Elmore bulletin. [volume] (Rocky Bar, Idaho) 1889-1906, 1896-03-25
CENSURE OF Mr.. BAYARD
COUSINS OF IOWA WON DIsTINC-
TIoN AS AN ORATOR.
Hoke smith Subjected to Another
Series of Blasts IN the
Senate.

Washington, March 1s.-The house
today entered upon the consideration of
resolutions censuring Ambassador Bay
ard for speeches delivered by him be-
fore the grammar school at Boston,
England, and before the Edinburgh,
Scotland, philosophical institution last
fall.
With the exception of the speech OF
Mr. Cousins of Iowa, however, the ora
tory OF the occasion was disappointing,
Mr.. Hit, chairman of the foreign af-
fairs committee, and Mr.. McCreary.
who was the chairman of the commit
tee in the last congress, opened respect
lively for and against the resolutions.
Mr.. Draper of Massachusetts, an
nounced his inability to bring himself
to vote for the resolutions of censure.
If the utterances were inappropriate,
the punishment was too harsh.
Mr.. Cousins speech In support of the
resolutions was the feature of the pro-
ceedings. He won for himself the high
est distinction as an orator. His bursts
of eloquence, set off by keen and pen
etrating wit, aroused the house and the
galleries to unbounded enthusiasm.
Mr. Dinsmore of Arkansas, in closing
the debate for the day, defended the
utterances of Bayard to the effect of
his remarks against protection, and, to
the great delight of the democrats, read
extracts from Senator Chambers in
terview alleging that the Mckinley
books were levying on the protected IN
dustries.
The debate will conclude tomorrow.
In opening his speech in favor of the
adoption of the resolutions Mr.. Hit
reviewed the speeches delivered by MIR.
Bayard. The one at Edinburgh, deliv-
cred two days after the November cleo
ton, he characterized as a political
dlatribe." Bayard's auditors, he said,
had that day read the election returns.
no doubt with great regret and it was
to a sympathetic foreign audience that
he delivered his passionate address.
That speech called attention again 10
the speech previously delivered at Bos-
ton describing the Americans as vio-
lent people.
That" he said, was the cause upon
which the foreign affairs committee re-
ported their resolutions of censure."
Mr.. Hit then took up and analysed
Bayard's letter to the secretary of
state, explaining the circumstances I'M
der which his addresses were delivered.
Think of it," said he, IAN ambassa-
dor and an ex-secretary of state defend
ing himself behind the bold letters of
instructions to diplomatic officers. Why,
Mr.. Speaker, had a republican ambas-
sador at his post abroad rallied at the
democratic creed as degrading, as cor
rupting to the public life. is there re-
publican among the millions who would
not have been wounded and have re-
sented it as an affront to his country?
There lies the offense."
Mr.. Hit referred to the manner in
which the presidential influence had
been used to drive reluctant members
into voting for the resolutions of the last
congress censuring Minister Stevens. In
conclusion he urged the proprletv and
duty of the adoption of the resolutions.
Mr. McCreary of Kentucky, ex-chafr-
man of the foreign affairs committee,
followed Mr.. Hit in opposition to the
resolutions. At the outset he called at
tention TO Mr.. Hits error in saying
the Edinburgh speech was delivered
just after the last congressional cleo
tons. The last congressional elections
occurred in November. 1894. This speech
was delivered In November 1895. In
declaring his opposition to the resolu-
tions Mr.. MeCreary said that they were
unprecedented in congressional history.
The proposed action of the house was
an invasion of the rights and authority
of the president of the United States.
and II the speeches of Bayard referred
to in the resolutions required action in
the executive, he was sure the latter
would do his duty at the proper time.
Since the organization of the govern
ment, the president Mr. McCreary said,
had controlled our diplomatic officers.
There was, however one case where the
acts of a diplomatic officer had been
condemned by the house. and that was
of a prominent republican, Hon. Rob
ert Schenck, the minister to Great Brit
ain, whose conduct in connection with
the Emma silver mine was investigated
by committee of the house. and reso-
lutions reported condemning his action.
Schenck was also made conspicuous
while representing the United States at
the court of St. James by the address
which he wrote on the subject of poker
playing, but there was no effort made
to censure him for it. Bayard was not
the first diplomatic officer representing
the United States who had been assailed
by his political opponents while repre-
senting his country in England and a
vote of censure, now prompted by
prejudice and partisanship." will not
he said, hurt Bayard. The purpose was
too we'll understood. 1t might prove a
garland of distinction and open the way
to him for high offices and greater hon
ors.
The people of this country, he contin-
ued, know that Thomas f. Bayard had
proved himself a patriot, statesman
and faithful public servant. The ques-
ton of so-called protection, Mr. Me
Creary declared. was living, absorb
ing question, which was engaging the
attention of the civilized world. 1t was
natural, therefore, in a comprehensive
address to educators and students that
Mr.. Bayard should give his views Of
protection.
Mr. McCreary concluded, in part, as
follows: when a citizen of our free
country becomes an ambassador or a
minister, should he be required to sur
render or suppress his true sentiments2
Should he not have the right to speak
his sentiments politely and respectful
ly. II they are in accord with the policy
OF the government which he repre-
sents?"
While Mr.. hlccreary was referring TO
the Boston speech, in which Mr.. Bay
ard said 1t took a real man to gov
ern" the people of the United States,
Mr.. Grosvenor interrupted to ask II he
Il.