Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-04-06

1
the seating of Donnelly. Julian, Donnelly's g
counsel, had called upon him and labored with
! him for couple of hours, and had left him
with the impression that he, Springer, was not
right on that point, and would not vote to ex-
clude the vote of Isanti county. The Finley
letter was written the day after that interview
with Julian. 1t had been supposed that this
Finley bulldosing letter had the desired ef-
feet upon him, and that was where the decep-
tion had come in. If it was thought that he
could be influenced by any such trash.
cHRTTICIzING.
Mr. Manning asked Mr.. Springer whether he,
Springer, had not stated to Phister and to
Armfeld that he was with his Democratic
brethren on both points as to unseating WASH
burn and seating Donnelly and had not urged
these gentlemen and the Democratic members
of the commission to vote for both PROPOSE
| tiOns.
Mr.. Springer admitted that he had spoken to
them in favor of unseating Washburn but he
denied he had favored seating Donnelly.
Mr.. Manning asked him if he had not told
Armfield that he held himself ready at the last
moment to vote with the majority of the COM
mittee.
Mr.. Springer replied he had withheld his final
Judgment until the time came when he should
have to decide. He was not irreversably fixed
to any proposition, but kept himself as far as
possible from all prejudice to the last moment
He called on Mr.. Speer, Democratic member
of the committee, to state what he knew on
the subject.
Mr.. Speer stated that Springer had urged up
on him the argument that the evidence justi-
fed the unseating of Washburn, but did not
Justify the seating of Donnelly.
Mr.. Springer remarked that he was not re-
spensible for having been mis- sderstood. but it
was positively untrue that he had tried to de-
ceive any body in the matter. He next called
on Kiefer, a Republican member of the COM
mittee, to state what he knew of the matter.
Mr.. Kiefer said that he had always under
stood Springer would not vote to seat DON
nelly.
Mr.. Springer next called on Phister, Demo-
cratic member of the committee, to state what
he knew.
Mr.. Phister stated he had told Springer that
he would vote to unseat Washburn and against
Donnelly, and that Springer said. Il intend to
vote in the same way" That was before
Springer went to New York.
Mr., Springer next called on Mr.. Weaver, d
greenback member of the committee.
Mr. Weaver stated Springer told him that the
vote of Isanti county could not be thrown out,
and he (Weaver) agreed with him on that point.
just before leaving for New York Springer had
told him that he would vote against seating
Donnelly aud for unseating Washburn. He
would vote differently.
Mr.. Armfeld, Democratic member of the
committee, said that Springer had
never told him how he would
vote on the question. He added, however, that
last Thursday Springer called him out of the
hall and remarked to him that Manning seemed
very much excited. That he, Armfela said
that the reason of Manning's excitement was,
that he, Springer, had repeatedly assured Man
ming that he would vote with the Democrats on
both points, the unseating Of Washburn and
seating of Donnelly, and that Springer replied
that Manning had misunderstood him, but
that he had tried to get Speer and Clark, of
New Jersty, and Phister, to vote with them,
the Democrats, but he had found them
as solid as rock. He added
that after the final vote in committee, Springer
told him that he would have voted to seat Don
nelly if his vote could have carried that propo-
sition. He had repeated that statement as
many as three times adding that he did not
dare go against the good of his party.
Mr.. Calkins, a Republican member of the
committee. explained the conditions of his
pair with Springer. 1t his (Springer's) vote
was not necessary to seat Donnelly, then the
pair should apply all the way through, but if
his (Calkin's) vote was necessary to keep Don
nelly from being seated, he was authorized to
vote. daughter on the Republican side.)
Mr. Springer, after these several statements
had Deen maQe ChallengSd any member OF the
committee, or the House. except Manning to
assert that he had led him to believe that he
would act otherwise than he had done. No OF
accepting the challenge, he went On to say that
he had done and said all that was necessary for
him to do and say on that subject. He would
not ask for committee of investigation, but
if anybody wished such a committee he,
Springer, would not object, and he would testi-
fly on oath to what he had
stated to-day He had acted all through the
matter from conscientious motives. He SUBJ
mitted to the House and to the country wheth-
er he had not conscientiously discharged his
duty in the matter. If the gentleman from
Mississippi (Manning) had been misled by in
advertence or accident, he (Springer) regretted
it, 1t had been farthest from his thoughts to
deceive that gentleman or anybody else. MAN
ifestations of approval and sympathy
Mr.. Manning closed the discussion. He
would not have any controversy with the gen.
tleman on the question of duplicity, although
he might have good deal to say on that sub
ject. The gentleman, however, had not denied
that he had time and again assured him that
he, Springer, was with the Democratic major
ity of the committee on both points involved.
He defended Donnelly from the imputations
made against him by Springer, and represent
ed the absurdity of supposing that Donnelly
had anything to do with the sending of the
anonymous letter.
At this point message was received from
the Senate, and there was no further DISPOSE
tion manifested to resume the controversy.