The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-08-11
Explanations that DO Not
Explain.

Senator Edmunds' anxiety concern
ing his prospects in the senatorial con-
test is well indicated by the growing
frequency of his efforts in private let
tiers and interviews with newspaper
correspondents to explain his course in
relation to certain matters. The state
ment of his home organ, last winter,
that he would make no personal effort
to secure his reelection was decidedly
premature.
The principal Edmunds organs in
this state have recently proffered some
new explanations of the senator's con-
duct in the campaign of 1884 These
pretended explanations appear to be
founded upon mere assumptions rather
than upon facts. 1t is assumed that
Mr.. Edmunds was so fully convinced
that Mr.. Blaine was a corrupt and dam
gerous man that he could not conscien-
tiously speak in his behalf in the cam
paign. If this conscience plea has any
basis of truth, it may well be asked how
Mr.. Edmunds could bring himself to
vote for Mr.. Blaine, as it is claimed
that he did. What did he do with his
conscience on that occasion? 1t is
stated that Mr.. Edmunds believed and
declared in 1884 that "the paramount
need and duty was the defeat of the
democratic party" And yet it appears
that he did nothing himself to compass
that result. Again, it is stated that he
desired the success of the republican
ticket, but that he could not openly adj
vocate Mr.. Blaine's election because of
the fear that he might be asked some
embarrassing questions about the can
didate. This is the most absurd OF all
the apologies for his conduct. II is
certain that other republican senators
Morrill,, Sherman, Harrison, Hawley,
etc.-possessed as much knowledge of
the alleged questionable transactions of
Mr.. Blaine as did Mr.. Edmunds, and
yet they did not hesitate to go before
the people and advocate Mr.. Blaine's
election. A good deal has been said
about a certain letter that Mr.. Ed
munds had written, years before, criti-
cising Mr.. Blaine's acts as senator,
and that he feared if he took an active
part in the campaign that letter would
be published, to the detriment of the
republican cause. The existence of
such letter has never been con-
clusively proved; but if it ever did eX-
list, and its contents were of the char
acter represented, it was a cowardly,
unfounded and scurrilous attack upon
Mr.. Blaine and deserves the reproba-
ton of every fair-minded republican.
But the explanations of Mr.. Edmunds
course in 1884 now made by his organs are
incomplete and unsatisfactory. Some
of his friends in that year did not hest
tate to say that his personal dislike OF
Mr.. Blaine was the chief cause of his
inaction in the campaign, and all the
known circumstances of the case appear
to justify that conclusion.
In private letter Mr.. Edmunds has
attempted another explanation of his
connection with railroad corporations
but, as in recent interview with cor
respondent on this subject, he fails to
cover the whole ground. When the
Beck bill was considered in the senate
on June 23d the land-grant corporations
were under discussion, and Mr.. Ed
munds then admitted that he had beer
counsel for some of them. He excuse,
his opposition to the measure on thu
ground that it is unconstitutional, bu
in his speech on the bill, June Odd, h,
failed to show that the principle con
tanned in the bill violated any specili,
constitutional provision, or that it de
prived senators and representatives o
any privilege they could properly exer
else. The principle of the Beck bill i
very simple. 1t is that Legislators shall
not vote upon measures in which the,
have a pecuniary interest. 1t will b
difficult to show any infraction of tn
Constitution in this sound principle, o
that it imposes an unfair restriction
upon the lawyers who have been hor
ored with seats in congress. 1t may b
of some interest to the people of Vel
mont to learn that the conduct of MI