The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-03-31
The Long Debate Ended.

reported by the republican members Of
the judiciary committee were separately
adopted On Tuesday Senator George
of Mississippi opposed the majority re-
port and also denounced secret ses-
sions. On Wednesday Senator Nor
gan made a constitutional argument on
the question and defended the Presi-
dents position. Senator Mitchell con-
demned the administration for with
holding the papers called for by The
senate, but disapproved of the resolu-
ton pledging the senate to refuse con-
frmations so long as the President
holds out. Senator Hoar controverted
the theory that the resolutions would
bind the majority to reject nominations
when the papers were not furnished.
On Thursday Senator Voorhees, OF In
diana spoke at length in opposition to
the resolutions, and charged that they
were originated for partisan effect.
Senator Call of Florida argued in
similar strain. Senator Evarts sus-
tanned the majority report in an able
speech. On Friday Senator ingalls, of
Kansas made a speech, which attracted
a large audience to the senate chamber,
and in which he presented scathing
review of the acts of the administra-
ton. He denounced the offensive
partisan " letter of acknowledgement
Villas as one of the most despicable
documents ever issued by a public
official. The senate had not asked the
Presidents reasons for suspending re-
publican office-holders, but had only
demanded the public papers relating to
individual cases. The senate was not
trying to keep republicans in office, but,
that no injustice might be done the
suspended officers, it wanted to know
whether they were suspended for cause
or simply for political reasons. If it
were understood that the removals were
for political reasons, the republicans
would be content. He believed that no
republican could hold public office I'M
der a democratic administration with
out sacrificing his convictions or for
feiting his self-respect. Senator Harri-
son of Indiana also made an effective
speech, in the course of which he stated
that three hundred sixty-one Union
IL nd al rv;1 IF cpl1
had been removed from Office in Indi-
ana, and but ninety soldiers and one
widow of a soldier appointed in their
places. Senator Logan said that the
moment the President placed papers on
file in the departments they were pub
lie papers, and the senate had right to
the documents. The people are en-
titled to examine any records in the
departments touching themselves. He
also pronounced in favor of open execu-
tive sessions. Senator Edmunds closed
the debate. He said the question be-
fore the senate was simply whether the
two houses of congress had a right to
see the papers affecting the business of
the government. What the senate
asked for was not motives or reasons,
but official facts concerning the state of
the public service.
Before taking vote on the resolu-
tons, Senator Van Wyck spoke in favor
of his amendment to abolish secret
executive sessions. Mr.. Plat and Mr..
Logan expressed themselves in favor
of the proposition as separate matter,
but not in connection with the reso-
buttons. Mr.. Van Wyck's amendment
was rejected-all the republicans ex-
cept Mr.. Van Wyck voting against it.
The vote is not considered test of the
strength of the proposition for open
executive sessions, since republicans
who favor the principle voted to table
the appeal and democrats who oppose
it voted against tabling it. The first
resolution, asserting the right of the
senate to the papers on file in the de-
partments, was then adopted by party
vote of thirty-two ayes to twenty-six
nays, Mr.. Riddleberger not vot.ng The
second resolution, expressing condem-
nation of the encouragement action
in refusing papers called for, was adopted
by vote of thirty-two ayes to twenty
five nays-also party vote. The third
resolution, declaring it to be the duty
of the senate to refuse its advice and
consent to proposed removals in cases
in which the papers are deemed neces-
sary and refused, gave rise to consid-
cradle discussion. The democrats tried
to have it ruled out of order, on the
ground that it changed the rules, but
the chairman decided against them, on
the ground that it was a mere express
sion of opinion. An appeal from this
ruling by the democrats was laid on the
table by vote of thirty-one to twenty
eight. Mr.. Brown of Georgia then
moved to strike out the third resolu-
ton. That was lost by vote of thirty
one nays to twenty-seven ayes. The
vote then required on the adoption of
this resolution, and it was carried by a