C7S 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 013 789 108 6 
 
 pH8^ 
 
E 673 
 .C75 
 Copy 1 
 
 America. Germany. Ymt^, 
 The Administration \ia^d?f,?ted, 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF -—V. 
 
 \y' 
 
 ROSCOE CONKLING, 
 
 OF" ]SrE^V\r YOKK, 
 
 DBLITERED { 
 
 IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES, 
 
 f 
 FEBRUARY 19, 1872. 
 
 « Let aU tbe enda thon alm'st at 1»« thy Country's." 
 
 WASHINGTON: /^^^ash.^^ 
 
 P. & J. RIVES & GEO. A. BAILEY, 
 
 EEPORTERS AND PBINTERS OF THE DEBATES Off CONQBKSS. 
 1872. 
 
/ 
 
 
i 
 
 America- Germany. France The Adminislralion Vindicated 
 
 On tbe 12th of February. 1372, Mr. Svmnbe. of 
 Massachusetts, ofiFcred a long preamble charging the 
 authorities of the United States with violating neu- 
 trality toward Prussia in the late Franco-German 
 war by selling arms to France. The preamble also 
 charged American officials with corruption. 
 
 A resolution followed raising a special committee 
 to inquire into all the charges, and also into other 
 matters nottouchingtheGovernment or officials, but 
 relating to the mercantile affairs of American citi- 
 Eens. 
 
 No objection wa« mnde to an immediate vote on 
 the motion, but Mr. Sumnbe asked delay. 
 
 On the 14th day of February, Mr. Somnbr asked 
 to put aside all other business and take up his mo- 
 tion. This was promptly voted, and an immediate 
 investigation was offered by the Republican Sen- 
 atorB. A vote was noi permitted, but Mr. Sumnkr, 
 and afterward Mr. Schurz, delivered elaborate 
 speeches reiterating and enlarging the charges, and 
 reading newspaper and other uiatements to prove 
 them in advance. 
 
 On the 19th of February- 
 Mr. CONKLINGBaid: 
 
 Mr. PuesidlENt: Nearly five months of thia 
 session have gone — March, April, December, 
 January, have gone, and nearly the whole of 
 February. Legislation waits, and debate goes 
 on, only for political effect. The appropriation 
 bills are put aside. They ought to be acted on 
 now, while they may be deliberately sifted and 
 freed from errors which will escape us in the 
 haste of belated consideration. The revision of 
 the tariff which ouijht to be made, has not yet 
 been made. No action has been taken upon the 
 bill which ought to strike forty millions of in- 
 ternal taxes from the shoulders of enterprise 
 ar.d labor, which ought to disband the remnant 
 of the army of internal revenue collectors, and 
 reduce the internal revenue establishment to a 
 skeleton. These bills and others wait. Need- 
 less political discussion blocks the way. 
 
 If right were the opposite of wrong, this 
 could- not be right; but rights are of many 
 kinds, and some rights are the twins of wr»ng. 
 The Constitution says a Senator shall not be 
 questioned in any other place for that he utters 
 here ; and thus a Senator may, by preamble 
 
 and by speech, slander his countrymen, slan- 
 der his Government, slander his country, and 
 place it in a false position before the nations 
 of the earth. All this may be done to the 
 hurt of the public business, to the peril of the 
 nation's interests at home and abroad ; and 
 there may be no aim or reason in it except to 
 affect a presidential election, and to gratify 
 passion and wreak vengeance on individuals. 
 It may be done boldly in plain words, or it 
 may be done by vague and cunning hints ; it 
 may be best done by insinuation, the moat 
 deadly weapon in slander's virulent vocabu- 
 lary. However it be done, if it be done and 
 time be wasted iu debate, the waste must be 
 charged to those who bring on debate and 
 insist upon it. 
 
 The Senator from Ma-ssachusetts would 
 have delay. He would not have investigation, 
 he would have debate. He would not have 
 businesa, he would have talk. He would pre- 
 cede investigation by a speech which fills 
 seven columns in the Globe, and which could 
 not go unchallenged. He would utter state- 
 ments in advance, which could not eecap« 
 exposure and denial. 
 
 He said his speech was not political. What 
 was it? What was its aim and object? Was 
 it to obtain investigation? The whole Senate 
 proffered that. To use a favorite expression 
 of the Senator's, the proposition to investii^te 
 was '"hailed" throughout the Chamber ; there 
 was not one dissenting voice. " Turn on the 
 lights," " Turn on the lights," was the demand 
 on every side the moment we heard the dark 
 insinuations of the Senator. He himself, and 
 he alone, asked that his resolution should lie 
 over and not be acted upon at the time he 
 introduced it. He himself requested that 
 it should wait, that debate might proceed ; 
 and I pause here to send to the Secretary the 
 New York Tribune, from which I ask that an 
 editorial may be read. I have marked it. 
 
 The Chief Clerk read as follows from the 
 New York Tribune of February 15, 1872: 
 
 The Armi Soandnl. — If we regarded the defea.t 
 of the renomination of Oeuoral Grant as the sole 
 
object and end of political work at this moment, 
 we would be perfectly satisfied with the perform- 
 ances of his thick-and-tbin partisans in the Senate 
 and in the press. If they had a particle of sagacity 
 left they would not for a moment suffer themselves 
 to be placed in a position so humiliating and so 
 untenable as that which they have voluntarily as- 
 sumed. When Senator Sumner iutroduced his res- 
 olution calling for the oppointmeiU of a committee 
 to inventiaute the suapicious circumstances con- 
 nected with the sale of United States arms to the 
 agents of the French Oevernment of National De- 
 fense, thePrcBident's partisans in the Senate at first 
 prevented the consideration of tlie resolution., while 
 their liveried organ in New \ork followed its usual 
 custom of denouncing the Senator who introduced 
 the resolution, ascribing to him and to all who sup- 
 port the demand for an inquiry those mean motives 
 which alone it is able to comprehend. Is it possible 
 that they knoxo what they are doing? Do they not 
 see thut this is the course which leads to the utter 
 ruin of politicians and of parties f This is a matter 
 which cannot be hid out of sight. Every moment 
 of resistance increases the general suspicion and 
 indignation. For a day the country and the inde- 
 pendent press axoaited the action of the Senite. 
 During this pause of attention the janizaries of the 
 Senate and their newsijaper lackeys drew a breath 
 of relief, and one of them yesterday began to exult 
 that the movement for investigation had, to use its 
 own choice English, 'fallen comparatively still- 
 born.' They saw a new light on the subject yes- 
 terday, however, and the resolution passed with- 
 out serious opposition. Now, let no one resist or 
 delay a thorough and searching examination of this 
 matter." 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I take the Senate to wit- 
 ness the calumny there recorded ; I take the 
 Senator from Massachusetts himself to witness 
 it. I refer to the records of the Senate, to 
 the Journal, and the Globe, to prove that 
 the Senator himself, and the Senator alone, 
 requested that no action should be taken 
 on the resolution when it was brought for- 
 ward, but that it might lie over and wait. 
 Mr. SUMNER. Lie over and be printed. 
 Mr. CONKLING. "Lie over and be 
 printed." Of course lie over and wait. The 
 Senator chose his own time to call it up, and 
 the Senate voted to put aside all else that the 
 Senator might proceed. Yet, Mr. President, 
 such is the violence done to truth in a wanton 
 and ruthless crusade for political effect. 
 
 What was the aim and object of the Sena- 
 tor's speech? It could not be to secure in- 
 vestigation. No plea was needed to obtain 
 inquiry ; there has never been a moment since 
 the resolution was heard that the Senator 
 coutd escape inquiry had he wished to do so. 
 What was tbe purpose of his speech ? Was it 
 to prejudge the truth and forecast it against 
 us? Was it to assist France and French 
 claim agents in prosecuting claims against 
 American ruerchauls and American citizens? 
 Was it meant to gender suspicion and rouse 
 passionate resentment toward those charged 
 with executive affairs? Was it meant to make 
 the Germans of America believe that bigli 
 Republican officials had clutched French blood- 
 money in a war in which the whole Republican 
 heart beat for Germany? Was it meant to 
 help the Democratic party out of its plight of 
 sympathy and partisanship for France through- 
 out the German war? Was it thought that the 
 Germans of America could be persuaded that 
 
 there went from a Republican Administra- 
 tion a prayer, a hope, or a wish for French 
 success on the burning battle fields where 
 Germans and Germany won imperishable re- 
 nown? Was it meant to compromise or con- 
 vict us before the world for having been false 
 to national morals and national vows? Was it 
 meant to befoul us in the ey^^s of Christendom ; 
 to say to England and to Germany, now when 
 Germany's emperor is about to sit as umpire 
 upon claims of ours, that the Republic of 
 Ainerica had been more perfidious than Eng- 
 land ever was? I will read two brief edito- 
 rials, one from the New York World, and one 
 from the New York Sun, to show the impres- 
 sion produced upon the press and the public 
 by this strange proceeding. The World says: 
 
 "There was a deliberate violation of the neutral 
 obligations of tbe United States. Our Government 
 behaved altogether worse toward Germany than the 
 British ever did toward us in the gloomiest period 
 of our civil war. The Government establishments 
 were worked to their fullest capacity iu manufactur- 
 ing cartridges for France to be used against Ger- 
 many. The most improved patterns of arms were 
 sold to the agents of France out of the national 
 arsenals. The worst that we have ever charged 
 against England is that she permitted private indi- 
 viduals to build ships for the confederates. But our 
 Government did not merely allow the Fernch agents 
 to purchase arms and ammunition of private manu- 
 facturers, but set all the public establishments in 
 full activity to manufacture these things for France 
 to be used against Germany. This scandalous affair 
 will turn the whole voting German population of 
 the United States against General Grant." 
 
 The Sun says: 
 
 "Another point of equal, if not greater import- 
 ance, is the fact, which also seems to be proved by 
 official evidence, that the workshops of the War 
 Department were employed during the period in 
 question iu manufacturing cartridges for the I^rench 
 Government. It appears that France would not buy 
 the arms unless ammunition was furnished to use in 
 them; and so great was the power of the military 
 ring of speculators that they were able to cruse the 
 War Department to furnish these cartridges. This 
 was a violation of the laws of neutrality and of 
 international obligations far exceedingall that Eng- 
 land can be charged with for allowing the Alabama, 
 the Florida, and the other confederate cruisers to 
 depart from her ports upon their errand of destruc- 
 tion. In that case she was guilty of negligence ; but 
 in the case of the ammunition manufactured for the 
 French during their war with Germany General 
 Grant's administration was guilty of taking direct 
 part in the war." 
 
 Mr. President, what other impression have 
 the Senators from Massachusetts and Missouri 
 been laboring to produce? What oiher impres- 
 sion did they suppose was to come from the 
 assertions of the preamble, and the speeches 
 with which they followed it? Bismarck had 
 not complu.ned that we had violated the duties 
 of neutrality. I Lave a right from the evi- 
 dence before us to say that he approved the 
 propriety of our course. That true German, 
 and Christian gentleman. Baron Von Gerolt, 
 who at the time represented the North German, 
 Confederation here, never criticised or took 
 umbrage at our sales of stores. The origin 
 of these criticisms and charges is widely difi'er- 
 ent ; and what impression, 1 repeat, except the 
 one these newspapers reflect, was expected 
 froiu such manifestoes at such a time? 
 
I have seen an attempt to gild the nnpa- 
 triotic features of this proceeding by saying 
 that the charge is not aimed at the American 
 people. Mr. President, that will not do. The 
 lacquer is too thin. We never charged the 
 British people with building and fitting out 
 rams for the rebels, and making England a 
 naval base for the confederacy. We did not 
 say the people of Britain permitted these acts. 
 We charged the British Government with guilt, 
 and our charge meant treaty or war. And when 
 these Senators charge the American Govern- 
 ment, the acknowledged authorities of our 
 country, with acts such as are depicted and 
 insinuated in this preamble, it will not do to 
 say the charge is harmless because it is not 
 leveled at the whole American people. It is 
 in effect leveled at the whole American people. 
 If the charge were true, the nation aggrieved 
 would have the right to hold America respons- 
 ible. 
 
 Listen again to some of the imputations we 
 have heard. I read the words of the Senator 
 from Massachusetts as they stand recorded in 
 the Globe : 
 
 "And now, sir, I present this case on suspicions 
 aroused abroad and apparently sustained by docu- 
 ments here at home. That is al . * * „ 
 "American officials suspected 1 Who, sir ^ How 
 SHSpected? Eminent they must be if their names 
 or their positions are known in France ; not without 
 evidence, if suspicion has been awakened so lar 
 away." 
 
