Year: 1875

TIE PACIFIC MAIL LNVES7IGAnON


II il due to the Committee of Ways and
Means 10 say that their dealing with the mat
ter of the Pacific Mail Subsidy was in the end
as thorough and straightforward as could rea-
sonably have been expected. Several times
in the course Of their investigation they
seemed to be giving undue prominence to
evidence which could not possibly prove any
thing, and to shut the door upon other
avenues of proof which appeared to lead too
directly to the sources of power at both ends
of the Avenue. But perhaps by an ordinary
exercise of charity we may attribute these in
cidents to the infrmities of human nature,
and not to any prearranged scheme to defeat
the Ostensible purposes OF the inquiry. 1t IS
not easy tn account for the fact that Mr. kng
was within easy reach of the Committees
summons until he saw that he was to be sub
penaed. But after all, the examination OF
Mr.. Schumacher forbids us to assert
that anything would have been learned from
the late Postmaster of the House, if he had
| appeared before tho Committee. He might
have followed Schumaker's example, and
pleaded oblivion of the past in the hope OF
amnesty for the future. The general opinion
| is that Mr. Schumaker's mind is not such a
mush of fOrgetfulness as he represented, but
| it is hard 10 sec how the Committee OF Ways
| and Means could have done anything more
than intimate their disbelief in his astOnish-
| ing story. The marvellous statement OF the
small fry of lobbyists like Shaw and Boyd
| and Herscy, which was Incredible. to people
at q distance, was accepted by the Committee
| as genuine In that strange world of Wash
| ingtOD, where Irwin was hunting for ways to
get rid of his million without consideration,
we are not able to say that even such lndc-
scribable follies as this might not have taken
place. The Committee was convinced that
they did, and we have no Fright to impugn
their good faith in this respect.


Two substantial and unexplained facts they
had before them that Mr.. Schumacher re-
ceived 100000 of the money spent by the Pa
cifc Mail Company to obtain their subsidy,
and that Mr.. King received $4,000. We do
not think the Committee cnn justly be criti-
cised for their action in regard to these two
points. We do not see that they have avoided
any responsibility which properly fell upon
them in this especial matter. They did not
show much timely diligence in calling King
before them. but certainly endcavored to reach
him after it was too late. Schumacher they
summoned promptly and examined him with
drectncss aud candor, and they. are mot to
| blame if they elected nothing from him.
| They were powerlcss il the face of that as
sumed blankness Of recollection. But they
| have not shirked the truth in their report,
nor evaded their responsibility in their reso
Ii; MS al, 1or
| TO the =" painful contradictions" apparent be-
| tween tho evidence now before them and
| the sworn testimony on record from Mr.
| King. They also characterize the evidence Of
| Schumacher under oath, rs Incredible" Not
| content with this, they presented resolutions
| to lay a copy OF the evidence IL this case be-
fore the next House of Representatives, Of
which both Schumacher and King arc men,
bcrs elect and before the Prosecuting Attor
ncy of the District, that he may found upon
it an Indictment for perjury. 1t is crcditable
to tho Committee that they dld not think
their duty discharged by the mere presenta-'
ton of this report to the House. They
watched it carefully, and amid the hurry and
confusion of Wednesday night, Mr.. kasson
called up the resolution and had it passed
This was done by large majority in spite of
the protest of Mr.. Crookc of this State, who
thought that to Derpetuato evidence against
dishonest member of Congress from Brooklyn
was an outrage against law and common
sense


The late Congress has done il this affair
about as much as could have been cx-
pccted. 1t has taken away the subsidy
gained bys fraud ,and bribery, and has
thrown upon the next Congress the re-
sponsibility of dealing with its own mem
bers whose names are most deeply stained in
these disreputablc transactions. 1t shows the
power Of q disinterested public opinion as
plainly as anything which has happened in
recent years, and the action of the next Con-
gress will'be looked to with interest, TO see
whether under its new LEADERSHIP the Demo
cratic majority viii be equally amenablc to
the same influence. They have an admirably
clear case for action. The late Congress has
presented to them statement Of facts gravely
affecting the honor of two Of their members,
one q Democrat and one a Republican. The
way in which they deal with them will afford
a much-needed indication of the standard of
public morals which is to guide the new ma
jOrity.





WHAT CONGRESS THINKS ABOUT IT.


Three months of delberation, investigation,