, 1874-12-04

=
| law, and lie voted also for the moro infamous
one concooted in the sonato, but which, boing
exposed iu time, tho House rejected. If tho
law that was passed is no meaningless md
harmless, why pass It Mt NIL? If tho United
States Ind got along quito comfortably for
sovenly-fivo ycars without such n Inv, where
tho necessity for it now? I}ut tho oxpatn-
ton Of II NJ n "harmlcss measure /" III not
corrnct. II WIS q deliberate attempt to ali-
thorizo tho ntrost Of any newspaper editor or
publisher, in my part Of tho United States,
dta1oh him by force to Washington, to be there
tried for s1nnder Or libel by servilo District
Court an1 paokod jury, upon the complaint
Of my number Of CongreAt, or scnntor, or
other officer Of tho Government ut Waslling-
ion. Wo know It WIS disguiaud 1,,ldor pro-
tcxt to authorize tho capture Of fngi.
tvcs from justice, mud to accomplish
this the Poland Inv provided tint
any editor (any in Wisconsin) pub
lisl'ing libel or s1andor in my part of
| tho United States, upon boing indicted, or
charged Herewith, in tho District of Colrnl-
bia might be arrested Mt his home rs ft,gi-
t1%@ AAr4t 3A7katO *Llak W fltAl4lRtOu ~
he tried and punished. Tint is Senator
Howes idoa Of harmless" innocent 1egisla-
ton, which lo says lie nor any ono WHO voted
for it, including Mfr. Carpenter, would ever
! think Of ropenling. If tlero be ono act Of
Congress moro than another Tint ought to 10
,opealcd upon the first tlay of tile coming ses-
sion, that gRg-law net is ono. We arc conf
! don't there IN not an intelligent man III Wis
consin, besides AIcssrs. Carpenter aud Howe,
who approves Of it, or who does not think it
ought to be repealed. III tho defougo Of Mr..
| Cnrpenters action on this bill it will bo no.
ticcd that Alr. Howe il nlso defending hitn-
self and Carpontcr's reelection will DO an
acqnittal Of lotli.
Gov. Nasllburn stales tho truo posi-
ton Of the question by declaring TINT ho
prefers no claim Of right to tho Office over
any othor person; that the choice ia exclusive
ly with tho people, who arc entitled to lavo
any person Tor Senator that they may prefer
This is tho only correct view to tako Of this
question. Acting on this theory, he l,aa not
| done anything to influence tho choice Of tho
people, either in lis own fayor or ngai1,st any
other person. If the people want AIr. Car.
pointer. ho will be, rs lie ought to be, elected !;
if they want some other person, then that
other person ought to be elected.
Tho friends Of b1r. Carpenter have been
holding in tew"rem over Mr.. N'asllburn,
with throats of its future production, letter
>srittcn by him in 1871, in which it was said
that lie spoke in the highest terms of Mr..
Carpenter, and promised 10 support him for
recollection. This matter is eTcctnally cx-
plodcd by Gov Wasabulu who produces md
publishes copy Of tho letter referred to,
which is quite different thing. Even admit
| ting TINT tho letter in 1871 contained a
promise not to oppose Carpenter in 1876,
TINT promise was nlaito before A1r. Carpenter
had po,petratodr his Objectionable record.
That was before A1r. Carpenter had voted for
tho salary grab; before he had pockotcl
tho money and justified the net in tho
most brazen manncr; and before the
dato of tho gag-laws Of tho last scs-
sion, w1licl, ho supported; and before many
other things which have moro or less
impaired the Senator's standing before tho
country. Gov. Wnshbnrn, or any other per-
sol1, could hayo foreseen in 1871 tho record
Dir. Carpenter would mike il 1879, . and \.
There IL not man in Wisconsin who is op-
posing MIR. Carpenters recollection becnuso of
his Senatorial record rs it stood in 1871 and
even if q promise was made in that ycar, and
upon tho record as it then stood, it would be
binding Oh no one ut this date, in the Light Of
subsequent events. Tho Legislature Inns to
choose n Senator, not upon what
l hiu n1,o t,.