 And then, quoting what my friend from 
 New Jersey [Mr. Fbelinghuysen] most aptly 
 styled "the brag of a broker" that he had the 
 "strongest influences" at work for him, the 
 Senator continued : 
 
 " ' The strongest influences working fnr «s.' Sir. 
 •what are the 'strongest influences?' They could 
 not be men in the streets or mere attorneys hired 
 for the occasion; hardly members of Congress; they 
 must be men near the business in hand. 
 
 Who are these insinuations meant to hit? 
 What impression are they meant to carry 
 abroad ? Can you imagine a British peer utter- 
 in*^ words like these in the House of Lords at 
 random ? Can you imagine a British peer utter- 
 ing such words about his Government unless 
 they were wrung from him by conviction after 
 thorough examination, and when judgment and 
 conscience would no longer permit him to 
 doubt? Can you understand the utterance of 
 SQch words by an American Senator unless he 
 had made sure of his ground ? Can you imagine 
 a Senator professing to belong to the political 
 party charged with the administration of the 
 Government, making such statements in his 
 place, without having ^aken every pains to ascer- 
 tain their truth, ay, without having taken a 
 bond of fate to guard against mistake? 
 
 The Senator tells us he knew of this subject 
 before December. Ay, long before Decem- 
 ber. I speak in the hearing of Senators who 
 know that weeks before December, this mat- 
 ter was being prepared and trained as a mine, 
 the explosion of which would destroy officials 
 "eminent" indeed, even higher than the rep- 
 
 resentatives of the people, higher than mem- 
 bers of Congress. 
 
 The honorable Senator says he kept his 
 design locked up in the depths of his own 
 consciousness. He revealed it to no one. 
 Let me read his words : 
 
 "At any rate, I know that no human being had 
 reason to suppose I was to move in it until I did. 
 
 Here, Mr. President, is a remarkable phe- 
 nomenon. The substance of this portentous 
 preamble and resolution, was published in 
 Boston, in Chicago, and in Cincinnati, before 
 it was presented here, with an announcement 
 that it was to be presented on the next day. 
 Can anything be found in clairvoyance or 
 psychology to exceed this? Burke said the 
 age of chivalry had passed away ; but clearly 
 the age of miracles is still upon us. 
 
 We know that the honorable Senator is very 
 near the press; but there is nothing in the 
 nearness of Damon and Pythias, nor of Romeo 
 and Juliet, which comes so close to absolute 
 oneness as this. I might borrow the language 
 of a hymn, and say of the newspaper men and 
 the Senator — 
 
 " They know the words he means to speak 
 Ere from his opening lips they break." 
 
 [Laughter.] 
 
 It is marvelous that such silence, such reti- 
 cence, such reluctance, should not have kept 
 this huge affair from being darkly hinted in 
 political circles for months, and from being 
 recorded in newspapers before it broke upon 
 the ears of the Senate. It is possible that as 
 men engaged in daring and perilous ventures, 
 sometimes cast lots as to which shall do the 
 deed, so there was, down to a recent period, 
 some doubt as to who should bear the match 
 that was to fire the fuse, that was to explode 
 the bomb, that was to destroy a dreaded pres- 
 idential candidate, and disable all who sustain 
 him. The cast of characters may not have 
 been agreed on, nor the heavy part given to 
 the Senator till late. 
 
 But the Senator from Massachusetts knew 
 of the matter for weeks ; did he take one 
 natural, one generous or just step to ascertain 
 the truth of his assertions? He alleges in his 
 preamble — and I wish once more to call atten- 
 tion to the language— this : 
 
 " It appears from the official report of the Secre- 
 tary of War that in the year 1870-71 the sale of ord- 
 nance stores reached the sum of $10,000,000, from 
 which, according to the report, only a small sum was 
 retained to meet the expenses of preparing other 
 stores for sale" — 
 
 Now mark, Mr. President : 
 
 " while the official report of the Secretary of the 
 Treasury for the same year acknowledges the receipt 
 of only $8,286,131 70, showing a difference of over 
 $1,700,000." 
 
 This charge I understand to be withdrawn 
 now ; but why was it published and sent 
 throughout two hemispheres? That is the ques- 
 tion, ''l have heard the Senator quote a say- 
 ing which he thinks started with Fisher Ames, 
 
6 
 
 that a lie will run a mile while the truth is 
 putting on its shoes and stockings; and why 
 was such a calumny sent to traverse earih 
 and sea without some pains being taken in 
 advance to see whether even apparently it had 
 the shadow of foundation? 'Ihe very official 
 report referred to, on its face disproves it. No 
 allegation can be more false, none more palpa- 
 bly false, than the allegation that the finance 
 report in question acknowledges the receipt of 
 only $8,286,131. It is doubly untrue. First, 
 no such thing appears ; and second, the reverse 
 appears. 
 
 One word from the Secretary of the Treas- 
 nry, one word from any clerk connected with 
 the accounts in the Treasury Department, 
 would have dispelled and exploded this de- 
 lusion. The War Department is in sight of 
 the windows of the Senator from Massachu- 
 setts. In that Department lies a record, an 
 original record, proving immutably by items 
 every sale of arms. The lodgings of the Sec- 
 retary of War are divided from the lodgings 
 of the Senator from Massachusetts, only by a 
 street. A biscuit can be tossed froni one to 
 the other. Knowing of this subject since be- 
 fore December, did the honorable Senator 
 take the pains to inquire of his neighbor and 
 constituent, the Secretary of the Treasury, or 
 of his immediate neighbor here, the Secretary 
 of War? No, sir. I have a right to say no, 
 for I pressed the Senator upon that point. 
 When he objected to an interruption by the 
 Senator from Iowa [Mr. Harlan] to correct 
 his Associated Press dispatch, I asked him 
 whether he had taken the trouble to inquire 
 if the sale he sought to show by the news- 
 paper, had in fact occurred, the statement of 
 the Secretary of War not showing it ; and his 
 answer stands recorded : 
 
 " I have held no communication with the Depart- 
 menton the subject." 
 
 No communication with the Department; 
 but the tedious labor of rolling back and ran- 
 sacking newspaper files was not distasteful 
 when the object was to impeach the word of 
 the Secretary of War ; and accordingly, the 
 ponderous files of the New York Times were 
 turned back a year and three months, to find 
 an Associated Press dispatch in October, 
 1870— for what ? To prove that the Secretary 
 of War certified falsely when he sent a com- 
 munication to the House rendering an account 
 of his stewardship in the disposition of ord- 
 nance stores. 
 
 But whatwilltheSenatethink,if itturns out 
 that this Associated Press dispatch, brought in 
 for such a purpose, nowhere slates any sale of 
 arms or of ordnance stores ? Let me read It: 
 
 " The bids under the advertisements of October 
 17, opened at tho Ordnance Bureau yesterday, are 
 OS follows." 
 
 "The bids- opened are as follows" — not 
 an intimation that they were accepted; not 
 a statement whether they were rejected or 
 accepted ; but the Senator, with the Treasury 
 Depaitment on his way to the Capitol, with 
 
 the Secretary of War at his elbow, waited 
 through the gay and leisurely holiday season, 
 and came into the Senate in the month of 
 February, no question having been asked of 
 either Secretary, and read, that the natioQ 
 might hear, an Associated Press dispatch, 
 empty in fact, and introduced for no purpose 
 save to impeach the word of the Secretary of 
 War. 
 
 But this was not enough. The Secretary 
 was to be chased yet further with the hot foot 
 of hostile eagerne^. The Senator saya: 
 "They"— 
 
 That is, the authorities — 
 "took no initiative, but sent a report to the other 
 House which on examination excited still further 
 suspicion." * * « * "But, sir, this report 
 which I hold in my hand, nnd which was sent hero 
 to counteract the inquiry already foreseen "— 
 
 There is a pleasant suggestion. For gener- 
 ous candor and charity, commend me to a fling 
 like that. Let nie give a moment to it. Sent 
 to Congress " to counteract the inquiry already 
 foreseen 1" Why should the Secretary of War 
 wish to thwart an inquiry ; why could he wish to 
 thwart it, except that " conscience dues make 
 cowards of us all?" Does not every one see the 
 imputation, the double imputation, in this lan- 
 guage : first, that the Secretary of War had a 
 guilty consciousness, the black drop in his 
 heart we call guilty motive, to escape the 
 investigation ; and second, that he made aa 
 attempt to circumvent and evade investigation 
 by a trick upon the House of Repreeealativee ? 
 But further says the Senator : 
 
 " If you look at it"— 
 
 That is, at this report — 
 " you will find on its face— how shall I express it ?— 
 an incompleteness, if not a slovenline* of prepara- 
 tion. Here is this long list containinj the amount 
 of sales, but there is no addition, thtre ia no nun 
 total at the end. Why waa that otniitedf J hope 
 before thia debate ia over that there will be »ome 
 explanation of it. J hawi }ieard of an explanation 
 from an important quarter, and J await communica- 
 tion of it by soma other Senator. I havi taid that thia 
 report, eent to the other Chamber aa an anrwer in ad- 
 vance to any poieible inquiry, ia ineowtplete/ I am 
 almost ready to aay painfully incomplete." 
 
 The row of figures was not added up I Mr. 
 President, it was Paul — Paul, the noblest advo- 
 cate that ever stood before a court — who said, 
 "Though I speak with the tongue of men and 
 of angels, and have not charity, I am become 
 aa sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal. 
 
 "0,. beware, my lord of jealousy; 
 It is the green-eyed monster which doth mook 
 The meat it feeds on." 
 
 A great master tells us that — 
 " Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind." 
 
 How can a suspicion so unworthy, so base- 
 less, so barbarous, find harbor in a breast so 
 guileless, so generous, so gentle, so just? 
 
 Mr. President, a scent less keen, eyes less 
 bloodshot, prejudices less blinding, passions 
 less unpitying, would have avoided many errors 
 in this ugly business. Let me speak of one 
 strange blunder, if blunder it be, of which you 
 have not heard. One of the most odious and 
 
enormous charges of the preamble ia this: it 
 13 alleged, in substance, that France paid our 
 Government for arms a great sura of money, 
 and that our "oflScials" have not accounted for 
 it, but that a deficit is shown by the accounts. 
 The Senate will see the elements of this charge. 
 The first element is, of course, a purchase from 
 our Government ; because if the purchase was 
 not from the Government, no such charge, or 
 question, or defici'' "v, could exist. The pre- 
 amble refers to ' c»athority for this accusa- 
 tion. What is the authority? The French 
 account, as it appears in the report of a French 
 commission. The Senator from Massachu- 
 setts produced this report, and he aud the 
 Senator from Missouri both used it, and re- 
 ferred to it, to sustain, and they stated that it 
 did sustain, the allegation based upon it. I 
 read now from the preamble: 
 
 Whereas a oomparison of the acoonnts rendered 
 by the French Government for moneys expended by 
 its. agents in the purchase of arms from the United 
 States, and the accounts rendered by the Govern- 
 ment of the United States for moneys received in 
 the same transaction, show a large ditference, which 
 aeeina to hax>e. given rine to the mmpicion abroad thai 
 United Statea oficiaUs have taken an undue part 
 therein. 
 
 It will be seen that the marrow of this 
 count of the indictment is that the United 
 States was the seller. The averment is that 
 the money was expended " in the purchase of 
 arms from the United States." The intention 
 ofthe draughtsman does notrest upon the words 
 ^^from the United States" a'.one, because the 
 sentence concludes by saying that " United 
 States officials^' are those suspected in the 
 transaction. Thus the Senate will see that 
 the pith of this specification, and the whole 
 sting and force of it, is that arms were pur- 
 chased "from" the United States. If arms 
 were only purchased in the United States, if 
 they were only purchased of citizens and mer- 
 chants in America, it would be absurd to talk 
 about the Government as a party to the sales ; 
 or of " officials," as those who made commis- 
 sions or profits. The record produced of the 
 French report in which the account of moneys 
 paid is given, was the New York Sun. Here 
 U is— the Sun of July 12, 1871. 
 
