Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-03-18
WORCESTER
MONDAY. MARCH IS, 1s4a.
Mr.. TrumbulI'. "personnl Explanation"

kruuDuai7A k@eEsOudt EAIllAuahAOus'7
Sen itor Tumbulls personal explanation
in the senate last Saturday, was more impor
tant so far as related to the occasion for it, than
the dispatches have shown. Neither our special
telegraphic correspondent nor the reporter for
the associated press gave a clear account of it.
Somebody, it appears, thinking his course in the
''sale of arms debate" not we'll warranted, was
disposed TO eight back" Memory became ac-
tive in the war department, we presume, and
brought up again the particulars of the Near
die case, in which Mr.. Trumbull was retained
rs counsel Tor the government, receiving very
heavy fee without doing much work. The par
riculars were published in several newspapers,
incorrectly in most cases. 1t was the publica-
ton of this case in a Michigan paper which &C.
casioned the personal explanation" Fred
erick Douglass, in the last number of his sNew
Era states the case as follows:
During the impeachment trial of Andrew
johnson, and but a short time before he would
be required TO decide by his vote the guilt or in
nocence OF his accidental" eXcellency, Senator
LYMAN Trumbul one of the foremost and Bit
terest in his charges of dishonesty against the
republican party, and by inuendo against the
president, was retained by Johnson himself, and
promised fee of ten thousand dollars for his
services in the cases of McArde and the state of
Georgia against Gen. Geo. G. Meade. Gen.
Meade was then in command of the military dis
tricr embracing the state oil Georgia. McArde
hid been tried by q court martial, authorized
bv Gen, Meade, for murder, and sentenced to be
shot. writ OF habeaS corpus had been sued
out, aud the case came before the United States
supreme court. Hon. Matt. Carpenter, who was
then a private citizen was the real attorney for
the government and performed all the labor the
suit required. Senator Trumbull was not en-
ployed more than a few minutes, if at all, and
practically had nothing TO do With it, For this
service be rendered the following bill, in his own
handwriting, against the government, and ii
srGS paid
UNITED STATES:
To L. TRUMBULL DR.,
To legal services in the case of er parte Nc
Arde and toe state of Georgia Against
George u Meade and Others, in the SUI
preme court Of the United States, at De-
camber term, 1857 and 1868. $1,000
Or. by cash. oiVVI
"TDese $1,000 were paid by General Townsend
March I, 1858, $1,000. and April 49, 1865 $1,000.
As Mr. Stanton believed the whole thing of
very doubtful cburacier il nothing worse, he
refused 10 pay the balance, and Mr.. Irumbull
did not receive it until April %, 1869, after Mr..
Stantou's death On that day it was paid by
John Potts, the disbursng clerk of the war de-
partment."
This statement is not altogether correct. There
is nothing to warrant the assumption that the
$4,000 had some mysterious connection with
the impeachment trial. Moreover, MIR. Trum-
bull claims that he was retained not by Andrew
johnson but by Secretary Stanton, and after,
wards by his successor in the war department,
Gen. Grant; and there is nothing TO show that
he docs not state this fact correctly. His bill
for services shows that he was first engaged pre-
90 4lo ,aY1tr
luton passed the house of representatives, Feb
ruary "a, 1868, and the trial began in the senate,
March 5, 1868; therefore, if he had been en-
ployed by Andrew johnson, it would be forced
conclusion to assume that "bribe" was in
volved in the matter. For the rest, Mr.. Trum-
bull admits thai he allowed himself to be en-
ployed in the case, and that he received $4,000.
In all this, he maintains, he violated no law,
which is doubtless true although a violation of
law has been charged.
There are two points, however, relative TO
which something may be said on the other side
In the first place, was it quite proper for a sena
tor 10 undertake that case? Ii is stated that
Senator Edmunds refused the case before appli-
cation was made to Senator Trumbull on the
ground that it would be improper for him to I'M
dertakeit. In the second place, was it proper to
take 900 from the national treasury for do
ing very httle work? 1t seems to us quite i'm
proper; and, if it can be shown to the invest-
eating committee that anybody in the war de-
partment enriched himself in this easy way, by
gains made in connection with the sale of arms,
we hope he will receive proper attention. The
actual work in the McArdle case was done by
Mr.. Carpenter who was not then a senator Mir.
Trumbul did but little; and, certainly the dis
proportion between the amount of his bill and
the extent of his services, is very great.