United States. Congress.

Congressional record : proceedings and debates of the ... Congress online

. (page 110 of 172)
Online LibraryUnited States. CongressCongressional record : proceedings and debates of the ... Congress → online text (page 110 of 172)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


sent him or the source whence it came, other than what you have
already stated.

Mr. CARPENTER. To that question we oblect.

Mr. LOGAN. Before the point is submitted, I will state that the
first question I propounded was not objected to by the Senate. The
last one was objected to. I desire to have that first question fully un-
derstood, and I ask the Clerk to read it again to the witness and haye
it answered before we proceed to another question.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The interrogatory propounded by
the Senator from Illinois will be read.



Digitized by



Google



TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. BELKNAP.



239



The Chief Clerk read as follows :

Q. Prior to the sending of the first money had you over said any-
thing to any person or had any person ever said anything to yon on the
snhjeot of sending money to General Belknap ; and, if so, who was it T

A. No ono that I remember. No other except what I have already
stated, the conversation with Mrs. Bower.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts
[Mr. Dawbs] proposes a question, which will be read.

The Chief Clerk read as follows :

Q. State all the knowledge or information that General Belknap
had, which it is in your power to state, as to the amount of any money
sent him or the sonrce whence it came, other than what you have
already stated.

Mr. DAWES. I do not desire to have the witness state over again
what he has already stated.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection being raised the Chair
will put the question to the Senate : Shall this interrogatory be ad-
mitt^ f

The question was decided in the afiOrmative.

The Witness. I have stated all the money that I have sent General
Belknap, as far as I can remember.

Mr. Manager LAPHAM. That is not the question.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Read the question again.

The PRESIDENT |>ro tempore. The Secretary will read the question.

The Chief Clerk read as follows :

Q. State all the knowledge or information that General Belknap
had which it is in your power to state as to the amount of any money
sent him or the source from whence it came other than what you have
already stated ?

A. O, I do not know anything about General Belknap's knowledge :
I know nothing of General Belknap's knowledge except the money I
sent him.

Mr. MORTON. I submit the following interrogatory :

Q. Did General Belknap personally or through any x>erson or by
letter ever inquire of you why this money was sent, and did you in
any way ever assign a reason to him for itf

A. Never, to my best recollection.

Mr. CONKLING. I propose a question which may have been an-
swered in substance, but I should like to have an answer to it :

Q. Was your intention to send money to General Belknap and your
act in sending^it in consequence of any communication between vou
and General Belknap, and, if there was any such communication,
state itf

A. No, sir ; there was not.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. The managers would like to put a ques-
tion now, if convenient.

Mr. CARPENTER. I object.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. We certainly claim the right.

Mr. LOGAN. I have a question to proi)ose.

The PRESIDENT iwo tempore. The Senator from Dlinois desires
to submit a question.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. We waive the right to put ours while
Senators are asking questions.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The interrogatory of the Senator
from Illinois [Mr. Logan] will be read.

The Chief Clerk read the question of Mr. Logan, as follows:

Q. Did yon have any understanding with any person other than
General Belknap in reference to sending the money you have testified
to or any part of it t If so. with whom was such understanding, and
what was such understanding f

A. I had an understanding on the night of the funeral. I had some
conversation with Mrs. Bower, the present Mrs. Belknap.

Mr. Mana^r McMAHON. We object that that is only getting in-
directly at the same matter that has already been settled by the
Senftte

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair has submitted each of
these questions, and will also submit this, to the Senate.

Mr. LOGAN. I wish to state merely the object of my question.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection! The Chair
hears none, and the Senator will state it.

Mr. LOGAN. There seems to be a kind of vagueness about this
thing, and my object is, if there was an understanding under which
this money was sent, to get at the understanding, what it was, and
with whom it was. I cannot see that that can be objected to. There
must have been an understanding with somebody, and I want to know
whom it was with. That is all there is in the question.

Mr. EDMUNDS. He has stated that he had not any conversation
with anybody in the world but one.

Mr. Manager LAPHAM. The learned Senator will doubtless re-
member that there may be implied as well as express understandings.