 The Senator from Massachusetts and the 
 Senatorfrom Missouri adopted this translation, 
 and brought it forward. I have taken the 
 trouble to look also at the original in the 
 French paper, and poor as are my attainments 
 in foreign tongues, I venture the prediction 
 that no doubt will be set up as to the correct- 
 ness ofthe translation inthe respects to which 
 I now call attention. I hold up the record, 
 and deny the truth of the version which has 
 been given of it. I say there is no such ac- 
 count as we have had quoted to us. There is 
 no_ statement of hint that a farthing was ever 
 paid to the United Stales for arms ; there is 
 no hint in this record that arms were ever pur- 
 chased/7-o?« the United Stales. The assertion 
 in the preamble is a perversion ; it is more, it 
 is a fabrication out of whole cloth. The lan- 
 
 guage is more than tortured, it is more than 
 garbled ; the true language and sense is omitted 
 and suppressed, and other language with dif- 
 ferent aud opposite meaning is put in its place. 
 I read the PVench record. First comes the 
 Sun's editorial preface. It is of value on the 
 point I make, because the chief editor of the 
 Sun is one of the most accomplished linguists 
 in our land, and with a French paper before 
 him, he knows what he sees. This is hia intro- 
 ductory remark : 
 
 " The commission immediately entered upon its 
 labors, and on the 27th of June, Mr. I/'on Riant, to 
 whom had been intrusted tbe investigation of the 
 purchases of arms and ammunition hero in New 
 York, presented to the Assembly his special report." 
 
 Observe the statement: "purchases here in 
 New York," not in Washington or of the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States. 
 
 Now I come to the passage marked by the 
 Senator from Massachusetts. The editor says: 
 
 " In order that our readers may understand the 
 whole matter we give a translation of the report of 
 M. Rinnt in full, as we find it in the Journal Otiicial 
 de la Ropublique Fran^aise, June 28." 
 
 I read now the opening passage ofthe report?: 
 
 ''The commission of armament, led at the outset 
 of its operations by the insufficiency of the European 
 production, to effect purchases of arms in the United 
 
 States "— 
 
 "In the United States," not "from the Uni- 
 ted States." Then follows some figures ; and 
 I come to the second passage marked by the 
 
 Senator; 
 
 " The majority of the arms purchased in the Uni- 
 ted States have been delivered by the firm of R«m- 
 ington, or purchased by its intervention," &o. 
 
 Nothing is said of purchases from the Uni- 
 ted States. Tbe only statement bearing on 
 the point is that the United States is the coun- 
 try in which the purchases were made. 
 
 Here, then, is the truth of the matter. The 
 French commission make report of arms 
 bought in the United States, of arms bought 
 in New York, of arms bought in the American 
 market, of American dealers. The commis- 
 sion does not report that any arms were 
 bought from the United States, or that any 
 transaction in arms ever took place with the 
 Government of the United States — no such 
 thing. Yet this report, written and printed fn 
 a foreign tongue, is produced here by reference 
 and statement, to show not what it does show, 
 but what it does not show. The difference 
 between the fact and the assertion is as plain 
 as between black and white. It is a vital and 
 a convenient difference. Truly rendered, the 
 report has nothing to do with the case, and 
 cannot touch any ofiicial ; but as it has been 
 rendered, it has everything to do with the case, 
 and soils American officials. Token in con- 
 nection with the animus to be seen throughout 
 this affair, this error is very suggestive. Such 
 a mistake on atrial for horse stealing, might 
 disbar an attorney, or rob a witness of his 
 liberty. I make no statement or suggestion 
 who is guilty of this error or offense. I do not 
 know. It would have been a feariul mistake 
 
8 
 
 in a case where the rights of an individual 
 were staked, it is a graver matter where the 
 rights and the good name of a nation are in 
 the scales. We have heard something of a 
 book-keeper, who compared this account with 
 the accounts in our Departments. He was not 
 named, his name seemed a secret, but if this 
 be his handiwork, and he continues his trade, 
 he may yet leave a — 
 
 " Name to other times 
 Linked with one virtue and a thousand crimes." 
 
 I wish to guard my statement here, and I 
 ask my honorable friend from Vermont, [Mr. 
 Edmunds,] who has scanned this report and 
 translation more closely than I, to witness my 
 assertion. Referring to the passages marked, 
 (which I have looked at and answer for, myself,) 
 and referring also to the entire report, there 
 is not, I think, anywhere a statement or a hint 
 that arms or ordnance stores were bought from 
 the United States, but only a description of 
 them as having been purchased in the United 
 States. 
 
 Mr. EDMUNDS. No place in it where they 
 are spoken of as ever having belonged to the 
 United States. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I repeat the answer of 
 the honorable Senator, as it may not have 
 reached the ears of all the Senate, namely, 
 that there is no place in that report in which 
 it appears that these arms were ever owned 
 by the United States. 
 
 Mr. President, how comes all this succes- 
 sion of errors or misstatements in this pream- 
 ble? There is not one substantial averment 
 which has not been pulverized. How came 
 they there ? I submit to the Senator himself, 
 whether that care and caution due from the 
 highest and the humblest in matters affecting 
 thtj rights of even individuals, would not have 
 shunned errors so manifold and so monstrous. 
 If the credulity of any Senator has been im- 
 posed upon, I suggest it is high time that it 
 should be admitted. 
 
 But blunders are not all, and blunders 
 were not enough. The preamble was not 
 enough ; the speeches by which it was 
 to be followed, were not enough. The 
 affair must be huge and sensational to the 
 utmost. There must be lightning all around 
 the sky. The occasion must be full of signs 
 and wonders. Stars must shoot madly from 
 their spheres. The whole continent must 
 stand aghast, and its blood must freeze at the 
 audacity and monstrosity of official sin. The 
 whole thing must be grand, gloomy, and pecu- 
 liar. We must have a select committee. The 
 stage must be crowded with startling and 
 theatrical effects! Why a select committee? 
 Two months ago the Senate was libeled for 
 days if not weeks, because it was suggested 
 that it might be wise and convenient to dis- 
 tribute investigations among different com- 
 mittees ; that it might not be best to have one 
 committee for all investigations. We were 
 told then, in no polite or measured phrase, 
 
 that to distribute investigations between dif- 
 ferent committees, was to cloak fraud and 
 stifle investigation. We must have one com- 
 mittee, we were told, a standing committee, 
 a committee on retrenchment and investiga- 
 tion, and this committee, scouring earth and 
 sea, must investigate everything. We raised 
 the committee. The rest of us have been 
 compelled to refer investigations far more sub- 
 stantial and useful than this, to that committee. 
 Why should not this investigation go there 
 also ? Mr. President, I will tell you why. 
 There was something beyond the sensation to 
 be produced when the people of the country 
 should see the curtain rise and discover the 
 honorable Senator from Massachusetts with a 
 special committee of seven at his back. The 
 sensation would of course have been immense, 
 the committee would have been majestic, ana 
 the affair such a mammoth, that the committee 
 in charge of it must have nothing else to do. 
 But something beyond this great tableau was 
 hoped for in a special Committee. It would, 
 of course, if the Senator from Massachusetts 
 was to head it, be ;,>., deeply biased committee. 
 Had the original mo'tion for a retrenchment 
 committee prevailed literally as it was offered 
 last April and again last December ; had the 
 motion prevailed to revive the old committee 
 of which the Senator from New Hampshire, 
 now absent, [Mr. Patterson,] was chairman, 
 and from which he had been transferred to the 
 chairmanship of another committee, leaving 
 the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Schubz] the 
 seniormember of the retrenchment committee ; 
 had that original resolution literally prevailed, 
 and cast upon the Vice President the duty of 
 reviving the old committee, hampered as he 
 would then have been by parliamentary usage 
 and etiquette, the Senator from Missouri would 
 have been the chairman of the committee. 
 Had this snug result been brought about, we 
 should have had no motion for a special com- 
 mittee here, the "eternal fitness of things " 
 would have been fully preserved by having the 
 Senator from Missouri the charioteer of a pub- 
 lication machine, to address to the Germans 
 of the country a report showing that General 
 Grant had trampled neutral vows and obliga- 
 tions under foot, and sided with France in that 
 bloody grapple for the mastery in which she 
 went down before Germany. Ay, sir, we are 
 indebted to the accident that we created a new 
 committee, in place of reviving the old one 
 with the Senator from Missouri at its head, for 
 amotion raising a select committee, whose mis- 
 sion in part would be to illustrate a principle 
 in physics known as the indefinite expansibility 
 of matter, to show the world into how great a 
 balloon, a matter of no moment in truth or in 
 fact, could be blown. 
 
 And now I want a word with the Senator from 
 Missouri, [Mr. Schurz.] I shall speak with the 
 same confidence and frankness with which he 
 addressed us on a recent occasion. That honor- 
 able Senator informed the Republican mem- 
 
9 
 
 bers of the Senate — no, I correct myself; that 
 statement is inndequate : I should say that in 
 solemn and weighty words he divulged to the 
 Republican members of the Senate an impres- 
 sion, dark and wide, in the country, that there 
 exists somewhere a " military ring." Let me 
 read the language of the Senator : 
 
 "But, gentlemen, do not close your eyes to one 
 fact— and her'i I will express myself frankly and 
 boldly." 
 
 That is right ; I like a bold man. 
 
 "There is an impression prevailins in this country 
 that somewhere in this Government there sits a 
 'military ring,' which is exercising an unwholesome, 
 a far-reaching, a corrupt, and dangerous influence 
 upon this Administration. That impression is grow- 
 ing all over the land. This suspicion may be well- 
 founded or it may not." 
 
 My acquaintance with the people of the 
 country may not be as extensive as that of the 
 honorable Senator from Missouri ; but the peo- 
 ple I meet, have, I think, no such impression. 
 They hear talk about a " military ring." They 
 regard that talk as a part 'of the slang and 
 scandal that defiles and brutalizes our politics. 
 They read paragraphs in newspapers talking 
 abouta " military ring,'' an*?! they dismiss them 
 with other such, regarding these reeking pub- 
 lications as among the brutalities of progress. 
 But, Mr. President, I want to tell the Sen- 
 ator of an impression that does prevail. There 
 is an impression with many people — it is com- 
 ing, I am sorry to say, to be a fixed impres- 
 sion — that another ring exists — a "senatorial 
 ring," or, more properly speaking, a "sen- 
 atorial cabal." The impression is that the 
 business of this senatorial cabal, is not to fur- 
 nish ammunition to the French, but to furnish 
 ammunition to the Democratic party. It is 
 believed that men flying the Republican flag, 
 are trying to strand the Republican ship, it 
 is believed that the business of this cabal is to 
 malign the President of the United States, to 
 disparage and belittle him, to assault his 
 administration, to wait for opportunities, ay, 
 in the language of the good Book, "to lurk 
 privily" for opportunities, to place him in an 
 injurious and unjust position. It is believed 
 that the business of this cabal is to assail and 
 impugn the majority in Congress, and to injure 
 those charged with the conduct of public 
 affairs. It is believed that this cabal aids to 
 get up and keep up that snow-storm of libels, 
 too great in volume to be measured, which falls 
 daily on the country ; that stream of sliame- 
 less'falsehoods which, taking its rise in Wash- 
 ington, pours itself over the land through " in- 
 dependent" and avowed Democratic papers. 
 
 It is believed that persons connected with this 
 cabal are inflicting wounds upon the Repub- 
 lican party whicliDemocrats have not the power 
 to inflict ; wounds, which these same persons 
 could not make so deep, if they would put on 
 Democratic armor and let it be seen. This 
 impression waxes apace. It is strong, very 
 strong just now, in the State of New Hamp- 
 shire. There is fresh reason for it in New 
 
 Hampshire. An election depends there, and 
 the politicians say that whether the Repub- 
 lican ticket shall stand or fall, is of much import 
 for the light or shadow it will cast on the 
 coming presidential canvass. In the thick of 
 the New Hampshire contest, shrewd Demo- 
 cratic politicians treasure like "apples of gold 
 in pictures of silver" the words of mem- 
 bers of this supposed senatorial cabal ; their 
 speeches command attention with the New 
 Hampshire Democracy, which could not be 
 gained by all the Democratic heroes and sages 
 from Jefferson to my honorable friend from 
 Missouri, [Mr. Blair,] not even for the Brod- 
 head letter. [Laughter.] That_ vivacious 
 production is not so great a favorite now, it 
 is not such a success, or, as the play bills 
 say, it has not such "a run" in New Hanip- 
 shire now, as another document, which lies 
 before me. Here is a pamphlet consisting of 
 twenty-four closely printed pages. It is enti- 
 tled " Plain' language of independent Repub- 
 lican Senators;" "Thieving and profligacy 
 exposed;" "Speeches of several Senators;" 
 first of all, the honorable Senator from Mis- 
 souri, [Mr. .ScHDRZ.] This pamphlet bears 
 the following imprimatur: "Published by 
 the National Democratic Resident Committee, 
 Washington, District of Columbia." These 
 speeches appear without note or comment ; no 
 gilding fine gold here; no painting the lily. 
 Those who prepared the pamphlet, thought 
 they would let the speeches be as their makers 
 made them, and stop where their makers 
 stopped them, because they could not be im- 
 proved as electioneering documents for the 
 Democracy. I am told that two hundred thou- 
 sand copies of this pamphlet have been sent 
 free through the mails of the United States 
 franked by the Democratic members of the 
 House, into the State of New Hampshire. 
 
