Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-06-10
MATTHEW'S CONTUM4CY.


The sensation of Saturday in the proceed
ings Of the electoral investigating committee
was the refusal of Mr.. Stanley Matthews to
appear before it and testify as to his connec-
ton with the Louisiana frauds developed by
his letters to James E. Anderson. His letter
is mixture of falsehood and bravado that
will place him in still less enviable light
before the public than that which he has
heretofore occupied. He starts off with the
assertion that he has no knowledge of the
proceedings of the committee except through
the public prints. The clerk of the commit
tee declares that he sent him copy of the
proceedings of the committee by page, and
Messrs. Cox and Butler, two of his Republi-
can friends on the committee, positively
assert that he was in receipt of the official
copy referred to, thus convicting him of
deliberate falsehood.
After stating that he had called the atten-
ton of the Senate to the testimony involv-
ing him in the Frauds and moved a resolu-
ton for the appointment of committee to
inquire into the matter, Matthews says:
the Senate, which, by the adoption of the reso-
luton, has taken jurisdiction and entered up
on an investigation, as requested. That body
alone, SO Tar as my conduct is concerned, is
competent to render effective Judgment
upon the question. So far, therefore, as your
resolution invites me to submit to the House
committee an explanation Of my correspond
ence with Anderson in evidence before it, l
consider that it would be improper for me
under the circumstances to comply with it,
This amounts to defiance of the author
ity of the House committee and an imputa-
ton upon their honesty 1t is confession
that his conduct will not bear the close
scrutiny it would receive at the hands of
Potter and his associates; declaration that
he will only submit to having his conduct
inves tigated by the committee appointed on
his own motion for the express purpose of
withdrawing him. It betrays degree of
moral cowardice and a consciousness of
guilt that will 60 far towards convincing the
public that he is quite as much of a knave
as he was supposed to be fool.
The stand taken by Messrs. Butler and
Cox in this matter is worthy of praise.
These gentlemen were the first to call atten-
ton to Matthews untruthfulness, and to
maintain the dignity and impartiality of the
committee of which they are members.
They denounced emphatical]y the insinua-
ton that the accused Senator could not re-
ceive justice at their hands, and insisted
that the recalcitrant should be compelled to
attend and give evidence. Mr.. Butler de-
hat hn ho7 fr;a
nor enemies to punish, but he wanted, and
the people wanted, all the facts in this con-
spiracy. He did not propose to be thwarted
by Matthews, and moved the issue of sub
poena commanding his presence. His de-
mand was endorsed by the entire committee,
and If the Ohio Senator's contumacy con-
tinues we may expect to witness some lively
pyrotechnics.
The audacity exhibited by Matthews in
thus defying the authority of the committee
shows to what desperation he and his fellow
conspirators have been driven, and develops
an intention to interfere with and obstruct
the work of the committee by every means
that can be devised. His avowed intention,
also, of submitting his case only to the Jury
selected by himself, is an exhibition of the
most sublime cheek. Would it help the
cause of man on trial for heinous crime
if he should insist upon being tried by
jury of his own choice? Would it not
rather expose the weakness of his case, and
be presumptive evidence of his guilt?
Stanley Matthews has not improved his
case by this latest exhibition of audacitv
The time for braggggadocio has gone by, and
the sooner he realizes the fact and submits
to the demand of the people. that full flood
of light shall BIZ thrown upon this whole in
famous business, the better it will be for his
reputation among both friends and foes.