they are ready and willing to vield the organization of the Senate if only their revenge can be satisfied in the (iefeat of one of Vir¢nia's own honorable and honored sons, in the person of Cap­tain Riddleberger. They can yield a. complete republican organization, but can­not accept thls Virginia readjuster. I note with astonishnient the reasons as­signed, but discern very clearlv the real and underlying ones. Say they, he is of the repudiating party. If so, Mr. President, I, too, am of that party.

Here, then, follows the fact that the Senator whose opinion was

1:

I

I'

216 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. APBIL 6,

changed and who has now allied himself with the republican party was the originator and is the responsible person for placing a pro­fessed democrat, an avowed supporter of and an elector on the Han­cock and English ticket, before a republican caucus for their nomina­tion as Sergeant-at-Arms of the Unit-ed States Senate, and recognizing him by his description of alleged repudiation he declares himself in complete affiliation with him.

Now let us take another fact. When the committees of this body were changed they were, according to the list I have in my hand, thirty-nine in number,-thirty-three standing committees and six special committees. I find the name of the Senator from Virginia as the chairman of one, the Committee on Agriculture, and as occupy­ing high place upon three other important committees. I am making no objection to this; I am stating the facts, because from these facts there will be deductions and upon these facts there are and there ought to be the exercise of individ:ual and public judgment.

By the precedents of both political parties of this body, chairman­ships and influence in place upon committees are the awards to sen­iority and length of service; and I find as a fact that, ·whereas there are thirty-seven republican Senators who always were republicans, who were before the last election and are to-day republicans, four of those gentlemen are excluded from chairmanships of committees and fail to occupy those positions which seniority in party service would certainly have given them, according to all the precedents of party action,over the new-comer, whose political position or intentions were not assigned by him until two weeks ago.

All these facts combine to form the basis of an independent and intelligent judgment. There they are. Civility, the rules of this Senate which are founded upon decorum, personal courtesy, that charity which we all need in the construction of our motives, may prevent Senators and ought to prevent them from hasty or extreme expressions of opinion upon a case like this; butt gentlemen, judg­ment will be formed and judgment ought to be formed, and its ex­pression is a question perhaps of ta.ste, or of a sense of justice, or a sense of public duty ; but the facts are there, and from those facts the ordinary deductions of mankind, founded upon their usual ap­preciation of human motive, must and will be formed and they can­not hope to be escaped. They are heard to-day all over the country-and will not be soon forgotten. ·

So, then, having gone over the weight of public business demand­ing action and the perfectly trivial character of the pretext for its postponement on the other side, I now put in the scale with that, which justifies me to vote for the consideration of the public busi­ne s, the addition that in the face of such facts as these my views of political morality and duty tell me to lend my opposition to the con­summation of a reward to Mr. Riddleberger, or to the Senator who nominated him, on the state of facts which stand before us and the motives for which I have not assumed to state, however clear they may seem to my apprehension.

But, Mr. President, there is something more. As to the object of the nomination of the proposed Sergeant-at-Arms we are not left in don bt. With a conspicuous candor and in perfectly intelligible phrase, the honorable SenatorfromPennsylvania, [Mr. CAMERO~,] astute, and active, and influential, as we know him to be, in the conduct of party affairs; he, the spokesman of the present so-called majority; he, who led your phalanx of filibusters against the organization of the Senate committees four weeks ago; he, whose eloquence was wasted, no not wasted, but successfully exerted in motions alternately to adjourn and to attend to executive business, but always to defeat the regular business before the body; he, who is by common consent and by his own assumption fully cognizant of the motive and the object and the details of all this arrangement; he has spoken, and I venture to read to the Senate · his language. He claims that which I concede the right of the majority having the responsibility to exercise the power of control of the ordinary business of the Senate, and then adds :

The c&ntest, however, in which we are engaged-

Says the Senator from Penn ylvania on the 1st of April-I do not know that the day is ominous-

The contest, however, in which we are engaged is not simply t.o secure the offi.. eers and employ6s to party friends, as the Senators on the other side pretend, nor is it solely a struggle of the majority to maintain its right to control the organiza­tion of the body.

Those are the mere incidents, the unimportant parts. There is s~metbing higher than and abov~ all this, somethin~ the great impor­

tance of which has not escaped the attention of our opponents here. It is the coming political contest in Virginia. The Senator from Virginia. who sits nearest me has terrified the old democratic regim-e of his State by his courao-eons bearino­on this floor. o ..

And he is sustained by the remarks of the honorable Senator from Virginia whose speech some weeks ago was so very int-eresting in this Chamber but which has ceased now to be so. Now, Senators, consider what this means and whali is the claim of power. There is to be next fall an election in the State of Virginia for what f It is to be for a governor for that State, for a. Legislature for that State, for the judges of the court of appeals of that State. There is not a sin?,le Federal officer chosen. There cannot be under any law of the United States or pretext of authority a single Pederal officer, even in supervision, to control any of these elections. The Supreme Court have told us the United States have no voters of their own but that

they have a right to prevent a discrimination on the grounds of race or color bythelaws of a State, and they have assumed that control by act of Congress where members of Congress are concerned.

Mr. BLAIR. Will the Senator allow me to ask him one question f Mr. BAYARD. I want to state only my proposition. Mr. BLAIR. It was in regard to the citation from the Supreme

Court that I wanted to ask him about. Mr. BAYARD. I mean to say this: the State election in Virginia

is to be held by State officers, determined by State officers for an elec­tion of State officers, and the Government of the United States has no legal control, nor is there any law of Congress nor any featnre of the Constitution that gives the Congress of the United States the right to interfere with and control the election of State officers.

Now, what is proposed Y It cannot be said that Congress has the right to interfere. Legal control we cannot exert; interference we cannot legally exert. What is proposed f The dangerous step of renewed centralization, not by act of Congress regularly passed and approved which is capable of being tested in the Supreme Court as to its constitutionality, but by the separate action of the Senate, not a. legislative body for this purpose, part of the executive council in its present capacity, undertaking avowedly certain action that shall interfere with and control the election in the State of Virginia. Mr. President, I say that of itself cannot be defended. I say it is a usur­pation and an invasion. I say it is in the strongest sense of the word a revolutionary attempt by unlawful and illegitimate methods to con­trol the free election of a State in regard to matters solely submitted to its own laws and people. And how control it Y I deny the power, even if you attempted to exert it under the forms of law regularly enacted; but this is to do by indirection, without law to do that which even with law it is not competent for you to attempt. And then pause for one moment to consider not only do you exercise a power denied to you by your frame of government and by the Con­stitution you have sworn to support, but you add to usurpation the terrible danger of corruption, because if this man is to be chosen an officer of the Senate in order that he may influence elections in Vir­ginia, how can he do it in the line of his public duty! Is it the money that is to be paid him -for his services here that he is to expend there! Ia it his power of appointment over subordinates to be chosen there that is to enable him to exercise this power t

Why, ~entlemen, it will not be admitted, it will not be confessed because 1t would not be j nstifiable in any way to attempt so to misuse the official powers and salaries and emoluments of officers of the Gov­ernment of the United States. One hundred and fifty years ago a statute of Great Britain, standing to-day unrepealed and cited by Blackstone in his Commentaries1 tells you that for any man holding a public office to attempt to solicit or influence a vote subjected him to a fine of £100, because as Blackstone says to attempt to use the offices of a country to control the elections of a country is "to cut up gov­ernment by the roots." And yet in this case t.he United States Sen­ate goes out of its sphere, which is strictly federal, to interfere with the free elections of a State by means of appointing its officers, and all public business is to be arrested until that shall have been accom­plished. Pnt that in the scale and let it weigh-the fact that impor­tant and responsible offices of the United States Senate are merchan­dise in the political market to control .the election of State officers.

And, now, Senators, there is another feature of this transaction in­dependent of the great calls of public duty to fill these important places for which the President has sent us nominations; other ques­tions than the morality or immorality of suddenly rewarding with public office those who as suddenly and as unexpectedly shall change their political protestations, something stronger than the fact even that the offices of the Senate, one great branch of Federal power, shall be used to interfere with a matter confessedly within State juris­diction; and that is this: What is the main issue in the contest in Virginia which you expect to decide, and upon which you take sides and lend your influence by appointing the partisans of that faction which you embrace f So far as I can state the issue,-and I wish to state it restrainedly and fairly, and shall cite the language of the Senator from Virginia in order to describe it-it is this: The dominant party in Virginia was prior to the year 1879 what is known as. the democratic party of that State. A difference arose, a split took place in regard lio matters of their local interests. Vir­ginia. had been the theater of war, the camping-ground and the bat­tle-field of all those armed hosts who met in combat for four long years. There never was a day during those four years that the soil of that State was not in the occupation of armed forces, and the results followed too sad to be pictured by me, only useful by way of warning and of that wisdom we may gain from sad retrospection. The result was desolation and impoverishment, and at the end of the struggle the Commonwealth emerged with her old debt standing but her resources shorn, disordered and broken. What was to be done ! Social difficulties, political revolutions, an upturning of society from its very ba.se, threw upon the people of Virginia difficulties which few communitiesinthehistoryof mankind have been ableto survive. But thanks to the seed of American manhood which though buried yet will grow, and which though broken will still survive, she has emerged and is day by day progressin~ rapidly and hopefully into the outer air of prosperity and the ability to settle fully and fairly with those to whom she ie indebted. Yet there was a great public debt honestly incurred, for which public improvements had been purchased valll-:

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. 217 able to her people, and the question was simply to make arrangements financially to meet it.

What is the difference between the two parties, or the divisions, those who are called the debt-paying portion and those who call them­selves the readjusters of the State debt T It is simply this: the debt of Virginia as it stands upon her statute-books, as attested by the bonds issued under her seal, is every cent of it admitted by the debt­paying or the fonder party of Virginia, but they call upon those who are creditors to consider their condition and make with them a vol­untary arrangement or compromise just and honorable to both, and which they can with care and honesty carry out; in other worus, the debt-paying and funding portion of Virginia will do nothing with their public obligations except that to which the creditor consents. Volcnti non fit injuria. They propose to enforce nothing ·except their own obligation, and if concession is made in the spirit of compromise it shall be such as their creditors consent to. That is their position. It is to be a voluntary arrangement acceptable to the creditor or ac­cepted by the creditor without any compulsion on the part of the debtor, and upon that they propose to adjust and settle their obliga­tions in full.

On the other hand is another party, the" rea.djnsters," as they call themselves. They say, "We do not ask the consent of the creditor; it is not what we owe; it is not what he asks; it is what we see fit to pay him; we will make a new contract with him ; we will :fix our own terms;" and to use a fine phrase and euphuism which I find in the speech of the Senator-from Virginia [Mr. MAHoNE] at page 92 of the REcoRD, we will" elirninate" such portions of the public debt as we do not choose to pay. That means thirteen solid millions of prin­cipal and the entire interest since 1861. Lest I may do injustice, let me read the language:

In fixing the principal debt of Virginia at $19,665,176 it is obvious that about 13,600,000 of the principal which the McCnlloch bill- . That was the debt-payer's bill-

sought to fasten upon us has been eliminated. There is much in a phrase. Said Pistol : "Convey," the wise it calL "Steal!" foh! a :fico for the phrase. Repudiate f No, eliminate. Further, the Senator from Virginia

says: How, then, is that enormous amount (greater than the whole debt of undivided

Virginia) made np 7 By capitalizing simple and compound interest which accrued dnnng the period of war and reconstruction. We not only object to this usurious and oppressive mode of accumulation against ns, but we peremptorily reject the whole claim for any interest at all for the period indicated.

