Skip to main content

Full text of "Proceedings in the Cases of the Impeachment of Charles Robinson, Governor, John W. Robinson ..."

See other formats 


Google 



This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 




MICROFILMED 



>'W«^ *^* M -^N^iVlM^H 




/ * . -• 



- / * 



IN THE 



CASES 



OF THE 



IMPEACHMENT 



OF 



CHAKLES EOBINSON, Governor; JOHN W. ROB- 
INSON, Secretary of State; GEORGE S. 
HILLYER, Auditor of State, 
OF KANSAS. 



JPTTBIiTSlKC'Fm IBTST A - X7 ' r Jr lO RlT X . 



-i 



LAWRENCE: 

XAXBAS BTATB JOtTKNAL STBAM nOSB. 



1862. 



IBS HSA voaK 

393559B 



PROOEEDINQS 



IN TBK 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 



In the House of Representatives on January 30tli, 1862, Mr. 
Anderson offered tlie following resolution : 

" Whereas, It appears from the reports of the Auditor and 
Treasnrer of State, that a certain amount of the bonds of the State 
have been disposed of; and whereas, said reports do not fully set 
forth a detailed statement of the facts in relation thereto ; therefore 

"Resolvedy That a special committee of five be appointed by the 
Chair to examine and investigate the accounts of the Auditor and 
Treasurer of State, and to ascertain all the facts connected with the 
sale of the bonds of the State of Kansas, the disposition of the 
proceeds thereof, what amount of scrip there has been issued, what 
amount redeemed, and what amount has been bonded, what amount 
of bonds are remaining on hand and unsold, and whether or not 
State officers have been speculating in the indebtedness of the State 
of Ki^nsas, with full power and authority to send for persons and 
papers, with instructions to report at an early day." 

Mr. Thoman offered the following amendment which was 
accepted : '^ By what authority the Treaauser of this State, receives 
$12,400 for 831,000 of War Bonds, when the law authorized only 
the issue of $20,000 of bonds for war purposes." 

Besolution as amended was adopted. 

On the next day the Speaker appointed, as the above committee , 
Messrs. Anderson, Carney, Clark, 8th District; Hartley and Jones, 
14th District 



PROCEEDINOS IN THE 



On the 13tli of February Mr. Anderson, from said committee, 
made the following report : 



BEPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE 

APPOINTED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO INVESTIGATE 

THE ACCOUNTS OF THE AUDITOR AND TREASURER OF STATE. 

THE SALE OF BONDS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. &o., kd 

JANUARY 30. 1808. 

The Special Committee to whom was entrusted the duty of inves- 
tigating the sale of Kansas State Bonds, and the Accounts of 
the State Auditor and Treasurer, heg leave to submit the following 
report: 

On Thursday, the 30th day of January, 1862, the House of 
Bepresentatives adopted the following Preamble and Besolutien, 
from which your Committee derive their authority, to wit : 

^'Whereas, It appears from the reports of the Auditor and 
Treasurer of State, that a certain amount of the Bonds of the State 
have been disposed of; and, whereas, said reports do not fully set 
forth a detailed statement of the facts in relation thereto ; therefore, 

^^Resolvedy That a Special Committee of five be appointed by the 
Chair to examine and investigate the accounts of the Auditor and 
Treasurer of State, and to ascertain all the facts connected with the 
sale of Bonds of the State of Kansas, the disposition of the proceeds 
thereof, what amount of scrip there has been issued, what amount 
redeemed, and what amount has been bonded, what amount of bonds 
are remaining on hand and unsold, and whether or not State officers 
have been speculating in the indebtedness of the State of Kansas, 
with full power and authority to send for persons and papers, with 
instructions to report at an early day/' 

Before proceeding to call testimony touching the subject matter 
of investigation, it was deemed best to make a careful examination 
of the different Statutes of the State in relation thereto. They find 
that an act was passed by the last Legislature and approved May 
8d, 1861, authorizing certain persons, to wit: Austin M. Clark and 
James C. Stone, to negotiate the sale of one hundred and fifty 
thousand dollars of the Bonds of the State, and report to the Legis- 
lature, within seventy days, their acts in the premises. By reference 






IMPEAOHMENT OASES. 5 

to the Journals of the last Session, and on page 882, it will be seen 
that they did report that any attempt at that time to negotiate the 
sale of Kansas Bonds, would be utterly useless and unavailing. 
After reoeiying the report of said Commissioners, an act was passed 
the Legislature, and approyed June 7th, 1861, supplementary to 
the first named act, authorising the sale of one hundred thousand 
dollars of the Bonds of the State, for not less than seyenty cents on 
the dollar. This act giyes authority to the Governor, Secretary of 
State, and Auditor, to negotiate the sale of these Bonds, a majority 
of whom can act. This law provides that the Treasurer shall pre- 
pare Bonds to the amount of one hundred thousand dollars, with 
coupons attached, bearing interest at the rate of seven per cent, per 
annum, and to be made payable in fifteen years. The interest to be 
paid semi-annually. 

Another act was passed by said Legislature, which was approved 
June 7th, 1861, providing for the issuance of twenty thousand dollars 
of the Bonds of the State, bearing ten per cent, interest, afid made 
payable in two years. 

These are the only acts that your Committee have been able to 
find bearing upon the matter of the sale of Kansas State Bonds. 

With regard to Bonds issued by the State during the year 1861 , 
under the acts referred to, your Committee would state that the total 
issue of Bonds of every description amounted to $189,400. Of 
these, $40,000 were ten per cent. Bonds, issued under the act of 
Hay 7th, and known as War Bonds. Thirty-one thousand dollars 
of these ten per cent. Bonds have been sold by the Treasurer to B. 
8. Stevens, for forty cents on the dollar; the balance are in the 
Treasurer's hands. It appears, on evidence before us, that a large 
portion of these Bonds ($26,000) were sold by Mr. Stevens to the 
Interior Department at Washington for ninety-five cents on the 
•dollar. Of the seven per cent. Bonds, $62,200 were used in taking 
up State scrip, and $87,200 were delivered to R. S. Stevens, for 
which sixty cents on the dollar was to be accounted for by him to the 
State. It appears, from evidence before us, that these Bonds were 
sold to the Interior Department at Washington for eighty-five cents 
on the dollar. The evidence before your Committee regarding the 
sale of Bonds is quite lengthy, and will be placed before your body 
in printed form. 

The conclusion arrived at by your Committee are such as to 
warrant them in the belief that this House will take decisive meas- 
ures, and deeming a fair and full examination of all the evidence 



6 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

proper in the premises, would commend it to the attention of the 
House. 

Of the $40,000 issued under the act of May 7th, your Committee 
are clearly of the opinion that $20,000 are illegal, and the House 
should take some action regarding them. 

Your Committee also are clearly of the opinion that the Treasurer 
had no authority to sell any of the ten per cent. Bonds at less than 
par, and is liahle to the State for the face of all ten per cent. Bonds 
sold, and of which $12,400 haye heen paid into the Treasury, leaving 
a deficiency on Bonds sold, to be accounted for, of $18,600. 

Of the seven per cent. Bonds sold, your Committee would call 
attention to the fact that they are sold by Mr. Stevens as State 
Agent, he deriving his authority from the State officers authorised 
by law to sell these Bonds. It appears, on evidence, that he was 
authorized by them to have all he could realize over sixty cents on 
the dollar. Your Committee are of the opinion that the State 
officers are not authorized by law to make any such agreement, and 
believe Mr. Stevens liable to the State for all Bonds sold by him, 
for the full amount far which he negotiated the Bondsy viz : eighty* 
five cents on the dollar. An unlawful act cannot be rendered lawful 
by any sanction given it by State officers, in the opinion of your 
Committee. We would further state that, from the evidence before 
us, it appears that the $87,200 of seven per cent. Bonds were not 
negotiated with the Interior Department until after the semi-annual 
interest had matured, the Bonds having been issued on July 1st, 
1861, and negotiated on or about January 1st, 1862. This interest, 
amounting to $3,052, it appears upon evidence, has been paid to K. 
S. Stevens, and thus the State has realized on Bonds sold but fifty- 
six and a half cents on the dollar. Your Committee are of the 
opinion that this interest properly belongs to the State. 

We would further state, that of the $87,200 of Bonds placed in 
the hands of R« S. Stevens, it appears upon evidence that he has 
accounted to the State for $56,200, at bixty cents on the dollar, by 
the payment into the treasury of 833,720 — the balance of the Bonds 
($31,000) being negotiated with but not paid for by the Interior 
Department at Washington. Your Committee would recommend 
that an act be at once created, appointing an Agent to go to Wash- 
ington to take charge of this property, with full power to transact 
all further business necessary in the matter on behalf of the State. 

Your Committee call special attention to the extracts from letters, 
and the receipts, copies of contract, and appointment, accompanying 
the evidence. 



IMPEACHMENT 0A8ES. 7 

In reference to the State Treasurer, the Committee ask time to 
take further testimony, Trtiioh, in their opinion, is necessary to a 
proper disposal of the case. 

From the evidence which your Committee submit with this report, 
they are of the opinion that there has been a collusion of Charles 
Bobins on, George S. Hillyer and John W. Bobinson, with B. S. 
Stevens, to defraud the State of Kansas of a large sum of money. 

Your Committee therefore unanimously report the following 

resolution, and recommend ite adoption, as a measure demanded by 

public justice and a proper regard for the rights of the people of 

Kansas. 

Resolvedy That Charles Bobinson, Governor, John W. Bobinson, 
Secretary of State, and George S. Hillver, Auditor of the State of 
Kansas, be and they are hereby impeached of high misdemeanors in 
office. 

MABTIN ANDEBSON, Chairman. 

H. L. JONES, 

B. W. HABTLEY, 

THOMAS CABNEY, 

SIDNEY CLABKE. 



State op Kansas, Executive Office, ) 
Topeka, January 29, 1862. j 

To the House of RepretenUUives : 

Gentlemen: I have the honor herewith to transmit the report 
of the Auditor of State, and his answer to House resolution relating 

to the sale of State Bonds. 

Very respectfuMy, 

C. BOBINSON. 

Auditor's Office, ) 
Topeka, January 27, 1862. j 

Gov. C. Bobinson: 

SiE : In reply to the'resolutions adopted by the House of Bepre- 
sentatives the 20th inst!, calling upon you for information as to the 
sale of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of State bonds of the 
State of Kansas, authorized to bo issued by act of May 3d, 1861, 
and an act supplementary thereto, approved June 3d, 1861, I have 
the honor to state as follows. Sixty-two thousand two hundred 
dollars of the bonds were issued to various persons in taking up and 
redeeming State scrip held by them, leaving a balance of bonds 



'9 PBOOSSDINQB IN THE 

unsold of $87,800. Under an act approved May 8d, 1861, Meesn. 
Clark and Stone were authorized to negotiate said bonds, and after 
much effort were unable to do so, not succeeding in getting an 
offer. 

The Goremor, Secretary of State, and Auditor were then consti- 
tuted a board, with authority to dispose of the same. 

This board used erery effort to effect a sale, but could find no 
purchaser. 

Parties who had funded their State scrip, owing to the depressed 
state of the finances of the country, in order to raise money were 
compelled to sell, and were offering and selling their bonds at prices 
ayeraging about forty cents on the dollar ; thus establishing prices 
beyond which the State could not easily realize for the bonds 
undisposed of. The importance of the selling of the residue of the 
State Donds must be apparent to every mind, in view of the sinking 
credit of the State. 

The Secretary of State and myself went East last fall, and sought 
in vain to find purchasers in any financial community. We then 
proposed to R. S. Stevens, Esq., to undertake their sale as an agent. 
'This he at last consented to do, provided he could receive all he 
could obtain over sixty cents on the dollar. To this we agreed, and 
entered into a contract accordingly. After great effort and much 
delay, Mr. Stevens succeeded in making a sale of $87,200 of bonds 
—$50,000 of the denomination of $500 each; $37,200 of the 
denomination of $100 each. He has paid into the State treasunr 
$80,000 in cash; the balance, something over $20,000, is on deposit 
in New York, and will be paid into the State treasury as called for. 

Respectfully yours, 

GEO. S. HILLTBR, 



John W. Robinson, Secretary of State. 



Auditor of State. 



Gkorge S. HiUyer being sworn and examined, says : 

Q. What office do you hold in the State of Kansas ? 

A. State Auditor. 

Q. What is the total amount of warrants drawn by you on the 
Treasurer, durine the year A. D. 1861 ? 

A. Sixty-six thousand dollars — ^perhaps a little over. 

Q. What is the total amount of bonds issued by the State of 
Kansas, during the year A. D. 1861 ? 

A. One hundred and eighty-nine thousand four hundred dollan. 

Q. What amount of bonds were issued under the act of the legis- 
lature authorising the negotiation of one hundred and fifty thousand 
dollars of bonds to defray current expenses of the State, approved 
JMav 1st, 1861 1 

A. Fifty thousand dollars. 



IMPEACHMENT GASES. 9 

Q. Wkat amount of bonds were issued under an act supplemental 
to said act, and approved June 5th, 1861 ? 

A. Nmety>nine thousand four hundred dollars. 

Q. What amount of bonds were issued under the act authori- 
siDg the State to borrow twenty thousand dollars to repel invasion, 
Ac., approved May 7th, 1861 ? 

A. Forty thousand dollars. 

Q. What amount of State bonds, of every description, were nego- 
tiated by the State during the year 1861 ? 

A. One hundred and eighty thousand four hundred dollars. 

Q. What amount of bonds issued under the act of May 3d, 1861, 
were negotiated ? 

A. Fifty thousand dollars. , 

Q. What amount of the bonds, issued under the supplemental act 
of June 5th, 1861, were negotiated ? 

A. Ninety-nine thousand four hundred dollars. 

Q. What amount of the war bonds were negotiated ? 

A. Thirty-one thousand dollars, v 

Q. By whom were bonds issued under the act of May 3d, 1861, 
negotiated where, and with whom ? 

A. By myself and Secretary of State at Washington, to R. S. 
Stevens. 

Q. By whom were the bonds issued under the supplemental act, 
approved June 5th, negotiated where, and to whom ? 

A. Sixty-two thousand two hundred were sold in taking up 
outstanding warrants. Thirty-seven thousand two hundred dollars 
were sold by myself and the Secretary of State, at Washington, to 
B. S. Stevens. 

Q. By whom were the bonds issued under the act authorizing the 
8tat« to borrow twenty thousand dollars to repel invasion, and 
approved May 7th, 1861, sold where, and to whom? 

A. Sold by the Treasurer, can't state when, to R. S. Stevens. 

Q. For what amount on the dollar were the bonds issued under 
the act of May 3d, negotiated ? 

A. Sixty cents on the dollar. 

Q. For what amount on the dollar were the bonds issued under 
the supplemental act of June 5th, negotiated ? 

A. Same price. 

Q. For what amount on the dollar was the bonds issued under the 
act authorising the State to borrow twenty thousand dollars, &c., 
negotiated ? 

A. Forty cents on the dollar. 

Q. What amount of serip has been redeemed by State bonds ? 

A. Forty-three thousand five hundred and forty dollars. 

Q. Was an appropriation of one thousand dollars for stationery 
made by the legislature, bonded ? 

A. It was. The bonds were issued to the Secretary of State. 

Q. At what time were the bonds issued ? 

A. Some time in September or the first of October. They were 
issued by the Treasurer in my absence. They were bonds which I 



10 PBOCEEDINQS IN THE 

liad previously countersigned. I had not issued warrants at the 
time the bonds were issued. 

Q. Were there any vouchers filed in your office at the time the 
bonds were issued? 

A. There were none. They were issued upon the word of the 
Secretary that he needed the money to meet expenditures for sta- 
tionery, &c. I have never seen the bills of the expenditure. 
The Secretary has stated that be had the bills, with one exception, 
which bill he would send ip Chicago and procure. 

Q. Has the Secretary ever filed any original bills of any descrip- 
tion in your office ? 

A. I think he has not. 

Q. Does the Secretary draw an appropriation for expenses on his 
own statement of bill of expenses ? 

A. He does. 

Q. Has he always drawn the full amount of every appropriation ? 

A. He has. 

R. S. Stevens was appointed agent to sell Kansas State bonds by 
the Grovernor, Secretary of State, and myself. He received the 
appointment in October. 

Q. When you made the arrangement with Stevens, did you expect 
to go to Washington ? 

A. I think the Secretary and G-ovemor did not intend to go ; I 
did. 

Q. At whose solicitation was Stevens appointed agent ? 

A. It was upon consultation of myself, Secretary and Governor. 
Before receiving his appointment, Mr. Stevens proposed to buy the 
bonds. He proposed to buy fifty thousand dollars at forty cents — 
those issued under act of May 3d — and twenty or twenty-five thousand 
of those under the supplemental act, at seventy cents. When Mr. 
Stevens was appointed agent, it was the understanding that I should 
eo on to Washington with him. I had understood there was an 
Indian trust fund at Washington that was to be invented in State 
bonds. I took with me, when I went to Washington, besides the 
State bonds, fourteen for myself, ten for Mr. Weir, two for Mr. 
Button, and, I think, four for Mr. Griffith. These bonds were each 
one hundred dollars. The Secretary left here for Chicago the day 
before I left for Washington. He arrived in Washington from 
Chicago some four or five days after I did. 

Q. Bid yourself and the Secretary make any attempt to negotiate 
these bonds ? 

A. We did not — any direct attempt. Mr. Stevens arrived in 
Washington about the 20th of November. We made an arrangement 
with Stevens on or about the 3d of Becember. The agreement was 
that he should take the bonds, and, when sold, account to the State 
for sixty cents on the dollar. The bonds were delivered to him as 
he sold them ; he gave no security for them. 

Q. Bid you know, when you made the agreement with Mr. 
Stevens, what he was going to do with the bonds ? 

A. I supposed he was going to negotiate them with the Interior 
Bepartment. There was no agreement that if the bonds should be 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 11 

iold for more than sixty cents the State should receive amount over 
sixty cents. 

Q. For what amount of these bonds did Mr. Stevens account to 
the State ? 

A. Eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars. 

Q. Do you know the price at which these bonds were sold to the 
Department t 

A. I do not. Mr. Stevens was to receive as his compensation all 
over sixty cents on the dollar. The reason we sold these bonds to 
Mr. Stevens was, we considered it the last and only chance to eflfect 
a sale. Mr. Stevens had a large amount of bonds of his own he 
wished to negotiate, and had been looking to this Indian fund for a 
long time. 1 therefore supposed he would oppose the negotiation 
of the State bonds through any other hands than his own. Mr. 
Stevens seemed to have this whole matter in his own hands and under 
his control, so that the negotiation could not be effected through. 
any other person. The Governor gave to the Secretary verbal 
authority to sign his name to any paper that might be necessary in 
effecting the negotiation. We made this sale of bonds to Mr. 
Stevens with the advice of Senator Pomeroy, who stated that it was 
the best that could be done — that if we did not sell them now we 
never would. I advised with Senator Pomeroy at every step of the 
proceedings. Mr. Pomeroy seemed very anxious the sale should be 
made. Mr. Pomeroy never offered to assist us in the negotiation of 
these bonds, except through Mr. Stevens. It was Mr. Stevens' 
proposition to take the bonds at sixty cents. He would give na 
more. We could do no better. The cost to the State for the nego- 
tiation of these bonds, besides the per cent, made by Stevens, was 
about three hundred and fifty dollars — expenses of Secretary and 
myself to and from Washington. 

GEORGE S. HILLYER. 

George S. Hillyer recalled: 

I delivered to Mr. Stevens fourteen hundred dollars in bonds ol 
my own, which he sold, and returned to me sixty cents on the 
dollar. I had no personal interest in the sale, other than derived 
fr^m the sale of nfr own bojids. 

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Stevens had any partner in the 
sale? 

A. I do not. He intimated to me that he had to interest other 
parties, I do not know who. 

Q. Do you know of any person who shared any of the profits of 
the sale, excepting Mr. Stevens ? 

A. I do not. I took with me, of private bonds, fourtoen hundred 
dollars for myself, one thousand dollars for Mr. Weir, and two 
hundred dollars for Mr. Dutton. I returned to Mr. Weir sixty 
cents on the dollar, the same that 3Ir. Stevens returned to me. 
Mr. Stevens settled with Mr. Dutton hinj^elf, I suppose. Mr. Lane 
objected to the payment of the money into Stevens' hands. An 
arrangement was finally made for the payment of the money into 
the hands of S. C. Pomeroy. I think an order for such payment 



12 PE00SBDING8 IN THB 

of the money was signed by Pomeroy, Lane and Conway. The 
order or letter was directed to Caleb B. Smith, recommending the 
money to be paid to Pomeroy, and sent to Kansas as Pomeroy and 
Conway should direct. 

(JEORGB S. HILLYER. 

Correction, by Mr. Hillyer, of the evidence given before the 
<]lommittee. 

I am mistaken in my statement that Mr. Stevens returned to me 
l>ut sixty cents on private bonds, which I put into the sale. I 
received seventy cents on the dollar, and am indebted to Mr. Wier 
for ten cents on the dollar for one thousand dollars. 

GEORGE S. HILLYER. 



John W. Robinson being duly sworn, says : 

Q. Did you ever act in your official capacity aa Secretary of State 
in conjunction with any other persons in negotiating any of the 
.State bonds of Kansas? 

A. I did. 

Q. With whom? 

A. The Auditor and Governor of State. 

Q. Where and with whom did you negotiate said bonds ? 

A. At Washington with R. S. Stevens. 

Q. What amount of bonds wery negotiated by the Governor, Mr. 
Hillyer, and yourself? 

A. Fifty thousand dollars of the act May 1st, 1861, and thirty- 
. aeven thousand dollars of the supplemental. 

Q. At what price were said bonds negotiated ? 

A. Sixty cents. 

Q. When was said negotiation effected ? 

A. About the last of December, 1861. 

Q. Did you ever enter into any agreement or contract with any 
third party to sell any of the State bonds ? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Will you state the nature of said i^eement or contract? 

A. Mr. Stevens was made the a^ent of the State and was to have 
all he could realise at the sum of sixty cents on the dollar. 

It was a written contract, signed by Mr. Hillyer and myself, and 
I think the Governor's name was attached, but am not certain. He 
stated to Mr. Hillyer and myself that, if sixty cents could be realised, 
lie would 8HS^® ^ 1^7 ftrrangement to make such sale. The board 
of State officers, some time in the summer, agreed to receive forty 
cents, supposing they had an offer fo)m some parties in New YorK 
to that amount, but they afterwards refused to take any. 



IMPEAOHMENT CASES. 1$ 

Q« Did you make any direct attempt to negotiate the bonds withi 
the Department? 

A. We did not. When I arrived in Wahsington, Gen. Pomeroy 
informed me that Mr. Dole would not take the State bonds, advised 
me not to attempt the sale. 

Q. Had the board authorised any one to sell these bonds before 
you went to Washington ? 

A. I think they had ; the understanding was that Hillyer was to* 
go to Washington with Stevens. I think there was no written: 
arrangement till we got to Washington. Stevens was appointed at 
his own suggestion. Senator Pomeroy advised us to contract with 
Stevens; he assisted Stevens in the negotiation of the bonds. 

The President at first objected to the negotiation, afterwards 
consented. Mr. Stevens sold some bonds for me; he returned me 
seventy cents on the dollar for about one thousand dollars. The 
bonds were for back salary* and money due me from the State. There 
was no difference in the bonds upon which Mr. Stevens returned me- 
fleventy cents and those upon which he returned sixty cents. Mr. 
Stevens appeared better acquainted with the different departments 
at Washington than any one else who could aid us in the sale. I 
think Stevens could operate through the parties necessary to the^ 
Deeotiation, better than ourselveSj aided by Senator Pomeroy, Conway 
and Lane. The parties to be o}^erated through were the Indian 
Commissioner, Secretary of the Interior and President. 

I think if we had not sold the bonds to Mr. Stevens they would 
not have been sold. Mr. Stevens took the bonds, negotiated them, 
brought the money to Kansas, and paid it into the Treasury. I have^ 
never had any of the money paid into my hands. 

Q. Do you know what Mr. Stevens received for these bonds ? 

A. I do not know what Mr. Stevens received for these bonds. 

Q. Had these bonds been bearing interest any length of time ? 

A. These bonds had been on interest six months. The States 
received sixty cents on the face. I think they were all dated July 
Ist, 1861. 

JOHN W. ROBINSON. 



D. H. Weir being duly sworn and examined, says : 

I have been elerk in the Secretary, of State's office since the 
organisation of the State government, to within two days. 

I understood, some time in September last, that an arrangement 
could be made in Washington, through a third party, to self bonds 
to the Indian Department. I received this information from the 
Secretary. He borrowed what bonds he could ; drew what scrip he 
could get ; got it bonded ; and sent the amount — about four thousand 
dollars-— on to Washington. They were sent, I think, about the 1st. 



14 PROCEEDINQS IN THE 

of October. Some time in October, a letter was received by the 
Secretary (so be stated to me) tbat a large amount could be sold, and 
tbat it was necessary tbat tbey sbould all be tbere by tbe first of 
November, 1861. 

Tbe understanding was, between tbe Auditor and Secretary, before 
tbe Secretary left, tbat be sbould tele^apb from Quincy tbat the 
bonds sbould be in Wasbington by tbe 2d of November. Tbe 
Secretary's bonds were sent to Mr. Fomeroy. Mr. Pomeroy wrote 
tbe letter giving tbe information tbat the bonds could be sold, so 
the Secretary informed me. 

I understood, from the Secretary, that the bonds would not be 
sold for less than seventy cents on the dollar, and perhaps a larger 
price would be realized. From a memorandum, in the Secretary's 
desk, on which was computed the amount of bonds at eighty-two 
cents, and bonds at sixty cents, I inferred that eighty-two cento was 
the price received. The Auditor was so confident the bonds could 
be sold, that be advised me not to bond my scrip, as there would be 
money to redeem it. I knew, from the letters which I received 
from him, that Secretary Robinson was one of the parties who 
Reirotiated the bonds with the Interior Department. 

D. H. WEIR. 



Copies of letters from J. W. Robinson to D. H. Weir. 

Washington, Dec. 8th, 1861. 
Friend Weir — 

Strange to say, I am still in this city, and when I <im to leave 
the Lord only knows. 

We are at work as hard as is possible, for the interests of the 
■State ; and if we succeed we shall put Kansas upon good footing ; 
if not, Heaven knows what will become of her — I do not I We 
want nothing said there about bonds at all — not a word. I was 
indiscreet enough to mention Pomeroy's name to one or two whom 
I supposed I could trust, telling them not to let him know that I 
had said a word, and forthwith half a dozen start up and send him 
bonds as a private agent. He cannot but know the information 
comes from me, when he has sworn to keep his name entirely away 
from the name of bonds. 

The bonds you sent are in Stevens' hand, I think ; at any rate, 
Pomeroy has sent them to some Kansas man, and I believe it is 
him. ^ 

We have been steadilv at work ever since we came, and have 
accomplished a good deal ; but we have one very important obstacle to 
overcome yet, and it depends entirely upon this whether we succeed. 
I am not very sanguine myself, and yet it is life or death with 
Kansas. If bonds are not now sold, they never will be sold, or not 
for a long time to come. * * * * 



IMPEACHMENT 0A8SS. 15 

Keep entirely *' mum '' about the bonds. Do not say a word to 
any person alive, not even to your wife ; for we want it as secret as 
it can be till it is fixed. 

Yours very truly, 

J. W. ROBINSON. 
D. H. Weir, Esq. 



Washington, Dec. 10, 1861. 
Mt Dear Wbib — 

A day or two since I wrote you a line, but fearing you may not 
receive it I repeat it now. 

It is a matter of uncertainty what day I may be able to start for 
the land of my adoption, but I hope it may be as soon as the first 
of next week, to-day being Wednesday. The whole of this gov- 
ernment machinery moves so terribly slow that no man can ever 
say, with even tolerable certainty, how long he may be detained by 
it. I had no idea when I arrived in this city that I should spend 
more than four days at the longest, and here I have been four 
weeks and more ; and had not the interests of Kansas been jeop- 
ardized I should have left long ago; but we have waited and 
waited, and worked and worked, till I have become tired and worn 
out. We hope to succeed. 

We have removed obstacle after obstacle, and at last we have 
unexpectedly run against the President himself; and now are at 
work trying to overcome his objections. I hope we may succeed, 
but the Supreme Ruler only knows what other things may present 
themselves when this is done. If we do succed Kansas will be 
placed upon tolerable decent footing ; if not, God only knows what 
will become of her, or how she will get along. There is no other pros- 
pect of disposing of bonds anywhere else in the Union. The money 
market 1^ closed up ; no stocks but these of the Union are touched 
or looked at. 

Don't buy any more bonds, unless you want to be bitten. And, 
as I said in my former letter, keep *' mum entirely " about bonds. 
Say nothing to nobody. 

Fomeroy is quite indignant to think that somebody must have 
used his name in connection with the Kansas bonds, and sent him, 
and attempted to make a broker of him. He has not said much to 
me about it, but I hear it from others. So I want you to be very 
careful, indeed, what vou say, and especially say nothing about 
bonds in connection with Washington or any of the State officers. 

* ^ 4c • * * * * 

Yours very truly, 

J. W. ROBINSON. 
D. H. Weib, Esq. 



16 PBOOEEBINGS IN THE 

Washington, Dec. 18, 1861. 
Friend Weir — 

* * * We have encountered eveirtbing but death 
here in trying to negotiate our bonds. We have altered proposition 
after proposition, and met with obstacle after obstacle, until I have 
been discouraged, disgusted and thoroughly mad. The last one is 
Jim Lane, an enemy of Stevens, and, of course, would let his duty 
to the State run into the ground if he could gratify his personu 
hatred. I am still in hopes that we may be fortunate enough to 
effect a negotiation. ***** 

I had an interview with Mr. Lincoln night before last in his 
private parlor ; and he seemed desirous to do all he could, and 
promised to order the negotiation made if it was not serieusly op- 
posed by any of his Cabinet, or the people of our State. We shall 
try to conciliate Lane any way, and if we fail he must take the 
responsibility. 

There are one thousand dollars of your bonds. We shall have 
them put into the sale if made at all at whatever the State (or we) 
get for ours, of course } but we shall get the seventy cents, as I had 
hoped, before leaving. We may possibly put in the whole lot at 
sixty cents, but it will never hurt the State a dime, or will ever 
heard of, but I shall thank God. * * * a Keep 

still." 

Yours, etc., J. W. R. 



H. R. Button being duly sworn and examined, says : 

I am Treasurer of the State of Kansas. 

About $40,000 has been paid into the treasury in money during 
the time which I have held the office, which has been realized from 
the sale of State bonds ; about thirty thousand dollars of this was 
realized from the sale of seven per cent, bonds. This money waa 
paid into the treasury by Mr. R. S. Stevens. He made no written 
report to me about his transactions in the sale of bonds. 

I prepared forty thousand 4ollars of Kansas ten per cent. bondB 
for sale. I sold thirty-one thousand dollars of these bonds to R. S. 
Stevens for forty cents on the dollar. The full amount of said sale 
was paid into the treasury. I never used any of the bonds in pay- 
ment of any State indebtedness. I never received any prop- 
osition to use any of these bonds in payment fo State 
indebtedness. Mr. Gollamore wished to take the bonds 
and negotiate them; I referred him to the law authorizing 
me to sell the bonds. He stated to me, or the Governor, that he 
would take from four to five thousand dollars of those bonds at par. 
I havethem now ready for him. I told him 1 would retain them 
from the sale if I made one, and I did so. I attempted the sale of 



IMPSAOHMKNT GASEfi. 17 

the bonds to A. M. Clark, of Leavenworth, and to James C. Stone. 
I also attempted to sell them to Joseph Mann, of Pennsylvania. I 
was in New York about the time of the battle of Bull Run, and 
was told it would be impossible to sell them. I did not make the 
attempt. I do not remember whether Mr. Stevens proposed to buy 
first or I to sell ; the matter was talked over between us. He asked 
me what I expected to get for the bonds. He said he did not think the 
bonds were worth as much as the seven per cent, fifteen year bonds. 
He told me after I had been to New York and seen what I could 
do, that he would give me forty cents. The bonds were sold him 
about the last of July. They were issued about the last of June 
or first of July. I delivered the bonds to him at Buffalo, in New 
York, and I took his receipt. I was on my way home and he told 
me he was going to Washington. He paid me for the bonds when 
he reached home. I also gave him twenty-nine 'thousand dollars of 
seven per cent, bonds and took his receipt for them to be returned 
or sold at seventy cents. The bonds were not returned to me. He 
came back, and I was informed by the Auditor and Secretary of 
State that they had made an arrangement for the sale of the bonds 
and I took an additional receipt for fifty-three thousand four hun- 
dred dollars, five thousand dollars being retained by the Auditor to 
redeem scrip. Mr. Hillyer told me that they had agreed with Mr. 
Stevens to take fifty thousand doUars of bonds at forty cents, and 
the balance, about thirty-seven thousands dollars, at seventy cents, 
at the time this receipt was given. Mr. Jlillyer told me after he 
came back from Washington, that Mr. Stevens was agent for the 
State to sell the bonds. I receipted to him for money paid into the 
treasury. I have paid the semi-annual interest on fifty thousand 
dollars of the seven per cent, bonds for which Mr. Stevens receipted. 
I paid it to Mr. Stevens. I have made arrangements to pay the 
interest on all the bonds of the State at the Ocean Bank, New 
York City. Robert Morrow's warrants, issued in payment for sup- 
plies furnished to the Quarter Master General of Kansas, were paid 
in money to Stevens. I sent two hundred dollars in bonds by Mr. 
Hillyer to Washington to sell. Mr. Hillyer told me he gave them 
to Stevens, I asked Mr. Stevens about them and he told me he 
would return me sixty cents on the dollar. 

H. R. BUTTON. 

H. R. Button recalled. 

Q. Is the Governor's signature attached to forty thousand dol- 
lars of ten per cent, bonds issued under the act of June 5th. 
A. It is. The seal of the State was attached to the whole 



Q. Have you ever received as a gift, donation, payment for ser- 
vices, or for any other purpose, or in any other manner, any sum or 
sums of money or other thing of value from Robert S. Stevens, sinoe 
the 1st of July, 1861, up to the present time ? 

A. I have not. I had authority in July last from the Auditor 
and Secretary of State, to sell the twenty-nine thousand dollars of 
2 



18 ^ PROCSSDINGB IN THE 

bonds at seventy cents on the dollar, which I deliyered to R. 8, 
Stevens, at Buffalo, in July. 

Q. Would you think you were authorized to pay interest on 
State bonds upon the presentation of coupons if you had official 
I . knowledge that said bonds from which the coupons were detached 
' were the property of the State at the time said interest was due T 

A. I would not. I had a conversation with the Auditor on his 
return ^m Washington, in which I understood that a sale had 
been made of the seven per cent, bonds ; I asked him if the Janu- 
ary coupons were included in the sale, and understood from him 
that they were. 

Q. Did the Auditor or Secretary of State know that you had paid 
this interest to R. S. Stevens 7 

A. I think the Auditor was present when Stevens presented the 
coupons and when I receipted to him for them as so much money. 

Q. Did the Auditor make any objections to the payment of this 
interest to Mr. Stevens ? 

A. He did not. 

H. R. DUTTON. 

Received, Buffalo, July 30th, 1861, of H. R. Dutton, Treasurer 
of the State of Kansas, twenty-nine thousand dollars in bonds of 
the State of Kansas, of the denomination of five hundred dollars 
each, and numbering from one to flfby-eight inclusive, which are to 
be sold at seventy cents on the dollar or returned. 

[Copy.] Signed, R. S. STEVENS. 

Received of H. R. Dutton, State Treasurer, State bonds of the 
denomination of one hundred dollars each numbering from 671 to 
1000 both inclusive ; also of 9500 bonds numbering from 59 to 
100, both inclusive. 

Topeka, Oct. 19, 1861. 

[Copy.] Signed, R. S. STEVENS. 



R. S. Stevens being duly sworn and examined by the Committee, 

says: 

My place of residence is Lawrence, Douglas county, Kansas. My 
business is of a general character. While 1 lived in Lecompton I was 
in the profession of law ; since that time not. 1 entered into an ar- 
rangement with the State officers for the sale of Kansas State bonds. 
The Auditor and Secretary of State made the arrangement with 
me. The arrangement was made on or about the last of November 
or first of December. The arrangement was made in writing at the 
city of Washington. The officers alluded to were in the city of 
Washington with eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars of 



IMPXACHMSNT CA8S8. 19 

Kansas seyenty per eent State bonds. They proposed to me to 
undertake the sale of these bonds. I agreed that I would do so 
nnder certain conditions, which were, that I should receive all that 
I could realize over sixty cents on the dollar, paying the State 
therefor at the rate of sixty cents on the dollar. I considered I 
was acting as agent of the State officers alluded to, and thus indi- 
rectly the agent of the State. I was employed by them to sell the 
bonds on the terms as specified aboye. I sold the bonds to the 
Secretary of the Interior in his official capacity as trustee for cer- 
tain Indian tribes, he acting under the direction of the President 
of the United States, or by his approval, as I am informed. The 
bonds were negotiated for eighty-five cents on the dollar. I 
negotiated for the sale of the whole amount of the bonds in the 
hands of the State officers alluded to. I paid into the hands 
of the State Treasurer, such amount as I received pay for at the 
rates as agreed upon, less about three thousand dollars, now in 
my hands, which is subject to his order at any time. I received 
payment in a draft on the Assistant Treasurer, of New York. 
These bonds had been drawing interest from July 1st, 1861. I 
have paid the State as above for sixty-four thousand two hundred 
dollars. The ballance of the bonds I left with the Secretary of the 
Interior at the time I made the negotiation. I was to include with 
them some other bonds which I owned myself, and some owned by 
other parties. I delivered him all the bonds I had then in Wash- 
ington, including the bonds of the State which he paid me therefor 
iifly-four thousand nine hundred and ten dollars, which paid for all 
the bonds I delivered to him less thirty-one thousand dollars, 
which I left with him and are the property of the State. 
The amount due the State on account of bonds sold accor- 
ding to agreement, and for which payment was made, was thirty- 
three thousand seven hundred and twenty dollars. At one time 
a portion of the board stated that they considered they were author- 
ized to sell fifty thousand dollars of bonds at any price they choose 
to and offered them to me at forty cents on the dollar. I was au- 
thorized to act just as I did act in the disposition of these bonds by 
the Auditor and Secretary of State in their employment of me 
as their agent. I bought of the Treasurer of State about thirty 
thousand dollars of ten per cent, bonds, I think some time during 
the month of July 1861. Some of the bonds I have on hand, 
some I sold to one party, some to another. I sold some to the Inte- 
rior Department. I received for those I sold at the Interior De- 
partment ninety-five cents on the dollar. I think I sold about 
twenty-six thousand dollars. I paid to the Treasurer the full 
amount of bonds that I bought at the time of the purchase. I 

K'd a portion of it in cash ; the balance was afterwards placed to 
credit in the Lawrence bank to be paid in coin or Eastern ex- 
change. 

B. S, STEVENS. 

R. S. Stevens recalled. 

Q. Did you receive the semi-annual interest due on the Kansas 



20 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

State bonds which was due on January 1st, 1862, or did the Secre- 
tary of the Interior receive it ? 

A. I received it. 

Q. Had yon any partner in the transaction of bn3ring the Kansas 
State ten per cent, bonds or in the negotiation of the State seven 
per cent, bonds ? 

A. I had parties associated with me who shared the profits of 
the negotiation. 

Q. Who? 

A. I do not choose to state. 

Q. Did any of the State officers share any of the profits growing 
out of the sale of Kansas bonds ? 

A. When I was in Washington Mr. Hillyer and Mr. Robinson 
put in some bonds owned by themselves, which I sold and returned 
them seventy cents on the dollar. Those were the only parties who 
were State officers, who were the parties to the sale of State bonds 
of any kind. If any State officer received any further interest in 
the matter directly or indirectly they can speak for themselves. 
At the time I made the negotiation with the Secretary of Interior, 
I included in the sale one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, sta- 
ting to him that but eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars 
were the property of the State, the rest having been issued to 
various persons in taking up and liquidating State scrip held by 
them, agreeing, however, if possible, to secure all the bonds thus 
issued and deliver the same to him. The written conditions of the 
agreement being that I was to deliver the balance of the bonds and 
on delivery be paid therefor. 

Q. Did Charles Robinson share with you any of the profits 
arising from the sale of Kansas State bonds? 

A. In reference to any parties, I prefer they should answer for 
themselves. The amount of bonds which Mr. Hillyer and Robinson 
put in, was, I think about seven thousand dollars. My impression 
is Robinson had about four thousand four hundred dollars. They 
received seventy cents on the full amount. The bonds were a por- 
tion of them sent to Washington, sometime in October. I think 
about fifty thousand dollars were sent previous to November let, 
1861. 

R. S. STEVENS. 



Charles Robinson being sworn and examined, says : 

I am Governor of the State of Kansas. I do not know whether 
I was or was not a party to the sale of Kansas State bonds in Wash- 
ington. I do not know whether my name was used or not. I did 
not understand that any party was authorised to use my name 
officially. I will state, however, that in conversation with the 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 21 

Secretary and Auditor, before they went to Washington, I told 
them that any arrangement for the sale of bonds that they might 
make according to law I would approve of. I do not know, except- 
ing ft'om their statements, that any arrangement or contract was 
made with any third party for the sale of the bonds. I have never 
seen any writing to that effect. They told me they authorized Mr. 
Stevens to sell the bonds. I took it for granted that they [Hillyer 
and Robinson] employed him in their official capacity. My impression 
IB, they would have the power to employ a third party in the trans- 
action if it was according to law. I did not authorize or recommend 
the sale of the bonds to Mr. Stevens. I understood from Hillyer 
and Robinson that they authorized Stevens to sell the bonds and 
have all he could get over sixty cents on the dollar. I did not 
approve officially of the sale. As I understood the law, I did not 
think I had the right to make the sale for less than seventy cents, 
bat I believed it good policy for the State to sell them for even less 
than sixty cents if they could not get no more ; and, in that respect, 
I should approve of the policy of selling them, although I could not 
do so officially. There was a conversation before they went away 
about the necessity of the sale of bonds to meet the interest due on 
bonds the 1st of January and for legislative purposes. It had been 
stated that State bonds could be invested in the Indian fund at the 
Interior Department. I had no official knowledge in regard to the 
matter. I think the information came from Senator Pomeroy. I 
never was a party to any arrangement to sell the bonds issued under 
the first act to R. S. Stevens for forty cents. I have heard Mr. 
Stevens say he realized for the bonds eighty-five cents on the dollar. 
I have no official knowledge of any of the transactions other than 
I have testified to. I do not think the State officers could have 
negotiated the bonds with the Interior Department except through 
Mr. Stevens. 

C. ROBINSON. 
Governor Robinson recalled : 

Q. Do you consider that the State officers had the power to 
negotiate one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of bonds, issued 
under the act of May third ? 

A. I think they had the power to negotiate them, but not for less 
than seventy cents on the dollar. 

Q. Did you attach your name officially to forty thousand dollars 
of ten per cent, bonds, issued in July, and known a3 war bonds ? 

A. I cannot say. I si^ed some war bonds. I do not know 
how many. It is the business of the Auditor, to register war bonds. 
I keep no register. 

Q. Did you attach the State seal to the war bonds J 

A. I think not to all of them. I may have done so to a portion 
of them. The Secretary of State has power to use the seal, and I 
think attached it to most of the bonds. 

Q. Have you ever received as a gift, donation, payment for services, 
or for any other purpose, in any manner, any sum or sums of money, 
or other thing of value, from K. S. Stevens, jsince the first day of 



22 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

July up to the present time, in consideration of his negotiation of 
Kansas bonds ? 

A. I have not. I had a conyersation with some of the State 
officers, and others, before they [Hillyer and Robinson] went to 
Washington, relating to the right of State officers to sell a portion 
or all of the seven per cent, bonds at a price less than seventy cento 
on the dollar. It was contended that at least fifty thousand dollars 
of the bonds could be sold for such price as could be agreed upon. 
Not having examined the law, my mind was not at that time 
thoroughly made up upon the subject. Afterwards, on a thorough 
examination of the law, and before Mr. Stevens went to Washingtoa 
I came to the conclusion that I had no right to sell the bonds for less, 
than seventy cents, and declined, for that reason, to sign a paper 
avthoriaing a sale for a less price, presented by Mr. Stevens. 

C. ROBINSON. 



Wm. P. Dole being sworn and examined, says : 

I reside in Washington. I am Commissioner of Indian AffisLira 
I am not acquainted with George S. Hillyer or John W. Robinson. 
I have never had any conversation with any person in Washington, 
except the Seoretanr of the Interior, about the sale of Kansas State 
bondis officially. The Senators may, possibly, have mentioned the 
subject to me. I know that State bonds of Kansas have been 
negotiated at Washington. They were sold to the Secretary of the 
Interior for the use of the interior tribes, invested in the Indian 
fund. I caunot say from positive knowledge at what price the bonds 
were sold. My impression is, the seven per cent, bonds were sold 
from seventy to eighty cents on the dollar ; the ten per cent, bonds 
from ninety to ninety-five on the dollar. My impression is derived 
from general conversation and the papers themselves. The war 
bonds were sold, in my absence to the west, on or about the last of 
August or first of September. The State bonds were sold about the 
first of January, 1862. My impression is that an agent of the State 
offered them, and that they were negotiated through the Kansas 
Senator's infiuence. I refer now to the seven per cent, bonds. I 
do not know who ofifered the ten per cent, bonds. I do not think 
the Department at Washington would require an agent to show any 
authority from the State. The presumption is that the holder of 
bonds has the riffht to negotiate. My impression is that the Depart- 
ment thought Uiat the State of Kansas was to receive the full 
unount for which said bonds were sold. Such impression would be 
given from the fact that the Kansas Senators ^ave an order for such 
money to be carried to Kansas. The negotiation for State bonds is 
always with the President and Secretary of the Interior. The 
Oommissioner has no power of purchase. After the negotiation is 



IMPXAOHMSMT 0A8SS. 28 

made the papers are filed with the CommiBsioner, and he draws a 
draft for the money. I will state, that after the Secretary had 
stated to me the proposition for the sale of the Kansas seven per 
cent, bonds to the Indian Department, requesting my opinion as to 
the pnrehase, that I addressed him a note, statins to him that my 
views as to the purchase of State bonds would be tound in my annuu 
report, but that if it was determined to purchase State bonds that 
Kansas State bonds would be a safe investment. The Secretary of 
the Interior, after my reply to his note, said he would not close the 
negotiation until the whole matter was referred to the President. 
The papers were referred to the President, and returned with his 
endorsement, directing the purchase to be made. I think the State 
offieers could have made the same arrangements with the Interior 
Department, with the assistance of the Kansas Senators, that R. S. 
Stevens made. 

WM. P. DOLE. 



James H. Lane being duly sworn and examined, says : 

Q. Will you please to make a statement of what you know regard- 
dng the sale of Kansas State bonds at Washington ? 

A. I arrived at Washington on the morning of the first day of 
the session of Congress of; the U. S. in time to take my seat in the 
•Senate on the first dav of the term. Shortly after my arrival, 
^korge S. Hillyer, Auditor of the State of Kansas, and John W. 
Bobinson, Secretary of the State of Kansas, called upon me and 
•informed me that they were there to negotiate the sale of some 
>8tate bonds of Kansas to the Indian Department ^or trust funds 
'belonging to the Indians to be invested by the Government for their 
benefit ; that they had tried to sell them at several points but had 
fiiiled, and unless they could sell them to the Government the State 
Government would have to suspend; that they could not buy 
stationery or pay the members of the legislature; that the State 
Government could not go on; that they had arranged with the 
Secretary of the Interior for the sale of the bonds, and that the 
question was then pending before the President, and desired me to 
go before him and make one of my appeaU in fiiivor of t}ie negotia- 
tion, I advised them that it was best for the entire congressional 
delegation from Kansas, to go in a body, and it was arranged to go 
in a Dody, but from some cause Tl suppose other engagements) they 
did not go, and I went by myseli, ana urged upon the President the 
necessity of the sale, on account of keeping the State Government 
going, and that it was a safe investment. I understood that my 
colleagues called upon him the same day. I learned about this time 
from persons in Washington from Elansas, that the money was sought 
to be obtained for use against my friends and myself in Kansas, and 



24 PROCEEDINOB IN TBE 

that it would not go into the State Treasury. I saw Hillyer and 
Robinson frequently afterwards, before the negotiation was con- 
sumated, and asked them as frequently if Bob. Stevens br Gov. 
Robinson had anything to do directly or indirectly, with the bonds, 
the sale of the bonds, or the proceeds of the sales. They asseverated 
in the most cmphatw manner^ that they had nothing whatever to do 
with the bonds, the sale of the bonds, or the proceeds of the bonds, 
except Mr. Hillyer said perhaps there might be some back salary due 
Robinson, which he would draw as other-s would on warrants. My 
friends still insisted that I should oppose the negotiation, and urged 
by them I proposed to Mr. Hillyer and Robinson, that they place 
the money in the hands of Gen. Pomeroy, and draw it out of 
Pomeroy's hands as the Legislature directed, with the exception of 
five thousand dollars, which they said they wanted immediately to 
prepare for the Legislature — telling them that I had no idea the 
money could be honestly kept in the State Treasury, although the 
Auditor and Treasurer might be ever so honest — that the harpies 
would manage somehow to steal the money. Afterwards, on consul- 
tation with my friends, it was thought best that I advise the Secretary 
of the Interior to pay for the bonds as follows : Pay five thousand 
dollars to Robinson and Hillyer for inimediate use, and the balance 
in instalments as directed by the Legislature when it met. This 
plan I mentioned to the Secretary of the Interior, and he was willing 
to accede to the plan if the united congressional delegation would 
recommend it. In the many conversations with Hillyer and Robinson , 
I gave them my opinion freely of Bob Stevens' propensities, and told 
them frequently that I would not have anything to do with the 
negotiation, if Rob Stevens was to handle the money or see the 
money, or know where they kept the money. Mr. Hillyer pledged 
himself to me in the most unequivocal terms, that he himself would 
convey the money to Topeka, and deposit it in the Treasury, and see 
that it did not*go out except upon duly authorized warrants; and 
that the money would not go to pay old debts, but to pay the members 
* of the Legislature. After the negotiation was arranged, Hillyer 
and Robinson came to me one morning (with Stevens behind them,) 
and asked me to sign a paper, which was a paper required by the 
President from the united congressional delegation, recommending 
that the investment be made, 1 was intensely angry, and told Hillyer 
and Robinson, that unless- they could come to me without the com- 
pany of a thief like Bob St<}vens, that I would have nothing to do 
with them or their negotiation . They wen t away — ^afterwards Hillyer 
and Robinson came alone and I signed the paper, and the purchase 
was consummated. But for the asseverations of Hillyer and Robin- 
son, that Gov. Robinson and Stevens had nothing to do with the 
transaction, I should have opposed the arrangement, and it could not 
have been made without the delegation acting as a unit. The change 
was made from the instalment plan to the plan of paying over all the 
money upon the pledge of Hillyer and Robinson that Hillyer would 
bring the money out to Kansas and safely hold it, to be disposed of 
by the Legislature, excepting so much as was necessary for stationary. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 25^ 

and pTeparation for the Legislature. My understanding was that 
the Commissioner of Indian affairs, Mr. Doie, had expressed an 
opinion adverse to the purchase before my arrival in Washington, 
and was in no wise connected with it. Mr. Smith, the Secretary of 
the Interior, was of the opinion that the interest of the Government 
would be best subserved, by a sale of all of the seven per cent, bonds 
to the Interior Department, and this negotiation was intended to 
include them all. Hillyer and Robinson negotiated the bonds 
directly with the department, through the congressional delegation. 
So far as I am concerned, had I known that Gov. Robinson, or Bob 
Stevens had anything whatever to do with the negotiation, or pro- 
ceeds, or any part thereof, I would have opposed it with all the 
energy of my nature. 

Q. Do you know at what price the bonds were sold to the Interior 
department ? 

A. I know nothing about the price but what 1 learned from Hillyer 
and Robinson, that they had sold them for two cents more than the 
minimum price, which would make the price seventy-two cents. 

JAS. H. LANE. 



