Democratic Sentinel, Volume 14, Number 4, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 14 February 1890 — SPEECH OF HON. D. W. VOORHEES, OF INDIANA, [ARTICLE]

SPEECH OF HON. D. W. VOORHEES, OF INDIANA,

In the Senate of the United States, Wednesday, January 8, 1890. [Continued from last week. ] In behalf of the people of Indiana I desire the Attorney-General of the United States to inform this body whether the action of his official subordinate in interfering with and obstructing the duties of a Unit -d States commissioner was inspired by his instructions or now meets his approval; and, if so, to further inform the senate and the country by virtue of what law he and his subordinate are upheld,— Sir, I here assert, fearless of any intelligent contradiction from any senator or from anybody else, that a district attorney for the United States has no more legal right over the action of a United States coms missioner in the issuance or the refusal to issue a warrant of arrest than he has over the appointment of a ministei to England.— Such an assumption of authority on the part of an attorney for the -Governmenthas never been claimed or even hinted at in the best authorities on the law of the Federal judiciary. Jn the contrary, United States commissioners are treated as a peculiarly independent class of officials. Spear, in his work on the jurisdiction, practice, and pleading of the Federal courts says:

“Each circuit court may appoint in different parts of the district for which it is held ss many discreet persons as it may deem necessary, who are to be called commissioners of circuit courts,and to possess and exercise the powers which are or may be expressly conferred by law upon commissioners of circuit courts. * * * These commissioners, though appointed by the circuit courts, are not officers of these courts, and the courts do not, by the mere fact of having made the appointment, acquire any supervisory jurisdiction over them or over their proceedings.” It would seem from this citation that neither J udge Woods,nor even Judge Gresham, of the United States circuit court, could have prevented by any authority ot law, commissioner Van Buren from issuing a warrant for the arrest of Dudley, as did Smiley N. Chambers.

From a letter to the First Comptroller of the Treasury by the late Attorney General, Mr. Garland, written October 15,1886, it will be found, also, that the Department of Justice itself has no power of control over United States commissioners in issuing warrants and making examinations into alleged offenses. The Comptroller had presented the very question here involved, and had requested an order by the Department of Justice preventing commissioners from entertaining what he styled frivolous prosecutions, and from issuing warrants for the arrest es certain parties charged with tim* ber depredations. In reply, the Attorney-General, amongst other things, said:

“While I am in full accord with you as to the end in view, us preventing frivolous prosecutions,and am willing and ready to do all .in my power to effect this, yet I do not see how 1 can grant the request contained in your letter. The commissioners, under the law as to these matters, stand as examining courts in the states do as to state state prosecutions (section 1014, Revised Statutes of tlje United States), and they we in nowise subject to any order or direction from this Department in respect of these inquiries. If th > order aske i for were made and yet a oom missioner kn w of an offense otherwise than by in the mode indicated in that order, made in aeO ordaoeewith your request, and

did not take cognizance of such offense he would be derelict in his uuty. And under the law, if he paid no attention to this proposed order of the Deportment I do not see how he could be punished or how this order could be enforced.

What I mean to say is, this is a matter for legislation, and not for departmental order and direction. It would appear, for example, that as the law now stands, these commissioners are committing magistrates for the United States, just as justices of the peace are for *he states, and hey proceed in the mode that the justices of the peace in the states do in making arrests, etc.”

It thus appearing that neither the courts whicn appoint them, nor the Attorney-General who has absolute control of district attorneys, have any control at all over these commissioners in their capacity as examining and committing magistrates, the claim that the district attorneys have the right to direct their proceedings and decide what cases they shall entertain and what eases they shall refuse to investi *ate becomes something worse than rid.culous.

Nor does the fact that a case has been before a grand jury once or oftener, even with what was deemed at the time a fu 1 and satisfactory hearing of proof, make the slightest difference in this question. The jurisdiction of the commissioner as an examining magistrate remains until the statute of limitations bars the offense, and the district attorney has no more right to interfere with its exercise at one time than at another. In the present instance, however, no grand jury has had fair play, or an honest chance to present an indictment in th* Dudley case; as has been fully shown by the proceedings and the movements of the court which had the matter in charge. When, therefore, J ohn A. Lang, a reputable and competent citizen of Indiana, within the last thirty days filed his legal and sufficient affidavit before William A. Van Bnren, a United States commissioner, or “a commissioner of th > circuit court” of the United States, charging that William W. Dudley did “knowingly, unlawfully, and feloniously counsel and advise an attempt to bribe voters in Indianajin the year 1888,” there was no power eithei in the discretion of the commissioner himself or in the-partisan dictation of the district attorney to withhold a warrant for the arrest of said Dudley The action of District Attorney Chambers in ordering the warrant not to issu? calls for his summary dismissal from office, unless the administration, of which he is a member, is willing to have the law still further violated in order to still further protect Dudley. It is not worth while to have it put forth and heralded over the country at stated intervals that the Administration did not shake hands with Dudley at the inauguration bal I, and that he now only enters the White House it the back door or not at all. No fairer opportunity can occur than the one now presented io the President to define his position as to Dudley and his crime and its indorsers. It matters not whether District At-