Bywhose consent! The consent of the debtor; and what does the creditor say T He is answered that his claim is peremptorily rejected, or it is eliminated; or if yon use plain English, it is insolently repu­diated.

Mr. President, that is the issue which we are told by the speech of the same Senator is to control the election in Virginia in the coming autumn. It is that issue incarnated in Mr. Riddleberger, whose bill bearing his name (passed by there adjusting legislature and vetoed by the democratic governor, Holliday) proposing to carry these pro­jects into effect is to be the Mahone-Riddleberger platform next fall in Virginia, and it is in that issue and upon that side of that issue that the republican party in the Senate of the United States propose to identify themselves by choosing this man to be their representa­tive, to be one of their own confidential and important officers. It is with him, it is with his doctrines, it is to such results that the ma­jority stand committed. The Grecian fable tells us of the man who slew the dragon and sowed his teeth and the crop was armed men who saturated the land with blood. It seems to me that if yon shall insist, Senators, in sowing the seeds of public repudiation of admitted a,nd honorable obligations, yon are sowing a crop worse than that of Cadmus, and which will bear infinitely more dangerous fruit to us and to our posterity.

What is credit Y It is the honest poor man's capital. It is because he is trusted for hiS honesty that he can borrow means to enable him to outlive his period of distress and await the time of the fruition of his labors. If Virg~a ~e poor, and I know she is poor, I beg of yon do n~t take that whiCh Is morenecessaryto herto.daythan it was in her tunes of opulence and plenty. Leave to her people the right to be believed and trusted. Leave them that sense of self-respect and honest manhood that an unbroken word gives to any man however humble. '

I read the other day, as I have often read, never without reverence and instruction, the words of Daniel Webster, who whenever the question w3;s aske!J. of his great brain and sound heart, what were duty and wisdom m regard to the government of his country never failed to give back a patriotic and a true response. In 1839 w'hen he was in London the house of Baring Brothers & Co. wrote to him ask­ing whether the Legislature of one of the States had legal and con­stitutional power to contract loans at home and abroad. He pro­ceeded to gtve J.ris reasons in h}s usual luminous and logical II,lanner to show the eXIstence unquestioned of that power. Having stated to his inquirers the existence of that power in the State he then pro­ceeded to consider what their remedies were to enforce s~ch contracts for loans as had been made by them. Said he: T~e security for State loans is th.e plighted faith of the State, as a. political com·

mnmty. It rests on the same basi& 58 other contracts with established govern. menta, the same basis, for example, as loans made by the United States, under the

authority of Congress ; that is to say, the good faith of the Government making the loan, and its ability to fulfill its engagements. The State loans, it is kiJown, hav~ been contracted principally for the purpose of making railroads and canals ; and m some cases, although I know not how generally, the income or revenue ex­pected to be derived from these works is directly and specifically pledged, and in others very valuable tracts of land. It cannot be doubted that the general resnlt of these works of internal improvement has been and will be to enhance the wealth and the ability of the States.

· It has been said that the States cannot be sued on these bonds. But neither could the United States be sued, nor, as I suppose, the Crown of England, in a like case. Nor would the power of sning give to the creditors, probably, a.ny sn~stantial additional security. The solemn obligation of a government, arising on Its own ac~ow~edged bond, would not be enhanced by ju.dsment ren uered on snch ~o~d. If It e1ther coni~ not or would not ma,ke p~ywwn for paying the ~ond, 1t Is not probable t hat It could or would make proVIsiOn for satisfying the JUdgment.

The States cannot ~id themselves of their obligations otherwise than by the hon­est payment of the debt . They can pass no law impairing the obligation of their own contracts. They can make nothing a tender, in discharge of such contracts but gold an.d silver. They possess all adequate power of providing for the case, by taxes ~d mternal mea~ of revenu~. They ca~ot get round their dnty, nor evade Its force. Any failure to fulfil Its undertakin"'S would be an open violation of public faith, to be followed by the penaltv of dishonor and disgrace ; a. penalty !t may be presumed, ·which no State of the "American Union would be likely t<) mcnr.

I would that the spirit and the meaning and the force of those words of this great Massachusetts Senator could burn themselves in upon the mind of every man in the American Union. He has stated the only penalty, but, great Heaven, wha,t a. penalty is that! The penalty of dishonor; the penalty of disgrace. When yon speak of that you have included all that makes life unhappy and existence unbearable.

To the people of Virginia I bear the same affection, no more and no less, that I do to the people of other States, save only that sometimes their very misfortunes have dignified them in my eyes and touched m& with a sympathy and an interest that I did not feel for those who had fared better in the rough voyage of fate. I have no right to interfere in local affairs in Virginia; I never did interfere in local affairs in Virginia; but I had my view privately, and justifiably I expressed it in a spirit of responsive friendship to her people, and publicly to­day do I here express it, when the proposition is made to strevgthen the hands of those who I feel are driving daggers into the side of that honored and venerable Commonwealth. I believe I could show with pen and pencil to any reasonable man that this dallying with the debt and suffering the plighted faith of Virginia to be brought in question is costing them annually infinitely more than the principal and inter­est of their debt combined.

I have since I came in this Chamber, as I think will be admitted~ been the steady uncompromising foe to everything like unwise leg­islation, that would jeopard the public credit of the United States; and no measure, originate where it may, recommended no matter by whom, that tended to strengthen the fabric of our public credit and prosperity but found in me a ready, an earnest, a zealous advocate. So to-day standing here, Senators, and weighing my duty whether by my failure to exercise every parliamentary right given to me I should permit the hand to be strengthened that seeks to strike down or injure the credit of a State of this Union, I tell yon I would be recreant to my sense of duty if I failed to exert myself to the utmost in opposition to it.

There stands my case before my conscience and it stands before this country. I submit it to yon. Look at the plain facts; look at the results.

I know yon say that the democratic party is a dangerous organiza­tion and that it is a high and patriotic duty to defeat and disinte­grate it. I db not pause now to make denial of that. If I thought so, I would aid yon, but l do net think so, and I oppose you.

But oh, gentlemen, does "the end justify the means Y" Are you to go back to your people or into your own closets and say, as I heard th3jt eloquent man whom dea.th took from us lately, Mr. Carpenter, ~ once say, that you can "sta,nch blood with fraud Y" Do you think you are justified in strengthening the hands of those who are actual if not avowed·repudiators of the public debt of that State in order to disintegrate the organization known as the democratic party of Vir­ginia T That doctrine will corrode all human promise; it will destroy every sense of human obligation. The means must justify itself. 'Vhat yon would have highly that yon should have holily. Have yon any right to do this thing f I speak to yon with respect; I speak to you with the earnestness of a man who desires to prevent you from doing that which I think will be a stain upon this body, and be a frightful precedent in political action. A witty man once said that a blunder was worse than a crime. He meant by that that the consequences of an unwise public act might be injurious far be­yond the intent of the man who committed it. The mistake in judg:.· ment of a general, the mistake in judgment of a minister of finaace on an unwise measure of finance, the plunging a country into buai-' ness distress, may lead it to ruin and dishonor amid the tears of the man who innocently counseled it. It is not by impeachment of your motives; it is by holding up before you the inevitable consequences of your action, and to beg yon to abandon your purpose that I make this appeal.

Sir, I have said these things because I see throughout this country an inability or an indisposition to comprehend the causes that keep this grave body in session apparently to no end. There is reason and right and force in much that you say in regard to yonr power and your duty as holding this nominal majority, but there is also reason

218 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. APRIL 6,

superabundant, as I have tried to show, to justify ns in arresting your onward progress in the consummation of this act, and in doing 1t I believe the facts justify us. I think so now, and so long aa I think so I shall try to stand by my conviction. AB I said, it is not the time or the occasion or the business for anything like threats or suggestions of physical endurance. That is not the question. I know they often tell us that this is not the heroic age. There are many ways in which heroism may be shown. There is many a man goes ·down to his death in the sober garments of peace as true a hero in -defense of his conviction and his conscience as any who died in panoply upon the field of battle. The question is serious; it may become more so, but by the light that I have received and for the reasons that I have stated, I stand for the present where I was when the con­test opened, and shall oppose the pa-ssage of your caucus resolutions.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. President, I did not expect yesterday to be drawn into this debate, but I found that the Senator from Delaware [Mr. BAYARD] and I agreed upon so many topics that I thought I was justified in coming forward and stating my position so as to show that although on opposite sides in politics we did agree upon the leading principle involved in the contest which is now going on. Perhaps I had better restate this governing principle before I answer the argument that he bas just made.

The Senator agrees with me that the fundamental rule of all delib­-erative bodies is that a m..'l>jority shall rule; that in every body, whether a senate or a house of representatives or a house of com­mons, however composed, in the end the vote of the majority of each member must determine the question; that the minority have cer­tain rights; that to secure those rights rules are prescribed, and that those rules enable such minority to delay business, to procrastinate a vote, to seek debate and to thwart to a great extent the a.ction of the majority; but after all, when debate is exhausted, then the ma­jority must rule. He depicted the results as the opposite doctrine but he did not state them nearly as strongly as they might be stated. When the tactics of the minority go beyond this reasonable rule they become revolutionary.

Fifteen Senators on this floor can prevent the Senate of the United States from doing a single act, and for the time arrest the Govern­ment. Under the rules of the Senate, without violating a single one -of them, this Government might be as absolutely destroyed as the southern confederates would have destroyed it if they had succeeded in their hopes. The action of a minority of fifteen determined men acting under your rules can prevent the appropriation bills from being passed; the pay of your Army, the pay of your Navy, or the pay of your courts. In other words, to use the expression of my friend, these motions, which were intended to be" the implements of free­men," to enable a minority to exercise their right of full debate, may be converted into revolutionary agencies. There are implements of freemen, but such implements may be very dangerons in the hands of people who will use them for a bad purpose.

The rules of the Senate were prescribed to enable minorities to ex­orcise a reasonable and fair restraint over legislation; to prevent hasty action, but when used for the purpose of defeating the will of the majority, they become revolutionary agencies. If a minority -carry their action to the full extent possible under the rules of the Sen­ate, they might destroy this Government, every branch of it from the Executive down through all its departments. These rnles were in­tended to be construed with reason and applied with judgment, and

. whenever Senators resort to extreme measures under the rules they may entirely defeat the will of the majority and paralyze the Govern­'lilent.

The Senate is so constituted to-day that either party could prevent the passage of any law. Yea, under the rules of the body a very small minority of either party could prevent the passage of any law. Because the minority have that power under the rules, will that jus­tify them and make it right for them to exeroise that power 7 No. The Senator assumes, and he and I agree there, that when you go beyond a reasonable parliamentary opposition to the will of the ma­jority you trespass upon dangerous ground of revolution. If such "Conduct is accompanied with the evil, bad intent that constitutes treason, it becomes treasonable. Fifteen men might break up this Government by the use of this minority power, and if they conspired for that purpose might be guilty of treason at common law, and yet act in strict accordance with the rules, because they might with a bad intent in exercising the power they enjoy under the rules actu­ally break up the Gove:pm1ent and destroy its existence.