Our objection is that this calls for a conversation with a third per-
son, and is the precise question upon which the Senal^ has already
passed. The witness having stated expressly that he had no conver-
sation with the defendant, the question calls for some express conver-
sation, some expression, agreement, or understanding, and not for an
implied or inferential un^rstanding from the acts of the parties.

Mr. CARPENTER. Let me inqure of the manager whether he
admits that there was no express agreement ?

Mr. Manager LAPHAM. Not at all.

Mr. IX)GiQ7. I will change the Isuiguage of the question in one



particular. Where it says " understanding " I will use the word
" agreement."

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Secretary will report the ques-
tion as modified.

The Chief Clerk read as follows :

Q. Did you have any agreement with any person other than Gen-
eral Belknap in reference to sending the money you have testified to
or any part of it f If so, with whom was such agreement and what
was such agreement f

Mr. BLAIR. Mr. President and Senators, this question is substan-
tially the same, in my own judgment, as that upon which this body
has already ruled. Senators will bear us witness that we have uni-
formly objected to this mode of examination. We think that, as the
parties here have represented it, they ought to be allowed to conduct
their own case. The other side have chosen to rest their case upon a
mere technicality by creating a presumption from the transmission
of money that there was an agreement that that money should be
transmitted to us in pursuance of an understanding. We have met
that presumption by the witness flatly contradicting it, and they are
therefore out of court on the case they have made. It is perfectly
apparent to any logical, reasoning mind that the implication which
they seek to bring against us of an understanding or agreement that
we should receive money on account of an appointment which the
party here made is utterly and absolutely rebutted by their own wit-
ness. Now, the attempt is to contradict that witness; to make him
testify to circumstances which will contradict that direct, plain state-
ment.

Mr. Manager HOAR. Would it be agreeable to the learned coun-
sel to permit me to put a question to himf

Mr. BLAIR. Not at this stage of the argument.

Mr. Manager HOAR. I will not do it then.

Mr. BLAIR. I want this body to have a fair understanding of
the case. We are here ready and willing and prepared to meet this
whole case. If they will go into it, and give this picture its clothing
and coloring, and let the Senate and country see the whole of it, and
drag these persons, all of whom are mixed up in it, before the Senate and
the country, let them do it ; we cannot object ; but when they choose to
rest their case upon proof of the reception of money, and thereby
seek to imply an agreement, and when we come in and rebut that
distinctly by showing there was none, by their own witness, it seems
to me that the Senate ought to hesitate before they make another
case for these gentlemen and go piece-meal in attempting to rebut
this testimony. Having gone as far, however, as the Senate has
chosen to go in this matter, it does seem to me that when a Senator
wishes to know the truth and to have an explanation of how it hap-
pens that money was sent to this person, when there was no agree-
ment between him and this person to have it sent, it is perfectly
legitimate to have the truth of that and to show at whose instance
and by whose request this money was transmitted to some person
claiming the money in that way. These gentlemen know, because
the facte are spread far and wide — ^they are facts of record — ^that
there was a person who claimed this money as her own and that she
directed this nloney to be sent in this mode.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. There is nothing of that in the case.

Mr. BLAIK. There is not anything of it in the case, but it is a fact
known to the country and known to us.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. It is not known to us.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Managers will not interrupt the
counsel without their permiMion.

Mr. BLAIR. It is Iraown to you and it is known to the Senate that
there was some arrangement by which this money was sent in that
form ; and now, when it is sought to know by what arrangement and
what person it was, it is objected to. It will lighten the burden of
the defendant to know that there was another person claiming this
money. It seems the gentlemen do not want to lighten our burdens,
but whenever they can get a piece of testimony that will weigh upon
us it is very fair ; they put it m by scraps; but the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, they do not want to know. They only want
to have the Senate know what will criminate this defendant, and not
what will exculpate him. Now I will answer any question the gen-
tlemen desire to ask.

Mr. Manager HOAR. Have you got through your address to the
Senate?

Mr. BLAIR. If you have any question to put, I will answer it be-
fore I sit down. You said you had a question to nut.

Mr. Manager Hoar. But I do not propose to ask it now.

Mr. THtJRMAN. I should like to ask the counsel a question. I
want to understand from him whether he objects to this question
being answered or whether he wants it answered.

