Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1855-07-19
poli,icaI MoraIity:

C0HsutO Dod4e Deiu8 our IhirioVoi'a'
Political Morality:
tn, Fvening Post having made objectlo', 70
senator Hale, that he had beer extsaAlys,y
employed as a lobby e....ginssA the National
Era defends Or Apologies for him. From this
controversy however, it appears that this hon
orable Senator has been engaged in getting
private measures through Congress for com
pensation. How far he may be influenced in his
Jealous agitation Of sectional question, by the
hope Of official reward, is of course only mat
ter of inference; but We should think that a
politician who win sell his political influence
for u fee, would not hesitate to PROSTATE his
Senatorial station for an office.
The National Era says I
"We did not like his Mr. Hale's] vote in favor
Of the Collins Lite Monopoly. We did not like his
using his influence last winter with Congress in be-
half Of the same cause"
This allusion to Mr.. HaleSs concern in the Col,
Inns affair makes Il proper that the should be
more fully stated. Mr.. Hale, while a member OF
the Senate, voted for the enormous appropriations
to the Collins monopoly. His term Of office ex-
pred, and in the interim, while not member of
the Senate, but expecting soon 70 be reelected,
he was engaged by Collins to use his influence with
the body Of which he was lately member In favor
of another liberal appropriation which he desired
to obtain. The service was performed, and the APP
preparation passed both houses Of Congress. The
election Of Senator from New Hampshire has since
taken place, and Mr.. Hale is again in the United
States Senate, with Colns's money in his pocket
What will he do there, when Collins asks for another
appropriation? We ask the National Era how it
expects Mr. Hale to vote in such case? VIII
that journal contend that member Of Congress SO
circumstanced has not made himself worthy Of the
sharpest censure? Hf
Even if Mr. Hale had not been about to return
to the Senate, bis conduct would have been cen
surable. He had acquired, by his position as a
leader in the Free-Sol party, by twelve years
passed in the Senate, and by the friendly terms on
which he stood with all the members, political in
iucnce which would greatly aid any private claim
upon the government in favor of which he might
exert it. That influence he had no right to sell ;
he was invested with it by those who confded in
him, that he might use il for great and worthy pur-
poses, for important public ends--not that he
might enrich himself by bartering it away to men
who had designs on the public treasury. Yet it
was this influence which Collins purchased Of him /;
II was this influence which he sold to the other
sntors who came to Washington with private
claims but for his possession Of this influence lie
would never have been employed. We find him
charged in the New Hampshire prints, with attend
ing the late session Of the New Hampshire Legis.
lature on similar errand, and figured there as a
lobby member, aiding to procure the passage Of
laws in which individuals had an interest,
FOR THE AMERICAN ORGAN.
The Baltimore Republican OF Saturday evening
last has been placed in my hands, and find there
in a comment upon my card, of the day before,
which justifes me in noticing its misrepresenta
tions
The Republican says:gs
"Mr Ellis denounces Bennett (of the New York
Herad) for lies uttered In reference to himself as
one unworthy of being believed, get he proauces
him as a toitness, 10 prove the truth Of his own
wicked charge against the President Of the United
States &. s
That portion of the comment of the Republican,
placed in Italics is not true and 1t was known to
the writer of it, to be untrue when it was penned.
There was no allusion, direct or indirect, in my
card to Mr. Bennett, or to the Herald, and yet the
editors Of the Republican, with my card before
them, interpolate the statement, that ! produced
Mr.. Bennett as witness to prove the charge made
against the President The object of the Republi-
can could have been no other, than to involve me
in the Inconsistency Of citing man as witness,
whom had previously pronounced unworthy of
belief On the contrary, stated in my card, that
the response made to the Pennsylvania Committee
by the President, was publicly stated in Wash.
ington at the time and the proof Of that response
wasin no way tracedb me oMr. Bennett, or to the
Herald.
But the Republican is not content with one mis-
representation of my card. II says:
80 Mr.. Ellis candidly confsses that his bold
charge Of the President of the United States being
influenced in his selection Of Cabinet appointments
by the Court Of Rome, was founded on the COM
mens of the partisan press opposed TO the present
administration" H
There Ia not one word Of truth, nor even the
semblance of truth, in the above statement. It'll
false from beginning TO end. gave the authority
on which the charges we're made, aud added, that
/" these proofs had been the subject Of comment"
but not that the charges were founded upon the
comments Of the press s.
The charge, that Catholic member of the Cab
met was promised to the Romish Church, in con
sideration of Catholic votes, depends first upon
the statement Of the Hon. d. NJ. Barringer, late
United States Minister to Spain, and second, upon
irrefutsble circumstantia proofs, which have been
heretofore in part, and will be again. in detail,
commented upon by the independent press Of the
country--and may here add, that not the least
remarkable occurrence, in the history of this Jes.
utical administration, is the fact, that General
Pierce has for once fulfilled his promises
The questions involved in these charges against
the administration, are Of too serious character,
not TO be fully canvassed by the public. II is time
the country should know in what mode, and to
what extent, the Pope and his minions influence
this administration. Nor can the administration
Catholic-foreign-fuso presses cheat the people
out Of an investigation by their repeated reitera.
tons Of the zoe knoOs" Of their hireling editors
the paid apologists Of Romanism and Foreignism.
The closing remark Of the Republican is worthy
of its paternity, and betrays recklessness, well