The Senator and I agree, therefore, entirely that the doctrine of the right of the majority to rule must prevail. We also agree that the minority have certain rights to interpose dilatory motions and vari­ous motions to delay and thwart and weary out, if they can, the ma-jority; but when they pass beyond that boundary then they enter upon dangerous ground, and my friend from Delaware agrees with me there.

Here lies the weakness of the argument. He told us yesterday that he wonld in a carefully prepared address bring forward the grounds

.and reasons why he now feelsjustifiedinresortingto dilatory motions, not to continue until December, but to continue until he changes his .mind. Other Senators on that side of the Honse not so cautions as .he say they must continue until December. If until December, why ;not until January-why not year after year, and year after year!

What weighty reason does the Senator come forward to-day and

give us f I have listened with ps.tience to nearly all he has said. What is it that justifies this act which he denounces as revolutionary and dan~erons f Forsooth, it is because the Senate of the United States WIBh to change three or four officers. He says we ought not to do it. Suppose he is right. I do not stop to debate that question, because I think it is too small for debate. Suppose he is right, must he therefore to defeat a small matter, which he says is a small matter, resort to dangerous expedients Y Must he cross the boundary-line between a reasonable opposition to the will of the majority and a dangerous opposition· to the will of the majority! Must he make the occasion of the removal of these few clerks the ground for resort­ing to extraordinary expedients which he himself has eloquently and ably denounced, and in which I concur Y What reason does he give us Y I have endeavored to sum up these reasons as briefly as I can so that I may not too long occupy the attention of the Senate; and I think I shall state them in the order in which I believe the Senator stated them.

The first objection made is that the Senator from Virginia, [Mr. MAHo~TE,] a member of this body, was a democrat. He was one of thirty-nine Senators who voted for Hancock; and he comes here now in despite of what they expected of him and proposes to vote with the republicans instead of voting with the democrats; in other words, that Senator has changed his mind, has changed his opinion, has changed his party relations. I could go into a minute defense ·with the facts which have been furnished me, to show that the Senator from Virginia never was elected as a democrat ; that he was repudiated by the democrats at the time he was elected ; that he wa.s not voted for by the democrats or a majority of them ; that he did not claim to be a democrat; that he claimed to be an independent, and was so elected, and was elected by the republican votes and readjnster or independ­ent democratic votes. I might go a little further and show yon that before that Senator came here he declared his purpose to separate from the democratic party; that he denounced the democratic party as the Bourbon democracy. In his speech here the other day he stated his position, and while he adheres to it he is a good enough republican for me. He said :

The desire of our people for cordial relations with all sections of a. common country and the people of all the States of the Union, their devotion to popular ed­ucation, their efforts for the free enjoyment of a. priceless suffrag_e and an honest count of ballots, their determination to make Virginia., in the puolic belief, a de· sirable home for all men, wherever their birthplace, whate.ar their opinions, and to open her fields and her mines to enterprise and capital, and to stay the retro­grade movement of years, so as to bring her back from the fifteenth in grade to her original position among the first in the sisterhood of States, forbid that my action here should be controlled or intl.uenced by a caucus whose party has waged war upon my constituency and where party success is held paramount to what I con­ceive to be the intere ts of Virginia and the welfare of the whole country.

The readjusters of Virgini.a have no feeling of hostility, no words of unkindness for the colored man. His freedom has come, and whether by purpose or by acci­dent, thank God, that, among other issue which so long distracted our country and restrained its growth was concluded, and I trust forever, by the results of the san­guinary struggle between the sections.

I have faith, and it is my earnest hope, that the march of an enlightened civiliza· tion and the progress of human freedom will proceed until God's great family shall everywhere enjoy the prodncts of their own labor and the blessings of civil, polit· ical, and religious liberty. •

The Senator from Virginia in the same speech sets forth the fact at length that he was not elected by the democrats. He shows that he was not elected by them; that he was elected in opposition to them; and a very excellent gentleman, with whom I had the honor t-o serve when I was a member of the Senate, who was the nominee of the democratic party, was his opponent, and he beat him.

But it is said that the Senator from Virginia voted for Hancock. A great many men voted· for Hancock because he made very fair promises. General Hancock is a very patriotic man. He in his letter of acceptance made a very good platform, much of which the repub­licans would very cheerfully adopt a-s their own. The trouble was that the republicans would not like to trust the democratic party to carry out the principles of General Hancock. I need not say any­thing further in regard to that. A great many men voted for General Hancock who had no faith whatever in the democratic party. But that is not all.

It appears that although the readjnster~ did vote for Hancock, or for Hancock electors, they did not vote for the same electors, and they did not adopt the democratic platform. On the contrary, they made a platform of their own, and they selected their own electors. Disclaiming any connection or affiiliation with the democratic party, they brought forward their own candidates, but they were known as Hancock electors. This half democracy, composed of men whore­pudiated the party, who denounced the leaders on every stump as the Bourbon democracy who never learned anything and never forgot anything, are held up to the world as deserters by the democracy which they had left. It appears also that every member of the Leg­islature who voted for the Senator from Virginia was elected as a "MAHONE" man, not as a democrat. Most of them were · elected by republicans; they were elected to snpport ?t1r. MAHoNE in opposition to the democratic party. Some wanted to support the ideas of the Senator from Virginia [Mr. MAHo~TE] on the Virginia debt; some with the hope that this break in the Bourbon element in the South would enable them to have a free election and a fair count; many with different motives; but all of them were elected aa opposed to the democratic party. Every man who voted for the Senator from Vir­ginia was elected in opposition to the democratic party. It is so

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 219 shown by these papers and so alleged by that Senator and not con­tradicted, as I understand, by his colleague; and upon this, forsooth, because he who has been repudiated and denounced by them, who was not voted for by a single Virginia democrat, comes in and acts with the republicans, that is the ground of a revolutionary movement to prevent the majority from taking the very first step that they want to take, the election of some officers of this body.

Sir, this is a very slender basis for a revolutionary and dangerous uroceeding that will not be justified by candid men. & The Senator from Virginia [Mr. MAHONE] I believe is now the best friend of the South. He comes here with a platform which, if he will stand by, the young men of the South will rally around, and with it and a fair leader will meet and overthrow the old democratic party of the South. I tell you, Senators, there is a profound distrust that the democratic party could not carry out any such platform; that from the nature of their organization, from their very composi­tion, from their material, they could not secure a fair count and an honest vote in the South. There is a profound distrust of that kind, but if the young men of the South, and I wish my voice could reach every one of them, whether he be a republican or a democrat; if the young men of the South or the old leaders of the South, yea, even if my friend from Delaware on the other side, who is a leader of his party, would join with the Senator from Virginia in carrying out his promises., we will have a successful and prosperous country, and no more sectional parties in the country.

In order to show you that the . Senator from Virginia took a high position on this matter before he came here, I ask the Secretary to read a single paragraph from an interview with him that was pub­lished in the pa.pers of the country.

The Secretary read as follows : And with the readjustment of the debt as -proposed, the readjusters come into

full control of the Commonwealth, remove the Bourbon r6a{)tionists from place and power, and start Virginia on a new career of progress, prosperity, and greatness. Free suffrage for all men ; a fair count at the polls; free education for :ill children, and an impartial administration of the constitution and the laws for all citizens, will bo the internal policy of the liberal party which shall have dethroned the Bourbons; and with respect to the nation and our sister States, the same liberal party will insist upon and inculcate honest submission to the results of the war· due observance of the constitutional amendment.<!, the reconstruction acts, and au the other expressed and implied conditions that accompanied the restoration of Virginia to the Union; the cultivation of fraternal relations with our fellow.citi­.zens of every quarter, and the removal of sectional jealousies and race distinctions in all our politics.

Mr. SHERMAN. The theory that the Senator from Virginia was elected as a democrat, that they had any claim 'n honor or in con­~cience upon his vote, that they had any right of courtesy or fair treatment from him except as one gentleman always owes courtesy and fair treatment to all people-the idea that this democratic party which my friend from Delaware represents had any claim of honor on the Senat.or from Virginia, is utterly unfounded.

Mr. :McPHERSON. Was this interview before or after the elec­tion f

Mr. SHERl\IAN. I do not know exactly when it was. Do yon know?

Mr. McPHERSON. I do not. I think it was after the election. Mr. SHERMAN. It is simply what l:fin"din the papers. When the

Senator from Virginia separat-ed from the democratic party, as he did when he was elected in opposition ·to their candidate by men who were voted for to elect him, the democratic party had no right to expect his vote.

Indeed we know very well that any act whatever of independence on the part of a democrat in the Southern States is punished with a severity that, we in the North know nothing about. When a demo­crat in the South rebels against the intolerant arrogance of that old Bourbon democracy we know what his fate is. AB an illustration of that fact I call your attention to a speech made by an honorable member of this body, the Senator from South Carolina, [Mr. BUTLER,] who, in speaking of General Longstreet, stated what would be done by the democratic party to any man who hesitated or faltered or became an independent or radical in any sense of the term. We all know the character of General Longstreet, a brilliant, able man, probably one of the ablest lea.ders of the confederates of the South, a man educated at West Point, who went into the confederate army. We thought he violated his oath of fealty, we spoke of him very unkindly; but when the wa.r was over he thought then that the feelings of the war should cease. No sooner had he taken his posi­tion as a kind of quasi-independent in the democratic party than he was ostracized. I do not say that upon my own authority, but I shaH read to show what the Senator from Virginia might expect from the democratic party if he declared his independence, as he ha~ now done, and the" kind of treatment they would deal out to him. This extract is taken from a speech attributed to one of the Senators from South Carolina. It is taken from a southern paper. Speaking of ind~pendents, he said:

If you have grievances here, publish them in the newspapers and refer them to the people, the sovereigns of us all. They have the power and the means, and the inclination, too, to correct whatever evils there may be in the democratic party. But for Heaven's sake, for the sake of the graves of your children, for the honor of your country, don't come out and say, "I'm an independent! " I love independence myself, but I do not believe in asking a blessing of Esau when I want it for Jacob. You independents come out at once and do as you are certain to do in the end, if you pel'Severe in this path, go right square into the ranks of the radical party. There is no half-way ground. You cannot occupy a half.way ground. You must be either for us or against us. I assume that some of the e independents believe

that they have grievances. If you have been beaten for office, learn a lesson of patience. Sit down and boor it, rapplause,] for if you do not you are certain to drift into the radical party. Look at Longstreet. He was begged and implored not to persevere in his course; but he drifted on and on and floundered deeper and into the mire until he landed head and foot into the republican slough. And what has he gained ~ Scorn, ostracism, odium, ill-will, worse than all, the contempt of the men who stood by him under the shower of death and destruction.

This is the spirit with which the democratic party always. punished the men who broke off from their party allegiance. The Senator from Virginia had no right to expect anything else, and has received noth­ing else.

He forfeited the opinion of all honest men for the sake of an office, and he began by being an independent.