 Such events, and such a proceeding as now 
 detains the Senate, I tell the honorable Sena- 
 tor will not tend to dispel the impression that 
 there does exist such a cabal. The proceed- 
 ing before us, wears an ugly look ; the business 
 of turning accuser of the Government, and 
 charging a breach of neutrality touching Ger- 
 many at this time, has an ugly look. It is 
 not giving information to the enemy in time 
 of war, but there is a sort of family resem- 
 blance between the two things, which will lead 
 a great many people into serious thought. A 
 great many people will think of it as the man 
 thought of his horses when he said, "One 
 looks so much like both, that I cannot tell the 
 other from which." [Laughter.] 
 
 But, Mr. President, 1 am able to assure the 
 Senator, and I hope the assurance will give 
 him pleasure, that the people in no portion of 
 the country, as far as' I can learn, are being 
 misled by these proceedings. They understand 
 the meaning of it all. In the Stale of New 
 York, during the last fortnight, many elections 
 have beeu held; the spring elections are pro- 
 gressing, and East and West, not only de the 
 
10 
 
 Republicans hold their own, but elections 
 result in unexpected, and in some cases unex- 
 ampled Republican gains. Tiie people be- 
 lieve in the Administration, and in tbe ilepub- 
 lican party as the party of progress and true 
 reform. 
 
 The other day, in the city of Buffalo, a Dem- 
 ocratic city, in which there is a large repre- 
 sentation of that sturdy, intelligent, upright 
 peojj J, the Germans of America, the llepub- 
 licaii ticket was chosen by a majority of nearly 
 twenty-five hundred ; most of the wards giving 
 Ilepublican majorities. The .same thing in less 
 decree is true generally in the recent and cur- 
 rent elections in the State of New York. 
 
 No, Mr. President, the pretense that there 
 is a ''military ring" gives no disquiet to men 
 who believe the cause of the Republican party 
 identical with the cause of the Republic; and 
 with no right to speak lor them, I venture to 
 say that tlie Germans of the Sta'e of New 
 York and of the other States, cannot be hood- 
 winked, -r nose-led, or handed over, by any 
 man, wb ver he may be. The Germans had 
 too much to do with preserving our nationality 
 when it rocked in the throes of an earthquake, 
 to be willing so soon to hand the country over 
 again to the party which once well-nigh ruined 
 it. The Germans know that it was a Dem- 
 ocratic Administration which prostrated our 
 credit; which stripped our northern arsenals 
 of arms and sent them to be ready for traitors 
 in the South ; which banished our Navy to dis- 
 tant seas; and sought to bind the Government 
 hand and foot that conspirators might murder 
 it in its bed. The Germans know that a Dem- 
 ocratic Administration did all this and more, 
 and that the Democratic party before, and 
 during the war, and since the war, has been 
 hostile to liberty, equality, law, public faith, 
 and national honor. 
 
 Napoleon said Europe would be republican 
 or Cossack ; and in the next presidential elec- 
 tion our country will be Republican or Dem- 
 ocratic. Gernians and all other men of sense 
 know this ; they know that third-party move- 
 ments, and Republican detections, mean aid to 
 the Democratic party; and such a woe. must 
 have something more to commend it, than the 
 griefs or resentments of individuals. 
 
 Will the Senator join with me, or will he let 
 me join with him, in removing the impression, 
 if there be an impression al)road, that there 
 exists a " military ring" on the one hand, and 
 the impression also that there exists a sen- 
 atorial ring, I'atally bent on mi>chief, determ- 
 ined to divide, disintegrate, and destroy the 
 great party of progress and reform ? Will the 
 honorable Senator join me in dispelling these 
 two murky appearances? 
 
 Mr. President, it was not my purpose to 
 trespass thus long on the patience of the Sen- 
 ate; yet it is my wish to say something touch- 
 ing the transactions referred to in the pream- 
 ble as they in truth look place. When our 
 great struggle for nationality was over we 
 
 found ourselves possessed of a great aggre- 
 gate, not only of arms, but of stores, mate- 
 rial, and munitions of war. This mass of 
 perishable property was to be sold, and at 
 sale by public outcry, it found only a tardy 
 market. It was being eaten by the tooth of 
 time; rust would corrode metals; moisture 
 would destroy powder, and everything would 
 lose value, beside loss of interest and stor- 
 age. In 18G8, on the 20th of July, Congress 
 passed an act to hasten the disposal of this 
 surplus. The object was to turn these stores 
 into money at the first hour, and therefore 
 the act authorized private sales. We had not 
 only arms, but all parts of arms; we had not 
 only cartridges, but all parts of cartridges ; 
 pig lead, powder, and metal. These articles 
 were sold, sometimes "assembled" — using a 
 phrase of the trade — all parts of the gun 
 "assembled," that is, put together as a com- 
 plete article. Sometimes, as the schedule of 
 sales will show, these parts were sold sep- 
 arately — gun stocks, for instance, by them- 
 selves, in a lot, gun-barrels by themselves, and 
 so on. The Senator (rom Missouri thinks he 
 has discovered that under the statute it would 
 not be lawful for the ordnance department to 
 "assemble" the different parts of a cartridge 
 in order to make it marketable, but that they 
 must sell these parts separated, and as raw 
 material. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Will the honorable Sena- 
 tor from New York just permit me a question 
 which I put iu perfect good faith for my 
 information? 
 
 Mr. CONKLTNG. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. There is one portion of this 
 statute which I do not really understand, and 
 1 should like to have his legal opinion about 
 it, distinguished lawyer as he is : 
 
 "That the Secretary of War be, and he is hereby, 
 authorized and directed to cause to be sold, after 
 ofi'er at public sale on thirty days' notice, in such 
 manner and at such times and places at public or 
 private sale as he may deem most advantaKeous to 
 the public interests," &c. 
 
 Inasmuch as the Senator from New York 
 has referred to there being some latitude given 
 to him whether he is to sell at public or pri- 
 vate sale, 1 should like to know how he con- 
 strues this clause : 
 
 " Authorized and directed to cause to be sold, 
 after offer at public sale on thirty days' notice." 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Is that the Senator's 
 question ? 
 
 Mr. SCHUE^Z. That is my question. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Will it be agreeble to 
 the Senator to allow me to postpone my answer 
 for a space? I will come to it presently. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Certainly. Ididnotmean 
 to interrupt the Senator's argument. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I meant to remark on 
 the mode of sale, and I am obliged to the 
 Senator for calling my attention to it. 1 pro- 
 ceed, ho\Vever, now to complete a different 
 point to which I was in the act of speaking. 
 The Senator from Missouri understands that 
 
11 
 
 the statute works a disability to prepare or put 
 in order for sale stores, or at least ammuni- 
 tion, or, more correctly speaking, that it does 
 not contemplate or admit the power to prepare 
 the wares tor sale. I think that is his idea. 
 
 Mr. SCHCTRZ. I beg the Senator's pardon. 
 I did not say that the statute did not contem- 
 plate the putting together of the different ma- 
 terials out of which ammunition is composed ; 
 but I did say that I did not think the statute 
 contemplated the manufacturing of ammuni- 
 tion for the purposes of sale. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Somebody has said that 
 words are things. I wonder if the Senator 
 from Missouri would say so. I stated his point 
 to be that under the statute they could not 
 before sale jjroperly put together the different 
 parts of a cartridge and make it a complete 
 mai-ketable thing. He says that is not his 
 point, but his point is that they cannot manu- 
 facture. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. I beg pardon. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Then I do not under- 
 stand the Senator. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. That the ordnance depart- 
 ment may put together tlie diti'erent materials 
 which constitute a cartridge there can be no 
 doubt in the world, for they have got to do 
 so for the use of the Army. The question is 
 this: whether a statute allowing the ordnance 
 department to sell material which is unsuited, 
 or unsuitable as the statute expresses it, for 
 the use of the Army or of the militia of the 
 United States, permits the ordnance depart- 
 ment to manufacture cartridges for sale? That 
 : is what I say. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. The honorable Senator 
 I suppose does not understand that this par- 
 ticular statute gives the power to manufacture 
 cartridges for use in the American Army. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. No, sir, that the statute 
 does not give any such power. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Then let us lay that 
 matter out of the case, and let us assume that 
 he and I alike are discussing what might be 
 done under the statute now in question, and 
 for the purposes of the statute. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Precisely. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Let me restate the Sen- 
 ator's point, because I am not one of those 
 who suppose advantage can be gained by mis- 
 stating or undervaluing the position of an ad- 
 versary. Let me state his point as strongly as 
 I can. It is that under that statute the ord- 
 nance department had no right to take the 
 different component parts of cartridges and 
 put them together in finished cartridges, and 
 then sell them. Is not that his point? 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Exactly. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. So I first intended to 
 stale it, and I think I did. Let me examine 
 the point. Does the Senator think that under 
 that statute there is power to scour or burnish 
 guns in order to make them marketable? 
 Does the Senator think that if a thousand 
 pieces lack ramrods, there is authority to sup- 
 
 ply the ramrods, to make them marketable ? 
 Does he think that if one hundred pieces have 
 lost their bayonets, there is power to make or 
 finisli bayonets and put them on ? If he admits 
 this power, his argument falls to the ground? 
 Why ? Because the object of putting a ram- 
 rod upon a piece, or a nipple, or a hammer, 
 or a guard, would be to make it marketable as 
 merchandise; and if in order to make a vu- 
 sand pieces marketable as merchandise, it is 
 necessary to furnish v.^itli them their comple- 
 ment of ammunition, the power is the same, 
 the purpose is the same, the legal test is the 
 same ; the two cases, as the lawyers say, are 
 on all fours with each other. Does not the 
 honorable Senator see that? 
 
 Now look at the proposition practically. 
 Here was the Government an enormous holder 
 of pig lead ; millions of pounds, more per- 
 haps than could be found in all the country 
 beside, were in the arsenals and manufacto- 
 ries of the Government. Does the Senator 
 think that although they could sell o many 
 tons of pig lead, and so many hundred pounds 
 of powder, and although they could sell so 
 much sheet copper to make cartridges with, 
 they could not put these things together and 
 sell them as a marketable article, if the price 
 and the sale not only of the ammunition, 
 but of the guns to go with it, depended on 
 the ammunition? The Senator's argument 
 proves too much. The statute means nothing 
 useful, unless it implies the power to burnish 
 arms, to make them serviceable and market- 
 able, to repair them, to add a ramrod or a 
 bayonet; and I call the Senator's attention to 
 the fact that in the report of the War Depart- 
 ment, which once played so large a part in 
 this case, the report which was at first relied 
 on for the novr post mortem discrepancy, it is 
 said expressly that money has been retained 
 to put in order the residue of the stores for 
 sale. The argument of the Senator would 
 prove that the Secretary admits that he vio- 
 lated the statute there. The argument would 
 prove that buyers must take the arms as tliey 
 were rusted on tlie field of battle, blemished 
 by the dew-fall, broken by the shock, take 
 them as debris and refuse instead of buying 
 them in good and merchantable order. This 
 would be absurd. 
 
 Mr. MORTON. Will the Senator from 
 New York allow me to call his attention to 
 the fact, in answer to the question of the Sen- 
 ator from Missouri, that the ordnance depart- 
 ment has authority by other statutes to go 
 forward at any time, whenever there is an 
 immediate prospect of war or an immediate 
 prospect of sale, to manufacture into fixed 
 ammunition all the raw material on hand, not 
 depending upon this statute at all for that 
 authority ? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. This is true no doubt. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. May I ask the Senatoi from 
 New York whether he has got through wiih 
 this point of the argument? I do not want to 
 
12 
 
 reply to him. I shall do so at a subsequent 
 period, but 1 might now call liis attention to 
 the question which I took the liberty of putting 
 to him with regard to the meaning of the 
 statute, 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. If the Senator is impa- 
 tient for my answer, I will answer him now. 
 