Robert Morrow being sworn and examined, says: 

I reside in Lawrence. Am interested in the Lawrence Bank. I 
am at this time nominally President of the Bank, but disposed of 
mj interest sometime in the fall, to R. S. Stevens. The Directors. 
of the Lawrence Bank are James Blood, T. B. Eldridge, Mr. Stevenb*, 
Governor Robinson and myself. The Directors are principally the 
stockholders. The issues of said Bank are secured by the State 
bonds of Kansas. They were made so on the first of last July. 

Q. Did your bank buy any war bonds of the State of Kansas, or 
any of the officers ? 

A. Myself, individually, bought some two or three thousand dollars, 
in pajrment of bill of provisions furnished the Quarter Master Gen- 
eral of the State of Kansas, at seventy Gent« on the dollar. The 
Quarter Master General certified to my bill, and I sent it to the 
Auditor, Who issued warrants for the amount, and I received the 
bonds at seventy cents on the dollar. 

Q. Did any parties connected with the bank, beside yourself, buy 
any of the war bonds ? 

A. Mr. Stevens has told me that he bought all, or nearly all that 
the act provided for. The bonds which I bought were put into the 
bank as securities. Mr. Stevens put into the bank bonds, as security, 
I do not know what amount. Governor Robinson has put in booyds 
as security. I do not know to what amount. The bonds which the 
GovemoT put in, were seven per cent, bonds. The total amount of 



26 PBO0SEDINO8 IK THK 

bonds in bank as seoorities, is about $20,000. I think there are na 
ten per cent, bonds as securities in the bank but my own. Mr. 
Dutton has an account at the Lawrence Bank. He gires drafts on 
our bank, which we pay in such funds as he draws for, coin, eastern 
currency, and our own bills. The Lawrence Bank is doing business 
under a charter of the Legislature, with securities of Kansas State 
Bonds. We are not doing business under the State Banking Law. 

ROBERT MORROW. 



Copies of the following documents were furnished to the Com. 
mittee by R. S. Stevens. Whether they are copies of originals, 
and if so, whether such copies are correct, the Committee have not 
been able to ascertain. 

[copy.] 

This certifies that we have employed and constituted R. S. 
Steyens an asent on the part of the State of Kansas to negotiate 
and sell all we seven per cent, bonds of said State, issued in accor- 
dance with the provisions of an act of the Legislature of the State 
•of Kansas, approved May 1, 1861, and an act supplementary thereto, 
.approved June 3, 1861, authorising the issue and sale of one hun* 
died and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of said State ; and we 
hereby agree to give him for his services as such agent, all and 
whatever amount of money he may receive for said bonds over and 
above sixty cents (60 cents) on the dollar ; that is to say, for all the 
boBSds beloneing to the State, which the said Stevens may sell, heia 
to pay into the State treasury the sum of sixty cents (60 cents) 
on ea<Sh and every dollar. 

Witness our hands this third day of Deoenber, A. D. 1861. 

JOHN W. ROBINSON, Secretary of State. 
GEO. S. HILLYER, Auditor of State. 

iBkis paper is, according to my belief, a true copy of the original 

R. S. STEVENS. 

[copy.] 

EXSOUTIVX DXPABTMSNT^ OfHOE StATS AuDITOB, ) 

Topeka, Kansas, Oct. 25, 1861. i 
The undersigned, executive oflkers of this State, authoriied by 
law to dispose of and sell the seven per cent, bonds, the issuance of 
which was authoriied by an aet of the Lepalaftwe of this State, 
approved May 1, 1861, entided '^ An act to anthoriie the negotia* 
^n of one hundred and 8ftj thoosand doUaia of U&e bonds ox the 



IMPXAOHMSNT CA8S8. 27 

State of Kansas, to defray the current expenses of the State/' and 
an act supplementary thereto, approved June 8, 1861, do hereby 
constitute and appoint Robert S. Steyens, Esq., an agent to sell and 
dispose of said bonds, giving him, the said Stevens, full power and 
authority to negotiate, dispose of and sell the entire sum of said one 
hundred and fifty thousand dollars of said bonds for the benefit of 
the State of Kansas, hereby ratifying and confirming all and what- 
ever said Stevens may do in the premises. 

Witness our hands this 26 day of October, A. D. 1861. 

C. ROBINSON, Governor, 
JOHN W. ROBINSON, Secretaiy of Stote, 
GEO. S. HILLYER, Auditor of Stote. 

[Note. — ^This paper was executed in Washington, in December, 

1861, and dated back, the Governor's name being signed thereto by 

Ihe Auditor or Secretory.] 

The above, excepting the note in brackets, I believe to be a true 
-copy of the original, on file in the Interior Department at Wash- 
jngton. 

R. S. STEVENS. 



George S. Hillyer recalled : 

I met Mr. Lane at the Avenue House, in Washington. He pro- 
posed to toke a walk up the avenue, which I accepted. And in 
relation to the agency for the sale of bonds, he desired that I should 
lake it and arrange some price which should be accounted for to the 
State, and add to that five or eight cents on the dollar, as two or 
three cents (he said) would be immaterial to the Department, to pay 
me for my services to the Stote. I consented to no such arrange- 
ment. Mr. Lane knew before this that Stevens was the agent. 

GEO. S. HILLYER. 



James H. Lane recalled : 

The following paper being shown to Gen. Lane, and the question 
asked by the Committee if it is a oorreot copy of the paper he signed, 
hi9 answers as follows. 



28 pbocxsdingb in the 

[copy.] 

Washington, Dec. 16, 1861. 
To THE President : — The undersigned would respectfully repre- 
sent that the State of Kansas has, by an act of her Legislature, 
authorized the sale of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the- 
bonds of said State, bearing interest at the rate of seven per cent. 

Ser annum, payable semi-annually, and that said bonds have been 
uly executed, and are now held by the State for sale. We further 
state that Robert S. Stevens is the duly authorized agent of the 
State of Kansas, te sell said bonds, and that any contract made by 
him will be respected by the State. The Constitution of the State 
of Kansas prohibits any further issue of bonds by her Legislature, 
and also provides that the Legislature, at the time they authorized 
the issue of bonds, authorized by the Constitution, shall provide by 
law for the levy and collection of tax te pay the interest, and for the 
ultimate redemption of the bonds: Such a law was passed by the 
Legislature, which authorized the issue of the bonds now offered 
for sale by the State ; and we do not hesitate to say that the interest 
upon the bonds will be promptly paid, and the principal at maturity. 
We understand that the Department of the Interior has funds 
belonging to several tribes of Indians in Kansas, which, by treaty 
provisions, are to be invested in safe and profitable stocks. Believ- 
ing that these bonds are both safe and profitable, we earnestly 
recommend to the President that he shall direct the Secretary of the 
Interior to purchase said bonds at such price as to such Secretary 
shall be deemed advisable. 

Very respectfully, 
(Signed,) S. C. POMEROY, 

J. H. LANE, 
M. F. CONWAY. 

The original of this paper was filed in the Interior Department, 
and this I believe to be a true copy. 

R. S. STEVENS. 

A. *To the best of my recollection the only paper seen by me 
connected with this transaction, was one handed me by Mr. George 
Reynolds, which he asked me to examine and consider. I received 
it and retained it for some time, and handed it back to him unex- 
amined, and unsigned by me. The other was the paper referred to 
by me in my former testimony, brought to me in the first instance 
by Hillyer and Robinson, and Stevens in the rear, at which time I 
told them they must come to me without the company of a thief. 
On the same dav they did return with the paper saying to me that 
it was a paper advising the President to make the negotiation. I 
am as confident as of any other event that has transpired, that Bob 
Stevens' name was not in the paper as in any way connected with the 
transaction. If it had been, I should most likely have seen it, aad 
most certainly if I had seen it, I should not have signed my name 
to the paper. It is barely poinble that I am mistaken, but I feel 



IMPBAOHMSNT 0A8E8. 29 

T«rj confident that if my name is to that paper, as it now reads, the 
crime 6i forgery i& added to the crime of thefl; that either my name has 
been forged to the paper, or the paper heen forged to my name, at least 
so far as inserting the name of R. S. Stevens. There is abare po$9ibUiijf 
tliat, relying npon the honesty and truthfulness of Hillyer's emphatic 
asBeverations that Steyens had nothing whatever to do with the 
transaction, I may have signed the paper without reading it) and 
been deceived. Certainly I would not have signed it had I known 
Stevens' name was in it, of which purpose Hillyer and Robinson 
were fully cognizant. 

The statement of George S. Hillyer, marked ** A," has been 
shown to me. and in reply I would state : The only semblance of 
trutb contained in the statement, is in the following and only con- 
versation which I ever had with him on the subject of his remu- 
neration. I inquired of him in what way he expected to be paid 
for his services in negotiating the bonds r He said he expected to 
obtain it from the Legislature. I told him if I was here when the 
Legislature was in session, it would afford me pleasure to aid him to 
get a liberal compensation for his services. Every other material 
statement of his, in the paper referred to, is untrue, and manufiio- 
tured out of whole cloth. 

J. H. LANE. 



George A. Reynolds being duly sworn, says : 

Q. State to this Committee what you know about the sale of 
Kansas State bonds to the Interior Department at Washington. 

A. I arrived in Washington the first day of December, 1861, in 
company with Gen. James H. Lane. In a day or two after that, 
Robert S. Stevens arrived. I was acting as Gen. Lane's secretary. 
Stevens came to me, saying that he was there for the sale of some 
seven per cent. Kansas bonds to the Interior Department. I under- 
stood that part of them belonged to him, and part to others. He 
desires my services in assisting in the sale of the bonds, and said it 
was necessary to have the recommendation of the Kansas delegation 
to the President for their sale. He was not on speaking terms with 
Oen. Lane, and he desired me, who was the friend of both, to lay 
the matter before Gen. Lane, which I consented to do. In a day or 
two after I did have a conversation with Gen. Lane about it, and 
urged, as a matter of State interest, that he should use his influence 
for the sale, and Gen. Lane said he would give the matter his atten- 
tion. I supposed, and had every reason to believe that the State 
would receive the full benefit of the sale of such bonds as she owned. 
I had no knowledge or intimation that the State was to be defrauded 
out of a single dollar, I knew that State bonds had been purchased 



80 PBOOEBDINGB IN THE 

by parties in Kansas at very low rates, and supposed that when the 
bonds belonging to the State were sold, these bonds in private hands 
would be turned in, thus affording profit enough to the owners to 
justify them in making considerable effort for the sale. 

In the mean time Messrs. Hillyer and Robinson had called on 
6en. Lane, and upon their representatives. He had agreed to use 
his influence with the Department to effect a sale. On several 
occasions Lane said to Hillyer he would have nothing to do with 
Stevens in negotiating the sale. He and Stevens, to nay knowledge, 
never did have any talk about it while I was in Washington. 

Stevens gave me a letter, as I understood it to be, asking the 
President to make the sale. At the time he handed it to me the 
letter was signed by Pomeroy and Conway. When I handed it to 
Lane he refused to sign it, and gave as a reason that he had no time, 
and would see to it next morning. I then carried the letter back 
to Stevens and gave it to him ; and that is the last I ever saw of it. 
From frequent conversations between Hillyer, Lane and others, I am 
confident that Lane supposed, as I did, that the State was to get the 
full benefit of the sale of her bonds. I never heard or knew that 
there was a contract between the State authorities and Stevens, for 
him to receive all over any stated sum that they might be sold for. 

The morning after I handed Lane the letter, Mr. Hillyer came 
alone to Gen. Lane for final answer as I believe. Lane said to 
Hillyer, " Hillyer, I believe you are an honest man, and if you say 
this thing is right, and will see that the money goes to Kansas and 
is placed in the btate Treasury, and will let it be there subject to 
the control of the next Legislature, I will recommend the President 
to order the sale." These are about his exact words. Hillyer then 
promised to do this. I heard Hillyer and Robinson repeatedl y say 
to Lane that Stevens had nothing to do with the transaction. After 
some further conversation, he told Hillyer that he would sign the 
letter that I had asked him to sign. I may have glanced at the 
letter, but don't remember its contents. I took it to be a letter, 
asking the President to order the sale. It may or may not be a letter 
the copy of which Mr. Stevens presented in evidence. I then left 
the room, and in a day or two after left the city, and knew nothing 
further of the matter. I did not know that the sale had been con- 
summated until I arrived in this city some three or four weeks after. 
I never heard from any of them, neither did Gen. Lane in my 
presence, the price they were to get. I presumed the State Officers 
would get the best price possible for the State. 

Q. Did Mr. Stevens promise you any compensation for services ? 

A. He did. He stated to me that he was there for the sale of the 
Kansas State bonds, and that there was a little money to be made at 
it — about a thousand dollars. He stated to me that Lane and him 
were not friends, and that in order to effect the sale of bonds it 
would be necessary to have the recommendation of the entire Kansas 
delegation. He said the State of Kansas had authorized the issue 
of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of bonds, and that he was 
authorised to sell bonds for the State. He did not say how many 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 31 

he liad tliere for sale, but told me he had bonds for other parties, 
which he proposed to put in the sale. I told him that I would lay 
the matter before Gen. Lane, and see what he thought of it ; which 
I afterwards did. 

Q. Did Mr. StCTcns pay you according to promise for your 
fiervioes? 

A. He did not. 

Q. Has he ever paid you any part thereof f 

A. He has not. 

Q. Have you ever asked Mr. Steyens for the pay for your 
services? 

A. When I arrived in this city I asked Mr. Stevens for five hun* 
dred dollars, Irhich he gave to me, and I gave him my note therefor. 

Q. When you aaked Mr. Stevens for the money did he require a 
note. 

A. He did not; but afterwards asked me for a note for the money, 
and I gave him one. When >]^r. Stevens promised me the money, 
I understood it was a legitimate transaction, and if it is proven that 
a fraud upon the State has been committed in collusion with State 
Officers, I shall never expect, nor will I ever accept, a cent. 

Q. Did vou know at what price the bonds were to be sold ? 

A. I did not. I never knew any thing about it. 

Q. Did you know what price the State was to receive for bonds J 

A. I did not. 

Q. Did you believe the State was being defrauded in any manner 
in the sale of bonds ? 

A. I understood, and believe that the profits arising from the sale 
of private bonds would justify the outlay of money for services in 
procuring the sale of the bonds. I supposed the State authorities 
would guard the interests of the State. 

Q. Did Gen. Lane ever receive, to your knowledge, or have you 
ever had any suspicion that he received any money or other consid- 
eration arising from the sale of Kansas bonds ? 

A. I never had any suspicion, nor do I believe he ever did. 

G. A. REYNOLDS. 



W. F. M. Amy, being duly affirmed according to law, says : 

During the last Legislature I was a member and took some part 
in the actions of that body, in regard to issuine bonds by the State, 
and on one occasion I made a motion to limit the sale of the seven 
per cent, bonds at eighty cehts on the dollar, and stated that I knew 
that Kansas State Bonds could be negotiated East at that rate, and 
would agree to make the negotiation at that price, if my traveling 
expenses East and return were paid. I was induced to withdraw 



S2 PBOOEEDINQS IN THE 

my amendment upon the representation of Mr. Eaton, that the 
expense of going East would be saved, as parties were here who 
would negotiate the bonds and report to the Legislature before they 
adjourned, and that negotiations could be made which would be 
equivalent to eighty cents on the dollar. After the loan for what is 
termed the twenty thousand dollar War Bonds, I called on Gov. 
Eobinson and told him that I knew parties who would negotiate 
them at par, and that I would get them negotiated in New York 
State at par free of charge, on my part. He told me that nothing 
could be done then in the matter because there was no qualified 
State Treasurer. 

Q. To your knowledge did you know that the War Bonds could 
be negotiated at par. 

A. I do. 

Q. Did you so state to Gov. Robinson ? 

A. I stated to Gov. Robinson that they could be sold at par if 
they were to be used exclusively for war purposes, and I would 
attend to the negotiation free of charge, if they were used for that 
purpose, as I was about to start to New York to look after relief 
matters where the negotiation could be made. 

Q. When was that ? 

A. I cannot give the exact date, but it was previous to the issuing 
of the bonds. The Governor told me they could not be issued on 
account of the Treasurer. 

Q. Was this proposition identical with Mr. Collamore's ? 

A. It was not, it was from citizens of New York, who wished to 
assist Kansas in her then condition. 

W. F. M. ARNY. 



STATEMENT OF TREASURER, FEBRUARY 12th, 1862. 

To the Honorable Martin Anderson and others, composing the 
Uommittee appointed te examine the books and accounts of the 
Auditor and Treasurer. 

Gentlemen : — In reply to the requirements made of me by your 
Committee, I give you herewith the following statement : 

Whole amount of bonds issued under an act entitled ^^ An act, to 
authorize the negotiation of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars 
of the bonds of the State of Kansas, to defray the current expenses 
of the State,'' approved May 1st, 1861, waa $50,000. 

Whole amount of bonds issued under an act entitled " An act, 
^pplementary to an act to authorize the negotiation of one hundred 
and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of the State of Kansas, to 



IMPXAGHMENT OASES. 83 

defiray the current expenses of the State/' approved June 8d, 1861, 
Wfts $99,400. 

The whole amount of bonds issued under an act entitled '* An act 
to authorize the State of Kansas to borrow money to repel invasion, 
suppress insurrection, and to defend the State in time of war,'' 
approved May 7th, 1861, was $40,000. 

Of the above, $62,200 of the bonds issued under the supplemen- 
tary act, approved June 8d, 1861, were issued in redemption of 
State warrants, redeeming warrants to the amount of $43,540, 

The whole amount paid into the Treasury f^om sale of bonds, 
issued under the two acts, approved May 1st, 1861, and June 3d, 
1861, is $33,119 68. 

To amount received from sale of war bonds, - - $12,400 00 

The amount paid by County Treasurers, • - 11,094 97 

The amount received from sale of Capitol materials, 261 88 
The amount received from County Treasurers for 

school purposes, 358 98 

Total, $57,229 91. 

Whole amount of war warrants redeemed, $5,159 15 
Amount paid in redemption of coupons, 4,564 00 
Amount of State warrants redeemed, 86,625 41 46,348 56 

$10,881 85 
Balance in the Treasury February 10th, 

1862, of which there is war funds, $7,240 85 

School funds, ... 353 98 7,594 78 

$8,286 57 
Amount required to redeem outstanding 

coupons, ..... 686 00 

Amount subject to draft, - • 2,600 57 

Whole amount of State warrants issued, 82,670 38 

Whole amount redeemed, ... $80,165 41 

Interest paid on above, ... 899 06 80,564 47 

Amount warrahts outstandingi .... $2,115 91 

H, B. BUTTON, Treasurer. 

The report was made the special order for 2 o'clock, P. M., the 
next day, and was ordered to be printed. 

On the next day, February 14th, at 2 o'clock, P. M., the House 
took up the special order. 

Mr. Plumb offered the following resolution which was adopted: 

Resolved, That the report of the Committee on Investigation be 
received and spread upon the Journals, and that said Committee are 
hereby authoriied to take such additional testimony as they see fit." 
8 



84 FR0GXXDIN08 IN THfi 

The resolution reported by the Committee was amended by con- 
Bent by striking out the words "and they are hereby/' and making 
it read as follows : 

Resolved^ That Oharles Robinson, GoTomor, John W. Robinson, 
Seoretarr of State, and George S. Hillyer, Auditor of the SUte of 
Kansas, be impeaohed of high misdemeanors in o£Soe, 

And was adopted unanimously. 

Mr. Plumb offered the following resolution which was adopted : 

Reiolved, That a Special Oommittee of fire be appointed to act 
with the Attorney Graneral, to prepare articles of impeachment 
against Charles Robinson, Qoyemor, John W. Robinson, Secretary 
of State, and George S. Hillyer, Auditor of the State of Kansas, for 
high misdemeanor in office, and to manage the trial of the said 
parties upon said articles before the Senate. 

Mr. Plumb offered the following resolution which was adopted : 

Reeolvedy That a Special Committee of three be appointed by the 
House to notify the Senate that the House will present an impeach- 
ment of Charles Robinson, Qoyemor, John W. Robinson, Secretary 
of State, George S. HUlyer, Auditor of the State of Kansas, and 
that in due time the House, by its managers, will present spe^fio 
articles of impeachment, and to ask process against the persons 
impeachment. 

On the next day, February 15th, the Speaker appointed Messrs. 
l^himb, Spaulding, Potter, Wagstaff and Wilson, special committee 
to conduct the impeachment cases before the Senate ; also, Messrs. 
Clark, Fishback and McCarthy, Special Committee to notify the 
Senate that the House has impeached C. Robinson, Gk>vemor, G^o. 
S. Htllyer, Auditor, and J, W. Robmson, Secretary of State. 

On the same day Mr. Clark, from Special Committee to notify the 
Senate of the impeachment of C, Robinson, Geoi^e S. Hillyer, and 
J. W. Robinson, made the following report : 

The Special Committee appointed by the House to notify the 
Senate that the House will present an impeachment of certain State 
officers, would report : 

Your Committee performed the duty assigned tbem, by appear- 
ing at the bar of the Senate, and by reading in the Senate, and by 
deliyering to the Secretary thereof, the following notice and demand : 

SIDNEY CLARKE, Chairman. 



mSBAOHMSNT 0A8S8. 81 

[COPY.] 

Mr. Pubidbnt :— Tlie nndersigned appear at the biff of the 
Senate aa a Committee of the House of nepreaentatiTea, ohareed 
with the dnty of notifying your honorable body that the Honae has 
impeached Charles RoDinaon, Governor, John W. Robinaon, Secre- 
tary of State, George S. Hillyer, Auditor of the State of Kansas, for 
high misdemeanors in office, and will, in due time, by its managers, 
present special articles of impeachment, and demand that the Senate 
take order for the appearance of the persons aboye named to answer 
to said impeachment. 

SIDNET CLARKE, 

JOHN McCarthy, 

W. H. M. FISHBACK. 

On February 18th, the following message was receiyed from the 
Senate : 

Kb. Spsakbb: — ^I am directed to notify the House that the* 
Senate has adopted the accompanying preamble and resolutien. 

A. R. BANKS, Secretary. 

Whsbxas, On the 15th dayof Februaxythe Houae of Repreeea- 
tatiyes, by three of their members, Messrs. Sidney Clarke, John 
McCarthy and W. H. M. Fishback, at the bar of the Senate, im- 
peached Charles Robinson, Goyemor, John W. Robinson, Secretary 
of State, and George S. Hillyer, Auditor of State, of hi^ misde- 
meadors in office, and informed the Senate that the House of 
Bepreaentatires will, in due time, exhibit articles of impeachment 
against them, and make sood the same ; and likewise demanded that 
the Senate take order ror the the appearance of the said Charles 
Bohinaon, Ooyemor, J^n W. Robinson, and George S. Hillyer, 
to answer said impeachment; therefore 

Resolved, That the Senate will take proper order thereon, of 
wkieh due aotioe shdl be giyen to the House of Representatiyes. 

On February 20th, Mr. Plumb, from Committee of Managers for 
the trial of impeachments, reported articles of impeachment of John 
W. Robinson, Secretafy of State. 

On motion, the House resolyed itself into Committee of the Whole 
on the articles of impeachment, 

Hr. Russell in the chair. 

After some time spent therein, the Committee arose, and, through 
ita chairman, reported back to the House the articles of impeachment 
of John W. Robinson, Secretary of State, and recommended their 
adoption. 

Report of the Committee of the Whole was agreed to. 



86 PBOOBSDDfOB IN THB 

Mr. Plumb moved that the olerk of thb House be instructed to 
inform the Senate that the Hoilse, through its maoagerB, is prepared 
to present to that body articles of impeachment of John W. 
'Bobinson, Secretary of State. 

Motion Prevailed. 

On the same day the following message from the Senate was 
received : 

Mb. Speakeb : — I am instructed to notify the House that the 
Senate is ready to receive the managers for the purpose of exhibit- 
ing the articles of impeaehment of which they have been notified. 

A. R. BANKS, Secretary. 

On February 25th, Mr. Plumb, from Committee of Managers, 
presented the plea of J. W. Robinson, signed by his Attorneys, 
Shannon, Stanton and Case, and submitted a repUoation thereto, 
which was adopted. 

On the same day, Mr. Plumb, firom Committee of Managers, pre- 
sented an amended replication to the plea of John W. Robinson in 
the impeachment case, which was adopted and ordered to take the 
place of the one adopted to-day. 

On February 26th, Mr. Plumb, from Committee of Managers on 
impeachments, presented the articles of impeachment of George S. 
Hillyer, Auditor of State, and also of Charles Robinson, €k)vemor. 

On motion, the articles of impeachment against Qeorge S. Hillyer, 
Auditor of State, were adopted. 

The vote being taken on the adoption of the artioles of impeach- 
ment of Charles Robinson resulted as follows : 

Ayes 53. Nays 7. 

And so the resolution was adopted. 

On motion of Mr. Plumb, the clerk was instructed to notify the 
Senate that the House, through its managers, is ready to present 
articles of impeachment against Charles Robinson, Qovemor, and 
George S. Hillyer, Auditor of State. 

Mr. Plumb offered the following resolution which was adopted : 

Resolved^ That the Board of Managers on the part of the House 
be instructed to move that the first Monday in June be set for the 
trial of the oases of impeachment against the State offioem. 



IMPEAOHMBNT CA8S8. 37 

The following meBsage was received from the Senate : 

Mr. Spsaker: — I am directed to inform the House of Represen- 
tatives, that the Senate will be ready to receive the Managers of the 
House for the purpose of exhibiting their articles of impeachment 
against Charles Robinson and George S. Hilljer, agreeably to the 
notification received by the Senate from the House of Representik 
tives, at the hour of 7 o'clock, this evening. 

A. R. RANKS, Secretary. 

On February 27th, Mr. Anderson, by consent, offered the follow- 
ing resolution, which was adopted : 

Whereas, It has come to the knowledge of this House that 
there are material and important witnesses on the part of the prose- 
cution of the impeachment now pending before the Senate, are in 
Washington, to wit : James C. Stone, ». C. Pomeroy, George W. 
Collamore and Martin F. Conway, and that D. H. Weir, and Chas. 
Chadwick and James H. Lane, have lefb this city since the initia- 
tion of these prosecutions, and the House is unable at present to 
ascertain where the said Lane, Weir and Chadwick are at this time ; 
and 

Whereas, These prosecutions, nor either of them can be con- 
ducted with effect without the testimony of said witnesses, and the 
said witnesses are material and important for said prosecutions with- 
out whose evidence this House cannot safely proceed to trial; there- 
fore, be it 

Resolved, That the Board i)f Managers be requested to present 
this resolution and preamble to the Senate, and ask that the trial 
of these impeachments be postponed until such time as in the opin- 
ion of the Board, will enable said Managers to procure the testimony 
of said witnesses. 



FROOEEDINaS 



UTTKK 



SENATE. 



SSNATX OhAMBSB, ) 

February 15, 1862. J 
The following oommiiniofttion from a oommittee of the House waa 
read by Mr. Olark on the part of the oonunittee : 

M&. PaisiDSNT: — ^The undersigned appear at the bar of the 
Senate aa a oonunittee of the Houae of Kepresentati^ies, char&'ed 
with tiie duty of notiftring your honorable body^that the Houae naa 
impeaohed Charles Robinson, Governor, John W. Robinson, Seeie- 
taiy of State, Geo. S. Hillyer, Auditor of the State of Kansas, for 
high misdemeanors in office, and will in due time, by its managers, 

E98ent special articles of impeachment, and demand that the 
nate take order for the apprehension of the persons above named 
to answer to the said impeachment. 

SIDNET GLARES, 

JOHN McCarthy, 

W, H. M, PISHBACK. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Two O'OLOOK, p. M. 

Mr. Ingalls offered the following resolution which was adopted : 

ReiolvSif That the communication received this morning from 

tbo commiltea of the House of Representatives, be referred to a 



40 HBOOBEDINQS IN THE 

Special Committee of tliree witli instructions to report what order 
the Senate will take therein. 



Senate Chamber, ) 

Monday, 2 o'clock, P. M., Feb. 17th, 1862? j 

President announced as the committee to whom was referred the 

resolution introduced by Mr. Ingalls on Saturday, in relation to 

what action the Senate will take in regard to the communication 

from the House of Bepresentatiyes, Messrs. Ingalls, Lynde and 

Spriggs. 

Mr. Ingalls offered the following resolution which was adopted : 

Resolvedy That a Committee of three be appointed by the chair 
to report rules for the Government of the Senate in the cases of 
impeachment. 

The President announced as the committee to prepare rules for 
the government of the Senate in the oases of impeachment, Messrs. 
Ingalls, Hoffman and Gunn. 



Senate Chamber, \ 
Tuesday, Feb. 18th, 1862. j 

Mr. Ingalls, chairman of the Special Committee to prepare rules 
for the government of the Senate . in cases of impeachment, made 
the following report : 

Mr. President : — ^The special committee to whom was referred 
the subject of the rules for the governmi^t of the Senate in 
cases of impeachment, have considered the same and instruct me to 
make the accompanying report and recommend its passage by the 
Senate. 

INGALLS, OhaitmaB. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 41 

KULES TO BE OBSERVED IN CASES OF IMPEACH- 
MENT. 

1. When the Senate shall receive notice from the House of 
RepresentatiTes, that managers are appointed on their part to conduct 
an impeachment against any person, and are directed to carry suoh 
articles to the Senate, the Secretary of the Senate shall immediately 
inform the House of Eepresentatiyes that the Senate is ready to 
receive the managers for the purpose of exhibiting such articles of 
impeachment agreeably to said notice. 

2. When the managers of an impeachment shall be introduced at 
the bar of the Senate, and shall have signified that they are ready 
to exhibit articles of impeachment against any person, the President 
of the Senate shall inform the managers that the Senate is ready to 
receive the same, after which they shall be read and delivered, and 
the President shall inform the managers that the Senate will take 
proper order on the subject of the impeachment of which due notice 
shall be given to the House of Representatives. 

8. Thereupon a summons shall issue, directed to the person or 
persons impeached, in manner following :-^ 

COURT OF IMPEACH3IENTS. 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, to Greeting : 

Whebeas, The House of Representatives of Kansas, did, on the*^ 
day of , exhibit to the Senate articles of impeachment 



against you, the said , in the words following, (here recite the 

articles,) and did demand that you the said should bo 

put to answer the accusations as set forth in said as^cles, and that such 
proceedings might be had agreeable to law and justice. You, the 

gaid , are hereby summoned to be and appear before 

the Senate of the State of Kansas, at their Chamber in Topcha, on 

the^ day of , then and there to answer to the said articles 'of 

impeachment, and then and there to obey and perform such orden 
and judgments as the Senate of the State of Kansas shall make In 
the premises according to the Constitution of the State. Hereof 
fail not. 

Witness , President of the Senate, at Topeka, thia; 

day of 



4^ TKOCEXDTirOB IN THB 

The said stimAiQins shall be attested by the Secretary of the 
Senate, and served by the Sergeant-at-Arms, or such other person 
as the Senate shall specially appoint for that purpose who shall serve 
the same in accordance with the forms next hereafter given. 

4. A precept shall be indorsed on said writ of summons as 
follows — 

Court of Impeachments, ) 
State of Kansas. J ^' 

The Senate of the State of Kansas to , Greeting,— 

You are hereby commanded to deliver to and leave with , 

if he can be found, a true and attested copy of the within writ of 
summons, together with a copy of this precept, showing him both, 
or in case he cannot with convenience be found, then you are to 
leave true and attested copies of the said summons and precept, at 
his usual residence or place of business, and in whatever way the 
eervice is performed, let it be done at least ' days before the 
appearance day mentioned in the said writ of summons, thereof fail 
not, and make return of this writ of summons and precept, with 
your proceedings endorsed thereon, on or before the appearance day 
named in said summons. 

;T Witness' , President of the Senate, at Topeka, this 

^— — day of ; which precept shall be attested by the Sec- 
retary of the Senate. 

6. Subpoena shall be issued by the Secretary of the Senate, upon 
application of the managers of the impeachment or of the part 
impeached, or of his counsel in the following form, to wit : 

To , Greeting :— 

You and each of you are hereby commanded to appear before the 

Senate of the State of Kansas on the day of ,then and 

there to testify your knowledge in the cause which is before the 
Senate, in which the House of Representatives have impeached 
■ Hereof fail not. 

Witness , President of the Senate, this day of 

; which shall be attested by the Seoretaiy . 

The subpoena shall be directed to the proper officer of the districti 
in which the witness resides, in manner following, to wit : — 



IMI^EACHMXNT CA8BS. 



iz 



THB SENATE OF THE STATE OF KANSAS, 

To the Sheriff of County : 

Ton ue heieby cominiktided to serve and return the within 
subpoena, according to law. 

Dated at Topeka, this day of A. D. 

6. The President of the Senate shall direct all forms of pro- 
ceedings not specially provided for by the Senate ; he shall ako be 
authorized to employ such assistance as may be necessary to serve 
«U process required during the trial. 

7. At twelve o'clock of the day appointed for the return of the 
summons against the person impeached, the Legislative and Execu- 
tive business of the Senate shall be suspended, and the Secretary 
shall administer an oath to the returning officer as follows 7 '* You 
do solemly swear that the return made and subscribed by you upon 

the process issued on the*-^— day of ,by the Senate of the 

State of Kansas, against , is truly made, and that you have 

performed said service as therein described, so help you Ood •" 
which oath shall be entered at large upon the records. 

8. The person or persons impeached shall then appear and answer 
ihe articles of impeachment against him. If he appear in person or 
bj Attorney, it shall be recorded; the record stating the person 
appearing, and the capacity in which he appears. If there be bo 
appearance in person or by Attorney, the fact shall also be 



9. At twelve o'clock of the day i^pointed for the trial of an 
impeaohment, the Legislative and Executive business of the Senate 
shall be postponed. The Secretary shall then administer the follow- 
ing oath to the President : 

<< You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 

of the impeachment of ■ , you will do impartial justice 

aeoording to the Constitution and Laws of the State of Kansas." 

The President shall administer the same oath to each Senator 
pieseni; after which the Secretary shall notify the House of Repte- 
lentatires that the Senate is ready to proceed upon the impeaohment 
ef , in the Senate Chamber of the State of Kansas. 

10. Counsel for the parties shall be admitted to appear and be 
heard upon an impeachment. 



44 PBOOBEDINGS IN TKB 

11. All motions made by the mKnagen, ihe parties or their 
counsel, shall be in writing, directed to the President, read by the 

Secretary, and decided by yeas and nays without debate, all of 
which shall be entered on the records. 

12. Witnesses shall be sworn in the manner following : — ^^ You 
do solemnly swear (or affirm) that the evidence you shall give in the 

case now pending between the State of Kansas and , 

shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so 
help you Ood.'' The oath shall be administered by the Secretary. 

13. Witnesses shall be examined in chief by the party producing 
them, and cross-examined in the usual form. 

14. If a Senator be called as witness, he shall be sworn, and 
^ve his testimony standing in his place. 

15. If a Senator wish a question put to a Vritness, it shall be 
reduced to writing and put by the President. 



Mr. Ingalls from the Special Committee to whom was referred the 
communication from the House of Bepresentatives, made the follow- 
ing report: — 

Mb. President : — The committee to whom was referred the accom- 
panying communication, have had the same under consideration, 
and instruct me to report the following Preamble and BesolutioBy 
and recommend its adoption by the Senate : — 

Whebeas, On the 15th day of February, the House of Repre- 
sentatives by three of their members, Messrs. Sidney Clark, Joha 
McCarthy, and W. H. M. Fishback, at the bar of the Senate, 
impeached Charles Bobinson, Governor, John W. Robinson, Secre- 
tary of State, and George S. Hillyer, Auditor of State, of high 
misdemeanors in office, and informed the Senate that the House of 
Representatives will in due time exhibit articles of impeachment 
against them and make good the same, and likewise demand that 
tne Senate take order for the appearance of the said Charles Robinson, 
John W. Robinson and Gkorge S. Hillyer, to answer said impeach- 
ment; therefore 

Re9olved,f That the Senate will take proper order thereon, of 
which due notice shall be given to the House of Representatives. 



impeaohment oases. 45 

[communication.] 

Hb. President : — ^The undersigned appear at the bar of the Senate 
as a eommittee of the House of Representatiyes, charged with the 
duty of iiotifyingyour honorable bodythat the House has impeached 
Charles Robinson , Ooyemor, John W. Robinson, Secretary of State, 
and George S. Hillyer, Auditor of State of Kansas, for high mis- 
demeanors in office, and will in due time by its managers, present 
special articles of impeachment, and demand that the Senate 
^e order for the appearance of the persons aboye named, to answer 
to said impeachment. 

(Signed,) SIDNEY CLARK, 

JOHN McCarthy, 

W. H. M. FISHBACK. 

Mr. Ingalls moyed that the report of the Committee on Rules 
ibr the goyemment of the Senate in cases of impeachment, be referred 
to the Committee of the Whole. 

Carried. 

On request of Mr. Broadhead, tbe Senate went into a Committee 
of the Whole for the consideration of the report of the Committee 
on Rules for th^ goyemment of the Senate in cases of impeach- 
ment. 

Mr. Hoffman in the chair. 

After some time spent therein, the committee arose and through 
its chairman reported the Rules back to the Senate with amend- 
ments, with the recommendation that they be printed. 

The report of the committee was agreed to. 



Senate Chamber, \ 
Wednesday, Feb. 19th, 1862. J 

On request of Mr. Ingalls, 

The Senate went into Committee of the Whole for the consider- 
tion of the Rules', to be adopted by the Senate in the cases of im- 
peachment ; 

Mr. Keeler in the chair. 



49 PaOOEXDINQB IN THJB 

After some time spent therein, Uie eommittee arose, and through 
its chairman, reported the same back to the Senate with amendmenta, 

and recommended their adoption. 
The report of the Committee of the Whole was agreed to. 



Senate Chamber, ) 
Thursday, Feb. 20th, 1862. j 

Mr. Ingalls offered the following resolution, which was adopted : 

Retohedy That the Report of the Committee on Rules to be 
obseryed by the Senate in cases of impeachment, as amended by the 
Committee of the Whole, be engrossed and entered at large upon 
reeords of the Senate. 

Mr. Ingalb offered the following resolution which was adopted : 

Resohedj That two hundred and fifty copies of the Rules adopted 
to govern the Senate in oases of impeachment be printed in pam- 
phlet form for the Legislature. 

Mr. Ingalls offered the following resolution, which was adopted : 

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be directed to inform 
the House of Representatives that the Senate is ready to receive the 
managers for the purpose of their exhibiting articles of impeach- 
ment against John W. Robinson. 

Mr. Plumb, ohairmui of the maxiagers on the part of the House 

of Representatives, appeared at the bar of the Senate and read the 
following communication : 

Mb. Pbebident : — The committee of managers appointed on be* 
half of the House of Representatives, herewith exhibit to the Senate 
articles of impeachment against John W. Robinson, Secretary of 
State. 



ARTICLES OP IMPEACHMENT 

Exhibited by the House of Representativea of the State of Kansas, 
for themselves, and on behalf of all tho people of Kansas againsti 
John W. Robinson, in maintenance of their impeachmenit heretofore 
prefferred against him for high crimes and misdemeanors. 



IMPXAOHMSNT CASKS. ^ 

ARTICLE I. 

That tlie said John W. Robinson was, prior to the third day of 
June, A. D. 1861, ever since has been and still is, Secretary of 
State of said State of E^ansas. That on the fifth day of June, A. 
D. 1861, the said John W. Robinson, as Secretary of State, together 
wiih the Governor and Auditor of said State, was anthorized and 
empowered to negotiate and sell the bonds of the State, the issuance 
of which was provided for in the act authorising the negotiation of 
one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of the State of 
Kansas, to defray the current expenses of the State, approved May 
lat, 1861. 

That bonds of the State of Kansas, to defray the current expenses 
of said State as aforesaid, were prepared, executed and usued accord- 
ing to law. 

That the said John W. Robinson, being so empowered to sell and 
negotiate said bonds, did authorize and empower one Robert S» 
Stevens to negotiate and sell said bonds, to the amount of eighty* 

4 

seven thousand two hundred dollars, at any price over sixty per 
centum upon the amount of said bonds, he, the said Stevens, paying 
to the State no more than sixty per centum of said amount; that 
under said agreement, and with the full knowledge and consent of 
said Robinson, said Stevens proceeded to sell and deliver a large^ 
amount of said bonds, to wit : The amount of fifty-six thousand 
dollars of said bonds at the rate of eighty-five per centum on said 
amount of fifty-six thousand dollars, all of which was well known to> 
said Robinson ; and under the said agreement, with the full knowk 
edge and consent of said Robinson, said Stevens paid over and accoun-^ 
ted to said State for only the amount of sixly per centum on said bonda 
so sold as aforesaid, which said agreement, so made and entered into 
by said Robinson, was in direct violation of the laws of said State 
in this : that under the said laws said bonds could not be sold for 
less than seventy per centum on the amount of said bonds, and was 
in violation of the official duties of the said Robinson in this : that 
the said State was, by said agreement, defrauded out of its just 
rights, in that said State was entitled to receive the full amount for 
which said bonds were sold, while in truth and in fact, with the full 
knowledge and consent of the said Robinson, said bonds were sold 
for eighty-five per centum upon the dollar of the amount of said 
bonds, while in truth and in fact the said State did not receive more 
than sixty per centum upon the whole amount of said bonds so sold^^ 



/ 



48 pBOOEEDiNas m the 

whereby said John W. Robinson betrayed the trust reposed in him 
by the State of Kansas, subjected said State to great pecuniary loss, 
and has thereby been guilty of a high misdemeanor in said office of 
Sectetary of State aforesaid. 

ARTIOLE II. 

That the said John W. Robinson, as Secretary of State, as afore- 
said, being authorized and empowered to negotiate and sell said 
bonds as aforesaid, well knowing that by the laws of said State said 
bonds could not be sold for less than seventy per centum upon the 
dollar of the face of said bonds, and contriying to cheat and defraud 
said State in the premises, did secretly enter into the agreement 
above set forth with said Stevens, so that said State of Kansas 
8|iould realize therefrom only sixty per centum upon the dollar, 
well knowing at the time he so made said agreement that said 
bonds could be sold for eighty-five per centum upon the dollar of 
the amount of the face of said bonds, thereby the said Robinson was 
guilty of high misdemeanor in his office of Secretary of State, as 
aforesaid. 

ARTICLE III. 

That the said John W. Robinson, as Secretary of State, as aforesaid} 
t>eing authorized and empowered to negotiate and sell said bonds, as 
aforesaid, with the guilty intent to cheat and defraud said State oat 
of its just rights in the premises, consented that said Stevens, acting 
as the agent to sell and negotiate said bonds under the agreement, 
aforesaid, should receive said bonds, to wit : Said bonds to the 
amount of eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars, with all the 
^sonpons for the semi-annual interest upon said bonds attached to 
4ndd bonds; and the said Stevens, with the full knowledge and 
^consent of said Robinson, received said bonds with said coupons 
thereto attached; and included among the coupons so attached, 
were coupons for the semi-annual interest due on the amount of said 
bonds on tho first day of January, A. D. 1862, being the first semi- 
annual interest payable on the amount of said bonds; that said 
Stevens, with the full knowledge of said Robinson, did not sell and 
negotiate the bonds so sold by him until after said coupons for the 
first semi-annual interest became due and payable, to wit : After the 
first day of January, A. D. 1862, and at the time said, so sold as 
aforesaid, were sold by said Stevens; said Stevens, with the full 
knowledge and consent of said Robinson, detached from the said 



IMPBAOHMSNT 0ABI8. 48 

bonds fer tbe sum of eigHty-seven thoasand two hundred dollan, tlie 
said coupons for the first semi-annnal interest npon the amount of 
said bonds, which said semi-annnal interest had not then aocmed 
against the State, and with the full knowledge and consent of said 
Robinson, presented said coupons so attached, to the Treasurer of 
said State, and received from said Treasurer the full amount of thd 
semi-annual interest upon the amount of said bonds, amounting to 
three and one-half of one per centum upon the whole amount of 
bonds BO sold, to wit : upon the said sum of eightynseTen thousand 
two hundred dollars, whereby the said Robinson was guilty of high 
misdemeanor in his office of Secretary of State, ss aforesaid. 

ARTICLE IV. 

That the said John W. Robinson, as Secretary of State, as afore- 
said, being empowered and authorized to sell and negotiate said 
bonds, as aforesaid, was thereby constituted the agent of the Slate 
aforesaid, for the negotiation and sale of said bonds, and that while 
acting as such agent, and without any authorities of law therefor, 
authorized and empowered one Robert S. Stevens, aforesaid, to sell 
and negotiate said bonds, and entrusted to said Stevens for the pur- 
pose of selling and negotiating the same, a large amount of said 
bonds, to wit : bonds to the amount of eighty-seven thousand dollars ; 
that he took no security or other guaranty from said Stevens that 
he would preserve the State from loss while he so held, negotiated 
and sold bonds, as aforesaid, whereby said Robinson was guilty of 
high misdemeanor in his said office of Secretary of State, as afore- 
said. 

ARTICLE V. 

That the said John W. Robinson, as Secretary of State as afore- 
said, entered into a conspiracy with George S. Hillyer, Auditor of 
State, and Robert S. Stevens, to cheat and defraud said State in 
this : that the said Robinson and the said Hillyer, constituting a 
majority of those persons authorized by law to sell and negotiate 
bonds, were empowered and authorized to sell and negotiate 
bonds, that they, said Robinson and Hillyer, so conspiring as 
aforesaid, with said Stevens, did secretly, in the city of Washington, 
in the District of Columbia, whither they had gone for the purpose 
of carrying out and consummating said conspiracy, well knowing at 

the same time that stud bonds could be sold for more than the sum 
4 



<W paoonDiNas in thx 

of seveaty per oentom upon tlie amount of the faoe of said bonds, 
and without making any e£Fbrt to. sell or negotiate isaid bonds, entered 
into an agreement with said Stevens, constituting and ap- 
pointing said Stevens the agent of the State aforesaid for the 
sale of said bonds, whereby said Stevens was to receive all the pro- 
^eeeds of said bonds above the amount of sixty per centum upon the 
face of the bonds he should so sell, and the said Hillyer and said 
Robinson, entrusted to said Stevens, bonds of the said State which 
.which they so empowered and authorized to sell as aforesaid, to the 
amount of eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars, to be sold 
and negotiated by him under the agreement aforesaid, and said 
Robinson, Hillyer and Stevens well knew that at the time said 
agreement was so made as aforesaid, and it was so understood be- 
tween them, that said bonds could be sold to the Gk)vemment of the 
United States at the rate of eighty-five per centum on the dollar of 
the amount of said bonds, and the said Stevens thereafter, with the 
full knowledge and consent of said Hillyer and Bobinson, proceeded 
to sell and did sell said bonds to the amount of fifty-six thousand 
dollars at the rate of over seventy per centum upon the face of said 
bonds, to wit : at the rate of eighty-five per centum on the face of 
said bonds, and with the full knowledge and consent of said Robinson 
and Hillyer, did receive for said bonds, so sold, to wit : bonds to 
the amount of fifty-six thousand dollars, payment at the rate of 
eighty-five per centum upon the dollar of said amount, to wit: the 
sum of forty-seven thousand and six hundred dollars; which said 
amount the said State was entitled to receive for said bonds, but the 
said Stevens, acting under the said agreement heretofore set forth 
between him and the said Robinson and Hillyer, and in carrying 
out said conspiracy, to cheat and defraud said State, and with the 
full knowledge, consent and connivance of said Robinson and Hillyer, 
paid over to said State, as the full amount to which said State was 
entitled, only the sum of thirty-three thousand six hundred dollars, 
being only sixty per centum upon the amount of bonds, so by said 
Stevens sold, as aforesaid, whereby said State was cheated and de- 
frauded by said conspiracy, out of the sum of fourteen thousand 
dollars; and the said Robinson further conspiring with said Hillyer 
and said Stevens to cheat and defraud said State, together with said 
Hillyer, under a preconcerted fraudulent agreement between said 
Bobinson, Hillyer and Stevens, entrusted to said Stevens under the 
said fraudent agreement, the said bonds of said State to the amount 
of eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars with the coupons 



IMPBAOBiaiTT 0A8XB. ^1 

tbereanto attached for the first senti-annual interest npon the amount 
of said bonds, which said interest by the terms of said coupons be- 
came due on the first day of January, A. D. 1862, and the said 
Bobinson and the said Hillyer well knew that said Stevens did not 
sell the bonds so, as aforesaid, sold by him until after said first day of 
January, 1862, and the said bonds were not so sold unMl after that 
time, and at the time said interest by the terms of siud coupons 
became due and payable, the whole amount of said bonds, to wit : 
to the amount of eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars, were 
still the property of sud State, which said Robinson and Hillyer 
weU knew that the said Stevens in carrying out the before mentioned 
ooDspiracy to cheat said State, with the full knowledge, consent and 
connivance of said Robinson and Hillyer, while said bonds were the 
property of said State, and before the same or any part thereof had 
been sold, detached said coupons from said bonds, and with the like 
knowledge, consent and connivance of said Robinson and Hillyer, 
and in the furtherance of said conspiracy said Stevens did present 
flud coupons to, and received from the Treasurer of said State the 
full amount of said first semi-annual interest upon said sum of 
-eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars, amounting to three 
thousand and fifty-two dollars, whereby, by this conspiracy, afore- 
said, the State of Kansas was cheated and defrauded by said Rob- 
inson, as Secretaiy of State, as aforesaid, conspiring with said 
Hillyer as Auditor of State, as aforesaid, and said Stevens, out of 
the sum of three thousand and fifty-two dollars, whereby the said 
Bobinson was guilty of high misdemeanor in his offioe of Secretary 
of State, as aforesaid. 



ARTICLE VI. 

That the said John W. Robinson as Secretary of State, as afore- 
said, under the laws of said State, was authorized and empowered 
to procure the printing of the ^' Banking Law'' submitted to the 
votes of the people of said State at the general election in November, 
1861, where practicable, in one newspaper in each county in the 
State ; and whereas he well knew that no newspaper was published 
in the county of Wabaunsee in said State, permitted and consented 
that one J. F. Gummings should, in fraud of said law and said 
State, print said law in what purported to be a newspaper printed 
and published in the county of Wabaunsee, styled the '^ Wabaunsee 



'62 nocoBiDiiiaB m thx 

Patriot," wbioh said pretended newspaper was printed and pnbliahed 
as said Robinson well knew, for the sole purpose of defrauding said 
State out of the fees for the publication of sud '' Banking Law/' 
and the said Robinson afterwards, well knowing all the feots above 
stated, oertifled that the account of said Gununings for said pretended 
publication was correct, and the amount thereof due from said State 
to said Cummings, to wit : the amount of three hundred and forty- 
four dollars, which amount said Cummings by yirtue of said certifi- 
cate, drew from the Treasury of said State the said amount, and the 
said Robinson well knew that in so certifying as aforesaid, he was 
cheating and defrauding said State, whereby said John W. Robipson 
was guU^ of high misdemeanor in his said office of Secretary of 
State, aforesaid. 

ARTICLE VII. 

Thatsaid John W. Robinson, as Secretary of State, as aforesaidi 
was guilty of high misdemeanor in his said office in thi§ : that the 
said John W. Robins(m, as Secretary of State, as aforesaid, was by 
the laws of said State, entrusted with the duty of countersigning 
oertain bonds of said State issued under the proTiaions of an act 
entitled '^ An act to authorise the State of Kansas to borrowmoney 
to repel invasion, suppress insurrection and defend the State in time 
of war," approved May 7th, A. D. 1861 ; and whereas, by said law 
the bonds of said State were authorised to be issued for the sum of 
twenty thousand dollars, and no more, he, the said John W. Robin- 
son, countersigned bonds pretended to be issued under the provisions 
of said law, to the amount of forty thousand dollars, of which said 
bonds so countersigned by him, thirty-one thousand dollars were 
negotiated and sold, which said act of said Robinson in counter- 
signing more than twenty thousand dollars was in violation of law 
and to the great damage of said State ; thereby said Robinson was 
guilty of high misdemeanor in his said office of Secretary of State. 

