Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1855-08-07
Reeder Not Removed for Speculation.

half-past seven, 4. M To-Day.
Reeder Not Removed for Speculation.
Whilst the fact Of Reeder's removal is in
controvertible, the causes still remain mys-
terry. The Executive intimates that the re-
moval has been caused by malversation in
office; but minute analysis Of his reasoning
shows conclusively that this act is attributable
30 some other motive This motive, we affirm,
was to concilate the South at the same time
the specious reason Of malversation in Office
was alleged, to prove to the Free-Soil allies OF
the Executive that Reeder was not removed
because Of his advocacy Of their interests.
Our reasoning will be found accordant with
the strictest rules Of logic.
The removal of Reeder was demanded for
two reasons:
l. That he was guilty Of malfeasance in Of
flee, in certain speculations
.. That he was an active Abolitionist.
As no other objection has been alleged, it
must follow that, if guiltless of the one charge,
he must have been removed upon the other.
1t appears from the testimony Of Clarke,
Indian Agent, that as early as November last,
the Governor and Judges of Kansas were
charged with malfeasance in office, in the pur-
chase of certain Indian reservations.
In January, 1865, the contract of this pur-
chase was submitted by Governor Reeder to
the President for approval, and referred by
him to the Indian Bureau, which reported that
it was illegal, informal, demoralizing and dis
graceful" The President Immediately return
cd the contract, without approval or rejection,
aud Governor Reeder proceeded to correct the
defect in form and testimony. The contract
was again presented to the President early in
May, and, on the 2sth July, Reeder was dis
missed from Office upon an allegation of NAL
feasance.
This offence consisted in the purpose of spec
ulatiDg in the property of the Indians 1t is
well stated by Secretary McClelland:
Although the Governor of this Territory is not
es Others er-cio Superintendent Of Indian Affairs
yet from his position he is supposed to have eye
b the welfare of the Indians, and should be the last
70 set an example at variance with the uniform prac-
tice of the Indian Bureau He should avoid every
thing that could be tortured into suspicion of un-
fir dealing: So also, the judges interested in these
contracts, who may be called upon In their judicial
capacities to pass SOLEMN judgment upon some of the
questions connected with or resulting from them.
at is necessary to throw around the property of
the Indian every guard which may efficiently protect
him from the superior sagacity OF the white man. and
u.s. in ordinary cases, such contracts would be scru-
tinized with great care it is much more necessary
where men, from their official positions, have supe-
TOR advantages, and are clothed with power that
gives them extraordinary influence"
The offence, then, consisted in this: The
Governor and Judges of Kansas attempted to
purchase lands belonging to the Indian wards
of the government This offence was consum-
united when the intention to commit it was
ayowed. The competency of the Indians to
make legal title constituted no part of the
offence.
Wa consider that Governor Reeder could
not hare been removed for this offence, because
the President returned his Indian contract
without rejecting it. He allowed him to make
an argument and to adduce testimony in favor
Of the legal validity of the title, and Of the conse
quent authority Of the President to confirm it
But there is another pregnant circumstance to
show that the President did not remove Gov
error Reeder for malfeasance in office. During
the month Of June, 1866, the Hon. Mr. Davis,
Secretary of War, stated, in speech delivered
in Mississippi, that the appointment Of Reeder
was "a mistake, and that he would be removed
Now, II viii appear from the official dismis-
sal of Reeder, dated 2sth July, 1855, that this
had been determined on in consequence of
the reasons contained in the reports Of the
Indian Bureau, dated respectively 23d and
26th Of July. II then the removal of Reed
or had been determined upon in June, il
could not have been on account Of mafeas-
ance in Office, because he was not convicted Of
that offence until the 2Sth OF July, and that
upon document Of the Indian Bureau, which
was not published until after the declaration
Of Mr.. Davis
From this inferential reasoning it is estab.
lished:
l. That Reeder was not removed for spec
ulation in office, because that offence was
Svowed to the President in January last,
and was not punished by removal
2. That he was not removed upon conviction
of official immortality, because his removal had |
been determined upon before the evidence
upon which he was convicted had been pub
lished
IL our argument has been successful we
have shown that Governor Reedcr was not re-
moved because he had been guilty Of NAL
feasance in office. The inevitable inference is
that his removal was due to his active advoca.
cy Of the Abolition cause in Kansas What
ever may have been the reason, il becomes the
Executive to como out boldly and avow it
At the South, the removal Of Reeder viii be
claimed as rebuke to Abolition amongst the
Soft Shells Of New York and Pennsylvania, II
will be charged TO official venality. Let the
Executive organ come out promptly and say
to which cause it should properly be attrib-
u.ed
The Current Elections.
We shall attempt no prediction upon the
result Of the late elections. 1t would be futile
and entitled to no respect When the returns