Thus the very motives of General Longstreet, who had distinguished himself so much in their service, were wrongly imputed to him :

This appeal I make to colored men, as well as white. Good government is as essential to them as it is to the whites. The republican party at theN orth is dif­ferent from the republican party in the South ; at theN orth incorruptible, honest, virtuous, intelligent men al'e to be found in its ranks. It is not so in the Sooth.

So he goes on and endeavors to cajole or perhaps persuade, I might say, the colored people of the South that the kind of republicans they had down there they could not rely upon. Further :

Go, then, fellow ·democrats, in a body to thEIIe men, reason mth them, plead with them, bring them back in to the democratic fold if you can, and if you cannot, then kick them mto the radical crowd where they belong.

"\Ve are all men at lea~t of middle age or past middle age. We know very well what independence means in the South. We know the terms of social ostracism. I admire the courage of any man who dares express his opinion openly and freely and follow the dictates of his conscience, and you will not find our northern republicans shrink­ing from the fellowship and aid of men who dare to do what they think is right in the face of an oRtracism like this. How unnatural it appears to us in the North! In the North we haveonrdifferences. My colleague and I may agree very well, although we differ as wide as the poles in our political relations. It does not affect or disturb the social relations of men. So in the Northern States generally men differ. So it wa~ before the war; theydifferedandhad theirdebates and discussions.

How many distinguished men in Virginia in the past have been elected by one party and finding that that party was not pursuing the path which conformed to their ideas of right deserted the party and tried to do better for their country Y There is Benjamin Watkins Leigh, who was an eminent man in Virginia in his time, who was elected by one party and followed another. William C. Rives was another, a man who is honored in Virginia everywhere. Ay! one of my old colleagues, Mr. Hunter, of Virginia, was elected by the whigs, and you know what a democrat he became. James M. 1\fason had something of the same experience. John Tyler, a bitter demo­crat, was taken up by the whigs and put on their ticket, and then as we thought, the whigs of those times, it was before my day, be de­serted and went to the democrats. One of the most remarkable pages of English history was the sudden change of Sir Robert Peel, an em­inent English commoner, the very prince of tories, a leader of the tories, who belonged to the country party and who led them in sev­eral great contests. He was for protection, he was for the corn laws, and was elected to office on that position; but being convinced by the events that disturbed England in 1845-'46, and along there, he changed his course and although at the head of the government, he took up the notions of Mr. Cobden and aided in repealing the corn laws; but yet Sir Robert Peel was never denounced as much by the tories of that time a.s the Senator from Virginia is denounced, and whyf Though not elected by the democrats, though disclaiming any connection with them, because he did not vote with them here at the beginning of this session.

This will not do, gentlemen. You must find a stronger basis or fulcrum for ·this revolutionary opposition to the will of the majority than the mere fact that the Senator from Virginia chooses to ally himself with those who sympathize with him in many of the lead­ing ideas that he adopts. And here I feel bound to say that so far as he proposes to repudiate any debt, any obligation, State, county, city, or national, I am utterly opposed to any such idea; and I was surprised beyond measure to hear my friend from Delaware beg us by every consideration not to ~ociate with repudiators. Though I believe every word that he says about his own position, that he would not repudiate a debt, that he had stood by the public faith under strong temptations, yet he is in daily association with Senators of States that have repudiated debts by the wholesale.

l'tir. BAYARD. Will the Senator please explain what he means by "strong temptations" to me T

Mr. SHERMAN. Party fealty is always a strong temptation, and the Senator from Delaware has certainly at times separated from the mass of his party on financial questions.

Mr. BAYARD. I never felt the temptation in the least. It was the easiest thinll' in the world for me to resist it. Those things may be tempting to ~orne other people, but they are not tempting to me.

Mr. SHERMAN. My friend from Delaware is a very good man, I have no doubt; bnt at the same ~e I t~ party fealt_y som~~es pulls him a good way out of a straight lme, an~ the cl;uef obJecti_on I have to him is that be does not always stand by hiS pronunCI.a­mientos when it comes to party matters. Sometimes I think he has

220 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. APRIL 6,

followed his party where really hie ~onscience did not go with it; bot in thn,t I may have been mistaken.

Now, Mr. President, as to the ideas of the Senator from Virginia upcm repudiatior. of aTiy public debt, I am not conversant enough with the question there to debate ' it even. This is not the time to debate it. We have not foil information in regard to the statistics of the repudiated States. One of the officers of the Government is now engaged in making up an elaborate statement of the repudia­tion of State debts and connty debts and district debts and city debts that have occurred in many of the Southern States, and perhaps at times in two or three of the Northern States, and we shall soon have in copious detail all the information that will enable us to fix the responsibility of parties and of men in regard to the repudiation of the Southern States. This, however, I may state in a general way, upon the basis of a document that I now hold in my hand, tha.t at least ten of the Southern States have repudiated or scaled down or refused to pay over one hundred and thirty million dollars of their State debts. I know many explanations have been given; Senators have risen in their places and tried to explain why and wherefore it has been done. That is not the thing; but the fact is that in ten of these States debts have been repudiated to the amount of 130,000,-000-more than the entire debt of the conn try at the formation of the Constitution.

Mr. HARRIS. Would it be inconvenient for the Senator to name those States Y

Mr. SHERMAN. Well, I would not do it; because if I were to name the States the Senators would then probably want to reply in the midst of my speech; but here they are, and here is the document, an official document prepared by an officer of the Government, who states the amount of repudiation of these States. I do not care to go into that. This is an article in the International Review, written by Mr. Porter, who is one of the officers of the Census Bureau.

Now, Mr. President, enough for the first of the rea.sons given by my honorable friend from Delaware. He says next that he is justi­fied in resisting this organization, not only because the Senator from Virginia does not vote with him-and how any democrat could sup­pose the Senator from Virginia would vote with him under the cir­cumstances I do not know-but he says we ought not to do this at a called session. That is the smallest pin-hook upon which a great revolutionary proceeding could hinge. It will not hang the weight. The Senate can do anything now that it may do without the consent of the House of Representatives. You heard here for almost two hours the honorable Senator from Indiana [Mr. VooRHEES] prove to you by copious extra-cts from the founders of the Government and from leading prominent men from the beginning of the Government to this hour that the Senate had full power to discuss the question of the funding bill, the national banks, calls for information, to send committees, to do anything that it cared to do ; and yet now sud­denly we are told that they cannot elect the officers of the Senate, the smallest and least significant of their duties; that they cannot turn out a clerk. They can send committees all over this broad land, as they have done; they can investigate the question of refunding and the conduct of the national banks; they can do anything such as the Senate has done over and over again.

Why, sir, this is too narrow a basis for a revolutionary movement. I could give in my own experience innumerable acts that have been done by the Senate at such sessions. The Senate itself, when it was completely under the control of the democrats, did change its officers at such a session. It is said that was done for cause. Well, sir, sup­pose we have a political cause for which we do it; that is a cause; the majority must determine. The majority here think it wise under the circumstances to make this change. That surrenders the question of power. Whether we are wise or not in doing it is another question. You can debate that, you can resist that, but you cannot resort to rev­olntion to prevent us from exerting the smallest and weakest power of the Senate, especially when it has been demonstrated liere by one of your own members within a few days that we have every power that the Senate can exercise except that which requires the assent of the House of Representatives.

But the third proposition of my friend is that to elect Riddle berger Sergeant-at-Arms is to interfere unconstitutionally with the election in Virginia, that the election of Riddle berger in some way or other has a connection with the election in Virginia. I do not exactly see how, although I hope it will. If the· election of Riddleberger will enable us to break up the power of the Bourbon democracy in Virginia I will go into this contest with ten times the heart I have had. If the action of the republican party in coming up to the support of the Senator from Virginia and electing one of his trusted friends will trengthen the republican party in Virginia that is a political object

which will greatly advance the good of the people of the United States, it is a political object for which I would contend. Anything that will beat down that party and build up our own is justifiable in morals and in law. Ev-ery party does it. Your nominations are made for the Presidency and Vice-Presidency from particular States to help the party in the States from which the candidates come. Every party acts from political motives, and a-cts honorably in doing so.

Now, sir, for any Senator to tell me that because we choose to elect :Mr. Riddle berger it is done for the purpose of corruption in the State of Virginia. is the simplest nonsense. There is no corruption about it. We will by the strong right arm of the republican party, that

party which has governed the country in twenty years of peace and war, that has a record as honorable as any in American history, pro­tect and defend the Senator from Virginia when he declares his in­dependence of Bourbon democracy. If he will stand with us upon the great principles of our party, we will cover him with our shield, we will back him with our strong arm. If you attack him you attack us, and we are accustomed to contests with you. That is the way I feel.

Therefore, if the election of Mr. Riddleberger will strengthen the republican party we are justified in electing him, if for no other rea­son; and there is not a Senator on that side of the House, if he would speak from his heart, bot would say he would be justified by a political motive like that. To call it corrupt or dishonorable is to use terms totally unworthy. We buy no man; we barter with no man. We have made no promises to any man. Sometimes the im­putation has been thrown out, not that Senators make a charge, but sometimes they send a paper up to have it read which contains a charge imputing corruption; sometimes an innuendo is thrown ont as that "we will not inquire into the means by which this has been brought about." · Gentlemen, that will not do; you cannot make the people believe there has been any corruption, because there has been none-no promise, no hope, no ezpectation of reward, nothing that is corrupt. Our motives for entering into this movement are as open as the day, as bright as the ann, and can be proclaimed on every house-top n,nd every stnmp in the broad land. We give our hand to the Senator from Virginia because we believe that in doing that we shall advance the public interests. We believe it will tend to break down that bitter feeling of hostility in the South which has prevailed since the war which almost borders on the dangerous. We believe that by extending our help and aid to thet~e men in expressing their opinions, even if we do not agree with all their opinions, by aiding them in defending themselves against the ostracism of a great and powerful sectional party, we do good to our country, and we propose to carry ont that policy, and in carrying out that policy we do mare good to the South than we do to ourselves.

We are strong enough in Ohio, strong enough in the other States, although we are nearly equally divided. If either party prevails in any one of the Northern States it makes no great difference, for the time being, any mistake is corrected by the changes of political par­ties; but in the South you have but one party, you allow no other. If a man goes from one party to another, which ought to be as near as from one neighbor's door to another, you ostracize him, yon detract him, you impute to him corruption, yon do with him as it was said waa done with Longstreet. Thi.s is the great evil. That which haa held back the democratic party more than anything else is because the northern people of both political parties mistrust yon; they doubt you. When yon say you will do a thing, they are afraid you will not ; not that you do not intend to do it, not that you do not start out with a good purpose, but because you fear the social ostracism and power of the Bourbon democracy of the Southern States.

Mr. President, so much for that. When we elect Mr. Riddelberger .we do not elect him because he wn,nted to readjust the public debt of Virginia; we do not elect him because we agree with all his notions, for I suppose that is scarcely possible in political life, but we do agree with the general ideas that are proclaimed in his doctrine here about equality of rights, about securing a free and fair election and an hon­est connt; and the repeal of that law, intended not for the purpose of levying taxes in Virginia, but for the purpose of deterring voters, a. law which itself has reversed the politics of Virginia; a law the re­peal of which would to-morrow give the republicans a. majority there· without any coalition with anybody.

