Year: 1876







The debate in Congress on Tuesday
touching the summons of the House Com
mittee to appear before the Grand Jury in
the Belknap matter was so partisan in
character as to make it difficult to get at
the real merits of the question at issue.
Upon the one side the Republican men,
bers were seeking to press the matter TO
the bottom Upon the other side the
Democrats were determined that it should
not be, and the result of this antag-
onism was a great deal of passion, bun
combe, demagogism and partisan bitter
ness.


In trying to get at the merits Of this de-
bate, II is necessary TO keep in view all
the time the fact that Mr.. Clymer, Demo-
cratic Chairman of the Investigating Com
mittee, allowed the witness Marsh TO al
scond to Canada, and take with him all
the original papers, contracts, and docu-
ments which had been before the Com
mittee, in the face of the protestations Of
Republican members of the Committed, and
that Clymer declined to detain him before
any announcement was made that Marsh
was to be prosecuted. In view Of this and
other facts, the allegation OF the Demo-
Gratis that il was the intention of the Ex-
ecutive to intimidate witnesses, throttle
investigation and afford immunity to
criminals is very lame and thin, and it
suggests some important questions which
seem to have been studiOusly avoided by
the Democrats in the debate. Why was
not Marsh detainedS Being allowed to
escape, why was he allowed to carry off
the original contracts and the checks
proving the payments to BelknapY Hav-
ing let this witness escape and carry of
l.
ness who can prove the charges contained
in the articles of mpeachment-now come
these members of the House Com
mittee, and, hiding behinu their priv
ilege, refuse to testify before the Grand
Jury. Why are they opposed to going
before the Grand Jury? II they refuse to
appear before that body, then why do they
not go on with their impeachment? If
they intend toproceed with their impeach-
ment, why have they let their witness go,
and allowed him to take their documents
and proofs with himS Why are they now
setting up their "privilegeY' The Grand
Jury is a body sworn to secrecy. The
testimony before them is not made public.
But, even admit that the whole of the
testimony should leak out, Mr.. BLAZING.
asked Mr.. Clymer If the Committee had
withheld any of the evidence against Bel
KNAPP in its report to the House, and MIR.
Clymer emphatically replied that IL had
not. Why, then, was this Committee,
after it had placed the House il possession
OF every item of evidence, and after that
evidence had been spread abroad in the
Congressional Record and in every news
paper in the country, afraid to go before
the Grand Jury and testify? What wit
nesses are TO be intimidated who have not
already been intimidated? If they have
already told all their testimony, why are
they afraid to repeat it before the Grand
Jury? As Mr. Blaine says: "Does not
the whole country see that having posses
sion of the evidence on which an indict-
ment can be found, and having in its pos
session every paper in the case Except
those they allowed Marsh TO take to Can
ada) the House puts itself behind It's tech
nical privilege and throws itself across the
indictment of Belknap, and that to-day it
stands as an obstacle and sole obstacle To
the indictment of the late Secretary of
War;" Why do they not impeach himg
If they are not going to impeach him,
why not indict himY The animus of
the Democrats is apparent enough.
Having done what mischief they can IN
besmirching Republicans, they seem
afraid to go farther. If they do, other ex-
pOsures might follow very damaging to
their crowd They are getting alarmed.
They have suddenly found themselves in
deep water Investigation is a two edged
tool. "Sitting upon the rocks and bob
bing for whales" with their tiger-tail
bait" they have found Democratic levia
thans in close and dangerous proximity to
the bait, and in order not to hook them
they must stop fishing. Hence the failure
togo on with the impeachment. Hence
this attempt to slifle the Grand Jury in
vcstigation. Although his indictment
could not affect his impeachment, nor his
impeachment affect his indictment, the
Democrats have thwarted the one by send
ing away their witness and allowing him
to carry off the papers, and now seek TO
stifle the indictment by screening them
selves behind their privilege. 1t is all
we'll enough to impeach Belknap, so long
as ii does not expose some prominent
Democrat to impeachment. 1t is all we'll
enough to indict Belknap, if it does not
involve the indictment of Democrats. AS
this consequence, however, is apparent,
the Democrats arc doing the next best
thing by carrying this business as far as it
will serve the purposes of political clap
trap and then stopping. Let no guilty
man escape-unless he be Democrat
Chicago Tribune, March 0.