GIDEON GRANGER.[24]

Mr. VARNUM moved that the letter of the Postmaster-General be referred

to a select committee to inquire into the subject.

Mr. NELSON hoped the motion would not prevail, as no good purpose could

be answered by the inquiry. It appeared to him to be an affair of honor

between two gentlemen, and Congress had nothing to do with it. If, upon

investigation, the charges were found to be true, Congress had no power

to remove the Postmaster-General from office. For what purpose, then,

were they to waste the time of the House in such an inquiry? That was not

the proper place to make the application; it should have been made to

the President, if made at all, as he had the power of removing officers.

The session was far advanced and limited in its duration. A variety of

important business still remained unfinished, and he feared some of it

would remain so; yet, notwithstanding, the House was called upon to

take up private quarrels between gentlemen. He hoped the motion would

not prevail, and that the gentlemen would be left to settle the dispute

themselves.

Mr. BRYAN called for the yeas and nays.

Mr. ELLIOT.--This House was informed by a member, (Mr. RANDOLPH,) in

language too strong to be misunderstood, that corruption had found its

way within these walls, and that indirect advantages had been taken to

influence the decision of the House upon a question pending before them.

An officer of the Government, who considered his conduct much implicated,

has informed the House, by letter, that he has been informed that his

public conduct has been arraigned, and prays an investigation into it. In

my opinion, nothing can be more just and reasonable than to grant it.

Mr. NICHOLSON.--I recollect but a single instance in which the conduct

of an officer of the Government has been inquired into, at his request;

that was the case of Mr. Wolcott, the late Secretary of the Treasury,

who, upon his resignation, addressed a letter to the House, requesting

an investigation into his conduct. That letter was couched in decent

terms, and the language was such that no member could take umbrage at.

Had the letter of the Postmaster-General been written in the same style,

I should have had no objection to the investigation, although I can see

no good likely to result from it. But it is couched in such language as

this House ought not to listen to. We are told in it, that charges made

by a member of this House are untrue. Are we to sit here, and suffer

such language to be used? I trust not, sir; had I known the language of

the letter, I should have opposed its being read. If gentlemen wish an

investigation into their conduct, they ought to ask it in decent terms;

and I should not oppose it, although, as I before observed, I can see no

good likely to result, for I trust that the Postmaster-General will never

be dignified with an impeachment. If the charges against him are true,

the President ought to remove him, and it is to him that he ought to

justify himself. If, however, gentlemen are anxious that an investigation

should take place, let them lay a resolution to that effect on the table,

and I will give it no opposition; but I will never agree that such a

letter as the one now on the table be referred to a committee, and, by

that means, give a sanction to the language contained in it.

Mr. GREGG regretted that such business had been brought before the House,

especially at so late a period of the session. He did not know for what

purpose an inquiry was to be made; for, supposing the charges to be true,

the House had no power to remove him. The Postmaster-General was not one

of those officers who could be impeached; and the President was the only

one that could remove him. He was opposed to the motion, conceiving that

too much important business remains unfinished, to take up new matters,

which would answer no good purpose whatever.

Mr. CLARK was opposed to the reference of the letter, on account of the

language which it contained. It charged a member of the House with having

uttered falsehood. In his opinion, such language ought not to receive any

sanction from the House.

Mr. LYON.--I feel, Mr. Speaker, a sympathy for the Postmaster-General,

who, as well as myself, was so egregiously belied yesterday by the member

from Virginia, (Mr RANDOLPH.)

[Here Mr. NICHOLSON called Mr. LYON to order, whereupon the latter sat

down, when the SPEAKER decided that the words were out of order.]

After this decision was made, Mr. LYON again rose to proceed, and was

again called to order, but the SPEAKER determining that he was in order,

Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 3 (of 16) · 第 76 / 232 题