Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1889-04-01

EIafSfcad.

EIaisfead.
Soon after The Senate went into executive
session on Saturday Mr. Sherman arose to
omen the debate. He took the dignity CT
the Senate for his text, and attempted to
argue that it was not impaired Big sucn at
tecks as Mr.. HaIstead mad made upon it or
disfeured by such mud 50 Mr.. Ralstead
had thrown. Mr.. Evarts, Mr.. Teller, and
Mr.. Ingalls, put some questions to Mr.. Sner'
man which rather diverted him from his
line of thought and compelled him to admit
that he had not thought it was not respect
able Journalism or even common pollteEess
to call Il Senator o thief and boodler and
hken him TO barrel Of Standard oil. Mr..
Sherman explained that ne meant that the
license Of the press had become so we'll I'M
derstood that such attacks as MIR. Hslstead
had made did nos degrade the Senate in the
eyes of the people, but the constant inter
rnrtion and expression of dissent that came
from all carts Of The chamber soon con-
vincad him that he had started on the
wrong track, so he changed his tactics and
made another personal appeal rot TO dis
grace great and good man because he had
gore wrong.
Mr.. Teller, in reply 10 Mr.. Sherman, said
that certain members OF the Senate had feel
ircs rs well rs Mr. Halstead. He compared
| MIR. SheTmaD's logic 10 the story OF the boy
who stoned The frog 1t was fan 10 the boy
| but death 10 the frog. He told Mr.. Sher
nan that he did not reco!lect that the Sen
ator from Ohio or nybody else appealed to
| Mr. Halstead not TO disgrace the Senate OF
! The United States by 5espattetiug Senators
with language that neither Hsistead nor
sherman would use in their drawing rooms,
nor did he understand that Mr.. halsteAd
had ever made ea apoo97 for the expires
sion he had useG. If Mr.. Halstead believed
an honorable man wonld rest under snch as.
sauis as be had made upon the Senate he
g7as Il very poor judge Of hnman nature, and
he thought il Tae about time for the Sen
alc TO assert its dignity and establish pre-
cedent by refusing o advise or consent TO
the appointment OF such reckless editors 10
Office.
Gen. Huwley, who is usually peacemak-
er. and MIR Blair Both spoke in favor of Hal
stead. and took the ground that the Senate
was heittiing itse,f by taking notice of such
attacks. This called out MIR. Evarts, who
made another long speech 10 which be re-
| viewed the case and spoke at length regard
| ing he liberty that was taken by newsps
re:s nowadays with the private lives and
characters of public men. Mr.. Payne, too,
made another appeal to TIE Senate ofa some
what personal nature, and said very plainly
that he should consider the confirmation OF
Mr.. Halstead az an expression of its ap
proval Of the attacks made upon him.
Mr.. y jarts then called attention to the
nrecedents in the case and said that demo
cratic nominee for postmaster in Virginia,
meaning Mr.. Button of Lynchburg, had been
rejected by the Senate OF the same charges
that they now propose to rfj sct Mr.. Hal
stead, and he appealed TO the republicans to
be consistent and administer the same pun
ishment TO q member of their party, who
had heen guilty OF the same offence.
Then vote Was taken, and HalsteaG's
nomination was rejected. Mr.. Quay's
vote against HalHtead caused T. de-
cded sensation, because of bis rela-
tons with the administration and his
position at the head of the republican
party. While he made no explanation: it is
inferred that his action is the first expires
sion of resentment toward Mr.. Wanamaker
for his selection OF a man for the Phiadel-
phia postoilice who is personally offensive to
| him.