The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1849-08-28

public business has been discharged in all of them;
and into all the of complaint from any quar-
ter, at the manner in which said departments, or
their bureaus or officers, any of their officers or
agents of every description whatever, directly or
indirectly connected with them in any manner,
officially or unoficay, in duties pertaining TO the
public interest, have fulfilled, or failed 10 accom-
plish the objects of their creation, have violated
their duties, or have injured and impaired the pub
lie Service and Interest," has been determined 10 be
inadissbe and has not been permitted 10 be produced
before said committee, so as TO enable the committee
TO pronounce, either athrmatively negatively,
upon the truth Of the various matters referred TO
their consideration by the resolution under which
they constituted.
50. Because on many, if not most, OF the subjects
which were referred to the attention of the commit
tee, as well from the want of time from the alb
sence of alleged existing testimony, the nvestiga
ton has been manifesty and necessarily incomplete
and imperfect, and no just impartial and satisfac-
tory Judgment can be pronounced thereon.
O. Because the report of the majority does ex-
press opinions and conclusions upon partial and
imperfect investigation, which should be the result
only of the most satisfactory examination of the
rious and complicated subjects to which such CON
illusions and opinions relate
The majority of the committee to which
we have above referred consisted of JOHN
CLANCY Of Ohio, DUTEE J. PEARCE of
Rhode Island, GoRHAM PARKS of Maine,
EDWARD A. HANNEGAN of Indiana,
HENRY A. MUHLENBERG Of Pennsylva-
MIA, and ABIJAH MANN, jjr., of New York.
These were the men who in 1887 so mar
rowed and restrained the scope of inquiry
contemplated by the resolution of the
House, as to ''preclude and suppress the
investigation.
And at the very same time that this COM
mittee was thus baffied and defeated, an
other committee was sitting under the same
roof to inquire into the nature of the con-
nexion between REUBEN NJ WHITNEY and
the Deposite banks. This committee was
constructed after the same fashion. In
its proceedings we generally find WISE
and PEYToN, and JOHNSON of Louisiana,
voting OH one side; and the Tory phalanx,
GARLAND, PIERCE, FAIRFIELD, GILLETT
HAMER and MARTIN voting on the other
The TORIES of this committee pursued
precisely the same course denounced by
the minority of the other committee The
questions propounded by the WIG mem
bers were voted down; and on every oc-
casion Mr.. GILLETT voted with the side
which sought TO stife the investigation.
|
1t is little curious to see how uniformly
he voted with the design of excluding light
from the people. Questions that even his
Tory colleagues thought unobjectionable,
Mr. GrLLETT moved to suppress. We
must give few instances to illustrate his
answering party fidelity, and to show
how entirely subordinate he considered
the character of the representative to that
OF the partisan. On page 1913 Of report
No. 1913, OF the House of Representatives
second session, twentytourth Congress
we find it entered that Mr.. WISE pro
pounded the following interrogatory t.
MIR. RICHARD S. COKE;
Please TO state all the information which yo,
:. have derived from r. NJ. Whitney, or any othe
'agent Of the deposite. banks, or officers of tn
{" Treasury Department, in relation to the subject
" of investigation contained in said resolution
Mr.. GILLETT objected to this interrogatory
which was decided in the affirmative, as follows:
Ayes-Mcssrs. Garland, Fairfield, Wise, Ha
" mer, Martin, Peyton.
" No-Mr Gillcu"
SO, on page l04, we find that Mr. Ply
TON proposed set of interrogatories to b.
propounded to Mr.. A. Van Wyck, cashie
Of the Union Bank of Tennessee. While tn,
interrogatories were under discussion, Mr.
GILLETr, with the view of getting rid o
them-a- we infer from the sequel-moveC
to adjourn, which was decided by the fol
lowing vote Ay-Mr. Gillett; Noes
all the rest of the committee present. Mr.
PEYToN then moved that Mr.. Van Wycl
be summoned to appear before the com
mittee forthwith, which was decided il
the affirmative by the following vote
Ayes-Messrs. Garland, Wise, Johnson
Hamer, Peyton. No-Mr. Gillett. So
on page l3S of the same document, w
find the following entry:
q" Mr.. PEYroS then moved that the following in
" terrogatores he propoundcd 10 the witness, (w
" J. Duane) {. State all you may know in relatio
" TO the part taken by II. VI. Whitney or Amc
&" Kendall, while he the agent of the Trcasur
f" Department, in relation TO the structure O
" scheme, contained in exhibit A, annexed to th
4" report of the Secretary Of the Treasury.
" Mr. GfLLgrr objected 10 this question, which va
/" decided in the affirmative by the following vote
Ayes-Mcssrs. Garland, Pierce, Fairfield, MAJ
4" tin. Hamer. Peyton, Johnson, Wise.
No-Mr. Gillett."
So on page l43 of the same report
when Mr. PEYTos moved for a subppn
for David &. Wilson, Of Wilmington, De
+ aware on the question whether or nc
, the subpoena should issue the vote stood
.AyeS-AIessrs. Garland, Pierce, Martin
= Hamer, and Peyton. .No-Mr. GrLLET1
II we turn to page 22S of the same doc