Wyandot County Republican. [volume] (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1869-1903, 1871-05-11
senator sherman Rises to Explain


Senator Sherman has written to The Springfield
Republic III answer to inquiry in reference To his
vote for the deposition of Sumner from the Commit
tee on Foreign Relations After stating that al
though he voted for the committee as organized
without Mr. summers name upon it. he did what he
could TO prevent the dropping of Nr. summer, he
| proceeds:
The chief rsasons that led to the removal of Mr.
Sumner We:e that his personal relations with the
President and Secretary Fish had become such tn at
II was lmpossl lie Tor them to transact in harmony
| the public business and that the Committee so
constituted as not TO fairly represent majority Of
the Sen Ite. The Senate shares with the President
the treaty making power. This from lis nature is
confdentia-secTt conducted mainly in social inter-
course, demanding confidence aavice ard concert.
| 1t SO happened. When the committees to be
formed, that, besides diplomatic appointments and
| formal treaties III other powers had hand
the highly important English nrgOti.tion and the
San Domingo annexation.
On both these topics the President and Sr. Sumner
diff red widely. Mr.. Sumner insisted tha the hlsty
proclamation py Great Britain OF neutrality between
the United States and the Southern Cuu!edeIacy was
the foundation-the gravamen Of the Alabama claims
The President and NJ. Fish contended that this proc
lamation WAS act Of which could rot complain
except an Indication of Gnfriendly spirit by
Great Britain-and that the trUe basis of the Ala
bama claims is that tsrcGt Britain, aitFr proclaim
ing neutrality. did not enforce it, bat allowed her
SUI iectS to build, man, and fight English Cruis-
under cover of the rebel nss to the destruction
OF our commercial navy. No nation ever before,
y hi!e prociaiming peace Inflicted great injury
upon friendly power. This difference of opinion
between the President and Mr.. Sumner led 10 the
removal of Mr.. Motley, who sided with sumner, ana
unquestionably intensified TIE feeling that had
arisen from the San Domingo treaty.
As to the last named treaty, it was a conceded
fact that before the President had become publicly
committed to it he htd, waving his official rams
sought the advice ana counsel Of Mr.. Sumner, and
was evidently mised as TO Mr.. Sunaer views on
t!:is suljecI. he subsequent debate in both open
and executive ssion lei to Mr.. summers taking
most extreme ant active opposition 10 the treaty
in which he yCd with great severity the conduct
# the naval officers, the See retary of the Navy M
Fish, and the President. This aggravated By
-l5a NJ
erviewe S. in which the motives of the President
and others were impusned. In the meantime social
reiat onS between the Secretary of state and Mr.
sumner had become impossible; and considering
human passion prejudice and feeling, anything lke
frank and Confidential communication between the
President and Mr. Sumner was out of the question.
1t must be remembered that on both these impor-
talt topics majority Of the Republican Senator's
sided with the President. We generally agree that
it was Il false-prete nded utrdlty and too hasty
proclamation at neutrality, that gave unques-
tiona BILE right to demand indemnity from Great Brit
ain for the depredations of the Alabama and Other
English cruisers. And as for the san Domingo
treaty, large majority of Republican Senators had
voted for t,-thousI dd not: and nearly all of US
had voted for the Comm isSioners of Inquiry. OF
which Mr. W ade was the chief member:
When met in March, it was known that beth
these important SUBJECTS " oud necess rily be re-
ferred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and
that aside from the hostile personal relations of Mr.
sumner and the secretary OF State, he did not aud
could not and wOuli not represent the views of the
majority of his Republican collie igues, and that u
majority of his committee agreed with him Com
mitt es and ought to be Organized 70 represent
tie Iody. giving Il majority OF the members to the
prevailing opinions but fairly representing the
views OF the minority. Ii has been the custom
in the Senate to allow eacn party to choose its
own representatives iii eah committee, and in
proportion to their numbers.
In the Republican Conference the first qucs-
ton that arose was as to Mr., sumner. lie was
the oldest senator in consecutive service. lie
: eminent, not only a the faithful repreSen
tati sfs OF Republican principles, but as espec-
iIi.y quali1ie to be ch ,rman Cf our Foreign
Relations. He had long held that position and
it not unusual in the Ser ;t1 to change the
committees, but to follow the rule of seniority
placing Senators OF the majority party in the
order of their coming into the Senate, and those
of the minority the loot Of the list. In ecid-
ing Mr.. Summers case IN view of the facts l
have ed. two plans W lie urged.
First-ro place him at the II" ad OF the new
and important committee of privileges, and |
leaving the rest of the committee to stand in the /
precise order it had been, with one vacancy TO |
be filed in harmony with the majority
Secnnd-ro leave Mr.. Sumner TO stand in hi /
old place as chairman, and to make Il change in 4
the body of the committee by promo,i ing one of its
IL embers to another committee, and NIL the va
cancy by a Senator in harmony with the m ljori-
ty. My own opinion was and is that the latter
course was the mos polite and lust: but the .
maj orty 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
But he was next in the list, and, by
uniform usage, became its chairman unless he
volunta. lily declined.
Such are the leading facts. and L state them
without ny desire to justify my own opinion or
to arraign Others. Of one thing l L III clear, that
after this purely domestic controversy was de-
cided tn Republican Conference, it was hi shly
improper to allow our political adyersares to re-
view T. He must have anar' ow mind who can
not perceive enough here for an honest differ
ence of opinion, or who can lind in this question
a pretense Tor 4 schism in great political i
org aniZatiOn-
Very truly yours, JOHN SHERMAN.