The New York herald., 1879-02-04
A Spicy Debate in the Ex-
ecutiVe Session.
ANOTHER LETTER FROM GENERAL ARTHUR.
The Presidents Opposition to the
Ex- Collector Explained.
AN ANALYSIS OF THE VOTE
PROCEEDINGS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

WASHINGTON. Feb. g. 1879.
The consideration of the nominations of Edwin
A. Merritt to be Collector of Customs and Slas W.
Burt to be Naval Officer for the Port of New York
was resumed by the Senate In executive session to-
| day at one P. NJ.
Senator BAYARD. soon as the doors closed.
| submitted motion that they be reopened and that
| all proceedings be conducted in public.
Senator EDMUNDs objected to the present consider
alton of this motion. and it therefore went
under the rules.
| SPEECH SENATOR BAYARD.
Mr.. BAYARD then took the floor and made speech
of considerable length and earnesness favor
| of confirming the nominations. He referred in
| detail to the testimony taken by the in
| vestigating committee of which he was member,
some years ago. showing as he alleged gross maad-
| ministraton of the New York Custom House under
Collector Murphy. and he claimed it then. and
had been since mere political machine and source
Of corruption. He heartily favored the Presidents
declaration of an intention to reform its admnstra-
ton by placing it business principles and to this
| end would vote for the removal Of Messrs. Arthur
and Cornell and the confirmation of the pending
nations a step in the direction of much needed
| form.
| IN OPPOSITION.
Mr.. EDMUNps was the next speaker. He strongly
opposed tho removal Of General Arthur 1.-THE pending
| question being on General Merritt's nomination
only) and insisted that sufficient cause had been
shown to justify it, In the of his remarks he
combated the idea that in order to properly admins-
| ter the affairs of custom house. it necessary
that the Collector should be personal friend Of the
President Of the Secretary of the Treasury II
| the duty of officer to obey tho law and unless
corruption or inefiiciency proven he should be
retained in Office regardless of personal feelings
! or partisan preferences.
| Mr. Osed he ecOO6r oP Gap
| Merritt on the ground that although there were
abuses to be corrected he satisfied that Mr..
Merritt was At man to be intrusted with their cor
| rection.
| Mr.. HERMAN took similar grounds. The New York
| Custom House had been run as political machine
| but in his opinion there would be no
| improvement effected by placing it under
| control Of Mr.. Merritt who was mere poll
tician. with nothing in his. record to commend
| him for the appointment. While, therefore he tNIr
Kernan was not willing to vote for Mr. Merritt he
| was not willing the other hand, to indorse Mr.
Arthur. Consequently. he should decline to vote
4 at ALL
| Mr.. HOWE then made q speech of about half
| hours duration, in which he took up and compared
the charges and the replies and arrived at the con-
clusion that there no good cause shown for the
| proposed removals.
Mr.. CocKREIL reviewing the controversy said it sp-
peared that grave charges had been made against
Arthur, and in return very serious allegations were
| made against Secretary Sherman. the truth Of
| some Of which the Secretary seemed to admit. He
therefore thought the only proper way to
deal with the subject would be to recommit it to
| the Committee Commerce. with power to send
for persons and papers, and make a thorough inves
tigaion Of Custom House affairs. &C., under General
| Merritts administration. He therefore submitted
| motion to that effect.
| A PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION.
| Mr.. MORGAN. after making q speech Of much the
| same purport Mr.. Cockrell's, moved to indef
| nitely postpone the pending nomination. on the
ground that this would indicate that the Senate did
not consider Merritt proper for the place and
would open the way for the President to send in
another name.
| The presiding officer (dr. Mitchell, occupying
| the chair temporarily. ruled that this motion was
| out Of order it involved final action and under
the rules OF the Senate. although postponement to
fixed date permissible. the final question on
nomination must always be. docs the Senate advise
| aud consent to its condrmation?"
A long discussion ensucd the parliamentary
question thus raised. and after eight Senator's
had spoken NEARLY all of them supporting the de-
| cision of the Chair Mr. Morgan withdrew his mo-
| ton.
| SENATOR Combines SPEECH.
The question then rccurrcd Mr.. ConklinQs
motion to recommit and Mr.. Conkling took the floor
| to close tho debate.
He sent to the Clerks desk General Arthur's letter
to him OF tho lst inst. in reply Secretary sher.
mans last communication. It is as follows
ANOTHER LETTER FROM GENERAL ARTHUR.
New YoEK. Feb. 1. 1872
SrB-Mr Sherman commuu uication of, january 81
1872 replying to my answer to his charges against
the presentation TO the Committee Commerce or
the senate of formal ropy to afford him the prctcxt
(,rl vyl I'm plV pIs
without mpropriety call your attention person
ally TO or two points.
the care with which he avoids the real points. Thus
Ire enlargcs the cgality OF the system Of ''rco
permits but he carefully avoids referring to the fact
that the acting Collector is adhcrng the sys
TEN which existed while in Office; that he has
issued more free permits monthly than did, and that
Mr.. sherman furnishes him tho blanks which he uses
for that purpose
Again. he returns to the charges that the clerks
employed in making up the statements for refunds
does not refer to the fact that called his attention
to- this practice In April last and that the clerks he
now stigmatizcs guilty have been since re-
tanned by him in the Custom House. So he cnlarycs
the cnormity Of the acts of the wcghers. but
fails to- state that every OF the wcghors whom he
retained in oflce the reduction Of tho force
those against whom he makes these
charges; that tho charges and the evidence were
alike known to him when he directed their retention
ana tho letter directing he declared that tho
irreuiaritics they appeared TO havo committed were
partlonablc In like manner. while admitting that he
restored one of three subor,iinates removed by mo
for taking grnucs he Is careful not to refer to the
fact he did not restore his two associates who
were equally innocent or guilty.
When referring to the investigation of the charge
made by the Senate committee of which Mr. Buck.
iugham chairman Mr.. sherman must have been
obliyous of dates. That committee commenced its
igation within two weeks OF my entering upon
the duties Of Collector My administration was in no
sense the subject of its examination.
Mr. sherman refers 10 the abuses which sprang out
of the 'moicty SYSTEM. but fails to state that the
complaints against that system chiefly from the
acts of members OF the corps of special agents whom
he volunteers to defend. The two individuals whose
conduct was most severely mpugned happen to have
been precisely that whose charges against Mr.
Lydcckcr Mr.. sherman greatly relies and that
other one who the controlling cement in the
Meredith commission on whose report. with utter
disregard to its date he claims TO have acted.
CHARGES AGAINST LyDBCRER.
AS to Mr.. Lydeckcr IL should be borne In mind
that Gara rfod L..