USA > Arkansas > The aftermath of the civil war, in Arkansas > Part 23
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26
"The committee are now informed by some that there is certain evidence in the city of New York and other places that will sustain the charges. From others, by whom we were informed of the abundance and sufficiency of proof at hand, the committee can get no information whatever. And such information as the committee have been able to obtain is in the opinion of the committee
327
CIVIL WAR, IN ARKANSAS
entirely inadequate to sustain the charges against the Governor, and too frivolous to attempt a further prose- cution of this case.
"And believing as we did, when we voted to impeach Governor Clayton, that it is not only the right but the sworn duty of a Representative of the people to protect their rights by a thorough investigation of the official acts of their servants, however high the position they occupy, we here take occasion to say, with the lights then before us, we would do so again.
"The committee entered upon a discharge of the duties imposed upon them with a full determination that to the best of their ability they would vindicate the rights of the people; but, while they are ready and willing to vindicate the people's rights, they are unwilling to prose- cute this case further when they have no grounds to believe that they can, from any proof within the knowl- edge or reach of the committee, prosecute this case to a successful termination.
"In view of the facts above stated, and the further fact the people demand at our hands such relief as we are able to give by legislation, the committee would re- spectfully recommend the adoption of the following reso- lution :
"Resolved: That further proceedings in the im- peachment of Powell Clayton be dispensed with, and that the action of this House heretofore taken be set aside and cancelled; that the Senate be informed of the action of this House in the premises by the clerk of the House, and that the committee as the board of managers be discharged."
The primary object of the impeachment proceedings was to cause my suspension from office, the induction of Lieutenant-Governor Johnson to the Gubernatorial chair,
328
THE AFTERMATH OF THE
and such delay in the prosecution of the impeachment that I would have remained indefinitely out of office, while my enemies worked out their ulterior purposes.
The disastrous failure of this whole conspiracy greatly strengthened me with my party, as is shown by the re- sults of my second election to the United States Senate, which occurred on March 15, 1871, when I received a two-thirds majority on joint ballot : all Republicans,-18 votes in the Senate 8 and 42 in the House.9
FOOTNOTES FOR CHAPTER XV
1 Arkansas House Journal, 1871, pp. 369-371.
2 Arkansas House Journal, 1871, pp. 371-372.
3 Arkansas House Journal, 1871, pp. 376-377.
4 Arkansas Senate Journal, 1871, pp. 188-189.
5 Arkansas House Journal, 1871, pp. 512-514.
6 Arkansas House Journal, 1871, p. 519.
7 Arkansas House Journal, 1871, pp. 538-541.
8 Arkansas Senate Journal, 1871, p. 273.
º Arkansas House Journal, 1871, p. 716.
329
CIVIL WAR, IN ARKANSAS
CHAPTER XVI
MY SENATORIAL INVESTIGATION
I now come to a question which gave me much trouble but which in the end, in the investigation of my right to a seat in the United States Senate, led to my most trium- phant vindication and the complete downfall of my politi- cal enemies.
At the fall election of 1870 illegal polls were set up in Pulaski County for the purpose of electing Joseph Brooks, James L. Hodges, and other political enemies of mine to the State Legislature.
The election for Representatives to Congress was held at the same time, and in the district of which Pulaski County was a part the candidates for the Lower Hotise of Congress were John Edwards, Democrat, and Thomas Boles, Republican. Some time after this election, but before all the returns had been certified to the Secretary of State, information came to me from the very highest sources (being no less than from the Supreme Court and the Legislative Department of the State) which satisfied me that what purported to be returns in the office of the Secretary of State for eight precincts in the county of Pulaski were the returns of bogus elections, and conse- quently were no returns at all in the legal acceptation of the term.
In three of the precincts referred to, two sets of polls were held,-one by the legally appointed officers, and the other by persons who, under false pretenses, usurped
330
THE AFTERMATH OF THE
the lawful authority and held illegal elections. Mani- festly both polls could not have been legal, since the law only authorized one set of polls in each precinct. The county clerk, who was a party to the frauds, certified to the Secretary of State the returns of the unauthorized judges, and declined to certify the returns of the regular judges.
