Democratic Sentinel, Volume 14, Number 5, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 21 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. [Concluded.*] Now, Mr. President, a few words as to the points made by the senator from Vermont. Mr. Sellers, who, the senator has been informed resigned because he did not wish to prosecute these cases and because material had accumulated before the grand jury that he- did not want to handle, placed his resignation on the files of the Department of Justice, stating that the reason why he was compelled 10 resign the office was that his partner, whom I know well, Jrdge Reynolds, had been elected judge of his circuit, and he was compelled reluctantly to re; ign the office of United States district attorney to go back home and take charge of the large and lucrative business abandoned because Judge Reynolds had been placed bench. That letter is on file m the Department of Justice, and the attorney general|knew it was there whim he informed ti.s senator of Mr. Sellers’s resignation; otherwise

the senator would rot have known it. I know the senator too well to suppose he has hunted up these things tor himself. I have no de sire to say a harsh or unkind word, but I do not intend willingly to be imposed or allow the senate to be imposed upon by statements of this kind. X repeat, the United States die* trict attorney, whom the senator, paraded here as resigning because there matters he did not wish to handle or prosecute before that grand jurv, resigned and gave as his reason in writing, which is now in the Dep rtment of Justice, that his practice compelled him to go back to his home because of the eleration of his partner to the judgeship. So much for that. The senator then desired the senate and these galleries to understand that Judge Claypeol did not wish to prosecute cases of this character. Judge Claypool was appointed by the President and then designated by Judge Harlan to prosecute the pleas of the Government; and when Judge Woods gave his second charge, perverting the law and overruling his first charge, cutting the Dudley case up by the roots, and ! n' ended to do ao, thereupon ensued a scene between Judge Woods and Judge CL.ypoolin which Judge Claypool to his face and in his teeth told him he had disgraced the judicial robes he wore, disgraced his manhood, and falsified his own convictions of the law.

If the senator had not brought such matters here I would not say these things; but tho people of Indiana know what is true, and they know that, instead of Judge Claypool going away from tho discharge of his duty, he pursued Judge Woods till hs delivered that false ruling, and when he did he took supreme satisfaction out of him face to face, as ho always will. That is tho history of these twe district attorneys whom the senator stands here, posted by the attorney general, and says to the senate and the American' people failed of their duties! Again, Mr. President, the senator speaks of the failure of Dem ocratic courts and prosecuting attorneys of the state oourts to ars raign Dudley and indict him and piosecnte him. At the time Dudley’s letter was written the state of Indiana had no law on her statute books punishing an advisor, punishing one who advised an attempt at bribery. Ii was found alone in the code of the United States. But a succeeding legislature has enacted that law now, and if Dudley or

any other friend of the senator from Vermont Mr. Edmunds rose. Mr. Voorhees. The senator in rising forgets that he refused to yiold to me. Mr. Edmunds. Oh, no; Ido not. Mr. Voorhees. I say if Dudley or any other friend of the e nator repeats the offense of advising the bribery of voters in Indiana there 7 8 a law now that will settle them in short order. Mr. President, the Martinsville letter, heard of now by me for the first tim , is far less than nothing. It is nothing at a discount. Nothing of the kin was ever heard of in the state before, and I think I know what is going on there pretty well.

The senator from Vermont, posted by his attorney —and he ought to act in the capacity of attorney to a lawyer of the rank of the senator from Vermont —introduced the Cov case. Yes, Coy was sent to the penitentiary for eighteen months in the woiet partisan, arbitrary, unfair, and malicious court that has been organized since Jeffreys, and to show the sentiment that was entertained as to Coy’s conviction it is only necessary to say that when he returned with a pardon, which public opinion enfore don Harrison, so far as the fine of a thousand do Jars was concerned, in a ward which has a

Republican majority, he offered himself as a candidate and was elected by the largest majority he ever had. That is the comment of the people on the ruling of J udge Ho ds—Republicans voting for Coy as well as Democrats, pardoned by a Republican President! Now make the most of that. The rendition of that meaning is that, so infamous was the ruling of Judge Woods that placed Coy in the penitentiary, the people, irres pective of party, spit upon it, scorned it, and put their ban upon it, the very first opportunity they had. That is the Coy case.

The poor hous * and the jail! I should like to ask th£ senator from Vermont whether the attorney general told him the number of paupers that were voted; and, if he did, whe her the superintendent of that poor, house, who had had control of it for twenty ye-rs .iD the interest of the Republican party, had not always voted the same men. I should like to know of the senator whether the attorney general gave him any information on that point.

Now, Mr. President, turning away from this trifling with a great question, this poor trifling, this attempt to belittle it in a manner unbecoming a pettifogger betere a justice of the peace, what ansXver does the senator make to the grave fact that justice has been denied against a momber of their national commiHee who used the authority of that committee? The senator says he does not kno.v whether the letter is genuine or not. I shall

commit no impropriety in saying that I think he does know it. But admitting that he does not know it, I will say that ever body else does. Everybody knows that a man who brings a suit for a forgery, if it is a forgery, prosecutes. If it was brought far a blind, as I saiu in my opening remarks, for the purpose of causing the people to believe a lie uitil an eleetiqo|iß over, then he will ru away from the case. He rushed into the conrts of New York and clamored for justice before the election. The eleotion over he turns from the state cl New York and has never since put foot there so far as the perries to this suit know, and yet . sena f or rises in his place and says wr do not know wnether this is a forgery or not and utters platitudes about the Morey letter. Why, everybody sees what it is. 1 condone wrong

in no quarter, if the senator from Vermont was in earnest upon this proposition would he turn around aad say that somebody else had done wrong and therefore he was in doubt about this? By no means, Mr. President.

In regard to the resolution before the senate, I see bo objection to the amendment offered by the senator from Vermont, exoept that he has, whether bv desigr or bv accident, left out what is oont >inr-d in my resolution calling upon the attorney general to inform us by what authority the district attorney ordered a warrant not to issue against Dudley . I will simply say Mr. President, that I desire a vote upon the preamble and the resolutions which I have offered. If thev are not adopted, we shall see what we can do next. They contain an honest statement of the case, and on it 1 desire to have a vote of the senate.