ARTICLE VHL 

That the said John W. Robinson, as Secretary of State, as afore- 
said, was in conjunction with the Auditor and Treasurer of said 
State, authorised and empowered by the laws of the said State of Kan- 
to receive bids for the public printing for said State, for the year 



IMPXAaHMSNT 0A818. 5S 

A. D. 1861, and to award oontraots for the same to the lowest 
TospoiiBible bidder or bidden. That the eaid John W. Bobinson, aa 
Seoretaiy of State, as aforesaid, acting in oonjnnotion with the 
Auditor and Treasurer of said State, as aforesaid, did, on the tenth 
day of June, A. D. 1861, award to Trask ft Lowman, printers and 
publishers, of Lawrenoe, Kansas, the contract for the Legislative 
Printing for the year A. D. 1861, as the lowest bidders for that 
branch of the public printing for said year; and the siud John W. 
Bobinson, as Seoretaiy of State, as aforesaid, did officially notify the 
said Trask ft Lowman that the said contract had been so, as aforesaid, 
awarded to them, and requiring them, the said Trask ft Lowman, to 
come forward within the time prescribed by law, and ftle their bond, 
conditioned for the faithful performance of said printing so awarded 
to them, that the said Trask ft Lowman did ftle in the office of the 
said Secretary of State, within the time prescribed by law, a good 
and sufficient bond, in manner and form ss required by law, con- 
ditioned for the faithful and legal performance of the said printing 
so aa aforMdd awarded to them; that the said bond wss approved 
by the Seoretaiy in his official capacity, and by him duly filed in his 
office ; that a few days after the filing of said bond, and its approval 
as aforesaid, the said John W. Bobinson, Secretary of State, as 
aforesaid, did consent to the withdrawal of the bid of said Trask ft 
Lowman for said Legislative printing, and, the aforesaid bond by 
«aad Traak ft Lowman, so as aforesaid filed in the Secretary's office, 
and the said bid and bond were withdrawn ; in consequence of which 
Ae contract for the said Legislative printing, had to be and was 
acwarded to the next lowest bidder, whereby the State suffered great 
feouniary damage, and the said John W. Bobinson, Se(netary, as 
aforesaid, did violate his official oath, and became goil^ of a high 
misdemeanor against the said State. 



And the House of Bepresentatives of said State of Kansas, saving 
to themselves the liberty of exhibiting at any time hereafter any 
ftirther articles or other aocusaUon or impeachment against the said 
John W. Bobinson, and also of replying to his answers hereto, and 
of offering proof to all and every of the aforesaid articles, and to all 
and every other articles of impeachment or accusation, which shall 
he exhibited by them, as the case shall require, do demand tl^t tfie 
iaid John W. Bobinson may be put to answer the misdemeanor as 
herein charged, and that such proceedings, examinations, trials and 



54 vmwaammm m tbb 

jud^pnentB may be theTeupon had and giYen as are agreeable 16^ 
j«0tioe. 

SAMUEL A. STINBON, 

Attorney €kneral. 
P. B. Plumb, 'j 

AzsL SpAULDinay [ Managers on the part of the 

F. W. POTTBE, y 

. . W. R. Wagstaff, I House of Representatives, 

' Dayiss Wilson, J 

The foregoing are the articles of Impeachment duly prepared by~ 
the Honse of Eepresentatives of the State of Kansas, against John. 
W. fiobinsoD, on the twentieth day of February, A. D. 1862. 

M. S. ADAMS, 
Speaker of House of Representativea. 
JOHN FRANCIS, 
Ghief Clerk Houae of BepretentatiTee. 



SsNATx Chamber, ) 
Friday, February 21st, 1862. J 

Mr. Ingalb offisred the Miowing resolutioD, aad moved its 
adoption : 

Resolved, That the Secretary be directed to issue a summons tb 
John W. Robinson, Secretary of the State of Kanaas, to answer 
eertain articles of impeachment exhibited against him by the House 
of Representatiyea on Thundiiy the 20th instant, and that the saia 
summons be returnable on the 24th day of February, and be served 
at least one day before the return day thereof. 

Mr. Lynde moved to strike out the " 24tV' and insert the << 25ih'' 
in the resolution. 

Lost. 

The question recurring upon the ori^nal resolution offered by Mt. 
IngaUs, it was 

Adopted. 

The Rules as amended by the Committee of the Whole were 
ordered to be printed for the use of the Legislature. 



IM9XA0HMSNT 0A8SB. *6S> 

BULES TO BE OBSEBYED IN CASES OF IMPEACH- 
MENT. 

1. When the Senate shall receive notice from the Honse of 
Bepresentatiyes that Managers are appointed on their part to 
conduct an Impeachment against any person, and are directed to. 
carry such articles to the Senate, the Secretary of the Senate shall 
immediately inform the Honse of Bepresentatiyes that the Senate is 
TewAf to receive the managers for the purpose of exhibiting such 
ariicles of impeachment agreeable to said notice. 

2. When the managers of an impeachment shall be introduced to 
the bar of the Senate, and shall have signified that they are ready to 
exhibit articles of impeachment against any persons, the President 
of the Senate shall inform the managers that the Senate is ready to 
receive the same, after which they shall be read and delivered, and 
the President shall inform the managers th^t the Senate will take 
proper order on the subject of the impeachment, of which due notice 
shall be given to ^ House of Bepresentatiyes. 

3. Thereupon a summons shall issue, directed to the person o« 
persons impeached, in the manner fbUowing : 

COUBT OF IMPEACHMENTS. 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, to Qreeting i - 

Wbsbeas, The House of Bepresentatiyes of Kansas, did, on the 
day of , exhibit to the Senate articles of impeachment 



agunst you, the said , in the words following, (here recite.tlie 

articles,) and did demand that you the said should be 

put to answer the accusations as set forth in said articles, and that such 
proceedings might be had agreeable to law and justice. You, the 

siJcl ^ are hereby summoned to be and appear before 

the Senate of the State of Kansas, at their Chamber in Topeka, on 

thej day of , then and there to answer to the said artitdes of 

impeachment, and then and there to obey and perform such orders 
and judgments as the Senate of the State of Kansas shall make in 
the premises according to the Constitution of the State. Hereof 
fidl not. 

H^Witness jJfPrerident of the Senate, at Top eka, thig 

day of 



^^* .-. . .; ♦.; 



§6 pRoonDiNOs nr thx 

The said rammona shall be attested by the Seeretary of the 
Senate, and serred by the Sergeani«t-Anns, or such other person 
as the Senate shall specially appoint for that purpose who shall serre 
Ae same in acoordanoe with the forms next hereafter given. 

4. A precept shall be indorsed on said writ of summons as 
foUowc 



Oonrt of Impeachments, > 
State of Kansas. J "' 

The Senate of the State of Kansas to , Greetmg,— 

You are hereby commanded to deliver to and leave with , 



if he can be found, a true and attested copy of the within writ of 
iummons, together with a copy of this precept, showing him both, 
or in case he cannot with convenience be found, then you are to 
leave true and attested copies of the said summons and precept, at 
his usual residence or place of business, and in whatsoever way the 

service is performed, let it be done at least days before the 

appearance day mentioned in the said writ of summons, thereof fail 
Bot, and make return of this writ of summons and precept, with 
your proceedings endorsed thereon, on or before the appearance day 
named in 4aid summons. 

Witness , President of the Senate, at Topeka, this 

day of ; which precept shall be attested by the Seo- 



retaiy of the Senate. 

6. Subpoena shall be issued by the Secretary of the Senate, upon 
application of the managers of the impeachment or of the pari 
impeached, or of his counsel in the following form, to wit : 

To , Greeting : — 

You and each of you are hereby commanded to appear before the 

Senate of the State of Kansas on the day of ,then and 

there to testify your knowledge in the cause which is before the 
Senate, in which the House of Bepresentatives have impeached 
■ ■ Hereof fail not 

Witnes s ■ , President of the Senate, this day of 

— — ^; which shall be attested by the Secretary. 

The subpoena shall be directed to the proper oflioer of the Senate, 
in manner following, wit : — 



lUFBAOHMBNT 0A8X8. 57 

THE SENATE OF THE STATE OF KANSAS, 

To the Sergeant-atr Anns : 

Ton are hereby commanded to serve and return the within 
mbpoena, according to law. 

Dated at Topeka, this day of A. D. 



6. The President of the Senate shall direct all forms of pro- 
ceedings not specially provided for by the Senate ; he shall also be 
mnthorised to employ such assistance as may be necessary to serve 
all proeesB required during the trial. 

7. At twelve o'clock of the day appointed for the return of the 
summons against the person impeached, the Legislative and Execu- 
tive business of the Senate shall be suspended, and the Secretary 
shall administer an oath to the returning office as follows ? " You 
do solemly swear that the return made and subscribed by you upon 

the process issued on the day of , by the Senate of the 

State of Kansas, against , is truly made, and that you have 

performed said service as therein described, so help you God ;" 
which oath shall b6 entered at large upon the records. 

8. The person or persons impeached shall then appear and answer 
ibt artioles of impeachment against him. If he appear in person or 
Vj Attorney, it shall be recorded; the record stating the person 
appearing, and the capacity in which he appears. If there be no 
mppearanoe in person or by Attorney, the fkct shall also be recorded. 

9. At twelve o'clock of the day appointed for the trial of an 
impeachment, the Legislative and Executive business of the Senate 
shall be postponed. The Secretary shall then administer the follow- 
ing oath to the President : '* You do solemnly swear that in all 

things pertaining to the trial of the impeachment of , 

j<>n will do impartial justice, according to the law and the evidence.'' 

The President shall administer the same oath to each Senator 
present; after which the Secretary shall notify the House of Bepra- 
sentatives, or the person or persons who may have been chosen by 
the House of Bepresentatives, to represent sud House of fiepresen- 
tatives upon the trial, that the Senate is ready to proceed upon the 

impeaohmentof , in the Senate Chamber of the State 

of Kansas. 

10. Counsel for the parties shall be admitted to appear and be 
heard upon an impeaohment. 



fiS PB00m>ni€MB IK TBM 

11. All motionB made by the managers, the paitiei or their 
connael, shall be ia writings directed to the President, read by the 
Secretury, and decided by yeas and nays without debate, by the 
Senate, all of which shall be entered on the records. 

12. Witnesses shall be sworn in the manner following : — ^* You 
do^solemnly swear (or affirm) that the evidence yon shall giye in the 

ease now pending betweea t|ie State of ELansas and , 

shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, d^ 
help you God.'' The oath shall be administered by the Secretary* 

13. Witnesses shall be examined in chief by the party producing 
them, and cross-examined in the usual form. 

14. If a Senator be called as witness, he shall be sworn, and 
give his testimony standing in his place. 

15. If a Senator wish a question put to a witness, it shall be 
reduced to writing and put by the President. 

16. Upon the return day of the summons, a day shall be fixed b j 
the Senate, not less than three days from said return day, for tiie 
trial of the impeachment. Should it be made to appear upon the 
said return day, by affidavit of the party impeached, or one of thf 
managers of the impeachment, that essential witnesses for th0 
(fl^osecution or defense cannot be present| from sickness, absence, oc 
other disability, the Senate may grant commissioners to take tha 
depositions of suchivitnesses, and assign the trial of said impeachment 
fo) such day as shall seem reasonable and just. 



Sxi^ATS Ohambbr 1 

Monday, Febmaiy 24, A. D. 1862, 2 o'clock, P. M. | 



Senate called to order. 
President in the chair. 



The Miowiiig ooaunmiioaiion to the President waa read i by the 
Seeretarj: 

ToPEKA, February 24th, 1882. 
E&n, J. R Boot, PrtridenU of tU Smwie of the StaU qf. Kanta*:; 

» 

gn^ : — ^Xhe undersigned have i^e honor to inform the Senate that* 
they have been retained aa couDsel for Hm. John W. Robinsoo^ 
SBorataiy of State, and that they are now present, ready to appear 
for him, and m^e answer to any Articles of Impeachment which 
may be exhibited against him by the House of Bepresentatives 
before the Senate, when sitting as a Court of Impeachment, 
and duly. sworn in the manner prescribed by the Constitution of the 

State. 

We have the honor to be, 
Most respectfully, 

Your Obedient serv^ts., 

WILSON SHANNON, 
F. P. STANTON, 
N. P. CASE. 

The Sergeant-at-Arms having returned the following writ of 
summons against John W. Robinson, the following path was admin- 
istered to him by the Secretary of the Senate : 

" Tou do solemnly swear that the reftum mad^ and avbsorlhed^by 
yim upon thapioeeas iwued on the 22d day of February by ^le 
SMiste of the State of Kanaa^, against John W. Bobinson is truly 
mnde, and tihst you hav^ performed said service as therein describe^^ 
•0 help you fiod/^ 



Court of Impeaohmefita, ) 
SMaofKaiiaaa. ) 

The Senate of the State of Kansarf, To John W. Robmsetfr 
Greeting: 

Whereas, the ,Hou8c of Representatives of Kansas did, on the 
20th day of February, exhibit to the Senate, Articles of Impeach- 
ment against you, the said John W. Robinson, in the words fol- 
lowing : 

(Here follows the Articles of Impeachment as set out in a former 
part of these proceedings.) 



<90 PBOoin>niot m thi 

im^HlH bsmd that yov, the said John W. Bobiuon^ should be 

pvt to aurwer the aoousatioiiB as set forth in said Articles, and that 

: anoh proceedings might be had agreeable to law and jnstioe. Yotiy 

'the said John W. Robinson, are hereby summoned to be and appear 

•before die Senate of the State of Kansas, at their chamber in 

Topeka, on the 24th day of February, then and there to answer to 

the said Articles of Impeachment, and then and there to obey and 

perform such orders and judgment as the Senate of the State of 

Kansas shall make in the premises, according to the Constitution of 

the State. Hereof fail not 

Witness, J. P, BOOT. 

President of the Senate. 

Done at Topeka, this 28d day of February, A. D. 1862. 

Attest:— A. R. BANKS, 

Secretary of the Senate. 



Oourt of Impeachments, \ 
State of Eiansas. j "' 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, To J. Pigman, (Greeting: 

You are hereby commanded to deliTer to and leare wiA John W. 

Bobinson, if he can be found, a true and attested copy of the within 

"Writ of summons, together with a copy of this precept, showing 

Um both, or in case he cannot with conyenienee be found, then you 

;are to leave true and attested copies of the said summons and pre- 

oept at his usual residence, or place of businaas; and in whatever 

way the serrice is performed, let it be done at least one day before 

the appearance day mentioned in the said writ of sumnons ; thereof 

fidl not, and make return of this writ of summons and precept widi 

your proceedings endorsed thereon, on or before the appearance day 

named in said summons. 

Witness : J. P. BOOT, 

President of the Senate. 

Done at Topeka, this 22d day of February, A. D, 1862, 

Attest:— A. B. BANKS, 

Secretary of the Senate. 



IMPIAOHIIXMT CA8B8. 61 

[INDOBSXD.] 

I hereby certify that I serred the within precept and writ of 
snmmoDs on John W. Sobinson, by deliyering to him a correct 
copy on the 22d day of February, A. D. 1862, at 11 o'clock 
A. M. 

J. 8. PIGMAN, 
Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate. 

Betnmed and filed this 24th day of Febrnary, A. D. 1862. 

A. R. BANKS, 
Secretary of the Senate. 

Mr. Ingalb moved that the Senate do now resolve itself into a 
High Conrt of Impeachment. 

Carried. 

The President announced 'Hhe High Court of Impeachment for 
the State of Kansas now in sesssion.^' 

The Secretary proceeded to administer the following oath to the 



" You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the Impeachment of John W. Robinson, you will do impartial 
justice, according to the law and the evidence.'^ 

Whereupon Messrs. Bancroft, Broadhead, Connell, Curtis, Denmaa'' 
Essick, Gunn, Hoffinan, HoUiday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Lambdin, 
Lynde, McDowell, Morrow, Osbom, Rees, Roberts, Spriggs and 
Stevens took the following oath, which was administered by the 
President : 

" You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial' 
of the impeachment of John W. Robinson, you will do impartiat 
justice, according to the law and the evidence." 

Mr. Sleeper took the following affirmation, which was adminis- 
tared by the President : 

*' You do solemnly affirm that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the impeachment of John W. Robinson, you will do impartial 
justic, according to to the law and the evidence." 

I • Hon. Wilson Shannon, counsel for the defendant, moved the 
Court that the Senator from Johnson, (Mr. Keeler,) be sent for bj 



"^2 PBOOSEBIirGS IK THB 

the Court, and that he be required to take the oath prescribed by 
,tha Constitution. 

Upon whioh) the yeas and nays being taken, the vote resulted as 
Allows : 

Ayes 15. Noes 4. 

Ayes— Bancroft, Broadhead, Connell, Curtis, Essick, Gunn, Hoff- 
man, Holliday, Hubbard, Lynde, Morrow, Rees, Roberts, Spriggs, 
Stevens. 

Nays — Ingalls, McDowell, Osbom, Sleeper. 

And so the motion prevailed, and the Sergeant«t*Arms was sent 
for Mr. Keeler. 

Sergeant-at-Arms returned with Mr. Keeler, when the President 
administered to him the following oath : 

.^' You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the impeachment of John W. Robinson, you will do impartial 
justice, according to the law and the evidence. 

The Hon. Fred. P. Stanton, counsel for the defendant, John W. 
Robinson, presented the fallowing plea in his behalf: 



Plea. 



'Court of ImpeachmentB. ^ 

The State of Kansas, 
vs. 
John W. Robinson, See. of State. 

And the said John W. Robinson, Secretary of State of the State 
of Kansas, by his Attorneys, Wilson Shannon, Frederick P. Stanton, 
and Nathan P. Case, comes here into Courts and praying leave of 
the Court to save, and to reserve to himself the same right of ob- 
jection to all or any of the foregoing charges against him, preferred 
by the Honorable, the House of Representatives, of the State, 
which he might or would have in case a demurer to the same were 
here filed, and not confessing or admitting the constitutional 
authority of the Court in the premises, or the sufficiency in law of 
all or any of the sud charges for the purpose intended, says he is 
not guilty of the said supposed high crimes and misdemeanon in 
u>ffice, or any of them laid to his charge, in manner and form, as 



IMPXAOHHBIfT OASIS. 08 

the Honorable, the House of BepresentatiTes have, shove theieof 

in and by the said charges, oompUined against him. 

JOHN W. ROBINSON, 

Seoretaiy of State, &e., 

By his Attorneys, 

Wilson Shannon, 
P. P. Stanton, 
Nathan P. Gasb. 

Hon. S. A. Stinson, coonsel for the State, offered the following 
motion: 

The managers, on the part of the House of Bepresentatives, do 
now move that the Court adjourn until to-morrow at 4 o'olook, P. M., 
in order that they may present the plea of the defendant to the House, 
and reoeiye their instructions. 

Upon which the vote was taken with the following result: 

Ayes 20. Noes 1. 

^jes — ^Broadhead, Gonnell, Curtis, Essiok, Ounn, Hoffinan, 
HolUday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Eeeler, Lambdin, Lynde, McDowell, 
Morrow, Osbom, Bees, Boberts, Sleeper, Spriggs, Stevens. 

Noes — ^Bancroft. 

And so the motion prevailed, and the Court adjourned until 
to-morrow, 4 o'clock P. M. 



SiNATX Chambbb, \ 
Tuesday, February 25, 4 o'clock, j 

The High Court of Impeachment being in session, Messrs. Bamett, 
Oenman and Lappin appeared and took the following oath, which 
administered by the President : 



" You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the impeachment of John W. Bobinson, you will do impartial 
justice, according to the law and the evidence." 

Hon. S- A. Stinson, on behalf of the managers, moved the Court 
to adjourn until to-morrow at 10 A. M., for the purpose of permitting 



64 PBooKSDnroB m thx 

ibe XBAaagen to complete and perfect their reply to the answer of 
the defendant. 

Upon which the yeaa and najB weite taken, with the following 
reenlt: 

Ayes 22. Nays 2. 

Ayes — ^Bancroft, Bamett, Broadhead, Oonnell, Curtis, Denman, 
Gunn, Hofiinan, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingals, Eeeler, Lambdin, 
Lappin, McDowell, Morrow, Osbom, Bees, Boberts, Sleeper, BpriggSy 
Stevens. 

Noes — ^Bancroft, Lynde. 

And so the motion to adjourn prevailed. 



JSenats Chambmb, \ 

Wednesday, Feb. 26, 1862, 10 o'clock, A. M. j 

Gourt assembled. 

The President presiding. 

Hon. S. A. Stinson, on behalf of the managers, presented the 
fbllowing RepliccUumy to the Plea of the Defendant : 

Beplication by the House of Bepresentatives of the State of Kansas 
to the plea of John W. Bobinson, Secretary of State, exhibited 
against him by the House of Bepresentatives. 

The House of Bepresentatives, by their managers, reply to the 

plea of John W. Bobinson, Secretary of State heretofore, to the 

Articles of Impeachment preferred against him, and charge that the 

said Articles are true, and that the said John W. Bobinson is guil^ 

of all and sundry the matters contained in the said Articles of 

Impeachment, and that the said House of Bepresentatives are ready 

to prove against him at such convenient time and place as the Senate 

shall appoint for that purpose. 

SAMUEL A. STINSON, 

Attorney Oeneral. 
P. B. Plumb, 
AzsL Spaulding, 

F. W. POTTEB, 

W. B. Wagstait, ( BoMe of i?epreMnto^tic<. J| 



Managers on the part o/ the 



Dayies Wilson, 



I: 



mPlAOHUBirF 0A8B8. 65 

The Hod. Wilson SKannon, ooonBel for the defendant, presented 
the following joint motion : 

We moTe the Court to adopt the following Rule, in relation to 
depositions. 

Rule. — That either party may take depositions of witnesses 
residing out of the State of Kansas, or of persons who cannot be 
present at the trial from sickness, absence, or other disability, by 

fiyin^ the adverse party the usual notice required by law. All 
epoeitions, when so taken, shall be directed to the President of ^e 
Senate of the State of Kansas, and by him opened on the written 
request of either party, or their Attorneys, they may be taken hQ&re 
the same officers and certified in like manner, as required by law in 
other cases. 
February 25th, 1862. 

SHANNON, STANTON & CASE, 

Attorneys for Defendant 

SAMUEL A. STINSON, 

On the part of the Managers. 

Upon which the TOte was taken with the following result : 
Ayes 18. Noes none. 

Ayes — Messrs. Bancroft, Barnett, Broadhead, Connell Denman, 
Essick, Gunn, Hubbard, Lambdin, Lynde, McDowell, Morrow, 
Osbom, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs, Stevens. 

The Hon. S. A. Stinson presented fte following motion on behalf 
of the managers : 

The managers move the Court that the trial of John W. Robinson 
be fixed for the second Monday of April, A. D. 1862. 

The Hon. Wilson Shannon moved to amend by striking out '* the 
second Monday of April,'' and inserting '< the first Monday in June'' 
instead. 

Hon. S. A. Stinson, on behalf of the managers, submitted the 
following motion to the Court : 

That the Court do now adjourn until half-past seven o'clock, P. 
M.y to-day. 

Upon which the vote was taken with the following result : 

Ayes 21. Noes none. 

Ayes — Messrs. Bancroft, Barnett, Broadhead, Connell, Curtis, 
Essick, Ounn, HoUiday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Lambdin, 



66 FBOOXiniN<M IN THX 

Lynd«, McBowelL Morrow, Osbom, Reos, Boberts, Sleeper, Springs, 
Stevens. 

And 00 the motion to adjourn preyailed. 



EVENING SESSION. 

February 26, 7 o'clock, P. M. 

Oonrt called to order. 
The President presiding. 

The managers of the House of Representatives appeared at the bar 
of the Senate, and Mr. Plumb, on their behalf, read the following 
communication : 

Mb. President : — ^The board of mani^ers have been instructed 
by the House of Representatives to exhibit to the Senate the fol- 
lowing Articles of Impeachment against Charles Robinson, Governor, 
and George S. Hillyer, Auditor, of which the Senate heretofore had 
notice. 

P. B. PLUMR, Chairman. 

The following Articles of Impeachment against Charles Robinson 
were read by the Secretary: 



ARTICLES OP IMPEACHMENT 

Preferred by the House of Representatives on behalf of themselves 
and all the people of the State of Kansas, against Charles Robinson 
Governor of said State, for high misdemeanors ib office. 

ARTICLE I. 

The he, the said Charles Robinson, being Governor of the State 
of Kansas, was authorized and empowered by the laws of said State 
as such Governor, to sign certain bonds of said State, issued under 
the provisions of an act entitled ^'An act to authorize the State of 
Kansas to borrow money to repel invasion, suppress insurrection 



IMPEACHHXNT CASES. 67 

and to defend the State in time of war/' approved May 7tk, 1861, 
to wit : bonds to the amount of twenty thousand dollars ; and the 
said Governor pretending to act under the provisions of said law? 
did, in violation of his official duty, sign bonds to the amount of 
forty thousand dollars ; that of said bonds, so signed, there were 
sold and disposed of bonds to the amount of thirty-one thousand 
dollars, whereby said State was subjected to great pecuniary loss. 
And the said Charles Robinson as Governor, as aforesaid, was guilty 
of high misdemeanor in his said office of Governor. 

ARTICLE II. 

That the said Charles Robinson was, by the law of the said State 
of Kansas, duly authorized and empowered, together with the Auditor 
and Secretary of State, of said State, to sell and negotiate certain 
bonds of said State, the issuance of which was authorized by '^An 
act to authorize the negotiation of one hundred and fifty thousand 
dollars of the bonds of the State of Kansas, to defray the current 
expenses of the State," approved May 1st, 1861, and an act supple- 
mental thereto, approved June 8d, 1861 ; and whereas, it was pro- 
vided by law that said bonds should not be sold for less than seventy 
cents on the dollar, the said Charles Robinson, disregarding said 
law and his official obligation to said State, did, together with said 
Auditor and Secretary, conspire with one Robert S. Stevens, to 
cheat and defraud said State in this : that the said Robinson, as 
Governor, as aforesaid, did agree and consent that said Stevens 
should receive a large amount of said bonds, to wit : Bonds to the 
amount of eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars to be sold by 
him, said Stevens, for such price as he might obtain therefor, and 
that said Stevens should account to and pay over to said State no 
more than sixty cents on the dollar of the bonds he should so sell, 
and said Stevens did receive, with the knowledge and consent of 
sud Robinson, the bonds aforesaid of said State, to said amount of 
eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars, and said Stevens did 
sell said bonds to the amount of fifty-six thousand dollars with the 
knowledge and consent of the said Robinson, for eighty-five cents 
on the dollar, and paid over and accounted to said State for sixty 
eents and no more on the dollar of the bonds so sold, whereby 
the laws of said State were violated, said State defrauded, and the 
•said Robinson was guilty of high misdemeanor in his said office of 

_ > 

Governor. 



I 

68 PBOOXEDINaS IN THX 

ABTIOLB m. 

Thatthe said Oharles Robinson, as Gh>T6rnor, as aforesaid, agreed 
and consented that said Stevens should receive and sell said bonds, aa 
aforesaid, pajing over and accounting to said State for no more than 
sixty cents on the dollar, when he, the said Bobinson, well knew and 
understood that said bonds could be sold for said price of eighty- 
five cents on the dollar, whereby the said Robinson was guilty of 
high misdemeanor in his said office of Governor of said State. 

ARTICLE IV. 

That the said Charles Robinson, as Oovernor, as aforesaid, agreed 
to and with said Auditor and Secretary of State, that any arrange- 
ment which might be made to sell said bonds for sixty cents on the 
dollar, would receive his sanction, and consent, whereby said Robinson 
consented and agreed to a violation of the law of said j^te, and was 
thereby guilty of high misdemeanor in office. 

ARTICLE V. 

That the said Charles Robinson, as Governor, as aforesaid, di^ 
officially consent to approve of the said aforesaid sale of bonds of 
he State of Kansas, whereby the said State realized the said sum of 
sixty per cent, on the dollar, whereby the said Robinson became 
guilty of a high misdemeanor in office. 

And the said House of Representatives, saving and reserving to 

themselves the liberty of exhibiting at any time hereafter, anj 

further articles or other accusation or impeachment against Charles 

Robinson, and also of replying to his answers hereto, and of offering 

proof to all and every one of the aforesaid Articles of Impeachment 

or accusation, which shall be exhibited to them as the case may 

require, do demand that the said Charles Robinson may be put to 

answer the misdemeanors herein charged, and that such proceedingS| 

examination, trials and judgements may be thereupon had and given^ 

as are agreeable to justice. 

SAMUEL A. STINSON, 

Attorney Oeneral. 

P. B. Plumb, ^ 

Azbl'^Spaulding, I Managers on the part of the 

P. W. POTTBB, S' 

W. R. Wagstaff, j Haiue of Representatives. 

DayIKB WiLBONy J 



IMPIAOHMSNT 0A8S8. 69 

The following oommonioation to the President waa reoeived and 
lead: ^ 

ToPKKA, Feb. 26, 1862. 

Him, J. P. Root^ PreM&U of ih» Senate of tKe StcUe of Kansas : 

Sib : — ^The ondersigned hare the honor to inform the Senate that 
ihey have been retained as eonnsel for the Hon. Charles Robinsoni 
GoTomor of this State, and that they are now present and ready to 
appear for him and make^an answer to any Articles of Impeaehment 
which may ba exhibited against him by the House of Bepresenta- 
tiv66 before the Senate, when sitting as a Court of Impeaohment, 
and duly sworn, in the manner prescribed by the Constitution of 
the State. 

We haye the honor to be, 

Yerj respeotfidly, 
X our obedient serr'ts, 

WILSON SHANNON, 
F. P. STANTON, 
NATHAN P. CASE. 

The following Articles of Impeachment against Gteorge S. Hillyer> 
Auditor of State, were read by the Secretary : 

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT 

Exbibited by the House of Representatives of the State of Kansas, 
forthemselTes, and on behalf of all the people of said State, against 
George S. Hillyer, Auditor of said State, in maintenance of 
their Impeachment agunst said Hillyer, for high misdemeanor in 
office. 

ARTICLE L 

That the said Oeorge S. Hillyer, as Auditor of State of the State 
of Kansas, was, together with the Secretary of State and Gtovemor 
of said State, by the laws of said State, authorised and empowered 
to negotiate and sell the bonds of the State, the issuance of which 
was prorided for in the act authorising the negotiation of one hun- 
dred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of the State of Ejmsas, 
to defray the current expenses of the State, approred May 1st. 
1861. 

That bonds of the State of Kansas to defiray the current expenses 
at the State aa aforesaid, were prepared, executed and issued accord- 
ing to law. 

That the said Oeorge 8. HiUyer, being so empowered to sell and 



70 FBOOSEDINQS IN THE 

negotiate said bonds, did authorize and empower one Robert 8. 
Stevens to negotiate and sell said bonds to tbe amount of eighty- 
seven thousand two hundred dollars at any price over sixty per 
oentum upon the amount of said bonds, he, said Stevens paying to 
the State no more than sixty per centum of said amount ; •that under 
said agreement, and with the full knowledge and consent of said 
Hillyer, said Stevens proceeded to sell and deliver a large amount 
of said bonds, to wit : the amount of fifty-six thousand dollars of 
said bonds at the rate of eighty>five per centum on said amount of 
fifty-six thousand dollars, all which was well known to said Hillyer,. 
and under the said agreement with the full knowledge and consent of 
said Hillyer, said Stevens paid over and accounted to said State for only 
the amountof sixty percent, upon said bonds so sold, which said agree- 
ment BO made and entered into by said Hillyer, was in direct viola- 
tion of the laws of said State in this : that under said laws, said 
bonds could not be sold for less than seventy per centum on the 
amount of said bonds, and was in violation of the official duty of 
said Hillyer in this: that said State was, by said agreement, 
defrauded out of its just rights, in that said State was entitled to 
receive the full amount for which said bonds were sold, while in 
truth and in fact, with the full knowledge and consent of said 
Hillyer, said bonds were sold for eighty-five per oentum upon the 
dollar, and the State did not receive therefrom more than sixty per 
centum upon the bonds so sold, whereby said Hillyer betrayed the 
trust reposed in him by the State of Kansas, subjected said State to 
great pecuniary loss, and has thereby been guilty of high misde- 
meanor in his said office of Auditor of State aforesaid. 



ARTICLE II. 

That the said Qeorge S. Hillyer, as Auditor aforesaid, well know- 
ing that by the laws of said State, said bonds could not legally be 
sold for leas than seventy cents on the dollar, contriving to oheat 
and defraud said State in the premises, did secretly enter into the 
agreement above set forth, with said Stevens, by which said Stevens 
should realize therefrom only sixty cents on the dollar, well knowing 
at the time he so made said agreement, that said bonds could be 
sold for eighty-five cents on the dollar, whereby said Hillyer was 
guilty of high misdemeanor in office. 



;x^ 



IMPBAOHMENT CASKS. 71 

ARTICLE III. 

That said George S. Hillyer, as Auditor, as aforesaid, with the 
guilty intent to cheat and defraud the State out of its just right in 
the premises, consented that said Sterens, pretMiding to act as tlie 
agent of said State to sell and negotiate said bonds, should receive 
the bonds, so as aforesaid entrusted to him for sale, with all the 
coupons for the semi-annual interest upon said bonds, attached to 
said bonds, and the said Stevens with the full knowledge and con. 
sent of said Hillyer, received said bonds with said coupons thereto 
attached ; and included among the coupons so attached, were cou- 
pons for the semi-annual interest due on the amount of said bonds 
on the first day of January, A. D. 1862, being the first semi-annual 
interest payable on the amount of said bonds ; that said Stevens 
with the full knowledge of said Hillyer, did not sell and negotiate 
the bonds so sold by him until after said coupons for the first semi- 
annual interest became due and payable, to wit : after the first day 
of January, A. D. 1862, and at the time said bonds so sold as afose- 
Bud, were sold by said Stevens, said Stevens, with the full know- 
ledge and consent of said Hillyer, detached from the said bonds so 
received by him, the said coupons for the first semi-annual interest 
upon said bonds which said semi-annual interest had not then 
accrued against the State, and with the full knowledge and consent 
of said Hillyer, presented said coupons so attached, to the Treasury 
of said State, and received from said Treasury, and secured from 
said Treasury the full amount of the semi-annual interest upon the 
amount of said bonds so received by him, said Stevens, whereby said 
Hillyer was guilty of high misdemeanor in his said office. 

ARTICLE IV. 

That said G^rge S. Hillyer, as Auditor aforesaid, being em- 
powered and authorised to sell and negotiate said bonds, as aforesaid, 
did, frithout due authority of law, authorise and empower one Robert 
S. Stevens, to sell and negotiate said bonds of said State bo entrusted 
to him, and entrusted said bonds to said Stevens for the purpose of 
selling and negotiating said bonds; that he took no security, or 
guaranty from said Stevens, that he, said Stevens, would deal fiiirly 
and honestly by said State, and to secure the State from loss while 
said Stevens so held, or negotiated and sold said bonds, whereby 
said Hillyer was guilty of high misdemeanor in his said office of 
Auditor of State as aforesaid. 



72 PBO0XSDINO8 IN THE 

AETICLB V. 

That the said George S. B[aiyer,a8 Auditor of State, as aforesaid, 
did enter into a oongpiracy with John W. Bobinson, Secretary of 
State, and said Robert S. Stevens, to cheat and defraud said State in 
this : that the said Hillyer, and the said Bobinson constituting a 
majority of those persons authorised by law to sell and negotiate 
said bonds, conspiring, as aforesaid, with said Stevens, did secretly, 
in the city of Washington, in the District of Columbia, whither they 
had gone for the purpose of carrying out and consummating said 
conspiracy, well knowing at the time that said bonds could be sold 
for more than the sum of seventy cents on the dollars, and without 
making any effort to sell or negotiate said bonds, entered into an 
agreement with said Stevens, constituting and appointing said 
Stevens the agent for the sale of said bonds, whereby said Stevens 
was to receive all the proceeds of said bonds above the amount of 
sixty per centum on the dollar, and the said Hillyer and said 
Bobinson, entrusted to said Stevens, bonds of said State which 
they were so authorised and empowered to sell to the amount 
of eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars, to be sold and 
negotiated by him under the agreement aforesaid, and said 
Hillyer well knew that at the time said agreement was so made 
as libresaid, and it was so understood between them, that said 
bonds could be sold to the Government of the United States at the 
rate of eighty-five per centum on the dollar, and the said Stevens 
thereafter, with the full knowledge and consent of said Hillyer pro- 
ceeded to sell and did sell said bonds to the amount of fifty-six 
thousand dollars at the rate of over seventy per centum on 
the dollar, to wit: at the rate of eighty-five cents on the 
dollar, and with the full knowledge and consent of said Bobinson 
and Hillyer, did receive for bonds, so sold, payment at the rate 
of eighty-five cents on the dollar of said amount, to wit: the 
sum of forty-seven thousand six hundred dollars; which sidd 
amount the said State was entitled to receive for said bonds, but the 
said Stevens, acting under said agreement heretofore set forth 
between him and the said Bobinson and Hillyer, and in carrying 
out said conspiracy, to cheat and defraud said State, paid 
over to said State, as the full amount to which said State was 
entitled, only the sum of thirty-five thousand six hundred dollan, 
being only sixty per centum upon the amount of bonds, so by said 
Stevens sold, as aforesud, whereby said State was cheated and de- 



IMPEAOHMXNT OASES. 78 

frauded by Bud oonspiracy, out of the sum of fourteen thousand 
dollars, whereby sud Gkorge 8. HiUyer ' was guilty of high 
misdemeanor in his said offioe. 

ARTICLE VI. 

And the said George S. HiUyer, as Auditor of State, as aforesaid, 
further conspiring to cheat and defraud said State, did enter into a 
conspiracy with said Stevens, and Robinson, whereby the coupons 
upon the bonds of said State, so as aforesaid received by said 
Stevens, were received upon said bonds as set forth in Article 8, of 
tiiese Articles ; and that the said Stevens in receiving the amount 
df said coupons as set forth in said Articles, acted in accordance 
with a preconcerted design formed with said Hillyer, and said Rob- 
inson, to cheat and defraud said State, whereby said State suffered 
neat pecuniary damage and loss, and whereby said George S. 
HSlyer ^^ guilty of high misdemeanor in office. 

ARTICLE Vn. 

That the said George S. Hillyer, as Auditor, as aforesaid, did, 
together with Robert S. Stevens, and John W. Robinson, Secretary 
of State, arrange to go to the city of Washington to assist in the 
negotiation and sale of the said bonds hereinbefore described, and 
that he, said Hillyer, did proceed to the city of mehington for the 
purpose, aforesaid, and that he did then and there represent to James 
H. Lane, Senator of the State of Kansas, that if said bonds could be 
sold to the Gtorenunent of the United States, whatever might be 
realised from said sale would enure to the benefit of the State of 
Kansas, and by his said representations induced said Lane to use 
Ids influence to assist in said sale, and he, said Hillyer, also repre- 
.sented that said sale was to be made by the State officers, and said 
Lane was further induced to lend his said influence by the pledge 
tnd promise of said Hillyer as Auditor, as aforesaid, that every 
-dollar realized from said sale should be paid into the State Treasury, 
and that in inducing said Lane to lend his assistance to effeot said 
sale, he suppressed and concealed entirely the arrangement hereto- 
finre set forth, by which said Stevens was to receive all over sixty 
oents on the dollar of said bonds. All of which representations 
and pledges of said Hillyer were intentionally false, in this : that 
at the time he so made said representations and pledges, the said 
Hillyer was acting for the purpose of forwarding an agreement, in 
ibese Articles hereinbefore set forth, by which said Stevens was to 



74 PBOCXSDINOS IN THB 

reoeiye all over sixiy cento on the dollar of said bonds, and said aajb 
was effected under said representations and pledges, as aforesaid, 
contrary to law, and to the great pecuniary danuige of the State, as 
hereinbefore set forth ; whereby said Oeorge S. Hillyer was guilty 
of high misdemeanor in office. 

And the House of Representatires of said State of Kansas, saving 
and reserving to themselves the liberty of exhibiting at anytime here- 
after any further articles or other accusation or impeachment against 
said Oeorge S. Hillyer, and also of replying to his answers hereto, 
and of offering proof to all and every one of the aforesaid articles, 
and to all and every other articles of impeachment or accusation, 
which shall be exhibited by them, as the case may require, do demand 
that the said Geo. S. Hillyer may be put to answer the misdemeanors 
herein charged, and that such proceedings, examination, trials and 
judgments may be thereupon had and given as are agreeable to 
justice. 

SAMUEL A. STINSON, 

Attorney General. 
P. B. Plumb, "J 

AzBL Spauldino, ( Managers on the part of the 

F. W. POTTBB, V 

W. R. Wagstafp, I House of Representatives, 
Da VIES Wilson, J 

The following oommunioation to the President was received and 
read: 

ToPBKA, February 27th, 1862. 

Em. J. P. Root, PrendeiU of the Senate of the State of Kansai: 

Sib : — ^The undersigned have the honor to inform the Senate that 
they have been retained as counsel for Hon. George S. Hillyer, 
Auditor of State for the State of Kansas, and that they are now 
present, and ready to appear for him, and make answer to any 
Articles of Impeachment which may be exhibited against him bj 
the House of Ilepresentatives before the Senate, when sitting as a 
Court of Impeachment, and duty sworn in the manner prescribed 
by the Constitution of the State. 

We have the honor to be, 
Very respectfdllj, 

Your Obedient serv^ts., 

WILSON SHANNON,. 
F. P. STANTON, 

NATHAN P. CASE. 



IMPSAOHBOaCT 0A8B8. 71^ 

The hour having arrived to whieh the Court adjourned^ the Pres- 
ident announced the *^ High Court of Impeachment for the Stale 
of Kansas is now in session/' 

The Seeretary prooeeded to administer the following oath to the 
President : 

*' You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the Impeachment of Charles Robinson, you will do impartial 
justice, according to the law and the evidence.'^ 

Whereupon Messrs. Bamett, Bancroft, Bi*oadhead, Connell, CurtiB 
Denman, Essick, Gunn, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler. Lamb- 
din, McDowell, Morrow, Osborn, Rees, Roberts, Spriggs and' 
Stevens took the following oath, which was administered by the 
President : 

'^ You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the impeaohment of Charles Robinson, you will do impartial 
justice, according to the law an4 the evidence.'' 

Mr. Sleeper took the following affirmation, which was adminis- 
tered by the President : 

" You do solemnly affirm that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the impeachment of Charles Robinson, you wilt do impartial 
justic, according to to the law and the evidence." 

And thereupon the Secretary administered the following oath to 
the President : 

'^You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the impeaohment against George S. Hillyer, you will do impar- 
tial justice according to the law and the evidence.^ 



pf 



Whereupon, Messrs. Bancroft, Barnett, Broadhead, Connell, Cur- 
tis, Penman, Essick, Gunn, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, 
Lambdin, McDowell Morrow, Osborn, Rees, Roberts, Spriggs and 
Stevens took the following oath, which was administered by the 
President : 

" You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial' 
of the impeachment of George S. Hillyer, you will do impartial 
justice, according to the law and the evidence." 



76 PBOOUDINOS IK THl 

Mr. Sleeper took the following affirmfttion, which was adminis- 
tered by the Preeident: 

"You do solemnly affirm that in all things pertaining to the trial 
•of the impeachment of George S. Hillyer, you will do impartial 
JQStioe, according to law and the eyidenoe/' 

Hon. Wilson Shannon, counsel for Oharles Robinson and C^rge 
8. Hillyer, defendants, waived service except so much as required 
the Secretary to Aimish copies of the Articles of Impeachment 
•exhibited by the House of BepreaentatiTes to the Senate against 
them. 

Hon. Wilson Shannon, counsel for the defendants, filed the 
following Plea to the Articles of Impeachment against Oharles 
Bobinson : 

Oourt of Impeachments. \ 

The dtate of Kansas, f pj^ 

Oharles Bobinson, Governor of said State. J 

And the said Oharles Bobinson^ Governor of the State of 
Kansas, by his Attorneys, Wilson ^Shannon, Frederick P. Stanton, 
and Nathan P. Oase, comids here into Oourt, and praying leave of 
the Oourt to save, and to reserve to himself the same right of ob* 
jection to all or any of the foregoing charges against him, preferred 
by the Honorable, the House of Bepresentatives, of the State, 
which he might or would have in case a demurer to the same were 
here filed, and not confessing or admitting the constitutional 
authority of the Oourt in the premises, or the sufficiency in law of 
all or any of the said charges for the purpose intended, says he is 
not guilty of the said supposed high crimes and misdemeanors in 
. office, or any of them above laid to his charge, in manner and form, as 
the Honorable, the House of Bepresentatives have, above thereof 
f in and by the charges, complained of against him. 

OHABLES BOBINSON, 
February 26, 1862. Governor. 

By his Attorneys, 

Wilson Shannon, 
F. P. Stanton, 
JTathan p. Oabb. 



\ 



\ 



IMPXAOHBfXNT OABXB. 77 

Hon. Wibon Sliannon, ootmsel for the defendant, filed the 
following Plea to the Artioles of Impeaehment against George S. 
Hillyer: 

The Stale of Kansas, > 
Connty of Shawnee, j 

Court of Impeachment, 

The State of Kansas, I p, 

Geo. S. Hillyer, Auditor of State. 

Aod the said George S. Hillyer, Auditor of State of the Stote of 

Kansas, by his Attorneys, Wilson Shannon, Frederick P. Stanton, 

and Nathan P. Case, comes here into Court, and praying leave of 

the Court to save and reserve to himself the same right of objection 

to all or any of the foregoing charges against him, preferred by the 

Honorable, the House of Bepresentatives of the State, which he 

might or would have in case a demurer to the same were here filed, 

and not confessing or admitting the constitutional authority of the 

Court in the premises, or the sufficiency in law of all or any of the 

said charges for the purpose intended, says he is not guilty of the 

said supposed high crimes and misdemeanors in office or any of 

them above laid to his charge in manner and form, as the Honorar 

ble, the House of Representatives have above thereof in and by the 

charges complained of against him. 

GEORGE S. HILLTEB. 
February 27, 1862. 

By his Attorneys, 
Wilson Shannon, 
Frederick P. Stanton, 
Nathan P. Case. 

Hon. S. A. Stinson, on the part of the managers submitted 
the following resolutions : 

Mr. President : — ^The managers on the part of the House of 
Bepresentatives present the following resolutions, and move their 
adoption : 

Re$olv€dy 1st. This Court shall always be open for the purpcie 
of filing additional Articles of Impeachment against any or all of 
the persons impeached, or other pleadings, for tne purpose of filing 
precipes for witnesses, the issuing of summons, and all interlocu- 
tory matters which may require only the action of the officers of 
the Oburt, 



78 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

2d. The board of managers may, at any time before trial, file 
additional Articles of Impeachment, of which filing the party against 
whom said Articles shall be filed, or his counsel shall haye notice 
and a copy of such additional Artichvs, and the said party shall plead 
thereto within six days after the filing of said Articles, unless the same 
shall be filed when this Court is in session ; and in that case, the 
said party shall have such time to plead thereto as the Court shall 
direct. 

And the question being, '^ shall the resolutions be adopted f" the 
vote resulted as follows : 

Ayes — Messrs. Bancroft, Barnett, Broadhead, Connell, Curtis, 
Denman, Essick, Gunn, HolUday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Lamb- 
din, McDowell, Morrow, Osborn, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs, 
fitevens — ^21, 

And so the resolutions were adopted. 

Hon. S. A. Stinsoa, on the part of the managers, withdrew the 
^motion that he offered this morning in relation to the time of oom* 
mencing the trial of John W. Bobinson on the first Monday in April 
next. 

Hon. S. A. Stinson, on the part of the managers, submitted the 
following motion : 

Moved, that this Court will proceed to the trial of the impeach- 
ment of John W. Robinson the first Monday of June, A. D. 1862, 
and to the trial of George S. Hillyer on the first Thursday, 1862, 
and to the trial of Charles Robinson on the second Monday of June. 
1862. 

, Hon. Wilson Shannon, counsel for defendants, moved to amend by 
striking out all in said motion which relates to the trial of Charles 
Robinson. 

Upon which the vote resulted as follows : 

Ayes — ^Bancroft, Broadhead, Essick, Gunn, HoUiday, Ingalls, 
Morrow, Roberts, Stevens — ^9. 

Noes — Connell, Curtis, Denman, Hubbard, Keeler, Lambdin, 
McDowell, Osborn, Rees, Sleeper, Spriggs — 11. 

And so the motion did not prevail. 

Mr. Ingalls moved that the Court do now adjourn until Friday at 
7 o'clock, P. M, • • 



IMPBAOHMENT 0ASB8. 79 

Upon whMh t]i« vote was as follows : 
Ayes 13. Noes 7. 

Ayes— Messrs. Bancroft, Barnett, Broadhead, Oonnell, Curtis, 
DenmaD, Essiok, Gunn, Ingalls, Lambdin, McDowell, Osbom, 
Sleeper. 

Noes — ^Messrs. HoUiday, Hubbard, Keeler, Morrow, Roberts^ 
Spriggs, Stevens. 

And so tbe motion prevailed. 



Senate Chamber, | 
Friday, February 28, A. D. 1862. j 

Court called to order. 

Tbe President presiding. 

Mr. Ingalls offered the following resolution, wbicb was adopted : 

Heiolvedy That one hundred copies of the Articles of Impeach- 
ment, exhibited by the House of Representatives, against Clharles 
Robinson, George S. Hillyer, and John W. Robinson, together with 
the Answers and Replecations of the parties and managers, and the 

Sreliminary proceedings connected therewith, in the House and 
«nate, be prmted for the use of the Legislature. 

On motion, the Senate adjourned until to-morrow morning at 10 
o'clock. 



OotJRT ChAMBBB, ) 

Friday, February 28, 7 o'clock, P. M. j 

The Court opened by the following proclamation firom the 
8ergeant-at-Arms : 

'^ yes ! yet I O yez ! The High Court of Impeachment! 
for the State of Kansas, is now in session.^' 

MenAers present : 



80 mOCMXDlHQB IN THX 

Hessn. Bancroft, Barnett, Broadhead, Gon&ell, Cnrik, Eflaek^ 
Gonn, HoUiday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Lambdin, McDowelI| 
Morrow, Osbom, Bees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs and Stevens. 

Present — Hon. S, A. Stinson, and the Board of Managers on the 
part of the Honse of Bepresentatives. 

Charles Bobinson appeared in person, and Gkorge S. Hillyer, 
and John W. Bobinson appeared by his Attorney, Nathan P. Oaae» 
Esq. 

Nathan P. Oase, counsel for the defendants, submitted the follow* 
ing motion : 

The State of Kansas, *) 

vs. >- Court of Impeachment. 

George S. Hillyer, Auditor of State. ) 

The defendant, by his attorneys, move the Court here that the 
Sergeant-at-Arms be ordered to bring into Court, Hon. E. Lynde 
and Hon. S. E. Hoffman, that they may be sworn as members of the 
Court. 

SHANNON, STANTON & CASE, 

Attorneys for Defendants. 
Upon which the vote was taken with the following result : 
Ayes 19. Noes none. 

Ayes — ^Bancroft, Bamett, Broadhead, Connell, Curtis, Gunn^ 
Holliday, Hubbard, Keeler, Lambdin, Lynde, McDowell, Morrow, 
Osbom, Bees, Boberts, Sleeper, Spriggs, Stevens. 

And so the motion prevailed. 

Mr. Lynde appeared and took the following oath, which was 
administered by the President : 

"You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaitting to the trial 
of the impeachment against Charles Bobinson, you will do impartial 
justice according to the law and evidence.^' 

Mr. Lynde took the following oath which was administered by the 
President : 



" Tou do soleomly swear that in aK tihings pertaining to the trial 
of the impeachment i^ainst George S. Hilleyer, you will do impartial 
justice according to t£e law and evidence*'' 



Hon. P. W. Potter, on the part of the managers, filed the following 
Beplication to the pleas in the case of Charles Bobbson : 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 81 

BeplicatioB of the House of Representatiyes of the State of Kansas 
to the plea of Charles Robinson, Governor of said State, to the 
Articles of Impeachment exhibited against said Charles Robinson 
by said House of Representatives. 

Now comes the said House of Representatiyes, by its managers, 
and saying all manner of exceptions to the form and sufficiency of said 
plea, and that the said Charles Robinson is guilty of the charges pre- 
ferred'against him in said Articles of Impeachment, in the manner 
andform therein alleged, and this they are ready to make appear to 
the Senate by proof, at such time and place as the Senate shall 
direct. 

SAMUEL A. STINSON, 

Attorney General. 

