New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-07-20
GIVE IT'S A TRUE RECORD.

There is one way by which the number OF
personal explanations" and Questions of
privilege of which we have had so MANY in
Congress during the present session. may be
sensibly reduced, and such unpleasant scenes
as that between Messrs. Robson and Hewitt
the other day to some extent may be avoided.
Many of these explanations and privileged
questions, which consume time and often
create bad blood and perhaps scandal, arise
out of the practice among members of printing
in The Record under leave of the House
speeches that were never uttered on the floor.
Out of this grew the wordy tilt-nOt particu-
larly creditable to either party--between
Messrs. Robson and Hewitt Mr.. Hewitt
having set the example of printing in The
Record some remarks which were not spoken
on the floor of the House, and which Mr..
Robeson conceived reflected on his personal in
tegrity, the latter used the same privilege in
revising for print the proofs of his reply thereto,
and added one or two singing sentences re-
pelling the insinuatiOns as false. Thereupon
Mr.. Hewitt rose to a privileged question and
asked that the offensive sentences be stricken
| from The Record, and the scene which has been
| heretofore described took place. The dispute
was purely personal one; it touched no ques-
ton other than t'at of the private character of
| the two persons engaged in it !; and it was car
| ried on by both of them in manner that, to
say the least, reflected no credit upon either
and no honor upon the legislative body in
which it occurred
AS to the merits Of the case, it seems to us
that Mr. Hewitt was unduly sensitive to the
| SHARPNESS with which Mr.. Robson resented
what he considered an attack upon his personal
1o4
| the proyocation was great. And he should have
| remembered also, when he demanded that the
| offensive words be stricken from The Record
on the ground that they were not uttered on
the 1oor, that his own charge of "criminal in
capacity against MIR. Robson was printed in
| The Record under precisely the same circum-
stances. not having been uttered on the floor
| and that provocation and retort stood on
| the same ground in that regard. The contro-
versy thus opened over what must be cOnsid-
| cred a very trivial and petty question speedily
developed bad blood, and an angry wrangle
| followed in which language was used in COM
parison with which the words complained of
were the hOneyed accents of affection. In his
cooler moments Mr.. Hewitt will have very
little satisfaction in remembering that he
charged fellow member with printing in The
Record what he did not dare say on the floor,
that he tainted that member with having been
called a thief, liar and perjurer on the floor of
the House without challenging his assailant.
Nor will Mr.. Robson recall the circumstance
with pride that even under such provOcatiOn he
SO far forgot himself and what was due his
own position and the dignity of the House as to
indulge in unseemly personalities and grossly
offensive insinuatiOns and charges. Both gen.
tlemen transgressed the pIoprieties of debate
TO an extent that is unusual even in Congress,
and we only hope that both are sorry for it.
The first cause of the whole unpleasant bust
ness was obviously the practice of printing in
The Record as having taken place in the House
what as matter of fact never did take place.
The Record purpOrts to print the actual pro-
ceedings of Congress. The debates which it
records are Supposed actually to have taken
place, the speeches actually TO have been de-
liyered. The Robeson- Hewitt episode-which,
by the way, is truthfully reported in full and is
not likely to give posterity very favorable
opinion Of the XLVIIth Congress grew out OF
the essentially bad and untruthful practice
above referred to. There is one way, as we
began this article by saying, in which such
scenes to q considerable extent may be