Mr. BLAIR I do not object to it. I did object on general princi-
ples to the whole series ; but as these questions are going in, I should
like to have the Senate let something in on our side. They are letting
in everything else that is brought against us. I should like to see a
little fair play.

Mr. Manager HOAR. Mr. President, the question that I proposed
to put to the learned counsel would have conveyed an idea which I
will convey directly to the Senate. I suppose if a judge were on trial
on an impeachment for bribery, and it turned out that a certain suitor
had a case once a year for six years, and it were proved that a bag of
money containing |3,000 as passed up by that suitor to the bench



Digitized by



Google



240



TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. BELKNAP.



every time the case came on, it would not be neoeesary to go any
f urtner and prove an agreement

Mr. BLAIK. That is argument on the merits.

Mr. Manager IIOAK. It would not be necessary to so any further
and prove an agreement to receive that money corruptly. Now sup-
pose that were the state of the proof in the case I have supposed,
would it be material in defense to show that the ba^ of money was
passed up to the judge at the request of the judge's wife once a year f
^That is toe whole of the present proposition.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. President, I should like unanimous
consent to make one remark. As I understand it, the court, exercis-
ing its privilege and against the objection of the respondent, permit-
ted it to be proven that there was a conversation which had relation
in some manner to these payments. I think it is the right of the re-
spondent that that conversation should now be given. It was the
court, not the respondent, who introduced the fact that there was
such conversation that had relation to these payments. I do not think
w6 can fairly exclude the conversation.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Mr. President, if I were at liberty to say any-
thing, as I am not

The PRESIDENT mo tempore. The Chair hears no objection.

Mr. EDMUNDS. I shall object myself ; but if 1 were at liberty I
should say that I did not agree with tbe law of my friend at all ; but
I cannot go into a debate here upon the subject and shall not under-
take to do it.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Secretary will report the ques-
tion.

The Chief Clerk read as follows :

Q. Did you have any agreement with any person other than Qen-
eral Belknap in reference to sending the money you have testified to
or any part of it f If so, with whom was such agreement and what
was such agreement f

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Shall this interrogatory be admit-
ted?

The question being put, a division was called for ; and the ayes
were 18.

Mr. LOGAN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered ; and being taken, resulted — ^yeas
25, nays 21 ; as follows :

YBAS— Messrs. Allison, Booth, Brace, Conkling, Conover, CragixL Dawes,
Feny, FreUnghaysen, Hanrey, Hitohcook, Howe, Inntils, Logan, MitctaelLMorriU,
Morton, Oglesby, Paddock, Patterson, Sherman, Wadleigh, West, Wiadom, and
Wright— 85.

NAYS— Messrs. Bogy, Caperton, Cockrell, Cooper, Davis, Dennis, Edmunds,
(Gordon, Hamilton, Kelly, Kernan, Key, McCreery, Merrimon, Norwood, Baoflom,
Stevenson, Thnrman, waJlaoe, Whyto, and Withers— SI.

NOT VOTINO— Messrs. Alcorn, Anthony, Barnom, Bayard, Bontwell, Borxiaide,
Cameron of Pennsylvania. Cameron of Wisconsin, Christiancy, Clayton. Dorsey,
Eaton, Goldthwaito, Hamlin, Johnston. Jones of Florida, Jones of Nevada, Mc-
Donald, McMillan, Maxey, Kandolph, Robertson, Sargent, Sanlsbnry, Sharan, and
Spencer— 96.

So the question was decided in the affirmative.

The PKESIDENT pro tempore. The witness wiU answer the ques-
tion.

Iffr. CAHPENTEB. Let the question be repeated.

The PRESIDENT pro Umpore, The Secretary will report the ques-
tion.