Now, sir, when these gentlemen come forward and say that they will give to all men equal rights, that they will repeal this obnoxious law, that they will make the way open and free to the ballot-box, that the votes shall be fairly counted, and then that the majority shall rnle, and that the insolent, dominant, aristocratic minority which controls in the South shall be overthrown, we give them the ri~ht hand of fellowship; we will elect them Sergeant-at-Arms, we will elect them to office and share with them all honors and employ­ments as long as they will carry out that doctrine and that pledge. They are of us bone of our bone and tl.esh of our flesh, even if we do not agree with them in their :financi..1>l views.

Sir, if I was ~oing to Virginia, I should state to the people of Vir­ginia that I behave that the best thing for Virginia would be to pay the whole of the debt, not to repudiate a single farthing, pay it as fast as they can without regard to the proposed compromise with the­bondholders. I know it would be hard. The State of West Virginia, I believe, is more at fault than old Virginia in re$ard to the debt. Congress itself was at fault in not providing in the fundamental act which organized West Virginia for a mode of dividing the debt. I have always thought so, and always regretted it, though I have no doubt I voted for the bill myself without thinking much about the debt at the time. It ought to have been provided by Congress that West Virginia should assume a certain proportion of the debt, and the rule should have been laid down. '!'hey did not do l't ; but the State government of West Virginia did do it. The State of West Virginia resolved in its first constitution that it would assnme a. por­tion of the debt and pay it. Well, sir, the two States coUld not agree; they appointed commissioners at one time; but there was a differ­ence as to the mode and manner of the division, whether it should

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 221 be based upon population or upon property, and finally it fell through until the democratic party came into power in West Virginia, and then the debt was repudiated.

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. 1\Ir, President, the Senator does not mean·what he says, I reckon.

Mr. SHERMAN. If I have said anything the Senator does not agree to, I will yield to him to correct me.

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. The Senator stated, I believe, that the republican party had made provision to pay the debt of West Vir­ginia and that when the democrats came into power they repudiated it. I think that was the statement.

Mr. SHERMAN. I did not say that at all. Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. Then I beg the Senator's pardon if

he did not say that. That is what I understood him to say. Mr. SHERMAN. I said that in the adoption of the constitution of

West Virginia the republican party of that State gave a guarantee that they would assume a portion of the Virginia debt, to be a-scer­tained afterward. Am I correct in that?

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. That far. Mr. SHERMAN. And efforts were made, commissioners probably

were appointed and sent to Richmond, and they disagreed as to the basis of a settlement. Is that right Y

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. Yes; that is correct. . Mr. SHERMAN. That is all I said, except that afterward in West

Virginia when the democrats came into power they never did anything about it. They have never taken any steps, and I am told changed the constitution--

MI. DAVIS, of West Virginia. The Senator now is speaking of what he knows nothing about. ·

Mr. SHERMAN. I ask the Senator, then-.Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. Now let me state it in my own way. Mr. SHERMAN. Let me ask," did not the democrats when they

revised the constitution of West Virginia leave out that provision for the adjustment of the debt with Virginia~

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. No, sir. Mr. SHERMAN. I was informed they did. Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. No, air; but I will tell you what

they did. The same provision that originally existed was not re­newed, but a provision was made for the payment of the debt when­ever a settlement took place; and if the Senator will look at the con­stitution he will find that the State of West Virginia made a provision, and that was the only debt she had in view, that whenever the debt was settled ~-between the States, whenever the question wa-s settled, then there should be provision made for it. ~ow, let me aay--

Mr. SHERMAN. That is more cunning than I thought, because they made no provision for a settlement, and yet provided that when it was settled provision should be made.

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. The Senator from Connecticu't [1\Ir. HAWLEY] yesterday misstated the thing. The Senator from Ohio will permit me to say this: It was stated by the Senator from Con­necticut yesterday, and again by the Senator from Ohio to-day, that when the democrats came into power in West Virginia they repudi­ated the debt, or words to that effect. Now I state to both those Senators that I hope at a future day my colleague and myself will put this question fairly before the Senate ; but in the mean time I wish to say to each of these Senators that the democratic party is probably the only party that has moved straight to this question. It appointed commissioners, and they went to Richmond. The resolu­tion was introduced by a democrat, and by your speaker, sir, and passed through the Legislature, and the commissioners went to Rich­mond, and as the Senator says they disagreed; no settlement took place. They returned and their report was made and agreed to by a republican whom my friend knows well, :Mr. Campbell of our State; all these gentlemen have heard of him. He is a leading republican. That report now .stands approved by him; and so far as I know, and so far as the action of West Virginia is concerned, she is ready now and has been ready all the time to take her fair, just, and equitable proportion of that debt. I hope some day it will come to an adjust­ment; but until then I hope that the Senator and others will not misrepresenttheparties. Now, I saytothe Senator, so far as Iknow the republicans never sent a commission there, while the democrats did.

?tlr. SHERMAN. I think I have given way sufficiently. It is very manifest--

Mr. KELLOGG. I should like to ask the Senator from West Virginia a question.

Mr. SHERMAN. I would prefer not to yield further. Mr. KELLOGG. I ask aside from the fact that no provision has

been made in the constitution by the democratic party for an adjust­ment of the debt, has not the governor of West Virginia proclaimed in a State paper that the State was not bound for and did not owe any portion of the debt of old Virginia. 7

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. What governor does the Senator refer to~

Mr. KELLOGG. A democratic governor of the State: Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. What one 7 Mr. KELLOGG. I cannot specify the governor. I am so informed

by the Senator from Virginia. Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. So far as I know no governor has

ever expreased himself in that way. I never heard of it; but on the

,.

contrary every governor who has expressed himself on that subject has said we ~~ri to have a settlement.

Mr. SHER . Mr. President, I must protest against the habit that it seems to me has grown up in the Senate of interruptions more than I think it used to be. I do not know whether it is so or not, but it strikes me that it is more thJI.n it used to be. The interrup­tion of Senators on the floor ought not to be carried so far. How­ever, we have secured from the Senator from. West Virginia one im­portant fact. I was not arraigning West Virginia or East Virginia ; I respect both those States, and I believe both those States have un­developed resources which some day will make them rich and power­ful and able to pay a good deal more than th~ present debts. But the Senator from West Virginia himself confesses that the guarantee or promise on the part of the State of West Virginia to assume a por­tion of the debt of Virginia, of the old State, was omitted by the democrats in forming the new constitution, according to his own statement; and I have no time to look into it. All there is in it is that when the proportions are adjusted or settled and they find out what it is, then they will pay the share of West Virginia.

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. I know the Senator will allow me a moment. In the constitution of 1862, the first the State had, you will find a reference to the debt pending between the two States, and the State of West Virginia proposed to assume a just and equita­ble proportion of it. That constitution stood until1872, when there was a second constitutional convention, and by that convention the same words were not used, but a provision was made then for the bonded debt, and he will find it in two places.

Mr. HOAR. The Senator cannot find any such provision, I think. Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. It will be but a few days before the

subject will be properly presented to the Senate, and then the Sena­tors will know just how it stands. In the mean time I would advise my friend from Connecticut particularly to examine int-o the state­ments he made yesterday.

Mr. HAWLEY. Let me throw in a remark right here in justice t-o myself. I stated the exact fact as I understood it, that they left out of the constitution of 1872 that provision in the constitution of 1862 which provided for the assumption of a portion of the debt.

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. Mr. President, the Senator said the republicans did so and so and the democrats did so and so. He was wholly mistaken.

:Mr. HAWLEY. The democrats have had the State since 1872 and have not taken one step toward paying the debt.

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. The republicans had it lopg before that and did not pay anything.

Mr. SHERMAN. Now, Mr. President, it is clear that between the two, West Virginia and East Virginia have refused, neglected, and repudiated practically their public debt; that for years after the democrats came into power, after they got control of every depart­ment of government, they neglected to pay the interest of the debt, and after they had entered into an agreement to pay a certain sum they failed to pay it, when a controversy arose among the people of Virginia, not only among democrats but among republicans, as to the terms and conditions of the debt, as to what Virginia could pay and ought to pay. One side wa-s called ''debt-payers" and the other side called u readjusters." Neither party was infavorofpaying the public debt as it stood, so that in one sense both were equally faulty.

The Senator from Virginia has given his version of that contro­versy. He has stated that he was in favor of paying two-thirds of the debt at a fixed rate of interest, a rate of interest that if the credi-t of Virginia was as good as it formerly was would make her bonds at par to-day, leaving West Virginia to provide for one-third of the debt, leaving one-third of the debt to be provided for by West Virginia. Although all sides were in favor of repudiating the debt to a certain extent, the "debt-payers" only proposed to pay a part of it at a rate of interest of 4 per cent., I believe, and the readjusters proposed to pay a little less rate but probably more of the principal. Because of this difference, lo and behold I this Senate must be revolutionized by the renewing of motions one after another to adjourn and to go into executive seasion. This must be continued day after day, and day after day, until next December, in order to prevent us from electing a Virginia readjuster to an office here.

Mr. President, this is too narrow a basis to start a revolutionary proceeding upon, a proceeding that my friend from Delaware de­nounces as revolutionary when it was confined simply to Senators declining to vote. How is that revolutionary f Has not a SeRa tor a right to vote as he pleases 7 Has he not a right to withhold his vote f Yes. Has he not a right to go out into the cloak-room and not vote t Yes, ordinarily; but whenever his declining to vote or his going into the cloak-room to avoid a vote is for the purpose of defeating the will of the majority or to break a quorum it is wrong. The Senator agrees with me there. So when he votes day after day, and day after day, for motions to adjourn when he does not want to adjourn, and to go into executive session when he knows that there is a piece of business on the table that a majority wish to dispose of first before they go into executive session, he only travels through the same road of revolutionary precedents which he denounces in others and which I am glad to concur with him in saying is im­proper.

