Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1870-03-06

/ Etktn I'd intervene III l4lio MAJ
ket Of gold sales so as to keep
! gold up; after the President Is
SHOWN to be convert 70 the crop
| theory of the conspiratOrs, and after
! the letter written by Mrs. Grant to
| Mrs. COrbin, which like the letter OF
Corbin to the President, was de-
siTOyed; after all these sworn state
ments pointing to the head Of the gov
eminent as having some personal re-
| sponsibility on this subject Of gold
| sales, and in a matter where the chief
of the cOnspirators was his brother-in-
law, and after the testimony before us,
showing the origin, progress and col
| lapse of the scheme-it might have
been expected that the committee
would not dissolve without giving
the Executive an opportunity Of ex-
PLANTATION. We say of explanation,
| but we do not say it as necessarily inn
plying his eXculpation. Nor should
| the majority thus insist. But expla-
nation was called for of the diff
ferent parts which he played
or was made to play--it may be
! hOnestly-in a drama where his
wife, his sister, and that sisters hus-
/ band and himself were constantly APP
pearing as perSORG. One word vOUch-
safed from the President, one state
ment from his wife and his sister,
would have elucidated many myster-
! les and furnished US the opportunity
of saying: 4" We, the opponents Of
! this Executive, in all fair criticism,
add our tribute to confirm the partial
attestatiOn of his friends, and we do
/ il the more cheerfully because we are
! bound by our relations to the admin
/ i5tratiOn to challenge all its acts
Was this opportunity furnished ?
! Justice TO the committee requires US
! to say that at first il was. Ii was left
| for the minority 70 suggest this, and
it was unanimously agreed to. We
| cid it with becoming respect. The
! record shows tilat MIR. Cox offered the
! following:
" move that the chairman Of this
committee be requested, either in
writing or personally, as he may
| choose, to confer with the Prasidn,,. -,
of the United States in reference to
! the testimony given before the Com
n1lttee which refers to him or his fam
lily; and that in said conference he
- - -, - "a ulics I,s5ljilIiI,
| after considering the matter, whether
he declares to be heard before or 9th
erwise, with reference to said evi-
dence."
Shortly aftervard, On the 4th of Feb
ruary. the honorable chairman, Gen.
Garfield, made the following report:
'In pursuance of the instructions Of
the committee l called upon the
President Of the United States and
stated to him that in some Of the tes-
timOny taken before the committee
personal reference was made to him
self and to some members of his fam
lily, and that the committee had au-
thOriZed me TO lay before him that
portion Of the testimony, that he
might make any suggestions or state
ment5 concerning ii If he cnOSe TO do
so. The President desired me to ex-
press his thanks to the committee f0r
their courtesy, and to say that he pre-
lerred not to see the testimony nor to
make any suggestion or statement in
reference to it during the progress OF
tine investigations
On the presentation of this report it !
was suggested that the President de
sired to be more formal and official In
mis- relations with the Committee OF
Congress than the resolution seemed
TO indicate. Thereupon, believing
that he would be glad 10 appear and
afford Us his explanations (as his sec
retary had, and as President Lincoln
had to a former cOmmittee), and still
anxious TO hear him, so that we might
all join in the Justification of his per
sCnal integrity % well Of his official
conduct as to the gold sales, Mr.. Cox,
on the 4Uh of February, moved that
he be summoned. It was suggested
that we had not the power to reach
the Executive in this way; that his
only mode of communicating with a
coordinate branch of the Govern
ment was by message; that be might
have contemplated that mode, and
that our only a mode CT reaching
him for Otici&S acts was by im-
parchment. IA coupon, TO remove
all such objections, and still feel
ing the necessity of hearing from
the President, one of his friends on
the committee, and in our Judgment
his wisest friend, On the motion arising
On the Sth OF February to summon the
President, moved to amend It "by re-
guesting" the President to appear be-
fore this committee. This vote to
amend, as the record shows, was lost.
There was the same result on the ORR
ginal resolution TO summon. The
committee could not have shown more
respect to the President. Indeed, it
is cur own belief that he would net
have refused TO appear. Even though
he may have doubted our power to
.rr F.n NOR, him rs1ieeIH ha rt-Q fv-aI
his right and responded. Thus the
undersigned are lett for their guidance
in these matters entirely to the mys-
teriOus, unexplained, conflicting and
nebulOQs testimony which points to
but does not enter the inviolable cham
bers Of the White House.
While we accord to the committee
the utmost vigilance in prosecuting
their researches into the conduct of
the Sub-Treasurer and the haunts of
the gold gamblers and their agents in
New York, We cannot accord to them
the same th0rOughness in the exami-
nation Of officials in the city of Wash
ington. If it be true, Is Mr.. A. A.
Low testihes, that The conspiracy WAS
" weak combination of men to raise
the price of gold to the injury Of the
common interest, basing their calGg-
latlOns on the policy of the govern
ment to withhold SO much gold that
they could manipulate the balance;"
and if this policy made speculation
a matter OF easy calculation" " and
when the committee had already
shown by conversation and letters
that the President had been converted
TO that policy, we demand to know
what there Is in the Executive Office
that we should stop short, outside of
its doors in our investigation The
majority answer: s'Ihere is nothing
to inculpate the President, and our
duty does not call on US to call on him
until that Is done.n The majority lay
great stress and give great credence TO
AIr. Gould. He gave it as his opinion
that the President was pure and had
no connection with the movement. |
What has that to do with our investi-
CATION of " "caGses@' Suppose this is
Mr.. GoulG's opinion; or suppose Mr..
Fisk (ss he does) gives different Opin-
ion. We know it is part of the plan
of these shreWd operators, IN matters
of this quasi political nature, where
their interests are in question, to bal
ance or divide their opinions between
parties. But are these opinions, even
if shared by the committee pro or con,
a reason for calling halt when the
investigation reaches the door Of the
White House? But even on Mr..
GOuld's statement, we do not see why
the President should not be called.