P. B. Plumb, ^ 

AzEL Spauldinq, I Managers on the part of the 



F. W. Potter, } 

W. R. Waqstaff 
Dayies Wilson, 



W. R. Waqstaff, I House of Representatives, 



Hon. F. W. Potter, on the part of the managers, filed the 
following Replication to the plea in the case of George S. Hillyer : 

Replication of the House of Representatiyes of the State of Kansas, 
to the plea of George S. Hillyer, to the Articles of Impeachment 
heretofore exhibited against George S. Hillyer by said House of 
Kepresentatiyes. 

Now comes the said House of Representatiyes, by its managers, 
and saying all manner of exceptions to the form and sufficiency of 
said plea, say that the said George S. Hillyer is guilty of all and 
singular, the misdemeanors charged in the said Articles of Impeach- 
ments, in the manner and form therein set forth ; and this they are 
ready to make appear by proof, at such tiine and place as the Senate 
shall order. 

S. A. STINSON, 

Attorney General* 

P. B. Plumb, ^ 

W. R. Wagstaff, I Managers on the part of the 

F. W. Potter, \ 

AzKL Spauldinq, I Sotue of Representatives, 

Dayibs Wilson, J 

Nathan P. Case, Esq., counsel for the defendants, offered the 

following amendment to the motion offered on Wednesday last by 

Hon. S. A' Stinson : 
6 



82 PBOOXSDINGS IN THE 

On qnestion of continuance, the defendants, by their Attor- 
neys, move the Court now that the question be taken in each case 
separately. 

SHANNON, STANTON A; CASE, 

Attorneys for Defendants. 
February 28th, 1862. 

Nathan P. Case, Esq., counsel for the defendants, moved the 
Court that Mr. Hoffinan be now sworn. 

Mr. Hoffinan took the following oath which was administered by 
the President : 

" Tou do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the impeachment against Charles Robinson, you will do impar- 
tial justice, according to the law and evidence.'' 

Mr. Hoffinan took the following oath, which was administered by 
the President: 

" You do solemnly swear that in all things pertaining to the trial 
of the impeachment against Oeorge S. Hillyer, you will do impartial 
justice, according to the law and the evidence.'' 

Nathan P. Case, counsel for the defendants, withdrew his 

motion to amend the motion offered by Hon. S. A. Stinson on 

Wednesday. 

Mr. Ittgatts submitted the following amendment to Hon. 8. 
A. Stinson's motion introduced on Wednesday, and moved its 
adoption : 

*' I move that the Impeachment of Charles Robinson, Oovemor, 
Oeorge S. Hillyer, Auditor, and John W. Robinson, Secretary of 
State, be set for trial on Wednesday, the 14th day of May, A. D» 
1862." 

J. J. INGALLS. 

The President decided that under the precedent already set by the 
Senate, this motion could not be entertained until the original motion 
was disposed of. 

Mr. Ingalls withdrew his motion. 

The question then recurring upon the original motion offered by 
Hon. S. A. Stinson, introduced on Wednesday last, 

Upon which a vote was taken with the following result : 
Ayes 12. Noes 9. 

Ayes — Meessrs. Bancroft, Connell, Curtis, Gunn, HoUiday, Hub- 
bard, Lambdin, Lynde, McDowell, Rees, Stevens. 



IMPSAOHMENT OASIS. 88 

Noes — ^Messrs. Barnett, Broadhead, Essiok, Hoffman, Ingalls, 
Morrow, Osborn, Sleeper, Spriggs. 

And 80 the motion of Hon. S. A. Stinson prevailed. 

Hon. S. A. Stinson, on the part of the managers of the House 
of B^presentatives, offered the following motion : 

The managers move the Court that the following Bule be adopted : 

" That the Assistant Secretary of the Senate is empowered to issue 
subpoenas to either party, in the absence of the Secretary of the 
Senate, upon the written precipe of either party." 

Upon which the vote was taken with the following result : 

Ayes — ^Bamett, Bancroft, Broadhead, Connell, Curtis, Denman, 
Ounn, Hoffman, HoUiday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Eeeler, Lambdin, 
McDowell, Morrow, Bees, Boberts, Spriggs — 18. 

Noes — Es sick, Lynde, Osborn, Sleeper, Stevens — 5. 
And so the motion prevailed. 

Hon. S. A. Stinson submitted the following motion : 

" On the part of the managers of the House of Bepresentatives, 

" We move the Court to adjourn until the first Monday of June, 
A. D. 1862, at 12 o'clock." 

Upon which a vote was taken, with the following result : 

Ayes 11. Noes 12. 

Ayes — ^Bancroft, Connell, Curtis, Keeler, Lambdin, McDowell, 
R^es, Boberts, Spriggs, Stevens. 

Noes — Bancroft, Broadhead, Denman, Essick, Hofl&nan, Holliday, 
Hubbard, Ingalls, Lynde, Morrow, Osborn, Sleeper. 

Motion was lost. 

Upon request, the President called for a vote of the court upon 
the question — ^whether the Court will permit amendments to motions 
or not? 

Upon which the roll was called with the following result : 
Ayes 6. Noes 16. 

Ayes— Messrs, Bamett, Essiok, Holliday, Hubbard, Lynde, 
Osboro. 



84 PBOGESDINGS IN THE 

Noes — Messrs. Bancroft, Broadbead, Connell, Curtis, Denman, 
Oann, Hoffman, Keeler, Lambdin, McDowell, Morrow, Bees, Boberts, 
Sleeper, Spriggs, Stevens. 

' And so tbe Court decided tbat amendments to motions sbould not 
be entertained. 

Mr. Ingalls offiered tbe following motion : 

" I move tbat tbe Court do now adjourn until 7 o'clock, on Tues- 
day next.'' 

Upon wbicb a vote was taken witb tbe following result : 

Ayes 11. Noes 12. 

Ayes — Messrs. Essick, Hoffman, HoUiday, Hubbard, Ingalls, 
Lynde, Osborn, Bees, Boberts, Sleeper, Spriggs. 



Noes — Messrs. Bancroft, Bamett, Broadbead, Connell, Curtis, 
Denman, Ounn, Keeler, Lambdin, McDowell, Morrow, Stevens, 

And so tbe motion did not prevail. 

Hon. S. A. Stinson, on tbe part of tbe Managers, submitted tbe 
following motion : 

'^ We move tbat tbe Court do now adjourn to tbe first Monday of 
June next, at 11 o'clock, A. M." 

Upon wbicb a vote was taken witb tbe following result : 

Ayes — Messrs. Brancroft, Broadbead, Connell, Curtis, Denman, 
Gunn, Keeler, Lambdin, McDowell, Morrow, Bees, Boberts, Spriggs, 
Stevens — 14. 

Noes — Messrs. Bamett, Essick, Hoffman, Holliday, Hubbard, 
Iifgalls, Lynde, Osborn, Sleeper — 9. 

Motion prevailed. 

And tbe President announced tbe Court adjourned until tbe first 
Monday in June next, at 11 o'clock, A. M. 



IMPBAOHBfXNT 0A8XS. 85 

AMENDED RULES TO BE OBSERVED IN CASES OF 

IMPEACHMENT. 

1. Wlien the Senate shall reoeiye notice from the House of 
Representatiyes that Managers are appointed on their part to 
•eondnct an Impeachment against any person, and are directed to 
carry such articles to the Senate, the Secretary of the Senate shall 
immediately inform the House of Representatiyes that the Senate is 
ready to receiye the managers for the purpose of exhibiting such 
articles of impeachment agreeably to said notice. 

2. When the managers of an impeachment shall be introduced to 
the bar of the Senate, and shall haye signified that they are ready to 
exhibit articles of impeachment against any persons, the President 
of the Senate shall inform the managers that the Senate is ready to 
receiye the same, after which they shall be read and deliyered, and 
the President shall inform the managers that the Senate will take 
proper order on the subject of the impeachment, of which due notice 
shall be giyen to the House of Representatiyes. 

8. Thereupon a summons shall issue, directed to the person or 
persons impeached, in the manner following : 

COURT OF IMPEACHMENT. 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, to Greeting : 

Whebxas, The House of Representatiyes of Kansas, did, on the 



— ^ day of , exhibit to the Senate articles of impeachment 

against you, the said , in the words following, (here recite the 

articles,) and did demand that you the said should be. 

put to answer the accusations as set forth in said articles, and that such 
proceedings might be had agreeable to law and justice. You, the 

•, are hereby summoned to be and appear before 



the Senate of the State of Kansas, at their Chamber in Topeka, on 

the day of , then and there to answer to the said articles of 

impeachment, and then and there to obey and perform such orders 
and judgment as the Senate of the State of Kansas shall make in 
the premises according to the Constitution of the State. Hereof 
fidl not. 

Witness , President of the Senate, at Topeka, this 

day—-. 



PBOOBSDIKGS IN THE 

The said summonB shftll be attested by the Secretary of the 
Senate, and served by the Sergeant-at-Arms, or such other person 
as the Senate shall specially appoint for that purpose who shall serre 
the same in accordance with the forms next hereafter given. 

4. A precept shall be indorsed on said writ of summons as 
fddlows — 



Court of Impeachment, . 
State of Kansas 



The Senate of the State of Kansas to , Greeting: — 



You are hereby commanded to deliver and leave with 



if he can be found, a true and attested copy of the within writ of 
summons, together with a copy of this precept, showing him both, 
or in case he cannot with convenience be found, then you are to 
leave true and attested copies of the said summons and precept, at 
his usual residence or place of business, and in whatsoever way the 

service is performed, let it be done at least days before the 

appearance day mentioned in the said writ of summons, thereof fail 
not, and make return of this writ of summons and precept, with 
your proceedings endorsed thereon, on or before the appearance day 
named in said summons. 

Witness , President of the Senate, at Topeka, this 

day of ; which precept shall be attested by the Sec- 



retary of the Senate. 

5. Subpoenas shall be issued by the Secretary of the Senate, upon 
application of the managers of the impeachment or of the party 
impeached, or of his counsel in the following form, to wit : 

To , Greeting : — 

Tou and each of you are hereby commanded to appear before the 

Senate of the State of Kansas on the day of , then and 

there to testify your knowledge in the cause which is before the 
Senate, in which the House of Representatives have impeached 
. Hereof fail not. 

Witness , President of the Senate, this day of 

" ; which shall be attested by the Secretary. 

The subpoena shall be directed to the proper officer of the Senate, 
in the manner following, to wit : — 



IMPXAOHMENT 0A8B8. 87 

THE SENATE OP THE STATE OP KANSAS, 

To the Sergeant-at-Anns : 

You are hereby commanded to serve and return the within 
subpoena, according to law. 

Dated at Topeka, this day of A. D. 



6. The President of the Senate shall direct all forms of pro- 
ceeding not specially proyided for by the Senate ; he shall also be 
authorized to employ such assistance as may be necessary to serve 
all process required during the trial. 

7. At twelve o'clock of the day appointed for the return of the 
summons against the person impeached, the Legislative and Execu- 
tive business of the Senate shall be suspended, and the Secretary 
shall administer an oath to the returning officer as follows ? '* You 
do solemly swear that the return made and subscribed by you upon 

the process issued on the day of , by the Senate of the 

State of Kansas, against , is truly made, and that you have 

performed said service as therein described, so help you God;" 
which oath shall be entered at large upon the records. 

8. The person or persons impeached shall then appear and answer 
the articles of impeachment against him. If he appear in person or 
by Attorney, it shall be recorded; the record stating the person 
appearing, and the capacity in which he appears. If there be no 
appearance in person or by Attorney, the fact shall also be recorded. 

9. At twelve o'clock of the day appointed for the trial of an 
impeachment, the Legislative and Executive business of the Senate 
shall be postponed. The Secretary shall then administer the follow- 
ing oath to the President : ^' You do solemnly swear that in all 

things pertaining to the trial of the impeachment of , 

you will do impartial justice, according to the law and the evidence/' 

The President shall administer the same oath to each Senator 
present ; after which the Secretary shall notify the House of Bepre- 
sentatives, or the person or persons who~ may have been chosen by 
the House of Eepresentatives, to represent said House of Kepresen- 
tatives upon the trial, that the Senate is ready to proceed upon the 

impeachment of , in the Senate Chamber of the State 

of Kansas. 

10. Counsel for the parties shall be admitted to appear and be 
heard upon an impeachment. 



88 PBOOSEDINQS IN TfiE 

11. All motions made by the managers, the parties or their 
oonnsel, shall be in writing, directed to the President, read by the 
Secretary, and decided by yeas and nays without debate, by the 
Senate, all of which shall be entered on the records. 

12. Witnesses shall be sworn in the manner following : — " You 
do solemnly swear (or affirm) that the evidence you shall give in the 

case now pending between the State of Kansas and , 

shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so 
help you God." The oath shall be administered by the Secretary. 

18. Witnesses shall be examined in chief by the party producing 
them, and cross-examined in the usual form. 

14. If a Senator be called as witness, he shall be sworn, and 
give his testimony standing in his place. 

15. If a Senator wish a question put to a witness, it shall be 
reduced to writing and put by the President. 

16. Upon the return day of the summons, a day shall be fixed by 
the Senate, not less than three days from said return day, for the 
trial of the impeachment. Should it be made to appear upon the 
said return day, by affidavit of the party impeached, or one of the 
managers of the impeachment, that essential witnesses for the 
prosecution or defense cannot be present, from sickness, absence, or 
other disability, the Senate may grant commissioners to take the 
depositions of such witnesses, and assign the trial of said impeachment 
for such day as shall seem reasonable and just. 

17. That either party may take depositions of witnesses residing 
out of the State of Kansas, or of persons who cannot be present at the 
trial from sickness, absence or other disability, by giving the adverse 
party the usual notice required by law. All depositions when so 
taken shall be directed to the President of the Senate of the State 
of Kansas, and by him opened on the written request of either 
party, or their Attorneys ; they may be taken before the same 
officers and certified in like manner, as required by law in other 



18. This Court shall always be open for the purpose of filing 
additional Articles of Impeachment against any or all of the persons 
impeached, or other pleadings ; for the purpose of filing precipes 
for witnesses, the issuing of summons, and all interlocutory matters 
which may require only the action of the officers of the Court. 



i 



IMPEACHMENT CA8E8. 89 

19. The Board of Managers may, at any time before trial, file 
additional Articles of Impeacement, of whicli filing the party against 
trhom said Articles shall be filed, or his counsel, shall have notice 
and a copy of such additional Articles, and the said party shall 
plead thereto within six days after the filing of said Articles, unless 
the same shall be filed when this Court is in session ; and in that 
case, the said party shall have such time to plead thereto as the 
Court shall direct. 

20. The Assistant Secretary of the Senate is empowered to issue 
Bubponas to either party, in the absence of the Secretary of the 
Senate, upon the written precipe of either party. 

21. Amendments to motions shall not be entertained by the 
Court. 



Court of Impeachment. 



FIRST DAY. 



Court Chamber, Topeka, 
June 2d, 1862, 11 o'clock 



SEA, ) 
, A. M. J 



High Court of Impeacliment for tlie State of Kansas opened 
with the following proclamation by the Sergeant-at-Arms : 

Oyez! Oyez! OyezI The High Court of Impeachment iff 
now open. 

The Associate Secretary, C K. Gilchrist, called the Senate to 
order. 

The roll being called, the following Senators responded : 

Messrs Bamett, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, 
Knowls, Lambdin, Lappin, Osborn, Bankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper 
and Spriggs — 15. 

Absent — Messrs. Council, Curtis, Denman, Hoffinan, Lynde, 
XoDowell, Morrow and Stevens — 8. 

Mr. Osborn presented the credentials of Hon. John Bayless, 
Senator elect from the 1st Senatorial District, and moved that he 
receive the oath of office. Upon which, the ayes and noes being 
demanded, the vote resulted as follows : 

Yeas — Messrs. Bamett, Easicks, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, 
Keelcr, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, Osborn, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, 
Sleeper, and Spriggs — 15, and so the motion prevailed. 



92 PBOOSEDINQS IN THB 

N. P. Case, one of Gonnsel for the Defense, objected to Mr. Bay- 
less being sworn in as a Senator. 

Mr. Ingalls. — ^No one can be permitted to debate the preliminary 
questions of organization but Senators, tbey being, under the 
•onstitution, the sole judges of the election and qualifications of 
their own members. The Attorney for the Defense cannot be 
allowed to proceed, and if he continues his impertinent and un- 
warrantable interference with our deliberations, the Sergeant-at- 
Arms must be directed to conduct the intruder without the bar of 
the Senate. 

The Secretary hereupon called Mr. Case to order, but as he 
insisted on being heard, the Sergeant-at-Arms was ordered to eject 
Mr. Case from the Senate, which was accordingly done. 

Hon. John Bayless appeared and took the following oath : 

The State of Kansas, 1 
County of Shawnee,) 

I, John Bayless, do solemnly swear to support the Constitu- 
tion of the United States and the Constitution of the State of 
Kansas, and to faithfully discharge the duties of a State Senator of 
the State of Kansas according to the best of my ability, so help 
me God. 

JOHN BAYLESS. 
ToPKKA, June 2, A. D. 1862. 

; Sworn to before me, and subscribed in my presence, this 2d 

day of June, A. D. 1862. 

JACOB SAFFORD, 
Judge of the Third Judicial District, State of Kansas. 

I Mr. Bees moved that the Court do now adjourn until to-morrow 

morning at 11 o'clock. Upon which the roll was called with the 
following result : 

f Yeas — ^Burnett, Curtis, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls^ 

I Keeler, Knowlcs, Lambdin, Lappin, Osborn, Bankin, Bees, Roberts^ 

' Sleeper, Spriggs, Steven«h-17, 

And so the motion prevailed, and the Court adjourned until II 
o'clock to-morrow morning. 



SsNATX Chambfa, I 
Tuesday, June 8d, 1862, 11 a. m. j 

13enate assembled pursuant to adjournment, the assistant Secre- 
icetary preuding. 



IMPIAOHMENT OASIS. 98 

Qaomm present. 

Mr. Ingalls presented the credentials of S. A. Cobb, Senator eleot 
£rom the Eighth Senatorial District, and moved that the he receiye 
oath of office. 

Mr. Holliday.— Can the Senator from Atchison give any infor- 
mation as to whether this election has been held under the Gover- 
nor's Proclamation, and as to the number of votes cast ? 

Mr. Ingalls. — The following documents accompanying the cer^ 
tificate of the Secretary of State, are the only evidence I have 
upon the matter. That certificate alone is sufficient evidence of the 
gentleman's right to a seat in this body. For the frurther infor- 
mation of the Senate, I read the following election returns : 



County Clerks Offios,) 
Douglas County, v ss. 

State of Kansas. ) 

The following is a duplicate statement of the number of votes 
east at the special ielection held on the 24th day of March, A. D. 1862, 
at the within mentioned precincts of the aforesaid County and State, 
to fill the vabancy in the office of State Senator of 8th Senatorial 
District as returned to this office by the Board of Canvassers. 

Freoincts. Stephen A. Cobb* 

Wakarusa, - 12 votes. 

CHnton, 25 « 

Eudora, ........ 68 « 

Willow Springs, 32 « 

Total number, 187 votes. 

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and official 
eeal at office this 81st day of May, A. D. 1862. 

x=5^ GEO. W. BELL, 

v^y^ County Clerk. 

State of Kansas,") 
County of Johnson, j * 

I, Jesse H. Jackson, County Clerk of Johnson County, do hereby 
certify that the following is the number of votes cast in the dif- 
ferent precincts of Johnson County for State Senator, at an election 
held on the 24th day of March, A. D. 1862. 




94 PB0GEEDIN08 IN THB 

Pbeoinots. Stephen A. Cobb. 

Shawnee, 89 votea. 

Olathe, 93 

Monticello, 5 

Lexington, 82 

McCamish, --- 2 

(Gardner, - - 29 

Total 249 votes. 

Monticello caat 5 votes for W. E. Smith, as appears by record in 
my office. 

In testimony whereof, I have hereto set my hand and affixed the 
seal of said Johnson County at office, at Olathe, this 19th day of 
May, A. D. 1862. 

J. A. JACKSON, Clerk, 
By B. P. NoTBMAN, D. C. 



Abstract of votes oast at the election held io the County of 
Wyandott, State of Kansas, on the 24th day of March, A. D. 1862, 
in the 8th District, to fill vacancy caused by the disability and 
removal of 0. B. Gunn, Esq., from said body. 

Stephen A. Cobb received one hundred and thirty-five votes. 

Scattering two votes. 

State of Kansas, 1 
Wyandott County, ) 

We the undersigned County Canvassers of said County, do here- 
by certify that the above is a correct abstract of the votes cast for 
Senator at the election held in said County on the 24th day of 
March, A. D. 1862. 

FRANCIS KESSLER, 

Chairman pro. tem. 
Friday, March 28th, 1862. 

I hereby certify that the above is a true copy of the abstract of 
election held «n the 24th day of March, A. D. 1862, as taken by 
the Board of Canvassers on the 28th day of March, A. D. 1862. 

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed 
the seal of my office at city of Wyandott, County of Wyandott, 
State of Kansas, on this 24th day of May, A. D. 1862. 

EDWIN T. VBDDER, 

County Clerk. 




mPSAOHMXNT OABBS. 96 

Mr, Holliday. — ^My object in oalling attention to the matter is to 
liaye these returns spread on the record where they will oocapy but 
a small space, and be satisfactory for reference. 

Mr. Stevens moved as a substitute, that the claims of Hon. 8. A. 
Cobb to a seat as Senator in this body, together with all papers and 
matters connected therewith, be referred to a Special Committee of 
five, to be appointed by the Secretary, which committee is directed 
to make report thereon, at 11 o'clock to-morrow morning. 

The Secretary pro tern ruled that the motion of Mr. Stevens 
could not be entertained in the form of a substitute. 

Mr. Stevens. — ^I wish to ask in what capacity this body is now 
acting, whether as a Court or a Senate ? My motion was either an 
amendment or a subsitute. If we are here as a Senate, the first is 
parliamentary. If as a Court, the second is in accordance with the 
rules adopted by the Senate for the Government of this High Court 
of Impeachment. 

Mr. Hubbard. — In meeting here we have but one special object. 
We are still a Senate, having but one purpose — ^the trial of these 
respondents, impeached by the House of Bepresentatives. We 
should, therefore, in all practicable cases, be governed by the rules 
firamed by the Senate for the trial of Impeachments. In oases not 
covered by those rules, we should be governed by parliamentary 
law. The motion of the gentleman from Douglas being one to 
refer, is, therefore, a privileged question, and takes precedentiie of 
the motion of the Senator from Atchison, and ought to be 
entertained. 

The Secretary. — I will entertain the motion of the Senator from 
Douglas, as a substitute for the original motion. 

Mr. Keeler. — In'relation to the admission of Mr. Cobb, who with 
me, represents the 8th Senatorial District, let me state what I know 
in relation to his election. Mr. Gunn, the former Senator, came 
fit)m Wyandotte county. The people of that section, therefore, 
claimed the nomination, when the Senate declared the seat vacant, 
which was accoorded them, and the name of Stephen A. Cobb being 
presented in Johnson county, where I reside, we voted forthat gen- 
tleman. I cannot think a shadow of doubt rests upon the right of 
Mr. Cobb to a seat in this body. 



96 FROOEKDINGB IN THS 

Mr. Osborn. — Can the Senator from Atchison inform ub at what 
time this gentleman was elected ? 

Mr. Ingalls. — It was at the general spring election. 

The roll was called upon the amendment with the following 
result: 

Ayes — Messrs. Barnett, Denman and Stevens. — 3. 

Nays — Messrs, Bayless, Connell, Curtis, Essiok, Holliday, Hub- 
bard, Ingalls, Eeeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, 
Osborn, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper and Spriggs. — 18. 

And so the amendment was lost. 

The question recurring on the original motion of Mr. Ingalls, the 
roll was called with the following result : 

. Ayes — Messrs. Bayless, Connell. Curtis, Denman, Essick, Holli- 
day, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keelor, £nowles, Lambdin, Lappin, 
McDowell, Osborn, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper and Spriggs.— 
19. 

And so the motion prevailed. 

Mr. Holliday moved that all the papers pertaining to the election 
of Hon. S. A. Cobb, as State Senator, be spread upon the minutes^ 

Upon which the roll was called with the following result : 

Yeas — Messrs. Bamett, Bayless, Connell, Curtis, Denman, Essiok^ 
Holliday, Ingalls, Knowles, Lambdin, McDowell, Osborn, Rankin, 
Bees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs and Stevens. — 18. 

Nays — Messrs. Hubbard, Keeler and Lappin. — 8. 
And so the motion prevailed. 

The Hon. S. A. Cobb came forward and took the following oath,, 
which was administered by John T. Morton, Esq., Clerk of the U. 
S. District Court for the district of Kansas. 





impxachmxiit oases. 97 

Thx United States of Amxrioa, 
State of Kansas, 

County of Sbawnee. 

I, Stephen A. Cobb, do solemnly swear that I will support the 
Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State 
of Kansas, and that I will faithfully disoharge the duties of a 
Senator of the State of Kansas according to the best of my ability, 
80 help me God. ^ 

^ STEPHEN A. COBB. 

Topeka, June 3d, 1862. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 3d day of June, A. D. 
1862. 

JOHN T. MORTON, 

Clerk of the District Court of the United States, 

f<Mr the District of Kansas. 

Mr. Sleeper moved that the Senate do now proceed to elect a 
President pro tempore, 

Upon which the roll was called with the following result : 

Yeas — Messrs. Barnett, Bayless, Cobb, Council, Curtis, Denman, 
Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, 
Lappin, McDowell, Osbom, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs and 
Steyens — ^21. 

And so the motion prevailed. 

Mr. Sleeper nominated T. A. Osborn of Doniphan County. 

Mr. Connell nominated J. H. McDowell, of Leavenworth County. 
Mr. Essick nominated J. M. Hubbard, of Waubaunsee County. 
Mr. Barnett nominated John J. Ingalls, of Atchison County. 
Mr. Stevens nominated C. G. Keeler, of Johnson County, 
Mr. Keeler nominated C. K. Holliday, of Shawnee County. 
Whole number of votes 22. 

Necessary to a ehoioe 12. 
First Ballot : 

For Mr. Osborn, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Euiowles, Lambdin, Rankin, Roberts, 
Sleeper, Spriggs — 8. 



98 PB00EXDINQ8 IN THE 

For Mr. Ingalk, 

Messrs. Barnett, Cobb, Hubbard, Lappin — 4. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Connell, Denman, Keeler — 3. 

For Mr. Keeler, 

Messrs. HoUiday, McDowell, Osborn, Steyens — 4. 

For Mr. Habbard, 

Messrs. Essick, Ingalls, and Rees — 8. 

No gentleman having received a majority of all the votes oast, 
there was no choice, and the Senate proceeded to the 

Second Ballot, as follows : 

For Mr. Osborn, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Ejiowles, Lambdin, BAukin, Robertst 
Sleeper, Spriggs — 8. 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Barnett, Cobb, Hubbard, Lappin— 4. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Messrs. Essick, Ingalls, Bees, HoUiday — 4. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Connell, Denman and Keeler — 3. 

For Mr. Keeler, 

Messrs. Osborn, Stevens — 2. 

For Mr. HoUiday, 

Mr. McDowell— 1. 

No gentleman having received a majority of all the votes cast, 
there was no choice, and the Senate proceeded to a 

Third Ballot, as follows : 

For Mr. Osborn, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Knowles, Lambdin, Bankin, Bees, 
Sleeper, Spriggs-^8. 



IMPSAOHMENT GASES. 99 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Connell, Denman, Holliday, Keeler, Stevens — 5. 
For Mr. Hubbard, 

Messrs. Essick, Ingalls — 2, 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Barnett, Cobb, Hubbard, Lappin — 4. 

For Mr. Holliday, 

Mr. McDowell— 1. 

For Mr. Essick, 

Mr. Osborn — 1. 

For Mr. Knowles, 

Mr. Roberts — 1. 

No gentleman baring received a majority of all the votes cast, 
the Senate proceeded to the 

Fourth Ballot, as follows : ^.^o 

For Mr. Osborn, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Enowles, Lambdin, Rankin, Robert8| 
Sleeper, Spriggs — 8. 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Barnett, Cobb, Hubbard, Lappin — i. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Connell, Denman, Keeler — 3. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Messrs. Essick, Ingalls, Rees — 3. 

For. Mr. Keeler, 

Messrs. Holliday, McDowell, Osborn, Stevens — 4. 

And no gentleman receiving a majority of all the votes oast, 
there was no election. 



r^f^.'^p^KPn 



100 PBOOXlDINOa XS TSK 

Hr. Ingalls moved 

That ihe Coort adjourn until 3 o'clock, P. M. 

Lost. 

Hr. Curtis moTod 

That the Court adjourn till 2 o'clock P. H., and 

The motion prevailed. 



AFTERNOON SBSSION. 

Tuesday^ 2 o'clock P. %. 

Senate assembled. 

Quorum present. 

On motion of Mr. Eeeler, 

A call of the Senate was ordered and the Sergeant-at-Arms sent 
for absentees. 

Messrs. Morrow, Lynde and Hoflhian, were excluded ftt)m the 
call. 

The Sergeant-at-Anns having returned with Messrs. Denman^ 
Bees, and Spriggs, 

Further proceedings under the call were dispensed with. 

The Senate under the order of unfinished business, proceeded ta 
the fifty ballot for president pro tempore, with the following result : 

For Mr. Osbom, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Enowles, Lambdin, Rankin^ Bees^ 
Roberts, Sleeper, and Spriggs — 9. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Gonnell, Eeeler, Penman, Stevens-^. 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Bamett, Cobb, Essick, HoUiday, Hubbard, Lappin— 6. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 



IMFSAOHMSMT 0A8K8. 101 

Messrs. Ingalk, Osboni — 2. 

For Mr. Holliday, 

Mr. McDowell— 1. 

No gentleman having reoeived a majority of all the yotes ciit, 
there was no election, and the Senate proceeded to the 

Sixth Ballot, with the following result : 

Por Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Bamett, Oobb, Hubbard, Lappin*-4. 

For Mr. Osbom, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Bankin, 
Bees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs — 10. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Gonnell, Denman, Essick, HoIIiday and Stevens—^. 
For Mr. Hubbard, 
Mr. Ingalls — 1. 
For Mr. Holliday, 
Mr. McDowell— 1. 

There being no choice the Senate proceeded to the 
Seyenth Ballot, with the following result : 
For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Bamett, Cobb| Holliday, Hubbard, Lappin, Boberta— 6. 
For Mr. McDowell, 

Misssrs. Connell, Denman, Keeler, Stevena— 4. 
' For Mr. Osbom, 

Messrs. Bayless. Curtis, Knowles, Lambdin, Bankin, Beea, 
•Sleeper, Sprigg»— 9. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Measrs. Ingalls and Osbom — 2. 

For Mr. Lappin, 

Mr. HcDoweU^l. 



102 PROOSEBINQS IN THB 

Thi^re being no choice, the Senate proceeded to the 

Eighth Ballot, with the following result : 

For Mr. Orborn, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Knowles, Lambdin, Rankin, Roberts 
Sleeper, Spriggs — 8. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Connell, Denman, Stevens — 3. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Messrs. Ingalls, Keeler, Osbom, Rees — L 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Barnett, Hubbard, Lappin — 3. 

For Mr. Sleeper, 

Mr. Cobb— 1. 

For Mr. Cobb, 

Mr. Essick — 1. 

For Mr. Lappin, 

Messrs. Holliday and McDowell — 2. 

There being no choice, the Senate proceeded to the 

Ninth Ballot, with the following result : 

For Mr. Osborn, 

Messrs. Bay less, Curtis, Knowles, Lambdin, Rankin, Roberts, 
Sleeper, Spriggs — 9. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Barnett, Connell, Denman, Holliday, Rees and Steyens — 6. 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Hubbard and Lappin — 2. 

For Mr. Spriggs, 

Messrs. Essick, Ingalls and Osborn — 3. 

For Mr. Stevens. 

Mr. Keeler — ^1. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. lOS 

For Mr. Denman. 

Mr. McDowell— 1. 

There being no choice, the Senate proceeded to the 

Tenth Ballot, with the following result : 

For Mr. Osborn, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Essick, Knowles, Lambdin, Bankin, 
Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs — 9. 

For Mr. McDowell , 

Messrs. Connell, Denman, Keeler, Bees, Stevens — 5. 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Bamett, Oobb, Hubbard, Lappin — 4. 

For Mr. Lappin, 

Mr. Holliday— 1. 

For Mr. Stevens, 

Mr. McDowell— 1. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Mr. Ingalls — 1. 

For Mr. Spriggs, 
Mr. Osbom — 1. 

There being no choice, the Senate proceeded to the 

Eleventh vote, with the following result : 

For Mr. Osborn, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Rankin, 
Bees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs — 10. 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Barnett, Cobb, Holliday, Hubbard, Lappin — 5. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Connell, Essick, Denman, Stevens — 1. 

For Mr. Essick, 

Messrs. McDowell, Osbom — ^2. 



104 PE00XBDINO8 IN THE 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Hr. Ingalls — 1. 

There being no ohoioe, the Senate proceeded to the 

Twelfth Ballot, which resulted as follows : 

For Mr. Osbom, 

Messrs. Bajless, Curtis, Knowles, Lambdin, Rankin, Bees, Roberts' 
Sleeper, Spriggs — 9. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Messrs. Barnett, Cobb, Essick, Ingalls, Lappin — 5. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Connell, Denman, Hollidaj, Stevens — 4. 
For Mr. Curtis, 

Messrs. Keeler and McDowell — 2. 

For Mr. Barnett, 

Mr. Hubbard — 1. 

For Mr. Essick, 

Mr. Osbom — 1. 

There being no choice, the Senate proceeded to the 

Thirteenth vote, which resulted as follows : 

For Mr. Osbom, 

Messrs. Bayless, Curtis, Cobb, Knowles, Lambdin, Rankin, Rees, 
Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs — 10. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Messrs. Bamett, HoUiday, Ingalls, Keeler, Lappin. — 5. 

For Mr. McDowell, 

Messrs. Connell, Denman, Essick, Stevens.- 

For Mr. Barnett, 

Mr. Hubbard. — 1. 

For Mr. Denman, 

Mr. McDowell.— 1. 



IMPSACHMXNT GASES. 105 

For. Mr. Essick, 
Mr. Osborn. — 1 

There being no choice, the Senate proceeded to the fourteenth 
ballot, which resulted as follows: 

For Mr, Osborn, 

Messrs. Bayless, Connell, Curtis, Penman, Essick, Keeler, 
Knowles, Lambdin, McDowell, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, 
Spriggs, Stevens. — 15. 

For Mr. Ingalls, 

Messrs. Bamett, Cobb, Hubbard, Lappin. — 4. 

For Mr. Hubbard, 

Messrs. Holliday, Ingalls. — 2, 

Mr. Osborn having received a majority of all the votes, was 
declared duly elected President j>ro tern, of the Senate of the State 
of Kansas. 

The President appointed C. K. Gilchrist, Assistant Secretary, 
Secretary pro tern, of the Senate of the State of Kansas, who took 
the following oath : 

Unitsd Statbs of Ambbica, 
State of Kansas. 

Shawnee County, 

I, G. K. Gilchrist, do solemnly swear that I will support the 
Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of 
Kansas, and faithfully discharge the duties of Secretary pro tem. 
of the Senate of the State of Kansas, according to the best of my 
ability; so help me God. 

C. K. GILCHRIST, 

June 3d, 1962. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 3d day of June, A. D. 
1862. 

T. A. OSBORN, 
Preudent pro tem. of the Senate 
of the State of Kansas. 

Robert Parham was appointed by the President as Assistant Beo- 
retary, and after taking the usual oath entered upon the duties of 
his office. 




106 PBOCEEDINOS IN THE 

On motion of Mr. Hubbard 

The Senate proceeded to the election of an Assistant Sergeant-at- 
Anna. 

Whereupon, Charles Clarkson haying received 21 votes, was de- 
clared unanimously elected. 

Mr. Holliday offered the following preamble and resolution, and 
moved its adoption : 

Whereas, the names of Messrs. Lynde and Hoffman appear upon 
the roll of the Senate, and whereas, said Lynde and Hoffman are 
commissioned officers in the military service of the United States, 
and whereas, the Senate has determined, by previous action, that 
the holding of a military position and a seat in the State Senate are 
incompatible, therefore 

Resolvedy That a committee of three be appointed by the Chair 
to inquire whether Messrs. Lynde and Hoffman are entitled to 
seats m this body, and report such action as they may deem 
advisable. 

The resolution being adopted, 

The Chair appointed Messrs. Holliday, Cobb and Essick said 
Committee. 

Charles Clarkson, Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms, appeared and took 
the oath of office. 

Messrs. Bayless, Cobb and Rankin took the following oath, which 
was administered by the President pro tem.: 

*^ You and each of you do solemnly swear that in all things per- 
taining to the trial of the impeachment of John W. Robinson, yon 
will do impartial justice, according to the law and the evidence ; so 
help you God;" 

Mr. Rankin offered the following resolution and moved its 
adoption : 

Resolved, That the Senate hereby authorize the publication of 
its proceedings in the trial of the impeachment of Charles Robin- 
son, Governor, John W. Robinson, Secretary of State, and George 
S. Hillyer, Auditor of State, in the daily Topeka State Record^ in 
such form as will be convenient to be bound for the use of the 
State, and such proceedings to be reported for publication by the 
regular reporters of this body. 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 107 

Upon which resolution the yeas and nays were demanded with 
the following result : 

Ayes — ^Messrs. Bamett, Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Essick, Holliday, 
Lambdin, McDowell, Bankin, Bees, Mr. President. — 11. 

Nays — ^[essrs. Curtis, Denman, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, 
Knowles, Lappin, Boberts, Sleeper, Spriggs and Stevens. — 11. 

There being a tie, the President declared that the resolution was 
lost. 

Mr. Sleeper moved that the Senate adjourn until to>morrow morn> 
ing at 10 o'clock. 

Lost. 

The President announced that the Senate was ready to proceed 
to the trial of the impeachmant of John W. Bobinson, Secretary of 
State, of the State of Kansas. 

Whereupon, the Sergeant-at-Arms proclaimed : 

" Oyez ! Oyez ! Oyez ! The High Court of Impeachment of the 
State, of Kansas is now open.'' 

Present. — The Hon. S. A, Stinson, Attorney General of the 
State, and the Board of Managers on the part of the House of 
Representatives of the State of Kansas. 

The Hons. Fred. P. Stanton and Wilson Shannon, and N. P' 
(!ase, Es<]., counsel for the respondent. 

John W. Bobinson appeared in person. 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President: — I have a paper here which I wish 
to read, and ask that it may be filed and spread upon the Journal of 
the Court : 

John W. Robinson, by his Attorneys, excepts to these proceed- 
ings, and denies the authority of this body, which assumes to be 
the Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a Court of Impeach- 
meat, for the following reasons : 

Ist. Because by the Constitution of the State, all impeachments 
must be by the Senate, sitting legally for that purpose : whereas 
the Senate and House of Bepresentattves, by Concurrent Besolu- 
tion, adjourned »m€ die on the 6th day of March last, and cannot 
of their own motion, again assemble for any purpose until the time 
designated by the Constitution for the regular session. 

2d. By the Constitution, the sole power of impeachment is vested 
in the House of Bepresentatives. This authority caunOt be delega- 



108 PBOOSEDINQS IN THK 

ted to any committee or other person whatsoever, and no impeach- 
iment can be tried except upon the prosecution of the House of 
JKepresentatives, and during the session of \ that body. 

3d. The Constitution of the State recognizes the Senate only as 
a branch of the Legislature, and there is no authority for any session 
of theT Senate, separate and apart from that of its co-ordinate 
branch— the House of Representatives. 

4th. The supposed law of the last session, entitled '^ An Act 
regulating trials of Impeachment, and fixing the compensation of 
members and officers of the Court," could not have become a law 
until its publication in April last ; supposing said law to be valid 
and constitutional, the adjournment of the Court of Impeachment 
until the first Monday in June, inst., which took place on the 28th 
day of February last, was without authority of law, and absolutely 
void. This body is, therefore, now sitting in direct centravention 
t of the provisions of the Constitution. 

5th. The proceedings of this body, thus irregularly mad unlaw- 
-; fully assembled, will be a nullity, and neither its acquittal nor its 
woonviction will accomplish any result whatever. 

WILSON SHANNON, 
FRED. P. STANTON, 
NATHAN P. CASE. 

The Attorney General of the State, Hon. S. A. Stinsoa, on the 
part of the Board of Managers, rose and said : 

May it please the Court : We object to the introduction of this 
paper, or to its being filed among the records of this Coiui. This 
paper, Mr. President, is an insult } neither in form or sttbstanoe is 
it respectful to the dignity of this body. 

I have yet to know that a party can come into Court and present 

a protest against the jurisdiction, and ask that it be filed. Suoh 

proceedings are not allowed in any Court of law or justice ; and 

ilearned counsel are well aware of the fact that protests are only 

iddlowable in legislative proceedings. Suppose these proceedings 

\weie taking place in a court of criminal jurisdiction : would counsel 

• oonsider that they had a right to enter the court and file a paper of 

.this character? If counsel will present these objections in proper 

;8hape and form as a plea or motion against the jurisdiction of this 

Court to try these impeachments, the Board of Managers on the part 

•of the House of Representatives will be found ready to vindicate the 

validity of these proceedings. In their name I do object — ^moet^ 

jiolemnly object — against placing this paper on file. 



IMPEACHMENT CA8E8. 10^ 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President, and Gentlemen of ttie Senate: Th« 
Attorney General is mistaken in supposing this to be a protest 
against the jurisdiction of the Senate to sit as a Court of Impeach- 
ment ; it is an objection to the regularity of the present session. It 
is no matter whether this paper is filed or not; the objections it 
contains cannot help being met. No Senator can refuse to meet 
them ; they will be present at every turn : — in the opening of 
depositions, in the swearing of witnesses, and in all the details 
of these proceedings; they cannot be ignored. I wish the gentlemaii 
would show, in our own country or in England, a single case where 
an impeachment has been conducted, except by the House of Rep- 
resentatiTes acting as a solemn Court of Impeachment while in 
session, by its managers, and appearing at times as a body before 
the Senate. We present this paper, because it was thought best to 
bring up the objections in this form, at the beginning of these 
proceedings. If the Senate will hear the arguments now, it will 
bring the matter fully before them. It is our candid belief that 
these proceedings will be a nullity. This Board of Managers may 
be worthy gentlemen, but they have no legal existence. These 
proceedings amount to nothing but frivolity. You cannot dodge 
the issue. 

The Attorney General. — We do not now intend to argue the 
questions involved in this paper. What I ask is that there shall be 
some legal plea or motion presented here, and when it comes up in^ 
such shape, we shall undertake to defend the action of the House 
of Representatives, and the dignity of this body. We shall under- 
take to show that you are not guilty of the frivolity of which you- 
are accused by the learned counsel. We do not expect to dodge the 
issue. When these objections come regularly before this body, we 
can and will meet them. 

Mr. Stanton. — I suggest to the Attorney General that this paper 
is merely asked to be filed as a Bill of Exceptions. We intend the 
placing it on record as a basis of proceedings in other courts. We^ 
are aware that no appeal can be taken from the judgment of this 
body, if it shall decide affirmatively on its right to proceed at this 
time. But there is collateral action involved. The officers im« 
peached may try to stay a judgment depriving them of office. 
Writs of quo tcarranto may issue, and thus the subject come 
regularly before the Supreme Court, the highest tribunal of the 
State. In this way the whole matter will be brought up. We 



110 PROOEEDINOS IN THE 

intended no disrespect to any gentleman, by the objections, or the 
form in which they are presented. 1 do not think any gentleman 
will think, for an moment, that we had any such intention. 

Mr. Stevens.— I would like to ask the Attorney Grentral if an 
agreement is not possible, by which we may hear these important 
questions argued by counsel before the Senate ? 

The Attorney General. — ^The subject is not before the Senate in a 
proper form to be argued. 

Mr. Stanton. — We do not object to the Senate sitting as a Court 
of Impeachment, but we do not recognize this body in that capacity. 
We cannot, therefore, objectto the jurisdiction of a court which is not 
a court. Counsel associated with me have examined this question, 
and we solemnly believe that there is truth contained in the matter 
presented in this paper. We should be sorry to see Kansas placed 
in the false position which this trial will give her before the 
country : a position different from that of any other State ; a reality 
that is, at the same time, a nullity. 

15y request of a Senator, the paper was read again. 

The Attorney General. — From the reading of this paper, it 
sttikes me that the proper place to object to these proceedings 
would be at the office of the Provost Marshal General of the State. 
He announces that he will suppress all illegal assemblies. The 
learned counsel so characterizes this honorable body. If they be- 
lieve it to be so, then they need have no fears for their clients. 
These defendants can go from this chamber at any time without 
oaring for our action. 

Mr. Stanton. — The Legislature of the State adjourned sine die 
on the 6th day of March. How, then, can the Senate be here in 
Bession at this time ? No call has been issued by the Governor, 
and one body cannot be in session without its co-ordinat« branch. 
I observe in what purports to be the proceedings in these cases of 
impeachmcat, that a motion to adjourn the Senate till the 2d day 
of June, was made by the Hon. Attorney General, on the 28th day 
of February. The House of Representatives is not here, and both 
bodies adjourned without day on the 6th of March. How can this 
body be legally assembled ? These proceedings will not affect our 
clients, except subjecting thom again to the forms of a tedious 



IMPSACHMENT CASES. Ill 

trial, whicli will have to be held by the next session of the Legisla- 
ture, in order to make the proceedings legal. 

The Attorney General.— -It is my right to close this debate. I 
cannot be drawn into a discussion on other matters. I object to the 
filing of this paper, and insist npon the objection. The counsel for 
the defense agreed, if I remember aright, to the adjournment of 
the Court of Impeachment to this day. 

Mr. Stanton. — I meant no disrespect to the Attorney General, in 

calling attention to this adjournment. I am aware that counsel on 

' both sides agreed to that arrangement, but we had no evidence then 

that the House of Representatives would act illegally, and fail to be 

present. 

The Attorney General, — May it please the Court : I insist on 
my objection to the filing of this paper. 

The President. — Counsel must confine themselves to to the rules 
of courts, in these discussions. This debate is very irregular. 

Mr. Holliday. — This is a new question, and I would like to hear 
the arguments of counsel. I hope the Senate will adjourn, and 
that at the next session counsel will argue the question, which I 
am glad to hear they are ready to do. I, therefore, submit the fol- 
lowing resolution, and move its adoption : 

Besohcdy That the matter under discussion be postponed until 
to-morrow at 10 o'clock A. M., when the Senate will hear arguments 
upon it. 

Lost. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^I am aware that it is not regular for counsel to 
proceed in this way. It is usual for the Senate to discuss questions 
for information, and to hear counsel. Such a course could not be 
allowed during a trial. 

Mr. Hubbard. — Mr. President: — The question is upon filing 
this paper, and not upon the questions involved in it, as I under- 
stand it. 

Mr. Cobb. — ^Will counsel inform me if the filing of this paper 
would be considered by them as an admission by the Court of the 
points contained in it ? 

Mr. Stanton.— Not at all, Sir I 



112 PBOOEEDINQB IN THE 

The question before the Senate being, *^ Shall the objection of 
the Attorney General be suBtained 1" the vote resulted as follows : 

Ayes — Messrs. Barnett, Bayless, Connell, CurtiS) Essick, Hub* 
bard, Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, Bankin, Sleeper. — 11 

Nays. — ^Messrs. Cobb, Denman," Ingalls, Boberts, Sprigga 
Stevens. — 6. 

And 80 the Senate refused to allow the paper to be filed. 

The Attorney General. — ^May it please the Court : — On behalf of 
the Board of Managers, I now move -that we proceed to the trial of 
John W. Bobinson. 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President: — ^We desire to object to all 
fxirther proceedings of this body in this matter, on the grounds set 
forth in the paper rejected from the files of this body. 

The Attorney General. — ^In the matter of the impeachment of 
John W. Bobinson, on the part of the managers, I request the 
opening of the depositions taken on behalf of the House of Bep- 
resentatiyes here prosecuting. 

Whereupon, the depositions were opened by the President pro 
tem. 

Mr. Bankin offered the following resolution, which was 
adopted: 

Resolved, That a committee of three be appointed by the chair 
to inquire what steps should be taken by this body in regard to the 
publication of the proceedings of the Court of Impeachment, and 
report to-morrow morning. 

The chair appointed Messrs, Bankin, Bees and Boberts, said 
committee. 

Mr. Steyens offered the following resolution, which was 
adopted: 

Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed to cause cur- 
tains to be hung at all windows on the west side of the Hall, and to 
provide such other things as may be necessary for the convenience 
of Senators. 

On motion of Mr. Sleeper, 

The Senate adjourned until 10 o'clock to-morrow morning. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 113 

THIRD DAY. 

Senate Chamber, ) 
Wednesday, June 4th, 1862. j 

Senate assembled. 

Present — ^Hon. S. A. Stinson, and the Board of Managers. 

The Hons. Fred. P. Stanton and Wilson Shannon, and N. 
Case, Esq., counsel for the respondent. 

John W. Robinson appeared in person. 
Journal of yesterday read and approved. 

Mr. Stevens offered the following resolution, which was 
adopted : 

Rt^mlcfxl, T\vi{ the President of the Senate bo and he is hereby 
authorized to appoint such officers and clerks as he may deem ncG- 
essary to properly transact the business of this session. ^ 

Mr. Cobb offered the following resolution, which was not adopted : 

Resfjlved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms be instructed to procure 
saw-dust for the floor of the Senate Chamber, and have the same 
spread upon the thoroughfares of the Chamber by the assembling 
of the Senate to-morrow morning. 

Mr. Rankm, Chairman of the Special Committee on Printing, 
submitted the following report : 

Your Committee, who were appointed to inquire what steps should 
be taken by the Senate in regard to the publication of the proceed- 
ings of the Court of Impeachment, would report that they have 
had the subject under consideration, and have come to the follow- 
ing conclusion : That a sufficient number of copies of each day's 
proceedings, exclusive of the speeches of the attorneys, to furnish 
each member of the Court with a copy, and each one of the parties, 
and their attorneys, with a copy, should be published in pamphlet 
form, and laid upon their desks at the next sitting of the Court 
after such proceedings have been had ; and that three hundred 
extra copies be printed and bound for the use of the State. We, 
therefore, recommend the consideration of the following resolution 
to the Senate : 

Besoived, That one copy of each day's proceedings of this Court 

of Impeachment, exclusive of the speeches of the attorneys, be 

printed in pamphlet form and furnished to each member of the 

Court, and one copy to each one of the parties, and one copy to each 

8 



114 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

of their attorneys, and laid upon their desks at the next sitting of 
the Court after such proceedings haye been had, and that three 
hundred extra copies of the same be printed and bound for the use 
of the Senate. 

J. M. RANKIN, 
Chairman. 

Mr. Hubbard moved to amend by striking out the words " exclu* 
sive of the speeches of the attorneys/' 

Carried. 

The report, as amended, wsfi adopted. 

On motion of Mr. Rankin, the printing was referred to the Senate 
Committee on Printing. 

The President appointed Mr. Denman on said committee, vice 
Mr. Lynde. 

Hon. Fred. Pi. Stanton, of counsel for the respondent, John W. 
Robinson, submitted the following motion : 

The counsel for John W. Robinson moved that this honorable 
body take no action on the Articles of Impeachment preferred 
against the said Robinson at the last session of the Legislature, on 
the ground that the Senate has no lawful authority to hold a session, 
or to proceed in the trial of said impeachment at the present 
time. 

WILSON SHANNON, 
FRED. P. STANTON, 
NATHAN P. CASE. 

Mr. Stanton said : 

Mr. President : — ^I had the honor yesterday to submit some 
exceptions, which the Senators refused to entertain or consider. It 
therefore becomes necessary for me to make the motion now be- 
fore you, in order that I may bring the subject to the serious exami- 
nation of this body, before it enters upon an itfyestigation incapable 
of producing any legal result. 

The journal of the last session of the Senate, in manuscript, now 
lies before me. In it, I find that on the 6th day of March last, by 
concurrent resolution, the Senate and House of Representatiyes 
adjourned sine die. Neither of these bodies can meet of its own 
will until the second Tuesday of January next, the time designated 
in the 26th Section of the 2d Article of the Constitution 
for the regular session of the Legislature. By the 5th Section of 
the 1st Article, the Governor may convene the two Houses upon 



IMP8AGHHKNT OAfiBS. 115 

extraordinary occasions. No proclamation, however, haa called this 
body together ; and as the day for the annual meeting of the Legisla^ 
ture has not arrived, we must look elsewhere than in the Constitution, 
for the authority to organize this body, at the present time, with the 
form and functions of the Senate. 

