Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-02-26

Time the crowd became denser anu tn
scene noisier. aste,AA-
~ The Ladies' fET a1
having been admitted within the body Q
the hall stood grouped at the mouths OF al
the aisles and pressed around at the bacl
of the circle. Many of them had achieved
| prominence by gaining possession of thu
chairs of members. They did not seen
abashed or conscious of being out of place
| On the contrary they wore an air OF anx
ious, determined, persistent eagerness il
pursuit of their object.
Mr.. Haldeman, apparently impressed
with the incongruity of his surroundings
made motion that the floor be cleared o
all but members, but the Speaker informed
him that the doors had been opened by
unanimous consent and that it was too late
to object now. Haldeman rnugr
Subsided,
his rebuff being hailed with laughter.
AT 1l:45 the Speaker announced that the
special order was the report of the Credit
Mobiier Committee.
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts,, IS If un-
prepared, moved that the House go into
COMMITTEES of the Whole on the Legislative
Appropriation bill, whereupon, Mr.. Gar
field intimated that 1t would be just as well
for him 10 -eT ~ ~, e-a
Attend to His Own Business
and leave the committee on appropriations
to manage its own affairs, rebuff which
brought the laugh against Mr. Butler.
The House then proceeded with the
special order, when the clerk read the reso-
buttons for the expulsion Of Ames and
Brooks.
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts, offered the
following substitute: s51a
Whereas, the select committee of the
House has, after investigation, reported to
the House testimony which is by them
deemed sufficient to show criminal action
In one or more members of the House;
Whereas; the testimony shows that SINH
lar acts have been done by other persons
not now members of the House;
And whereas, it clearly appears that what
ever acts were done or offences committed
by members of the House or by civil officers
of the United States now in Office, or others,
were done and committed more than five
years ago and within jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court of the District of Columbia;
Whereas, no legal or constitutional right
to use Its power for the expulsion of its
members as a-punishment for crimes done
or committed by member before his cleo
ton thereto exists, but the punishment of
all crimes and offences against the laws
should be after trial by jury and judgment
of court of competent Jurisdiction: where
fore, -...--- ~, - .. ...
Resolved, That in the judgment of the
House, as it appears there is probable cause
to Believes from the report of the testimony
submitted by the select committee of in
vestigation Of the matter of Credit Mobilier,
that grave offences, punishable by the
statutes Of the United States as well as The
common law, such as giving and receiving
brides or false swearing, may have been
committed as. shown in said testimony,
within the District of Columbia; therefore,
the Clerk of the House be, and is
hereby ordered to cause copy of the tes-
timony so taken to be forwarded to the
district attorney, the prosecuting officer for
the United States for said district, with the
recommendation of this House, and that
the same, and such other Testimony which
he may deem material, he shall cause
to be presented to the grand jury sitting
in and for said district at the next session
thereof, that they may take such action in
the premises as to law and justice sh all
appertain.
Mr. Poland declined to yield to have the
substitute offered.
POland's Argument
Mr.. Poland then opened the case for the
prosecution in speech reciting the facts
justifyiDg the report of committee. After
showing by the testimony that at the time
of the TRANSACTIONS the stock of the Credit
Mo5ilier was worth from 200 to 800 per
cent, he asked whether Ames was so utterly
insensible to the profit which be could have
derived from TIT stock, had he chosen to
sell it, that he preferred To let members of
Congress have it without any profit to him
self. How came his charitable disposition
all at once to be so extended in favor of
members of Congress? His ostensible
business in Washington that winter was
his position as member of the House, but
his actual business was peddling ten shares
of stock in place to members in Congress-
Mr.. Briggs interrupted the argument of
Mr.. Poland and asked him to state whether
or not the evidence showed that these lead
ing members to whom Ames was peddling
this stock knew it to be worth from 200 to
800 per cent.
Mr.. Poland suggested to hS friend from
Delaware that if he would wait he (Poland)
would get along to that point. Laughter. I
Mr.. Briggs-We wait patiently.
Poland went on with his argument and
said there was some balancing motive in
the mind of Ames which induced him to let
certain men have stock at 100 when he
could have got two or three or four times as
much for it. Was there any possible doubt
about the motive of Ames? He had de.
signed to get this stock into the hands of
members not merely to rely on the feeling
of gratitude which they might show to him
because he had given them something worth
two or three or four timesras much as they
paid for it, but he relied on something
stronger than that. Ames had lived long
enough in the world to know that q man
sometimes forgets kindness, that a mans
gratitude for a kindly act does not last al
ways. He had read enough Scripture to
know that "Where mans treasure is, there
will his heart be also. [Murmurs of ap-
plause.] Ames had avo 8ed bis whole phi
losophy on that subject. He had said that
the difficulty is that you cannot
SCI mdu W give LIS dLtoD-
ton to thing unless be has an interest
to do so. He had therefore to contrive
soma means or other by which he could
make the interest of those leading men in
Congress identical with his own, so that
they should be as watchful in relation
to this matter as he himself Ames knew
that himself and friends started on a voyage
which sooner or later he knew would be
exposed. He knew that the nation had
been by their performances defrauded of
millions, and he understood it would be a
good thing when that time came, that he
should have, if possible, some strong back
ers, and he had intended by his course of
conduct to provide himself with them. He
had done so for the very purpose and with
the intent to influence their action as mem
bers of Congress on matters to come be-
fore them. That was an act Of bribery for
which ne might have been sent to the peni-
Tertiary. even though every member had
received the stock from him in entire inno-
cence. The law did not require the intent
to be known to the person to whom the
present was made. 1t was an insidioIs at
tempt to undertake to bind a man over
by gratitude, that constituted
bribery. 1t would not do for Anes to
plead ignorance of the law. The plea was
not permitted to the most 'debased and ig-
norant criminal, and was the House to lib
eralize that rule oflaw for the benefit of
millionaire, and of a ten years. member of
Congress? Was that man to stand up in
such presence, or any body for him, and