The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-06-19

the gentleman AFTER the disclaimer; Dut the TeSolu-
ton stands on the records of the country.
Mr.. BAYLY remarked, that the letter which he
had spoken of was not addressed TO the Secretary
Of the Treasury, but TO the Secretary OF the Int
rior
Mr.. ASHMUN. If the call was made on the Sec
rotary of the Interior, why are the charges made
against the Secretary of the Treasury
MIR, DISNEY said, that the charges are so seri-
Gus, that they should be investigated. II ascer
tanned to be true, they would lead to the impeach-
ment Of the officer. He had learned of his coll
league (Mr swEETzsR) that the facts charged are
true; that the 9th of June, lS47 under the adj
ministration of Mr. Polk, 8 1862 900 were transfer
red from the surplus fund to the general treasury
OF the nation, and that in December, 1919, the pre-
sent Administration did take from the treasury
this money, and re-approprlate II without author
ity Of law.
Mr.. CASEY remarked that the charges were
made against man as honorable any one in
this hall. He considered the proceeding miser-
able pettifogging unworthy the House and the
country. He had right to know ON what authority
the charges were made Who is your author?
Dare the gentleman bring him before this House!
MIR. SWEETZER. j desire to say, In this pre-
liminary proceeding, that will not suffer my feel
ings to be excited, suffer myself TO be turned
aside from the course desire To pursue At a
proper time the gentleman shall be gratified with
exhibition in this hall of all the facts. act
with a view to "A solemn discharge of public duty,
and state what believe TO be true; and, SO help
me God, will discharge my. duty faithfully
Mr.. CASEY asked a question, to which
Mr.. SWEETZER replied, do not recognise the
right OF the gentleman TO PROFOUND it.
Mr.. CASEY said that, as the gentleman had
made the charge, he should give his authority for
it. He recognised right to assail the character of
the Secretary, and charge him with pecustion
and it appeared to him that tho resolution was es
pecially worded To reflect on the character and
conduct of that officer The gentleman from Lou
isana MIR. MoRsE) deserved the thanks OF the
country for the magnanimous stand which he had
taken. He was that gentlemen on that (thc
Denocratic) side were not SO blinded by bigotry
prejudice as to deny justice The Secretary OF the
Treasury will out Of the ordeal like gold tried
in the fire.
Mr.. THOMPSON, of Mississippi, said that some
SIX weeks or two months ago there was referred to
him the items of the Indian appropriation bill for
examination. There certain items of reap
preparation of the surplus fund. He visited the
department. to see what items remained unpaid,
and not paid when the money went to the surplus
fund. In response to an inquiry, he was told that
when money had been carried to the surplus fund
1t could be drawn again. To this he MIR. To re-
piled that if such rule should prevail there would
be no end of the reappropratons. Mr. Ewing
said that the rule had been made and carried in
the OF the Seminole Indians that he had need
of the money which carried to the surplus fund
in June, lS47, and had drawn warrant on the
treasury, and that il had been paid. Ii the
opinion of Mr.. Ewing that the money had been
improperly carried to the surplus fund. He (Mr.
L. believed now, as he did then, that II was i'm
proper for the Secretary TO withdraw the money.
The Committee of Ways and Means put into the
Indian bill the items of reappropriaton, and did not
purpose to pursue the subject.
Mr.. yIN,rON Did not Mr.. Ewing say that the
money was irregularly and improperly carried to
the surplus fund?
Mr. THOMPSON He took that ground.
Mr.. VlNToN Did not the same thing occur un.
der previous dIninistration-money enormously
carried TO the surplus fund-and the books of the
treasury corrected
Mr.. THOMPSON. The Secretary of the Interior
admitted that it was dangerous principle, and he
said that there were three or four precedents Inn
rn.ad telu fiery ha \ cd for Tho
statement in writing; and from that day to this the
call has never been answered.
Wr ASHMUN. How long since?
Mr. THOMPSON. 1t may have been two months
ago.
Mr.. ASHMUN asked several questions, which
MIR. THOMPSON answed by saying that he had
not investigated the propriety Of directing the mo
ney TO be drawn from the surplus fund. lie had
not asserted that it improperly carried there.
He only said that il drawn out Of the treasury
the warrant Of the Secretary of the Interior. He
WAS for investigation.
Mr.. HOUSTON. If this proper subject of
inquiry, why did not the gentleman call the atten
ton of the House to III
Mr.. THOMPSON. wrote letter to the Secre-
tary Of the Interior TO give me the facts.
Mr., STRONG said that resolution for invcsti
CATION by committee implies charge; and he
asked whether the facts could not be asceraned by
a resolution of inquiry!
Mr.. THOMPSON. Money in the treasury can
not he drawn without appropriation by law. The
committee can inquire whether this has been done
not.
MIR. KING, of New Jersey, said that it would be
courteous manly, and fair, give to the Secretary
the benefit of an explanation; and he condemned
the bringing of charges against the Secretary TO
lnjure his reputation.
MIR. SWEETZER repeated, that the charges
against the Secretary in his official capacity.
The resolution charges, not that the money has
been stolen, but taken out of the treasury without
authority of law.
Mr.. KING, of New Jersey. asked the House to
reconsider its hasty action lac desired for the Sec
rotary of the Treasury but simple Justice.
Mr.. CABLE, of Ohio. ask the gentleman whe
ther he does not know that the Cabinet have con-
demned the acR
Mr.. KING. ! am not acquainted with the pro.
ceedings of the Cabinet
Mr.. CABLE. heard that the Cabinet had con-
demned the act.
Mr. STANTON, of Tennessee after listening to
the debates, had come TO the conclusion that IL
would be a graceful act TO reconsider the resolu-
ton. IL appeared 10 him that nothing disgraccful
or corrupt is suspected. Every thing that can be
obtained by n committee Of investigation can be
obtained by resolution of inquiry. Why should
a resolution be passed TO ccnsure the Secretary Of
the Treasury, then, for doing nothing more wrong
than TO mistake act Of Congressl lie should
thus act more for his respect for the Democratic
party than for the Secretary of the Treasury Such
an investigation as that ordered IL could not be
denied, implied censure. II was unnecessary, when
VIC facts could be arrived At in another way Out
of respect TO themselves they ought 10 adopt this
course.
Mr.. ROOT contended that there could be no ne
cessty for a committee Of investigation.
Mr. McLANE said that the Secretary Of the
Treasury had nothing 10 do with the question un-
der the law. II there any violation Of the law,
il must be by the President ior in response to the
Secretary OF the Interior. the President directed the
Secretary Of the Treasury TO draw warrant. He
was against select committee, and wished the
Committee Of Ways and Means TO make the in
quiry.
Mr.. TUCK said that the report on the case Of the
Doorkecpcr was laid upon the table, because IL was
too small mttter. He no reason why the
subject now before them should not be similarly
disposed Of, for certainly IL was less important.
Mr.. lNGE moved 10 lay the motion 70 reconsider
upon the table.
Mr.. TUCK demanded the previous question.
The SPEAKER, in reply TO a question asked by
Mr.. VfSroN, said that II the motion 10 reconsider
be laid upon the table, the resolution Of Mr. SWEET
zER would stand as If passed.
The demand for the previous question was sec
onded, and
The vote by which the resolution was adopted
wa reconsidercd-yeas 1875, nays 81.
The question now REQUIRED on il adoption, when
Mr.. SWEETZER said that he had offered IL in
discharge Of his public duty, believing that the