I am aware it is claimed that on the 28th of February last, the 
Senate, then organized as a Court of Impeachment, adjourned over 
until the first Monday in June. But I have thoroughly examined 
the journal of the Senate, and I find no such entry among its pro- 
ceedings. The only order for any adjournment, except from day to 
day, is that to which I have already alluded, by which the two 
Houses adjourned nine die. 

It is probable the Secretary of the Senate may have kept the 
minutes of tha.t body, as a Court of Impeachment, in a separate 
book from that which contains the journal of the Senate. But as 
no such record is to be found in the office of the Secretary of State, 
where the law requires it to be kept, I will assume, however, that 
there is some such record, for I find the statement in a pamphlet, 
printed by order of the Senate, although upon or in this pamphlet, 
there is no sort of authentication of the document, by any certificate 
or signature of any officer whatever. Admit, for the sake of argu- 
ment, that the Senate, as a Court of Impeachment, did, on the 28th 
of February last, regularly adjourn until the first Monday in June, 
the language of the Constitution is, *' All impeachments shall be 
tried by the Senate f and although the body may have assumed 
the forms of a Court, it was still the Senate, and could be 
nothing else but the Senate. It had power to adjourn to 
any time within the session of the Senate; it could even 
adjourn over to a subsequent session ; but this was nothing more 
than the mere postponement of the business until the time designa- 
ted. When the Senate and the House of Representatives adjourned 
sine difj this latter order overruled and annulled the former. 

There is no such thing as a Court, separate and distinct from the 

Senate. On the contrary, the Senate comprehends or contains the 

Court. It embraces both the legislative and the judicial body. 

Therefore, when the Senate adjourned shie die, all its functions 

legislative and judicial were entirely suspended ; and they cannot 

be resumed until the body shall again assemble in pursuance of 
law. 

This body certainly assumes to be the Senate ; and if it has any 

power to sit at all,, it must be in that character, and in no other. I 



116 PROCEEDINQS IN THE 

find from your proceedings, that you have admitted new members, 
thus judging of their qualifications ; you have appointed a com- 
mittee to inquire as to the right of members who are now in the 
army ; you have elected a President, and other officers. 

All these acts are done in the exercise of functions which belong 
only to the Senate. It is wholly impossible that you could meet as 
Court alone, without, at the same time, assuming in many respects 
the character of a legislative body, and performing duties which 
belong to you only in that capacity. It is" therefore plain that any 
supposed adjournment to meet simply as a Court, and not as a Sen. 
ate, is nugatory. Especially is it so when the adjournment is to a 
time outside of the sessions of the Senate, and after the Senate, by 
concurrence of the House of Representatives, has adjourned sine die. 

The Constitution of the State of Kansas recognizes the Senate as 
one branch of the legislature, and nowhere seems to contemplate 
separate action or separate functions. Even in the case of impeach* 
ments the two branches of legislature must co-operate in the exercise 
of their respective powers ; for the House prosecutes while the 
Senate tries. 

The provision in our Constitution on the subject of impeachments 
is identical with that in the Constitution of the United States, with 
the exception of that clause which re([uires the Chief Justice of 
the Supreme Court to preside, in case of the impeachment of the 
President. We know that the Senate of the United States does 
often sit, when the House of Representatives has adjourned sine Jie^ 
for there is an express authority given to the President to convene 
either house of Congress when he thinks it necessary. Yet, al^iough 
there have been four cases of impeachment in the Senate of the 
United States, and that body has separate functions from those of 
the House of Representatives, no impeachment has ever been tried 
in the vacation of the House. Some of the cases have been post- 
poned from time to time, and even from session to session, under 
circumstances when it would apparently have been convenient to 
hold an extra session of the Senate alone, in order to conduct the 
trial. But so far as I can ascertain, no suggestion of such a pro- 
ceeding was ever made from any quarter. Our Constitution has 
made no provision for separate sessions of the Senate, under any 
circumstances, or for any purpose whatever. These is not one 
clause in the whole instrument, which, by the remotest implication, 
seems to contemplate any such separate sessions. On the contrary, 



IMPEACHMENT GASES. 117 

there are several clauses which would seem to negative the power to 
hold them. I shall refer to these directly. 

The House of Kepresentatives has the sole power to impeach, and 
it cannot delegate this power to any other parties. It is usual to 
appoint managers on the part of the House, hut these have no 
delegated power. They are merely agents or instruments, through 
whom the House executes its orders. 

The House is always considered to he present in the person of its 
managers ; hut this presumption cannot he admitted when the func- 
tions of the hody have entirely ceased hy an adjournment sine die. An 
adjournment from day to day does not suspend the functions of a 
' legislative body at all ; in contemplation of law it is in continual 
session. But any longer adjournment has a very different effect.* 

Our law of impeachments as well as the whole machinery of pro- 
ceeding, has been derived from the law and practice in the English 
parliament. This was the necesssary result of the language employed in 
the Constitution of the I)nited States, and with our previous con- 
nection with the government of Great Britain under the common 
law of the realm. When trials for inpeaohment are pending before 
' the House of Lords in England, the Commons invariably attend in 
a body.f The House of Representatives of the United States, 
have not thought it proper or admissible for them to depart ftrom 
this praotice. 

The case of Blount, a Senator from Tennessee, in 1799, was not 
an exception ; for no trial was even had in that case, it having been 
decided after full argument, that an U. S. Senator is not subject to 
impeachment under the Federal Constitution. The subsequent 
trials of Pickering, Chase and Peek, were all conducted strictly 
according to the English precedents. No step was taken by the 
Senate until it had first given due notice to the House of Repre- 
sentatives, and generally, the latter body, having resolved itself into 
a committee of the whole, attended the trial in person. No pro- 
ceedings of the kind have ever been carried on in the Senate of the 
United States, in the absence of the House of Representatives — 
that is to say, while the latter was not in session, and either actually 
or constructively present at the trial. Barclay, in his digest, page 
91, gives the following account of the proceedings of the twenty 

first Congress : — 

^ " ' ■ ■■ I ■■■■■■ —a— I , . 

*Ciiihiac Law o| LeffisUtiT* AMtmbUM. pa 901, MS. 788.) 
tCoflhinc Law of Lafialattre AncmbllM. p 981. 



118 PROeiSKDINGS IN THE * 

The Senate notified the House ^^ that it was ready to proceed 
upon the impeachment of James H. Peck, Judge &c., in the Senate 
chamber, which chamber was prepared with accommodations for the 
reception of the House of Representatives." 

Thereupon the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole 
House and proceeded to the Senate in that capacity ; having spent 
some time therein, they returned into the chamber of the House, 
and the Speaker having resumed the chair, the chairman of the 
committee of the whole reported the proceedings which had taken 
place, and that the Senate sitting as High Court of Impeachment 
.had adjourned to meet at the next session. 

At the ensuing session the Senate notified the House of their 
readiness to proceed to the trial, and the House resolved that from 
day to day it would resolve itself into a committee of the whole and 
attend the same. 

I insist that under the provisions of our Constitution, no impeach- 
ment can be prosecuted, except by the House of Representatives, 
which must necessarily be in session, so that it can be at least 
constructively present at the trial. We are entitled to the benefit 
of the wisdom and justice of that body, while acting under all the 
responsibility of its position and character, as representing the whole 
people of the State. In the great case of Warren Hastings, when 
Mr. Burke, in the course of his address to the House of Lords, used 
expressions which had not been sanctioned by the House of Com- 
mons, the latter, upon the petition of the accused, resolved that Mr. 
Burke ought not to have used the expression complained of.''' 

What recourse have we under, under present circumstances, if the 
gentlemen sent here by the House of Representatives of the State, 
should act vindictively or oppressively, or should in any way exceed the 
authority claimed to have been devolved upon them ? I do not, for 
a moment, question the good motives and just intentions which will 
guide these honorable gentlemen, in their prosecutions of these 
impeachments. They may also be as wise and as eloquent as Burke . 
but they will hardly claim to be entirely free from the errors, which 
even that great orator and statesman could not altogether avoid. 
They oahnot act with the same sense of solemn responsibility, which 
doubtless would control the House of Representatives, if that 
body was actually now here, performing its high constitutional ' 
duty, in conducting this prosecution. I have the highest respect 

*Cmihiiif, 863 m. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 119 

for the gentlemen who appear on behalf of the House. I know 
their integrity and ability ; yet they can scarcely escape the inftuence 
of professional pride, which will invariably bring them down from 
the elevated position of the great public body, in whose shoes they 
stand, to the level of mere attorneys, with all the ambition and love 
of victory which characterize the conflicts of the bar. The great 
ends designed to be secured by the peculiar and imposing proceed- 
ings in cases of impeachments, will, to a great extent, be frustrated, 
and these trials, with all their expense to the State, and annoyance 
to individuals, will fall into the ordinary routine of every-day 
investigations. We have a right to the presence and protection 
of the House of Representatives. The great and important funct- 
ions of that body, in such cases as these, cannot be transferred to 
any committee. The honorable gentlemen, who assume to appear 
for them, though they be all that individual men can be, are inca- 
pable of holding and exercising the great trust which the people 
have conferred upon the whole body of their Representatives. The 
vast responsibility and the majority of that body, cannot be com- 
pressed into the persons of these half dozen gentlemen, who claim 
to stand here in the name and stead of the entire representative 
body. Judge Story, in his Commentaries on the Oonstitution, vol. 
2, p. 166 to 171, says: 

*^ The objects of prosecutions of this sort (impeachments) is to 
reach high and potent offenders, such as might be presumed to 
escape punishment in the ordinary tribunals, either from their own 
extraordinary influences or from the imperfect organization and 

Sowers of those tribunals. These prosecutions are, therefore, con* 
ucted by the representatives of the nation, in their public capaetty, 
in the face of the nation, and upon a responsibility which is at once 
felt and reverenced by the whole community. 

^^ The notoriety of the proceedings ; the solemn manner in which 
they are conducted; the deep extent to which they aflect the 
reputation of the accused ; the ignominy of a conviction which is to 
be known through all time ; and the glory of an acquittal which 
ascertains and confirms innocence; these are all calculated to 
produce a vivid and lasting impression on the public mind; and to 
give such prosecutions, when necessary, a vast importance, both as 
a check to crime and an incitement to virtue." 

If we would avoid the danger of *^ imperfect organization and 
powers" on the tribunal which tries high political offenders, it 
becomes us to tread reverently in the footsteps of those who have 
preceded us and established rules and precedents for our guidance ; 
to pursue the antiquas vtas in which alone there is safety, when 



120 PROCEEDINGS IN THE « 

we approach things of such magnitude as those which now engage 

US. 

Mr. President, I do not know of a single instance in this country, 

where, under a Constitution like ours, these principles have heen 
disregarded. I challenge the gentlemen on the other side to 
produce one if they can. The Constitutions of some of the States 
provide generally ^^that there shall he no trial of an impeachment 
until after an adjournment of the Legislature.'' — Cushing, 986- 
Such a provision as this would, undoubtedly, change the whole 
character of the tribunal, and would introduce new rules and prin- 
ciples. But the very fact that such provisions were deemed 
necessary, in any State Constitution, would imply the impossibility 
of proceeding in that way, without express constitutional authority. 

The maxims, ^^expressio unius exchmo alter lus/* would prevail in 
the case of a Constitution without such a provision, and exclude the 
possibility of separate sessions of the Senatorial body. 

It was argued, however, that the law of the last session, entitled 
^^An act regulating trials of impeachment and fixing the compensa- 
tion of members and officers of the Court," makes the present 
session of the Senate legal and valid. I am sure, in the absence of 
that law, no one would contend for the regularity of your present 
session. I am equally sure, on the other hand, that no sanction for 
the pending proceedings can be derived from the law in question. 
The Court of Impeachment claims to have adjourned from the 28th 
February last, until the 1st Monday in June inst., and this was 
done in pursuance of the law quoted. But that law did not pass 
both Houses until the Ist of March ; it did not become a law until 
the 6th of March ; and by its own express provisions, it was not in 
force until after publication, which took place some time in April. 
The adjournment of the 28th February was not, therefore, author- 
ized by the law, nor was it afterwards legalized by it ; for the whole 
provision, on that subject, is contained in the 1st Section, which is 
in the following words : 

^' That the Senate of the State of Kansas, when organized and 
sitting as a Court for the trial of impeachments, brought by the 
House of Representatives, shall have power to adjourn from time 
to time, and hold sessions after the adjournment of the Legislature." 

The subsequent sections authorize the Board of Managers, 

appointed by the House, to conduct the prosecution, appoint their 

own officers, send for persons and papers, and compel the attendance 

of witnesses, as folly and amply as the House of Representatives 

itself might have. They also provide for the payment of the memben 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 121 

of the Senate and those members of the House engaged in the 
prosecution. 

I have already endeavored to show that the whole spirit of the 
Constitution is against the power of either branch of the Legislature 
to hold separate sessions. There are, however, two express provis- 
ions with which the law quoted seems to come in direct conflict. 

The 10th Sec. of the 2d Art. provides that "neither House? 
without the consent of the other, shall adjourn for more than two 
days, Sundays excepted." This provision evidently implies that 
both bodies are to co-oporate in their respective acts of adjournment, 
judging of the necessity and propriety of such steps, at the time they 
are taken. The Legislature has no right to pass a law to the effect 
that this prohibition, as to adjournment, shall be inoperative. To 
«nact that either House may adjourn when it will and as long as it 
pleases, would be virtually to repeal this clause of the Constitution. 
This is not the "consent" contemplated when the Constitution gave 
each House this control over the adjournment of the other ; for if 
it were, then, as one House alone can never repeal a law, the House 
can never hereafter recall its consent to adjournments in cases of 
impeachment, and the Senate may thus forever prevent prosecutions 
from being carried on by the House of Representatives. 

Moreover, if the Senate may sit alone to try impeachments, the 
House may also sit alone in order to institute them. A law may be 
passed authorizing the House to adjourn from time to time, at its 
pleasure for this purpose ; and thus the last vestige of co-operation, 
in the functions of these two bodies, will have been virtually 
abolished and erased from the Constitution. 

But, after all, it is not so certain that this law does actually 
authorizes the Senate to adjourn longer than for two days. It cer- 
tainly does not expressly so enact, and, in the absence of such ex- 
press words, a well known pnnciple of construction, would preserve 
the Constituttonal provision, by interpreting the law in accordance 
with it. 

Another provision of the Constitution plainly violated by this 
law is that contained in the 8d Sec. of the 2d Art., which declares 
what compensation members of the legislature shall receive for 
their services. It is only at some " regular or special session " of 
the legislature, that any compensation at all is allowed. I think 
nothing is plainer than that no compensation can be paid to 
members of the Legislature, except in conformity to this clause of 



122 PE0CS£DINQ8 IN THE 

the Constitation ; and as it certainly was not intended to compel Sen- 
ators to perform the important duties of a Court of Impeachment 
without compensation, it follows that^their session, in that capacity 
were intended to be within some regular or special session of the 
Senate. 

I know very well, that in oases of impeachment, there can be no 
appeal irom the decision of the Senate. But when a body, which is 
not a Senate, undertakes to pronounce judgment, and depose an officer 
of the State, the Supreme Court, upon a writ of Quo Warranto, vf ill 
determine whether the body claiming that high prerogative, is Consti- 
tutionally authorized to exercise it. Or, again, any member or 
officer of this body may apply for a mandamus, to compel the State 
officers to pay his compensation ; and the question whether he is 
entitled to pay as a member or officer of this body, will be directly 
presented for the decision of the Court, and that decision will 
necessarily inyolve the Constitutional right of this body to sit here 
now as the Senate of the State. 

Let no Senator suppose that this argument is designed as a means 
of escape for those who stand accused of high crimes and misde- 
meanors by the House of Kepresentatiyes. The impeachment will 
not fall, if an adjournment should take place. Neither will the 
expiration of their term of office relieve any one of them from the 
trial which the Senate, when Constitutionally assembled, may pro- 
ceed to consummate. They may still be convicted, and rendered 
forever incompetent to hold any office in the State. It is not for 
the purpose of escaping trial that this motion is presented and 
insisted upon. Our only object is to secure a tribunal whose judg- 
. ment, either of acquittal or condemnation, will put an end to this 
controversy forever. 

It is manifest to me that the proceedings of this body will not 
accomplish that result. Confident of the innocence of those who 
have confided their cause to my hands, in' part, I am anxious that 
no shadow of illegality or incompetency of Constitutional 
authority shall rest upon the tribunal which shall pronounce their 
vindication. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, the Senate adjourned until 2 o'clock 
P. M. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 128 

AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Wednesday, June 4, 1862, 2 o'clock, P. M. 

Senate assembled pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the chair. 

Quorum present, 

Hon. F. W. Potter, of the Board of Managers, in opening the 
argument against the motion of the Defendant's counsel, said : 

[The argument of Mr. Potter was not furnished by the 
reporter.] 

The Hon. S. A. Stinson, Attorney General, continued in behalf 
of the State, as follows : 

Mr. President, and may it please this Honorable Court : — After 
the able and comprehensive argument of my colleague, in favor of 
the legality and jurisdiction of this tribunal, I might, perhaps, re- 
frain from debating the question now presented, did I not feel that 
I should be lacking in courtesy, should I neglect to reply to some 
of the many questions directly addressed to myself by the distin- 
guished gentleman who opened the argument of this motion on the 
part of the defense. 

The arguments adduced by the learned gentleman, Gov. Stanton, 
in support of his position, naturally divide themselves into two 
classes. The one aimed at your pockets, the other at your under- 
standings. 

It is insisted that the law, which, among other things, provider 
for the payment of the members of this body, is unconstitutional ; 
or, at any rate, that the State officers who have to pass upon the 
question, (some of them now here for trial,) may have such grave 
doubts in the premises, as to compel you to resort to the Courts to 
coerce from their unwilling hands the poor compensation which the 
Isw gives you for your services. The only conceivable purpose for 
which this argument could have been urged was to influence your 
judgments, as I remarked in the outset, by an appeal to your pockets. 
In these warlike times, we hear of victories achieved by cutting off 
the enemy's supplies, and I am led to believe, from the arguments 
of counsel, that the State officers contemplated some such strategical 
movements upon your honorable body. I regret this implied 
threat— ^ne not new to our ears — as it carries with it the impres- 



124 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

sion that parties in power desire to retard this invcstigittioii, and 
shows that either the ahle and learned gentleman, or his client, 
misoonceives the motives, temper, and spirit with which this hon- 
orable body is here ssembled. I shall, with this brief notice, pass this 
branch of the gentleman's argument, and address mjself to the 
propositions legitimately involved in this discussion. 

j In brief, it is contended that this Body is assembled withoutr 

J authority of law, and that its judgment either of conriction or 

acquittal will be a mere nullity. The reasons urged in support of 
this proposition are substantially these : 1st. The House of Repre- 
sentatives not being in session, the Senate has no authority to 
J , proceed with this trial. 2nd. That the adjournment of the Senate 

j on the 28th day- of February, to the first Monday of June^. was 

unconstitutional, the consent of the House of Uiepresentativts^ not 
having been obtained thereto. 3rd. That on the t)th day of March, 
1862, the Senate together with the House rf RepresEtentatives ad- 
journed sine die, ^ 

In discussing those positions, I propose to sail your attention in 
the outset to what I conceive to be the peculiar constitution and 
I functions of this body, as at present ovga&iiedu The 2nd Article 
I' ^ the Constitution of this State, Sec. 1,. reads as follows : ^ The 
, Legislative power of the State shall be Tesled ia a House of Rspre- 
; sentatives and Senate." This article i»«iiiitkd ^^ Legislative^'' and 
: all its provisions from its oommenceswnt to' the 27th Sec, relate 
purely and strictly to the legislative or ktw-aaking department of 
^. the government. Yet even as law-making bodies, and brandies of 
[' the Legislature, the existooee of neither bvane^ is so absdkitely 

I . dependent upon the other, as the gentiemsA would have you believe. 
\ In its purely legislative capacity, the Senate may have an or^niied 

.existence — may be legally in session withovt the presence ox- organ-* 
ization of the House. To ilhutrale: — Bvppese the next 9enat» 
meets and organizes on the day presoribei id ^e Constituiito, anA 
^ the House for any reason, should fail to assMnble, would tie Senale 
for that reason lack a legal existeikee and orgaoization ? I advaate 
I these views merely for the purpose of showing that thert^is no such 
' . Siamese Twins connection between the two Houses of the liiegislalmre, 
as the gentleman would seem to contend for. But i% is not as a 
: branch of the legislative department of the government or in the exer- 
cise of legislative power that the Senate sits for the purpose of trying 
• impeachments. Strictly and technically that [vertioii of the Oon* 



i 



\ 



I 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 125 

stitution which confers upon the House of Representatives the 
power to impeach, and upon the Senate the power to try impeach- 
ments, should he classed under the ^^ judicial/' and not the legislative 
head. This jurisdiction over matters of impeachment is simply an 
infringement sanctioned hy long usage and weighty reasons, upon the 
functions of our ordinary judicial tribunals. 

Says Chief Justice Story : — " An impeachment as described in 
the common law of England, is a presentment by the House of 
Commons, — the most solemn grand inquest of the whole Kingdom, — 
to the House of Lords, — the most high and Supreme Court of 
criminal jurisdiction of the Kingdom." Read *' State" for 
Kingdom," '* Representatives" for *^ Commons" and " Senate" 
for ^' House of Lords," and the passage applies with equal force to 
this proceeding. I contend that the Senate, when in the language 
of the Constitution it is sitting for the purpose '' of trying impeach- 
ments," is legally another and a different body from the Senate when 
in the discharge of its legislative functions. That, when sitting for 
that purpose, it is erected into a judicial tribunal, and becomes at 
once, in the discharge of its high dutie sabsolved from that connection 
with the House of Representatives, which exists between the two, 
as branches of the Legislature. But uiy able and ingenious adver- 
sary, while as I conceive, admitting all the premises from which I 
derive my conclusions, takes refuge in a kind of ^' nivolutetff' 
theory. Admitting, as I think he does, that the Senate as a legis- 
lative body, and the Senate as a Court, each have a separate exis- 
tence, he contends that the one existence is inferior to, and involved 
in the other ; or in other words, that the Senate as a legislative body 
must be in a condition to exercise its functions, or el^ the Senate 
as a Court cannot exist. I confess, ingeniously as this view has been 
urged, I>am at loss to see how the gentleman reconciles the inva- 
riable proceedings in impeachment cases with his theory. The 
invariable custom, so my examination of the cases leads me t(/ 
believe, is for the Senate by solemn proclnmation to pas? from its 
legislative to its judicial capacity, and wlicu its duties are ditscharged 
to return to its legislative character; as in many of the States 
where the distinction between Courts of law and Courts of equity 
still exists, and the same judge is vested with jurisdiction both at 
law and in equity. Still the Courts are different; so here it is the 
same body of men, but in the one case it is a Senate to enact laws 
and in the other a Senate — a Court to try " high and potent 



126 PBOOSBDINaS IN THB 

offenders." Thus much I urge to show that the Senate although 
disqualified by the absence of the House of Representatives from 
exercising its legislative functions, still that disqualification of itself 
does not deprive it of its power and right to sit as a court. 

But the gentlemen says it is the House of Representatives that 
should be here prosecuting ; that the House exercises a delegated 
power, and he brings in a weighty maxim of the law to show ^^ that 
delegated power cannot be delegated.'' I meet him here with the 
broad proposition that, for the purposes of this trial, neither the 
House of Representatives, or its managers, need be here prosecuting. 
The House of Representatives has " the sole power to impeach " by 
the Constitution. That power the House haa exercised, and in the 
most solemn manner, ^^for themselves and on behalf of all the people 
of the State of Kansas " here, at your bar, the House of Represen- 
tatives has impeached John W. Robinson of high misdemeanors in 
office. In due time the House filed its specific Articles of Im- 
peachment, the accused was notified^that he was impeached, and 
here, at your bar, he has pjeaded to the Articles of Impeachment, 
and upon his plea the House has taken issue. The case is made — 
the li£eral constitutional duty is discharged — the accused is in your 
hands ; and I claim that it would be your solemn duty, upon such 
evidence as might present itself, even though the House nor its 
managers — even though no one urged the prosecution — to hear and 
to try the issue joined. Certainly the defendant would have a right 
to a trial — might insist upon every principal of justice and of law — ^that 
the House should not thus asperse his fair fame, and leave him the 
poor boon of an unsatisfactory dismissal. But ^ ^ precedent, precedent," 
cries the gentleman ; ^^ the whole round of English and American 
precedents are being violated ',* and he solemnly urged and touch- 
in gly invoked you back " antiqua$ vias — into the ancient ways." I 
felt almost disposed to doubt the gentleman's r^ublicanism, when I 
heard him dwell so lovingly on the pomp and ceremonial — the 
various ^^ sticks in waiting" — ^and the awful paraphanalia which 
attended the trial of Warren Hastings, where the managers came to 
prosecute before the House of Lords, with the Commons of England 
at their back. We are told here, in solemn procession the House of 
Representatives of the United States attends its managers to the bar 
of the Senate when an impeachment is to be prosecuted. All this 
is very impressive — all this is exceedingly picturesque ; but when 
the poor State of Kansas comes to prosecute her trusted offioers for 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 127 

the unlawful depletion of her pauper Treasury, we naturally inquire 
if all this expensive pomp— this mute array of some seventy members 
of the House of Kepresentatives — is not a mere idle ceremonial, 
affecting in nothing the substantial rights of the people or the 
accused. This matter of impeachment is one of those extraordinary 
proceedings above precedent. There is no such thing as the com- 
mon law of impeachment. Whenever a case is presented, rules are 
made conforming or not to the rules which may have been adopted 
in similar cases elsewhere, according to the good pleasure of the 
body before which the trial is to be had. This Senate — ^presuming 
always the substantial rights of the accused — might have made a 
precedent for itself; and it would have but followed the spirit of the 
age had it denuded the whole proceeding of all its superstitious 
formality. The grand spirit of progress, which ha^ set every artery 
of commerce, trade, and art, throbbing with new life, has even at 
last crept through the misty cerements which, for so long, have 
enshrouded the law in mystery and dread, and instinct with fresh 
vigor, it now goes straight and sure in its high mission of adminis- 
tering justice. Forms, which, by centuries of growth, had entwined 
themselves in, and become almost a part of, the law, have been 
ruthlessly torn away; and now the great aim is to preserve the 
substance only, so that plain, speedy, and exact justice may be done 
to all. How much more should you, bound by no mystic tie to 
these ancient ceremonies, ignore them all, and stand in the simple 
majesty of your high position — ^the arbiter between the people and 
the accused — resolved only that substantial justice shall be done. 

Even, however, if this question is to be arbitrarily decided upon 
precedent, I am not here so absolutely without authority as the 
gentleman charges. The precedents which have been here intro- 
duced, on the part of the defense, are purely negative. It is 
nowhere affirmatively decided that the Senate cannot sit in the 
absence of the House ; on the contrary, in the State of Missouri, 
upon the trial of Jackson before the Senate, this question was, for 
the first time, raised, discussed, and decided ; and it was there held 
that the Senate could sit for the purposes of the trial, in the absence 
of the House ; and the case was so proceeded with and concluded. 
Here is a positive decision, in the cases cited by the defense. It 
appears simply that the practice has been different. I regret that 
I have not the case, as reported ; but I well remember that the 
report was in the hands of Senators, at the time the adjovrnment 



128 -PROCEEDINQS IN THE 

was had, and they will bear me out in my recollection of its contents, 
in so far as I have stated them. The provisions of the Constitution 
of the State of Missouri, on the subject of impeachment, are 
verbatim et literatim our own. The adjourpment complained of, 
was not thoughtlessly had, as the gentleman presumes ; but as I 
well know, after a mature and careful consideration of those very 
questions, which are now presented by the defense. 

And now at last I come to the defendant's demand, that for the 
protection of his rights, the House of Representatives should b® 
here, lest peradventure we, here prosecuting, should,, in the hard- 
ness of our hearts, practice some oppression upon him. And again the 
inevitable Hastings is invoked — we are told how he petitioned the 
House of Commons, and how the House of Commons rebuked Mr. 
Burke, for some unlicensed language towards Mr. Hastings. So let 
the House of Representatives rebuke me, or the managers, if, in 
word or deed, we are betrayed into any injustice towards this 
defendant ; but I presume the rebuke like a ^' rod in pickle,'' will 
be all the more severe by being kept until January next. 

But do you want the House of Representatives, gentlemen of the 
defense ? If so, I see here impeached and Waiting his trial, Charles 
Robinson, Grovemor of the State of Kansas. To him the Constitu- 
tion has fortunately given the high prerogative of convoking the 
House. Let him exercise that power, or let him and those accused 
with him, forever after hold their peace. The gentleman recites from 
Cushing's manual, to show that, by the Constitution of some of the 
States, the Senate is prohibited from trying impeachments during 
the session of the Legislature, and claims that this, upon the 
principle that ^^ the expression of one thing is the exclusion of the 
other," is a clear recognition of the position that the Senate cannot, 
without express authority, sit in the absence of the House. The 
gentleman, had he more carefully studied this passage, would have 
seen that it makes clearly against his position — it is prohibitory and 
not permissive — it does not sanction the separate session of the 
Senate ; but forbids the Senate from trying impeachments, while the 
House is in session. / 

If the gentleman's position is correct, then in the States where 
this provision exists, no trial on impeachment can be had at all. 
He says when, as .in one State, the Constitution contains no express 
grant of power to the Senate to sit in the vacation of the Legisla* 
ture, such session cannot legally be held. By the provision above 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 129 

quoted, the Senate is prohibited from trying impeachments during 
the session of the Legislature ; and there is an entire absence of 
expressed authority to sit for that or any other purpose in vacation. 
The gentleman's authority proves too much. 

The facts upon which the second objection is predicated, appear 
in the printed copies of the proceedings heretofore had in these 
cases. The Senate in its official capacity — sitting as a Court of 
Impeachment, having, on the 28th day of February, ascertained that 
no further proceedings could then be had at that time in the cases 
pending before it, adjourned as a Court, until the first Monday of 
June. It is contended that this was done without the consent of the 
House, and therefore violated that provision contained in Sec. 10 of 
Article 2, of the Constitution that ^^ neither House, without the 
consent of the other, shall adjourn for more than two days, Sundays 
excepted." This provision clearly applies to tjie Houses only when 
they hold to each other the relation created by vesting the Legisla- 
tive power in them jointly — that is, when sitting as a Legislature.* The 
Constitution of the United States, in subdivision 4, of Sec. 5, of 
Article 1, contains a similar provision ; yet in the case of Judge 
Chase, cited by the gentlemen themselves, tried before the United 
States Senate, the Senate as a Court adjourned to the next session, 
while the Senate as a legislative body still continued in session. In 
tiiis case, the congressional annals fail to show any consent on the 
part of the House. So, upon reason and authority, I am satisfied 
to rest this branch of the case. But fortunately this objection 
seems to have been anticipated, and by a law, which has been read 
in your hearing, provided that the Senate should sit to try impeach- 
ments, when the House was not in session, and should adjourn from 
time to time. This law is somewhat rudely assailed as being unoon- 
stitutional in some of its parts ; and surely it cannot be contended 
that in the consent it gave that the Senate should adjourn for more 
than two days, it is not constitutional. It went into effect, it is true, 
afler the adjournment ] but I contend, that even then, it ratified 
and confirmed the act of the Senate. There is another consent, 
however, which the gentleman has failed to discover. On the 27th, 
or 28th of February, the Committee of Investigation, who had had 
in charge the matters pertaining to these impeachments, and were 
most conversant with the testimony, fearing that the Senate might 
force the managers into trial at once, in the absence of material 
testimony, introduced into the House a resolution, which was passed, 



180 PBO0SSDINO8 IN THX 

instruoting the managers to move in the Senate, that the trial of 
these impeachment cases should be postponed to the first Monday 
in June. Upon that resolution, the motion to adjourn was predi- 
cated. The Journals of the. House cannot be had : but I hare a 
right to refer to them as public records, and I am well aware, that 
in my recollection of this fact, I am borne out by members of this 
Court. Here then, is consent, if consent were needed. So that I 
claim there are two fatal defects in the second objection : First, 
consent is not necessary : Second, consent was given. 

My answer to the last objection, I have necessarily, almost 
entirely anticipated. The Senate and House, according to inrariable 
custom, by concurrent resolution, adjourned sine die, on the 6th day 
of March. By this act, the functions of the Legislature were 
suspended, so that they could not, by any act of the Legislature 
alone, be resumed. Taking the two acts of adjournment together, 
and following the rule, which prevaib in Courts, of attempting to 
arriveiat the intent of parties, and what was the evident intention 
here ? If , as I contend, the legislative Senate has a legal existence, 
separate from the judicial Senate, then these two adjournments are 
perfectly reconcilable. If there is not this separate existence ; but 
it is all the time, in every sense, in contemplation of law the same 
body, then I claim that the adjournment on the 28th of February, 
with the consent of the House, adjourned the Senate absolutely, to the 
first Monday of June. The gentleman must either admit the 
proposition of a separate, legal existence, for which I contend, or 
else the conclusion inevitably follows, that the adjournment of the 
28th of February, carried with it both Court and Senate. The 
oonsent of the House, I claim, I have shown beyond controversy. 

A single word, now, in reply to the outside talk in this case, and 
I have done. The gentleman brings here his solemn convictions 
that your proceedings will be a nullity. That, at the close of this 
trial, whether ** guilty" or " innocent," shall fell from your lips, 
they will be mere cold words. That he to-day, with his associates 
comes here, as he would pause at the mention of a friend's name in 
a crowd, at the comers of the streets, to see that no harm be done 
his reputation by the vile breath of some passing slanderer. He 
talks of quo warranto, and other remedies, which his client has for 
testing this thing. He threatens that your sentence will not be 
executed. 

My solemn convictions against his I 



nCPSAOHHXNI 0A8X8. 181 

IF ever man stood in mortal peril of all that wliicli honest men 
most love, in that position stands his client to-day. If you 
shall pronounce him guilty, it will be no mere stain upon his char- 
acter. But by your sentence the word will be branded deep and 
ineffacable in burning letters upon his name and his fame 
forever. 

Will he, as his counsel say, contend against your decree, should 
it be adverse to him ? I pity, while I scorn the head and heart of 
the man, who, for a few days in a paltry office, will face the Coorta 
of his country that he may, upon some technicality, defeat the 
righteous judgment of such an assembly as this. Yet if these 
charges be true — if he, indeed, be guilty — then let us not wonder 
at the lingering tenacity with which his figings grasp the vitals of 
the State ; and if you shall pronounce him free from guilt or guile 
in office, it will be the proudest earthly vindication that mortal 
xnan could have. If such shall be the issue, let him thank the 
Lord. 

(The argument was closed in behalf of the respondent by Gov- 
Shannon, who declined to furnish the reporter with a copy of his 
remarks.) 

On motion of Mr. Cobb, the Senate adjourned until to-morrow 
morning at 10 o'clock. 



FOURTH DAY. 
MOBNINa SESSION. 



Senate Ghambjer, 
Thursday, June 5th, 1862 



.} 



The Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court of 
Impeachment, met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the Chair. 

Boll called. 

Quorum present. 

Absentees: — Messrs. Denman,* Hoffman, Holliday, Lambdin, 
Lynde, Morrow, Sleeper and Stevens. 



132 PBOOSBBINOS IN THS 

Mr. Stevens moved to amend Section Eleven (11) of the Roles 
to be observed in cases of impeachment, by inserting the words 
" except when in secret session/' after the word " Senate/' 

Carried. 

On motion of Mr. Cobb, tbe Chamber was ordered to be cleared, the 
doors closed, and the Senate went into secret session. 

After some time spent therein, the doors were reopened, and the 
Senate resumed its usual order of business. 

Mr. Stevens offered the following resolution, and moved its 
adoption : 

JResolvedj That the Senate will hold two regular sessions daily ; 
that the hours of meeting will be at 9 o'clock A. M., and 2 o'clock 
P. M; that the hours of adjournment shall be at 12' M., and 
6 P.M. 

Mr. Denman moved to amend by inserting the hour '' 10 o'clock 
A. M.,'' instead of 9 A. M. 

Lost. 

The question recurring on the original resolution, it was 
adopted. 

On motion of Mr. Stevens, the Senate adjourned. 



BB, \ 

.M.J 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

SsNATE Chamber 
Thursday, June 6, 1862, 2 o'clock P 

Senate met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the Chair. 
Roll called. 

Quorum present. 

Absentees — Messrs. Hoffman. Holliday, Lynde, McDowell, and 
Morrow. 

Present : — ^Hon. S. A. Stinson, and the Board of Managers on 
the part of the House of Representatives. 



IBCPXAOHMSNT 0A8X8. 188 

John W. BobinBon appeared by N. P. Caae, Esq., one of the at- 
torneys for the respondent. 

Journal of yesterday read and approred. 

The question being on the motion of respondent's oounsel to 
dismiss the case against John W. Robinson, 

The ayes and noes were taken, with the following result : 

Those gentlemen voting No, were 

Messrs. Bamett, Bayless, Oobb, Connell, Curtis, Denman, Essicl, 
Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, 
HeDowell, Bankin, Bees, Boberts, Sleeper, Spriggs, and Mr. 
President. 

And so the motion was lost. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, the Senate took a reoess of thirty 
minutes. 

The time having expired, the Senate was called to order. 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President : — After very serious consideration 
of the subject, in consultation with our client, we have determined^ 
without acknowledging, in any way, the authority and legitimate 
organization of this body, to be here present and take such part in 
the proceedings as may be necessary for the protection of our 
elients. The acts of this body cannot possibly injure our client in 
a legal sense. We are disposed to see if this body will push this 
matter to the extreme. It was, perhaps, asking too much of them 
to demand that steps taken should be retraced. We shall remain 
and watch the proceedings. 

Attorney General : — On behalf of the Board of Managem, I am 
requested to ask, through the President, in what oapaoity the gen- 
tlemen appear in this Court ? 

The President. — ^The Attorney Qeneral will see, by reference to 
the rules, that defendants may appear, through counsel, in this Court. 

It is presumed that they so appear. 

> 

Mr. Stanton. — Certainly: we so appear. We could not be here 
in any other capamty. 

Attorney General. — My question was called forth by the remarks 
previously made by Got. Stanton. 



184 PB00XSDINO8 IN THB 

Hon. Azel Spaulding, one of the Board of Managers on the part 
of the House of Representatives, in opening the case of the im- 
peaohment of John W. Robinson, said: — 

Mr. President: It is with feelings of embarrassment that I find 
myself, in the absence of the Chairman, compelled to open this case 
in behalf of the prosecution ; a case of such general interest and 
inyolving such momentous issues. 

John W. Robinson, Secretary of State, by the* honorable House 
of Representatiyes, has been charged with high misdemeanors in 
office. Articles of Impeachment have been properly prepared by 
that body, and, through its Board of Managers, presented to the- 
Senate. This Court is convened for the discharge of these high 
and responsible duties, conferred upon it by the Constitution of the 
State ; and the House of Representatives, by its Board of Managers, 
is now called upon to sustain the allegations made in the Articles of 
Impeachment. As these articles constitute the foundation, of this 
ease, I will take the liberty of reading them to the Court. 

[Mr. Spaulding then read the Articles of Impeachment exhibited 
by the House of Representatives of the State of Kansas, in mainte- 
nance of their impeachment against John W. Robinson, Secretary 
of State, for high crimes and misdemeanors.] 

Such, Mr. President, are the Articles of Impeachment upon 
which the House of Representatives has rested its case, and for the 
prosecution of which their Board of Managers now appear before 
this Court. 

For the purpose of placing before the Court a complete statement 
of authority upon which we claim the right to impeach this party, 
I ask your attention to Art. 2d, Sees. 27-28 of the Constitution of 
this State, which read as follows : 

'* The House of Representatives shall have the sole power to 
impeach. All impeachments shall be tried by .the Senate, and, 
when sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall take an oath to do 
justice according to the law and the evidence. No person shall be 
oonvicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senators 
elected. 

** The Governor and all other officers under this Constitution, 
■hall be subject to impeachment for any misdemeanor in office ; but 
judgment, in such cases, shall not be extended further than to 
removal from office or disqualification to hold any office of profit, 
honor or trust under this Constitution; but the party, whether 



IMPSACHMSNT CASES. 186 

convicted or acquitted, shall be liable to indictment, trial Judgment 
and punishment, according to law/' 

The misdemeanor for which this defendant is called to answer, 
was caused bj a violation of the provisions of an act entitled *^An 
act to authorize the negotiation of one hundred and fifty thousand 
dollars of the bonds of the State of Kansas, to defray the current 
expenses of the State,'' approved May 1st, 1861. I will not occupy 
the time of the Court in reading this law, but briefly state its 
provisions, which are familiar to all. The act authorizes the issue 
of State bonds to the value of one hundred and fitly thousand 
dollars, and provides for the sale of them under conditions named 
therein. Messrs. Clark and Stone were authorized to negotiate 
these bonds. A supplementary act was passed, entitled "An act 
supplementary to " the one to which I have just alluded, which was 
approved June 8d, 1861. This act made it the duty of the Treas- 
urer to prepare one hundred thousand dollars of the bonds provided 
for in the first law. The Governor, Auditor and Secretary of State, 
were authorized, or a majority of them, to negotiate the sale of these 
bonds, providing, however, that they should not be sold for less than 
seventy cents on the dollar, 

1 would also call the attention of the Court to "An act to author- 
ise the ^tate of Kansas to borrow money to repel invasion, suppress 
insurrection, and to defend the State in time of war," approved May 
7th, 1861. This law authorizes the Treasurer to borrow twenty 
thousand dollars, by issuing bonds of three hundred dollars each, 
and beating interest at ten per cent per annum. 

It will be noticed, Mr. President, that the Articles of Impeach- 
ment embrace these different subjects, which are set forth as read 
to the Court. The prosecution expect to prove, substantially, each 
and every allegation we have presented. Before going into the 
argument and proof, I think it will be well to read the following, 
from Judge Story's comments on the United States Constitution, 
(page 553, chap, x.,) which is as follows : 

" The next inquiry is, what are impeachable offenses f They are 
'treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.' For 
the definition of treason, resort may be had to the Constitution 
itself; but for the definition of bribery, resort is naturally and 
necessarily had to the common law, for that, as the common basis 
of our jurisprudence, can alone furnish the proper exposition of the 
nature and limits-of this offense. 



186 PB00BBDIN08 IN THX 

" The only practical question is, what axe to be deemed high 
crimes and misdemeanors ? Now, neither the Constitution nor any 
statute of the United States has, in any manner, defined any crimes, 
except treason and bribery, to be high crimes and misdemeanors, 
and, as such, impeachable. In what manner, then, are they to be 
ascertained ? Is thie silence of the statute book to be deemed 
conclusive in favor of th& party, until Congress have made a 
legislative declaration and enumeration of the offenses, which shall 
be deemed high • crimes and misdemeanors ? If so, then — as has 
bieen truly remarked — the power of impeachment, except as to the 
two expressed cases, is a complete nullity ; and the party is wholly 
dispunishable, however enormous may be his corruption or crimi- 
nality. 

" It will not be- sufficient to say that in the case where any offense 
is punished by any statute of the United States, it may and ought 
to be deemed an impeachable offense. It is not every offense that, 
by the Constitution, is so impeachable. It must not only be an 
offense, but a high crime and misdemeanor. Besides, there are 
many most flagrant offenses which, by the statutes of the United 
States, are punishable only when committed in special places, and 
within peculiar jurisdictions, as, for instance, on the high seas or 
in forts, navy-yards and arsenals ceded to the United States. 

'^ Suppose the offense- is committed in some other than these privi- 
leged places, or under circumstances not reached by any Statute of 
the United States, wouki.it be impeachable ? 

"Again, there are many offenses purely political, which have been 
held to be within the reach of parliamentary impeachments, not one 
of which is in the slightest manner alluded to in our Statute Book. 
And, indeed, political offenses are of so various and complex a 
character — so utterly incapable of being defined, or classified, that 
the task of positive legislation would be impracticable, if it were 
not almost absurd to attempt it. What, for instance, could positive 
legislation do in cases of impeachment, like the charges against 
Warren Hastings, in 1788 ? Resort, then, muU be had either to 
parliamentary practice and the common law, in order to ascertain 
what are high crimes and misdemeanors ; or the whole subject must 
be lef^ to the arbitrary discretion of the Senate, for the time being.. 

" The latter is so incompatible with the genius of our institutions, 
ihat no lawyer or statesman, would be inclined to countenance so 
absolute a despotbm of opinion and practice, which might make 



IMPKAOHMENT 0A8S8. l37 

ihaf • -rime at one time, or in one person, which would be deemed 
inni it at another time, or in another person. The only safe guide 
in 8> : cases, must be the common law, which is the guardian at 
once f private rights, and public liberties. And however much 
it m fall in with political theories of certain statesmen and jurists, 
to d , the existence of a common law, belonging to, and applica- 
ble ' he nation, in ordinary cases, no one has as yet been bold 
enoi 1 to assert that the power of impeachment is limited to 
offei ^ positively defined in the Statute Book of the Union, as 
imp* liable high crimes and misdemeanors. 

■ 

'' " (le doctrine, indeed, would be truly alarming that the common 
law i not regulate, interpret and control the powers and duties df 
the iirt of Impeachment. What otherwise would become of the 
rule r evidence, the legal notions of crimes, and the application 
of } :ciples of public or municipal jurisprudence, to the charge 
agai ' the accused ? It would be a most extraordinary anomaly 
that > I lie every citisen of every State originally composing the 
Uni would be entitled to the common law as his birthright, and 
at his protector and guide ; as a citiien of the Union, or an 
offic'. •f the Union, he would be subjected to no law, to no prinoi- 
ples no rules of evidence. It is the boast of Bnglish jurispni- 
dent :ind without it, the power of impeachment would be an intoK 
•oral; grievance, that in trials by impeachment, the law differs not 
in e itials from criminal prosecutions before inferior courts. The 
«amt lies of evidence, the same legal notions of crimes and punish- 
men prevail. For impeachments are not framed to alter the law, 
but carry it into more effectual execution, where it might be 
obst led by the influence of too powerful delinquents, or not 
«asi -.Iscerned in the ordinary course of jurisprudence, by reason 
of t [peculiar quality of the alleged crimes. % Those who believe 
that a common law, so far as it is applicable, constitutes a part gf 
the of the United States in their sovereign character as a nation, 
not I source of jurisdiction, but as a guide and check, and expos- 
itor the administration oi the rights, duties and jurisdiction 
ooni . id by the Constitution and laws, will find no difficulty in 
«ffir: g the same doctrines to be applicable to the Senate, as a 
Gou t* Impeachment. Those who denounce the common law as 
havl any application or existence in regard to the national gov- 
emi . c, must be necessarily driven to maintain that the power of 
impc tment is, until Congress shall legislate, a mere nullity, or that 



188 FBOOSEDINOB IN THB 

t 

it ifl despotic, both in its secrets and in its proceedings. It is re- 
markable that the first Congress, assembled in October, 1771, in 

their famous deokration of the rights of the Colonies, asserted that 
the respective Colonies are entitled to the common law of England ; 
and that they are entitled to the benefit of such of the English 
Statutes, as existed at the time of their colonization, and which they 
have by experience respectiyely found to be applicable to their 
several local and other circumstances. It would be singular enough, 
if in their framing a national government, the common law so justly 
dear to the Colonies as their guide and protection, should cease to 
have an existence as applicable to the powers, rights and privileges 
of the people, or the obligations and duties, and powers of the 
departments of the national government. K the common law has 
no existence as to the Union as a rule or guide, the whole proceed- 
ings are completely at the arbitrary pleasure of the government and 
its functionaries, in all its departments. 

'* Congress has unhesitatingly adopted the conclusion, that no 
previous Statute is necessary to authorise an impeachment, for any 
official misconduct ; and the rules of evidence, as well as the prin- 
ciples of decision, have been uniformly regulated by the known 
doctrines of the common law, and parliamentary usage. In the few 
eases of impeachments which have hitherto been tried, no one of 
the charges has rested upon any statuatable misdemeanors. It 
0eems then, to be the settled doctrine of the high Court of Impeach- 
ment, that though the common law cannot be a foundation of a 
jurisdiction not given by the Constitution or laws, that jurisdiction 
when given, attaches, and is to be exercised according to the rules 
of the common law ; and that what are, and what are not high 
erimes and misdemeanors, is to be ascertained by a recurrence to 
ihat great basis of American jurisprudence. The reasoning by 
which the power of the House of Representatives, to punish for 
contempt, (which are breaches of privileges and ofienses not defined 
by any positive laws) has been upheld by the Supreme Court, 
stands upon similar grounds ; for if the house had no jurisdictioa 
to punish for contempts until the acts had been previously defined 
and ascertained by positive law, it is clear that the process of arrest 
would be illegal. 

<* In examining the parliamentary history of impeachments, it will 
be fbund that many offenses, not easily defined by law, and many 
of a purely political character, have been deemed high crimes and 



IMPXACHM&RT CASEff. 189^ 

uisdemeanoTB worthy of this extraordinary remedy, ^hus Lord 
Glianoellors and Judges, and other Magistrates, have not only been im- 
peached for bribery, and acting grossly contrary to the duties of their 
<Ace8, but for misleading their Sovereign by unconstitutional opinions, 
and for attempt to subvert the fundamental laws and introduce arbitrary 
power. So, where a Lord Chancellor has been thought to have put 
the great seal to an ignominious treaty ; a Lord Admiral to have- 
neglected the safeguards of the sea ; an Ambassador to have be- 
trayed his trust ; a Privy CounseHor to have propounded or sup- 
ported pernicious and dishonorable means, or a confidential adviser 
of his Sovereign to have obtained exorbitant grants or incompatible 
employments — ^these have been all deemed impeachable offenses. 

*^Sofne of the offenses, indeed, for which persons wore impeached' 
in the early ages of British jurisprudence until now^ seem harsh 
and severe ; but, perhaps, they were rendered necessary by existing 
eorruptions, and the importance of suppressing a spirit of favorite- 
ism and Court intrigue. Thus, persons have been impeached for 
giving bad counsel to the King; advising a prejudicial peace;, 
enticing the King to act against the advice of parliament ; pur- 
ehasing office ; giving medicine to the King without the advice of 
physicians ; perventing other persons from giving counsel to the 
King, except in their presence, and procuring exorbitant personal 
gmnia from the King. But others, again, were founded in the 
most salutary public justice — such as impeachments for malversatioir 
and neglect in office ; encouraging pirates ; for official oppression, 
extortions and deceits ; and especially, for putting good magistrates 
out of office and advancing bad. One cannot but be struck in this 
alight commiseration with the utter unfitness of the common tribur 
nals of justice, to take cognizance of such offenses, and with entire 
propriety of confiding the jurisdiction over them to a tribunal 
eapable of understanding and reforming and scrutinizing the politv 
of the State, and of sufficient dignity to maintain the independence 
and reputation of worthy public officers.'' 

For the purpose of having before us the leading landmarks which 
will govern this case, I have been induced to step a^ide, perhaps, 
from established practice in opening, and read these comments of 
America's greatest and most profound jurist 

In relation to the first article of impeachment, we expect to pro- 
duce evidence to cover not only that, but every other count charged 
in the several articles. It will be admitted by every officer and 



140 >ROCSEDINOS IN TBI 

citizen that at the time of the passage of the act alluded to, that 
the treasury of the State needed replenishing. This defendant^ 
John W. Robinson, with the Auditor and QoTernor, were duly 
appointed by the State its agents to negotiate the sale of her bonds 
to the amount of $100,000. We expect to prove that they accepted 
this trust, and that in it they were limited by the law. We shall 
pro>ye that these officers held a meeting in relation to the negotia^ 
tion of these bonds, at which the Goyernor gave to Mr. Hillyer 
^Auditor) and the defendant, authority to act for him. Whether 
this was verbal or written, the evidence will, in the course of the 
investigation, disclose. Mr. Hillyer and thb defendant, constitu- 
ting a majority of the board, went to Washington, and there met 
Mr. Robert S. Stevens, and without attemptiiig to perform the 
idnties devolving upon themselves in Begotiatiag the bonds, they 
lihen appointed Kr. Stevens agent ei the State. This act was in 
violation of law, they being only the agetkta of the State, without 
power to delegate (hat authority. Thdfr act we regard as indicative • 
of some collusion in the matter. We shall peeve that prior to the^ 
appointment of Mr. Stevens by them, they ascertained that the - 
bonds could be sold for eighty-five cents on the dollar, and. that: 
after being in possession of thb knowledge^ they agreed wit.h Mt. . 
Stevens to allow him all over sixty cents o» tW dollar that he; might 
receive. This, also, was in violatibaof lew,, and a perpetration of* 
a great fraad upon the State. In proving tkese facts we expeet^toi 
eatisfy this Court that this defendant, with Gorenkor Robinson,,]!^. 
Hillyer, Auditor, and Mr. Stevens entered ieto a conspivacy,. iniUU 
fully and knowingly, to defraud the State. We also expect toshow 
that the defendant and the Aud^r w»e eogniaant of all the »tepa 
taken in the sale of the bond» by their agent, falsely assuaed by 
them to be the agent of the State. Showing this o<on8pinMy, we 
riuyil ask this Court to hold the defendant responsible for eoeh and 
every act of Stevens, touching the negotiation and sale of these State 
jMiids. 

