The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-21

S"o"s"6 suos We osuuSN 10 6AovSiy "6SA'>~@
Germany as England sinned against as In the
time of the rebellion.
We make these averments on the authority
of Mr.. Schurz himself, as expressed in his
speech in the Senate yesterday. The offence
which he committed is not unk nown to our
laws. In the Fifth Congress, during the
Presidency of MIR. Adams, the elder, statute
was passed expressly forbidding any citizen to
hold correspondence with any foreign govern
ment, or its agent, with an intent to influence
the measures of that government in relation to
disputes with the United States, or intended
to defeat the measures Of the United States.
This is made high misdemeanor, and the
penalty is set down as fine not exceeding
five thousand dollars and Imprisonment for
term not less than six months or more than
three years. Now, we do not know whether
this statute has been violated by Mr. Sumner
or Mr. Schurz. That must be determined by
those skilled in law and the construction OF
statutes. There is one member in Congress
now under conviction in Washington, and
about to be sentenced for the violation OF q
statute no less binding than that of 1897. We
should be grleved to see Mr.. Sumner or Mr..
Schurz in the dock with ex-Congressman
Stokes, of Tennessee, and we shall be glad
to hear that the point made by Mr.. Conkling.
that they may have subjected themselves to
this punishment, is unfounded; but the fact
that the suspicion of its violation has been
aroused, and justly aroused, shows to what
desperate straits impatient and angry dema-
gogues may be driven, when they allow for
one moment their political necessities to inter-
fere with their duties of allegiance.
II is plain to the minds of all men that this
latest intrigue against General Grant is most
unworthy proceeding. Is there no real ground
of opposition to the President that Senators
must dishonor themselves as members of a
party or run the risk of indictment for violat-
ing the law? Have we lost all sense OF that
delicate and chivalrous loyalty to the republic
and it's chief which would lead us, no matter
how frail and weak the administration had
been, to initiate the patriarchal example, and
walk backward with averted gaze to hide
the shame? Can we have no politics untainted
with calumny and detractiOn and disloyalty ?
1t would seem from the debate of yesterday
that all sense Of this had departed from the
Senate. We see little difference between this
Senate of demagogues and partisans who now
hold carnival in Washington'and the Senate of
Rome in the latter days of the empire, and
the Senate of France which tamely registered
the DEGREES of Bonaparte. Beautiful is indie
pendence of thought, and all honor to the manly
Senators who calmly tread the path of duty,
whatever winds of detraction sweep over it.
But it is not independence to make cow
ardly war upon the President, as the head of
a military ring, because he gave offence to
sensitive scholar from Massachusetts,, and an
irritable and exacting young refugee from
Missouri. Nor is there any path of duty
which leads into the closets of foreign lega-
tons, to find the inspiration of a conspiracy
against the peace and dignity and honorable
name of the republic.