 Mr. SCaURZ. No. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. If he is not, I will renew 
 the assurance given him a few moments ago, 
 that I shall not omit that answer; and I will 
 fortify my assurance by saying that I have a 
 memorandum on my notes of that point, and 
 my memorandum, and the Senator, and I to- 
 gether, will be able to take care that the mat- 
 ter is not forgotten. 
 
 Mr. President, this statute existing, and the 
 ordnance department being, in the language 
 of Vattel, engaged in its "customary trade," 
 ■war suddenly reddened the fields of France 
 and Germany. Tiie cable flashed the news to 
 us, and the President of the United States 
 forthwith addressed to the American people a 
 proclamation of caution touching their duties 
 as citizens of a neutral power. 1 ask the Sec- 
 retarj^ to read that proclamation as I have 
 marked it in the volume which I send to the 
 desk. It contains a full epitome of neutral 
 duties. 
 
 The Chief Clerk read as follows : 
 
 By the President of the United States of America. 
 
 A PEOCLAIIATION. 
 
 "Whereas a state of war uuhapiiily exists between 
 Prance on the one side, and the North (ierman Con- 
 federation and its allies on the other; 
 
 And whereas the .United States are on terms of 
 friendship and ainity with all the con tending Powers, 
 and with thepersous inhabiting their several domin- 
 ions; 
 
 And whereas great numbers of the citizens of the 
 United States reside within the territories or domin- 
 ions of each of the said belligerents and carry on com- 
 merce, trade, or other business or pursuits therein, 
 protected by the faith ot treaties; 
 
 And whereas great numbers of the subjects or cit- 
 izens of each ot the said belligerents reside within 
 the territory or jurisdiction of the United States, 
 and carry on commerce, trade, or other business or 
 pursuits therein; 
 
 And whereas the laws of the United States, with- 
 out interfering with the free expression of opinion 
 and sympathy, or with the open n\anufacture orsale 
 of arms or munitions of war, nevertheless impose 
 upon all persons who may be within their territory 
 and jurisdiction the duty of an impartial neutrality 
 during the existence of the contest: 
 
 Now, therefore, I, Ulysses S. Grant, President of 
 the United States, in order to |)reserve the neu- 
 trality of the United States, and of their citizens and 
 of persons within their territory and jurisdiction, 
 and to enforce their laws, and in order that all per- 
 sons, being warned of the general tenor of the laws 
 and treaties of the United States in this behalf, and 
 of the law of nations, may thus be preventeil from 
 an unintentional violation of thesame, dohereby de- 
 clare and i)roclaim that by the act passed on the2Uth 
 day of April, A, D. 1818, commonly known as the 
 "neutrality law," the following acts are forbidden 
 to be done, under severe penalties, within the terri- 
 tory and jurisdiction of the United States, to wit : 
 
 1. Accepting and exercising a commission to serve 
 either of the said belligerents by land or by sea 
 against the other belligerent. 
 
 2. Enlisting or entering into the service of either 
 of the said belligerents as a soldier, or as a marine, 
 or seaman on board of any vessel of war, letter of 
 marque, or privateer. 
 
 3. Hiring or retaining another person to enlist or 
 enter himself in the service of either of the said 
 belligerents as a soldier, or as a marine or seaman 
 on board of any vessel of war, letter of marque, or 
 privateer. 
 
 4. Hiring another person to go beyond the limits 
 or jurisdiction of the United States with intent to 
 be enlisted as aforesaid. 
 
 5. Hiring another person to go beyond the limits 
 of the United States with intent to be entered into 
 service as aforesaid. 
 
 6. Retaining another person to go beyond the lim- 
 its of the United States with intent to be enlisted as 
 aforesaid. 
 
 7. Retaining another person to go beyond the 
 limits ol the United States with intent to be entered 
 into service as aforesaid. (But the said act is not to 
 be construed to extend to a citizen orsubject of either 
 belligerent who, being transiently within the United 
 States, shall, on board of any vessel of war, which, 
 at the time of its arrival within the United States, 
 wa^! fitted and equipped as such vessel of war, enlist 
 or enter himself or hire or retain another subject or 
 citizen of the same belligerent, who is transiently 
 within the United States, to enlist or enter himself 
 to serve such belligerent on board such vessel of war, 
 if the United States shall then be at peace with such 
 belligerent.) 
 
 8. Fitting out and arming, or attempting to fit out 
 and arm, or procuring to bo fitted out and armed, 
 or knowingly being concerned in the furnishing, fit- 
 ting out, or arming of any ship or vessel with intent 
 that such ship or vessel shall be employed in the 
 service of either of the said belligerents. 
 
 9. Issuing or delivering a commission within the 
 territory or jurisdiction of the United States for any 
 ship or vessel, to the intent that she may be em- 
 ployed as aforesaid. 
 
 lU. Increasing or augmenting, or procuring to be 
 increased or augmented, or knowingly being con- 
 cerned in increasing or augmenting, the force of any 
 ship of war, cruiser, or other armed vessel which at 
 the time of herarrival within the United States was a 
 shi)) of war, cruiser, or armed vessel, iu the service 
 of either of the said belligerents, or belonging to the 
 subjects or citizens of either, by adding to the num- 
 ber of guns of such vessel, or by changing those on 
 board of her for guns of a larger Caliber, or by the 
 addition thereto of any equipment solely applicable 
 to war. 
 
 11. Beginning, or setting on foot, or providing, or 
 preparing, the means for any military expedition or 
 enterprise to be carried on from the territory or 
 jurisdiction of the United States against the terri- 
 tories or dominions of either of the said belligerents. 
 
 And I do I'urther declare and proclaim that by the 
 nineteenth article of the treaty of amity and com- 
 merce, which was concluded between his M;ijesty the 
 king of Prussia and the United States of America on 
 the 11th day of July, A. D. 1799, which article was 
 revived by the treaty of May 1, A. D. 1828, between 
 the same parties, and is still in force, it was agreed 
 that ■' the vessels of war, i)ublic and private, of 
 both parties, shall carry freely, wheresoever they 
 please, the vessels and effects taken from their ene- 
 mies, without being obliged to pay any duties, 
 charges, or fees to officers of admiralty, of the cus- 
 toms, or any others; nor shall such prizes be ar- 
 rested, searched, or put under legal process when 
 they come to and enter the ports of the other party, 
 but may freely bo carried out again at any time by 
 their captors to the places expressed in their com- 
 missions, which the commanding oliioer of such ves- 
 sel shall be obliged to show." 
 
 And I do further declare and proclaim that it has 
 been officially communicated to the Government of 
 the United States by the envoy extraordinary and 
 minister plenipotentiary of the North German Con- 
 federation at Washington that private property on 
 the high seas will be exemiited from seizure by the 
 ships of his jM;ijcsty the king of Prussia, without 
 regard to reciprocity. 
 
 And I do further declare and proclaim that it has 
 been officially communicated to the Government of 
 the United States by the envoy extraordinary and 
 minister plenipotentiary of his Miijr.-ty the emperor 
 of the French, at Washington, that orders have 
 been given that in the conduct of the war the com- 
 
13 
 
 manders of the French forces on land and on the 
 aeag shall scrupulously observe toward neutral Pow- 
 ers the rules of international law, and that they 
 shall strictly adhere to the principles set forth in 
 the declaration of the congress of Paris of the IGtli 
 of April, 1856, that is to say: first, that privateering 
 is and remains abolished; second, that the neutral 
 flag covers enemy's goods with the exception of con- 
 traband of war; third, that neutral goods, with the 
 exception of contraband of war, are not liable to 
 capture under the enemy's flag; fourth, tha_t block- 
 ades, in order to be binding, must be effective, that 
 is to say, maintained by a force sufficient really to 
 prevent access to thecoastof the enemy; and that, 
 although the United States have not adhered lo the 
 declaration of 1856, the vessels of his Majesty will 
 not seize enemy's property found on board of a ves- 
 sel of the United States, provided that property is 
 not contraband of war. 
 
 And I do further declare and proclaim that the 
 statutes of the United States and the law of nations 
 alike require that no person within the territory and 
 jurisdiction of the United States shall take part, 
 directly or indirectly, in the said war, but shall re- 
 main at peace with each of the said belligerents, and 
 shall maintain a strict and impartial neutrality; 
 and that whatever privileges shall be accorded 
 to one belligerent within the ports of the United 
 States shall be, in like manner, accorded to the 
 other. 
 
 And I do hereby enjoin all the good citizens of the 
 United States and all persons, residing or being within 
 the territory or jurisdiction of the United States, to 
 observe the laws thereof, and to commit no act con- 
 trary to the provisions of the said statutes, or in vio- 
 lation of the law of nations in that behalf. 
 
 And I do hereby warn all citizens of the United 
 States and all persons residing or being within their 
 territory or jurisdiction, that, while the free and 
 full expression of sympathies in public and private 
 is not restricted by the laws of the United States, 
 military forces in aid of either belligerent cannot 
 lawfully be originated or organized within their 
 jurisdiction; and that while all persons may law- 
 fully, and without restriction by reason of the afore- 
 said state of war, manufacture and sell within the 
 United States arms and munitions of war, and other 
 articles ordinarily known as "contraband of war," 
 yet they cannot carry such articles upon the high 
 seas for the use or service of either belligerent, nor 
 can they transport soldiers and ofBoers of either, or 
 attempt to break any blockade which may be law- 
 fully established and maintained during the war, 
 without incurring the risk of hostile capture, and the 
 penalities denounced by the law of nations in that 
 behalf. 
 
 And I do hereby give notice that all citizens of 
 the United States and others who may claim the 
 protection of this Government, who may misconduct 
 themselves in the premises, will do so at their peril, 
 and that they can in no wise obtain any protection 
 from the Government of the United States against 
 the consequences of their misconduct. 
 
 In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand 
 and caused the seal of the United States to be 
 affixed. 
 
 Done at the city of Washington, this 22d day of 
 August in the year of our Lord 1870, and of 
 [h. s.] the Independence of the United States of 
 America the ninety-fifth. 
 
 U. S. GRANT. 
 
 By the President: 
 
 HAMILTON Fish, Secretary of State. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. That proclamation fol- 
 lowed the announcement of war at. once. 
 Before, its issuance, E. Remington & Sons, on 
 live, different occasions, had been large buyers 
 of ordnance stores ; they had bought large 
 amounts in lots and groups of lots. And just 
 here it will not be out of place for me to ask 
 who are the Remingtons, and who is Samuel 
 Remington? A brief and sufficient answer will 
 be found in Senate Executive Document No. 
 72, of the second session of the Thirty-Seventh 
 
 Congress — a letter from the Secretary of War 
 sent us on the 17lh of July, 18i)'2. It will be 
 remembered that when the South was dis- 
 covered to be on a war footing, and the vail was 
 drawn aside which had partially concealed the 
 most hideous political and military conspiracy 
 of modern times, much haste and precipitation 
 ensued in ordering munitions of war. Orders 
 went by telegraph and by mail, and prices were 
 judged of as best they might be from the facts 
 before the authorities. Large orders went to 
 the Messrs. Remington, and early in 1862 Mr. 
 Lincoln and Mr. Stanton appointed a commis- 
 sion, to look into orders and contracts for 
 arms, at the head ofwhich was the present Judge 
 Advocate General Holt. Robert Dale Owen, 
 then of Indiana, was a member, and Major 
 Hagner, major of ordnance, was an assistant 
 of the commission. Here is its report, and I 
 send to the Secretary, asking him to read the 
 brief passages I have marked first from the 
 testimony of Samuel Remington and then from 
 the report. 
 
 The Chief Clerk read from Mr. Remington's 
 testimony, as follows: 
 
 " Our house has been constantly engaged in the 
 fabrication of arms and parts of arius_ for nearly 
 forty years, and we now possess facilities for com- 
 pleting every part of the rifle and revolver second 
 only to one other private establishment in this coun- 
 try, and we had expected such an increase of orders 
 from the Government as would place us on a footing 
 more nearly approaching equality with other private 
 establishments. 
 
 " Having business correspondence in all the prin- 
 cipal cities of the South, we declined all orders for 
 arms when there was the slightest ground to suspect 
 the loyalty of the parties. As early as November, 
 1860, we commenced returning orders from our south- 
 ern customers, and we have not furnished anyone 
 since who was known to sympathize with the rebel- 
 lion. Jefferson Davis ordered five thousand rifles 
 for the State of Mississippi in November, 1860, which 
 was also peremptorily declined. In this we have only 
 done our duty as loyal citizens. We claim no credit 
 for performing our duty, nor do we wish to disparage 
 others or make uncharitable comparisons; but jus- 
 tice to ourselves requires us to state that we have 
 furnished the Government with our Army and Navy 
 revolvers at fifteen dollars, while it was compelled 
 to pay twenty and twenty-five dollars for large quan- 
 tities of a similar arm confessedly no better than 
 our own; and in all our intercourse we have been 
 governed in all respects by the usages and regula- 
 tions of the service." 
 