The presentation of this evidence will show that the consent o^ 
the Senators and Representatives in Congress had te be obtidn^id 
hefore the sale could be completed. In obtaining thaa, the defen-^ 
dant, sometimes with Mr. Stevens and sometimte without, held 
interviews with them, in order to obtain their eoeeent. Wa shall 
prove that Senator Pomero/s consent could be obtained onjy with 
great difficulty, which was also the case witt Qen. Lane^ It will 



IHPKACHHENT CASES. 



ui 



be a question for considerationf through the evidence, whether Gen. 
Lane's signature was ever obtained. It will be shown that Lane 
refused to move if Stevens had anything to do with it. It will be 
shown that that signature was only obtained, if obtained at all, by a 
bribe of $1000, given by Stevens to one Reynolds. If we prove 
this fact, as we expect, we shall claim its weight in proving the 
existence of this conspiracy, and that this defendant was guilty of 
corruption. The stake at isstte must be large which would induce 
the giving of such a bribe to the Private Secretarg oj one of our 
Senators 

In presenting testimony upon the second and other articles of 
impeachment, we shall prove that John W. Robinson, the defen-- 
dant. did, as Secretary of State, commit a misdemeanor in the will-^* 
ful neglect of his duty relating to the issue of the War Bonds/- 
The State authorized the issue of bonds to the amount of 920,000 
for wax purposes. It is familiar to you all, that these bonds were 
confidently expected to sell at par. They were issued under such 
an impression, and the amount was thus limited. The defendant 
did suffer the issuing of $40,000 of these bonds, whereby the State' 
suffered a loss, and was defrauded. We expect to prove that in 
consequence of these acts by the defendant, $31,000 of these bonds 
were put in circulation, sold at a discount, and at a loss to the State 
of near $10,000. It may be said that this defendant did not control 
this issue, and that these bonds were not in his possession. This 
plea, we think, will fail to shield him, as it was his duty to countersign 
them, and he must have been fully aware of the amounts issued.- 
In proving this we shall charge the defendant with misdemeanor. 

We expect to show that the defendant knowingly audited a 
printing bill, presented by one J. F. Gummings, who claimed to 
have published the Banking Law, passed by the State Legislature 
of 1861, in a newspaper of this State, which we will prove never 
had existence. The amount of the bill was $344, and was unlaw- 
ftilly taken from the State Treasury, through the agency of the 
defendant. For this act we charge the defendant to have been 
guilty of a misdemeanor. All these articles and allegations we 
expect to prove by ample evidence. 

In appearing to answer these charges the defendant enters a plea 
of '^ Not Guilty." The House of Representatives, through its 
Board of Managers, in behalf of all the people of the State of 
Kansas, assume the affirmative, and are here in Court to proceed 



142 PBOOEEDINOS IN THE 

with the trial. If one half of the eridence alluded to shall be 
forthcoming, we feel confident that you will be warranted in pro- 
nouncing a conviction. If the defendant can establish his inno- 
cence, his country will rejoice. If conviction justly follow, the 
State will, by this tribunal, be relieved of an unworthy officer, and 
the Board of Managers will feel that they have properly discharged 
those responsible duties conferred upon them by the Hod. House of 
Bepresentatives. T 

With these remarks, Mr. President, I submit the case to the ad' 
judication of a body of officers, in whom we all have confidenoe, 
and whose duties are plainly written in our organic law. 

Hon. W. E. Wagstaff, on the part of the Board of Managers, rose 
to read the depositions. 

Hon. Wilson Shannon, for the defense, said : 

Mr. President : The prosecution presents here a number of 
depositions taken in Washington as evidence in this case. Nothing 
appears on the face of them to show that these witnesses were sworn 
in the case of John W. Eobinson. 

Gov. Shannon read the certificate of the Notary Public attached 
to it, and proceeded. 

May it please the Court : This certificate cannot be considered 
sufficient. It is true these witnesses were sworn ^^ the truth, the 
whole truth," but they were not sworn to do so in the case of the 
*^ State of Kansas, vs. John W. Robinson." I think this objection 
is fatal to their validity. The title should, but does not, appear 
anywhere on these documents. Counsel for the defense do not 
press the objection, but desire to call the attention to the subject. 

Mr. Cobb. — Does the title of this case appear nowhere but in th^ 
notices served on witnesses ? 

Gov. Shannon. — ^No sir. 

Attorney General, — May it please the Court : Counsel raise 
this objection now. It should have been done before the depositions 
were admitted for reading. This will be seen by reference to 
Section 395 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the State of 
Kansas. 

• 

Gov. Shannon. — ^We do not raise any objection, though not 
considering that the rule mentioned covers this case. 



IMPMAOHHENT 0ASX8. 148 

Hon. W. R. Wagstaff proceeded to read the depoeitions. 

DEPOSITION OF GEN. LANE. 

April 29, 1862. 
Hon. J. H. Lane, of lawful age, being by me duly sworn, cau- 
tioned and examined, depoeeth and saith as follows : 

First Interrogatory. — ^What is yonr name, age, occupation, and 
your place of residence J 

Answer. — ^My name is James H. Lane, residence at Lawrence, in 
the State of Kansas, lawyer by profession, and now a representative 
from the State of Kansas in the Senate of the United States, and in 
the 43d year of my age. 

Second Interrogatory. — ^Will you state, if you please, what you 
know in relation to the sale of Kansas State bonds to the Depart- 
ment of the Interior ? 

Answer. — I arrived at Washington on the first day of the present 
session of Congress. Soon after my arrival, Oeo. S. Hillyer, Auditor, 
and J. W. Robinson, Secretary of State, called on me and informed 
me that they had arranged with the Secretary of the Interior for 
the sale of Kansas State bonds; that the matter was then before the 
President and desired me to wait upon the President and make an 
appeal to him in favor of the sale. They informed me, amOng other 
things, that unless the sale was made, the State Government must 
slop ; that they could not purchase stationery or pay the members 
of the Legislature. Pursuant to the then request, I did wait upon 
the President and urged the purchase as indispensable to the running 
of the State Government. 

Third Interrogatory. — Prior to the sale of the bonds on the 20th 
of December, 1861, had you any conversation with the Secretary of 
the Interior upon the subject, and did you know the price he was 
willing to pay for the bonds ? 

Answer. — ^I had several interviews with the Secretary of the 
Interior on the subject, before and afler the requisitions for the 
money were issued. My friends from Kansas outside, were earnest 
in their efforts to convince me that the sale should not be made, and 
if made, the money would be divided and the State defrauded, 
urging, among other things, that Bob Stevens and Gov. Charles 
Robinson would have the controlling of the money. Acting on my 
fears, excited by them, I f^quently conversed with Hillyer and J. 



f 



144 PBOOIBDINQB IN THB 

W. Robinson on the subject of Stevens and Charles Bob ^n'o 

connection with the transaction. They as frequently assure me, 

in the most emphatic manner, that neither Stevens or C. Ro isoD 

had anything to do with the matter, directly or indirectly, 3ept 

in this, that in one conversation Hillyer said that perhap lere 

wafl a small sum due Gov. Robinson on his salary, which he uM 

draw out, as other creditors, on a warrant in his favor. hile 

this was going on, I sought the Secretary of the Interio xoi 

expressed my fears that the money would be diverted. I su*: ted 

to him that the bulk of the money should be deposited w . my 

colleague. Gen. Pomeroy, or left with him to be drawn out the 

order of the Legislature, except five hundred dollars, which i yer 

and J. W. Robinson said was necessary to fit up the rooms < the 

Legislature, and for purchasing stationery. I never heard, fi the 

Department of the Interior, or from any other source, ui my 
arrival in Toj^eka, in Kansas, the real price for which the - nda 

were sold. Hillyer and John W. Robinso;i informed me in ish- 

ington, that they could get or had got two cents over the mii. lum 

price fixed by law, which would be seventy-two cents. Alt the 

issue of the requisition, I saw the Secretary of the Inter!' and 

urged upon him to suspend the payment of the money. I a' aaw 

the President and urged him to suspend the payment of the ' nej 
until the Legislature had met and taken action on the subject 

Fourth Interrogatory. — ^Did you know, at that Ume, thi> any 
arrangement was made by which R. S. Stevens, or any othe^ ' :rty 
representing Uie State, would sell these bonds for eighty-fiv< ^nts 
on the dollar, and only account to the State for sixty cents < v the 
dollar ? 

Answer. — I have before stated that I did not know, unt< ' fter 
my arrival at Topeka, in Kansas, the price the Interior Depai ent 
paid for the bonds. Hillyer and J. W. Robinson, as I have ' ore 
stated, assured me at divers times during the negotiations, an*^ :\er 
the requisitions were issued, that Stevens and Charles Robinsi'i liad 
no connection with the transaction ; they pledged me in tl^ . lost 
solemn manner, that neither Stevens or Charles Robinson i-l old 
see the money, touch the money, or know where it was kept. '1 lese 
pledges were made at a suggestion from me that althou^i- the 
Auditor and Treasurer were ever so honest, these rogues \\ uld 
manage to steal the money. Hillyer, among other things, pr< n sed 
to carry the money to Kansas himself, and keep it until the i gis* 



IMPEACHMENT GASES. 145 

lature met. It was distinctly understood that the State was to 
receive every cent of the proceeds of the sale of the bonds to the 
Interior Department. On one occasion, I asked Hillyer how he was 
to be paid his expenses in effecting the negotiation ; he told me he 
Lad to depend upon the Legislature for that. I told him, in that 
conversation, that if I was in Topeka, at the time, I wo^d help him 
to get a liberal appropriation. 

Fifth Interrogatory. — ^Will you state the circumatanoes under 
which you, with Senator Pomeroy and Representative Conway, 
signed the communication to the President of the United States, 
dated December 16th, 1861, in which R. S. Stevens was stated » 
the agent of the State for the sale of these bonds, and in which you 
urged their purchase by the Government ? (See official copy of 
letter attached to deposition of R. G. Corwin, marked A, and which 
is recognized as an authenticated paper.) 

Answer. — ^I state, that until my return to Kansas, I never heard 
R. S. Stevens' name mentioned as agent for the sale of the bonds ; 
that if I had known that he or Charles Robinson had anything to 
do with the sale, or the proceeds of the bonds, or had any connec- 
tion with it, I would have opposed the sale with all the energies of 
my nature ; at the time the sale was going on, I expected to be a 
candidate for re-election to the Senate before the Legislature, and 
knew that if they had any contract of the money, it would be used 
against me in the election. I signed a paper under the following 
circumstances : Shortly after my arrival, George Reynolds presen- 
ted a paper for my signature. I retained it sometime, and, without 
examining it, returned it to him without signing it, and declining 
to do so. Some days after, George S. Hillyer, John W. Robinson, 
and Bob Stevens in the rear, came to my room in the Avenue House. 
Stevens with them caused my anc^er. I told them to go away ; that 
I would have nothing to do with their negotiations, unless they 
would come without the company of that damned thief, Bob Stevens. 
They went away and came back the same or the next day, with a 
paper which they said was directed to the President, requesting him 
to let them have the money ; that they had got the signature of Mr. 
Pomeroy and Mr. Conway, and all it wanted was my signature, as 
the President and Secretary, or both, wanted the signatures of the 
entire delegation, before they would give the money. Since my 
return to Washington, I have examined the paper referred to, as on 
file in the Indian office ; my name appears upon it as between Gen. 



146 PftOGEEDINOS IN THE 

Pomeroy and Mr. Conway. It b a good imitation of my signature, 
yet I do not believe that I ever affixed my signature to that paper, 
as it stands. Either R. S. Steyens' name has been added to the 
paper since the signature, or my signature has been added or pkoed 
there by some one else, to the best of my belief, and my reasons for 
this opinion are these : It is scarcely possible that, after drinng 
Hillyer and Robinson from me, because Stevens was in their 
eompany, they would have the audacity to present me, in so short a 
time, with a paper with his name in it. My signature appears on the 
paper between Pomeroy's and Conway's, as if I had signed it before 
Conway. When they brought the paper they told me that Pomeroy 
and Conway had signed it, and that if the negotiation fiidled, the 
responsibility would rest on me alone, my signature being indispen- 
sable to the negotiation. I am confident that Pomeroy and Conway's 
signature were on the paper when I signed it. I have conversed 
with Mr. Conway since I have arrived here on the subject. He is 
confident that Mr. Pomeroy's and my signature werg on the paper 
when he signed it. If this be true, my name is a forgery. 
To arrive at the conclusion that the paper ' is genuine, you must 
oonclnde that Hillyer and Robinson presented to me a paper for my 
signature, which they well knew I would not sign, if I read it, and 
that I did sign it without reading, for, under no circumstances, 
would I have consented to the negotiation if I had known that 
Stevens or Charles Robinson had anything to do with it. I believe 
them to be in partnership, and have no confidence in their integrity. 
(Here counsel for defendant objects to this answer, in so far as it is 
based on hearsay and belief, and further because it is not responsive 
to the question.) My cdgnature could not have been ^obtained to 
any paper forwarding these negotiations, if I had not been assured 
by Hillyer and Robinson first, that every dollar of the money, except 
$5,000 which was to be used for purchasing stati<»iery and fixing 
the legislative rooms, was to be placed under the control of the 
Legislature then about to meet, and that Stevens and Charles 
Robinson had nothing to do with it. 

Sixth Interrogatory. — ^Were you ever in the habil^of signing your 
uamfs to papers presented to you without examining their contents ? 
Answer. — At the time this negotiation was going on, I had my 
senatorial duties to discharge, my contest with Mr. Stanton to attend 
to, together with superintending an expedition to the Southwest. 
It is barely possible that I may have signed that paper without 



IMPXACHMBMT OA018. 147 

reading H. I ireqiientlj sign papers, whenproaented by penons ia 
:irliam I liaiw confidence, and when dieir contents were stated, 
without reading. 

Seyentli Xnterrogatory. — ^Was your attention called to this partic- 
ular letter befove your departure from Washington ? 

Answer. — ^I think not. I never heard of the robbery until I 
reached Kansas. 

Eighth Interrogatory. — ^Would you have objected to Mr. Stevens 
acting as agent for the State, if you were si^isfied that he would 
exercise ^no (control over the money ? 

Answer. — ^I would. 

Ninth Interrogatory.*— Will you state what representations G. 
W. Keynolds made, at the time he handed the paper for signature t 

Answer i — ^I think 4ie said it was a recommendation for the sale of. 
State bonds. 

Tenth Interrogatory. — Did he intimate to you, or did you know 
at that time, that he had been offered, by R. S. Stevens, or any 
other person, one thousand dollars, or any other named consideration, 
for obtaining your signature to that paper, or do you now know that 
any such consideration was ever offered ? 

Answer. — I never heard of such a thing until my arrival at 
Topeka. Had such a representation been made to me by Reynolds 
or any other man, I would have spurned him from my presence as 
unworthy of my friendship. 

Eleventh Interrogatory. — ^What were the circumstances inducing 
you to send the following communication to the Secretary of the 
Interior, dated the 19th day of December, 1861 ? [Official copy 
marked 18 and attached hereto ; exhibit No. 1.} 

Answer. — My friends here were insisting strenuously that Stevens 
and Robinson would get hold of the money and defraud the State, 
and use the money against me in the Senatorial election, which we 
then thought would come off. To defeat this, the first plan was to 
have the money deposited in the hands of my colleague. General 
Pomerpy, except the five thousand dollars, before spoken of, to buy 
Mationery, to be drawn out by direction of the Legislature when it 
should meet. I subsequently arranged with Mr. Snuth, the Secre- 
tary of the Interior, to retain it in his own hands, and pay it out in 
installments aftar tbe Legislature had met. On tiia 18th day of 



148 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

December, I was confirmed as Brigadier General, and expected to 
leave for Kansas immediately. The paper spoken of was dated on 
the 19th day of December, 1861, and filed (with the expectation of 
my having to leave Washington immediately) for the purpose of 
sending the money to Kansas by some . safe hand, to be selected by 
Hessrs. Pomeroy and Conway, giving theu), so .far as I could, the 
sole direction of the money. 

Twelfth Interrogatory. — Did yon know that the act of the Kansas 
liCgislature, authorizing the issue of these seven per cent, bonds, 
limited the price for which they were to be sold, to seventy cents on 
the dollar, and that there was no authority rested on the said officers 
to sell them at a less rate ? 

Answer. — ^I knew nothing about it, except what I heard from 
Hillyer and Robinson. In one conversation, they said they could 
^fi\l the bonds for two cents over the minimnm price fixed by law, 
which I understood from them was seventy cents. 

Thirteenth Interrogatory. — ^Did you know anything about the 
issue of thirty-four thousand dollars, with ten per cent, war debt 
bonds, by the State officers, when the law authorized the issue of 
but twenty thousand dollars of such bonds ? 

Answer. — In the Spring of 1861, 1 went from here to Topeka, 
through Leavenworth, with verbal orders from the War Department 
to raise two regiments for an expedition to go into the Indian 
country. The Legislature was then in session in Topeka. I saw 
Gov. Robinson and others, and it was determined to issue $20,000 
of bonds to aid in organizing the two regiments. I had a bill drawn 
up for that purpose, and, as an inducement for its passage, said U> 
the members and others that the bonds could be used at Leaven«> 
worth at their par value, and my understanding was that the bill 
passed in view of that fact. 

Fourteenth Interrogatory— -Do you know whether any offer was 
made to the State officers to purchase these bonds, or any part of 
them, at their par value ? 

Answer. — I only know it from heresay. Gentlemen joined with 
me in saying that the bonds could be used at Leavenworth at par, 
the time the bill was passing ; that subsistence, and what was needed 
for the troops, could be purchased with them. 

Fifteenth Interrogatory. — Please state the nature of the conver* 
lation you had with Senator Pometoy, prior to your leaving 



IMPEAOHMBNT OASES. 149 

Washington, as to his taking charge of the fund realised from the 
sale of the bonds. 

Answer. — He consented to the plan, and was willing to take charge 
of the money. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY THE DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL. 

First Interrogatory. — In your answer to third interrogatory abore, 
you speak of certain outside friends of yours, who advised you to 
oppose the negotiation for selling the bonds. Please state who 
those persons were, and name those you reoolleot. 

Answer. — ^Gen. Stone, I. J. Weed, John G, Vaughn, Champion 
Vaughn, and others, whom I do riot now recollect. They advised 
me to oppose it, on the ground that they feared the State would be 
defrauded. 

Second Interrogatory. — ^Pid you protest against the pa/ment of 
the money to B. S. Stevens, both before and after the negotiation 
had been completed ? 

Answer. — The friends of whom I speak, as well as myself, feared 
that Stevens and Bobinson would get hold of the money in some way 
from the Auditor and Treasurer. While opposing the money going ' 
in any way they could get hold of it, I was willing it should be 
realized and held here until the Legislature could get hold of it. I 
never knew that there was any attempt being made to pay the 
money directly to them. I went to the Secretary and President 
«nd requested them to suspend the payment of the money on the 
requisitions. I think I could and I certainly would prevent the 
payment of the money if I had thought that Stevens had anything 
tp do with it. During all this time, almost daily, Hillyer and J. W. 
Bobinson were pledging me that Stevens and Charles Bobinson had 
nothing to do with it. 

Third Interrogatory. — ^You say you feared that Stevens would get 
the money in some way. How do you suppose he would get it after 
it went into the State Treasury ? 

Answer. — Stevens had a bank in Lawrence. I knew Ohsries 
Bobinson was Governor, and his partner, Dutton, the Treasurer, was 
indebted to Bobinson for his office. I knew their influence over 
Dutton, their cunning and dishonesty, and feared that they would 
get hold of the money by improper means and influence. They 
would induce Dutton to deposit the money in their bank, or persuade 
him to loan it to them, and expressed these fears to Hillyer, and 



150 PB00BXDIN08 IN THX 

•oUoiied from hun a pledge that thej Bhoald not know lAere die- 
money was kept, if it wu obtained. 

Fourth Interrogatory. — ^When you went to Kansas last January, 
did you oonyerse with George Reynolds on the subject of the offer 
made him by B. S. Stevens, for the purpose of getting your names 
to the paper^ whi<th purports to be signed by 6en. Pomeroy, your- 
self and Mr. Conway f 

Answer.— I danot remember that I ever did. I saw his testimony 
given before the committee while there. 

Fifth Interrogatory. — ^Was George Reynolds a member of the 
Legislature of Kansas ? and had he been elected prior to the com* 
mencement of the present session of Congress ? 
Answer. — ^He was, and was elected in October or November. 

J. H. LANE. 
Sworn to before me, 

N. Callan, Notary Public. 



DEPOSITION OF ROBERT G. CORWIN. 

Robert G% Corwin, of Dayton, Ohio, an attorney at law, of lawful 
agei being by me first duly examined, cautioned and solemnly sworn, 
depeseth and saith : 

First Interrogatory. — ^Were you employed by J. W. Robinson^ 
Secretary of State, or George Hillyer, Auditor of the State of 
Kansas, to negotiate the sale of certain State bonds belonging to the 
State of Kansas, to the Interior Department, or ever approached by 
them in relation to stch sale, and if so, when ? 

Answer. — I was not employed by them. I was employed by R. 
S. Stevens. I had frequent interviewe with J. W. Robinson 
and Qeerge Hillyer, but do not reooUeet to ever have seen them 
before. 

Second Interrogatory. — At what time did you first see theae 
parties? 

Answer. — I cannot state with certainty at what time I first saw 
them. It was about the first of December, 1861. It was after Mr. 
Stevens arrived in this city. I was employed by him, and he 



IMPBAOHMENT CASES. 151 

introduced me to them, the said J. W. Robinson and George S. 
Hillyer. 

Third Interrogatory. — ^Were you employed by B. 8. Stevens to 
sell these bonds, and did he represent to yon that he was the agent 
of that State, with authority to sell them, or did he represent to you, 
or did you know that he was the owner of these bonds ? 

Answer. — I was employed by him to sell the bonds. He repre* 
MUted to me that the State owned eighty-seven thousand dollars of 
the one hundred and fifty thousand, issued by the State of Kansas, 
and that he was here to sell them. I advised that the whole one 
hundred and fifty thousand dollars should be procured and sell them 
to the Government. He told me that he owned a part of the 
balance of the bonds, and he thought he could get the rest, and he 
proposed the whole to the Government, and did so sell it. 

Fourth Interrogatory. — ^Did you make the same declaration, at 
any time, to J. W. Robinson or George S. Hillyer ? 
Answer. — Yes, I did. 

Fifth Interrogatory. — ^Did you know when and through whom 
his authority as agent was derived ? 

Answer-^He showed me a power of attorney, purporting to be^ 
executed by the Governor, Auditor and Secretary of the State of 
KansM ; also a copy of the law which made them commissioners to 
sell the bonds. 

Sixth Interrogatory.— Do you know anything of the sale of. 
these bonds to B. S. Stevens. 

Answer. — ^I know but little about the arrangements between the 
officers of the State and Mr. Stevens. I don't know that he bought 
them or not. I represented him to the Government as the agent of 
the State for the sale of the bonds, and I suppose he was acting in 
that capacity, so far as the eighty-seven thousand of the bonds were 
concerned. 

Seventh Interrogatory. — ^Were you approached* by any other' 
parties from the State of Kansas in relation to the sale of these 
bonds f If so, please note the fkcts. 

Answer. — ^I had frequent conversation with the delegation here 
in the Senate from Kansas, Messrs. Lane and Pomeroy, and I do 
not now remember any other person from Kansas approaching me 
or saying anything on the subject. I consulted with Gen, Pomeroy 



152 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

in companj with Mr. Stevens, before the arrival of Gen. Lane. I 
think Mr. J. W. Robinfion and George S. Hilljer, accompanied 
Stevens and myself to Gen. Pomeroy's room. Gen. Pomeroy, 
Stevens and myself, retired to a private room to consult on the 
subject of the sale of the bonds, leaving the State officers in the 
room with Mrs. Pomeroy. 

Eighth Interrogatory. — What representations in relation to the 
sale of those bonds did you make to J. W. Robinson or Geo. S. 
Hillyer prior to the sale to the Department on the 20th of December, 

1861 ? ^ 

Answer. — Messrs. Robinson and Ilillycr were frequently present 
at our interviews in relation to the sale of the bonds, but I don't 
remember what representations were made in their presence. I 
conversed freely when they were present, as when they were not, 
and I suppoiCed they knew how the business progressed from the 
beginning to the end. 

Ninth Interrogatory. — ^Were they cognizant of the arrangement 
between R. S. Stevens and yourself? 

Answer. — ^They knew that Mr. Stevens had employed me to 
amst in the sale of the bonds. They were not advised by me of 
the terms of the arrangement between Mr. Stevens any myself. 

Eleventh Interrogatory. — Did J. "W. Robinson or Geo. S. Hillyer 
make any proposition to you as to compensation for the sale of the 
Bonds ? 

Answer. — They never did. 

Twelfth Interrogatory. — Do you know anything of the with- 
drawal of the coupons from these bonds prior to their sale to the 
Department on the 20th December, 1861. Such coupons being for 
the semi-annual interest due January 1, 1862 ? 

Answer. — ^The bonds were not delivered to the Government until 
a few days before the coupons were due. Only a part of the money 
was then to be paid. It was therefore agreed that the coupons 
ahould be taken off, and the interest account stated and settled when 
the balance of the money would be paid. 

Thirteenth Interrogatory. — ^Did J. W. Robinson and George S. 
Hillyer know these facts, and consent to the arrangements f 

Answer. — ^I don't know that they did. The arrangement was 
made between the Secretary of the Interior and myself. I advised 
Mr. Stevens of it, and he took the coupons off the bonds. I have 



IMPEACHMENT GASES. 153 

no rec llection of having said anything to any one else on the 
subjec ; . 

Fob . teenth Interrogatory. — Did you believe that these coupons 
belong od to the State of Kansas ? 

An»' wer. — I supposed that Mr. Stevens was acting for the State 
of Ka >.sas, and if so the coupons belonged to the State. If he was 
the 0^ ner of the bonds, then the coupons belonged to him. 

Fifit- cnth Interrogatory. — Did J. W. Eobinson or Gt. S. Hillyer,- 
show : ty thing as to the price for which these bonds were to be sold ; 
or wv ihe subject ever referred to in your several interviews with, 
them ': 

An^ ^ver. — I have no recollection of the subject ever being dis- 
cussed when they were present, and I do not know whether they 
«ver k'lcw the price or not. 

Sixt.^enth Interrogatory. — ^What interest, if any, did you suppose 
J. W. ilobinson, Secretary of State, and George S. Hilly er, 4.uditor 
of the State of Kansas, held in these bonds ? 

Answer. — ^They were here as the financial officers of the State, 
and uiiul the matter was brought before the Kansas Legislature, I 
had s > idea that they had any personal interest in it. I knew 
aothin ^ on the subject except what was published in the news. 
papers in connection with the investigation before the Kansas Ijegis- 
lature. 

Seventeenth Interrogatory. — At what price did you tell R. S. 
Stevers the bonds could be sold, and at what time during the 
negotiations ? 

An8«¥cr. — The price was not agreed upon until a short time before 
the trr inaction was closed up. I then told him I could get eighty. 
five ce . ..^ on the dollar, and he told me to take it. 

Eigu teenth Interrogatory .-^-Do you know anything about the 
ante-duting the authority conferred by C. Robinson, Governor, J. 
W. Robinson, Secretary of State, or G. S. Hillyer, Auditor, on R. 
8. Stevens, appointing him the agent of the State of Kansas, to sell 
these bonds, which authority was dated October 25th, 1861, yet 
executed in WaAington in December, 1861, by J. W, Robinaon 
andG. S. HUlyer? 

Answer. — I do not. 

CROSS INTERROGATIONS BY DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL. 

First. — ^De jom know whether Gen. James H. Lane, Senator from 



164 PROGSSBINGB IN THE 

Kansas, advised or approved the arrangement for the sale of the 
bonds? 

Answer. — ^I believe he did. 

Second Cross-Interrogation. — ^Did you at any time converse with 
him on the subjeot, and did he know that R. S. Stevens was agent 
for negotiating the bonds f 

Answer. — ^We had frequent conversations on the subject while the 
negotiations were pending. I drafted a letter addressed to the 
President for the signatures of Gkn. Lane, Pomeroy and Conway. 
In that letter it was recited that Stevens was the agent of the State 
of Kansas. Mr. Stevens copied that draft and brought it back to 
me with the signatures of Messrs. Lane, Pomeroy and Conway. 

Third Cross-Interrogatoiy. — ^I present a copy of that letter certi* 
fied by the seals of the Interior Department, marked Exhibit 4 ; 
please state if that is the letter you refer to in your last answer ? 

Answer, — ^It has been a good while since I drafted the letter, but 
I believe it to be a true copy of the letter referred to in my last 
answer. 

Fourth Interrogatory. — ^Are you acquainted with the hand writing 
of Gen. Lane, if so, please state whether the original of this paper 
when returned to you, was signed in the proper hand writing of 
Gen. Lane ? 

Answer. — ^I am somewhat familiar with his hand writing. When 
the paper was returned to me, I had no doubt as to the genuineness of 
all the signatures to it. Recently I understood, that Gen. Lane denied 
that his signature was genuine. I have since examined it with a 
great deal of care, and I could see nothing to convince me that it 
was not genuine. It looks like a genuine signature. 

Fifth Interrogatory — State what information you had from Mr. 
Stevens as to the circumstances under which this letter was signed 
by Ckn. Lane, and the means by which his signature was obtained f 

Answer. — ^I understood from Mr. Stevens that Gen. Lane declined 
to sign the letter, but that he could proeure his signature to it 
through Mr. Reynolds, by paying him, Mr. ReynoldSi one thousand 
dollars for it. Stevens objected to paying so large a sum of monej^ , 
and wanted me to take the letter without his signature, but I advised 
him to procure the signature of G^n. LanCj if it could be had for 
that consideration, as I had understood the President would not 
make the investment without the assent of the whole delegation.. 



IMFXA6hMENT CA8S9. US 

Hr. Stevens afterwards informed me that be had made the arrange- 
ment with Mr. Reynolds, and proonred the signature. 

Sixth Interrogatory. — ^Do yon know what the Kansas bonds were 
worth in the stook market at the time yon negotiated these bonds 
irith the Secretary of the Interior ? 

Answer.—They had no market valne. 

XXAMINATION IN OHISV BE8UMED. 

In your conversation with Gen. Lane, prior -tr the sale of these 
bonds, did you state to him distinctly that B. S. Stevens was the 
agent of the State to sell these bonds ? 

Answer. — ^I have no recollection of having made any direct state- 
ment to Gen. Lane on that subject. 

Nineteenth Interrogatory. — While the negotiation of these bonds 
were pending, did Gen. Lane ever express to you any opposition to 
R. S. Stevens' agency in the case, or his drawing the money for the 
sale of these bonds ? 

Answer. — He was very mteh opposed to die payment of the money 
to Mr. Stevene, but was not opposed to his acting as agent for the 
sale of the bonds, and did not wish Hr. Stevens to carry the money 
to Kansas, or to pass into his hands. 

Twentieth Interrogatory. — ^Did he take any steps to oppose the 
payment at any time after the sale t 

Answer. — I think he filed a written protest with the Secretary of 
the Interior, against the payment of the money to Mr. Stevens. If 
not in writing, he protested verbally. Hr. Lane insisted that the 
money should be paid to Mr. Pomeroy, and Hr. Conway, or to such 
persons as they might designate, and wrote a letter to the Secretarj 
of the Interior to that effect, and Messrs. Pomeroy and Conway 
deisignajted Hr. Stevens as the person to receive the money, and it 
wae paid accordingly. 

Twenty-first Interrogatory. — ^Did Gen. Lane ever make any state- 
ment to you, touching his signature being attached to the letter 
referred to? 

Answer. — I don't think he ever did. I received my information 
fW>m a clerk in the Department of the Interior, perhaps from the 
Secretary, or both. 

Twenty-second Interrogatory. — In relation to the one thousand' 
dollars, stated to have been paid by Hr. Stevens, to Hr. Reynolds ; 
did he, Stevens, explain who Reynolds was;^aDd whether he ex- 
ercised a degree of influence over Lane f 



156 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

Answer. — He told me that Reynolds waa a toady of Lane, that 
he, Lane, had procured his election to the Elansaa Legislatiure, and 
that the payment of the money was equivalent to paying it to Lane. 

Twenty-third Interrogatory. — ^What evidence other than the 
declaration of Mr. Stevens, had you, that the one thousand dollars 
was paid to Mr. Reynolds, with the exception of the presentation of 
the letter to you, bearing what purports to be the signature of Qen. 
Lane? 

Answer. — ^None at all. 

R. G. OORWIN. 
Sworn to before me, 

N. Oallan, Notary Public. 



^'A»' EXHIBIT 4. 

WA8HINQTON7 Dee. 16, 1861. 

To the PrenderU : 

The undersigned would respectfully represent, that the State of 
Kansas, haa, by an act of her Legislature, authorized the sale of one 
hundred and fifty thousand dollars of bonds of said State, bearing 
interest at the rate of seven per cent, per annum, payable semi- 
annuaDy, and that said bonds have been duly executed, and are now 
held by ihe State for sale. 

tPhey further state that Robert S. Stevens ia the duly authorised 
agent of the State of Kansas, to sell said bonds, and that any contract 
made by him will be respected by the State. 

The Constitution of the State of Kansas^ prohibits any {urther. 
issue of bonds by the Legislature, and also provides that the Legii^ 
ilature at the time they authoriied the issue of bonds authorised bgv 
the Oonstitution, shall provide by law for the levy and coUectioa q£ 
a tax to pay the interest, and for the ultimate redemption of ti^ 
bonds. Such a law was passed by the Legislature which authoMod 
{he issue of the bonds now offered for sale by the State, and wei d% 
not hesitate to say that the interest upon the bonds will be pwmpUs 
jMdd, and the principal at maturity. 

We understand that the Department of the Interior ftiu. ftutda 
l>elonging to several tribes of Indians in Kansas, whio^ by trea^ 
provisions are to be invested in safe and profitable st^cilMs BeUev<« 



V. 



IMPEAOHHENT CASES. 



167 



ing that these bonds are both safe and profitable, we earnestly 
recommend to the President, that he shall direct the Secretary . of 
the Interior to purchase said bonds at such price as to gidd Secre- 
tary shall be deemed advisable. 

Very Respectfully, 

8. C. POMBROY, U. S. 8. 
J. H. LANE, 
M. F. CONWAY. 



Department op the Interriob, 1 
Office of Indian AflFairs, April 28, 1862. J 

I, Charles E. Mix, Acting Commissioner of Indian Affairs, do 

hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original now 

on file in this office. ' , ^ 

CHARLES E. MIX. 

Acting Commissioner. 

UmTED states op AMERICA. 

I, Caleb B. Smith, Secretary of the Interior, do hereby certify 
that Charles E. Uix, whose signature is annexed to the foregoing 
certificate, is now, and was at the time of signing the same^ the 
Acting Commissioner of Indian Affairs, and that full faith and 
credit are due to his official acts as such. 



DEPOSITION OF HON. 8. 0, POMEROY. 

Hob. S. C. Pomeroy, of Atchison, in the State of Kan$iaft, of 
lawfal age, being by me duly sworn, cautioned and c^^amined, 
deposes and saith as follows : - ^ 

First Interrogatory. — Please state your name, ^ ''residence and 
oooupation. . ' 

Answer. — My name is S. C Pomeroy, nystde at Atchison, in the 
State of Kansas, and am forty-five je^ of age, and by occupation, 
a laborer. 



158 PBOGXSDINOS IN THB 

Second luterrogatory. — Will you please to state if you were ever 
written to by Charles Robinson, the Governor of Kansas, John W. 
Bobinson, Secretary of State, George S. Hillyer, Auditor of the 
State of Kansas, or R. S. Stevens, in relation to the sale of Kansas 
State bonds prior to the arrival of either of the said parties in the 
city of Washington ? 

Answer.— The only letter I ever received from either of the parties, 
was a letter from John W. Robinson, in answer to a letter I wrote 
him. 

Third Interrogatory. — ^What was the substance of your letter to 
Mr. Robinson, and his reply ? 

Answer. — ^Understanding that he had some State bonds for sale, 
I wrote to him that if he would send them on, I thought they would 
be sold. I referred only to his private property, such as he received 
for his salary. He did send me about 25 or 30 hundred dollars 
of stock, and his clerk sent on somewhere about eight hundred, and 
upon the arrival of Hillyer and Robinson, I turned over to Mr. 
Robinson his bonds, and Mr. Weir's to Mr. Hillyer. 

Fourth Interrogatory. — Did you at any time communicate with 
either of the parties above named, on the subject of the bonds 
belonging to the State ? 

Answer. — ^The only correspondence I had by letter is stated above. 
Afl«r the arrival of the parties, I had frequent conversations with 
them on that subject. 

Fifth Interrogatory. — ^By whom were you first approached in rela- 
tion to the negotiation of the bonds ? 

Answer. — ^The first time my attention was called to the subject, was 
by the Secretary of the Interior, who told me that he had purchased 
some Kansas War Bonds from R. S. Stevens. I mean the ten per 
cent, bonds issued on a short time. The Secretary of the Interior 
asked my opinion as to the character of the bonds, and the respon- 
sibility of the State, and of its indebtedness. 1 told him the bonds 
wet a good, and the State liable, and the investment a good one and 
safe. 

Sixth Interrogatory. — ^Did you know at that time that the law 
^authorizing thfi issue of the seven per cent, bonds, limited their 
price at seventy cents on the dollar ? 

Answer. — ^I had not seen the law myself, and heard different 
statements — some said thej could, and some said they could not sell 
them for less than seventy cents^ 



V 

V 



IMPSACHMBNT CASKS. 159 

Seventh Interrogatory. — Had you any oonyeraation with the 
Beoretary of the Interior, or Commissioner of Indian Affairs, in 
xelation to the purchase of the seven per cent, bonds, prior to the 
arrival of the said Secretary of State, or Auditor of Kansas, or B. 
8. Stevens in Washington City, and if so, what is the highest prioe 
the bonds oouhl be sold for at that time ? 

Answer. — At the conclusion of the conversation about the ten 
per cent, above alluded to, I suggested to him to purchase the seven 
per cent, bonds* belonging to the State. His reply was that he 
would consider the subject. I had no communication with him as 
to the price. 

Eighth Interrogatory. — Did you notify the State authorities of 
Kansas, or any person in that State, of the views of the Secretary 
of the Interior on the subject ? 

Answer. — In the letter alluded to, from me to J. W. Robinson, 
I said there was a prospect of selling the bonds, and requested him 
to send his private bonds to me, and that is the only notice I sent 
to parties in Kansas. 

Ninth Interrogatory. — On the arrival of J. W. Robinson, and 
George S. Hillyer in Washington City, did they, or either of them, 
ask your co-operation in effecting the sale of these bonds, and if so, 
what representations were made to you in reference to the same ? 

Answer. — ^Both of them asked my co-operation. They represented 
that they took their salaries in scrip, which they bonded, and unless 
they would sell the bonds, nobody could be paid, as the State had no 
money. It cost the State, for eveiything paid in scrip, twice as 
much as it would cost in money ; and further, that the bonds could 
be sold no where else, as the bonds had no market value, not being 
quoted in the prices current. 

Tenth Interrogatory. — Did the Secretary of State or Auditor, ou 
their arrival in Washington, inform you that R. 8. Stevens had 
been appointed the agent of the State, to sell the bonds, or was it 
at your instance, or did you advise that he should be appointed ? 

Answer. — They did not inform me on their arrivaly that Stevens 
had, or had not been appointed. In a conversation with them, I 
advised that as Stevens was successful in selling the ten per cent, 
bonds, that he would be a suitable person to sell the seven per cent* 
bonds. I recommended that they should secure his services in that 
manner. 



160 PROOEEDINOS IN THE 

Eleventh Interrogatory. — Do you know anything of the arrange- 
ments made with R. 8. Stevens, by which he was to have ovi - sixty 
cents on the dollar, realized on the sale of these bonds ? 

Answer. — ^I do not. My first advice to them was to sell th« bonds 
for seventy cents, or more if they could get it ; and afterwa ds in 
the course of the negotiation, I advised them to sell for s' tty, if 
they could get no more, as myself had bought Missouri ^.ses at 
forty-seven. Iowa State bonds were then offered here for liity. I 
then knew nothing of the alleged limitation in the law, fixing the 
price of Kansas bonds at seventy cents, except some contrai ictory 
statements alluded to above. 

Twelfth Interrogatory. — Had you any intimation at that I . >ne, or 
previous to the sale of these bonds on the 20th December, L"- 51, as 
to the probable price the Department would pay for them ? 

Answer. — I had no knowledge whatever. 

Thirteenth Interrogatory. — Do you know anything of the price 
Hr. Stevens was to be pud for his services ? 

Answer. — I do not. 

Fourteenth Interrogatory. — ^Will you state the substance of the 
conversation held in your private room with B. 0. Corwin aad R. 
S. Stevens, as referred to by K. G. Corwin in his deposition ? 

Answer. — I had frequent conversations with them, and cannot 
state the substance of any particular conversation ; the subject 
generally discussed, and that which 3Cr. Corwin generally consulted 
me about, was, as to the power of the Legislature to issue more 
bonds, so as to depreciate those then offered for sale. It was my 
understanding, that the State was limited, and the State could not 
issue any more stock for that purpose. 

Fifteenth Interrogatory. — ^Did John W. Bobinson or George S. 
Hillyer, state to yon at any time, the arrangement they had made 
with R. S. Stevens or R. G. Corwin to sell these bonds, or did you 
know of such arrangement prior to their sale ? 

Answer. — I have no recollection of their telling me anything 
about it. My belief was, that there was some arrangements existing 
between them, but do not know what it was. I not did thiak it 
my business to inquire. 

Sixteenth Interrogatory.— Did you know that R. S. Stevens had 
in his possession State bonds, the private property of the Governor, 
Secretary of State, and Auditor, and that in their sale to the Interior 
Department, they were paid seventy cents on the dollar ? 



IMPSAOHMENT OASES. 161 

Answer. — ^I knew of no private bonds, excepting those belonging 
to J. W. Robinson and Mr. Weir, referred to above, and I knew 
nothing of any arrangement for the sale of them. 

Seventeenth Interrogatory. — ^When did yon learn that eighty-five 
oents'was paid for these bonds ? 

Answer. — ^I first learned it by reading some published prooeed- 
ings of the Kansas Legislature, about January or February last. 

Eighteenth Interrogatory. — ^Had you any interest, directly or 
indirectly, in the sale of these bonds, other than to advance the 
interests of the State ? 

Answer. — I had none. 

Twentieth Interrogatory. — ^Did you know anything in relation to 
the withdrawal of the coupons for the semi-annual interest due 
January 1, 1862 ? 

Answer. — I do not. 

Twenty-first Interrogatory. — Prior, and after the sale of these 
bonds, was any action taken by any member of your delegation to 
arrest the sale or payment of the money realized therefrom, if bq, 
please state the facts ? 

Answer. — ^I understood that my colleague. Gen, Lane, objected 
to, or protested against the payment of the money to Mr. Stevens. 

Twenty-seoond Interrogatory. — ^What arrangement did Gen. Lane 
make with you, in relation to having this money paid directly into 
the Treasury of Kansas ? 

Answer, — ^He made no arrangement with me, but left a letter with 
the Secretary of the Interior, requesting him to pay the money as 
directed by myself and Mr. Conway. 

Twenty-third Interrogatory. — ^Will you please state what you 
know, through what agency the signature of Gen. Lane was obtained 
to a communication signed by yourself and Mr. Conway, bearing 
date December 16, 1861, and addressed to the President, in which 
B. S. Stevens is stated as the agent of the State for the sale of 
these bonds, and in which you urged their purchase 1 

Answer. — ^The paper was presented to me, in what I believed to 

be Stevens' hand writing, was presented by Mr. Stevens himself. I 

lead it and signed it, and presented it to Senator Lane. He handed 

it back to me without signing it, and said he would consider about 

it, and see me the next day. This is all I know about it. 
11 



162 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

GROSS EXAMINATION BT DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL. 

First Interrogatory. — Have you recently examined the letter 
spoken of in your last answer, at the Department of the Interior f 
If so, please state if it is the same paper you signed and presented 
to General Lane ? 

Answer. — ^I have seen it within a month, and believe it to be the 
same paper. 

Second Interrogatory. — Are you acquainted with the hand writing 
of Gen. Lane ? if so, please state whether the letter just referred 
to b signed in his own proper hand writing ? 

Answer. — I am acquainted with his hand writing ; and I think 
the signature attached to the paper, which I saw in the Department 
of the Interior, is in Gen. Lane's hand writing. 

Third Interrogatory. — Please state whether, in advising the Secre- 
tary of State and Auditor of Kansas to sell the bonds in question 
at sixty cents, if they could get no more, you considered that a 
good sale for the State ? 

Answer. — Considering the financial condition of the country, I 
did think it would have been a good sale for the State, as I believe 
they could not have been sold for that amount except to the Secre- 
tary of the Interior. I urged him to make the purchase, as I 
believed the bonds to be safe and good, and it was the custom of the 
Department to invest in Indian funds as far as practicable to the 
State where the tribes were located ; the government has also, some- 
times, given character to bonds of new States in this way. I 
thought it was a good arrangement both for the government and the 
State. I did not know what the government was paying for State 
bonds. 

8. C. POMEROT. 

Sworn to before me, 

N. Gallan, Notary Public. 



DEPOSITION OF M. F. CONWAY. 

Martin F. Conway, of lawful age, being by me duly examined^ 
eautioned and solemnly sworn, deposeth and saith : 

First Interrogatory. — Please state your name, age and occupation. 



IMPIAOHMENT OASES. 163 

Answer. — My name is Martin F. Conway, age, thirty-two years ; 
-and a lawyer by profession. 

Second Interrogatory. — Were you ever written to by Cbarlea 
Robinson, J. W. Bobinson, Secretary of State, George S. Hillyer 
or R. S. Stevens, in relation to Kansas State bonds; if so, where, 
and state if yon please, the substance of those letters ? 

Answer. — ^I nev^r received any such letters at any time. 

Third Interrogatory. — Were you ever approached at any time by 
either of these parties in relation to the sale of these bonds, and if 
80, how often ? 

Answer. — I was approached by J. W. Robinson and by G. S. 
Hillyer, Auditor of the State. These gentlemen stated to me that 
the Legislature of the State of Kansas had authorized the sale of 
certain bonds, and that they had been appointed agents to sell them, 
and stated also, that there was a fund in the Indian Department 
belonging to certain Indians, which the President was authorized' 
to dispose of as he thought proper for the benefit of the Indians ; 
that the President might be induced to invest it in these bonds^ 
They required my assistance, and represented how important it 
would be to the people of Kansas to effect the transaction. I agreed 
to do all I could to help the matter along, and accompanied these 
gentlemen several times to the President's house, and to the public 
Departments, but failed on each occasion to see the President or 
Secretary. I very shortly, however, ascertained that the object had 
been accomplished through other influence. 

Fourth Interrogatory. — ^Did you know at any time prior to the 
sale of these bonds that R. S. Stevens had been appoin^ted, by the 
State officers, their agent to dispose of them. 

Answer. — ^I did not. 

Fifth Interrogatory. — Did you know at any time prior to the sak, 
the probable price the bonds would be sold for to the Department, 
or was any reference, at any time, made as to the price ? 

Answer. — ^I did not. 

Sixth Interrogatory. — ^Did you give any advice to the State 
officers as to the price they should take for these bonds. 

Answer. — ^Did not. 

Seventh Interrogatory. — ^Did you know as to the arrangements 
between the State officers and R. S. Stevens, by which the bonds 



164 PBOCXaDINGS III THS 

were to be sold to him at sixty oeQts on the dollar, and he to hold 
as his own all that oonld be realised over that sum. 
Answer. — ^I did not. 

Eighth Interrogatory. — ^Did you advise the State offieers to 
employ B. S. Stevens as their agent 7 
Answer. — ^I did not. 

Ninth Interrogatory. — ^Did you know that the law that authorised 
the issue of these bonds limited them at seventy cents on the 
doUar f 

Answer. — ^I did not. 

Tenth Interrogatory. — ^Will you state if you please, at whose 
instance you signed the letter addressed to the President, in which 
B. S. Stevens is stated as agent of the State, and recommending 
the purchase of the bonds by the government ? 

Answer. — Can't remember when I signed that letter, ot where« 
Xhe probabilities are that I signed it at the instance of one or both 
the Senators from Kansas, or I signed because I saw the name of 
one or both on the paper before I signed it. 

Eleventh Interrogatory. — ^Do you know anything touching the 
signature of Hon. J. H. Lane, to that paper, and if so, state all 
the facto? 

Aoawer.— *I do not. 

Twelfth Interrogatory. — ^Do you know whether he protested 
against the payment of the money realised from the sale of these 
State bonds to Bobert Stevens, or the State officers f 

Answer. — He told me he protested against it. 

Thirteenth Interrogatory. — ^Will you state whether he had any 
oonversation with you upon the subject ? If so state the nature 
of it. 

Answer. — ^None whatever. 

Fourteenth Interrogatory. — ^What arrangement was made with 
you and Senator Pomeroy, and General Lane, to draw the money 
and pay it over to the State, after the meeting of the Legislature f 

AjiBwer.— *I never knew that any such arrangement had been 
made. 

Fifteenth Interrogatory. — ^What were the circumstances inducing 
you, a few days after^ to sign the letters with Senator Pomeroy 
requesting the money to be paid to B. S. Stevens f 



IMPSAOHMXNT 0A8S8. 165 

Answer. — ^Don't remember of signing such papers. 

Sixteenth Interrogatory. — ^Do yon know anything tonohing the 
writhdrawal of the coupons for the semi-annual interest, due Jantl* 
ary 1st, 1862 1 

Answer. — I do not. 

GROSS EXAMINATION BT DXYENDANT'S COUNSSL. 

First Interrogatory.—- Did you oonverse with €feneral Lane on the 
eubjeot of the negotiation while it was pending ; if so, can you saj 
whether General Lane was apprised of the agenoy of B. S. Stevcpu 
in selling the bonds ? 

Answer. — I had no conyersation with General Lane while the 
negotiation was pending. I called his attention to the matter one 
evening at the Avenue House, but he said only a word or two, being 
apparently engrossed with some other subject. 



DEPOSITION OF HON. CALEB B. SMITH. 

Oaleb B. Smith, being of lawful age, being duly sworn, cautioned 
and examined, deposeth and saith as follows : 

First Interrogatory. — Please state your name^ age, residence and 
•oeoupation. 

Answer. — ^My name is Caleb B. Smith, age 58, reside in the dtj 
of Washington, and am Secretary of the Interior of the United 
States. 

Second Interrogatory.— -In relation to the State bonds purchased 
by your Department, will you please state the amount purchased| 
and the amount per dollar given for them, and the time when 
purchased. 

