Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-02-03

"SAi ShouSil 70 leave LDOSe WORDS OUT, Dtlv
he could not see that they did any harm He
thought 1t was entirely useless to reconsider the
resolution.
Mr. NEuMANN thought the Senator from the Thir.
teenth was entirely mistaken in saying that the pre-
amble read that they have been convicted of on
alleged offense." 1t was nothing of the kind
1t said that they had been sentenced
by Judge Sawyer Of the United States
Circuit Court fer an alleged interference"
The speaker thought that the language was insult
ing. He was astonished that the Senators had
passed the resolution and sorry that he had not
ended to his duty by being in his seat on Satur-
day. 1t surprised him to think that Senate of edu
Gated gentlemen could have passed preamble
worded like this. He took it that there was some-
thing in the resolution which would probably allow
discussion in spite of the waste of time which was
always deprecated by the Senator from Santa Bar
bara. He thought that the crime for which these
men had been committed the highest known to
the law, and no matter how far his sympa-
thies might carry him in favoring men
who had been convicted for that tffense,
ne fe!t that the preamble should not be wOrded in
the way in which 1t was written He felt confident
that Senator Rowell. the author OF the resolution,
upon second consideration, would reach the GEN.
c'uson that II would be more proper to leave those
words out than to pass slur upon branch OF the
United States Government over which the Senate
had no control, and which probably had as much
weight with the Federal Government as any recon.
mendation Of the California Legislature He did
not believe that the case of these settlers was
placed in any better light by having this preamble
improperly worded. In conclusion, Mr. Neumann
expressed the hope that the Senate would recon-
slider the resolution and strike out the Objectionable
words.
Mr.. JoHNsos-I wish to say briefly that my mo-
ton was not made for delay in the slightest, and l
distinctly said, when may the motion, when
called attention to it here few minutes ago, that
so far as was concerned, and believe spoke the
sentiments of those who hold with me, that these
resolutions would be acted upon tomorrow morn
ing. / have no desire to delay the resolutions
Now wish to recount the history of this resolution
i'll order to convince my valued and young friend
from santa Barbara, Mr. Chase, that he is slightly
incorrect in his statement in reference to it, and
also to convince the author that he is incorrect in
his statement in reference TO it. When the reso-
lutions introduced they were not of course
printed and immediate action was then requested
upon them, and it upon motion of Senator Sear5
that they went to file, in order that they be printed
They came up Saturday, and when on Saturday
desired to object TO the resolutions and announced
that desired to debate them, met by the
statement Of Senator Sears that the object OF Mr.
Rowells haste that he had received telegram
announcing the dangerous illness of his wife and
wished to leave Immediately ia the cars and there.
fore could not delay the matter. said at that time
that desired to debate the resolutions and only
withheld my few remarks because of the statement
of Senator Sears That was the reason it was de.
layed at that time. On Monday brought this mat
ter up in pursuance TO notice, and at the sugges-
ton of Senator Lampson l allowed it to 20 over
until Tuesday, because he said Senator Rowell
would be here then. Yesterday it was not my
fault that this Senate spent whole day in dis
cussng lcng bill and did not get time to do any
thing else. | never attempt to delay any matter
unless squarely say so. | always make my fights
fairly aal openly and above board, asking no
fayors from anybody, although always Willing to
grant them. ! do not care as 20 whether have lost
my sympathies for the people not as the Senator
speaks of but never had sympathies for murder
ers. | never will sympathize with murderers 1
never had sympathies for men that violated the law,
and never will sympathiZe with them. When
time that il is fDr
resolution which indorses murder, because / am
in sympathy with the people, will be found voting
against it, although l may be accused of not
being in sympathy with the people. reverence the
law. respect the majority and the might OF thelaw
l respect it and believe in enforcing it. So be.
ieving have voted against these resolutions. re-
spect the Courts. l believe in abiding by their
decision. So believing am not in favor OF these
resolutions. The Senator from Fresno (Mr. ROHelD
was OF the men, in connection with the Senator
from Santa Barbara (Mr. Cbase) to vote against the
resolutions upon the Chinese treaty, when the rea-
son they alleged was that Judge Sawyer had made
certain decisions in the matter Then they said that
Judge Sawyer was man they would safely follow.
Now they think Judge Sawyer is II man they can
safely abuse; think that Sawyer was wrong and
said so frankly; but did not propose to censure
him by vote OF the Senate In my judgment, as
they at present constituted the resolutions are
wrong. do not ask for any delay. have statedthe
proposition, l think, as fully it could be.
have stated all the objections to the resolu, ,iOn.
said before that / didn't wish to enter into the
merits Of the controversy beween these settlers and
the railroad company, and do not attempt to enter
into it. The Senator from Fresno, Mr.. Rowell, un-
dertook to enter into the merits of the discussion
and to set himself above the case-to set himself
above the jury and above the judge, and to set him
self with his statement above the testi-
mony of the witnesses and the decision Of the jury
| am not in favor of doing that. | only take the
matter as it is presented to me by the cold, hard,
stubborn facts, not the theories of this matter. The
facts are that these men were indicted by u. S.
