St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-04-25
nal character. bnt had lite to do with the

sonal character, but had lite to do with the
question directly under discussion.
Mr. Hewitt, of New York, said he was not
willing to trust the expenditure of this money
to the present secretary of the navy. He
knew him as an able, astute politician, and he
believed that in the expenditure OF pu6he
money he was an honest man, and yet the
country had some experience what he would
do when placed in position OF great neces-
sity.
Mr.. Hiscock inquiredto what his colleague
referred.
Mr.. Hewitt replied, that under the naval
law of 1888, the secretary Of the navy was
directed to dispose of certain ships and ord
nance stores, no longer required for public
use, and to pay the proceeds of those sales
into the treasury of the United States. I'm
der that number of vessels, which were sold
in September last, and produced something
like $500, 600. When pending bill was orr
ginally before the house, he, Hewitt, went to
the treasury department to find out whether
the money had reached there. 1t was pay
able to the secretary, within thirty DAYS after
the sale OF the material, and yet up to three
weeks ago, it had not reached treasury. Now
he made no charge whatever
of any improper use of that
of the navy would appropriate dollar of it,
but when he left that money in the hands OF
some subordinate in New York or Boston, he
neglected his duty. He had found that $780,,
600 had been received from the purchasing
agent in New York on an open check, and
the secretary of the treasury was unable To
say from what account it came, except that
it was to the credit of the navy department
He would no trust public officer who did
not see that the money which came into his
custody was properly placed III the treasury,
the law required. There was no obligation
on the part of the secretary to turn in money
before the election, except the obligation of
the law with which he had not complied
three weeks ago.
Mr.. Calkins defended the secretary Of the
navy, and Mr. Cannon quoted from the an
nual report of the secretary of the navy to
show that all the money received from the
sale of old material had been placed ON de
post with the treasurer of the United States
subject to check by the secretary of the navy,
as the expenses connected with the sale "ere
| to be paid out of the proceeds Mr. CalAins
sent to the clerks desk, and had read tele-
gram from the secretary of the navy, stating
chat the proceeds of the sale had been imme-
diately deposited in the treasury, and there
remained. The reading of the telegram was
| received with applause on the Republican side.
Mr.. Cannon, continuing, thanked God
that he was not so organized, he was COM
PEELED at all times, in season and out of
season, To distrust every public officer or
every private citizen. He thanked God he
did not belong to Il party that was put in
such n strait that its principal leader, or
leaders, were compelled for the purpose of
| 70 fol
premises against the honesty and honor of
public officials.
NJ. Hewitt repeated his statement, thai in
his inquiry at the treasury department, he
had been informed the money had not been
paid into the treasury, and when investi-
CATION was made, it would be found, though
the money might be in the custody of the
treasurer, it was not 'carried into the treas
ury'' as the law required.
Mr.. Cannon said, the gentleman from
New York had gone for malfeasance, and
had scceeded in showing, not only his ill
will, but his ignorance of the public reports
of the department.
Mr. O'Neill's motion was lost and the re-
mainder of the amendments non concurred
in. The committee rose and the house agreed
to its report. The vote on concurrence in
the ordnance amendment, being yeas 1876,
nays 106.
Mr.. Kasson withdrew his point of order,
which had sent the postofiice appropriation
bill and senate amendments to the commit
tee of the whole, and the honse proceeding
to their consideration, the amendments were
non concurred in.
The house then took recess until O'Clock.
The evening session is for debate on tariff
| bill.
A revision of the vote in the house on the
ordnance amendment to the naval bill
shows it stood, yeas 127, nays 100. The fol
lowing Democrats voted in the affirmative: