New national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1870-1874, 1871-05-11
Sherman ON Summer.

sherman ON Summer.
The Ohio senator Explains the DispIaee
ment Of the Massachusetts, Senator as H.
Understands 1t.
The following letter from Senator Sherman
appeared in the Springfield (ohio) Republic o
Tuesday last:
MANsFIELp, 0HIo. April %, 1871.
Ser: | promised you that, after the close o
the recent session of Congress, / would answe,
the inquiries put to me in your paper of the
23d ultimo as to the removal of Mr.. Sumner
from the craftsmanship of the Committee or
Foreign Relations. One month has so dimin
ished the public interest in this controversy
that | doubt if it is wise to fevive it but as
made the promise to answer you, will perform
it, leaving you to determine whether it is no,
better to throw this letter into the waste basket
rather than to publish it. You wrote under
the impressiohSthat because finally voted for
the committee as organized by the Republican
conference, fa3ored the removal of Mr. Sum
ner. This is an error; Cor did what could
to prevent it. No Republican Senator voted
against the report OF the conference but sew
eral, though present, did not vote.
The chief reasons that led to the removal of
Mr. Sumner were that his personal relations
with the President and Secretary Fish had be.
come such that it was impossible for them to
transact in harmony the public business, and
that the committee was so constituted as not
fairly to represent majority of the Senate.
The Senate shares.ssih the President the
treaty making power. This, from its nature,
is contident-secret; conducted mainly in So
cial intercourse demanding confidence, advice,
and consent. 1t SO happened, when the com
mIttees were to be formed, that, besides diplo-
matte appointments and formal treaties with
other Powers, we had on hand the highly i'm
portant English negotiation and the Santo Do
mlngo annexation.
On both these topics the President and Mr..
Sumner differed widely Mr. Sumner insisted
that the hasty proclamation by Great Britain OF
neutrality between the United States and the
Southern Coniederacy was the foundaton-the
grdUamen OF the Alabama claims. The Presi-
dent and MIR. Fish contended that this procla-
matien was an act of which we could not CON-
plain, except as an indication of an unfrendly
spirit by Great Britain, and that the true basis
OF the Alabama claims is that Great Britain,
after procaiming neutrality. did not enforce
1T, but allowed her subjects to build, man, arm,
and fight English cruisers under the cover of
the rebel flag, to the destruction of our COM
mercial navy. No nation ever before, while
proclaiming peace, inflicted so great an injury
opinion between the President and Mr.. Sumner
led to the removal of Mr.. Motley, who sided
with Sumner, and PROFESSIONALLY intensified
the feeling that had arisen from the San Do
mingO treaty.
AS to the astnamed treaty, it was a con-
coded fact that before the President had become
publicly committed to it he had, waving his
official rank, sought the advice and counsel of
Mr.. Sumner, and was evidently misled as to
Mr.. Summers views on this subject. The sub.
sequent debating in both open and executive
session led to Mr.. Summers taking the most
extreme and active opposition to the treaty, in
which he arrayed with great severity the con-
duct OF the naval officers the Secretary of the
Navy, Mr.. Fish, and the President.
This was aggravated by alleged public con.
versations with Mr.. Sumner by "interviewers, -
in which the motives of the President and
Others were impugned. In the meantime social
relations between the Secretary of State and
Mr.. Sumner bad become impossible, and, con-
slderng human passion, prejudice, and feeling,
anything like frank and confidential commune
cation between the President and Mr. Sumner
was out of the question.
II must be remembered that on both these
important topics ma ority of the Republican
Senators sided with the President. We gen.
orally agreed that it was a false pretended
gave no unquoot:~-uuiO
right to demand indemnity from Great Britain
for the depredations of the Alabama and other
English cruisers.
And as for the San Domingo treaty largo
majority of Republican Senator'S had voted for
Though | did not and nearly all Of us had
voted for the Commission of Inquiry, of which
Mr.. Wade was the chief member.
When we met in March it was known that
hot H. nj,
be referred to the Committee on Foreign Rea-
tions, and that, aside from the hostile personal
relations OF Mr.. Sumner and the Secretary Of
State, he did not and could not and would not
represent the views of n majority of his Repub-
lican colleagues, and that ma orlty of his
committee agreed with him. Committees are
and ought TO be organized to represent the
body, giving a majority Of the members TO the
prevailing opinions, but fairly representing
the views of the minority. 1t has been the
custom in the Senate TO allow each party to
choose its own representatives In each commit.
tee, and in proportion to their numbers.
In Die Republican conference the first ques-
ton that arose was IS 60 MIR. Sumner. He
was the oldest Senator in consecutive service.
He was eminent not only as faithful repre-
sentative OF Republican principles, but as espe-
cally qualified as chairman OF our Foreign
Relations. He had long held that position,
and it was not usual in the Senate to change
heseommittee, but to follow the rule of SEMI
GRITTY, placing Senators of the majority party
in the order of their coming irfeo the Senate,
and those of the minority at the feot OF the
list.
In deciding Mr.. Summers case in view Of the
facts have stated, two plans were urged;
First-To place him at the head of the new
and important Committee of Privileges and
Elections, leaving the rest Of the committee to
stand in the precise order it had been, with
one vacancy to be filled in harmony with the
majority.
Second--To leave Mr.. Sumner to stand in
his old place as chairman, and to make change
in the body of the committee by promoting
one of its members to another committee, and
ill the vacancy by Senator in harmony with
the majority.
My opinion is and was that the latter course
was the most polite and just but the majority
decided, after full consideration and debate,
upon the first alternative
1t has been the subject of complaint that Mr..
Cameron, and not some one else, was left at
the head of the committee. But he was next
in the list, and by uniform usage became its
chairman, unless he voluntarily declined
Such are the leading facts, and state them
without any desire to justify my own opinion
or to arraign Others. Of one thing | am clear,
that after this purely domestic controversy was
decided in a Republican conference, it was
highly improper to allow our political adverse
ries to review it,
He must have q narrow mind who cannot
perceive enough here for an honest difference
of opinion, or who can find in this question q
pretence for schism in great political or
ganization. Very truly yours,