National Republican., 1879-02-28


desks shall not be removed and adding TO the com
mission Messrs. Hewitt of New York Butler and
lorlpg, Of Massachusetts, and Jones' Of New liamp-
The Senate amendments to the deficiency bill was
taken from the Speakers table ordered printed,
and referred TO the Committee on Appropriations.
The House then resumed the consideration Of
,he conference report on the internal revenue
Mr.. coNGEn opposed the report because II contin.
ued the tax on matches. The whole country de-
manded the repeal Of tho tax on matches When
ne had yesterday asked the gentleman from Virgil
mia (Mr. Tuckcr whether the Conference Commit
tee had taken any efforts to enforce the thrice re-
pealed wish OF the House for the abolition OF mat
| tax, and he had been answered with Virginia
snecr he insisted that he had n right to know what
| the committee had done.
The report Of the Conference Committee was
| agreed to-yeas, IA; nays, III.
| Mr, DURHAM, chairman ofthe Committee on Ex.
penIltues In the Department of Justice, asked ana
obtained leave TO have printed and rccommlttedth The
report Of that committee in regard to the abolition
OF the supervisors ofocction. ,,-.
| Mr.. BLAcKBURS, rising to personal explanation,
sent % the Clerks desk and had read an extract
from the san Francisco ChrOHicc to the effect that
ho tBlackburn) had been the cnuse Of delaying the
passage of the anti.Chueso bill by refusal to nc.
cord It precedence over some Insignificant measure.
| He simply desired to say that the charge was ut
| tery without foundation. He had on every occn-
sion supported the bill and furthev1d its passage
and he had never heard IN objection TO Its consid-
| GRAFTON coming from his side Of the hall
Mr. CoNGER objected 10 having ntcriccted Into
| personal explanation q reflection on the members
| on his side
Mr. BLGCKpuRN replied that he had intended no
| reflection upon anybody; but he would he glad TO
| have the gentleman from Michigan controvert his
| statement
| Mr.. sPRlsGER. rising to a question Of privilege
desired TO call up the resolutions reported rom the
| Committee on Expenditures In the State Depart
ment for the arrest of George f. Seward rs contu-
maciOus witness.
l. Mr.. HALE raised the question of consideration.
| On Q vote, by tellcrs the House refused to con-
slider the question now.
| Mr.. TURNER, as member of the Committee on
| Expenditures In the state Department demanded
| the yeas aud nays, and when afr. White suggested
that he Withdraw the call, he gcsticulatcd angrily
| and in an excited mahner insisted on the yeas and
nays. The scene was Il noisy and tumultuous one,
without any apparent reason for it,.
The yeas and nays were ordered, ana resulted
| yeas, 132; nays l2l.
So the House voted to consider the subject now
| Mr.. CARLISLE tnS Speaker pro fenl,) announced
| the appointment OF McsSrs. Gambler Lynde, Throck
| morton, Frye, and Monroe as the select committee
authorized under the resolution offered by Mr.
| Randall.
Mr.. SPRINGER moved the previous question on
| the resolution to have George +. Seward brought
| before the bar of the House.
| The previous question was seconded and the
| main question ordered. This leaving an hour for
| debate, the discussion was opened by
Mr.. SPRINGER, chairman OF the Committee on Ex;
pcnditures in the Treasury Department, who stated
| that the question involved was whether public
officer can be required TO produce the records of
| House not only IN refusing TO produce The books
called for in the subpoena duces tecam, but in reius-
| ing even to be sworn as n witness.
| lie ktateu tllat MT. SeWNitl plcH WIS lIut tut
books In question (what are known as the blotters)
were not public records. Mr.. Springer however.
underookl to prove that they were, and ne SAID
| that if q jndgo or an official could withhold his
| records he could thus defeat all investigation on
the part of the House, the only body that had the
power of presenting articles of impeachment
Mr.. BuSDY Ia member of the committe) con,
tended that Mr.. Seward was not in contempt and
that under the fifth article of the Constitution no
person could be required to supply evidence
against himself .As to the law of Congress on the
subject he conendcd that its provisions applied To
witnesses only, and not to parties.
A member asked whether Mr., Seward based ms
refusal on the ground that the production OF the
books would crminatc him.