Upon a writ of mandamus the case was heard by the Supreme Court of the State and a decision was rendered, with the concurrence of the full bench, that the elections held by the judges appointed by the Board of Registration were the legal elections, and that the others were illegal and void; and the county clerk was compelled to certify the returns accordingly.
Thus we had in the office of the Secretary of State what purported to be two sets of election returns for the three precincts referred to, and in the exercise of what I conceived to be not only a wise discretion but my sworn duty I discarded the returns of the election de- clared illegal and void by the Supreme Court.
A short time after the assembling of the Legislature, which had been chosen at this election, a resolution was passed by both Houses and a joint committee appointed to investigate the election frauds I have referred to. In their report, made to the Legislature on February II, 1871,1 they gave a detailed account of the result of their investigations and declared it to be the opinion of the committee that the elections held in the precincts alluded to should be declared void.
Thus the legislative department and the State Su- preme Court concurred in the decision that the elections so held were null and void. In accordance with these decisions the returns from these elections were excluded from the count, and by this act it appeared that John Edwards was elected to Congress from the Third Con-
331
CIVIL WAR, IN ARKANSAS
gressional District of Arkansas; therefore on the 20th of February I issued a proclamation 2 giving to Edwards a certificate of election. "The head and front of my of- fending hath this extent, no more." For this I was in- dicted by the United States Court.
As an election for a Senator to Congress was soon to take place in Arkansas, the opposition to the administra- tion gave forth statements that the certificate of election was issued to John Edwards, Democrat, in pursuance of a trade, whereby I was to receive the support of the Democratic members of the Legislature for my election to the United States Senate.
Prior to this I had been elected to the United States Senate, but had declined the election for the reason that the Republican party felt that its interests would not be safe in the hands of the Lieutenant-Governor. However, during the interim between my first and second Senatorial election an arrangement took place which resulted in White's resigning the office of Secretary of State and the Lieutenant-Governor's being appointed in his place. In connection with these changes I was charged with having contributed money and bonds to secure White's resigna- tion.
I did not formally answer this charge during the investigation in the United States Senate. I had taken the floor to do so when Senator Hitchcock, of Nebraska, came to me and urged that I should not enter upon the dis- cussion of that particular point lest it might result in the re-reference of the report to the committee and there- by delay the proceedings,-already unreasonably pro- longed, -- when at that moment an ample number of votes could be had to insure the passage of the majority report.
With the exception of stating that I was ready to go before the bar of the Senate and take oath that I had not
332
THE AFTERMATH OF THE
contributed any money or bonds for Mr. White, I imme- diately accepted Senator Hitchcock's suggestion.
I now take this occasion to say emphatically that I contributed neither money nor bonds to the fund raised and held by Jackson E. Sickels for Mr. White. Senator Hadley, who participated in the arrangement for White's resignation and who became Lieutenant-Governor in the place of Johnson, is still living and can bear witness to this statement.
I was told by Jackson E. Sickels that the money and bonds to indemnify Secretary White against the loss of his railroad interest, should he resign, were contributed by Mr. Sawin, the contractor for the building of the Mis- sissippi, Ouachita, and Red River Railroad.
The contractors for the various railroads aided by the State were entirely dependent upon the sale of State Aid bonds for the completion of their work. Therefore, they had become very much alarmed by Lieutenant-Governor Johnson's expressions of hostility against State Aid to Railroads, and by his open espousal, in his "Serenade Speech" published on pages 265-269, of the course pur- sued by Governor Senter of Tennessee, Governor Walker of Virginia and others, in what was termed the "sell-out" of those States to the Democracy.
They realized that Johnson's accession to the gov- ernorship would be fatal to their interests, and for self- protection the indemnifying fund for Secretary White was raised.
Whether Mr. Sawin was assisted by others in a simi- lar position I do not know, but I believe the reader will agree with me that, under the circumstances, this action was entirely justifiable.
