Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1886-03-26
A Few Facts about the Public Record of
Hon. George +. Edmunds

| that his trlckery and cquivocatlon in the clcc.
toral commission matter nine yea fsago shows
10 what unscruputOus lengths he is always
ready go Tor partisan purposes. Is there
/ 1863 declared on the floor of the senate that il
was none of the senute's business why the
/ President made removals, and who is now
/ trying to make the President deliver up tn ,
information ON which he acted in making re-
| mOVals,-is the man who prOclaims one code
| OF constitutional right and iustc wucn hi !
own part is in power, and then takes exactly
! the opposite course when it is of power,
| is he the man to receive democratic votes
ana confidence R(0rmer Of March >.
II anybody has ever before ma1incd that
| George +. Edmunds is loft " minded Dntriot
above the tricks and dishonesty OF the ucin-
ayogue, 1t is time now to get over it. George
f; Edmunds is the man who leads this crIS-
udc, and George +. Edmund3 is the man who
| declared on tn floor of the senate only few
years ago that lit is reason enough for me,
constitutional reason" for the making of any
removal that the President in his discretion
thinks it necessary. RefOrmer Of Fen 49,
There is not shadow of reason why any
/ Democratic legislator should vote for Smith
to do so would he to sell out to the very worst
elements of Republcansm. ON the other
hand, there IS every reason why he should
/ not vote for Edmunds, the leader of the cleo
/ tOral commission swindle, the man who de-
clare1 on the floor of the senate that the COM
mission bill meant a fun investigation and
then voted, when he got on the commission,
that 1t didn't the man who to-day leads the
nllbustcrlng against the administration on IA
demand winch he knows, and which he is on
I record as declaring, the senate has right to
make.-RQ OImerOf Fen %.
] The above extracts from late issues of
the Windham county RCfOrmcr are copied
to show the character and anmus of
bitter and reckless attack on Senator Ed
munds and his public record, to which
that paper has devoted its columns for
month past. It's main charges, it will be
seen, are two in number-first, that in the
matter of the electoral commission Mr.
Edmunds was guilty of "trckery and
equivocation" by holding on the floor of
the Senate, before the electoral commits
sion bill became II Flaw, that the commits
sion could 90 behind the returns, and then
voting exactly opposite to this after-the
commission came into existence and he
was member of it. Second. that in the
contest with the President Mr. Edmunds
takes ground just opposite to what he has
held toward Republican Presidents, and
contrary to his views as expressed on the
floor of the Senate on former occasions
notably in 1869 In both cases Mr. Ed
mnnds is charged with deliberately turn
! ing his coat for narrow and uniusttiable
partisan purposes.
/ This attack on the Senator is founded in
either malice or ignorauce-prObably in
both. To show that it is only necessary
to turn back to the official record of con
] gressiOnal proceedings. In the Joint com
mittee of the Senate and House which
originated the electoral commission BILL
Mr.. Edmunds, who was one Of its mem
bers, distinctly expressed his opinion on
the question of going behind the returns,
and 1t was adverse to any such action. In
/ confirmation of this we have Democratic
authority that ought to satisfy even the
RetOrmer. Hon. Abram 5. Hewitt of
New York, the well known Democratic
leader, was also member Of the Joint
committee, and his evidence as to the CON
sistency of Mr.. Edmunds's course was
publicly given on the floor of the House
after the decision of the electoral com
mission had been reached. On the cath of
February, 1877, when the decision in re-
gard to the vote of Oregon was under dis
cussion, Mr.. Hewitt made speech severe
ly crltlclslng the vote in the commission
of several of its MISUNDERSTANDING them
Hon. James A. Garfield Of Ohio and Hon.
Oliver p. Morton of Indiana but of the
course of Mr.. Edmunds, Mr.. Hewitt said {:
"Of Judge Edmunds desire to bear witness
that al no time To my knowledge did he cX-
press an opinion AS 10 the power OF this COM
/ mission to go behind the returns. It might
possibly have been inferred from his acti II ON
previous occasions thd1 he entertained the
view that the two Houses of Congress could
go behind the returns but neither in his
speech on the bll nor elsewhere do know
that he ever expressed that view"
This broad, frank statement from bit
terly PARTISAN opponent of Mr.. Edmuuds
is as we have SAID, conclusive and ii Will
be 50 accepted by Candid, honest-mnded
men. Tie fact is, moreover, that in the
minds of such men there was never any
question but that Mr.. EdmundS'S record
i'll the electoral commission matter was
consistent, statesmanlike, and without
concealment from beginning to end.
As to the second charge-that in the
present disagreement with President
Cleveland Mr.. Edmunds acts the part OF
a dishonest demagogue, taking ground
which gives the lie to his position under
it,,
lican President, in ls69-we have the oil
cial record of Mr.. Edmunds's own spoken
words, and they are equally conclusive,
equally to the point.
1t has been charged over and over again
by the Democratic and so-called Independ-
ent papers, during the past three months,
that Mr.. EdmuudS in 1869 declared in
public debate i'll the Senate that at is
cause enough for me, sir, constitutional
cause, for any removal, that the Presi-
dent has seen fit to make it," The speech
from which this garbled extract is taken
was delivered by Mr.. Edmunds in the
Senate in March, 1869. The tenure. of
office law and its proposed repeal or mOdi-
1catlOn was then under discussion, and in
the course of the debate Mr. Edmunds
SAID, in reply toa question from Senator
Morton
II say that the President Of the United S'dtes
has no IuSiuesS 10 uOmtudif 10 us Il man am
constitution gircS him Il right 10 nominate ia
often as he piedSsS-the President has no right
To propose To as 10 put uu one man aud put in
another unless tIer. IS cause. NOC, lChdt il
cause? The constitution has made the cause
The Au,lited discretion Of the President Of III,
United States aud the repreSeHtdtiu Of The
states, that is the cause. If the President 0f the
United states thinks for ann reason that S1tis
fes his moral nature that ii is better TO make Il
change ~ an otice, and proposes il 10 u.s. dtd u,
are satisfied for any reason That Is cOIiSOHdnt Il
our moral sense Of right and lCrOng That thai
change ought To or may be made, then II is done
aud there is cause. Nv friend may % into d
dissertation il he clSheS TO do 80, wteH il cOinc'
10 his turn 10 Spedk upon prOrimdte and ma
cause. There is crcr so much discussion IN book'
Of philoSOply about that. But IT is caus,
enough for me, sir-constltutional cause
if the Senator will-when the President
of the United States, acting, If he Il
honest, AS he always must, upon consclen
tious regard for the public service and con
scientlous sense of his responsibility TO the
people and to God, chooses to send in one
mans name for place that anot her mai
holds When he has done that he has done
, his duty, whether that cause sat'she my
. friend and me or not. Then Il becomes Oul
opportunity To speak and 10 consider, ana U az
are satisfied ruh the cause, or Uph ann Olhel
: cause that appeals 10 our judgment ana V0Oc