 The following extracts from the report of 
 the commission were read : 
 
 The commission find that the Messrs. Remington 
 have been for a number of years manufacturers of 
 arms for the Government; that they have a large 
 and well-supplied factory for gun-work ; that, upon 
 receipt of the above orders, they enlarged the capa- 
 bility of their establishment by the expenditure of 
 about one hundred thousand dollars ; that they are 
 working zealously and at extra hours to expedite 
 their work, and have now parts of all the five 
 thousand pistols in hand. 
 
 The work on the rifles is also fully under way, and 
 parts of a large number are in hand. 
 
 Mr. Remington has appeared before the commis- 
 sion and stated that they desired to devote the full 
 capabilities of their establishment to the use of the 
 Government; that they found they could manufac- 
 ture pistols and rifles with fair profit to themselves 
 ^ at much less prices, provided the Government would 
 secure to them work for a reasonable time by giving 
 orders for arms to the extent given to other first- 
 class manufacturers; that if permitted to contract 
 
14 
 
 with the Qovernment for the manufacture of forty 
 thousand rifles additional, or forty thousand Spring- 
 field muskets, they would agree to furnish the rifles 
 with saber bnyonets at seventeen dollars each, or 
 the S{>ringfield muskets at sixteen dollars each, and 
 would then charge the above ten thousand rifles, if 
 confirmed to them, at the rate of seventeen dollars 
 only ; and, further, that in case their proposal, made 
 in accordance with the advertisement of the ord- 
 naitoe department, to furnish Army revolvers was 
 accepted, they would likewise agree to include the 
 number in the above order of July 30 as forming part 
 of any number ordered, and at ttie rates stated in 
 their proposal. Theoommission, accepting the above 
 offer of Mr. Remington, postponed action on the 
 above crbcs, and recommended the execution of 
 oontracts for forty thousand Springfield muskets at 
 sixteen dollars, and for twenty thousand Army and 
 Nary revolvers at twelve dollars. 
 
 Ab the said coulraets havo now been executed ac- 
 cordingly ou the part of thr Government, they hereby 
 confirm the above orders of July 30 fur ten thousand 
 Harper's Ferry rifles and of July 30 for five thou- 
 sand Army revolvers, according to all their tcrrns 
 and conditions, provided that the price to be paid 
 for each rifle shall be seventeen dollars, including 
 appendages, and for each revolver twelve dollars, 
 including appendages; and provided further, that 
 they shall, witbin fifteen days after notice of this 
 decision, execute bond, with good and sufficient 
 sureties, in the form and with the stipulations pre- 
 ecribed by law, and the regulations for the perform- 
 ance of the contract, as thus modified, and, upon 
 their failure or refusal to execute such bond, then 
 the said orders shall be declared canceled and of no 
 effect. 
 
 We are, sir, very respectfully, your obedient ser- 
 tuaCs, 
 
 J. HOLT. 
 
 ROBEKT DALE OWEN. 
 
 Oommiisionern. 
 
 J. V.HAGNER. 
 Major of Ordnance, uasmtant to Commission. 
 (General J. W. Ripley, Chief of Ordnance. 
 
 Washington, June 20, 1862. 
 
 DsAR Sir: In the report which wo will make to 
 the Secretary of War in a few days we shall take oc- 
 casion to mention the reduced price at which Spring- 
 field muakets have been contracted to be manufac- 
 tured, and think it would be only justice for us to 
 state that the information on which our action, in 
 insisting on this reduction as reasonable, has been 
 based, came from yourself, llaveyou any objections 
 to our reJerring to you in this connection by name? 
 If you have, of course we will not do it. 
 
 Please answer by return mail, and oblige, very 
 rest^eotfully. 
 
 J. IIOLT, Gommiesioner. 
 Mi. S. Rbminotox, Ilion, New York. 
 
 Ofkice of Remington's Armory, 
 Ilion, Nkw York, June 25, 1862. 
 
 Sir : We havo your favor of the 20th instant, ad- 
 dressed to one Mr. S. Remington, and in reply havo 
 to say that we have no objection to your using our 
 name, as suggested in your report to the Secretary 
 of War in connection with the manufacturing of the 
 Springfield musket, &c. 
 
 We are, very respectfullv, your obedient servants, 
 E. REMINGTON & SONS. 
 Hon. Joseph IIolt, Waehinyton, I). G. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. 'J'hese extracts establish 
 two things : first, that Keraiiigton & Sons gave 
 all their facilities and energies to the Govern- 
 ment during the war, refusing and rejecting 
 all offers, at whatever profit, coming from the 
 rebels, or from the enemies of the United 
 States ; second, that they volunteered to in- 
 form the Government that tiie prices offered 
 them were excessive, and iliat at lower prices 
 they were willing to make, hecause they could 
 make with a living profit, the arms required. 
 
 I think Samuel Remington may stand for the 
 present upon Uiat record. Jf he wrote the 
 letter which is attribated to him, I am sorry 
 for it ; but I repeat, I think he may stand for 
 the present until some other snapper up of 
 unconsidered trifles shall rummage his pockets 
 for other papers. 
 
 Dugaid Dalgetty boasted of his loyalty; he 
 said he was'true to every Government as long 
 as it was his interest to be so. I hope that 
 this standard of loyalty will not be too high 
 for any man who, having served as the spy of 
 Louis Napoleon, is ready in turn to serve the 
 French republic, or the sons of Louis Pliilippe. 
 1 hope it will not be too high for those who are 
 seeking to bespatter our Government with the 
 mud ill which they are dredging for claims 
 against American merchants and Americaa 
 ciiizens. 
 
 Shortly after the proclamation to which I 
 have called attention, the ordnance depart- 
 ment discovered that Mr. Remington had busi- 
 ness relations with France, instantly trans- 
 actions with him were arrested, and from that 
 hour never was sale made by the United States 
 to Remington ; but the Government did con- 
 tinue the sale to other citizens of ordnance 
 stores. Was this unlawful, was it immoral 
 according to any code 7 Did the Franco-Prus- 
 sian war make it an act of hostility to Prussia, 
 for this Government to sell arras to our own 
 citizens? Were France and Prussia alone 
 arming? No, sir. The honorable Senator 
 from Missouri has chosen to discuss this ques- 
 tion as if the only market for arms sprang from 
 the combat between these two nationalities. 
 On ihe contrary, the allies of Prussia were 
 arming, as well as Prussia's foes. The whole 
 eastern hemisphere was arming. Russia was 
 arming, Austria was arming, so was England, 
 Egypt, and the Sultan of Turkey. Denmark 
 was arming, Sweden was arming. South Amer- 
 ica was arming. There were strifes for em- 
 pires and strifes for seas. Russia had given 
 notice that she would dissolve or rend her 
 treaty Btipulations which limited the armament 
 with which she might cruise in the Black sea, 
 Spain was on a war footing, in her own penin- 
 sula, and in the Island of Cuba. All Europe 
 was to be etnbroiled. There was likely to be 
 a riot of the nations. In every money-center, 
 and commercial mart on earth, there was a 
 market for arms. And we are told that at 
 such a lime, in the midst of such events, our 
 Government must suspend iis customary trade. 
 Who says this? What publicist ever said it? 
 In what tongue did he write? \n what library 
 can his words be found? Sir, I deny it. There 
 is no such principle of pubhc law, no such dic- 
 tum. I challenge its production. 
 
 Why pervert and cramp the case, by arguing 
 as if the Rhine was the sole field lor which 
 jirras were in demand? Remington himself 
 sold arms to eight foreign Governments: t« 
 Denmark, forty- two thousand stand of arms; 
 1 Spain, for Cuba, seventy five thousand stand 
 
15 
 
 of arms; Rome, ten thousand; Japan, three 
 thousand ; South America, ten thousand ; Swe- 
 den, thirty thousand ; Egypt, sixty thousand; 
 and others, nearly lialf a million stand of" arms 
 sold to foreign Governments within the last 
 three or four years, not to "scare geese," not 
 " to kill black birds." but to carry on the grim 
 trade of death, to lift still higher the purple 
 testament of bleeding war. Mr. President, 
 humanity may sigh and sicken, Christianity 
 may shudder at the thought ; but to talk about 
 this being a breach of international law, is the 
 very phantasy or hypocrisy of faded sentiment- 
 ality, if it is not something worse. Prussia 
 had her needle gun. On a hundred battle- 
 6eld8 the world had seen the arms of America 
 surpass all other implements of war; on a 
 hundred battle-fields American artisans had 
 proved their title to unequaled inventive genius. 
 The needle-gun of Prussia alone, in the whole 
 armory of the world, was entitled to compari 
 son with the arms we made. Prussia had her 
 needle-gun in numbers great enough. She 
 therefore did not buy guns of us, although our 
 ordnance stores did go in part, I am told, to 
 Prussia; but she wanted no guns. I call the hon- 
 orable Senator from Missouri as my witness to 
 prove this fact. I quote him: 
 
 "The Senator from Iowa called already our at- 
 tention to certain proceedings which passed between 
 the Prussian legation and the AVar Department. 
 Ue said that the Prussian minister had requested 
 the Secretary of War to suspend the sales of iirms 
 for a little while, so that Prussian agents also might 
 have an opportuniiy to bid. The Secretary of War 
 having communicated to me the same statement at 
 the time, or a short time after, I inquired of the 
 PruBHian legation whether this was actually the 
 ease." 
 
 I pause to ask the attention of the Senator 
 to that statement. A member of this body 
 goes to the minister of war and asks for the 
 statement of a fact touching a foreign Gov- 
 ernment, the Secretary of War makes an 
 explicit statement to the Senator upon his 
 veracity ; and that Senator tells us that he 
 then goes to a foreign legation, communicates 
 what he has heard, and inquires whether the 
 §tatement of the American Secretary of War be 
 true or not ! Sir, we have heard much about 
 official propriety ; we have been told many 
 things becoming and decorous in public officers. 
 I venture no comment on the passage I have 
 read, but I reserve the right to reflect whether 
 this is an example we should improve oar 
 ways by following. 
 
 The application the Senator made was a very 
 safe one, however. He inquired of the Baron 
 von Geroit, who was not only a truthful man, 
 not only a Christian, not only a German to the 
 core, and a watchful, zealous minister, but who 
 was a frieud of America iu sunshine and in 
 shade, and who carried with him from our 
 shores not only a memory of the respect and 
 affection in which he was held, but a thorough 
 appreciation of the kindness, the' friendship, 
 and the fellowship that Germany ever found in 
 the Amoricaa Republic. 
 
 The Senator continues : 
 
 "The information I received was this: that in- 
 deed they had requested the Secretary of War to 
 suspend ihe sales ol arms for a certain time, but not 
 with a view to buy for the use of the Prussian Gov- 
 ernment, which hud arms enough" — 
 
 So the Senator was informed by the official 
 representative of that Government — 
 " but in some way, by advancing money upon them, 
 to prevent the sale of those arms to the French." 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. The Senator is aware that 
 I think the day after I made those remarks, I 
 corrected them to some extent. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Will the Senator give 
 me the correction now? 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Certainly ; I have the Globe 
 here. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I do not wish to place 
 the Senator in a false position ; far from it. 
 
 Mr. CAMERON, (after a pause.) Has the 
 Senator from New York concluded ? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I am waiting on the 
 Senator from Missouri, who wishes to make 
 some correction. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. I think the Senator from 
 New York took part in that conversation 
 which I had with the Senator from Indiana 
 the next day after I made that speech. 
 