Mr. BrNDY replied that Mr.. Seward placed him.
self on this reserved constitutional right, ana he
(Mr. Bundy) stood before the House III vindicaton
of that reserved right The committee had evidence
before II from the State Department showing tha'
every dollar belonging to the Government which
had been received by Mr., Seward had been ac'
counted for, and that every book prescribed by the
| Department to be kept at the Consulate had been
returned to the Department.
Mr.. FRYE asked Mr.. Bundy whether he con
tended that, ii the books asked for were admittedly
public records, Mr.. Seward could still claim the
constitutional privilege.
Mr.. BUSDY replied in the affirmative but added
| that the books would show no item of Government
money that had not been accounted for.
Mr., BUTLER took the same ground. No person
accused of crime was eyer required to give grait
jury evidence against himself The privilege wa!
as old ms Magma Charta, which declared that hemt
I Seipsrlm nccasTc debe' If man was to be com
PEELED TO produce evidence against himself VIII!
| ~''N~ ~
the rack?
IL these books were private books, then Mr.. Sew
ard could not be required 10 produce them, ana 4
they were public books, then Mr.. Evorts was th(
proper custodian of them, and the subpoena shoult
/, issue to him.
| Mir. SPRINGER explained that Mr., Eyarts hat
called on Mr.. Seward to bring with him all tht
books, records, aud papers of his ohiee
| Mr. BUTLER said that then the other cOnstitu
toual difficulty Ullat these were private books wa
! run against If they had been returned as publ,
books then the House ought to have them, even /
| t, ,1,,1n Ittfll hOl IA Ia
moved TO the Captlo [l.aughterl 1t was mucl
more necessary TO preserve the great constitutions
privilege than to punish iiily Stewards. He sug
gested to Mr.. Springer TO take man of his owl
size-to take Evarts, not Seward. [Laughterl
Mr., BAYSE, member of the committee, argnet
that the books in question were private books nnC
} that Mr.. Seward could not be required to produce
Mr.. HUMPHREYS claimed for Mr. Seward that h
should have, as defendants III criminal cases, I'M
| benefit Of the doubt"
Mr.. BuHDY indicated his intention to move t.
refer the whole subject to the Judiciary Committee
Mr.. MAYHAM. u memberof the committee arguc'
in support of the resolution to have Mr.. SewarC
, brought before the bar of the House.
Mr.. DEAN, also member OF the committee
argued that in refusing to produce the books M
Seward was In contempt while in regard to MI
Stewards refusing to testify, he agreed with tn
5 to show that Seward not Eyarts,was the custodian
of the books in question. If Mr.. Seward could no
be compelled to produce these books then all thn
; delinquent public officer had to do was to with
} hold the books and defy investigation. lie re
garded such proposition as the most absur
$ thing in the world.
Mr., SPRINGER, IN reply to the arguments on III
T other side said that IL was the accounts which MI
4 Seward had not rendered, not those which he has
+ rcnderedthat, the committee was after Mr.. Sc
ward had kept two sets of books, In one of whcl
the original entries were kept and in the other wa
n transcript OF items from the original entries.
. the books of original entry could not be examines
i the committee could not determine whether all tn
Government moneys had been accounted fol
: | What an example would be set 10 consuls an
y other officers If they were to be told that they cou
L | go on and appropriate fees, nnd that they cou
c then shelter themselves behind the constitutions
!, | privilege aud refuse to produce their books
!. If the Constitution was to be the shield OF frau
II and peculatiOn and embe2zlemcnt of tGoyernmei
J. funds, the sooner n constitution was provide
| the better II would be for the country.
Mr. TOWNSEND IN. " inquired Oocuarly
| whether the missing books were those that ha
II been spirited away in Michigan. Iaughterl
- Mr.. SPRINGER replied that those books had bee
y already produced in courti but the Seward book
J hNd not been.
II The discussion was closed by Mr.. Hooker, VIII
also took the GROUND that public officer could M
o thus be allowed to shelter himself behind a pc
~ sonal privilege Especially was the attempt 10
y so unbecomlng in an Ambassador al u foreig
J. court.
l. The first vote was taken on the resolution oiere
by the minority OF the committee, TO the effect TN
re Mr.. Seward was justified In his refusal 1t was n
- jeclcd-yeas, ll9j nays, LEA party vote.
y The question then REQUIRED on the majority res
G. luton, directing tho sergeautatAms to, arre
N George Il. Seward forthwith aud TO bring him b
N fore the bar of the House.
| Af, ipIprnpgnl a "A n