torney Chambers had the legal right to prevent the arrest ot Dudley or not He exercised that right and not only refused to prosecute him. but declared himself in earnest sympathy with the felonions act with which Dudley is charged. Is the President willing so be held responsible for the conduct and the language of his law officer in Indiana, who openly declares the “blocks of five” letter to indicate simply a patriotic interest in the elections? If so, he will allow Smiley N. Chambers to remain in office; if not, he will call very promptly for his resignation. It is true that Chambers is not alone among the leaders of his partv in Indiana in his estimation and adulation of Dudley and his methods, and the President will

require a full share of moral and political courage to take his stand on the side of law and against the indorsers f bribery. The manner of Dudley’s rece f tion on his recent visit to Indianapolis was full of significance as well as full of shame. The district attorney not only protected him from “annoyance,” but the United States marshal paid him obsequious attentions; Judge Woods descended from the bench in open court to welcome him as one full of honors; he was dined as a favored guest by the chairman of

the Republican state central committee, and followed and waited on by hungry applicants for office as if he he’d for them the keys of lire and death. The President himself was never received at his own home with warmer manifesta ions of personal attachment and approval than greeted the hero of a scheme of election bribery at the hands ®f his leading party assooi tes. But Benjamin Harrison is President of the United States, and as such he is called upon to sbur», the disgraceful example and the pernicious influence of the corrupt po. litical coterie at Indianapol s, and by the immediate removal of Chambers throw the weight of his great office in favor of a pure ballot and the swift punishment of those who seek to debauch it.

Sir, the public mind of the country is in no uncertain mood touching this subject. An officer of the courts, whose duty it is to {iroseeute offenders agatnst the aws of his government is found to be in sympathy with the worst type of criminals and to approve as honorable and patriotic the blackest and most odious species of crime. Wh >t security can the people feel for ihe due enforcement of the criminal laws in such hands? A s a non-partisan view of th 3 gravity of this ugly question 1 quote from an article in the Civil Service Chronicle, written by a gentleman' of ability, who supported Harrison and worked hard to elect him.—

(Lucien B. Swift is well known in Indi .na as a repres ntative man. He says: “That Dudley wrote the letter there seems to be no manner of doubt T;»e man who wrote that letter believed in the principles there stated. Some of those principles are Lterally subversive of free government, and M'hen they run their logical course they take a country through corruption an anal chy to the rule of the strongest leader, and to despotism. The man who writes such a letter ought to

be a political and social outcast. He ought to be as much under the ban as Benedict Arnold. Yet Dudley comes to Indianapolis and dines >ith the chairman of the Repub] can state committee. He is called upon and congratulated by men who pass for respectable citizens ** * Therj has never been more convincing proof of how the ways of recent politics have roit d the pul lie conscience. We have, however, one other projf in District Attorn y Chambers,which would if reeded, complete the demonstration.” In the Sp 'ingfield (Mass.) Re■publicafT is the following just conception of election bribery and its far-re ching and fatal consequences:

“ What was the open rebellion of Jefferson Davis compared to this insidious assault upon the bul« walks of free institutions counseled and abetted by Dudley in 1888, and aided and comforted by the Tribune and Feder'l officials acting in the interests of the Administra tion? * * * Now let the Administration declare itself. J Was oi was not the ordinary course of justice interrupted by Federal officials at Indianapolis on the order of any cabinet officer or any superior in the service of the Government?— Did the district attorney shield Colonel Dudley from “annoyance’* at.the command or hint of th«. Administration ?