Answer. — On the nineteenth of December, 1861, 1, as Secretary 
of the Interrior of the United States, with the sanction of the 
President, purchased of the State of Kansas, through B. S. Stevens, 
agent, one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the seven per cent, 
bonds, of said State of Kansas, at the price of eighty-five per cent, 
their par value; ninety-five thousand six hundred, were delivered to 
me as Secretary, and are now in the poaseasion of this Department ; 
fifty-four thousand nine hundred and two dollars of the purchase 



166 PROOEBDINGS IN THE 

money was paid to Steyens bj requisition upon the Treafiury Depart- 
ment for the amount. It was agreed that no further sum should be 
paid on account of the bonds^ until the one hundred and fifty thctQ- 
sand should be delivered. No more of the bonds have been delivered 
since that time, and no more of the purchase money has been paid* 

Third Interrogatory. — Will you please state whether any com- 
munication was ever made to your Department, either by letter or 
in person by C. Robinson, Governor; J. W. Robinson, Secretary of 
State ^ or G-. S. Hillyer, Auditor of State, in relation to the siile of 
tihese bonds to the Department ; if so, will you state at what time, 
and the substance of such communications. 

Answer. — I never had any personal communication with either of 
these gentlemen in relation to the bonds or their purchase. 

Shortly bcffore the bonds were purchased, Mr. Stevens filed in this 
Department, a paper purporting to be signed by C. Robinson, Gov- 
ernor; J. W. Robinson, Secretary of State, stating that R. S. 
Stevens was appointed agent for the State of Kansas, with full 
power and authority to negotiate and sell the issue of seven per 
cent, bonds, of said State, for one hundred and fifty thousand 
dollars. This paper bore date the 25th October, 1861. Upon the 
faith of this authority, I recognized Mr. Stevens as agent of the 
- State. I havB had no other communication of any kind with either 
of these gentlemen. 

Fourth Interrogatory.*— Will you please state whether there was 
any party occupying an official position from Kansas assisting in the 
negotiation of the&e bonds before your Department, if so state who 
' ihe person ^as. 

Answer. — Mr. Stevens made a written application to me, as the 
agent of the State of Kansas,, to purchase the bonds on the third of 
December, 1861. I was then disinclined to make the purchase. 
Senator Pomoroy called to see me in relation to the matter, and 
represented that the sale of the bonds would be an advantage to the 
State, to enable them to paj some expenses which, bad been increased 
[incurred] in the organization of Uie State government. I made partic- 
ular inquiry of him in regard to the resourpes of the State, and the 
probabilities of the prompt payment of the interest. 

He assured me that the resources of thd State were ample ; that 
a law had already been passed to levy a tax to meet the interest 
which would.be promptly paid. I then told him that I did not feel 
perfectly iiuthorixed to purchase the bonds without the sanction of 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 167 

the President ; that if the entire delegation from Kansas would 
unite in a request to the President to authorize the purchase of the 
bonds, I would recommend to the President his sanction to the 
purchase. Senator Pomeroy then told me that the entire delegation 
desired it, and would make such request to the President. Shortly 
afterwards a letter was handed to me, dated December 16th, 1861, 
addressed to the President and signed by Senators Pomeroy and 
Lane, and Mr. Oonway of the House, requesting the President to 
authorize me to purchase the bonds. A certified copy of this letter 
has been furnished, and is among the papers and is hereto annexed 
marked " C." 

Sometime after the contract was made, but before any money was 
paid, Senator Lane called to see me and objected to the payment of 
the money to Stevens. He spoke of Stevens' hostility to him, and 
did not wish the money paid to Stevens or the State officers, until 
after the adjournment of the Legislature. He stated that he had 
no confidence in any of them, and if they received the money it 
would be used to influence the action of the LegiHlature. I told 
him I did not wish to be mixed in with any of their local quarrels ' 
or troubles, that I had refused to entertain any proposition to 
purchase the bonds unless the entire Congressional delegation would 
unite in recommending it. I told him then, that I would not com*' 
plete the transaction or pay the money to Stevens or any other 
person, unless the whole delegation would agree to its being so 

paid. 

On the twenty-first day of December, 1861, a letter dated the 19th 
day of December, was brought to the Department signed by Senator 
Pomeroy and Mr. Conway, requesting me, if the negotiation then 
pending between Mr. Stevens and mysfilf, for the purchase of the 
bonds should be concluded, to pay to Stevens the money for the 
bonds he should then deliver, and the balance when they should 
afterwards be delivered. 

This letter was referred to the Chief Clerk of the Indian Office ; 
the account was there stated and sent up to me for a requisition for 
the amount which I saw should be paid, t signed the requisition, 
and it was sent to the Treasury Department for payment. I had 
not then notioed or been informed that Senator Lane's name wa8 
not attached to the letter requesting the payment to be made to 
Stevens. 

The next morning, before I left my house, Mr. Mix, the Chief 
Clerk of the Indian Office, came to my house and told me Lane had 



168 FBOOSSDINQS IN THE 

not signed, and asked me wbetlier I intended that tbe money should 
be paid to Stevens without Lane's agreeing to it. 

I told Mr. Mix that I had informed them all, that I would not 
consent to close the transaction unless the whole delegation agreed 
to it. I requested him to go to the Treasury Department, and have 
the payment of the requisition suspended, and to tell Mr. Stevens 
that the money could not be paid to him unless he would get Lane's 

consent. 

Shortly afterwards, a letter was handed to me sighed by Gen 
Lane, requesting me to send the money for the bonds to the Trea- 
surer of Kansas, under the direction of Senator Pomeroy and 
Bepresentative Conway, these gentlemen having already requested 
me in writing to pay the money to Stevens. I considered Senator 
Lane's letter as eqivalent to a request to pay it to him I accordingly 
directed the payment of the money to Stevens. 

Fifth Interrogatory. — Will you please state whether there was 
any reference made, at the time you held this conversation with 
Senator Pomeroy, as to the price the Department would pay for 
these bonds, or was any reference made to this subject by him or 
any one else occupying an official position from Kansas, prior to the 
purchase of these bonds ? 

Answer. — My impression is, that Pomeroy said nothing about the 
price at which the bonds should be purchased. 

Sixth Interrogatory. — Please state the circumstances in relation 
to the withdrawal from these bonds, of the coupons for the semi- 
annual interest due in January, 1862 ? 

Answer. — ^There was a coupon on each of the bonds for six months 
interest, due January, 1862. The money was paid for the bond 
very near the last of December, 1861 ; and as there a very few 
days intervening between the purchase and the time when the 
•oupons were payable, I agreed that the coupons should be cut off 
and retained by the State. 

0B0S8 XXAMINSD BT THX DXFENDANT's OO0NSEL. 

First Interrogatory. — ^Did Gen. Lane havrany conversation with 
you on the subject of the negotiation while it was pending, if so, 
state whether he knew that you were negotiating with Mr. Stevens 
is the agent of the State? 

Answer. — ^I can't recollect any distinct conversation with Lane 
in regard to Stevens until he protested against the payment of the 
money to him. My understanding was that he knew he was ths 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 169 

man I was negotiating with. I had several conTersations with him 
before the contract was executed. 

Second Interrogatory. — ^Are yon acquainted with the hand writing 
of Oen. Lane, if so, is the signature to the letter of the 16th of 
December last, addressed to the President, of which yon have 
spoken aboYe, in his hand writing 7 

Answer. — ^I haye seen Gen. Lane's signature frequently, and from 

my knowledge of his hand writing, I suppose that signature to be 

genuine. 

GALBB B. SMITH. 



DEPOSITION OP WM. P. DOLE. 

William P. Dole, of lawful age, being by me first duly cautioned| 
examined and sworn, deposeth and saith. 

First Interrogatory. — ^What is your name, age, residence and 
occupation. 

Answer. — ^William P. Dole, fifty years of age, and Commissioner 
of the Indians, reside in the City of Washington. 

Second Interrogatory, — ^In relation to the sale of the seren per 
cent. Kansas State bonds. Will you please state the amount of 
bonds purchased, and the amount per dollar for them, and the time 
when purchased 7 

Answer. — ^The answer I make as from information derived from 
the records of my office, not from any personal knowiedge of my 
own, not being particularly consulted on that subject. The con- 
tract was for one hundred and fifty thousand dollars at eighty-five 
per cent., was made on the nineteenth day of December, 1861. 

Third Interrogatory. — Will you state if you please, by whom the 
proposition was first made to your Department to purchase them, 
and if any thing was said at that time, as to the prioe the Depart- 
ment would be willing to pay for them 7 

Answer .^-The first I remember of a proposition to purchase these 
i>onds, was a proposition referred to me by the Secretary of ttie 

Interior, of the 7th December, 1861, for my opinion as to the pro- 
priety of making the purchase. My answer to the Secretary oa 



170 PBOOSEDXNQS IN THK 

the exhibit marked D, appended to the deposition hereto, and that 
subsequently in conversation with the Secretary, he remarked that 
he would not close the purchase, but refer the whole mattter to the 
President. Subsequently the papers were returned to this office 
with the President's approval therein. 

Fourth Interrogatory. — ^Will you please state whether any com- 
munication was made to you, either by letter or in person, by Chas. 
Robinson, Governor, John W. Robinson, Secretary of State, Geo. S. 
Hillyer, Auditor of State, in relation to the sale of these bonds to 
the Department ; if so, state at what time, and the nature of the 
communications ? 

Answer. — ^I have no acquaintance with either of the gentlemen 
named ; I never had any correspondence or connection with them 
on the subject. All the correspondence on the subject is that which 
is referred to me by the Secretary of the Interior. 

Fifth Interrogatory. — Will you state if you please, whether R. 
S. Stevens applied to you in person, as the agent of the State of 
Kansas, to sell these bonds to your Department ; and if so, the time 
he first approached you on that subject ? 

Answer. — He never did. 

Sixth Interrogatory. — ^Will you state whether any communica- 
cations were made to your Department by Geo. S. Hillyer, Charles 
Robinson, or other State officers of Kansas in relation to the sale of 
these bonds ; and if so, the nature of such communication from 
them now filed in your office ? 

Answer. — Two communications were received from the State 
officers of Kansas, one bearing date October 15th, 1861, from 
Topeka, Kansas, signed by C. Robinson, Governor, J. W. Robinson? 
Secretary of State, H. R. Dutton, Treasurer of State, stating that 
the provisions of an act entitled " An act to authorize the State of 
Kansas to borrow money to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, 
and to defend the State in time of war," approved May 7th, 1861, 
were not intended to prevent the Treasurer from issuing more than 
$20,000 of bonds ; that the intent was to authorize him to realize 
from the sale thereof $20,000, and that the Treasurer was fully 
authorized to sell said bonds at such price as by him should be 
deemed necessary ; such was their understanding of the law 
referred to. 

The contract between these gentlemen and R S. Stevens, is dated 
October 6th, 1861. 



IMPEAOHMISNT CABE8. 171 

SeTenth Interrogatoi7.--*WM there any pavty oootip3^g an 
official position in Kaasajs, assisting in the negotiation ? 

Answer. — I think not. The Senators may have mentioned the 
subject to me ; certainly tto one else. I have no knowledge, except 
by the papers on file, as to who assisted before the President and 
Secretary of the Interior. 

Eighth Interrogatory. — Will you state whether your understand- 
ing was that R. S. Stevens was acting as agent for the sale of these 
bonds, or as the owner of them ? 

Answer. — I do not. 

Ninth Interrogatory. — Did you^ at any time prior to the purchase 
of these bond?, state to any person or persons the precise amount the 
Department would pay for them ? 

Answer. — I did not. 

Tenth Interrogatory. — ^Before and after tho purchase of these 
bonds, were representations made to you, by any person, to the efifect 
that- the transaction was not a bona fide one, and that the State had 
been or would be defrauded ? 

Answer.*— I had no such intimation until I was subpenaed to 
appear before the layestigating Committee, while on my virit 
there. 

Eleventh Interrogatory. — Do you know anything in relation to 

the withdrawal of the ooupons for the semi-annual interest due 

thereon ? 

j^g^Qf. — ^I do not. I know the bonds were not brought into my 

office until about the first of January, 1862. My understanding 

was that the bonds were purchased without the coupons. 

Twelfth Interrogatory. — ^Was any action taken by Gen. Lane to 
suspend the payment of the money paid for these bonds ? 

Answer. — ^I have no knowledge of that. I understand, from the 
Secretary of the Interior, that the delegation in Congress from 
Kansas were to designate to whom the money was to be paid ; such 
was done. 

GROSS EXAMINED BY DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL. 

First Interrogatory. — ^Did not Qen; James H. Lane protest against 
the piynent of the money to R. S. Stevens ? 
Answer.— rNot to me, that I remember. 



jif 



172 PEO011DINO8 IN THl 

Seeond Iiiterrog»tor7.-*-Will you fVinush a oojiy of tbe letter of 
the Oovernor, Seoretery and TreasoMr of Kmuas, as to the ton fer 
oent, bonds f 

Answer. — ^A oopy thereof b hereto annexed, marked " B. B/' 

WM. P. DOLE. 

Sworn before N. Callak, Notary Pnblio. 



JBI* JBI* 

I 

EXKCUTIYS DSPABTMSNT, ) 

Topeka, Kansas, October 15, 1862. J 

The undersigned, Exeontive Officers of the State of Kansas, 

hereby state that the provisions 'of an act entitled " An act to 

authorize the State of Kansas to borrow money to repel inTiaion, 

fuppress insurrection, and to defend the Stato in time of war/' 

approved May 7th, 1862, were not intended to prevent the Treasurer 

firom issuing more than twenty thousand doUars in bonds, but that the 

intent was to auiheriie him to issue bonds sufficient to realise, from 

the sale thereof, twenty thousand dollars ; and that the Treasuiw 

was fully authorised to sell said bonds at such price as by him should 

ibe deemed necessary. Such is our understanding of the law referred 

vto. 

G. ROBINSON, Gk>vemor. 

JOHN W. ROBINSON, Sec'y Stoto. 

H. R. BUTTON, Trearaier of Stato. 



DXPABTHXNT Of THX InTXBIOR, ) 

Office of Indian AAdrs, May 8, 1862. j 

I, William P. Dole, Commissioner of Indian Affiurs, do hereby 
certify that the foregoing instrument of writing is a true copy of the 
•original now on file in this office* 

WM. P. DOLB, 
Commissioner. 



^ 



IMFXAOHMXNT 0A8B8. ITS** 

DlPAKTMINT Of THX InTSRIOB, ) 

May 8, 1862. f 

I, Oaleb B. Smith, Seereftuy of the Interior, do hereby eertiff 
Ihal Wm. P. Bole, whoee ngnatore 10 attaohed to the foregfnng. 
otrtileate, is bow, and was at the time of signing the same, 
Oomaiiasioner of Indian Afiurs, and that ftiU ftith and oredxt 
are dne to his oiSoial aots as snoh. 



In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused 
the seal of said Department to be affixed this day of May, A. P»- 
1862. 

CALEB B. SMITH, 

Secretaiy*- 





ExBcnnvB Dbpa&tmsnt, 

Otfiob or THB Statb Auditob 

Topelca, Kansas, Oct. 25, 1861 

The undersigned, Ezeontive Offioen of this State, anthorised by^ 
law to dispose of and seU the seven per cent, bonds, the issnance 
of ikhich was authorised by an act of the Legishiture ot this State, 
^>proTed Hay 1st, 1861, entitled "An act to authorise Ae negotia^ 
lion of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of thf 
State of Kansas, to defray the current expenses of the State,'' and 
an act supplementary thereto, approved June Sd, 1861, do hereby 
constitute and appoint Robert S. Stevens, Esq., an agent to sell an4 
dispose of said bonds, giving the said Stevens full power and 
authority to negotiate, dispose of, and sell ihe entire issue of one 
hundred and fifty "thousand dollars of said bonds, for the benefit of 
the State of Kansas, hereby ratifying and confirming all and what- 
ever said Stevens may do in the premises. 

Witness our hands this 25th day of October, A. D. 1861. 

C. ROBINSON, Governor. 

J. W. ROBINSON, See'y of State. 

O. S. HILLTSB, Auditor oi State. 



174 PBO0EEDINO8 IN THB 

• WAsmNGTON, December 3, 1861. 

Sir :— •Having been duly appointed an agent, for the purpose of 

negotiating . and aeUing the bonds of the State of Kansas, the 

issuance of which were authorized by an act .of the Legislature of 

that State, approved May 1st, 1861, entitled ^'An act to authorise 

t}ie negotiation of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the 

bonds of the State of Kansas, to defray the current expenses of the 

State," and an act supplementary thereto, approved June 3d, 1861, 

t hereby propose to sell to you, as Trustee of certain Indian tribes, 

the entire issue of bonds authorized by said acts, being one hundred 

and fifty thousand dollars, at eighty-five cents on the dollar. I 

inclose my authority to sell said bonds, as given me by State officers. 

Very Respectfully Tours, 

R. S. STEVENS. 
Hon. 0. B. Smith, 

Secretary of the Interior, 

Washington, D. C. 



un » 



Department op the Intebiob, ) 

Office of Indian Affairs, December 7, 1861, J 

Sir : — ^I herewith' return certain papers, referred to this office by 
you, in relation to the purchase of $150,000, bonds issued by the 
State of Kansas, such purchape to be made for the benefit of certain 
tribes of Indians. My view, in relation to the manner in which all 
funds, coming into the possession of the Government, to be invested 
in stocks in trust for, and for the benefit of, Indians, have been 
fully expressed in my recent Annual Report. 

If, however, it is deemed advisable by you to cause such invest- 
ments to be made, in any other stocks than those of the United States, 
I feel free to state that, in my judgment, the prospects of Kansas, as a 
young, growing, and vigorous State, abounding in all the elements 
of future prosperity, are such as to warrant the belief that her 
stocks, bearing seven- per cent, interest, and purchased at the rate 
proposed by Mr. Stevens, as agent for Kansas, vis: at eighty-five 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 175 

cents on the dollar, must, in the end, be a profitable and safe 

inyestment. 

Very respectfxilly, your obedient servant, 

WM. P. DOLE, Commissioner. 
Hon. C. B. Smith, 

Secretary of Interior. 

(Indorsed.) The Secretary of the Interior is authorised to pur* 

ohase the bonds of the State of Kansas, on the terms named within. 

A. LINCOLN. 



Department or the Intebiob, \ 
December 14, 1861. j 

Sir : — ^The United States hold in trust for the Kaskaskia Indians 
the sum of $40,000, which the seventh article of a treaty made with 
them May 3d, 1854, (Statutes at Large, Tolume 10th, page 1084,) 
provides may be invested by the President, in safe and profitable 
stocks. There is also a fund of $15,000 held in trust for the lowas^ 
which, under the fifth article of the treaty made with them Kay 
17th, 1854, may be invested by the President in the same manner. 
The State of Kansas has issued one hundred and fifty thousand 
dollars of State bonds, bearing seven per cent, interest, and payable 
in twenty years. The State authorities offer to sell these bonds at 
eighty-five per cent. 

The Constitution of the State prohibits the issaing of bonds to a 
larger amount than two hundred thousand dollars, and also provides 
that a tax shall be levied to pay the interest. 

It seems to me that these bonds would form a safe investment for 
the Indians, and the opinion of the President, as to the propriety of 
making the investment, is requested. 

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servent, 

C. B. SMITH, Secretary. 
To the President. 



Washington, Dec. 16, 1861. 
To the Prendent : 

The undersigned would respectfully represent, that the State of 

Kansas, has, by an act of her Legislature, authorized the sale of one 



176 PR00EEDINQ8 IN THE 

bundled and fifty thousand dollars of bonds of said State, 
interest at the rate of seven per cent, per annum, payable semi- 
annually, and that said bonds have been duly ezeouted, and are now 
held hj the State for sale. 

They further state that Robert S. Stevens b the duly authoriaed 
agent of the State of Kansas, to sell said bonds, and that any contract 
made by him will be respected by the State. 

The Oonatitution of the State of EuMisaa, prohibits any further 
issue of bonds by the Legislature, and also provides that the Legis- 
lature, at the time they authorised the issue of bonds authorized by 
the Constitution, shall provide by law for the levy and collection o^ 
a tax to pay the interest, and for the ultimate redemption of the 
bonds. Such a law was passed by the Legislature which authorised 
the issue of the bonds now offered for sale by the State, and we do 
not hesitate to say that the interest upon the bonds will be promptly 
paid, and the principal at maturity. 

We understand that the Department of the Interior has funds 
belonging to several tribes of Indians in Kansas, which by treaty 
provisions are to be invested in safe and profitable stocks. Believ- 
ing that these bonds are both safe and profitable, we earnestly 
recommend to the President, that he shall direct the Secretary of 
the Interior to purchase said bonds at such price as to said Score- 
taiy shall be deemed advisable. 

Very Respectfblly, 

8. C. POMBROY, U. S. 8. 
J. H. LANE, 
M. F. CONWAY. 



Wabhinotok, December 19, 1861. 
Hon. G. B. Smith, Secretoiy of the Interior — Sir : In case that 
the negotiotion, now pending between yourself and R. S. Stevens, 
for the purchase of the bonds of the State of Kansas, is concluded, 
we respectfully request that you pay him now for the bonds he is 
able now to deliver, and the balance as may hereafter be delivered 
and ordered by the undersigned. 

Respectfully, 

S. C. POMEROY. 
M. P. CONWAY. 



IMPKACHHENT 0A8£S. 177 

Washinoton, December 19, 1861. 
Sect. G. B. Smith — Deab Sie: We, the undersigned, most 
respeotfullj suggest that the installments, to be paid to our State, 
upon bonds sold by its agent, be sent to the Treasurer of Kansaa, 
under the direction of Senator Pomeroy and Bepresentative Conway, 
now in this city. 

J. H. LANE. 
N. Callan, Notary Public. 



[copy of agreement.] 

It is agreed between the United States, by C. B. Smith, Secretary 
of the Interior, and the State of Kansas, by R. S. Stevens, agent of 
the State, duly appointed to sell the bonds of said State, that the 
United States purchase the bonds of said State, dated July Ist, 
1861, and payable in fifteen years in the State of New York, with 
interest at the rate of seven per cent, per annum, payable semi- 
annually in New York, to the amount of one hundred and fifty 
thousand dollars, and which is the whole amount of the issue of said 
bonds, and which bonds are to be paid for at the rate of eighty-five 
per cent, of their par value. 

Ninety-five thousand six hundred dollars of said bonds are deliv- 
ered to the Secretary of the Interior at this time, and he has paid 
to the State of Kansas, on account of the same, the sum of (55,0009 
and no further sum is to be paid until the residue of said bonds 
shall be delivered, when the balance of the purchase money shall be 

paid. 

CALEB B. SMITH. 

' R. S. STEVENS. 

Department of the Interior, December 19th, 1861. 



Department of the Interior, ) 



Deoember 20, 1861. 

Sir: — Referring to your letter of the 7th inst., returning papers 

referred to you in relation to the purchase of Kansas State bonds 
12 



178 PROOEEDINOS IN THE 

for certain tribes, I have to state that, under the authority of the 
President, I have purchased of the State of Kansas, through R. S. 
Stevens, agent, 246 bonds of said State, at eighty-five cents on the 
dollar, amounting to $54,910,000, as per bill herewith ; which pur- 
chase is made for the benefit of the confederate tribes of Weaa, 
Kaskaskias, Peorias and Piankeshaws, and the lowas, in the amount 
respectively named in the bill for these tribes. 

I have also received the bonds described, which are found, upon 
examination, to be right. 

You will, therefore, adjust the account for their purchase. The 
bonds are herewith inclosed to you, to be placed in the iron safe 
now in your charge, for safe keeping. The papers, connected with 
the purchase of said bonds, are also inclosed. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servent, 

CALEB B. SMITH, Secretary. 
Hon. Wm. p. Dole, Commissioner of Indian Affairs. 



Department of the Intebiob, ) 

April 25, 1862. | 

I hereby certify that the foregoing, on pages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 
9, and 10,* are true copies of the originals on file in this Depart- 
ment. 

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto subscribed my name, and 

caused the seal of the Department to be affixed this 25th day of 

April, A. D. 1862. 

CALEB B. SMITH, 
Secretary of the Interior. 




R. O. Corwin being recalled by the plaintiff's counsel, deposeth 
and saith : 

First Interrogatory. — ^Will you state the substance of the con- 
versation between Senator Pomeroy, R. S. Stevens and yourself, 

*Thif ooriifloato hM nferenoo to the p«ffw of the original depoiltion. 



IMPBAOHMENT CASES. 179 

wUle in his private room when you called on Gen. Pomeroj witk 
R. S. Stevens, J. W. Robinson and G. S. Hillycr, and left the 
latter gentlemen in the parlor, as referred to in jour answer to 
seventh interrogatory ? 

Answer. — We went there to consult upon the propriety of selling 
the entire issue of the bonds, $150,000. All of the bonds had been 
given out, except eighty-seven thousand dollars, or thereabouts, in 
paying the debts of the State. We wanted Stevens to get in or buy 
in all the bonds of the State that had been given out, and sell the 
entire issue to the Government. The result of the interview was 
that he, Stevens, concluded to do so. 

Second Interrogatory. — As the State officers were present at the 
time, what reason was there for not consulting them in relation to 
this subject ? 

Answer. — I do not know. We went into the parlor where Mr. 
Pomeroy and his wife and several gentlemen were sitting, and all 
engaged in conversation. Pomeroy and Stevens withdrew into 
another room, and invited me to accompany them. When we came 
out and repoi^ted the result to the officers, they were satisfied. 

Third Interrogatory. — Will you please state the compensation 
promised by R. S. Stevens, the agent of the State, for your services 
in negotiation and sale of these bonds ? 

Answer. — ^My compensation was a very small one. 

CBOSS EXAMINED BY DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL. 

First Interrogatory. — Was it not a subject of conversation with 
Gen. Pomeroy, whether the Legislature had power, under the 
Constitution, to issue more than two hundred thousand dollars of 
bonds, and whether this restriction did not make the present bonds 
more safe and valuable ? 

Answer. — I understood that to be the opinion of all the partiee 

concerned. I answer that that was the subject of conversation thai 

night, either in the parlor or in the private room. 

R. G. OORWiN. 
Sworn to before me, 

N. Callan, Notary Public. 

The Hon. S. A. Stinson offered the following motion on behalf of 
the managers: 

In the matter of the impeachment of John W. Robinson, we 
move for an attachment against D. H. Wier, as a witness on behalf 
of the prosecution. 






180 PBOOSEDINOS IN THE 

Twentj-one Senators voting aye and one Senator Toting no, the 
motion was suBtained, and the attaobment iflsned. 

On motion, the Senate adjourned. 



FIFTH DAT. 

Court Chamber, ) 
Friday, Jnne 6, 1862, 9 o'clock, A. M. j 

Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court of Im- 
peachment, met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the Chair. 

Roll called. 

Quorum present. 

Absentees — Messrs. Barnett, Denman, Hofiman. HoUiday, Lamb- 
din, Lappin, Lynde, Morrow and Sleeper. 

Journal of yesterday read and approved. 

Present : — ^Hon. S. A. Stinson, and the Board of Managers on4 
the part of the House of Representatives. 

Hons. F. P. Stanton and Wilson Shannon, and N. P. Case, Esq., 
respondent's attorneys. 

John W. Robinson appeared in person. 

Mr. Hubbard offered the following order : 

Resolved, That the Senate will not proceed with the consideration > 
of any matters connected with the trial of impeachments, except in 
the presence of seventeen Senators. 

It was so ordered. 

President announced the appointment of Byron Sherry as Jouma 
Clerk, and R. J. Hinton and Robert Parham as Reporters, 
appeared and took the following oaths : 

State of Kansas, 1 
Shawnee County, j ^' 

I, R. J. Hinton, do solemnly swear to support the Constitution oi 
the United States, the Constitution of the State of Kansas, and to 
faithfully discharge the duties of Reporter of the Senate of thtt. 



IMPSAOHMXNT OABES. 181 

'State of KaiuMB, according to the best of my ability, so help me 
God. 

R. J. HINTON. 
Topeka, Jane 6, 1862. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 6th day of June, A. D. 

1862. 

T. A. OSBORN, 

President of Senate. 

Unitxd Statxs of America, 
State of Kansas, 

Shawnee County, 

I, R. Parham, do solemnly swear to support the Constitution of 

the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Kansas, and 

to faithfully discharge the duties of Assistant Reporter of the 

Senate or the State of Kansas, to the best of my ability, so help me 

Ood. 

R. PARHAM. 

June 6, 1862. 

Sworn and subscribed to before me this 6th day of June, A. D. 

1862. 

T. A. OSBORN, 

President of Senate. 




>8S. 



United States ojt America, 
State of Kansas, 

Shawnee County, 

I, Byron Sherry, do solemnly swear to support the Constitution 

of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Kansas, and 

to faithfully discharge the duties of Journal Clerk of the Senate of 

the State of Kansas, to the best of my ability, so help me God. 

BYRON SHERRY. 
June 6, 1862. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 6th day of June, A. D. 

1862. 

T. A. OSBORN, 

President of Senate. 

On motion of Mr. Hubbard, the following order was adopted : 

Resolved J That one hundred copies of the depositions, read in the 
case of John W. Robinson, together with the letters and exhibits 
accompanying, be printed for the use of the Senate and for counsel. 

On motion of Mr. Hubbard, the Senate took a recess of fifteen 
minutes. 



182 PROCEBDINQS IN TBE 

The time having expired, the Senate was called to order. 
[GEORGE S. HILLYER'S TESTIMONY.] 

George S. Hilljer being called on the part of the State, was duly 
iwom : 

Mr. Stinson, Attorney General. — Mr. Hillyer, are you the Auditor 
of the State of Kansas ? 
Mr. Hilljer. — I am. 

Q. What are and have been your duties, in connection with the 
State? 

A. Issuing bonds^ auditing accounts, Ac, and so far as issuing 
them, to countersign and register the same. 

Q. Does that apply both to the war and the seven per cent* 
bonds ? 

A. Yes, sir, both. 

Q. Have you a record of the number and the amount issued by 
the State ? 
A. I have. 

Q. Will you state the number of war bonds countersigned by 
you? 

A. Forty thousand dollars. 

Q. What amount of the seven per cent, bonds was countersigned 
by you ? 

A. One hundred and fifty thousand dollars — ^all there was. 

Q. Under what act was the seven per cent, bonds issued, and 
what amount was ordered to be issued ? 

A. Under that act of May 3d, 1861, and an act supplementary 
thereto, approved June 3d, 1861, to the amount of one hundred 
and fifty thousand dollars. 

Q. At what date were these bonds issued ? 
A. The bonds all bear the same date, the 1st day of July, A. D» 
1861. 

Q. What is the date of the war bonds ? 

A. I do not recollect, but think they bear the same date ; I can 
tell by looking at the register. 

Q. What disposition was made (if you know) of the seven per 
cent, bonds?. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 183 

A. Sixty-two thousand eight hundred dollars of those bonds 
were issued for the redemption of scrip, — bonds being issued at 
seyenty cents on the dollar and scrip received at par. 

Q. What disposition has been made of the balance of the seven 
per cent, bonds? 

A. Eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars have been nego- 
tiated. 

Q. When, where and how were th^ negotiated ? 
A. They were negotiated and sold to R. S. Stevens at sixty cents 
on the dollar. 

Q. By whom were they sold ? 

A. By the Secretary of State — John W. Robinson, and myself. 

Q. Where were they sold ? 
A. At Washington. 

Q. When so sold J 

A. Between the Ist and 15th of December, A. D. 1861. 

Q. At what price? 

A. Sixty cents on the dollar. 

Q. What disposition was made of them (if you know) by Mr. 
Stevens ? 

A. They were disposed of by him to the Interior Department, as 
I understand it. 

Q. What, if anything, have you learned from Mr. Stevens. in the 
matter — I mean in regard to the price ? 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President : The defense object to this ques- 
tion. It is not important at this stage, and we do not expect to 
make issue upon this point. Every one here knows these bonds 
were sold for eighty-five cents on the dollar; the evidence of Mr. 
Secretary Smith and Commissioner Dole fully state this. Mr. 
Stevens may be called and testify in relation to the matter; our 
objection is based upon the general principal of refusing here-say- 
evidence. 

Attorney General. — ^May it please the Court, this prosecution 
charges the defendant, John W. Robinson; the witness, Mr. HiHyer, 
and Mr. Stevens, with having entered into a conspiracy to defraud 
the State. The charge is contained in the Article of Impeachment. 
£Mr. Stinson read article number 5, of the Article of Impeachment.] 
This question is unimportant to us at this pointf but we charge 



184 PROOEEDINQS IN THB ^ 

these parties with conspiracy and therefore claim a right to all 
evidence which may establish this charge. If we should not suc- 
ceed in showing the conspiracy, this testimony may be incompetent;, 
but if we do so show it, then the acts of one of the conspirators in 
furtherance of the common evil design is binding upon all. We 
have a right to begin at any part of our case, and if we do not fail 
to connect it, as I have indicated with the defendants, it may be 

properly stricken out. 

« 

Mr. Stanton.-— We do not deny the prosecution of the evidence 
if they have proved the conspiracy: the witness, however has the 
right to refuse answering such questions. Mr. Hillyer is an intelli- 
gent gentleman, and is aware that he need not criminate himself by 
aos^ring questions of this nature. 

Attorney General. — ^He can refuse to answer. 

The question was repeated. 

A. He never told me the price obtained. I did not know until 
his testimony before the Investigating Committee was published. 
I do not know that he has spoken of it since. 

Q. What conversation, if any, did you ever hold with the defend- 
ant in regard to the price of these bonds ? 

A. We had several interviews. We understood that there was a 
portion of these bonds — fifty thousand dollars — we had a right to 
sell without limitation. 

Q. That was a part of your conversation, was it ? 
A. Tes sir. 

Q. What further conversation had you ? 

A. We also understood that the expense of negotiating these 
bonds was to be retained out of the proceeds. 

Q. What conversation did you have with J ohn W. Robinson in 
relation to the price which the Department was to pay for these 
bonds ? 

A. We never had any conversation as to what was paid, as we 
never knew; we had determined to sell at seventy cents if it could 
be obtained. 

Q. What payment was made by Mr. Stevens, at the time of the 
sale of these bonds ? 
A. Nothing. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 186 

Q. What did he pay you ? 

A. He did not pay me anything. 

Q. Or the Secretary ? 

A. Nothing, to my knowledge. 

Q. What security did he give you for the payment of the amount 
for these bonds ? 

A. We took no security, but his receipt that the proceeds should 
be paid into the Treasury. 

Q. Have you the receipt ? 

A. Not here, I can send and get it. 

Q, Where is it ? 
A. In my office. 

Q. When was he to pay for these bonds 7 

A. When the bonds were sold and paid for by the Department) 
or to whomever they were sold. 

Q. Was there any limitation in the receipt as to the time he was 
to pay the amount '/ 
A. No sir, I believe not. 

Q. Did you know at the time you delivered these bonds to Hr. 
Stevens what disposition he was to make of them ? 

A. I did know that he had a bargain or contract made, or that 
the preliminaries were already made. 

Q. Did J. W. Robinson know what disposition Mr. Stevens was 
to make of these bonds ? 

A. Yes sir, we both understood that if negotiated at all, they 
were to he sold to the Interior Department. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with the Secretary of Interior 
in regard to the negotiation of these bonds ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Under the terms of the sale with Mr. Stevens, was he bound 
in any way ? 
A. No sir. 

Mr. Stanton. — The Attorney General will allow me to suggest 
that there is a written contract between these gentlemen, which has 
already been in evidence before the Investigating Committee. 

Mr. Hillyer. — There is such a contract between Secretary Kob- 
inson and myself, and Mr. Stevens. 



186 PROCESDINOB IN THE 

Mr. Stinson. — I do not understand there is Bach a contract 
To witness. — Q. Have you the contract made between the 
parties ? 

A. I kept a copy of it. 

Q. Where is it ? 

[Witness presented copy of the contract made by John W. 
Robinson and himself with Mr. Stevens, printed in the report of 
the House Investigating Committee.] 

Mr. Stanton. — ^We do not admit that document as evidence only 
80 far as proved. 

Attorney General to Witness. — Q. You admit that this is a true 
copy of the contract made by you and J. W. Robinson, with Mr. 
Stevens, do you ? 

A. Yes. 

The contract was then read : 

[copy.] 

This certifies that we have employed and constituted R. S. Ste- 
vens an agent on the part of the State of Kansas to negotiate and 
sell all the seven per cent, bonds of said State, issued in accordance 
with the provisions of an act of the Legislature of the State of 
Kansas, approved May 1, 1861, and an act supplementary thereto, 
approved June 8, 1861, authorizing the issue and sale of one hun- 
dred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of said State ; and we 
hereby agree to give him for his services as such agent, all and 
whatever amount of money he may receive for said bonds over and 
above sixty cents (60 cents) on the dollar ; that is to say, for all the 
bonds belonging to the State, which the said Stevens may sell, he is 
to pay into the State Treasury the sum of sixty cents (60 cents) on 
each and every dollar. 

Witness our hands this third day of December, A. D. 1861. 

JOHN W. ROBINSON, Secretary of State. 
GEO. S. HILLYER, Auditor of Stote. 

This paper is, according to my belief, a true copy of the original. 

R. S. STEVENS. 

Attorney General. — Q. Is this which I have read, a correct oopy 
of the contract made with Mr. Stevens ? 

Mr. Hillyer.-*--A. To the best of my recollection, it is a true oopy. 



IMPEAOHMSNT 0A8S8. 187 

Q. Mr. Hilljer, is this the contract under which the honds were 
Bold? 
A. It ifl. 

Q. Is this the only contract 1 
A. It is the only contract. 

Q. Was this paper executed hy John W. Robinson and yourself 7 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where was this paper executed ? 
A. At Washington. 

Q. On the day of its date ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. For what purpose did you and John W. Robinson go to 
Washington ? 

A. I went to sell the bonds ; donH know the entire business of 
the Secretary. 

Q. Do you know by any conversation you had with John W^ 
Robinson if he went on that business ? 

A. I should think not ; he has some relatiVes in Washington, 
whom he expect^ to visit, he left a day or two before I did, and 
did not decide on going to Washington until after he got to Chicago. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with J. W. Robinson in rela- 
tion to the bonds, prior to your going to Washington ? 
A. I had several conversations with him. 

Q. When you left here did you expect to negotiate these bonds 
while absent ? 

A. I expected to make an effort. 

Q. Had Mr. Robinson any private bonds of his own t \ 

A. I believe he had. j 

m 

Q. Do you know what amount ? ^ 

A. I do not. 

Q. Do you know about what amount ? 
A. I believe about three thousand dollars. 

Q. What disposition did he make of them J 

A. They were sold at the same time and place as the State bonds. . 

Q. Do you know what price he received for those bonds ? 
A. I do not. 



188 PROOSEBtNGS IN THS 

Q. Did be never tell you what he received for those bonda ? 
A. I do not know tbat be did. Tbe report is tbat be received 
seventy cents. 

Q. Have you beard it so stated in bis presence ? 
A. I tbink I bave. 

Q. Have you bad any conversation witb Jobn W. Robinson in 
•the matter ? 

A. I suppose I have. 

/Q. Do you know through whom they were negotiated ? 
A. Through Mr. Stevens. 

*Q. What private bonds bad you witb you ? 
•A. I bad fourteen hundred dollars of my own. 

Q. Had you any other bonds not the property of the State ? 
A. I bad. • But had no interest in, but only charge of them. 

Q. What did you do witb your private bonds ? 
A. They were sold with the State bonds. 

Q. What did you get for them ? 

A. I got seventy cents firom Mr. Stevens. No contract was made 
ifith him, as to tbe price I should receive. I told him I wanted my 
l>onds sold with those of tbe State. On his return, he paid me at 
the rate of seventy cents on the dollar. This was his own proposi* 
.tion. 

Q. Was the whole amount due paid to you at the same time ? 
A. Mr. Stevens paid me a portion at Washington, and the 
remainder on tbe final settlement here. 

Q. At what proportion did he pay you first ? 

A. I bad with me $1,400 of my own, two hundred dollars for 
Mr. Dutton, and some from Mr. Weir. Stevens paid me, I think, 
. a thousand dollars. I tbink Weir's amounted to one thousand 
dollars. 

Q. Under what arrangement did you have the bonds of Mr. 
Weir? 

A. I had no arrangement with him. He sent them in a letter ta 
.Senator Pomeroy, and asked that they be sold witb the rest^ 

Q. For bow much did you account to with Mr. Weir ? 
A. The whole. 

4i. When? 



IMFXACHMENT 0A6SS. 189 

A. When Mr. Steyens paid me. 

Q. What amount did you pay him the firbt time you settled witk 
him? 

A. I paid him sixty cents oi> the dollar. 

Q. How long after did you pay him the balance ? 
A. When he left here. 

Q. Was it before or after the sitting of the Inrestigating Gon^ 
mittee? 
A. After. 

Q. Did you ever see the original paper that this professes to be » 
copy? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Attorney Gkneral. — This paper is attatched to the depositionsr 
hut not marked as an " exhibit."'*' 

Q. Where was the original paper executed ? 

A. At Washington. i 

Q. By whom was it executed ? 
A. I signed it, and the Secretary. 

Q. Who signed the name of Charles Eobinson, Oovernor ? 
A. The Secretary signed the Governor's name, 

Q. At what time was this paper executed ? 
A. It was executed about the first of December, A. D. 1861. I 
could not tell the exact day. 

Attorney General. — May it please the Court : The paper to 
which the witness refers, bears date 25th day of October, A. D. 
1861. 

The regular hour of adjournment having arrived, the Court rose 
till 2 o'clock P. M. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 
Senate met pursuant to adjournment. 
President pro tem. in the chair. 



*8e« depofiUoiifi pp. 143 to 179, inelniiTe. 



190 PBOOEEDINOS IN THE 

Proclamatiom was made by the Sergeani-atrAnns. 
' The roll being called, 

Absentees : — Messrs. Barnett, Connell, Hoffman, Holliday, Hub- 
bard, Lynde and Morrow. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, the following order was adopted : 

Resolvedy That in closing the case, '' The State of Kansas against 
John W. Robinson,'* the arguments shall be limited to four, not 
exceeding one session of the Court each, two for the prosecution and 
two for the defense, the prosecution to open and close. 

Examination in chief of the witness, George S. Hillyer, was 
resumed by the Attorney General. 

Q. Mr. Hillyer, was any arra/igement made with R. S. Stevens, 
in relation to the sale of the bonds, prior to your going to Wash- 
ington ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you, in connection with Dr. Robinson, or did Dr. Robin- 
son, to your knowledge, offer these bonds for sale to any other 
party ? 

A. I believe not. 

Q. When you went to Washington, was there any arrangement 
that you should meet Dr. Robinson there ? 
A. No positive arrangement. 

Q. Was there any understanding ? 

A. There was an understanding that if he concluded to go, he 
would meet me at the railroad depot in Chicago. As he did not do 
80, 1 concluded he had gone on. 

Q. While in Washington, did you and Dr. J. W. Robinson, or 
Dr. Robinson alone, make any attempt to dispose of these bonds, 
except to Mr. Stevens ? 

A. We did not. 

•Q. At the time you made the negotiation with Mr. Stevens, did 
Mr. Stevens expect to sell the bonds ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where ? 

A. I was told to Interior Department. 

Q. Who by? 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 191 

A, I don't know, positively. 

Q. Were you so told by Mr. Stevens ? 

A. I am not certain, but think Mr. Stevens told me the Depart- 
ment of the Interior. 

Q. Was that communicated to Dr. Robinson, as well as yourself? 
A. I think it was. 

Q. For what amount of bonds (if you know) did Mr. Stevens 
account for to the State ? 

A. I think it was about fifty-six thousand two hundred dollars. 

Q. Was there any other contract, agreement or bargain, between 
yourselves and Mr. Stevens, except these embodied in the paper 
shown you ? 

A. There was not — no contract except the one exhibited. 

Q. From whose hands did Mr. Stevens receive those bonds ? 
A. From my hands. 

Q. When? 

A. Some time in December, A. D. 18C1. I do not recollect the 
date. 

Q. Where ? 

A. At Washington. 

Q, Had Mr. Stevens, prior to the time of your meeting him in 
Washington, any of these bonds in his possession ? 

A. He had, I believe ; the State Treasurer put some bonds in his 
hands. Mr. Stevens had not received any bonds except those 
received from Mr. Dutton. 

Q. What amount of bonds did you deliver to Mr. Stevens in 
Washington ? 

A. There were a portion of the bonds there, received from 
Dutton, which had been left by Stevens, I forget the amount, I 
I think it was $29,000. Prior to my going to Washington there 
was $21,000 there; I don't know who took those bonds on. The 
121,000 was receipted for by Mr. Stevens, as from Mr. Dutton, 
making $50,000 in all. I found them securely lodged in a safe, and 
there lefl them. I took on the $87,200, making in all $87,200,00, 
th^ whole of which came back into my hands, and were by me 
handed to Mr. Stevens, from whom I took a receipt. 

Q. Do you know, of your own knowledge that Mr. Dutton handed 
those bonds to Mr. Stevens ? 



192 PBOCEEDINQS IN THB 

A. I do not. I bave seen Mr. Stevens' receipt for the bonds. 

Q. Did you not, at any time, request Mr. Button to hand certain 
bonds to Mr. Stevens when he called for them, and take his receipt 
for the same ? 

A. I donH remember. Very likely the bonds were deliyered to 
Mr. Stevens by order of myself, or by the other officers. 

Q. At the time Mr. Stevens took these bonds, were they not in- 
complete, lacking the signature of the Oovemor ? 

A. I think all of that amount mentioned were perfected. I 
think all was perfected excepting the amount $37,200, (thirty-seven 
thousand, two hundred dollars) I took on myself. 

Q. By whose order did Mr. Button deliver those bonds to Mr, 
Stevens ? 

A. By the consent of myself, I presume. I do not know that any 
other was in it, probably after consultation with the Secretary it 
was agreed upon. 

Q. For what reasons were those bonds delivered to Mr. Button J 

A. I have no distinct recollection, but, to the best of my know- 
ledge, for to get a receipt for them from Mr. Stevens. 

Q. By what arrangement did Mr. Stevens take the $29,000 bonds 
from Mr. Button ? 

A. The $29,000 bonds were received from Mr. Button in New 
York, as I understand from his testimony before the Investigating 
Committee. 

Q. Was it done in accordance with any arrangement between Br. 
Robinson and yourself and Mr. Stevens ? 

A. His (Stevens) name was not mentioned in connection with the 
transaction at that time. 

Q. When Mr. Button took those bonds, were there any instruc- 
tions from Br. Robinson, or him and yourself, that he should make 
any certain disposition of them ? 

A. I don't recollect the date Mr. Button went East with the War 
Bonds, and took at the same time $29,000 of the seven per cent, 
bpnds, with instructions, whether written or not I don't remember. 
1 think they were given by the Crovernor, Secretary and myself, to 
sell them at not less than seventy cents on the dollar ; he wrote that 
he could not sell them at that price. I did not know that these 
bonds were in Washington. When I reached there, I learned that 
Mr. Stevens left them there in safe keeping. 



IMPSAOHMEHT 0ASB6. 19S 

Q. From whom ? 
A. H. L. Stevens. 

Q. When did you and Dr. Robinson first commence making 
arrangements with Mr. Stevens about the selling of these bonds ? 
A. It was about the first of December, in Washington. 

Q. Had you any conversation with him prior to that time ? 
A. Tes, some time in October, I think, in relation to the bonds ; 
about the middle I think. 

Q. What was that conversation ? 

A. The proposition was made to the Governor, Secretary Robin- 
son and myself, by Mr. Stevens, about selling these bonds, nothing 
resulted, and no official action was taken. I think the only conver- 
sation I had with Mr. Stevens was in Washington. 

Q. What was the cost to the State to negotiate these bondji ? 

A. It cost $350, paid out of the proceeds of the bonds sold tqt 
sixty cents — to pay my expenses to Wi^ington — the Seoretarya 
while there, and our passage home. 

Q. What compensation, if any, did Dr. Robinson reoMve IW)hi 
Hr. Stevens ? 

A. I have no knowledge of his receiving any whatever. 

Q. By whose authority and consent did Mr. Stevens purchase 
these bonds at sixty cents ? 

A. By the Secretory 's and my own. 

Q. Any other authority ? 
A. No other authority there. 

Q. Did you not learn, at any time while in Washington, the 
price at which these bonds were sold ? 
A. I did not. 

Q. Did you not learn about the price they were sold at ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you know whether or not, they were sold for less than 
seventy cents to the Interior Department ? 

A. I did not know any thing about it at all. I inquired of Sen- 
ator Pomeroy, but he said he [knew] nothing. No action had then 
been taken by the Department. 

Q. Did you ever hear Dr. Robinson say any thing in the matter ? 

A. I heard him say he did not know. 
13 



194 PEOOESBINaS IN THE 

Q. Waa ever any money paid you by Mr. Steyens for the State 
bonda? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Or Dr. Robinson f 

A. Not that I know of, either directly or indirectly. 

Q. Was Mr. Stevens at any time, prior to your going to Wash- 
ington, constituted your agent for the sale of State bonds t 

A. No, sir, he was not so constituted. The appointment was 
consummated in Washington. 

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge where the balance of 
the bonds are, that are not accounted for ? 

' A. The balance of the bonds not paid for by the Department, 
Mr. Stevens accounts for as being now in the possession of the 
Department. 

Q. In the authority which I exhibited to you, you said the Gor- 
emor's name was signed by the Secretary, Dr. Bobinson — why was 
it done ? ^ 

A. He said the Governor gave him authority to use his name, if 
it became necessary. 

Q. Was it necessary for him to do so at that time T 

A. I do not know that it was. 

Q. Do you know for what purpose Mr. Stevens used that paper f 
A. To show the Department that he had power to act for the 
State, I suppose. 

Q. Did Dr. Robinson and yourself, or Dr. Robinson himself, make 
any application to the Interior Department, to sell these bonds ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. I believe it became the duty of the Secretary to countersiga 
all the bonds, did it not 7 
A. It was. 

Q. Was the $40,000 War Bonds countersigned by the Secretary f 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What amount of the 140,000 War Bonds were sold ? 
A. There was $81,000 sold. 

Q. Who to ? 

A. R. S. Stevens, agreeably to Mr. Dutton's report. 

P. At what price ? 
A. At forty cents. 



IttPBAOHMBNT 0ASS8. 19S 

Q. Ton flay you do know that Dr. Robinson conntersigned the 
$40,000 of War Bonds ? 

A. The law requires me to register, and I noticed that all the 
bonds were signed by the Governor, and countersigned by the 
Secretary and Treasurer. 

Q. I believe these seven per cent, bonds were made with coupoDB, 
were they not ? 
A. Yes, sir« 

Q. Where were the coupons at the time these bonds were de- 
livered to Mr. Stevens ? 
A. On the bonds. 

Q. I believe these were dated July 1st, were they not ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were the coupons due on the Ist of January, on the bonds» 
when delivered ? 

A. Yes, sir, all coupons are attached to bonds when sold. 

Q. Do you know what became of the coupons due oa the Ijl ^ 
January? 

A. The l!reasurer reports them as paid by him. 

Q. Have you ever seen them since ? 

A. Have seen coupons in his office ; don't know if they are the 
same ; there is a large number. 

Q. Do you know anything of the printing of the banking law 
that was made at the last session ? 
A. Yes, I know something of it. 

Q. Are those accounts audited by you ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do the vouchers show the specific newspaper for which they 
were intended ? 
A. Yes, the vouchers will show, I believe. 

Q. Did you audit an account for the publication of the banking 
law, for the Wabaunsee Patriot ? 

A. I think there was such an account audited and paid. I have 
searched my papers, but cannot find this voucher. 

Q. Have you made diligent search for it where you thought it 
was to be found ? 

A. It was given to some legislative committee, or the Board of 
Kanagers, and I have not been able to find it since. I drew a 
warrant for the amount, and it was paid. 



196 nOCSBDINQS IN THX 

Q. What wan the amount of that youcher ? 

A. It was three hundred and forty-four doUan, I beliere. 

Q. What connection did the Secretary of State hare wiih thai 
■Atterf 

A. The accounts are sworn to by the parties to whom they aff» 
4ae. This banking law was to be published by the Secretary of 
State. I required that the Secretary's certificate should be attaoheA 
to each account. 

Q. Was it done on that youcher t 

A. It was on that. I did not allow any account without tsmik 
certificate. 

Q. In fayor of whom was that warrant drawn ? 

A. It was drawn in favor of J. F. Cummings, and transferred to 
R. S. Steyens. My books show this transfer. I was ordered to pay 
accounts to parties to whom transfers were made. 

Attorney General to defendant's counsel. — ^Tou can take the 
witness. 