Secretary White testified before the Investigating Committee that his railroad interest, against the loss of which the fund was raised, was confiscated, as he had
----
333
CIVIL WAR, IN ARKANSAS
feared it would be, and that thereafter the indemnifying fund was turned over to him.
The only connection I had with the transaction was to assure Secretary White that should he lose his railroad interest through his resignation, I would exert my in- fluence to see that the arrangement to indemnify him was faithfully carried out.
On the 15th of March, 1871, about one month after the issuance of the certificate to Edwards, I was again elected to the United States Senate 3 by a two-thirds ma- jority on joint ballot. At this second election, in direct refutation of the charge that I had issued the certificate to Edwards to secure the support of the Democratic mem- bers, but one Democrat voted for me in both Houses. I can only account for his vote by the fact that he was a Methodist preacher and a conscientious man !
Upon my going to Washington, O. A. Hadley, who was president of the Senate, became acting Governor of Arkansas. When I took my seat in the United States Senate the Joint Committee to "Inquire into the Condition of the Late Insurrectionary States," of which Arkansas was one, was in session at the Capitol, and in September, 1871, it examined Edward Wheeler and William G. Whipple, both of Arkansas. In the report of this Com- mittee, made on January 9, 1872, the following language is used :4
"The testimony of these witnesses ( Wheeler and Whip- ple) tends to impeach the official character and conduct of a member of the United States Senate from the State of Arkansas, and also to affect the right of a member of the House of Representatives from that State to re- tain his seat in the House.
"Other evidence of the same character was offered, and one of the gentlemen affected by this testimony claimed
334
THE AFTERMATH OF THE
the right to bring witnesses before the committee to con- tradict or explain the same. (Why did not the Sena- tor state that it was I who made the demand to be heard before that committee and was refused upon the ground that they were about to close their work?) The com- mittee, however, upon consideration, decided that the subject-matter to which said testimony related did not come within the limits of the investigation they were di- rected to make, and therefore declined to prosecute the inquiry any further, discharging a witness who had been subpænaed and was then awaiting examination. The joint select committee, pursuing what it deemed the proper parliamentary course, at a meeting on December 21, 1871, adopted the following resolution :
" 'Resolved : That the committee report the testimony taken before it, affecting Senator Clayton and Mr. Ed- wards, a Representative from Arkansas, to the Senate and House of Representatives, with a recommendation that each House take such action as it may deem proper.'
"Agreeable to this resolution of said joint select com- mittee, the undersigned Chairman on the part of the Sen- ate and the Chairman on the part of the House of Repre- sentatives beg leave to submit the testimony of Edward Wheeler and William G. Whipple, both of the State of Arkansas, said Wheeler and Whipple having been the only witnesses from that State who were examined by the committee, to the Senate and House of Representatives, for such action as each House may deem advisable."
After the above recommendations had been submitted to the Senate, Mr. Scott, the Chairman on the part of the Senate, made the following explanation :
"The testimony directed to be reported covers over thirty pages and the Senate would not listen to that now,
335
CIVIL WAR, IN ARKANSAS
but it is due to the Senator (Mr. Clayton) who is im- plicated by this report that I should make a very brief statement of the reasons that have induced the committee to make the report.
"The witnesses who were called were called primarily with reference to some judicial proceedings that were then pending in Arkansas. Their testimony revealed the fact that indictments were pending in that State against Sena- tor Clayton, which were not yet tried. Since the time these witnesses were examined before the committee the indictments have been dismissed in that court, not upon a trial but upon a demurrer to the indictments. . . Other incidental testimony was elicited; but the point which struck the committee as requiring them to take the course which they did, presented briefly, was this : It is charged that Senator Clayton, as Governor of Arkansas, made a bargain with the Democrats in that Legislature that he would disregard the returns of the election upon file with reference to the candidates for Congress,-Mr. Ed- wards and Mr. Boles,-and issue a certificate to Mr. Ed- wards, the returns showing Mr. Boles to be elected, in consideration of the support of the Democratic portion of that Legislature for the office of United States Sena- tor." 5
Thus it was that these unfounded charges were brought before the Congress of the United States, and that, too, in the face of the decision of the Supreme Court of the State and the Legislative Department. It merely goes to show that I was to be discredited and cast off, no matter what methods were resorted to, on the mistaken principle, I suppose, that "the end justifies the means." This was only one of a series of similar at- tempts, and its complete and ignominious failure proves that right will triumph in the end.