Nd JrtrNr nj eTfaripSr u-tb ha L
Another fact is that they were brought to trial be-
fore jury OF their own choosing. Afurther fact is
that they were ably and zeaousy defended,
and further foet is that that jury unanimously
found them guilty, and that the Judge in sentencing
them simply carried out the verdict of tie jury.
Those the facts. Theories which thousands cher
ish may exist in the brain Of the Senator from
Fresno but the facts OF the case are what are
called upon to pass upon, not on theory or any re-
suit that he may have reached in his own mind from
all investigation personal to himself in regard 10 the
matter. would not for moment insinuate that
his friendship for these men carried him into error,
but | have known men not made OF such good ma
terial as the Senator whose friendship sometimes
led them into error when passing upon the conduct
of their friends. This is square, simple, easy
proposition to decide. It is not that merits
any rhetorical flights. 1t is not one that
needs any appeal to the sympathy. 1t is not one
that needs any pathetic displays from anybody. 1t
and about how they feel, and about the wish or
voice of the people. 1t is not that merits any
thing except discussion Of the proposition whether
or not we desire to censure a United States Court
for having passed judgment upon men who were
convicted after fair trial. The Senator from the
Tenth (Mr. Neumann) has well said in answer to the
Senator from the Thirteenth (Mr. HittelD that the
pre- mbe does not say they convicted for this,
but it they were sentenced and if the preamble
is to be accepted as true Judge Sawyer and
Judge Hoffman sentenced these for no
crime at al-senteHeed them without any
trial if this preamble is correct-because it says
they were sentenced for alleged interference. They
were not sentenced for alleged interference. They
were sentenced because the jury found them guilty,
and l trust that, If any other Senator speaks upon
this proposition, he will endeavor to confne
himself to the facts OF the case that he will en-
deavor to cOnine himself to the language Of the res
oiution that he will not seek go outside of that
matter and make eloquent, or Oratorica pathetic
appeals to the sympathy but that he will discuss it
upon the question whether or not the use of this
language in this resolution is proper. That is the
only matter I respectfully again say that ask
Senator'S to disabuse their minds OF anything in
gard to sympathy for any person. | am will
ing to vote for the resolutiont when they express
some Of sympathy, and our desire TO have these
men pardOned. will not delay them a moment, but
[ do not wish to vote for any resolution which will
cast reflection upon the Courts after they have
carefully, fairly and egitimatey tried person and
found him guilty OF an ofense.
Mr. NYB said he was in favor OF the reconsidera-
tion of tile resolutions, for the reason tn t he
wanted to see the entire preamble stricken out,
to pardon these men. The resolution was either
right or wrong. Ii it was right it did not need an
apology or explanation II it was wrong they
should not pass it. He did not take the view eX-
pressed by the Senator from the Eighteenth. that
the Senate trying this case over again. because,
so far as that was concerned, the Senate claimed
the right to try any case over again.
They had done it this session, and no
man had made a. stronger argument in the
case than the gentleman from the Eighteenth,
on the murder proposition, on which the speaker
had made some feeble Arguments in the same line
But that was not the reason why he wished to
consider the resolutions. II on the main prop
ostion that the Senate did not need 10 apologize
for any such thing that. If they to come
down TO the merits Of the case and discuss the
rights Of those parties TO the land, he would go
far as to say that the original thirteen Colonies, in
the time Of the Revolutionary war, had no such
cause Of complaint as those claimants on the rail-
road lands and he would go further and say that il
he had lived in Colonial times he would probably
have been Tory and not aRevolutionist. lie would
not say, however, that the decision w3s wrong,
or that the defendants ought not to have been
vcted but he would say that il there was single
Senator who had been in their circumstances, and
had failed to do, under the provocaton, what they
did, he would have been Tory in the times OF the
Revolution. The question was, Whether the resolu-
tions were right wrong? If they were right they
need no apology. Ii they we're wrong the Senate
should not pass them.
Mr.. KANE made an argument in favor OF the reso-
lntions as they.stood during the course Of which
he referred in somewhat bitter terms TO the lack Of
sympathy for suffering humanity displayed by the
advocates of the reconsideration Of the resolutions
Mr.. NEUNASg explained to the Senator from the
Ninth, that their opposition to the resolutions as
they stand was not caused by any want OF Sympa-
thy for the prisoners but the result Of their re-
spect for Judges, iuries and decisions Of Courts.
Mr. ENos said that if the defendants mentioned in
ttla lftft lafa Arfth