 Mr. CON KLING. If there is any material 
 error, cannot the Senator correct it as matter 
 of fact now? 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. The correction I made was 
 this: that an arms merchant from New York, 
 having been advised of the sales going on here, 
 had come here and made the suggestion him- 
 self, not that the suggestion had proceeded 
 from the Prussian legation. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. The honorable Senator 
 corrects himself upon a point not material 
 now. His point is not in question here. I 
 am citing the Senator to prove two things : 
 first, that Prussia had the opportunity to buy 
 of our citizens as all other buyers bought, 
 and second, that Prussia declined, or did not 
 improve the opportunity, because she was 
 already equipped ; in the Senator's language, 
 that she had arms enough. That is all. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. May I interrupt the Sen- 
 ator for a moment there ? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. The Senator does not sup- 
 pose I pretend to speak here as to the reasons 
 which Prussia had for not buying arms. When 
 I said that she had arms enough, that was my 
 own supposition, nobody else's. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Then the honorable 
 Senator will allow me to say that he was un- 
 fortunate in putting the statement into the 
 mouth of Baron Geroit. Let me read what 
 he said : 
 " The information I received was this " — 
 
 From the Prussian minister — 
 " that indeed they had requested the Secretary of 
 War to suspend the sales of arms for a certain lime, 
 but not with a view to buv for the use of tho Prus- 
 sian Government, which had arms enough, but m 
 some way, by advancing money upon thorn, to pro- 
 vent tho sale of those arma to the French." 
 
16 
 
 Certainly if the honorable Senator meant to 
 express a conjecture of his own, there was some 
 infelicity in his putting it into the mouth of the 
 German minister ; but of course I make no 
 2)oint upon it if the Senator will only state 
 what he means us to understand now as to the 
 fact. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. What I meant the Senator 
 to understand was simply this, that that was 
 parenthetically interjected as a remark of my 
 own, for the Senator can very well understand 
 that if Baron Gerolt had made a statement 
 about the condition of his country to me in 
 regard to such matters, I would not report it 
 here. But that was one of the reasons which 
 suggested itself very naturally, as we were all 
 very well informed about the military condition 
 that Germany was then in. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Really the Senator pre- 
 sents me now with apiece of propriety too fine- 
 apun for my comprehension. My mind is not 
 microscopic enough to perceive the propriety 
 which he says restrains him. Let me under- 
 stand it. He says now, a year after the war 
 has ended, that he would not be guilty of 
 stating what Baron Gerolt told him pending 
 the war, touching the number of arms Prussia 
 had. The Senator knows that there has gone 
 into the military gazettes of Europe and of the 
 world, a minute statement of all the armament 
 of Prussia, from a gun-carriage to a canteen. 
 What possible secrecy or confidence can there 
 be at this late date about the armament or 
 equipment of Prussia, or the report of that 
 equipment made by Baron Von Gerolt? Con- 
 sidering the Senator had no scruple in making 
 known to the minister of Prussia the statement 
 of the Secretary of War, and in comparing 
 notes with the minister to know whether the 
 Secretary of War told the truth, it seems to me 
 it is very scrupulous in him now to shrink from 
 telling what the minister said about matters 
 which have already become notorious through- 
 out the world. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. I merely wanted to inform 
 the Senator that in reporting the conversation 
 I had with Baron Von Gerolt I desired to urge 
 the principal point, and that the remark inter- 
 jected there about the military condition of 
 Prussia was a remark of my own. However, 
 I do not consider the point relevant at all, nor 
 «loes the Senator from New York, as I per- 
 ceive. I think, therefore, it was hardly neces- 
 sary to multiply so many words about it. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. What, then, is all this 
 about? The Senator says now that Prussia's 
 fall supply of arms was his own statement. 
 Did he believe it when he made it? 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. That Prussia had arms 
 enough? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. To be sure I did. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Then I still call the 
 Senator as my witness. We know how thor- 
 oughly informed he is touching the politics 
 and public affairs of Christendom. We know 
 
 the access and facility he has to learn such a 
 fact as he states, and therefore I call him to 
 the witness-stand again to prove, not upon 
 the testimony of Baron Von Gerolt, but upon 
 his own testimony, that Prussia had the oppor- 
 tunity to buy arms, but that she was armed 
 and equipped, and did not want them. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ rose. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. But, sir, if the Senator 
 will pardon me a moment, without calling 
 him as a witness, I can prove the fact other- 
 wise, inside this case, and outside of it by a 
 cloud of witnesses ; and if the Senator is sen- 
 sitive about being quoted in this regard I will 
 establish the fact without his testimony. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Not at all. On the con- 
 trary, if the Senator had put the question to 
 me directly he might have had a very short 
 answer: " Yes, I believe so ; there is no doubt 
 of it." I did not want to put that remark into 
 the mouth of Baron Gerolt; that was all. 
 About the fact itself there cannot be the 
 remotest doubt in the world. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Very well. Then let 
 me apply the fact, as I was proceeding to do 
 when I was stopped by the Senator. The 
 fact, then, is that all comers alike, whether 
 from the Black sea, the Baltic, or the Mediter- 
 ranean, whether in the eastern or the west- 
 ern hemisphere, had the opportunity in open 
 market to buy ordnance stores in American 
 markets. That is the fact. What, then, be- 
 comes of the pretense that we violated neu- 
 trality? What becomes of the allegation that 
 France was favored? What becomes of the 
 assumption that the Franco-Prussian war mo- 
 nopolized the arms market, and that we were 
 bound to assume that all arms bought were 
 destined for the single region occupied by that 
 war? 
 
 But the Senator has another complaint. It 
 is said that Richardson — and now" I shall not 
 forget to answer the question put to me about 
 the mode of sale under the statute — " one 
 Thomas Richardson, the known attorney of 
 Messrs. Remington & Son," says the pream- 
 ble, bought arms, and the Government of the 
 United States is arraigned for selling to Rich- 
 ardson? Why? 
 
 Let me first remark that that statement in the 
 preamble is shown twice over to be ground- 
 less: first, because the allegation is that the 
 papers referred to show that Richardson was 
 the known attorney of RemiHgton & Sons, and 
 those papers upon inspection show no such 
 thing; second, the statement is false in fact, 
 however bolstered up, that Richardson was 
 "known" to the War Department as the 
 attorney of Remington ; and that is the mean- 
 ing of the preamble; that is the force of the 
 word "known" as there used. Theallegation 
 is not that he was so known to his family, or to 
 Mr. Remington and to his family, or in the little 
 hamlet where the Senator says Richardson 
 lives ; but the charge is that Richardson was 
 known to the War Department as the attoi* 
 
17 
 
 ney of Remington ; and the honorable Sena- 
 tor from Missouri appears as the advocate and 
 champion of that allegation. How does he 
 attempt to prove it? By circumstances, nay, by 
 theory and conjecture — nothing more. He tells 
 us that the Government was bound to inquire 
 who Richardson was, and he tells us that 
 Richardson was "a little lawyer;" "a little 
 country lawyer," "a bellicose lawyer;" and 
 then, with inimitable facetiousness, he asked 
 the Senate, did Richardson want these guns 
 to bombard the heads of judges in place of 
 bombarding them with arguments? Did he 
 want them to "scare away geese," or "fire at 
 blackbirds?" That is ineffably funny; it is 
 mirthful in a side-splitting degree; but I ask 
 the honorable Senator, is it worthy a place in 
 such an argument? 
 
 No, sir, Richardson did not want these 
 guns to scare away geese. He wanted them 
 to sell in the market at a profit, as he would 
 have sold so many barrels of flour or so many 
 pounds of beef. He wanted them, as every 
 other dealer wants a commodity, to make 
 money upon them — that was his interest and 
 object. Wheresoever a man's treasure is, 
 there is his heart also. 
 
 But the honorable Senator says the War 
 Department should have known that he was a 
 little country bellicose lawyer. Why so? It 
 turned out in the course of the Senator's argu- 
 ment that he knew enough of the mode of 
 transacting such business to understand that 
 men do not come with their bids upon their 
 lips, and present themselves face to face at 
 the Ordnance Bureau. Such business is done 
 by mail, or by broker, and on paper, not by 
 word of mouth, or in person. Therefore the 
 Secretary of War had no opportunity to com- 
 pare this man with greater men, and see how 
 " little " he was, nor how liable to be spoken 
 of by the Senator with such magnificent disdain. 
 
 But the honorable Senator seems not to 
 know the mode of transacting business at the 
 War Department in the sale of stores. Does 
 he know that every bid must be accompanied 
 by twenty per cent, of the amount in cash ? 
 Does he know that a margin of twenty per cent. 
 in money,i8 put up at the time of the bid, and 
 that the balance must all be paid before the 
 storesare delivered, and paid within thirty days, 
 on penalty of forfeiting the margin of twenty per 
 cent.? Does the honorable Senator know it 
 is a cash transaction — that the name of the 
 buyer is cash ? If I might air a faded classic- 
 ality, I would remind him that the Roman 
 poet tells us there is no color in money, and 
 when the little bellicose lawyer sends his 
 twenty per cent, of legal tenders with his bid, 
 and follows it with his eighty per cent, of pay- 
 ment, his money is as good as if it were the 
 money of the distinguished Senator himself. 
 
 If the bid of Richardson came in the due 
 course of business, and free from badge of sus- 
 picion, it would, of course, be treated like other 
 bids, and if it were the highest bid, it would be 
 
 accepted. What can it be supposed there was 
 to suggest French agency in one bid, more than 
 in another, whether the bidder spelled his 
 name Richardson, or spelled it otherwise? 
 If the authorities suspected Richardson, they 
 were bound, the Senator says, to inquire. If 
 they had reason to know, or believe, or 
 suspect him of being a French agent, 
 then there was something to put them on 
 inquiry. But this part of the case breaks 
 down for the want of a leg to stand on; 
 there was nothing to put the Department on 
 inquiry, and the Secretary says there was no 
 thought or suspicion that Richardson acted 
 for France in any way. Is it pretended that 
 Richardson's bid was in any respect peculiar, 
 suspicious, or noticeable? Not that we have 
 heard. 
 
 But the Senator wants me to observe the 
 requirement of the statute that notice shall 
 be given. Does he know that notice was given 
 in all these cases, and that every man who buys 
 at private sale buys as a bidder upon a recorded 
 bid? If he does know it (and he nods assent) 
 I should like to understand the weight of his 
 question upon the statute. He reads to me 
 the statute to show that as he understands it 
 notice must be given. I ask him if he knows 
 that notice always was given, and he nods 
 assent. What is it that the Senator would of 
 me, then, in reference to the statute? 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. My assent did not refer to 
 their always having given notice. I did not de- 
 sire to express any such opinion. All I wanted 
 of the Senator was merely to have his opinion 
 whether the statute really meant that notice of 
 a sale should be given thirty days beforehand 
 in some public paper; and that is what he 
 understands it to mean. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. No; I understand the 
 Senator now to interpolate the words "in some- 
 public paper." I had not heard that before. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Public notice being given. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Yes, notice beinggiveti — 
 nothing about newspapers, however. When we 
 talk about a statute, it is well to talk about it, 
 and not about something else, or something 
 it does not say. I have heard nothing before 
 about public papers, and I confess my ignor- 
 ance of the usage of the Departments as to the 
 particular mode or instrumentality of giving the 
 notices to which they resort. If I had under- 
 stood that the insertion in a newspaper was the 
 topic of the Senator's inquiry, I would have 
 pleaded ignorance at once. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Now I must confess that 
 the answer of the Senator is a little unintel- 
 ligible to me. Does he really interpret that 
 statute in such a manner that in the usual way 
 public notice is to be given of the sale of arms 
 or ordnance stores thirty days beforehand? I 
 ask that question in perfect good faith. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I have no doubt of it, 
 Mr. President, and I answer in like good 
 faith. The statute speaks of notice, or of sale 
 after notice of certain length of time, and I 
 
IS 
 
 understand all these sales have been in fact 
 npon and after such notice. If I am so dull 
 as not to apprehend the Senator's question I 
 beg his pardon ; I mean to apprehend it, and 
 I mean to answer it. 
 
 I have said that there seems to have been 
 no reason to inquire into Richardson, or to pry 
 into his circumstances or intentions. I want 
 now to prove by the Senator that the War 
 Department did not in fact know or suspect 
 that Richardson was the agent of Remington, 
 or the p^ent of France. How shall I prove 
 it? By interviews held between the Senator 
 and the Secretary of War at the time. Here 
 is th« Senator's own narrative of these inter- 
 views : 
 
 "The answer I received " — 
 
 That is, from the Secretary of War — 
 "in eeveral of these interviews was that the Gov- 
 ernment had a right to sell arms to American citi- 
 aens; that he did not know that the arms went into 
 the hands of French agents, and did not see any 
 reason to stop the sales." 
 
 If this statement is true, there is an end of 
 Richardson upon the question of his being 
 "known" to the War Department as the 
 emissary of France or the agent of Reming- 
 ton ; and I can prove by the Senator further 
 that the statement is true, because he has 
 been kind enough to support the veracity of 
 the Secretary of War. He says : 
 
 " Understand me well. I am by no means willing 
 to oast any aspersion of that kind upon the Secre- 
 tary of War. I have always esteemed him an 
 honest man." 
 