336
THE AFTERMATH OF THE
After the report was read and Mr. Scott had made the remarks above quoted, I said: "As I am the Senator implicated in this testimony, and as I do not care to lie under imputations one day longer than can possibly be avoided, I ask of the Senate unanimous consent to pro- ceed to the present consideration of the report." 6 The consent of the Senate was obtained and I addressed that body on the subject matter of the report, and in closing requested a full and thorough investigation, in the follow- ing language : "I ask of the Senate that an opportunity may be afforded me to defend myself against the asper- sions of two political, and I may say personal, enemies ; for the assaults made upon me by them and their co- adjutors transcend the ordinary rules of political war- fare. Since investigation is the order, let us have one in this case that will allow both sides to be heard; and if in the course of that inquiry it shall be found that im- proper acts or motives attach to me, then so be it. Let the Senate know it and the country know it; but if, upon the contrary, it shall be found that the dart which has been hurled at me by the hand of vindictive malice shall fail to reach its mark, or, like the Australian boomerang, shall return to lacerate the hand that projected it, then let that fact be made known and let the responsibility rest where it belongs. I ask, Mr. President, for a spe- cial committee clothed with the necessary powers to carry out the object of this inquiry." 7
Immediately after these remarks Mr. Wright offered the following resolution: "Resolved: That the report of the committee and the testimony accompanying be re- ferred to a special committee of three, with powers to send for persons and papers, to investigate and report upon the charges therein contained against Hon. Powell Clayton, a member of this body." 8
This resolution was considered by unanimous consent,
337
CIVIL WAR, IN ARKANSAS
and agreed to, and the appointment of the committee was left to the Chair, who named as such committee Mr. Wright, Mr. Morrill, and Mr. Norwood.
The investigations of this special committee were begun on the 18th day of January, 1872. James L. Hodges, of Arkansas, obtained leave of the committee to prosecute the charges before them, and I was present in person and by my counsel, Hon. Thomas M. Bowen and Hon. John McClure, both of Arkansas. The com- mittee held almost daily sessions from the day last named until and including the 14th day of May, when the testi- mony was closed. During that time they examined thirty- eight witnesses, whose testimony covered about 5,000 manuscript pages. Much of this testimony was absolutely irrelevant, as will be seen from the following extract from the majority report : 9
"We are justified in saying that much of it was taken and received de bene esse. In other words, for the prose- cution it was claimed that they would be able to show certain combinations, conspiracies, and corrupt agreements which, if established, would make such testimony compe- tent and relevant. For the defense it was insisted that this state of case could not be shown, and in no event could such testimony be admissible under the resolution of the Senate and the matter submitted for our investiga- tion, but in view of the possibility of its being so held, they submitted their testimony to meet the case supposed by the prosecution."
As the taking of the testimony in the case was not completed until the 14th day of May and Congress ad- journed on the Ioth of the next month, there was not sufficient time for the special committee to examine the mass of testimony and make a report before the adjourn-
338
THE AFTERMATH OF THE
ment, and the matter was carried over to the next session of Congress, which assembled on the 2d of December, 1872.
On the 26th of February, 1873, Mr. Wright, Chair- man of the Special Committee, asked and obtained leave to submit the report of the committee on the charges against me. In presenting the report he made the fol- lowing remarks :10
"I present the report of the Select committee ap- pointed in January, a little over a year ago, to inquire into certain charges against Hon. Powell Clayton. a Sena- tor from the State of Arkansas. In view of the length of time since the appointment of the committee I think it due to the committee and the Senate, if not to the coun- try, that I should make a word of explanation. We en- tered on the discharge of our duties immediately upon our appointment. We devoted from two to three hours each day to the investigation. The testimony was closed near the adjournment of the last session. Being unable to examine all the testimony before the last session of Congress adjourned, we made a partial report.11
"Immediately upon our re-appointment at this ses- sion we entered on the discharge of this duty and have examined the entire testimony (about 5,000 pages) for the purpose of determining what was admissible and what was not. This has necessarily taken days and weeks, and only now have we concluded the examination of such testi- mony and determined what was admissible under the rule thus established. I submit the majority report, with the accompanying testimony."
