The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-05-21

qulreo IL 10 De suppressed; Jnat attefWardS,
when Cameron 'felt the pressure of the null |
tiplied labor" he proposed to resign, but
coupled his offer with condition that ''some
one should be appointed not unfriendly to
his policy" namely, the policy of arming ne
groes, to which Mr.. Lincoln was himself
opposed; that Cameron did resign upon these
terms, and used the privilege conceded to
him by suggesting the name of Stanton.
Everybody who knows Simon Cameron will
understand the object of dragging this thing
by the head and shoulders into your article.
In fact and in truth there was no kind of con-
nection between these two men-no sympathy
nor rmutualrespect. Cameron didnotresign; he
was removed for good cause. He had no lot
or part in naming his successor The re-
moval and the appointment were both made
before Mr.. Cameron knew of either, and they
we're made because the President saw the
necessity of having man at the head of that
ruptible. The correspondence afterwards
published under the names of Messrs. Lin
coin and Cameron was fictitious, and got up
at the instance of the latter to give the affair
q false appearance. 1t is morally impossible
that Stanton could have given his approval
to Cameron's abortive report on
the negroes; for he was at that time white
man every inch of him, proud
of the great race he sprang from, and full
VI ldltu III lbb chpbClty 10 URub lUB OWL DdJUl6S
and govern itself. Nothing would have hu-
inflated him more than to see the American
people relinquish their rightful place in the
front rank of the world, surrender their in
heritance of free government, and sneak
back behind the African for protection in
war or in peace. Long after he was Secre-
tary of War he told Mr. Mallory, of Ken
lucky, that he had not only refused to sane
tion the enlistment of q negro regiment, but
1-1 Il.
it. 1 understand that you have promised to
contradict yourself on this subject, and 1
hope you will keep your word.
Your account of his raid upon the Trea-
sury, in company with Governor Morton,
would look very strange in a pane
gyric made by anybody else but you.
will restate the facts you have given, but
without the drapery by which you conceal
from yourself the view of them which must
unavoidably be taken by all men who believe
in the obligation of any law, human or
divine. In the winter of 1868, the Legisla-
ture of Indiana was dissolved before the ap-
propriations had been made to carry on the
State government or aid in putting troops in
the field. Of course, Congress did not, and
could not, make appropriations for carrying
on the State government or putting
troops in the field, which the State
was bound to raise at her own expense But
the Governor determined to get what money
he wanted without authority of law, and he
looked to Washington for assistance. Presi-
dent Lincoln declined to aid him, because no
money could be taken from the Treasury
without appropriation. Mr.. Stanton, being
applied to, saw the critical condition of the
Governor, and, without scruple, joined him
in his financial enterprise. He drew a war
rant for a quarter of million of dollars, and
gave it to the Governor to spend as he
pleased; not only without being authorized
by any appropriation for that purpose, but in
defiance of express law appropriating the
same money to another and totally different
object. If this be true, the guilt of the par
ties can hardly be overcharged by any words
which the English language will supply. 1t
was getting money out of the public treasury,
not only unlawfully, but by a process as dis
honest as larceny. It involved the making
of fraudulent warrant, of which the moral
turpitude was no less than that committed by
private individual when he fabricates and
utters false paper. 1t was gross and pal
pable violation of the oaths which the Gov
ernor and Secretary had both taken. 1t was
by the statute of 1916, felonious embezzle-
ment of the money thus obtained, punishable
by fine and ten years imprisonment in the
penitentiary. The parties, according to your
version, were both conscious of the high
crime they were perpetrating, for you make
one say to the other, ''If the cause fails you
and will be covered with prosecutions, and
probably imprisoned or driven from the
country" You do not diminish or mitigate the
offense one whit by saying that the money was
afterwards accounted for. A felony cannot be
compounded or condoned by simple restitu-
ton of the spoils and the law 1 have cited was
made expressly to prevent officers charged
with the safe keeping, transfer, or disburse-
ment of public money from using it to accom-
modate friends in ''critical condition" But
what will be said of your trustworthiness as
contributor to history when the public comes
| to learn that this whole story is bogus? I
| pronounce it untrue in the aggregate and in
the detail-in the sum total and in every
item. The truth is this:-In 1868 the Demo-
cratic majority of the Indiana Legislature
were ready and willing to pass their proper
and usual appropriation bills, but were pre-
vented by the Republican minority, who
'bolted" and left the houses without quo
rum until the constitutional limit of their
session expired. The Governor re-
| fused to reconvene them, and thus,
! by his own fault and that of his
friends, he was without the ways and
means to pay the current expenses of the
State He was wrong, but his error was that
Of violent partisan, not the crime of a COR
rupt magistrate. He did not come to Wash
ington with any intention to relieve his neces-
sites by plundering the Federal Treasury
He made no proposition either to Mr. Lincoln
or Mr.. Stanton that they or either of them
should become his accomplices in any such
infamous crime. His purpose was to demand
| payment of debt due, and acknowledged to
be due from the United States to the State of
Indiana. The money had been appropriated
by Congress to pay it, and it was paid accord
ing to law. know not how Mr. Morton may