The Chief Clerk read as follows :

Q. Did you have any agreement with any i>er8on other than Qen-
erai Belknap, in reference to sending the money you have testified to,
or any part of It f If so, with whom was such agreement, and what
was such agreement f

A. I had a conversation with Mrs. Bower, the present Mrs. Bel-
knap, on the niffht of the funeral. She asked me to go up stairs with
her to look at the baby in the nursery. I said to her, as near as I can
remember, "This child will have money coming to it after awhile."
She said. " Yes ; my sister cave the child to me, and told me the money
coming trom. you I must take and keep for it." I am not certain about
the rest of the conversation. I have an indistinct impression of what
was said afterward. I said, very likely, " All right ; but perhaps the
father ought to be consulted," and her reply was that if I sent the
money to him she would get it any way for the ehild, or something
of that kind. That is as far as I remember it ; but I had some un-
derstanding ; I have sometimes thought that I said something to Gen-
eral Belknap that night. My entire recollection is indistinct about
the matter, except her relation of her sister's dying request made an
impression on me more than any other part of the conversation. As
I said before, I have sometimes thought I said something to General
Belknap about it, but I am not at sOl certain. At all events I had
some understanding that night or subsequentlv before the next money
came due — and I do not remember of any subsequently — by which 1
sent the money to General Belknap.

Mr. Manager MoMAHON. Mr. President, if the witness is through
I desire to ask a question now.

Mr. DAWES, t wish to put a question which I desire to have an-
swered.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts
submits an interrogatory, which will be read.

The Chief Clerk read as follows :

Q. Did you or any other person to your knowledge ever explain
to General Belknap what "Southwest" means in your letters inform-



ing him that you had a remittance for him f K so, state the explana-
tion.

A. Never to my knowledge.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. I propose now to propound the f oUow-
ingqn^tion:

When you sent General Belknap the first letter notifying him that
you had a remittance for him "from the S. W.," state whether
he inquired of you by letter or otherwise from what source the money
cameT

Mr. CARPENTER. That we object to, because we object to the
managers retnminff to this case.

Bir. Manager McSLAHON. The managers certainly have aright to
come in now.

Mr. CARPENTER. What gives them that rightt

Mr. Manager McMAHON. To make a further explanation to the
Senate.

Mr. CARPENTER. Iffr. President, both narties have nuKle this
case to the Senate as they have chosen to make it ; and the court has
gone through in its own way, searching for facts, and, I understand,
has rested also. Now is it possible tlmt the parties are to take this
case up a^in and have any rights they would not have^ arising from
the examination as it took place on tneir part respectively f They
cannot go back with snch a question certainly, unless it be on ac-
count of some Questions that the court has put; and that certainly
cannot renew tneir right. They put this witness on the stand and
exhausted him as far as they thought it was safe to do so ; then we
cross-examined him; both parties rested; and now the court has
rested. Now we protest thisht the managers cannot ask any more
questions of this witness.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. Mr. President, I have heard a great deal
from one of the distinguished counsel on the other side and something
from another in regard to getting this case in by piecemeal, and I
have heard a great deal of criticism on the manner in which I have
done it; and I expected my honorable friend [Mr. Carpenter] to
ask this court to nonsuit the Government from the remarks which he
made upon one occasion, that we had made no case, &.o. The only
answer I have to that is that if we have failed to put in the fsyots in
this case to convict their client, they ought to be under the most ever-
last ing obligations of gratitude to us for our want of capacity in man-
aging the case.

Mr. CARPENTER. That is on the ground that you stop now.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. I accept the statement of the gentle-
man and the interruption, because it leads me directly to the next
'Point I am about to make. Tbe other gentleman [Mr. Blair] keeps
complaining all the time that we do not introduce the whole trutn.
Now the honorable gentleman [Mr. Carpenter] had the opportunity
to cross-examine this witness, to put every interrogatory to him that
he chose, and if our examination were short, which it was not, theirs
certainly was extraordinarily brief and, in my jud^ent— I say it
here - substantially a confession of the facts and circumstances in
this case.

But now, to fo further. I understand even the order in which a
witness is examined in a court of justice to be always a matter within
the discretion of a court. A witness who has been fully discharged
and gone may be called back and asked a ouestion because somethmg
new has been developed in the case; and often— it is so laid down
in the elementary books — ^you may recall a witness who has been
absolutely discharged to ask him whether upon a certain occasion at
a certain place he did not say so and so to A B, for the purpose of
calling A B right there to contradict him. That is a very common
practice.