Now what is the fourth reason he gives f Oh I my friend goes into very eloquent-I am sorry I cannot follow him-tropes and figures to

222 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. APRIL 6,

denounce repudiation; repudiation is the evil that threatens our na- the presiding officer, the Vice-President, and a regular majority, be­tiona! credit. So it is, but yet he is one of the honored members of cause on every vote made since the committees were organized there a party that has had control in every State of the Union where repu- has been amajorityof Senators on oursidee:x:ceptdnonetievote, when diation has been proposed or has been adopted. If the republican their motion made was lost anyway ; but on every other vote there party as it is now organized ever proposed repudiation in any State has been a majority of Senators. or community, when or where Y. At one time we had a proposition to Sir, I did not intend to be drawn into this discUBBion. I appeal to repudiate the debt of Ohio-my colleague is hardly old enough to re- Senators to allow us to proceed with the ordinary course of busine s; member that-when two of the leaders of the democratic party by let us take the vote on the pending resolution. The majority have the name of Byington and McNulty led off in a proposition to re~m- shown their desire to do it; and you ought not to resist it any fnr­diate the debt of Ohio, then 25,000,000, when we had a population ther than to get your absentees in, or any further than to secure full of something less than two millions. They said we never could pay opportunity for the friendly debate you desire to carry on. Yon may it. Our bonds had got down to fifty cents on the dollar by reason of denounce us for our connection with the Senator from Virginia. We their extensive issue for public improvements then going on and con- will take care of that. You may denounce us for voting for Mr. Rid­ducted by both parties. A proposition was made to repudiate the dleberger. We will take care of that. Anything that yon ask of us debt, and it seemed for a time as if we should have the subject seri- in reason we will yield without any solicitation. But, sir, when yon ously discussed in Ohio, just when I was entering into political life; say to us, "Though now in the minority we will not let you go on but the good sense of both parties, democrats and whigs, frowned it with the··public business except as we shall dictate," you put us in a. down, and McNulty was driven to Washington where he was elected position where we cannot surrender our position without endanger­by the democratic party Clerk of the House of Representatives, and iug the institutions of our country, without endangering the laws of soon after died, and Byington was driven into exile; and from that everydeliberative bodythateverexistedsincedeliberation was known day to this we have never had a threat of repudiation from any one. in political bodies. T.he majority must rule; the minority must have

So with other States; but this doctrine of repudiation now has its rights; those rights must be respected to the last extent, even to strong foothold, and it is twin sister to the doctrine that proposer} to personal discomfort, to secure full debate, to get in their absentees, pay the interest on the public debt by an increased issue of legal- to arouse public attention. That is reasonable and fair. But when tender notes without any regard to their value. We must remember that is exhausted, then the inevitable must come, or we have irr this that ideas about repudiation had even entered these Halls, and for a country nothing but a Mexican republic; we have a republic in the time it seemed two or three years ago as if the very foundations of the power of fifteen Senators to break it up at their will and pleasure public credit were to be disturbed. I am glad to say that the Sena- under the rules, because we cannot even change the rules so as to tor from Delaware did what he could to prevent it. It was proposed defeat an attempted revolution. We cannot do anything except at here and almost carried that the resumption act and all a-cts upon their pleasure. which the public credit was founded should be swept away andre- Suppose this idea had existed during the war when we had session pealed by the democratic party; and now my friend from Delaware after session night after night, when some of the most vital measures begs us in eloquent terms, by every consideration of honor, of public of the war, upon which rested and depended the fate of this country, faith, not to associate with Riddleberger or the Senator from Vir- were pending, and a small but a very able minority of men had e:x:­ginia because they are tainted with repudiation! ercised their right to call the yeas and nays and to interpose these

Mr. President, that will not do. That might come from others; dilatory motions. As I said yesterday, we sat through many a weary but it cannot come from members of the democratic party, which, as night to hear them out, but they never resorted to that expedient. I I said before, has been the author and the beginner, t.he finisher and have heard the Senator from Delaware denounce over and over again the ender of every proposition of repudiation of the public debt that some of the acts that we have passed, some that have been approved has been made in the United States of America. by the Supreme Court of the United States, some that were consid-

Now, sir, resume the argument, look over it all. Here is a proceed- ered vital and necessary in the reorganization of State governments ing that is admitted to be, if carried to an extreme extent, revolu- when reconstruction commenced, as unconstitutional, null, and void, tionary and dangerous, which blocks the wheels of Government, dangerous to the public liberties, and all the other words and phrases prevents our discharge of the public business, prevents our going that he could heap upon the measures of an opponent, bnt he never into executive session unless, forsooth, the majority will yield to the and his associates in those days never thought of resorting to this. minority in regard to the order of business. Suppose, gentlemen, expedient. you should drive us to go into executive session ; suppose you should I will say for the democratic party that during those long strug control our action so far as to say we shall not do what the majority gles it was never thought of to resort to dilatory motions except in desire to do; you have the power to do it; no one questions that. order to ~cure debate and to secure time, and we generally gave, Fifteen of you, if you have made up your minds to that dangerous them the time they desired and thus avoided controversy. Sup­expedient, can do it. It will not be long before the public attention pose they had adopted this doctrine on the passage of the thirteenth.. of this country is called to that dangerous revolution. Yon have the amendment or the fourteenth amendment or the fifteenth amend­power to do it. Suppose yon drive us to that point that we go into ment, we never could have had those great safeguards of public lib­executive business and propose to go on with the public business; erty ingrafted in the Constitution. when we get there you may say, " We will not consider a nomination This example is dangerous, it is revolutionary; it is like many good that we do not like ; fifteen of us will begin to exercise the same things which taken in moderation do very well. These dilatory mo­tactics." If yon can do it to prevent the change of clerks here, tiona to accomplish a wise purpose will always be acceded to and why can you not do it when you come to act on the nominations of justified by the people; but when they go beyond reason they travel the great officers of the Government f Why can yon not do it when upon revolution, and I believe that the good sense of the people of · you come to great matters a.s well as little matters f If revolutionary this country will see this controversy in that light. The Senato.r · expedients and violation of the rules of the Senate are to be justified from Delaware has not made out his case; the mysterious and mys­in these little matters, why not in greater matters 7 If the majority tical reasons that he was going to give us according to his promise once yield to the minority this right of controlling the order of dis- yesterday disappear like the clouds before the summer sun ; the ideas posing of what they will, there is an end of orderly deliberation in are too small, the grounds of opposition too weak. I trust to him, to this body. his sense of honor, to his sense of patriotism, to his independence of ·

No, sir, it is better as of old when one party goes out and another character, to let us out of this difficulty by allowing the majority to comes in that the party going out should accept the inevitable with proceed in an orderly way to the 'transaction of the public business. meekness and kindness. Both parties are subject to these conditions, Mr. BURNSIDE. .Mr. President, I should like to ask the other side and whenever a majority of one, or even the bare constitutional ma- of the Chamber what would be their course in case the Yice-Presi­jority of the casting vote, appears on one side or the other, the power dent should notify us to-day that he wanted to go to New York for · ought to be cheerfully and in a. friendly way handed over to the other, forty-eight hours and we should bring forward a resolution--very much as an English minister would say, "Well, gentlemen, I Several SENATORS. Let him go. believe I am right, but the House of Commons has decided that I am Mr. BURNSIDE. Suppose we should bring forward a resolution to . not by one majority; my message goes to the Queen, and she will elect a President pro tempore f send for the leader of the opposition." That is the orderly course of Mr. COCKRELL. When that time-comes we will determine what business. So in this body in my judgment this thing ought not to we will do. have occupied twenty-four hours. When the majority had by its Mr. BURNSIDE. I just suggest it to them. It may be an easy. action plainly intimated to the minority its desire to change certain thing to laugh at; but yon know what result might happen. officers, it ought to have been yielded to. They might have said, Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. I hope he will go. We shall find 1

"This is very hard; you turn out these gentlemen who are good offi- a way to elect a President pro tempore. · cera at the beginning of the season; they will lose the summer." Mr. DAWES. Mr. President, I hope we shall have a vote on the We would have said, "Very well; do what has been done in other resolution now. cases, give them their salary until next December, or if you please Mr. McPHERSON. I should like to ask the honorable Senator let the election of these new officers take effect on the 1st of July." from Ohio a. question before he entirely leaves the floor. If the bon­The Senate has full power in that regard. Any ternis of that kind orable Senator from Ohio at this time, having recently been elected would have been acceded to; but when they say," No, yon shall not by the republican party of the State of Ohio a Senator in this body, turn out these officers, though we admit yon are a majority; you should decide to separate himself from his allegiance to that party shall not do it; " and then resort to revolutionary expedients, they and go over to the democratic party-which I suppose is quite im­pass the bounds of safe example. They cannot even fall behind that possible; I might as well· anticipate his answer in that regard, be­narrow basis of drawing a distinction between a majority made . by . cause that.would be. a greater stride onward and upward than even, ,

•

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 223 a good man from the good State of Ohio would take-but I ask the question, suppose he should decide to separate himself from hi.s party and ~o over to the democratic side, would he first surrender his com­missiOn to the people of Ohio who elected him; would he first offer to them a surrender of that commission, or would he proceed deliberately to take his seat upon the opposite side of the Chamber and vote with the democratic party T

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. President, I think my answer to that ques­tion will show the absurdity of the position gentlemen occupy. Sup­pose the Senator from Virginia should resign his commission, as the Senator from New Jersey suggests, would it be a proper thing to do-

Mr. McPHERSON. I have suggested nothing. I have simply asked a question.

Mr. SHERMAN. Ah! .Mr. Preside t, we are not children. Mr. McPHERSON. The deduction may follow. Mr. SHERMAN. We are not children here. Whenever I choose to

change my political relations I will determine then what I will do and how I will do it; but there is no likelihood at all of my joining the democratic party. As to this particular case, there is no perti­nency whatever between it and the case put by the Senator in the question he propounds, because, as I have shown, the Senator from Virginia did not get a single democratic vote ·in the sense in which you consider men democrats. As I am told, he was elected by men who were opposed to the Bourbon democracy; and if he should re­sign he would resign to his own friends who are now supporting him by resolutions passed in various public meetings held by the very men who support him and who now control the Virginia Legislature. Therefore the case does not arise.

Mr. McPHERSON. I know the honorable Senator has already stated that fact, claiming it to be a fact, and with a great deal of emphasis. I did not suppose that the honorable Senator would undertake a vin­dication of one of his colleagues unless he was able to accomplish an effective and fnll vindication. He sent to the desk of the Secretary a statement and had read what was claimed to have beenaninterview with the Senator from Virginia, LMr. MAHONE.] When I asked him the question as to whether that interview took place before the elec­tion which decided whether Mr. MAHoNE was to occupy a seat in this body or not, he said that he did not know, but he still knew the fact of that interview, and he adduced the statements contained in Mr. MAHoNE's answer as an argument why Mr. MAHoNE was not supported by the democratic party of Virginia, and as a rea-son why he owed them no allegiance.

Now, Mr. President, I ask the Senator from Ohio again, or any Sen­ator on that side of the Chamber, to answer me this question : Can they show by any interview, by any speech, by any resolution, by any act, by any declaration made by the Senator from Virginia before his election, before the time that the votes of the people of Virginia were cast for him as a candidate for Senator here, that Mr. MAHONE in­tended to vote with the republican party! Is it not true, on the other hand, the readjnster party of Virginia ran a ticket upon a plat­form which the Senator from Ohio declared that he was not in sym­pathy with some of the declarations ofT Now I ask that Senator what declaration there was contained in that platform other than the one with which he is not in sympathy that was not found in the dem­ocratic platform ! Could he not with the same consistency and the same propriety trust any other democrat from Virginia f Could he not with more consistency and propriety trust a man who repudiated that part of the platform with which he was not in accord f Now, will the honorable Senator answer me another question T

Mr. LOGAN. He has not answered that yet. Mr. McPHERSON. He can answer them all at once. Does he be­

lieve that if Mr. MAHONE-the Senator from Virginia I should say, because I have no right in a parliamentarywaytomention names on this floor-does he believe for one moment that the party called the readjnster party, and which I have heard it claimed by republican Senators was made up largely of the democratic party in Virginia, a party that had never renounced its allegiance to the faith and princi­ples and the policy of the national democracy as enunciated in its national platform, but believed in its policy-do you believe that those democrats wonld have voted for the Senator from Virginia upon the distinct assumption that he was to vote with the republican party when he got here T Unless the Senator can answer these questions to the satisfaction even of his own side of the Chamber, I claim that the full vindication of the Senator from Virginia which be has at­tempted here has not been made.

Mr. HOAR. Mr. President, I do not desire to prolong this debate at this moment by any contribution of mine, except to make two sufficient and conclusive answers to the honorable Senator from New Jersey, [Mr. McPHERSON.]

