Year: 1872


and documents cited or referred
to therein showed clearly that
some one in this country must
be in nOn-official and unauthorized
communication with French Legation
because several OF them could not be
got in any other way. He believed
therefore that the whole proceedings
had been excited by the present
French government, and that Its
agents had been sufficiently adrOit to
draw into it member Of the senate.
The French government wanted evil
dence to prosecute some OF Its own
agents suspected of dishonesty, and 1t
had been able to find some person
here who was willing to aid il to ran
sack the records of the French lega-
ton, in the hope Of finding something
that could be used against depart
ment of his own government. The
preamble compared the records Of the
war depaItment-Of the amounts re-
ceiyed for arms-and the French re-
cords of what amounts have been
paid by that government. Now, the
question was, where did the author
OF the preamble get access to the
French records?


Senator Sumner-Why l held that
record in my hand while spoke yes.
terday, ii will be found in the Jour
nal of the French Republic.


Senator Harlan-Another neWspa-
per statement.


Senator Edmunds-Here it is in the
New York Sun. Laughter


Senator Sumner-It is the report Of
French official published in the
French official journal.


Senator Harlan-And copied into
the Sun.


Senator Sumner-COpied into the
Sun? Laughter.


Senator Harlan-Well, whether
that is sufficient authority for the ar
raignment of high officer OF our
own government by a member Of the
American senate, leave for the
American people to decide.


Senator Harlan then criticised the
resolution itself, and asked why it
proposed to limit the investigation to
| the period OF the F'rancO-Prussian
war, if the only motive was TO vim
dicate our own government from un-
just suspicious. Again, why was the
committee to ascertain who were the
| real parties interested? What differ
ence did il make to our government
whether the purchasers bought for
themselves or for somebody else?
Further, why must we ascertsin what
sums were actually paid by the real
parties interested2 The explanation
was that the French government
wanted this information, to be used
against their own officials; and the
question was whether it was legiti-
mate for the American senate to lend
itself to the Fre ch legation for such 9
purpose. II France had received any
wrong al OuF hands, let her resort TO
the courts.


Senator Frehnghuysen said that he
could not vote for the preamble, and
he did not see how any senator could;
and the resolution itself was wholly
unnecessary. The preamble and res
OlutiOn together were very anOma-
lOus productions, and if they had not
been introduced by one whose patriot
ism he could not question, Sumner
he would be forced to believe that
they were introduced in hostility to
this country. The events to be inves-
tigated had occurred in 1870, and no
complaint on the subject had been
made by Prussia, yet, in the absence
of such complaints, or any other
ground, an American senator had in
troduced a preamble asserting that
the good name of our government was
sensibly compromised, and a resOlu-
ton proposing an investigation.


Senator Frelinghuysen reviewed
the paragraphs of the preamble one
by one, and argued that some of the
statements quoted in it were plainly
false, and that none Of them furnished
foundation for the allegation that
the good name of our government
was seriously compromised. The in
vestigatiOn must now go on; but he
hoped il would be made not by the
committee proposed in this resolution,
because by parliamentary usage the
chairman of that committee Sum-
nerl would be one who had already
assumed in this preamble the truth
of charges to be investigated. He
hoped the matter would be referred to
the committee on Investigation and
retrenchment, the committee created
for the pur pose of investigating. This
was an era of Investigations; they
were ordered on almost every pretext,
and many of them, like this one, was
quite unnecessary, but tUey would
continue until after the Philadelphia
convention.


senator Schurz said that this inves-
tigation had seemed to be very pOpu-
lar in the senate yesterday, but it was
less SO tO-dsy. 1t was now regarded
as disgrace 10 the American name,
and the Senator from Massachusetts,,
TSumner1 who had always passed for
a good American, was suddenly made
to appear in the character of an agent
of France, or a person put up to Job
by somebody for the benefit Of the
French government. The senator
from New Jersey Frelinghuysenl
had also charged him with doing that
which would incite the PrusSian gov
ernment to make claims against the
United States. 1t appeared, therefore,
that Senator Sumner must be regarded
as Prussian agent, and also that the
two great belligerents OF 1870 were
united in this one thing. Laughter
But the opposition to this inveSti-
cation should not excite surprise, for
It should be remembered that the res
olution for the investigation OF abuses
in the New York custOmhOuse had
been met in the same manner, and
that the men who moved and
urged it were said TO be very doubt
ful characters in comparison
with Leet and Stocking. Laughter.
He insisted that there was no ground
whatever for the insinuation that Sen
atOr Sumner, or any other senator,
had instigated the proceedings Of
| the French government. The facts
seemed to be that that government
had ordered certain investigations,
and had discovered difficulties and
also reasons for believing that the
government of the United States was
aware Of practices OF questionable
character having gone on here in con-
nection with the sale OF arms. The
rule laid down for itself by the United
States government seemed to have
been that no arms should be sold to a
known agent Of either belligerent,
and If this rule had been observed no
arms would have been sold when
going at once into the hands of either
belligerent, was matter of ordinary
probability. II arEas were sold to in
dividuals who with any degree OF
probability could be presumed to
transfer them to either belligerent,
then it was as clear as sunlight that
the adoption Of that rule was only a