Now after the Senate has in the exercise of its discretion put
further questions to this witness and eliminated a part of the truth
from his bosom, what we want now is directly in the same line to
put a question throwing light upon the very questions that have
been put, and it is this : *^ When you sent General Belknap Hie first
letter notifyinff him that you had a remittance for him ' from the
S. W.,' state wnether he inquired of you by letter or otherwise from
what source the money came f '

K the defendant in this case is an innooent man and had no busi-
ness transactions with Caleb P. Marsh and had nothing in this letter
to notify him that this money was for Mrs. Bower or the child or anv-
thing else, but simply ** I have a remittance for yon from the South-
west," if he is an honest man, a man of high integrity in his Depart-
ment, is he going to fob the money without making any inquiry from
Mr. Marsh by letter '^Why, what is S. W.; where does this fund
come from ; what do you mean, Mr. Marsh ; you do not owe me any
money ; you are not trustee for any of my relations that I know of ;
to what account shall I pass this $1,500 f" Ah, the objection comes
from a confession of guilt, from a knowledge of guilt, a desiro not
to put in the whole truth as the gentleman [Mr. Blair] complains
that we do not piit it in, but from a desire to exclude the whole of it.

Mr. CARPENTER. Mr. President, will the manager allow me to
interrupt him a moment T

Mr. Manager McMAHON. Yes, sir.

Mr. CARI^NTER. The objection to this question is that it 10 out
of time^ and I want to ask the manager if he thinks that ot^Jeotion
makes in order an argument on the merits of the case and the guilt of
this defendant?

Mr. Manager McMAHON. I will say in all candor to the gentle-



Digitized by



Google



TRIAL OF WILLIAM W. BELKNAP.



241



man who has just taken hU seat that if he and his associates only
possessed the gift to see themselves as they see others, they would not
he so critical in their criticisms upon our conduct. My honorable
friend there [Mr. Blair] never rises to discuss a question but what he
talks to the merits, always telline us about some defense that is to
come, always expressing that sublime and childlike confidence in his
client's innocence, that there is not a single fact yet in this case to
warrant. Have I no right to talk about the facts that are in the
case ; have I no right to repel the statement here that we are endeav-
oring to exclude the whole truth f By all means I have the right,
and I say here that I have the right to call for an answer to this
question to throw light upon this important matter and to let us see
whether in this matter he did have knowledge when he was receiving
this money as to the source from which it may have come.

Mr. BLAIR. Mr. President and Senators, I know what the gentle-
man says to be true that a witness may be recalled at any time at the
discretion of the court : but the court presides over the trial and looks
after the interests of justice, and therefore it is within the compe-
tencv of the court, as every lawyer knows, to allow a witness to be
recalled. But I appeal to tnis court and to its discretion and ask this
court to consider whether it is just to allow this witness to be recalled
and re-examined in the manner that it is now sought to do when the
gentlemen have made their case, exhausted the witness, turned him
over to us and we made a very bnef cross-examination, and now when
the manager seeks to have the last word of this witness and to reiter-
ate and ding-dong in the ears of the Senate every time he makes a
speech denunciations of our client as if he was appealing on the last
argument of the case f I appeal to the Senate and to the Justice of
the Senate to know whether such a course of examination ought to
be tolerated.

Mr. CONKLING. Mr. President, in the hope of savinff time, I ask
to have read again a question put by the Senator from Indiana [Mr.
Morton] and the answer to it which I think covers this very ques-
tion. If it does, perhaps we shall get along.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question will be read.

The Chief Clerk read the following question propounded by Mr.
Morton :

Q. Did Qeneral Belknap personally, or through any person, or by
letter, ever inquire of you why this money was sent ; and did you in
any way ever assign to him a reason for it ?

ifr. CONKLING. That covers everything except the "S. W.,"
which is praoticallv included. The answer was that he never did.

Mr. Manager McMAHON. If that is the understanding of the Sen-
ate, we withdraw this question. Of course I do not wish to multiply
the evidence of the same thing. K that covers the ground in the
opinion of the honorable Senator, we withdraw the question.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is withdrawn.

Mr. HOWE. If the court has not closed its case, I should like to
have the question answered which I send to the Chair.

The PRESIDENT j>ro tempore. The question of the Senator from
Wisconsin will be read.

The Chief Clerk read as follows:

Q. Was the money which you sent to (General Belknap designed
for his use or for the use of some other person f



Online LibraryUnited States. CongressCongressional record : proceedings and debates of the ... Congress → online text (page 110 of 172)