“If President Harrison is capable of appreciating the gravity of the charges implied in the reports sent out from his home he will hasten an inquiry into the subject. For the question at issue is whether the debauchery of the elective franchise is to be pronounced a legitimate and commendable prac tice by the representatives of a political party, or stamped as a treasonable crime aimed at the life of the state.” From a hundred other soui ces of high intelligence and commanding influence I might read to the Senat j words of similar import— There is a striking agreement of opinion in the best thought of the country as to the giant evil which more than any other at this time threatens tlie very existence of the Government as framed by the fathers. The corrupt use of money with which to prey upon the poverty ana weakness of certain voters who approach the polls in al. the states now darkens the future of this Republic, and will blot out #ll its stars of liberty and of glory in the midnight gloom of a plutocracy unless bribe-givers, ' ribe-takers, and all the advisers, counselors, and indorsers of briber r shall be held in every relation of life as pirates are held on *he high seas, enemies of the human race and legitimate objects of destruction. As well might you expect pure water in a stream flowing from a spring impregnated with deadly poison as to anticipate the blessings of self-government 1 ased upon a system of ballot infected by the leprous taint of money handed to the voter. The money power of this country has been fostered by vicious legislation into enormous and dangerous proportions, and is full of menace to the interests of the people in every direction, but all its evils are insignificant compaied with those which will follow the laying of its unhallowed hand on the ballot-box, the birthright of Americans, the safeguard, the palladium of all our liberties,rights, hopes. Sir, on this theme I speak not alone for Indiana. That noble Commonwealth is in no more danger t han her siser states, except in so far as the fact that she is a political battle-field, with forces of no great disparity, invites scoun dreis with large sums of money and systemized corruption to seek to control enough of those loose and worthless ravelings of humau life known as “floaters,” to secure a dishonest majority. The mass of her people are as incorruptible as any between the two oceans, and I here denounce the slander uttered and implied by District Attorney Chambers, when he said there was no crimin dity in Dudley’s letter “construed in the light of the knowledge that we now possess oi how elections in ndiana are conducted by both parties. ’ in be - half of the great body of the people of both parties in that great state, 1 repudiate this imputation of dishonesty and corruption, as the people themselves will repudiate, at the first opportunity, its author and all who uphold him. 1 ask for the adoption of the preamble and resolutions. Mr. Edn unds having replied, Mr. Voorhees rejoined as follows: Mr. Voorhees. Mr. President, there is a system in the practice of the law in ca n P(l t t, Hfc of attorney and barrister. I believe the barrister holds the attorney’s brief and speaks to the court and jury crom that brief. The senaator from Vermont [Mr.Edmunds] has held this morning the brief of the Attorney-General, and, as barrister, has spoken for him here; and inasmuch as he was coached very thoroughly this forenoon by the Attorney-General in person in this capitol building, I am surprised at the trashy and quibbling character of the stuff that he has trumped up from Indiana. Nobody could have given him such material except somebody charging himself with that duty from the state, and inasmuch as the attorney general was known to call the senatoi from the committee on foreign, relations this morning and hand him his notes, I take it that lam not transcending any rule of propriety in saying that he has spoken the answer of the attorney general to whatever impropriety t may attack to hia conduct.

A shert time since the Indianapolis Sentinel directed its correspondents throughout he state to make diligent inquiry for aspir-ants-for positions on the republican Mate ticket from fheir respective counties and counties adjoin ing them. The Sentinel received a large number of replies, among the following from Jasper county: Rensselaer, Feb. 9.—There is little said on politics here at this time, but the office-seekers are gently at work. This judicial and senatorial district is composed of Jasper Benton an Newton counties, and is republican by a large majoritv. Judge Edwin P. Hammond, of Rensselaer, who was circuit judge for many years, and whojwas appointed to fill a vacancy ob the supreme bench by Gov. Porter, but defeated for the place in 1884, would not be averse to succeeding J udge Mitchell. Peter H. Ward, of Kentland, the present circuit judge, is a candidate to succeed han self, and he will probably receive the nomira’ion; tho’ F. Chilcote, of Rensselaer, an able lawyer and good judicial t'mber, would like the place; but the ringsteis are against him. Senator Thompson will do all in his power to succeed himself. He has been a persistent effiee-seeker for the last twenty years from congressman down to fence viewer; but he has only succeeded in being elected prosecuting attorney two terms and senator one term, a - ways running greatly behind his ticket in his own county. He is a perfect “deg in the manger” in politics, and has but few perse nai friends, but his wealth and the wealth of his relatives makes him an antagonist not to be despised. He is one of the four who refused to do the bidding of the caucus during the winter of ’So--87, which greatly disappointed his supporters, who Always boasted of his genuine republicanism. John F. Johnson, of Newton county, the present representative, will r e a candidate for reselection. He is a harmless nonentity, but will probabb receive the nomination The prosecuting attorney will go o Benton county. Daniel Frasi r, John T Brown and a young man named Gray are ready for the place. The Democrats(,are hopeful, vigilant gand aggressive, and expect to make gains for the state ticket. A number of the friends of Eld. L. E. Conner, pastor of the Church of God, treated him to an agreeable and substantial surprise party lasturday evening-his 29th birthday. On the 25th, Stephen Protzman will offer at public sale, at his residence on the E. L. .ollingsworth larm, a short distance north of the depot, farming implements, stock, etc. Frank Zinina, at his residence, the old Priest farm, in Hanging Grove township, on the 27+h, will oed ou farm implements, stock, etc. -

Just Perfect is what a lady said to us of the March number of “Peterson,” and we can x ully endorse the verdict. The opening engraving is a beautiful picture, and the nnmerous wood illustrations are all capital. The fashion and household departments offer the most varied attractions. “I'he Mother’s Department” and “Things Worth Knowing” should be read by every houskeeper and mother. “Peterson’ is a rare combination of useful, artistic and literary excellence. No other two dollar magazine can boast such a list of contributors as Rebecca Harding Davis, M. G.McClenland, Minna Irving, Lucy H. Hooper, EdgarFawcett,Frank Lee Benedict, Howard Seely, Clarence M. Boutelle and var ious others prominent writers of prose and verse. So far this year it has even surpassed its former nigh standard of excellence in many respects. Terms, $2.00 a year. / ddress,Peteison’s Magazine, No. 306 Chest nut Street, Philadelphia. i Aspirants for a place on tho Demvcrrtic State ticket are becoming numerous. The larest announcements are: For Clerk of Sup;. Court, Andrew M Sweeny, of Dubois county) Auditor 6f State, Geo. 8. Groan Pjsey C>.