 I think the Secretary of War, with the 
 indorsement of the Senator from Missouri, is 
 witness enough to establish the fact that the 
 War Department did not know or suspect that 
 Richardson was the agent of France or the 
 agent of Remington. The Secretary could 
 not be truthful if Richardson was known as 
 Remington's agent, because Remington had 
 become known as the agent of France. What, 
 then, is the truth of the whole matter? The 
 Government went on with its sales, beginning 
 long before the I'Vanco -Prussian war and con- 
 tinuing long alterward. And here 1 quote 
 from memory, not having lately looked — Sen- 
 ators fresh from examination will correct me 
 if I am wrong — the statement of Vattel to this 
 efiFect, that under circumstances like these it 
 is an unquestionable right of every Govern- 
 ment to "continue its customary trade." I 
 think I am not wrong in the phrase, and the 
 honorable Senator from New Jersey, [Mr. 
 FftELlNGiiUTSEN,] who hss, 1 think, recently 
 reviewed Vattel, will correct me if i am wrong. 
 The action of our Government, unchallenged 
 by Bismarck, unchallenged by Prussia, un- 
 challenged by the representative of Prussia, 
 is gainsaid now, as 1 have a right to s-iy, and 
 I invite a denial of the statement, with the 
 full knowledge that claim agents of France rely 
 upon it to bring out evidence wherewithal to 
 pursue merchants in the city of New York. I 
 repeat again, that I invite ueuial of the state- 
 
 ment that this is one motive of this invectiga- ^ 
 tion, and a motive not concealed from those i 
 who bring it forward. I 
 
 But, Mr. President, we are told that in trans- j 
 actions of ten million dollars, Americans have 
 made a profit of a million. What of it? I 
 am glad of it. I would it were two millions ; I 
 should not grieve if it were four. The French 
 people were doomed to be beaten and stripped 
 from the start, and if the profits they paid have 
 gone into the workshops of America, and not 
 into the workshops of Great Britain, amen, 
 amen. The French people were no parties to 
 the war. It was not their war. It was a sor- 
 did dynastic plot and raid of Louis Napoleon. 
 The sooner his money was gone, the sooner 
 the agony was over ; the sooner the woful 
 pageant was passed ; the sooner Alsace and 
 Lorraine were lost ; the sooner a sorry theatrical 
 clored with the words, " Not being permitted 
 to die at the head of my army, I lay ray sword 
 at the feet of your Majesty." Ask no grief 
 from me, for the cause or the gold this gamester 
 lost. His reign was a usurpation ; his Gov- 
 ernment and his campaign were founded on a 
 lie, ai.d a lie will upset anything, from an 
 apple-cart to an empire. 
 
 No, Mr. President, no investigation to enable 
 Louis Napoleon, or his successor, or the claim 
 agentsof France, to dog American merchants, 
 or rummage their books and accounts to learn 
 whether the sum be more or less they made 
 from the profits of merchandise in the markets 
 of the world. 
 
 We are told again that French officials have 
 been guilty of embezzlement. Well, justice 
 seems to be overtaking them. Remington, 
 overlooking apparently the ingratitude and the 
 scandal of their attempting now to wrong him 
 of his dues, has made valuable contribution to 
 the information which has brought French cul- 
 prits to justice. Let France punish her crim- 
 inals ; let France pursue her remedies ; but do 
 not let us soil the American name for effect in 
 a presidential canvass, or to fish for evidence 
 on which France or Frenchmen may harass 
 manufacturers or traders in America. 
 
 This case as it stands, is a case of collapse; 
 but let it be investigated, and let us be quick, 
 lest investigation turn to post mortem examin- 
 ation. Let us investigate it on all sides. I 
 have offered an amendment to enlarge the 
 scope of inquiry, and as pertinent to that 
 amendment 1 read an act of Congress to the 
 Senate : 
 
 " If any pcr?on being a citizen of the United States, 
 whether lie bo actually resident or abiding within 
 the United States, or in any foreign country, shall, 
 without the pcniii.ssion or autliority of tlie Govern- 
 ment of the United States, directly or iiuiiroctly 
 coDimcnco or carry on any verbal or written corre- 
 spondence or intercourse wit!i any foreign Govern- 
 ment, or any ofliccr or agent thereof, with an intent 
 to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign 
 Oovcrnmont, or of any officer or agent thereof, "in 
 relation to any dinputeg or controversies with the 
 United States, or defeat the measures of the Govern- 
 ment ot the United States; or if any person being a 
 citizen of. or resident within the United States, and 
 
19 
 
 not duly authorized, shall counsel, advise, aid, or 
 assist in any such correspondence, with intent as 
 aforeeaid, ho or they shall bo deemed guilty of a high 
 misdemeanor, and on conviction before any court of 
 the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall 
 be punished by a fine not exceeding $5,000, and by 
 impriaonment during a term not less than six months 
 nor exceeding three years." 
 
 That is a good statute. It was made for a 
 purpose, and has long stood. It was signed 
 by a Massachusetts President. I should like 
 I to know whether it has been violated. That 
 I correspondence and communication — I couple 
 [the words of the statute — have been com- 
 Imenced and carried on with a foreign Govern 
 pent, or with the agents or officers thereof, is 
 TOO clear for doubt. Whether this has been 
 ione with the intent denounced in the statute, 
 let us see. Let there be light on that point 
 among others. It may be that he, a citizen 
 of the United States, who, knowing that the 
 Alabama controversy with England is pending, 
 knowing that the San Juan boundary dispute 
 is pending, knowing that Germany's emperor 
 is an umpire in one of these disputes, know- 
 ing that heads of other nations are members 
 of the tribunals before which we are about to 
 appear, it may be that he who knowing all 
 this, upon groundless and unexplored pretexts, 
 arraigne the conduct and the honor of his Gov- 
 ernment before the world, charges it with a 
 breach of neutral oblio'alions more odious and 
 aggravated than those we lay at England's 
 door, and who holds correspondence with 
 French agents or officers lor this purpose, and 
 thus provides himself with evidence by which 
 to compass his object, is not caught in the 
 embrace of the statute I have read. If so, 
 it will do no harm to investigate, and let 
 us know how the fact may be. Enough has 
 cropped out to give occasion to the public to 
 consider the case in the aspect presented 
 by my amendment. 
 
 The Senator from Missouri will take no of- 
 fense I hope at my reading an extract from a 
 German paper published at Chicago, known 
 ae the Staats Zeitung. 
 
 Mr. SCHUliZ. Yes, sir, and it is edited 
 by the collector of internal revenue there. 
 [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. He must be a very good 
 collector of internal revenue. He is a very 
 good collector of external information and 
 external sense. Commend me to that man. 
 You may depend he is a careful collector of 
 the things which he deems it his business to 
 gather up. I read, after the remark of the 
 Senator, with leas hesitaiion than I had before, 
 the comment ofthis German organ upon the 
 proceeding which now occupies us. He says: 
 
 "The German Government has never regarded 
 this matter as a breach of neutrality. It bus never 
 complained or protested; and to bo more German- 
 ized than Bismarck we oertainly need not be. 
 
 "On the other side, these speeches of Suvinkk and 
 ScHUKZ, which are being made at the moment when 
 the_ conference of Geneva is threatened with disso- 
 lution, are so many nrms sent to England, to be 
 used against the United States. Tlii.i may suit 
 the Cologne newspaper, but ihat we should rejoioo 
 
 thereat does not seem so clear to us. It seems to u« 
 that in the German-American patriotism of Senator 
 ScHURZ a curious transformation has occurred. 
 
 "At the time when the Germans were protesting 
 and indignant Senator Schukz was an American 
 and remained silent. Now. on the eve of a conflict 
 with England, when it is the duty of every Aiaeri- 
 can, native or adopted, to be patriotic and public- 
 spirited. Senator ScnuEZ is all at once a German." 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Will the Senator from New 
 York permit me to make a remark? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. The collector of internal 
 revenue makes the remark that when life sale 
 of arms was being carried on I was an Ameri- 
 can and did nothing to respond to the explo- 
 sion of feeling which then went on all over 
 the country. The man lies, and he knows it, 
 and there are other gentlemen on this floor 
 who know it, and I appeal to my friend, the 
 Senator from Indiana. [Mr. Morton.] 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. I know it. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. There appears to be a 
 vast deal of information lying about loose. 
 [Laughter.] This, in spots and places and 
 at times, is the most intelligent body I know 
 anything about. The only wonder is that 
 some members who know so much on-.8ome 
 subjects, should be so wanting in information 
 on others ; but I am not surprised at this 
 gush of information. My opinion is, and it 
 does not rest on air, that members of this 
 body do know much of the history, ^he rise 
 and the progress, and they will no doubt yet 
 know much of the decline and fall of the 
 "arms scandal." Their knowledge goes back 
 for months, and when they leap forward ii; 
 their exuberance and wealth of information, J 
 am not surprised. 
 
 I did not read this extract from a Germac 
 paper to convict the Senator from Missouri of 
 having done or omitted to do anything. That 
 was not my object. I read it to hold the 
 mirror up to nature, to let the Senator seetho 
 reflex of his sayings and doings, to let him see 
 how it strikes intelligent men of all natioaal- 
 ities and all shades of opinion. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. May I say a word? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. Always. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Did not the Senator ratter 
 prove to me how it strikes the minds of inter- 
 nal revenue collectors? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I did not know that I did ; 
 but upon such disordered rules of evidence as 
 seem to prevail with the Senator, I should think 
 he mi{;ht come to such a conclusion. He has 
 seen fit to speak of this editor as an internal 
 revenue collector. I hope in so speaking, he 
 has not subtracted anything essential from 
 his next essay on civil service reform. I hope 
 tills passage torn out, will not mar the beauty 
 of the production. I hope enough materijil 
 will be left to make that essay tremendous with 
 stunning effects. Some oiher instance may be 
 looked up, to show that if a man has been 
 selected by the sentiment and intelligence 
 around him as a proper person to hold a pub- 
 
20 
 
 lie trust, he must be a scoundrel, and is to be 
 discredited and branded. I understand the 
 person now so roughly denounced, is a respect- 
 able American citizen of German descent. If 
 he has ever been guilty of peculation, theft, 
 fraud, or dishonesty, I pause to enable the Sen- 
 ator to state it. If he has not, if he stands 
 fair and has acquitted himself honestly, per- 
 sonally and otficialfy, I leave so much of satis- 
 faction with the Senator as will remain with 
 him for attempting to asperse an American 
 citizen and a countryman of his own. 
 
 Mr. SCHUiiZ. May I add one remark to 
 the eloquent passage the Senator has just been 
 delivering himself of? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. More than one. 
 
 Mr. SCHURZ. Did 1 not tell the Senator 
 that that editor, in stating what he does state 
 there, states something which he knows to be 
 false? 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I did not fail to hear 
 the very torse and laconic statement made by 
 the honorable Senator upon that point. I did 
 not join issue with him in regard to it, for fear 
 that my doing so might lead to discussion, 
 possibly controversy. Whether, assuming the 
 article to be false, the editor knew its falsity, 
 is one question ; whether the article is false 
 
 in general, is another question, and there the 
 belief of the honorable Senator and mine might 
 not coincide. 
 
 I believe, Mr. President, this proceeding, 
 this enormous accusation, and the publication 
 of it to the world, witli a reckless want of care 
 about its truth, is an act which can never be 
 justified, and can be palliated only by refering it 
 to prejudice and feeling too great to be resisted. 
 
 Difiering widely as to the quality of the act 
 of parading such accusations, the Senator and 
 I had better not discuss the justice of the news- 
 paper paragraph which has disturbed him so 
 much. 
 
 But let us have investigation on all sides. 
 Let there be no dark place, no nook, no cor- 
 ner anywhere. The American honor has been 
 assailed; the American name has been hawked 
 at ; grave and offensive charges have been 
 spread before the world. Let us know the 
 truth, no matter at what cost of convenience. 
 Let the witnesses be brought, if to bring them 
 it be necessary to traverse continents, visit 
 islands, vex seas. Let us know the very right 
 and justice of this matter. Let us have laid 
 bare, the motives which have brought it about. 
 Let justice be done, though officials higher or 
 lower fall. 
 
 LB S '12 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 013 789 108 6 
 
 L 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 013 789 108 6 
 
 pH8J