Democratic Sentinel, Volume 2, Number 7, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 29 March 1878 — UNDIGNIFIED SENATORS. [ARTICLE]

UNDIGNIFIED SENATORS.

Sharp Debate in the Senate on the Bill to Punlah the Timber Depredators. The bill making an appropriation for detecting trespass on the public lands being under consideration, Mr. Blaine, said: A labored attempt had been made to impress the country with the belief that in this Senate chamber the timber thieves of the conutry found defender* and apologists, a fid under this cloud of misrepresentation real issue which he’raised against the Secretary of the Interior was sought to be obscured. lam for prosecuting the timber thief, and Tam f< r protecting the settler, and this amendment, if it prevails, will force the Secretary of the Interior to do the same. The amendment only guaranteed to the settler in the Territory precisely wbat he had enjoyed from the foundation of the Government, precisely what the early settlers in Ohto,and Indiana, and Illinois, and Michigan, and Wisconsin, and Alabama, and Mississipui, and Arkansas had all in turn eujoyed, aud that privilege was simply only that until the timber ands were surveyed ard offered for sale the actual settlers might cat timber for their own use, and not for export. Mr. Eustis said he would vote against any appropriation to pay special agents of the Department of the Interior who were engaged in the business of (H oovering and prosecuting persons who were Charged with trespassing on the public lands. People absolutely knew noth ing of the proceedings ordered by the Department of the Interior, which were of a despotic character. The seizures were made on informal legal papers. Mr. Dawes argued that, if the proceedings were irregular, the Judge who issued the writs was responsible, and not tbe agents of the Interior Department. He was glad this discussion had taken place. It would teach tbo Secretary of the Interior that it was his duty to inquire into the conduct of his special agents charged with delicate duties. It would teach him that this was a Government of law, not of men.

Mr. Chriatiancy argued tbat tbe course pursued in Louisiana had no bearing whatever upon the course pursued in Montana. It was not to be expected that the Secretary of the Interior conld have knowledge of every act of the timber agents. The Senate would not have beard all these charges to-day had it not been tbat there was moro feeling against the Secretary of the Interior than for the pear settlers. Mr. Sargent said when Western Senators got up here, and asked for the people of the West privileges wh ch had been enjoyed by the people of Massachusetts, Vermont and other States, they were sneered at, and their wants measured by some county of Massachusetts. This provincialism he was opposed to. It was unworthy of debate like this. Western Senators were not to be turnc d from their convictions in this matter by sneers and statements that they desired to attack the Secretary of the Interior. No one thought of attacking the Secretary of the Interior until the people of the Territories were dragged before the courts, their property seizedj and they themselves charged with being thieves and plunderers. The policy of the present Secretary of the Interior was contrary to the whole policy of the Government in regard to the timber lands. Ho (Sargent.) would go as far as any man to protect the surveyed lands and punish men for stealing wood therefrom. The action of the Secretary of the Interior was caused by a desire to gain cheap reputation as & reformer. A considerate Secretary, instead of -turning the Interior Department into a huckster shop to peddle out wood, would have called the attention of Congress to the matter and asked for remedial legislation. Mr. Dawes said the remaiks of the Senator from California (Sargent) were as much uncalled for by the debate as they were by good breeding, and his allusions to Massachusetts— Mr. Sargent—Will you please quote anything I snid against Massachusetts ? 1 deny that I said anything. * Mr. Dawes—l have the floor and will not yield.

Mr. Sargent—As I yielded to the Senator from Massachusetts so frequently, I see his good breeding does not cori espoud. Mr. Dawes—The Senator’s memory is as bad as hi* manners. Continuing his remarks, Mr. Dawes said thousands of cords of wood were cut from the public lands in the Territories and ready for market, and it was that pluuder the Secretary of the Interior sought to stop, uo matter how much he might bo deuounoed for being over zealous. Mr. Sargent said the Senator frouvMassachusetts in his original speech spoke of the people of the Territories as thieves and plunderers. Did the Senator think that remark consistent with good breeding? He thought he was entitled to an apology from the Senator for questioning his manners. Mr. Dawes explained his remarks, and said be had no disposition to indulge in any remarks offensive to the Senator from California. Ho did not mean to speak of the people of tbe Territories as plunderers, bufe lie did meau to say that those who were taking property from the public domain were plrmd< ring it. Mr. Hoar argued tbat it was a bad thing for either branch of Congress to undertake to condemn a public officer for doing his diity, the neglect of which would have made him liable to impeachment. Mr. Matthews said it had been tbe practice of the executive officers of the Government to punish those trespassing upon the public lands for fire-wood or any other purposes, and he challenged the Senator from Maine (Biaine) to point to any statute authorizing settlers to cut fire-wood from public land. Mr. Blaine asked if it was a proper policy to charge $1 a cord stumpage. Mr. Mrtthews said it was not, but it was policy of law, not the policy of the Secretary of the Interior. Mr. Blaine challenged the Senator (Matthews) to point to an instance where settlers had been charged stumpage. Mr. Ingalls—l can do it. Mr. Blaine—Well, let us hear it. Mr. Ingalls then quoted from the instructions of J. M. Edmunds, the Commissioner of the General Land Office, in 1864, issued to public land officers, to punish timber depredations, which instructions were submitted to the Senate with the report of the Secretary of the Interior for that year. In reply to The question of Mr. Blaine, Mr. Ingalls stated the report showed that since Jan. 1, 1856, the sum of $199,608 had been paid into the treasury on account of titter depredations. He was not assailing or advocating the policy of the Secretary of the Interior, but he believed in giving the devil his dues, no matter whether it be the Secretary Qf the Interior or any one else. The Senator from Maine (Blame) reminded him (Ingalls) of the snake in “Hudibras,” that “wired in and wired out.” Mr. Christiancy inquired if anything had been paid into the treasury on acccuut of timber depredations'onder the late order of the Se rotary of the Interior. Mr. Blaine said yes, about $5,000 had been wrung out of the people of Montana. Replying to the argument of Mr Dawes, in regard to plunderers, he spoke of that portion thereof as a hole through which the Senator might esoape. Mr. Dawes—ls tbe Senator thinks anybody can beat him in dodging from hole to hole in this debate, he very much mistakes public judgment