In the first place I wish to show him that, taking his own narrow view of the character and the public duty of a Senator of the United States, he ia mistaken. The democratic party of Virginia before the election of the Legislature which sent here the present Senator from Virginia, before the presidential election, warned him by every mode by which the.Y could officially express their relation to him that he had no further part or lot with them.

Mr. McPHERSON. May I interrupt the Senator just now f 1\Ir. HOAR. Not at this moment until I have made the point, then

the Senator may.

I wish to read now from the chief organ of the democratic press of the State of Virginia, the Richmond D~patch, a sentence published a few days previous to the last fall election :

A.s for individuals, their action on the 4th of November will settle their status. Those who follow :Mahone will do so nnderstanding that they need never ask for recognition by a conservative convention or a democratic administration.

Next I hold in my hand the address of the executive committee of the democratic party of Virginia bearing date-

RooMS COXSERV.ATIVE EXECUTIVE COMMITIEE, Richmond, Virginia, July 28,1880.

After speaking of the regular democratic ticket for presidential electors, they go on to speak of the Mahone ticket thus:

The other ticket was framed-Says the official committee of the democratic party of Virginia­The other ticket was framed by a CQnvention that neither bore the name nor

affected the principles of the national democracy. It as embled after the national convention adjourned; sent, of course, no representative thereto, and was without a voice or vote therein ; was composed indifferently of democrats and republicans; counted among its constituents over forty negroes, and among these some delegates to the State republican convention, and many recognized as republican leaders; took pains, as we shall see, to disown all allegiance to or connection with the party that nominated Hancock and English; and as it was without participation m the choice, so is now without share in the organization of the national democratic party.

Mr. McPHERSON. May I a-sk the Senator a question right in this connection T Did not the so-called readjnster party of Virginia. rnn an electoral ticket in the interest of Hancock and English !

Mr. HOAR. Yes, and that is the one they are talking about. [Laughter.] Mr. President, it is the very insult of hypocrisy for dem­ocrats, members of a party, who by every form of official expression warned this man that he was not of them, that he did not belong to them, and neither he nor any supporter of his Hancock ticket should thereafter be treated as a democrat, when they come into the Senate of the United States, now in a minority, first to get down on their knees, as they did for three weeks before the organization of this Senate, begging him to come in and help them, and then, when they failed in their effort, to assume this sudden virtue and spasm of lofty indignation and undertake to denounce the republican party as they do, that we are allying ourselves with what they call the dregs of the South.

Mr. President, I challenge a democratic Senator on this floor to stand up in the face of the American people and declare that he would refuse to support for public office or refuse to have a political alliance with anybody at the South for the reason that he entertained the opinions in regard to the payment of public debts attributed to Mr. Riddleberger or to Mr. MA.Ho:sE.

Mr. BAYARD. May 1-Mr. HOAR. Will the Senator from Delaware, who does me the

honor now to rise to interrupt me, say that T Mr. BAYARD. Yes; the Senator wants an answer and I will try

to give it to him in the simplest English in the world. If a mau­l do not care who, democrat or republican-advocates the side of re­pudiation and repudiation is made. the issue, I would never support him, no matter what might be the number of votes by which he had been nominated.

Mr. HOAR. If repudiation is ma.de the issue ; but suppose repudi­ation is not the issue T

Mr. BAYARD. But repudiation in this case by the action of the Senator's party is made the issue.

Mr. HOAR. It is not. I deny it. Now I will resume the floor. Mr. BAYARD. I affirm it. . Mr. HOAR. I resume the floor. The difference between the Sen-

ator and me is that when the honest ballot, when the living of voters in safety at their homes, when assassination and fraud are the issue, he will ally himself with the repudiationist who stands for all these things, and I ally myself with the repudiationist who joins with me to put them down.

Mr. BAYARD rose. Mr. HOAR. Now let me read, before the Senator goes further-!'

do not yield to him at this moment; he was very unwilling to yield tome-

Mr. BAYARD. But the honorable Senator in the heat of his advo­cacy forgets, I think, to pay due respect to the motives of an oppo­nent.

Mr. HOAR. I do not attribute motives; I deal with the fact. Mr. BAYARD. But why, then, does the honorable Senator seek to­

stand before. the country and ally me in any way with dishonest and unfair political methods T Why should he do it, and why is it neces­sary for his case 7

Mr. HOAR. Because whenever the party that performs those things at the South is in distress the Senator from Delaware brings the weight of his own honorable and fair personal character always to its rescue. That is why.

Mr. BAYARD. I do not think it worth my while to deny, and I have lived too long to think it necessary for me to deny, such an allegation. The methods spoken of by the honorable Senator have found in me as active, as practical, as resisting, as persistent an opposition as my nature was capable of making.

Mr. HOAR. Well, Mr. President, the Senator thinks so; but in my judgment he is alone in thinking so. I have never heard from a southern Union man, black or white, I have never heard from a northern freeman of any color, the Senator from Delaware reckoned

. I

- -

224 OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. APRIL 6,

among the saints of that church. Why, Mr. President, let us look a little at this new-born zeal of our democratic friends against men who ally themselves with what he called the dregs of southern poli­tics, with men who, to borrow the language of the Senator from Mis­sissippi [Mr. LAMAR] the other day, are indorsing this leprosy. The readjusters of Virginia certainly have been frank in the expression of their opinions, however bad or of evil tendency those opinions might have been; their opinions were well known during the presi­dential canvass of la.st year, and democratic oratory was not spared in endeavoring to induce those men to give their support to the dem­ocratic party. Let me read from a report in the Staunton Vindicator, a paper which I understand is one of the leading and principal Bour­bon democratic papers in the State of Virginia, a passage.

Mr. McPHERSON. Will the Sena.tor allow me-Mr. HOAR. Not at this moment. I am reading from another dem­

ocrat. Mr. McPHERSON. I was only going to ask how long I should

have to wait for an answer to my questioq. Mr. HOAR. I am going at this time to yield my time to another

.democratic orator, not to my friend from New Jersey. Here is the speech which that paper says was made by an honorable Senator from North Carolina to an audience of Virginia-MAHoNE, Riddleberger, readjusters. Hear what he sayR, the honorable Senator who sits oppo­site me, [Mr. VANCE:]

How can your debt afiect or be affected by the presidential election! ·. You 711/USt 1ixthis thillgup among yourselves. We have hadreadjustmentinNorthCarolina. I am a readjuster myself.

Just think of my unhappy friend from Delawa.re. He cannot walk ()Ut of his seat through that end of the Chamber without coming against the Senator from North Carolina who says,'' I am a readjuster myself." And he goes on :

We just said, "We had land and negroes; you took the negroesJ which were equal to th.e 'iands, away ; now, you j Ul!t credit us with fifty cents in tne dollar and we'll pay you the balance." [Laughter.] We settled it, and didn't have anything to do with a presidential election either. And your Stat~ debt question-

Which has so much to do with the administration of his office by the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate!-

And your State debt question hasn't either. Settle that some other time.

Now, Mr. President, I should wish to repeat once more a passage in Scripture which occurred to me the other day. When our learned friends on the other side, our virtuous friends, our debt-paying friends, our honest friends, preach to us with horror the wickedness of putting this man into a ministerial office in the Senate of the United States, all I have to say is: "Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy."

But, Mr. President, there is another thing I wish to say. I utterly repudiate for myself the doctrine of the democrats on the other side of the Chamber which makes here a Senator of the United States simply a party tool and organ. The Senator from Delaware, I know, will join with me in that repudiation. He believes as thoroughly as I do in the doctrine that I am about to state, I 3ID sure, although I think he forgot it and abandoned it, and I do not think he is prac­ticing on it at this moment. A Senator of the United States, under the Constitution of the United Stat.e , is chosen for six years to perform every duty of the senatorial office according to his best discretion at the time he performs it, not to be instructed by any man or body of men, not to be responsible to any man or body of men, but responsible only to his conscience and his God. ·

The very idea upon which this conservative branch of the Govern­me:Q.t of the United States was framed was that for six years the peo~ ple put out of their own hands, out of the hands of the States, out of the hands of the Legislatures, into the hands of the chosen and picked sages of the Republic this large and weighty power and dis­cretion; and that idea has been acted upon again and again not only in former times but in recent times.

When Senator Trumbull, of Illinois, abandoned the republican party that elected him to his seat in the Senate he retained through his constitutional term his position, although he acted during the last part of that term with the party now occupying the seats on the other side. So did Mr. Doolittle. When my honored and beloved iriend, whose memory is to me one of the most cherished recollections of this earth, Charles Sumner, thought it his duty to differ with the republicans of his State and join with the movement on the other side in the support of Horace Greeley; whenhewrotea letterurging the colored men of North Carolina to support the Senator himself, who is a readjuster, for the office of governor, much as we regretted his judgment, much as we differed from him in opiillon, the repub­licans of Massachusetts recognized the fnll right of that illustrious Senator to act in public as his conscience might require ; and I say to you-and my colleague I know will confirm what I say-that there was not an event in future history more certain than the re-election of Charles Sumner to his seat in thiB body by a republican Legisla­ture of Massachusetts if he had lived until the election came around. The doctrine into which party necessity has driven the honorable Senator from Delaware is not only, as ha.s been so well said, revolu­tionary, but he forgets in his argument in support of that doctrine the senatorial character of which I am happy to say I think him so honorable an example.

Mr. VANCE. Mr. President, I rose to ask the Senator from Massa­chusetts whether it would be agreeable for me to interrupt him or whether I should wait liD. til he was done; but I did not obtain his recognition. He waB plea~ed to read from a speech which I made in the valley of Virginia in the last campaign showing that I was some­thing of a readjuster myself. I made that speech, Mr. President· and although it is reported by a. person who does not pretend to be a stenographic or short-hand reporter, I presume the publication was substantially correct as far as it went. I did advocate the doctrine of readjustment on that occasion. I proposed that instead of read­justing the State debt oi Virginia, we should readjust the national politics of this country and eject from office some of the many men who had disgraced it by attempting to deprive the people of their liberties and had covered the American name with corruption. That was the principal readjustment that I advocated. I then alluded to the fact that North Carolina had not settled her debt in fnll, and that even if I recognized the propriety of a citizen of an adjoining State going into Virginia and reprimanding her people about the manner in which they should settle their own State debt, I should have nothing to reproach Virginia with, because my State han not settled her debt in full. That was the position I assumed there, and I am a little astonished that notwithstanding that speech was published arrd went throughout the length and breadth of Virginia, the p~rticnlar friends and adherents of the new Senator from Vir­ginia [Mr. MAHONE] should lately have denounced me in Norfolk for an attempt to interfere with them in the State of Virginia in regard to the settlement of their debt! There is a mistake somewhere or other in this matter. I either did not interfere with their debt question in Virginia, or I did. If this speech is true which I made in the valley of Virginia, then, Mr. President, the resolutions of the readjusters in Norfolk were not true. One or the other must be the case.

