Morning journal and courier., 1882-12-11
MONDAY MORNING. DECEMBER !
c5ournu! altS Gouriet.
Monday, Dec. II, 1882.
POLITICAL ASSESSMENTS.


 The debate in the Senate on Mr. Beck 8 resolution for an investigation of the assess ment of government employees in the last political campaign is very interesting, and also somewhat amusing. The Democrats are doing their best to reveal the iniquity of assessments by Republicans, but they were well met by Senator Hale, who in reply to Senator Beck, said that he (Hale) wanted the investigation to have wider scope than was proposed. There was a growing evil con- nected with our elections, compared with which the one that troubled the Senator from Kentucky was insignifcant-the appli- cation directly to tho suffrage of large sums of money contributed by wealthy men and tho representatives of great business interests in alliance with one political party, and in oppo- sition to the other. He would have the in vestigating committee look into that subject. Why was it that the Democratic party, in making up it's campaign committee, was not content to take it's eminent representatives in Congress, but picked out rich men in differ ent parts of the country? Was it because of other reason why such men as Alexander Mitchell, of Milwaukee, and MT. Barnum, of Connecticut, Mir. Vanderbilt, of New York, and others, should be selected. The men on the Democratic committee represented Q hundred millions of property, and the only object of placing these rich men on the list was to levy contributions upon them He wished the committee also to inquire into the 1eyies made upon the liquor deal CTS and the Brewers association, the aggre- gate of which made the little contributions of government clerks, by comparison, "noth- ing but leather and prunella." In Milwau- wee the brewers alone had contributed $100,OOO, and in Massachusetts the Liquor Dealers association had raised an equal amount to elect General Butler and the rest of the Democratic ticket. This was as well worthy of investigation as the question whether John Smith or Peter Simpkins paid ten dollars or fifteen dollars in response to a circular sent out by the Republican commit tee
 It is we'll to have this matter of political assessments thoroughly talked oyer but it is doubtful if the takers will convince each other or the public that they really mean all they say. Perhaps after the Democrats have shown how bad the Republicans are and the Republicans have returned the con- pliment, the passage of the bill introduced by Senator Hawley will be az good thing as can be done. The first section of this bill provides that no member or member-elect of either House of Congress or employe of either House, and no executive, judicial, mill tary or naval offioer of tho United States, and TO clerk or employe of any department or of any branch or bureau Of either service, shall directly indirectly solicit or receive, or be in any manner concerned in soliciting or receiving, any assessment subscription or contribution for any political purpose what ever from any officer employe of the United States or from any person receiving any compensation from moneys derived from the Treasury of the United States. The second section provides that any person vio- lating this law shall be deemed guilty of a and shall on conviction be pun lshed by fine not exceeding So, 900, or in1- prisonment not exceeding thres years, or by such fine and imprisonment, both in the dis cretion of the court.
 If the Democrats are really in earnest in what they are saying about political assess ments let them help pass this bill. This will be better than an investigation which will not catch anybody