Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-03-20
Will Not Remain Silent I'm
der Unjust Accusation.
MR.. BACON'S CRITICISM
TIE COMMISSIONERS LETTER TO
SENATOR sPooNER.
Does Not Believe Senator'S Will Insist
on Such a Doctrine of Sena-
toria1 "Lese Majestic"

Mr. William Dudley Foulke of the civil
service commission has addressed letter
to Senator Spooner Of Wisconsin relative
to the resolution introduced In the Senate
calling on the civil service commission to
make a statement OF the charges and evil
dence in the matter Of the removal of Elmer
e. Forshay. a clerk in the office Of the sur
veyor general Of the land office Of Idaho.
Mr.. Foulke resents the intimation that gov
eminent officials must remain silent when
unjustly accused in the Senate and says:
81 do not believe that any considerable
number of senators will insist upon such
doctrine of senatorial lese majestic" Com
missioner Foulke's letter follows:
Charge of Senator Dubois.
"On February II Senator Dubois of Idaho
publicly charged in the Senate that the
civil service commission had procured the
removal of Elmer E. Forshay from the sur
veyor generals office of Idaho for receiving
contributions for campaign expenses, and
that such removal was unjust because the
contributions were received by Forshay I'M
der duress. he being directed and required
by the surveyor general to receive them
Senator Dubois further charged the commits
sion with attempting to conceal the facts
and refusing to furnish to him proper in
formation when requested. He introduced
a resolution that the commission send to the
Senate a statement Of the charges ana
evidence
His accusations were made under an
utter Misrepresentation as to the facts since
Forshay was not acting under duress, ana
the commission had not refused to furnish
any Information asked in regard to the
charges or the removal. / therefore believed
It to be my right and my duty, as one or the
commissioners involved. to deny the charges
4. ,,,,rt do
the resolution of inquiry offered by Senator
Dubois on the ground that the Senate could
not properly devote its time to inqulrlns
into each case of removal, | wrote to you
and to two other senators individually, stat
ing that If not opposed to the public inter-
ests I sincerely hoped the Senate would
adopt the resolution. In this letter point
ed out various inaccuracies in the remarks
of Senator Dubois. and also in the state
ment of Senator Bacon who said that II
seemed to be a conceded fact that the COM
mission had unjustly visited It's condem-
nation upon the young man (forsnay) anu
failed to extend it to the offlcer unoer
whose command the violation OF the law
had been perpetrated-a sta tement whicn
was quite at variance with the actual oc-
currences.
GAS these charges were openly made in
the Senate l conceive that 1t was proper 10
address to members of that body commu-
nications pointing out their inaccuracies.
for such use as the senator's addressed
might see fit to make of them.
Mr. Dubois resolution was adopted. the
commission furnished to the Senate the
charges and evidence against Forshay, an
entire special session of the Senate has
since been held, and that body has ad-
journed sine die without making any inves-
tigation even referring l"e matter TO a
committee.
senator Dubois has admitted that the
statements made by him in regard to the
removal Of Forshay were incorrect See
Congressional Record, February .. page
2S43 where he states that he was. in error
and that Forshay was not acting under
his charges
Senator Bacon's Criticism.
but although the charges against the
commission were untrue. 1t Is now said
that had no right to address to Individual
senators a letter pointing out their inaccu-
racies. Senator Bacon says:
81 am not going to dignity these subor-
dinate officials by entering into contro-
versy with them on this floor as to whether
or not what 1 said was correct or what
they say in reply Is correct. l think II
matter Of supreme effrontery on the part
of these subordnates that they should as
sumo to enter into the debates of the Sem
ate in any such way. 1t Is gross, mex
cusable breach Of the privilege OF the
Senate
Thus the paradox Is presented that,
although the charge was untrue. I had no
right to point out the particulars in which
1t was untrue, even in letters to individual
senators. In other words. according to
Senator Bacon, the Senate is not willing to
know from the officials criticised whether
what is said upon the floor is correct or
incorrect, and will not permit men whose
conduct Is publicly attacked to show that
the attack Is unwarranted If his position
is sound 1t would be the duty of executive
officers to submit in absolute silence to the
gravest charges of misconduct or even of
crime uttered In the most public place in
the nation. No self-respecting man could
hold an administrative office under such
conditions. l submit that it is not to my
letter that the epithet of supreme effront-
cry can most fifty be applied.
Mr.. Foulke's Intention.
'In conclusion. 1 will say that hereafter
whenever my own conduct or that Of the
body to which 1 belong is unjustly at
tackled In either house of Congress 1 shall
continue to address to any senator or rep
resentative who will receive 1t a commu
nicat ton pointing out the incorrectness Of
the statement as specifically as l know
how; that I will seek to have the unjust
charge refuted as publicly as 1t was made,
and IL (as do not believe) the time should
come when 1 can find no senator or no
representative who Is willing to give me a
hearing, shall seek by every means in my
power to make the world acquainted with
the injustice. do not believe that any
considerable number of senators will insist
upon such doctrine of senatorial lese
majestic as will prevent any officer. however
humble the position he may hold, from
protecting himself against. unfounded &C
cusat ions by every lawful means in his