Resolved, That we~.the readj usters of the city of Norfolk, and others, heretofore acting with the so-caued democratic and the republican party, hereby express our hearty approbation of the manly and independent course pursued by General WILL­lAM MAHon, Senator from Virginia, upon the floor of Congress, in refusing to co· operate with BAYARD, who had grossly misrepresented him and his party, and who lacked the manliness to correct his misstatements when informed of them; or to go in caucus with fum>To:Y, V .A.NCE, and MORGAN, who came from repudiating States to teach honesty t.o and defeat our party in Virginia, who were striving for a just and equitable readjustment of the State debt, or to act with JOHNSTON, whose inter­ference with our debt question the people of the Commonwealth had emphatically repudiated at the polls.

Mr. HOAR. Will the Senator allow me to ask him what Morgan is there referred to f

Mr. VANCE. I prefer not to be interrupted by the gentleman who would not recognize me when I was trying to obtain his attention, and if he cannot be easy I hope he will be as easy as he can. [Laugh­ter.] Now, Mr. President, either a direct misstatement has been made with regard to my course in the campaign in Virginia last sam­mer, or there is only one other interpretation to be given to it. It is seen that by the speech which I made in the valley of Virginia I wa~ in favor of paying fifty cents on the dollar, and so said to the crowd who were listening to me; and when I am here accused of trying to teach honesty to the State of Virginia, or rather to that portion of it that were called readjusters, perhaps the impudence and the inter­ference consisted in trying to get them to pay as much as fifty cents on the dollar, which I was willing to do. I do not know how that was. I will leave them to settle it among themselves.

I now desire to say, Mr. President, that North Carolina is not are­pudiating State. I desire to say to the Senator from Massachusetts that while North Carolina has not settled her debt in fnll, comes far short of having settled it in full, the compromise which was made by her last Legislature, and unds.r which her debt has been refunded, or is now in process of refunding, and under which more than half of all her outstanding indebtedness has already been taken in, was made when a committee of the bondholders of the State of North Carolina were present with the committee of the Legislature in charge of the debt question, and that committee of bondholders ac­ceded to the proposition made by the Legislature of North Carolina.. It was wholly voluntary and not compulsory. That was the settle­ment of the debt of North Carolina; and moreover when that com­mittee of bondholders was in conference' with the legislative commit­tee and it was agreed that a fnll and frank and candid conference should be had and questions asked and answered on both sides, after the committee on the part of the Legislature had responded fully to every question concerning the resources and the condition of the State and its capacity to pay its debt in full, then questions were put in turn to the bondholders to know what they had paid for the bonds which they held, for our bonds were nearly all in second hands, and they frankly confessed that the sum which we agreed to give them largely exceeded that which they had paid for their bonds; and they accepted that settlement gladly, and they made money by the proposi · tion.

Now, the Senator from Massachusetts, I know, is aware that there is a good precedent for settling the public debt at what it cost the holder thereof. The Government of the United States so settled the Continental scrip upon which we fought the war of independence and won our victory at about the rate of eight hundred for one, as I recollect.

There is the difference between the State of North Carolina and the

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 225 State of Virginia; and the Senator from Virginia the other day, when he made his speech, which I did not have the pleasure of hearing, referred to the fact that North Carolina was a repudiating State, as he saw proper to denounce it, and undertook to quote the act of her Leg­islature by which her debt was settled; he left out, for what reason is best known to himself, two important sections of that act, to wit, the third and fourth, which provide that the bonds to be issued under that act in taking up the old ·debt were to be non-taxable by any .authority whatsoever, State, municipal, or county, and further that the coupons upon those bonds were to be receivable in payment of public taxes. Those two things were left ont in his statement, because, as I suppose, while upon the face of the bills as thus presented the .Riddle berger bill would appear to be a little better, yet inasmuch as the Riddle berger bill neither pericitted the coupons of the bonds to be receivable in payment of taxes nor exempted them from taxation, which might have destroyed the whole of their value, it could not compare with the .full text of the North Carolina bill.

Mr. President, I did not propose to occupy time now, but I will ad­dress the Senate to-morrow with its permission. For the present, having answered the a-ssault which the Senator froin Massachusetts made on me, if it could be called an assault, I do not name it as such in an improper spirit, I shall say no more on the subject of North Carolina; but I propose to-morrow, with the permission of the Sen­ate and for the purpose of vindicating my State and her good name, which is dear to me as a matter of course, to give a short history of the legislation of North Carolina with relation to her public debt.

Mr. DAWES. Now, Mr. President, I hope we may have a vote on the resolution.

Mr. VANCE. I was just about proposing to the Senator::from Mas­sachusetts to let us adjourn and go to dinner.

Mr. DAWES. I hope that we may clear up the business before us, which we can do in fifteen minutes, and then the Senator from North Carolina will have a clear field for his speech to-morrow.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. ANTHONY in the chair.) The question is on the motion of the Senator from Ohio [Mr. PENDLETON] to indefinitely postpone the pending resolution of the Senator from Massachusetts, [Mr. DAWES.]

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. President, in order that we may give our atten­tion to that business for which we were convened by the President of the United States, I move that the Senate proceed to the considera­tion of executive business.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee moves -that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. '[Potting the question.] The noes appear to have it.

Several SENATORS called for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to

call the roll. .Mr. BECK, (when his name wa-s called.) I am paired for the rest

of the day with the Senator from Maine, [Mr. IIALE.] If he were here, I should vote " yea."

Mr. HILL, of Colorado, (when his name was called.) I am paired . on this question with the Senator from Arkansas, [Mr. WALKER.]

Mr. MORRILL, (when his name was called.) My colleague [Mr . . ~MUNDS] is paired with the Senator from Arkansas, [Mr. GARLAND.] On this question I vote "nay."

Mr. PLATT, of Connecticut, (when his name wa-s called.) I am paired for the day with the Senator from West Virginia, [Mr. CAM­

. .DEN.] Mr. INGALLS, (when Mr. PLUMB's name was called.) The Sena­

tor from Kansas [Mr. PLUMB] is paired with the Senator from Mis­.sissippi, [Mr. LAMAR.]

Mr. ROLLINS, (when his name was called.) On this question I am paired with the Senator from Florida [Mr. JONES] who was called away on very important business.

The roll-call was concluded. Mr. GROVER, (after having voted in t.he affirmative.) I am paired

with the Senator from Nebraska, [Mr. VANWYCK,] and I withdraw my vote. I forgot it when the roll was called.

Mr. TELLER. I am paired on this subject with the Senator from Texas, [Mr. MAxEY.] He will be absent from the Senate some little time; and this pair will continue on all political questions.

Mr. HARRIS. I was requested by the Senator from Mississippi ,[Mr. LAMAR] to state that he was paired with theSenatorfromKan­sas, [Mr. PLUMB.]

The result was announced-yeas 25, nays 26; ns follows:

Bayard, ,nrown, . Call, Cockrell,

·Coke, . Davis of W.Va.,

. Farley,

Allison, Anthony, Blair, Burnside, Cameron of Wis.,

.. conger, . Dawes,

YEAS-25. George, Gorman, Groome, Hampton, Hams, Hill of Georgia, Jackson,

Johnston, JonlLB, McPherson, Morgan, Pendleton, Pugh, Ransom,

NAYS-26. Edgerton, Ferry, Frye, Harrison, Hawley, Hoat:\ Ingaus,

Kellogg, Logan, McDill, McMillan, :Mahone, Miller, Mitchell,

XII-15

Saulsbury, Slater, Vance, Vest.

Morrill, Pl&ttof N.Y., Sawyer, Sewell, Sherman.

.ABSENT-25. Beck, Fair, Lamar, Butler, Garland, :Maxey, Camden, Grover, Platt of Conn., Cameron of Pa., Hale, Plumb, Conkling, Hill of Colorado, Rollins, Davis of lllinois, Jones of Florida, Saund61'8, Edmunds, Jones of Nevada, Teller,

VanWyck, Voorhees, Walker, Williams.

So the motion was not agreed to . Mr. DAWES. I move that the Senate do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and (at four o'clock and twenty-on&

minutes p. m.) the Senate adjourned. ·

THURSDAY, April 7, 1881.

Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. J. J. BULLOCK, D. D. The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved.

CAPITULATIONS OF OTTOl\IAN El\IPffiE. The VICE-PRESIDENT laid before the Senate the following com-

munication; which was read: . To tl!.e Senate of tl!.e United Statu :

I transmit herewith, in response to the resolution of the Senate of the 18th ultimo, a report of the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers, in relation to the capitulations of the Ottoman Empire.

JAMES A. GARFIELD. ExECUTIVE MANSION, W ABHINGTON, April 6, 1881.

To the President : DRPARTMIDIT OF STATE, W ABHIXGTON, .A.pril 5, 1881.

The Secretary of State to whom was refeiTed the resolution of the Senate of tho 18th ultimo, requesting the transmission to that body of a copy of the report made to him by Edward A. VanDyck, consular clerk at Cairo, on the capitulations of the Ottoman Empire, hiLS the honor to lay before the President herewith the report called for, with its appendices.

This report, of which the first part is now submitted, will, when complete, bo doubtless found of interest and value, lLB throwing much light, not merely on tho relations of the European powers to the Porte, which have oeen so prominent of late, but also on the treaty rights of the United States, a{! based on the "most­favored-nation" treatment accorded in the existing treaty with Turkey.

JAMES G. BLAINE.

· Mr. BURNSIDE. I move that the communication and accompany­ing report be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and printed.

The motion was agreed to. WITHDRAWAL OF PAPERS .

On motion of Mr. BECK, it wa-s Ordered, That William n. Clift and others be allowed to withdraw the papers

accompanying Senate bill No. 826 of the Forty.sixth Congress on file in the Senate.

OFFICERS OF THE SENATE . The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair Jays before the Senate the

unfinished business of yesterday, being the resolution submitted by the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES] for the election of cer­tain officers of the Senate, the pending question being upon the motion of the Senator from Ohio [Mr. PENDLETON] to postpone the resolution indefinitely, on which the yeas and nays have been ordered .

Mr. PENDLETON. I move that the Senate proceed to the consid­eration of executive business.

Mr. DAWES. The Senator from North Carolina [Mr. VANCE] yes­terday indicated a desire to occupy the attention of the Senate to-day. •

Mr. PENDLETON. "The motion will not interfere with him. He is willing that we should go into executive session.

Mr. DAWES. I did not know but that it would interrupt his arrangement.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion of the Sen­ator from Ohio, [Mr. PEl-."'DLETON,] that the Senate proceed to the con­sideration of executive business. [Putting the question.] The noes seem to have it.

Mr. PENDLETON. I call for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to

call the roll. . :Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania, (when his name was called.)

On this question I am paired with the Senator from South Carolina, [Mr. BUTLER.] If he were present, he would vote "yea" and I should vote "nay."

Mr. CAMERON, of Wisconsin, (when Mr. GROOME's name was called.) The Senator from Maryland [Mr. GROOME] iB paired with my colleague, [Mr. SAWYER.] ·

Mr. HARRIS, (when his name wa.s called.) I agreed to pair with the Senator from New York, [Mr. CONKLING,] who is absent. The Senator from Indiana [Mr. VooRHEES] is confined to his home by indisposition, and I have transferred my pair with the Senator fro:rn New York to the Senator from Indiana.

Mr. SEWELL, (when.l\fr. McPHERSON's name was called. ) I am paired with my colleague, [Mr. McPHERSON.]

Mr. SAUNDERS, (when his name was called.) I am paired on Jl<. ..