The Portland daily press., 1886-03-18
XLIXth CONGRESS- FIRST SESSION.
SENATE.
WASHINGTON, March II.

SENATE.
WASHINGTON, March II.
The chair laid before the Senate today the
new electoral count bill.
Mr.. Hoar addressed the Senate on the bill.
The present condition of the law, Mr.. Hoar
said, in regard to counting the Presidential
vote, would render it almost impossible 10
count the vote in case of any serious dltfer-
enee or difficulty, without some special rule
at the time of actual count. That constitutes
a serious public danger, and it was the Sen,
ate'S duty to provide against it. This bill
failed to provide for a settlement byiCongress
of case in which opposing sets OF returns
were made from any one State. In the pre-
sent condition of public opinion, and OF the
political sentiment in Congress, it was inn
case. If one House of Congress favored one
such set of returns, and the other another,
there would be no decision.
Daniel Webster had once said, SAID MI:
Hoar, that if the Senators of the United
States failed to assemble there was no earth
ly provision for preventing the republic from
going to pieces, and if the State electlons
failed to send to the Senate the necessary
certificates there was no way 10 compel thein.
Mr.. George had not been able as member
of the committee on privileges ana electiohs
to give his assent to this bill. There. were
some valuable provisions In 1t, he said, but
also some grave omissions.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Georges remarks
in opposition to the measure the bill wasipass-
ed without division.
laid before the Senate, one OF them Deing
unsigned, but received" said president
pro tenn Sherman, lin due and official form.
The message on suggestion of the chair, and
ON motion of Mr. C0ckrell was returned to
the President for his signature.
Mr.. Hoar gave notice that he would TO,
morrow move to take up the bankruptcy Dill
as a special order for Wednesday after next.
Unfinished business, being the Edmund s
resolution reported from the Judiciary COM
mittee was then laid before the Senate, and
Mr.. Dolph resumed the floor and continued
his remarks in favor of the majority report
of the committee. Mr.. Dolph reviewed the
history of the legislation OF Congress on the
subject of removals to show that power Ola
not lie exclusively with the, President lie
also quoted from the speeches of Webster,
Calhoun and other statesmen IN support OF
his position. He also cited decisions of the
Supreme Court to show that the power OF
removal was incident to the power OF ap-
pointment. Hence Mr.. Dolph argued that as
the President and Senate appointed the Pres
ident and Senate should remove.
Mr.. Coke followed. The underlying ques-
tion, he said, was whether the power, OF re-
moval was vested in the President alone or
in the President and Senate acting together.
The Constitution did not provide for consent
of the Senate to be given to removals from
office. Mr.. Coke contrasted the course OF
the Senate when Democratic, with the
course of the present Senate, saying the
Democratic Senate had not attempted to en-
barrass the Republican administration.
Mr.. Beck next took the floor Everybody
knew, Mr. Beck said, that Duskin was NOM
mated in March, 1881, and the Senate did not
see fit to confirm him. He was again ap-
pointed after adjournment of the session
and nominated at the October term Of the
same year, and the Senator from Vermont
(Mr. Edmunds) had not felt justified IN even
reporting him to the Senate for contrma-
ton.
The Senator from Kentucky, he said, was
violating the duty of Senator in respect to
the proceedings in executive session.
Mr. Beck denied this. The records ana
public papers, he said, showed these nomlna-
tions of Duskin and it was because the Sen
ator from Vermont knew that he was un-
worthy, that the papers were asked Tor De-
cause ho expected to entrap the department.
Mr.. Edmunds. insisted that the Sen
ator from Kentucky was out OF order and
asked the chair to decide the question.
The chair was of the opinion that the Sen
ator from Kentucky could see the distinction
and would no doubt observe the rules OF
order.
Mr.. Beck said he would do so. He would
not speak of anything that occurred in an
executive session, but he repeated his state
ment as to what the Record and the public
press would show, that the Senator from
Vermont did not see fit to act on the nomlna-
ton.
Mr.. Edmunds again insisted that Mr.. Beck
was out of order and asked the chair to en-
force the rule.
The chair stated that the Senator from
Kentucky had an undoubted right to refer to
public facts.
prove the public facts by the press of the
country, and would also prove by the records
of the House of Representatives which were
public, that Duskin was an utterly unfit
man to hold the place from which he was
removed, among other reasons because of
his connection with Strobach Marshal, and
that the Senator from Vermont himself
knew that fact; and Mr.. Beck thought he
would produce records from the Attorney
Generals office-the Republican Attorney
General, Mr. Brewster-verifying the fact as
stated by him (Mr Beck.) He hoped also in
executive session to get a vote of the Senate
to compel the Senator from Vermont to pro-
duce evidence which he had before his own
committee to show Duskin's unftness. He
also hoped to prove this effort to make an
issue in regard to Duskin was because the
Senator from Vermont believed Duskin's
case so bad that the Democratic administra-
tion would be glad to prove how bad he was,
and then the Senator would claim it as a
precedent in a good many cases.
Mr.. Edmunds said he would have to leave
entirely in silence what the Senator from
Kentucky had stated in regard to affairs in
executive session. Il feel bound in honor"
he said, motto make any allusion to any
such subject The idea of Senatorial honor
under the rules of the Senator from Ken
lucky and my own are entirely different.
Every Senator is sworn to the faithful per
formance of his duty as Senator according
to the regulations of the Senate that are
made under the constitution. If the Senator
from Kentucky thinks it honorable to garble
and misstate the existence of circumstances
in closed doors of course have no remark
to make on his sense of what is honorable
and right. cannot make any reference to
what has taken place under any clrcum-
stance when, under the rules of the Senate
and my own oath, the doors are closed
Therefore am make no reply to what the
Senator from Kentucky has said on the
subject to which he has alluded in execu-
tive session" Mr.. Edmunds then made
reports in the Attorney Generals office
about Duskin and what they would show.
Mr. Beck said his reference had been to
the committee on judiciary of which the
Senator from Vermont was chairman.
Mr. Edmunds reminded Mr.. Beck that he
had referred to papers in the office of Attor-
ney General Brewster, and what they would
show. He (Mr. Edmunds) could not allude
to what the judiciary committee had or had
not until he should have permission. Il
shall not violate my oath or my honor" Mr.
Edmunds said "by doing it now, whatever
other gentlemen may choose to do. II
there were reports in the Attorney Generals
office concerning Mr.. Duskin they were pre-
cisely what the Senate desired when it
passed its resolution calling for papers. 1t
appears Mr.. Edmunds continued ''that the
Senator from Kentucky can get at what the
Attorney General and the President of the
United States consider to be confidential and
private communications when the Senate of
the United States cannot. What the Senate
asked for, and what it only asked for, was a
report of the official papers and documents
on file in the department of justice respect
ing the conduct and management of the Of
fee covering the period of time embracing
six months of the suspended officer and six
months of the officer whom we have asked to
appoint in order that the Senate might see
how the office had been managed by its re-
spective occupants, whether money had
been embezzled whether false indictments
had been brought. and whether the Office had
under both or either of them been well or
honestly administered. If it were true
Mr.. Edmunds continued, ''that Duskin had
been bad officer it was of the highest inn
portance, not only that the Senate, but the
House of Representatives should know 1t,
and what his misconduct had BEEN" How
any papers stating misconduct in public Of
fee could be private and confidential COM
munications which belong to the President
alone, Mr.. Edmunds was quite unable to I'M
derstand.
Mr. Beck said he had not seen any paper