Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-02-27
CONGRESS.


was taken up.
Mr.. Toombs resumed.his remarks against
the bill.
Messrs Foot, Benjamin and Bayard advo-
Gated the bill, and Messrs. Jones OF Tennessee
and Butler opposed it.
Further consideration of it was suspended
by the arrival of the time for resumiug the
consideration of the bill to authorize the PEG
pie OF Minnesota Territory to form Consti-
tuition aud State government, preliminary to
their admission into the Union,
The Senate, by yeas 81, against nays "a,
reeoHsidered the vote by which the amend.
ment was adopted restricting the right of suf.
frage to citizens Of the UniteQ States and then
struck out the amendment by vote of 81
against "a, and passed the bill in the precise
form in which it came from the House, by
yeas 81, against nays %
The Senate resumed consideration of the
Submarine Telegraph bill.
The House amendments were then agreed
to, and the bill now only requires the action
of the President.
On motion of Mr.. Hunter, the tariff bill was
directed to be taken up, in order that it
might not be ong the unfinished business
at the time of adjournment
HoUsE-Mr. Davis OF Maryland called up
the resolution Of the Select Committee for the
"
bert.
Mr. Bennett of New York said that certain
parts OF the testimony of the witnesses (Swee-
ney and Simonton) were not published wtth
the evidence, such omissions having been
made by direction of the committee, The
suppressed testimony is deemed material to
Mr.. Gilbert's defence.
Mr.. Bennett said he could prove that Mr..
Sweeney was induced to swear to Just as
much as would convics MIR. Gilbert, and
nothing more. Eve y honest man would re-
bel against such conduct.
Dir. Warner of Georgia asked on what au-
thority Mr.. Bennett made his statement
Mr. Bennett declined to answer, but said if
the gentleman would 90 to the printing Office
he would see what was stricken out.
Mr.. Humphrey Marshall. wished to know
whether Mr. Gilbert wished to have trial.
Mr.. Bennett replied that Mr.. Gilbert not
only wished but demanded a trial on the pre-
sentiment against HIM.
An extended debate ensued, of which we
have room only for the lowing portions -
Mr.. Cadwalader of Pennsy lyania argued
that MIR. Gilbert by his own statement had
admitted the truth Of the charge against him.
Mr.. Gilbert of New York requested Mr..
Cadwallader to read further on in the report,
which he did, reading the words " no agree
ment was made with Mr.. Gilbert BY Sweeney,
lripett, or any other person, nor was | to
haze any benefit from the passage of the book
resolution"
Mr.. Cadwallader then insisted that Mr..
| Gilbert's conduct was, in its nature, corrupt.
Mr.. Colfax said he was but slightly ac-
| quainted with Mr.. Gilbert. and did not rise
as his advocate, but to point out why (al-
! though he would certainly vote to expel a
member for bribery he could not vote for his
expulsion, on the evidence submitted even if
| it had not been impeached. lie pointed out
| gross contradictions between Mr.. T1iplett and
Mr.. Sweeney. On the first day neither re.
| membefed Mr.. Welch in spite of the most
| searching questions, while three DAYS after,
both implicate him at the same session OF the
committee, and Mr.. Tnpett remembered then
! dozens Of conversations with him, and the
| next day further remembered that Mr.. WEIGH
| solicited more pay, if they had it TO distribute.
Mr.. Sweeney twice testified that he had an
individual contract with Mr.. Triplett, but'the
committee did MT ask him what it was Mr..
Triplett said Mr.. Sweeney was not present
WHEN Mr. Gilbert was introduced to them,
but the committee did not attempt to prove
by Mr. Triplett, who introduced them. He
(Colfax) then proceeded to show various fiat
| contradictions.
Mr.. Gilbert's defence was then reqd: He
assumes that the committee went beyond the
| power conferred by the resolution under which
they were appointed He saws the ,1lly two
witnesses against him are Mr.. Sweeney and
| Mr.. Iripett, who stand, by their own confess
sion, in the position OF acknowledged accom-.
| pices in each others guilt, and that they seek
! TO connect hun with themselves in their Of
| fence, thereby to escape the conseq uences of
their own admitted acts. The shallow efforts
,aff ho fftor
| ments by their confederation of each other
would excite smile, were it not done for the
grave purpose of afixing a guilty stain on
fellow member. Five witnesses of high per.
sonal character, great intelligence, and un-
questioned integrity, sW ear that Mr.. Sween--
eys character is lad for truth and veracity,
and that they would not believe him on oath
and the committee themselves are constrained
to confess he is vindictive when provoked,
and not over scrupulous III his measures of
revenge. Mr.. Tripett had no more than Mr..
Sweeney's word that any member of Congress
was interested in the book resolution Mr.
Gilbert then repeats he never stipulated for
any quantity OF land or other pecuniary con-
sideration, for his vote for that or any other
measures. He submits his case to the House.
demanding an open trial by the House, where
! justice will be administered according to legal
evidence, and in legal form, and where his
rights us man, and his privileges as a mem
Der, Will be respected, protesting his innocence
in tact and intentiou in every respect, where
with he stands charged, aud with an apology
for The length of his remarks, he cheerfuiy
abldes the judgment of the House.
Mr.. Edwards said that Mr.. Simonton's tes-
timony against him is printed in the report,
while his against Simonton is omitted. Mr..
Simonton's testimony is false
Mr.. Davis proceeded 10 justify the proceed
ings ct the Committee, saying that the ac-
cused parties were duly notified, and afforded
an opportunity for defence. The Committee
were liberal as well as just. There was no
necessity of examining the witnesses anew.
as nothing could change the evidence on re-
cord. The evidence, he commended, was such
as shows there was corrupt combir alton be-
tween Messrs Gilbert and Welch to procure
the passage OF a resolution, and bargaining
for that which ought to have been the result
of their judgment.
Mr.. Bennett said that Mr.. Gilbert desired
to be heard to morrow morning, and moved
an adjournment.
Adjourned.
MASSACHUSETTS, LEGIsLATURE.