The weekly Oskaloosa herald. [volume] (Oskaloosa, Iowa) 1855-1885, 1872-06-13
THE SUMNER SPEECH.

THE SUMNER SPEECH,
The sensation of the honr Is Mr.
summers great speech. 1t is great
IN us length, and still greater IN es.
SentIal falseness. One entirely ig-
norant of the present Adminisfrat;19,
would infer that its head is a Borais
Bourbon or Guelph Of the w0rsi
type. He is compared to the yiIest
representatives of those infamous
families, with no intimation that he
is any less d!spicable than they. 1t
seems hardly possible that the author
OF this atrociOus speech is the same
Charles Sumner that stood so man.
fully by the slave.
Inc explanation is suggested, in
the repeated complaint he makes
that he and those for whom ne smoke
have not been taken into the couu.
ellis Of the President, and that he
himself was deposed from the Chair.
manshlp OF the Senate Committee on
Foreign Affairs. He several times
alludes to the subject, each time with
increased bitterness. That denosi.
ton explains III full the whole tri-
ade.
me most notable feature Of the
speech Is the utter absence Of 50
much asan attempt TO prove corruu-
ton on the part Of the President
or OF his appointees. The speaker
asserted that dangerous presidents
had been set. To more clearly ap-
preciate the situation, apply the
principle involved to every day bus
mess affairs. Suppose stakeholder
IN some large corporation, say q
raliroad company, wished to prevent
the reelection of the President of
the concern; he would endeayor to
prove to his fellow stock. holders that
the affairs of the company were suf-
terlng either through inefficiency or
dishonesty. Charges of that kind
would command respect, and call
for an investigation; but if, in this
case, 1T were alleged that some of the
subordinate officials of the COMPANY
were related, by blood or marriage
TO the President, and soue of the
suoordlnates had, previous to the
PRESIDENTS election, done him a per
sonar FAVOR, would these allegations
nave weight? The answer would
be: What oft ? Now there are some
nifty thousand appointees to Federal
offices, 1t is estimated, and Mr.. sum
ner thinks bakers dozen of the
persons filling those places are rela-
ted to the president. He further
charges that three of his appointees
had made him presents before his
election. What of it? Whom Mr..
Seward was Secretary of State. his
son was his first assistant. No BODY
ever found fault with this appoint-
ment. President Grant has one
brother. He holds no office. and
never has. Have any of the men
whose appointment Sumner com
plains OF ever proved unworthy their
trusts! The Senator does not
charge 1t, neither is it true, EXCEPT
IN one case. The holder of q minor
office IN Chicago, who was a cousin
of the President, fell under snsnicion
or dishonesty. His case was report
ed at headquarters, and he was
promptly dismissed the service.
Ihat man was member of the Gin
clnnatl Convention. ANY sensible
person would say that the directors
OF stock company had made fools
OF themselves who should turn off a
Ifesldent or Superintendent, under
Whom the affairs of the COMPANY
were emlnently prosperous, on any
such charges as those preferred by
SharleS Sumner against General
Grant: According to the Senator's
own showing, the personal and fam
lily appolntees are not one in q thou-
sand 1t is a monstrous libel 70
compare the Presidents family. an.
polntees to the nepotism of the Dor
gas. The Papal nepotism turned
the treasures of Italy and of the Rom
Ism hierarchy into the family officers.
and made all Christondom tributary
to the klnfolks Of the Pope. Be.
tween such abuse Of power and the
patronage system of our President,
there Is no more resemblance than
between midnight and mid If
any unit man has been kept in office
on family ground, the enemies of the
Administration would have charged
1t. The absence of any such charge
Is deeply significant, and warrants
the conclusion that no such case ex-
lists.
Sumner has q great deal to saw
about San Domingo. Why rake
that up? The Senate decided
against annexation, and that en-
ded the matter. The President has
made no attempt to secure the an
nexation in spite OF the Senate.
True to his promise to have no poll
cy of his own, he dropped the mat.
ter wholly and at once. He doubt
less still thinks it is an acquisition
very desirable; but he recognizes
the right of the Senate to differ
from him, and the fnality of its de-
cision.
1t lily becomes Charles Sumner
to complain of the President for ac
cepting presents. Those gifts were
all made before his election. Gen
eral Grant, not President Grant, &C
cepted them. But Mr.. Summers
own skirts are not as clean. During
nearly decade he was chairman of
the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Every diplomatic appointment was
reported upon by him, and practic-
ally his authority in that department
OF patronage was almost equal to
that of the President and the Secre.
tary of State. Did he observe
the rule against accepting presents
which he lays down for the Presi.
dent, and insists upon so strenuously?
BY no means. His house is fairly
numbered with the gifts received
from our representatives abroad.
They overflow every room, from the
wlne-vault to the actic. Some of
these are of great value in a com
mercial point of view. The gift-ta-
king Senator should have remem-
bered the glass house adage. Let
him pull the beam out of his own
eye before making such a fuss about
the imaginary mote in the Presi-
dents eye.---Chicago Journal.
A Correspondent of the Cincin-
natti Gazette had an interview. n