The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-02-26

CHARGES OF CORRUPTION IN HIGH Places
The debate in the House of Representatives on
Thursday, arising out of motion of Mr.. Gen
try in reference to an alleged practice of the
heads of departments defrauding poor clerks
of portion of their salaries, suggests reflections
of the most painful and humiliating nature.
The charges of corruption made from time to
time against our city government, and the
Legislature of this State, are extended to Wash
ington and the government Of the nation and
unless these imputations are refuted, or the
offenders punished, the United States stands
disgraced before the civilized world.
An honorable member rises in his place, and
gives crcumstantial account of one case in
which, out of salary of 81 900, the sum of $500
has been distracted, though the clerk was COM
PEELED to give receipt for $1,000. 1t is further
stated by the accuser that he had the letter Of
the Secretary of the Interior admitting the
truth of the charge. The fact, indeed, was not
denied by any person in the debate, and the
only palliation that was offered for it was, that
it was only one case out of thousands, and that
the practice was quite common in all the depart
ments, under former administrations, as well as
the present.
This is a sad state of things. and the tone of
the House gives by no means an exalted idea Of
the standard of public virtue in the atmosphere
Of Washington. Even Mr. Gentry, who brought
the charge, and was the most indignant speaker
on the subject, calls the accused " a man of
honor" while in the same breath he not only
charges him with "a crime" but he says he has
the proof in his possession. in the handwriting
of the criminal. But there is still MORE as may
be seen by the following extracts from the dis
CUSTOM
Mr.. BAYLY-f the case deserves impeachment,
the gentleman should bring it forward.
Mr.. GENTRY give the gentleman my opinion
that it deserves an impeachment. (Sensation.)
Mr.. LETCHER, (dem.) of Va, mentioned a case
that had been brought to his knowledge twas that
clerk employed in the census bureau should pay
$500 of his salary to a lady in Pennsylvana-the
sister-in-law Of the Superintendent
Mr.. GENTRY exclaimed" God Almighty !"
U4aughter.)
Dir. TooMBs (whig) of Calf the charges are
true, it crime inconsistent with honor and homes
ty, and ought to be inquired into. You find under
the alacious pocythe pretence Of raising salaries
because OF the increased price Of pr0vsionsthat Of
fees are farmed out all over the country. You find
that you get the service for half of the money. You
take the office of dead man and get somebody to Gil
it for half the salary The House, however has not
the energy to enforce the right. Ii the gentleman
from Tennessee is right then there is question Of
degradation and punishment
Mr. GENTRY.-The charges are not controverted.
Here Mr. Gentry declares that "the case de-
serves impeachment" that the charges are not
controverted, and, at the mention of another
case. his hair stands on end and he exclaims-
oh ~ loI 10
an impeachment he declines to do so, but says
it ought to be done by somebody. What
inconsistency. He brings the most grave
charges against member of the federal gov
eminent; he has the proof but when it
comes to the point he says he has no no.
ton Of making formal impeachment. Then
he ought not to have preferred such accusa-
tions. As the matter now stands, the admins
tration is involved in imputations of high
crimes and misdemeanors, which they have not
been given the opportunity to refute, while one
branch of Congress is placed in the serious pre-
dicament ofparticipating in these offences by
refusing to bring the accused to trial. Mr..
Toombs says the House has not the energy to
enforce the right. Why did he not test the
House by moving an impeachment and thus
clear his own skirts Of the iniquity which he
imputed to the body? Could not one righteous
man be found in that assembly who had the
moral courage to do duty which so many
members admitted ought to be done: The
amendment of Mr.. Gentry, chastising such
offences by fine and Imprisonment. in
court of law, makes no provision for the
punishment Of the past, but merely shifts from
the shoulders of Congress the trouble and in
convenience of prosecuting the future cranes of
officials This mode. however, ofdodging the res
possibility will not satisfy the constituents Of the
House of Representatives. who have entrusted
these gentlemen with the care Of the public
money, the maintenance Of the national honor.
and the rigid enforcement Of justice. no matter
who or what may be affected by its operation.
If such an example Of guilty connivance at al
legged crimes be set in the highest deliberative
assembly elected by the people, what may we
expect in State legislatures, common coun-
ellis, grand juries, judges on the bench, and all
other bodies or individuals, who have aught TO
do with the public money or the administration
Of the laws? o teniporot