New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-03-04
THE EXCISE DOODLE.

The Tribune may have been In error in taking
TOO seriously n statement made by the Albany
correspondent of our city contemporary, The
Press" and published by our contemporary one
dov last week. to the effect that wellknown
lobbyist at Albany had received an offer OF a
large sum of money from a combination OF brew
crs big enough TO buy all the men in the Sen
ate who are purchasable.' to be used for the
do,eat Of the Raincs Excise bill. The CORE
spondcnt wrote that he had received this in
formation from the wcll-known lobbyist him.
self who said that he had replied TO the offer:
Il can't take your Doodle, gentlemen, though
nobody ever accused me OF throwing soon
things over my shoulder. You can't beat the
..b,u and | can't It's passed the Senate al
ready practically" This appeared TO be so ex-
pllcit and clear as to call for some notice at the
hands, II not Of both branches OF the Legislature,
nj least Of the Senate. the integrity OF whose
members was impuencd In the lobbyists state
ment that the sum Of money offered was Dig
enough TO bay all the men In the Senate VINO
ARE purchasab,e." The Tribune accordingly
suggested that the Legislature should make an
inquiry into the facts In vindication OF lis own
good name. 1t did not seem difficult to trace the
scandal Il such il was. TO It's source. and 1t did
seem proper that the Legislature should take
some steps to protect It's own good name
But several days having elapsed and no action
having been taken. and what is perhaps more
significant our esteemed contemporary having
not only failed to follow up the subject. but
failed as well 10 make any further reference TO
IT, we are constrained TO believe that there was
no foundation for the statement and That the
Legislature, being aware OF the fact. did not
deem II worth while To institute an inquiry
There was OF course. something in the nature
of 4 prctcxt for ignoring this quite distinct and
explicit charge in the circumstance that less than
Il wear ago the Legislature did set on foot an in
vest!ga,ion into n no less distinct and explicit
charge made by our esteemed contemporary In
volvlng the personal integrity q Senator Nlincs
the author OF the Excise bill. and that the com
mittee making the investigation reported. after
full hearing. that the charge was utterly
frivolous and groundlcss But even in that case
we do not think the investigation was In any
sense n mistake IT gave Senator Naincs an
opportunity TO vlndlcate himself. and-what may
not have been Of momentous Importance to the
public. but was quite useful to him-cstablshed
basis for libel suit, which, We believe, Is now
| pending 1t furnished. moreover, an occasion
| for the Hon. Mr.. Quigg. who was responsible
1
| for the charges TO demonstrate satisfactorily
| that In making them he had not been actuaied
by motives OF personal resentment or political
ambition growing out OF the complications Of his
Congressional canvass
1t is to be regretted, Of course, that the loose
and irresponsible gossip OF the State capital
| should find It's way into the columns Of respect
able newspapers, especially when 1t involves
such grave public scandal as the statement here
referred to. But such things cannot always be
avoided, though 1t Is unusual that they should
| happen twice TO the same journal In such quick
| succession. We are by means clear that the
best way for the Legislature to dispose OF this
scandal was TO ignore 1t contcmptuously. For
no matter what may be the reputation OF the
newspaper which gives currency to such things.
| they do find measure Of Judgment in the public
mind, and in the end affect TO some extent the
| general estimate Of the integrity OF the Legis-
lature rs n whole. Sill. as the Legislature has
given no heed TO the charge, and our contempt
! rary has manifested disposition to pursue
| it, we presume 1t will have TO be dismissed.