In this report, in referring to the charges under con- sideration, Mr. Wright said: "As there are no specific charges in the report itself, the testimony of the witnesses
339
CIVIL WAR, IN ARKANSAS
must stand alone in the place of charges, the information, or indictment. Than this few things could be more in- definite or unsatisfactory; so entirely wanting in every- thing approximating conciseness, clearness, or definite- ness." 12
Further on he said: "As we read the record, Senator Clayton received a clear majority in each branch of the General Assembly, outside of those claimed to be fraudu- lently elected, and some of those whose elections are thus assailed, voted against him, and this alone is all that need be stated upon this subject. So it only remains to inquire into the alleged frauds connected with the elec- tion. And here the principal if not the only one is that Senator Clayton issued to Hon. John Edwards a certifi- cate of election to the House of Representatives of the present Congress, upon a corrupt bargain or agreement that he was to receive in return for the same the support of the Democratic members of the General Assembly. If this charge is not sustained we hazard but very little in saying that there is nothing left of this case, and a brief statement will show how utterly groundless it is in fact." 13
"By the decision of the Supreme Court and the report of the committee in the Legislature the elections held by the regular judges were determined to be the only legal ones, and following these decisions the Governor gave the certificate of election to Edwards. It would certainly be most extraordinary to say that the Executive of a State may not follow the decision of its highest judicial tribunal, -- that he may not act upon the proceedings of the Legis- lative branch." 14 "But this is not all. General Edwards was given the certificate on the 20th of February, 1871. Governor Clayton was not elected until the 15th of March. He did not receive any votes under any such agreement, and least of all any number sufficient to in- fluence the result."
340
THE AFTERMATH OF THE
"Hence, we conclude that nothing could be plainer or more manifest than that this charge is totally and en- tirely unsustained !" 15 "What he wanted was not votes, for he had them, but he wanted such a condition of things as that he could take the office and keep faith with his friends." 16
He concluded his report with the following resolution : "Resolved: That the charges made and referred to the select committee for investigation, affecting the official character and conduct of the Hon. Powell Clayton, are not sustained, and that the Committee be discharged from their further consideration." 17
No immediate action was had on this report, and the minority committee asked and obtained leave to present its views, which was done on March 1, 1873.15 This report of the minority, presented by Senator Norwood. was based largely on the testimony of one W. H. Mc- Connell, concerning whom Mr. Wright, in the majority report, gave forth the following statement :
"One witness (McConnell) undertakes to bring all the matters detailed by him, or many of them, home to the Senator. But we feel bound to say that, in many respects, his story is improbable, and he stands before us in such an attitude that we are constrained to discredit much that he says. While before us he was almost a wreck from long continued dissipation, and we were com- pelled to put him under treatment for several days be- fore his testimony could be completed. It seems to us that no tribunal would be justified in condemning anyone upon the mere recollections of such a witness months after the transactions occurred." 19
During the proceedings in the Senate, Mr. Cameron, a Senator from Pennsylvania, made the following state- ment concerning the witness McConnell :
"Mr. President, as the doors are now open and what
.
341
CIVIL WAR, IN ARKANSAS
I say will be put before the public, I desire to state that I was told to-day for the first time that an important wit- ness in the case of the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Clayton) is a person called McConnell, and I learned, too, that he belonged to the State which I have the honor in part to represent. He belongs to a very respectable family there, a family of great ability. Nearly all of them have great talents, but sometimes they do not use them for the best purposes, though most of them, I think, do. He is a native, I think, of the town of my colleague. But I remember this of him, that he is perhaps the most unreliable man that ever was born in the State of Penn- sylvania. We have some bad men there, but I do not think anybody quite so bad as he.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.