Cross examined by Hr. Stanton : 

Q. Will you state what efforts you and Dr. Robinson made to sell 
these bonds before or after you went to Washington, and before you 
made the arrangements with Mr. Stevens ? 

A. We never jointly maide any such effort. Knowingly to each 
other we wrote, I to New York, he to Chicago. 

Q. What was the result of your correspondence ? 

Attorney General. — I submit to the Court whether this evidcDce 
ean be properly introduced, except in writing. ' 

Mr. Stanton. — Does the gentleman object to the question ? 
Attorney General.— I will not urge the objection at this time. 

Mr. Hillyer.— The information I received was, that to put bondft- 
in the New York market, would be equivalent to throwing them im 
the stove. I wrote to a brother in New York who had previously 
done some business of this kind. He said, further, he would go t^ 
Hartford or New Haven to see if a sale could be effected. He wtoU 
M> gentlemen who had dealt in securities. 



IMPSAOHMSNT OASES. lO^T 

Q. Wbat conclnsions did jou and Mr. Robinson come to, i^ 
regard to the selling of these bonds elsewhere than at Washington f 

Attorney General. — May it please the Court: I object to 
reoeiving this testimony. I am not willing that such evidence 
should be allowed. We are not here to try these gentlemen's con* 
elusions. I am willing to give a broad latitude to examinations, to 
eonnteract any feelings that may arise in the minds of gentlemen, 
as to the apparent negligence of John W. Bobinson or Mr. Hillyer, 
while in office. But conclusions are yours and not theirs. 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President and Senators : This question is 
one of motives and purposes equally with facts. I submit to the 
good sense of this body, as well as to their discretion, if it is not 
proper for this witness to testify that he and his colleagues came to 
the conclusion that they could not sell these bonds anywhere else 
except to the Government. It is a question of motives on their 
part. Yet 1 submit, if we show this, whether it is not a question of 
fact also. I might put the question in another form. I could ask 
the witness, why did you not go to New Terk to Sell these bonds 7 
It would be competent for him to reply, tiiey could not be aoU 
there, and then state the reasons. I think, with all due respect to 
my friend, his objection is rather a captious one. 

Attorney Gtenend.— May it please the Oourt : I am aware thai 
this is a question of intent, as well as of aetions j but I am not 
aware that it is competent, in a court of justice, to show the intent 
of an accused party, except by their acts. No man can stand, ia 
mieh a court, and endeavour to prove that he is not guilty of a 
orime charged and proven, on the plea that, deep down in his heart, 
he did not mean to commit a crime. The question of intent is 
simply this : Did the party charged do an act in violation of law, 
and did he intend to do that act ? 

Mr, Stanton.— Mr. President: The principle that the intent 
governs the criminality of aetions, is one well laid down in common 
law, and in all the authorities. We, therefore, claim that testimony, 
to prove the motives and ressons of John W. Robinson, in selling 
these bonds, will be perfectly legal and proper. 

Attorney General.— May it please the Court; If it is true thftt 
Hiese parties are guilty, as charged in the Articles of Impeaohment 
«pon which ihey now stand arndgned, it will be seeft that iilww 



198 PEO0KSDINO8 IN THE 

plans were well laid, and that they might well seek to disguise their 
guilty intents from themselves and each other, by such means as 
these counsel are now seeking to show in justification. It is com- 
petent to prove what John W. Robinson did, but not to show his 
conclusions prior to such acts. I therefore object to the question. 

The ayes and noes were taken on the objection, with the following 
result : 

Ayes — Messrs. Bayless, Cobb, Gonnell, Curtis, Hubbard, Knowles> 
Lambdin, Roberts and Sleeper — 9. 

Noes — ^Uessrs. Barnett, Denman, Essick, Ingalls, Keeler, Lappini 
McDowell, Rankin, Spriggs and Stevens — 10. 

And so the objection was not sustained. 

Mr. Cobb. — Mr. President : I desire to explain my vote. I 
understood the rule of law to be that conclusions cannot be given in 
evidence ; only acts. I therefore sustain the objection relating to 
the conclusions of J. W. Robinson and the witness. 

Witness. — Our conclusion was that we could not effeot a sale* 
except in quarters other than these we had tried. 

Q. Will you tell us why you did not go yourselves and negotiate 
with the Secretary of the Interior at Washington ? 

A. When I arrived in Washington, I called on Senator Pomeroy, 
and had a talk with him. 

Attorney €kneral. — ^May it please the Court : I make one more 
objection. If we are to go into heresay testimony, I am willing ; 
but I desire the rules shall be relaxed generally. 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President and Senators : If you will examine 
the depositions read here in the commencement of this trial, you 
will see that the conversations of witnesses are there reported. It 
is true that bonds were sold at sixty cents on the dollar, by this 
defendant. In doing this, we desire to see if he was specifically 
advised by the congressional representatives of the State. 

Attorney General. — ^May it please the Court : I object to these 

' witnesses giving heresay testimony. It is not proper to introduoe 

here what Mr. Pomeroy said. As to the depositions, counsel did 

* not object to the introduction of this class of evidence, beoause it 

told for, more than against them. Had such evidence been then 

objected to, I should not have resisted the objection. 



IMPBAOHUENT CABKS. 199 

The ay^8 and noes were taken on the objection, with the following 
lesult : 

Ayes— Messrs. Cobb, Curtis, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, Mc- 
Dowell, Osbom, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper and Spriggs — 12. 

Noes — ^Messrs. Bamett, Bajless, Connell, Benman, Essick, Hub- 
hard and Ingalls — 7. 

And so the objection was not sustained. 

Q. Mr. Hilljer, during the proceedings, did you and Mr. Secre- 
tary Robinson, in making the sale of these bonds* act on the advice 
of any other person than yourself? 

Attorney General. — ^I object to the question. 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President : It is hardly worth while for me to 
discuss this question. It is evident that this objection will be sus- 
tained. The defendent is accused of conspiracy, and we are not to 
be allowed to show that he, and those associated with him, acted in 
the matter upon the advice of our Senators and Representative in 
Congress. It will not injure our client if this objection is 
sustained. 

The ayes and noes were taken on the objection with the following 
lesult : 

Those gentlemen voting aye, were Messrs. Cobb, McDowell, 
Rankin and Spriggs — 4. 

Gentlemen voting no, were 

Messrs. Bamett, Bayless, Connell, Curtis, Denman, Essick, 
Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, Roberts and 
Sleeper — 14. 

And so the objection was not sustained. 

Mr. Denman, in voting said. — Mr. President : By the character 
of this evidence, we are led to believe that our Representatives in 
Congress may have something to do with this matter. To get at the 
truth, is the only reason I have for voting *^ No" 

The question was renewed. 

Mr. Hillyer. — We did. I acted on the advice of Senator Pomeroy 
so far as I am concerned, almost exclusively. 

Q. What advice did Senator Pomeroy give you ? 
A. He advised us to take sixty cents for the bonds. 

Q. What was Senator Pomeroy's advice to you in relation to 
seeing the Secretary of the Interior yourselfs 7 



200 PB00BSDING8 IN THB 

A. Senator Pomeroy told m% on my arrival at Washington, that 
it would be impossible to effect negotiations with the Interior 
Department; his reasons given were, that Mr. Dole had just 
returned from the West, and was opposed to such investmentSi 
especially in Kansas bonds, and he believed the funds uped in this 
were nearly exhausted. Upon a suggestion of my own, he agreed 
to go and ascertain the amount, if any, still left, and ascertain if 
possible, whether such negotiations could be effected. I called a 
day or two after, and he reported a sufficient amount to take all the 
Kansas bonds, but it was doubtful if the money would be so in- 
vested ', I said to him, I expected Hr. Stevens in a few days, that 
he ^ad had a good deal of business with the Department, and asked 
what he thought about his influence. He replied, that Stevens was 
the best man, and we had better do nothing till he came. I waited 
on that advioe till Mr. Stevens arrived. 

Q. Did Senator Pomeroy advise you against seeing the Sacretaiy 
of Interior yourselves or not ? 

A. He did, thought it would do no good. 

Q. After Mr. Stevens came to Washington, what propositions did 
Secretary Robinson make to him in regard to the sale of these 
bonds ? I mean, what propositions were made to Mr. Stevens in 
allowing him to sell these bonds f 

A. In consultation, it was thought best that Stevens should take 
the selling of the bonds, and Senator Pomeroy advised the making 
of Stevens, agent. I don't know that there was any proposition 
made as to the amounts ; we decided at the first interview to make 
dtevens agent. 

Q. At what price ? 

A. No price was stipulated, we supposed they would bring seventy 
cents. Mr. Stevens reported, before the negotiations closed, what 
eould be done, and what not. 

Q. Did not Secretary BobinsoB object in the first place, to receiv- 
ing anything less than seventy cents ? 

A. He did at first refuse to accept less than seventy cents, he 
afterwmrds said, that if Pomeroy advised it, he would waive hii 
•bjections. 

Q. Do you act recollect of his objecting positively to sell them 
my lees? 



IBIPEACHMSNT CASX8. 201 

A. It 18 possible he may have said that he would not take less 
than seventy eents, he was very much opposed to the sale. 

Q. When you first executed the paper, appointing Mr. Stevens 
agent, did you then contemplate taking less than seventy cents f 
A. We did not expect to take any less. 

Q. Do you not remember Dr, Kobinson insisting on getting sixty- 
ive cents if they could not get seventy cents ? 
A. He did want sixty-five cents. 

Attorney General.— May it please the Court, I object to this 
question. The defense have no right to ask leading questions of 
this character. If we had asked, or called out from the witness, 
anything in relation to this sixty-five cents, it would be a proper 
question. I submit whether this examination is of a proper character. 
Without meaning to reflect, let us look at the facts. The witness 
aow on' the stand, stands charged under similar Articles of Impeach- 
tnent, with like offenses. It is certainly fair to say, that he must 
therefore, have a strong bias in proving, and be induced, by ingenious 
questions from learned counsel, to show that John W. Robinson U 
A pure and honest man. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^Mr. President : This question may be a leading 
<me, imd the form can be changed, but if we can prove that Dr. 
Robinson did first try to get seventy cents, then sixty-five, we admit 
that while this would not excuse a violation of the law, that it will 
be important in showing his motives. With the permission of the 
Senate, I will read from Oreenleaf on Evidence, Vol. 1, page 188, 
Section 108. This will be found to bear directly upon the case : 

'* His declarations, made at the time of the transaction, and 
expressive of its character, motive, or object, are regarded as < verbal 
acts, indicating a present purpose and intention,' and are therefor^ 
admitted in proof, like any other material fkots. So, upon an 
inquiry as to the state of mind, sentiments, or disposition of a per- 
aon at any particular period, his declarations and conversations are 
admissible. They are parts of the resgeUce" 

Attorney General. — ^I waive the objection. 

Mr. Stanton.— Mr. Hillyer, do you remember Dr. Robinson insist- 
ing on getting sixty-five cents, if they could not get seventy cents, 
in some stage of the proceedings t 

Witnta.— I do. 



202 PE00IEDING8 IN THX 

Q. Do yoa remember at what time, or at wliat period of the 
negotiationB Dr. Robinson finally consented to the sale at sixty 
eents? 

A. I do not. 

Q. What consideration induced you and Dr. Robinson to accept 
sixty cents, when the law apparently demands they shall not be 
fold for less than seventy cents ? 

A. We thought the imperative interests of the State demanded 
it; that is all I know of Robinson's interest in the mattter. 

Q. What information as to the value of the bonds, induced you 
and Dr. Robinson to accept sixty cents for the bonds? 

A. My information, as well as knowledge and belief, was that, if 
we failed to sell to the Oovemment, we lost our only chance; accord- 
ing to our judgment and that of Senator Pomeroy, this was our only 
chance. 

Q. When Mr. Stevens was receiving eighty-five cents on the 
dollar for these bonds, why was it you and Robinson consented to 
take sixty cents? 

A. We did not know what he was getting for the bonds, and I 
don't know that others did. We understood that the bonds of other 
States were selling for less, and we did not expect to get more. 

Q. You say that when Mr. Stevens was first appointed as agent 
you expected to get seventy cents did you ? 
A. We did expect to realize seventy cents. 

Q. Why then did you come so low as sixty cents ? 

A. Mr. Stevens reported to us that was the best he could do, that 
we would have to take that, for he could get no more; the negotiv 
iions were in such a shape that it could not be effected without 
him — ^Mr. R. S. Stevens. 

Q. At any time during these negotiations, state whether or not 
these bonds were drawn from the hands of Mr. Stevens? 

A. They were withdrawn when he first made the proposition of 
getting but sixty cents; with my views and those of the Secretary 
we did not believe it would be right. I took the bonds back, and 
gave Mr. Stevens his receipt. Afterwards, Senator Pomeroy ad- 
vised our taking sixty cents. I took the bonds from Mr. Stevens 
with the intention of returning home. 

Q. How often did you and Robinson visit and hold interviews 
with Gen. Lane in relation to the sale of these Bonds ? 



IMPEAOHMENT CASES. 20& 

A. I think we went together two or three times to see Gen. Lane; 
the business was generally done by me alone. 

Q. Was it only two or three times in connection with Robinson 
yon went to see Gen. Lane on this matter ? 

A. Don't think it was more than three times we went together. 

Q. Did Stevens ever go in company with you and Robinson to 
see Gen. Lane. 

A. Mr. Stevens never went with me. 

Q. Did Gen. Lane ever denounce Mr. Stevens as a thief in your 
presence ? 

A. He did denounce him. I do not recollect being with Mr^ 
Stevens in Gen. Lane*s room, and hearing him denounce Mr. 
Stevens. 

4 

Q. You say he never denounced Mr. Stevens as a thief when he 
(Stevens) was with you? 
A. He never denounced Mr. Stevens when he was with me. 

Q. Will you state whether Gen. Lane made any propositions in 
regard to the sale of these bonds ? 

A. After I had stated to him what had been done I called upon, 
him to sign the papers necessary to effect the negotiation. He was 
very angry, denouncing Mr. Stevens, and said he could not consent 
to do anything while Mr. Stevens was agent. We met at the Ave- 
nue House, and then took a walk. He wished me to take the 
agency for the State, and said he would cheerfully assist me; he 
asked me about what my expenses would be. I told him my 
expenses would be allowed. He then proposed that I should take 
the agency, agree upon a per centum which I would report to the. 
State, adding thereto 5, 7, or 8 cents as I pleased, it did not matter 
much which, for myself, and he would help to put it through. I 
refused to do this; he then proposed to have me carry the money to 
Kansas. I agreed, and told him I thought Stevens would. The 
responsibility of taking money to Kansas at that time was not 
pleasant. He finally proposed that Messrs. Pomeroy and Conway 
should have charge of the sending of the money to Kansas. This 
suited me better. 

Q. Was there any proposition made by Gen. Lane to divide the- 
profits on the sale of these bonds ? 



204 PftOOSSBlNGS IN THK 

A. None at all. I refused to have anything to do with it. No 
more was said. 

Q. Do you know anything of Gkn. Lane's having signed the 
letter addressed to the President ? 

A. I know of his signing that paper. I saw him write tiie name 
to ih« paper himself. 

Q. Was Mr. Stevens' name in the letter at the time ? 
A. It was. 

Q. Do you know if Lane read the letter before he signed it f 
A. I do not. He took it, opened and read it, as I supposed, 
wrote his name to it, and returned it. 

Q. Do you know if Gen. Lane's attention had been called to that 
letter previously i' 

A. Yes sir, frequently. The Secretary and myself called hia 
i^ttention to it. He refused that day to have anything to do with 
it, for ihe reason that we were backed by Stevens,. I have no per- 
sonal knowledge that he saw the paper before, only that he said, 
tm the day we called, that he had had it. 

Q. Who was present beside yourself when he signed itf 
A. I do not remember that there was any one ; I think not, I 
was in only a minute. 

Q. Was Reynolds there ? 

A. I don't remember. It is possible he might have been. I did 
not notice him. 



Examination in chief resumed. 

Attorney General. — At the time Pomeroy recommended the sale 
H>f these bonds, to whom did he recommend you to sell them f 

A. He recommended to us to accept Stevens' propoeition-Hrizty 
eents, saying that, if we failed in that, we could not sell at all. 

Q. Did you and Secretary Robinson tell him that the law limited 
you to seventy cents t 

A. I did have a conversation with him in relation to a portion of 
those bonds, that, under the supplementary act, ihe law limited us. 

Q. Did you state to Pomeroy that the law restricted you to seventy 
^ntsf 



IMPBAOHMENT CASBS. 205 

A. I don't know if the Secretary was present. I called hit 
.(Pomeroy's) attention to that fact. 

Q. Did you tell him 1 
A. I did. 

Q. Did Senator Pomeroy advise you to sell those bonds in violiK 
Am of law ? 

A. He advised me to sell them at sixty cents. 

Q. When General Lane proposed yon shonld act as agent for the 
sale of these bonds, what price did he suggeet they should be sold 
at? 

A. He never said any thing about the price of the bonds himself^ 
directly or indirectly, he advised me to say what amount I woul4 
return to the State, and then add the per cent., and he would assiai 
me in putting it through. 

Q. Did Secretary Robinson and yourself believe you had a riglii 
to appoint Mr. Stevens as agent for the sale of these bonds t 
A. We did think we had a perfect right to do so. 

Q. During the progress of these negotiations in Washingtoa, dad 
Dr.* Robinson make any effort to sell these bonds to your knowledge f 
A. Not that I know of 

Q. How much did you and Dr. Robinson suppose Stevens was lo 
get for these bonds ? 

A. I never had any supposition about it; I presumed he wan 
making a fair per cent., I did not know what he was getting. 

Q. Did Robinson say about what price he supposed Stevens wae 
to get? 
A. He said he presumed that Stevens would do well. 

Q« Did you or Dr. Robinson make any inquiries at Washington, 
what you could get for these bonds ? 

A. No, sir. I never spoke to the Secretary of the Interior, or 
Mr. Dole, while in Washington. 

Q. Did Mr. Stevens or Dr. Robinson, state to you what he could 
get for your individual bonds ? 

A. No, sir, he merely consented to let them go in — ^that is, my 
mdividual ^onds — ^with the State bonds. When he settled, he pail) 
me seventy cents. He was under pp obligations to do so, but did 
it of his own accord. 

Q. How many written contracts did you have with Stevens in 
relation to these bonds f 



206 PBOOEEDINOS IN THX 

A. But one. 

Q. How many writings did jou have in relation to these bonds f 

A. A receipt or two passed there, that is all I know of. I gare 
him back a receipt when I took back the bonds, he gave me another 
receipt when the bonds were returned to him. 

Q. What time in December was the paper ezeonted, bearing dale 
25th or 26th of October ? 
^ A. Between the Ist and 6th. 

Q. Was it as late as that ? 
A. It was. 

Q. Do yon know anything of John W. Robinson's haying 
received any part of the proceeds of these bonds ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever hear him say anything abont receiving any- 
thing ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever hear Stevens say any thing about paying hi» 
anything ? 

A. No, sir, I heard him say he had not. 

Q. Was there any effort on the part of Eobinson to keep these 
aegotiations a secret, while in Washington ? 
A. No, sir, there was not. 

Q. Or at any other time ? 
A. No, sir. 

0B0S8 EXAMINATION BESUMED BT THE DEFENSE. 

By Mr. Stanton. — What propositions did General Lane make you 
at the time you were speaking of the sale of the bonds to him f 

Witness. — He simply said, I should affix a price to return to the 
State, and then add 5, 7 or 8 cents, and he would help it through. 

Q. What answer did you make J 

A. I told him I would have nothing to do with it. 

Q. Did you ever represent to Gen. Lane that Stevens had nothing 
to do with these negotiations ? 

A. I never told G^n. Lane that Stevens was not connected with 
the Bale. 

Q. You never told him, he, (Stevens) had not any thing to do with 
it? 

A. I did not. 



IMPXACHMSNT OASSfi. 20T 

Q. Did Br. RobinBon ever liaye control of those bonds at any 
time ? 

A. Dr. Robinson never had them in his possession. 

Q. Did you tell Dr. Robinson what Senator Pomeroj said about 
yonr not attempting to make the sale yourselves ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

EXAMINATION IN CHIST BXSUMED. 

By Attorney General. — ^Were not these bonds under your joint 
oontrol ? 

A. I suppose they were. 

By the President. — Did Senator Pomeroy tell you the bonds eould 
not be sold for more than sixty cents ? 

A. He did not make any such remark to me ; when I told him of 
it, he said that if we failed in that, case, we should probably fail 
altogether. 

The examination of this witness here closed. 
On motion Senate adjourned. 



SIXTH DAT. 

Senate Chamber, . ) 
Saturday, June 7th, 1862, 9 o'clock, A. M. J 

The Senate of the State of Kansas sitting as a High Court of 
Impeachment met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the Chair. 

Boll called. 

Quorum not present. 

On motion, of Mr. Ingalls, the Sergeant-at-Arms was sent after 
absentees. 

Sergeant-at-Arms appeared with Messrs. Bamett, Denman and 
Stevens. 

On motion flirther proceedings under the call were dispensed 
with. 

Quorum present. 

Journal of yesterday read and approved. 



208 Pl^OOEEDINQB IN THE 

Present, the Hon. S. A. Stinson, and the Board of Mana^rs on 
the part of the House of Representatives. 

Hon. Wilson Shannon, Hon. F. P. Stanton, and N. P. Case, 
Esq., attorneys for defense. 

The President appointed Augustus A. Smith, Assistant Secretaiy, 
who came forward and took the following oath : 

State of Kansas, ) 
Shawnee County, j 

I, Augustus A. Smith, do solemnly swear that I will support the 
Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the 
State of Kansas, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of 
Assistant Secretary, of the Senate of the State of Kansas, accord- 
ing to the best of my ability, so help me God. 

AUGUSTUS A. SMITH. 
Topeka, June 7, 1862. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 7th day of June, A. D. 

1862. 

T. A. OSBORN, 

President pro tem. of the Senate of the State of Kansas. 

Hon. Davies Wilson, on the part of the Board of Managers 
announced, that in consequence of the illness of Hon. P. B. I'lumb, 
the Hon. Azel Spaulding, had been nominated by the Board, its 
Chairman pro tem. 

Hon. Wilson Shannon. — Mr. President : We desire to inform the 
Senate, that Judge G. W. Smith, has been associated with counsel 
for defense, and we wish to haye his name so recorded on the 
Journals. 

It was so ordered by the President. 



[H. B. BUTTON'S TESTIMONY.] 
Mr. Button called and sworn on the part of the State. 

By Attorney General. — I believe you are State Treasurer, are you 
not? 

A. Some say I am, some say not. 

Q. You haye been acting, haye you ? 

A. I haye acted in that capacity for about a year. 

Q. Haye you been since the issuing of these bonds ? 
A. I haye. 



\ 



IMPJBAOHMKNT OAB^B. 209 

Q. I believe you were prior to the iBsaing of any bonda by tbe 
State, were yoa not ? 
A. I was. 

Q. Wbat amount of seven per'oent. bonds have been issned under 
the acts of May Ist and June 3rd, 1861 ? 

A. One hundred and fifty tfaouHand dollars, — I think some few 
bonds were destroyed — ^the amount issued was about one hundred 
and forty-nine thousand, four or six hundred dollars. 

Q. What disposition has been made of the bonds f 
A. Sixty-two thousand two hundred dollars was issued in re- 
demption of State 9crip ; the balance was given to Mr* Stevens, by 
order of the Secretary and Auditor, and his receipt taken fin* them. 

Q. When were those bonds delivered to Mr. Stevens? 

A. Twenty-nine thousand on the 30th of July ; and the balanee 
on the 19th of October. 1 have the receipts here, which show this. 

The receipts were handed to counsel. 

Attorney General. — What amount does these two receipts call 
for? 

A. Eighty-three thousand dollars. 

Q. For what purpose were the twenty-nine thousand dollar bonds 
placed in your possession ? 

A. I was going to New York, and they were placed in my hancl^} 
if I found an opportuity to sell at seventy cents on the dollar. 

Q. For what purpose were the others, of October date of reoeiptt 
in your possession ? 

A. They were never really placed in my hands, when I took the 
receipt for them. As they went out of the office, I took a receipt. 
They were not more in my hands for disposal, than that of the other 
State officers. 

Q. The bonds were in your custody, were they ? 

A. Yes, sir. I signed them. 

Q. Will you state again by whose authority or order you delivered 
them to Stevens? 

A. First of the Auditor and Secretary of State. 

Q. At the time the bonds were delivered by you to Mr. SteveoBy 

were they complete ? 

A. No, sir. 
14 



SSO* FA00XSDIN08 IN THX 

Q, In wlttt partieular did they laok completion 7 

A. They lacked the Bignatare of the Gtovemor, who was not 

ft 

here. 

Q. Waa Seoretary Bohinson and Mr. Hillyer aware of the imper- 
fection? 

A. I presume they were. I think the thing was talked of, and 
the bonds were t6 be taken to Lawrence for the Gk>Temor'8 signatnn. 
I don't remember particularly, but think it was talked of. 

Q. Who took these bonds to Lawrence to the Gbyemor for his 
signature ? 

A. I think Mr. SteTcns took them. 

Q. What portion of the bonds do you refer to ? 
A. The bonds thus incomplete were those embraced in the 19th 
of October receipt. 

Q. Did he, StcTens, make any objection on account of the lack of 
the signature of the Goyemor ? 
A. I don't recollect that he did. 

Q. Do you recollect what he did say in relation to it f 
A. I think he said they lacked the Governor's signature, and he 
Would take them down. 

Q. Do you know if the bonds ever came into the possession of 
fhe State officers, prior to Hillyer and Eobinson going to Wash* 
ington ? 

A. I do not. 

Q. Do you know who took them to Washington ? 
A. I do not, 

Q. Either from Bobinson or any party concerned 7 

A. I think Mr. Hillyer told me he took a part of them along. 

After they were put in hb possession, I really did not know what 

became of them. 

Q. Do you know, from Mr. Bobinson, what disposition was made, 
by them, of those bonds 7 

A. I heard him say they were put in Mr, Steyens' hands as agent 
of the State to sell them, with the understanding that the State 
kottds Hfete *to be sold at sixty centa. 

Q. Did Dr. Bobinson, at that time, say anything of the right to 
sell 7 



imf^ACvaamn oasis. 2U 

. A. Befcyie lie wsniMFay, he wsb of the opinion the Uw did nU 
limit the fifty thoQaaad dollsn. 

Q. At any other time I 
A, I think he did. 

Q. Did he exprees his opinion as to the limitation of the bonds 7 
A. I will give you what he said. 

Q.. What was that t 

A. It was abont making arrangements with Mr. Steyens to<8eU 
the fifty thousand at forty cents, and the balance at seventy cents. 

Q. The fifty thousand dollar bonds referred to, are those iasned 
under the act of May Ist, are they ? 
A. Ihej are. 

Q. Is this the signature of Mr. StOTens ? 
A. It is. ' 

Attorney GenevaL— May it please the Court : I propose now 
to offer in evidence these two receipts : 

Received, BnffiOo, July 30th, 1861, of H. R. Button, Treasurer 
of the State of Kansas, twenty-nine thousand dollars in b<mds of the 
State of Kansas, of the denomination of five hundred dollars each, 
and numbering from one to fifty-eight, inclusive, which are to be 
sold at seventy cents on the dollar, or returned. 

R. S. STfiVENB. 

Keceived of H. R. Button, State Treasurer, State bonds of the 

denomination <of one hundred dollars each, numbering firom six 

hundred and seventy-oae to one thousand, both inehisite ; also of 

five hundtsed dollar bonds, numbering from fiftynune to one knn- 

4red, both inclusive. 

R. S. STEVENS. 
Topeka, October 19th, IM^L. 

Q. By whose direction were the words limiting the sale to seventy 
<oents inserted in the July receipt ? 

A. By the Auditor and Seeretary of State; that was their diree- 
iions. They did not authorise me to put them in Mr. Stevens' 
hands, but gave them to me to. sell at that price. 

Q. What amount of bonds were there issued under the aot 
Mthorising the issuanee of bonds; besides those menAnned, how 
jnfny were issued t 

A. Sixty-two thousand two bundled doUass was used in the 
fedemption of scrip. At the time those receipts wero take&i five 



f 



212 PB0CSSDINO8 IN THS 

thousand dollars was retained for the redemption of anj aorip ttat 
knight come in between then and the time of sale, if sold. 

Q. What became of that five thousand ? 

A. I do not know. I think they were taken on and put in the 
sale. I judge so from Mr. Hilljer's report. 

Q. All these bonds were dated July Ist, and the first coupon* 

ft 

oame due January 1st, do they not ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What do you know of these coupons ? 
A. They were paid. 

Q. To whom ? 

A. All the five hundred dollar bonds to R. S. Stevens, and a 
portion of the one hundred dollar bonds. 

Q. To whom were the balance of the coupons paid ? 
A. They were paid to various parties on presentation. Soiiie are 
not paid yet. 

Q. Can you state ihe parties to whom they have been paid ? 
A. I am not able. 

Q. Do you keep no record to whom they have been paid ? 
A- Some were paid at the Ocean Bank in New York. 

Q. Those that have been paid here ? 

JL I have paid here to fifty different parties : some to Stevens, 
and some to others. , 

Q. I refer to those in the reoeipts. 

A. I never paid them to any other person ezc^t Mr. Stevens. 

Q. B^d you ever liave any oonversation with Dr. Robinson in 
this matter, after his return from Washington T 

A. Yery little. That was what I repeated a few moments ago, 
in regard to making Mr. Stevens agent. , 

Q. Did he ever state to yo<u what amount Stevens sold them for T 
A. He never did, sir. 

Q. Did he never state anything else, except what you have here 
stated, in veferenoe to the sale of these bonds ? 

A. I don't reodlleet of anything else. The parties did not say 
anything for several days after their return. I did not knew of 4 
sale i^iag effected sfer tome days after. 



XMPSAOHMSNT OA.8B8. ^18 

Q. Wm there anything said by Dr. Bobtnson, in relation to the 
isonpone ? 

A. No, sir. I do not remember haying any conversation on the 
subject with him. 

Q. Were you aware, at the time you paid those coupons, that 
ihey were the property of the State ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you aware what bonds they were that these coupons 
belonged to, when you paid them? 

A. Yes. I was told by Mr. Hillyer that the bonds were sold. I 
asked him directly if the January coupons were included in the 
4Mde, and he said they were. I am not certain if the Secrelaxy was 
present when I asked the question, but I do not think he was. '■ 

Q. At what price have these bonds been accounted for to the 
Bute Treasury ? 

A. So much as has been accounted for at aD, at sixty cents. 

Q. What portion have been accounted for to the State Treasury 1 
A. About fifty-two or fifty-three thousand dollars ; I cannot tell 
you exactly. 

Q. What bonds have been so accounted for f 
A. I cannot tell you. I have no report what particular bonds 
liare been paid. 

Q, ToH mean sixly dollars on the face, do you 7 
A. I mean sixty dollars for one hundred dollars. 

Q. What portion of the forty thousand dollar war bonds haxo 
been sold f 

A. Thirty-one thousand dollars. 

Q. Atwhatpricef 
A. forty oents. . 

Q. Do you know anything of the printing of the banking law in 
ihe Wabaunsee Patriot ? 
A. I do not. 

Q. How many numbers of that paper hove yon seen f 
A. I lemember seeing that PH^r, but don't remember seeing but 
one number of it. I never heard of it till I saw it on my table. 

Q. About what time was ihair 7 

A. About the tnse of the putattshing of tho Banking Law. 



flU PBoamziKW ni ram 

Q. Ab^tit the time cf ^botioA wia itf 
A. About that time I think. 

Q*. Have you seen if since that time ? 
A. I have not. 

Q. Do you know where it was printed ? « 

A. I do not, except what I hare been told; I db not remember 
who told me. 

Q. Were yon told by Dr. Bobtneon f 

A. I never had any oonversation With hhn on the subject. 

OaOSS IZAMINXD BT DSVXNBE. 

By Mr. Stanton. — 9y whom were the bonds placed in your handi^ 
in July, when you went Bast t 

A. They were in my hands with the consent of the GoTemor^ 
Secretary and Auditor. 

Q. You mean the seren per cent, bonds, do you ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q^ Did jou make an effort io sell them, in New York or elsewhere T 
A. No, sir. I talked with parties about selling them, but found 
BO prospect. 

I • • • . • 

. Q, Did you take tl^em. wiih.ypu for tl|at pmrpeee 7 
A. I took them with the hope of selling them at aeye^ty otBtsrf 

Q. The reason you did uat m«ko an effort, wee beoMiae you be* 
liered it to be uqaIcbs^ was. it f 
A. Yes, because it was useless. 

Q. What was the highest price you could get fbr tiJM W4lr 
Bonds f ^ 

A. I could get none at alL 

Q. It was on your return in July, that you garft- tbeae bouds to 

BW;wnsvimit? 

A. Yes, sir, on the SOih of July, at Buffalo.. 

Q. Did you say you had the authority so to do 7 i / 

A. No, sir^ i- had,. BOft. 

' Qi' WhA there any Mft HuiAt ftf «sy of 'these bMdfer m LeiveB- 
worth-F 

A. I talked with Mr. Olark, wte aakaA martf £ waalad^ t# sell 
them. I sAed •Ui» to stato wksa;pqi«»)he wwsH piy.^ 



IMFBAOHMBNT OAflB0« 211^ 

Attomej General. — ^I objeot to ibe qneetioiL 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President and Senaton ; I do not wisli to b#<. 
understood as offiaring evidence here, or asking the admission of > 
that which is not legal and proper. Counsel on the other side knew 
that we are not so asking. With the pennission of the honorable 
g4xtleman, I propose to read some autboritiea upon which we bas# 
oi^r claim. 

Attorney Oeneral. — ^I do not press the objection. 

President. — ^The Oourt has ifilready decided on a similan . foiof^^ 

and unless gentlemen wish to hear the authoritieSi the argumenft^ 

will be out of order, as the Attorney General does not press h]« 
objection. 

A Senator .-^Let us have the authorities. 

Ifr. Stanton then read from Greenleaf on Evidenoe. Vol. 1, * Seoi 
101, as follows :— 

" Thus, where the question is, whether the party acted prude^tljr^ . 
wisely, or in good faith, the information on which he a^tedt wheU^ 
true or false, is original and material evidence.^' 

From these authorities I submit ,to gentlemen^ wliether it is 4ot 

veieTant to introduce eyidence as to the advice upon which, a mi^ 

sets. 

i • 

Attorney Gtekieral. — If the Court please^ I do not propose taargujQ^ 

the question now, because it has been overruled, but every gentle- 
man and Senator knows that this evidence is not admissible. It is 
not competent to go into psst histcMy — ^partf^s acts from childhood 
bear upon his ftiture deeds. The principles are correct as to infbr« 
mation xelat^ig to a4!Vi^ee on which a maa actaiunhroeriaQi >6irc«ln- 
stances ; but not in this case. The gentleman well knoiiiS( dmt itte 
never proper to the extent to which the j seek to eany itw If there 
la no limitation then, we can go into every act^ of a n^al'JSi Jifr.. It 
is only when he acts directly upon information apd advice, and then 
in cases entirely different from this, that such evidence is competent* 
Ifiubmit graceful^ to the ruling of the Court, but- do not winh to 
he uadeiitood as suooombing to authorities, and I wish the recordi 
to show, that I» aa a lawyer, know better than to believe this testfti* 
npfij is admissible* I ai|i willing to go hsfoie the people andsArfce 
my reputation as a lawyer on th^ f o lwH»n<y>o£, my^objefltion. Id4 
not wish to exolndei but aunply to sl¥»ir.ai4resiie Ike eJbgeetiob. * 



216 PBOOSSDINOS IN THX 

Mr. Stanton. — ^Let iu niidentand each other. The evidence we 
propose to introduce i& not heareaj, but information directly given 
hiin by Mr. Clark, aa to the market value of these bonda. 
; President. — ^It will be necessary to call the roll. 

Attorney Qeneral. — ^Mr. President : I wish to be dislinetly under-* 
stood. I do not desire to occupy the time of the Senate by insist- 
ing upon, and compelling a vote upon objections. After the 
decision of the Court, indicating the intention to disregard the 
well established rules of evidence, with the permission of the Court, 
I will, therefore, have noted in the report, that the Board of Mana- 
gers and myself, object to the mass of hearsay and incompetent 
ttetimony, which the course of the defense will bring into the case»^ 
This I do as a matter of justice to those appearing here on the part 
of the prosecution, that it might appear that they were not so 
flagrantly ignorant of, or deteliot in their duty; as to consent to the 
introduction of a class of evidence, which experience has demon- 
strated to be entirely unsafe and unreliable, and calculated only to 
notislead the minds of Senators. I therefore object to the question, 
and ask that it be recorded, as b oflen done in Courts of Law. 

President. — It will be so ordered, unless the Senate object. 

Witness. — ^Answer resumed ; He said he might want some at 
twenty-five cents. 

Q. Was that the only offer you had at Leavenworth for the 
Bonds? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Mr. Clark is a Banker, is he not ? 
A. He is. 

. Q. Bo yon know any parties at Leavenworth who wanted these 
h^ndsatpar? 
A. I don't know of tiiem* 

Q. Whaf was the value of the seven per cent, bonds in Kansas? 
Attorney General objected. 

Witness. — ^I do not know what was their value. I know what 
could be obtained, as scrip was selMng at from 60 to 60 cents on the 
dodlsr ', that would be from 36 to 40 cents, their value. 

Q. What was their value im the money market, any where in the 
Ibited BtataB*-4o your knowledge ? 
A. So fiv as my knowledge extends, they had none. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 217 

Q. Were you a member of the Senate at the time the law 
Authorising the iflsuing of bonds was passed t 

« 

A. I was. 

Q. Do you or Dr. Robinson know what was the prevailing opinion* 
fs to the construction of the law, by members of the Senate J 

Attorney (General. — ^Here is a question to whioh I shall eertainlj 
object, if the the Court please. If a man wereindioted for larceny, 
it would not be competent to bring forward a Representative to 
prove that the law was not intended to apply to a horse. 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President : We well know that, if all the 
members of the Legislature believe in a certain construction of the 
law, that belief would not make their opinion, the law. We propose 
to prove that John W. Robinson honestly believed, Uiat the law 
intended the issuing of War Bonds enough to raise twenty thousand 
dollars ; we know that belief is not the law ; but, if he acted fairly 
in the matter, as to his belief, he certainly is not guilty of any 
crime. Had he received advice from legal counsel — the Attorney 
deneral, for instance, as to this particular construction of the law, 
he certainly would not be considered dishonest in acting upon it. 
We wish to prove by Senators^ what eonstmotion they put upon this 
law. 

Attorney General. — ^I withdraw my objection; you have done all 
the damage you ean. 

' Mr. StantoA.-^T&at is just what I expected from so manly and 
learned a gentleman. 

Attorney Oeneral. — Do not misunderstand me I I wish to ask 
Senators similar questions, and before I am through, I will show 
{he folly of the proposition. I withdraw my objection. 

The question was resumed. 

Witness, — ^I do not know that Dr. Robinson heard the opinion of 
other Senators than myself. It was my own opinion, and that of 
others, that the Uw authorised the issuing of enougli bonds to 
jraise $20,000 in money. 

Q. Did you convey your opinion or belief to Dr. Robinson ? 
A. I did. 

Q. Did Dr. Robinson express his concurrence in that belief? 
A. We tilked of it. At the time there was no doubt of it in 
ay mind. 



818 PRooEBBiijraB m thx^ 

Q. Waa there any doubt in his mind ? 
A. I think not. 

Q. What number of Senators expreraed their opinion at the tune 
yon conyersed with them t 
A. I don't remember particularly— I hare <^nyeiBed with serenl^^ 

Q. Can you tall how many T . 

A. I oaimot oertain— some eight or ten. 

X^AMINATION IN OHIXI KMBlf^MS>* 

By Attorney (general. — ^How u^aiiy bonds did jou take with yott 

when you went East. _ j 

A. Twenty-nine thousand dollars. < ,r 

Q. Tou say you handed them to Mr. Steven! f 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The bonds mentioned in the October reoeiptr— by wl^oso^ 
authority did you give them to Mr. Stevens ? 

A- They were given to him by the authority of the Auditor au^ 
Secretary. 

Q. What Senatpis did you hear exptesa tlMir. opinieos in r«gaid 
to the bonds ? 

A. Messrs, Osbprui Hubbard, Denman, Hoflfauv^ and Mr, Ingalls— 
who was the Secretary of the Senate. 

Q. Who have you heard express an opinion to the contrary to 
issuing of the (20,000) twenty thousand f 

A. I speak of these gentlemen as conversing with them on the- 
kw. Not all as concurring with' me. 

Q. How many concurred in your opinion, at the tixaa of the laif 
being madef 

A. I do not know positively. Bemember Colonel Martin par^ 
lioularly. 



[J. H. MoDOWBLL'S TESTIMONY.] 

Senator McDowell sworn in his plaoe. 

Attorney General. — ^You were a member of the Senate At the time^ 
t|M,Uw was passed authorising the iasuiog.of bonds^ were you. not P 



passea autno* 
A. I was. 



Q. HftT6 joa aii7iTe<K>llootioa of ike tixM &e law wtf paaiM 7 

Q. Have yOQ any meuur of knoiHtag or r6o6lI<^tfaig'of th^d}flliiottr^* 
of the Senators, as to the limitation pat upon the seven per eeiltL' - 
bonds, at the time the aot was passed ? 

A. Nothing bnt the expression of opinion as given. 

Q, What was that expression ? 
'A. Some gentlemen insisted on them heihg put at pal*;' oiie^ 
from Douglas county — Judge Miller — ^thought they should* hep^ll 
at ninety-five cents ; some thought no limitation |[should be ptlt dn, 
I was one; we thought the agents of the State should sell at whai 
they could get — si:^y and sixty-five oents was mentioned ; a com- 
promise was made at seventy cents. Judge Miller, I think, had 
his protest entered upon the record. '. . • ' . 

Q« For what purpose was the limitation of seventy oents put 
upon these bonds ? 

A. As I uxiderstoed it, that th«y ahe«ld : net be nAi hm^ thm 
seventy cents. 

Q. Was the object to prevent the sale at less f 
A. It was, as I understood. 



1 1 



Gross examined by the Defense. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^Do you know if- Dr% Bobiiumn knew these opui« 
ions 7 ^ 

A. Not unless he was present. 



fltamniatioii ih'dtfef t^MuHed"; ' ' ^ . 

Attorney GeneraL—^Weie the proceedings pjoftK^' * 

A. They were. * ; " ^ 

Q. Was Dr. Eobinson Secretaiy of State 7' 
A. Hewnsth^. 



i» 






[H. B. DENMAN'S TESTBUMnT.l- 

fienitor DeMnim War tmrti ' itt^his fhM. 

Attorney GeneM.— Will yott sttt^ ivl^^youii^YeoclBdetlotf U^(|^i 
regard to this matterf 



4 



SflD PB00SXDINO8 nr tks 

A. My uadentanding in reltlion to- ilia aot aath«riiiBg Ae imth- 
ing of bonds for $150,000, and the aot supplementarj theaoeAo^ that 
the limitation of aoventy o^nta therein was intended to pceyent th* 
aale for lets. 



Cross examined by Defense. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^Did you OTor oommanioate that opin£oJi to tttw 
Kobinson? 
Ji. No, sir. 

■ 

[J. F. CUBIMINGS* 'raSTIMONY.] 

4 

J. F. Gummings was then called and sworn. 

Attorney Oeneral-^-What is your profession ? 
A. Printer and Editor. 

Q. In the iUI ef 1861, was yoa the propriejbor of the Wt Jiaon* 
•ee Patriot? 
A. I was. 

Q. Where was it printed ? 

A. In the Tribune office, at Topeka. 

Q. How many numbers were printed f 
A. I think ten — ^I am not certain. 

Q. Was the banking law published in it t 
A. It was. 

Q. By whose authority 7 

A. Well, sir, by my own substantially— about th e time of publi- 
cofttion I went to Secretary Bobinson and ariced h as permiasjco to 
Tpobliah the backing law, which he refused, Abor it two weeks after, 
Jtwant again; he still refused, but said I might go on and publish 
iit, and he would try and get an appropriation ar id pay me. 

^Q. After you oompleted the publication of that law did you get 
your pay for it ? 

A. I did. 

Q. In what manner? 

A. I took my account to the 8ecx6Ui;/8 office, and D. H* Weir 
jactUied to it. Dr. Bobiaflon was absent, at the time. 

Q. In what capacity was D. H. WeiTi- acting ? 



IMPXACHBISNT 0A8X8. 221 

A. He was said to be acting as Assistant Secretary of State. 

Q. Was he acting in that capacity? 
A. He was in the office. 

Q. Did Dr. Robinson know of the certificate being ^yen f 
A. He coald not have known at that time. 

Q. When was the certificate given J 
A. In the middle of NoYcmber. 

Q. How soon after it was certified to was the warrant drawn T 
A. The warrant was not drawn till after Hillyer's return. 

Q. To whom was it assigned T 

A. It was assigned in bhink, and filled to R. 8. Sterens. 

Gross examined by the Defense. 

Mr. Stanton. — Yen say the papfer was printed in Topeka, where 
was it published ? 
A. At Wabaunsee. 

Q. Did you have a local editor at Wabaunsee ? 
A. I did. 

Q. Did you make affidavit to get your pay ? 
A. I did. 

Q. How many copies were circulated in the county f 
A. About 100 at first, and afterward nearly 200 copies. Thej 
were sent to Mr. Lines, the local editor. 

Q. Is it ever the case that papers are printed at one place and 
published in another ? 
A. I have known the same thing done in Ohio. 

Q. Was that paper published during the time authorised for the 
publication of the banking law ? 
A. Yes, and for some weeks*longer. 

Q. When you commenced the paper did you expect to continue 
it? > 

A. I expected to continue it six months, and longerif it paid. 

Examination in chief resumed. 

Attorney General. — How many paying' subscribers did it have 1 



i222 FBOCBBDIMaS IV THl 

» 

A. About 100. I think Hr. Lines ooUeoted the money, but has 
never yet made a settlement. 

Oross examination r^nme^ by defense. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^Was there Any other papor {addiaheid in Wa- 

ooonty, at that time J 
▲. Not tibat I hayp JMiy Jk;nowle4g« of. 

By a Senatoi'.-^Was Senator Hubbard a paying subscriber to 
the paper? 
A. I oai^ngt saj, but oan refer to my books. 

By a Senator. — ^What was the reason it was not continued six 
months, as at first intended f 

, A. From the fact that fit the time I lost the seeood of two 
children who died, my wife was sick then, and I had to go avay 
with her, and I had nobody to take charge of the paftor. I will 
say here that it was my Intention to publish the paiper till after the 
first of April, in order to get the publication of the ooiinty tax 
list. 

Got. Shannon. — ^Where did you go to f 

A. Went to Learenworth and elsewhere in the State for several 
weeks. 



Sergeant-at-Arms sworn. 

Q. I believe you had an at^hment for J>. H. Weir t 
A. I did. 

Q. What search, and what inquiries did you make for him ? 
A. I went to Lawrence and there disooTeied that he ww at 
Iiaporte, Indiana, 

Q. Have you made diligent search for him 7 
▲. I have. 

Q. From what source did you receive your information 1 
A. Chiefly from Hr. Finlay. 

s Q> What was his means of knowing f 



IMPBAOHMSNT 0ASS8. 228 

A. His wife kad received a letter from Mrs. Weir, dated on 
Monday last, from that plaoe, in wliicli she said Dayid (Hr. D. H. 
Weir) was at borne then. 



[a K. OILOHRISrS TESTDCONT.] 
Secretary pro tern, of (he Senate sworn. 

Q. What do you know of Mr. Weir's location at present ? 

A. Mr. Weir wrote to our firm, about a week ago, from ChicagOi 
stating that owing to his business there, he would be prevented 
from attending to a case he had in the Shawnee County Oourt| 
Which was to be heard in a short time. The first we had heard of him 
for some time, was this letter from Chicago. 

Q. Was your letter post marked at Chici^ f 
A. It was. 



[H, L. JONES' TESTIMONY.] 

Hon. H. L. Jones, of the House of Bepresentatiyes, was sworn. 

Attorney Qeneral. — ^Aro you a member of the House of Bepxe- 
•entatives 1 

A. I am. 

Q. Was you a member of the Investigatittg Committee of tte 
House ? 

A. I was. 

Q. Will you state if any letter oame before the Inyestigatiiig; 
Committee, written by John W. Robinson, and whose hands it cams 
£rom? 

A. The letters which are printed on pages eight and nine in the 
pamphlet report of that committee, were placed in our hands by D. 
H. Weir. 

Q. Whose hand writing were they in 1^ 

A. To the best of my knowledge, they were in the hand writing 
of Dr. Robinson. 

Q. Were they signed by him f 

A. They were signed J. W. Robinson. 

Q. What became of them f 

A. Mr. Weir stated there was some private matters in them, and 
he wished them returned to him ; they were so returned. 



224 PRocESDiNas in ths 

Q. What was the contents of those letters ? 
Objected to by defendant's counsel. 

Attorney General. — Mr. President : This objeotaon would oome 
with bad grace from gentlemen who have so recklessly availed them- 
selves of the lax rales of evidence established by this Conrt, even if 
I had not brought myself within the strict legal rules as to proving, 
by parol, the contents of a written instrament. We have shown 
that we have taken the necessary steps to secure the attendance of 
Weir; we have proved that, without fault or negligence on our 
part, he is now beyond the jurisdication of this Court; the letters, 
the contents of which we propose to prove, were his private corres- 
pondence and in his possession ; and the law still presumes thejp. 
to be there. Under these circumstances, I would be entitled to 
prove by parol the contents, as I will now show by an extract from 
Greenlea^ 1 vol. sec. 558. That portion to which I specially refer 
reads as follows : " If the paper was supposed to be of little value, 
or is ancient, a less degree of diligence will be demanded, as it will 
be aided by the assumption of loss, which these circumstances afford. 
If it belonged to the custody of certain persons, or is proved or 
presumed to have been in their possession, they must, in general, be 
called and sworn to account for it, if they are within reach of the 
powers of the court.'' I have attempted, during this examination 
to confine myself to legal and competent testimony, and from this 
course I do not propose to depart. 

Hr. Stanton. — Mr. President: The position assumed by the 
Attorney General is correct in one particular and on one condition : 
that is, if they have tried and used due diligence to get possession 
of the papers. 

Attorney General. — ^Where a party is beyond the jurisdiction of 
the court, all Senators know it is impossible for us to get these 
papers. They could only be obtained by an attachment of his person, 
if the party was in the jurisdiction of the Court. The law require 
only such a search as covers the usual places of deposit. If a party 
keeps his papers in a safe, and on searching, it cannot find them, he 
necessarily says he can't find them; that he has made diligent 
search, ti and must be so construed, in the meaning of the law. 

Hr. Stanton. — The law requires diligence. I understand his 
residence is in this city, and possession of the papers might be 
obtained by a search thereof. 



IMPEACHMENT 0A6EB. . 2^6 

SecreUfy of the Senate xecalled. 

By Defense. — ^Please state the manner of semee of th^ subpena 
on ICr. Weir. 

A. He oalled in my o^^ce while I was making ont subpenas, and 
stated he was going away, and the Sergeant-at-Anns would not be 
able to find him to subpena him. He said he would acknowledge 
serviee,. whieh h^. did. 



By the President, to the Senate. — Shall the objections of the 
defense be sustained, and the testimony be excluded ? 

The ayes and noes were called on the objection, which resulted as 
follows : 

Twenty-one gentlemen having voted in the ndgative, the objeetion 
was not sustained. 

The question resumed. 

Attorney General. — What was the contents of those letters ? 
The following copies of letters from J. W. Bobinson to P. H. 
Weir, were then introduced by the witness : 

Wajihinqton, Dec. 8, 1861. , 

F&iEND Weir: — Strange. to say^I am still in this city, and 
when I am to l^ve the Lprd only knows. 

We are at work as hard as possible, for the interests of the State ; 
and if we succeed we shall put Kansas. upon good footing; if not, 
Heaven knows what will become of her — ^I do not I We want 
nothing said tliere about bonds at all — ^not a word. I was indiscreet 
enough to mention Pomeroy's name to one or two whom I supposed 
I could trust, telling them not to let him know that I had said a 
word, and forthwith half a dozen start up and send him bonds as a 
private agent. He cannot but know the information comes from 
me, when he has sworn to keep his name entirely away from the 
name of bonds. 

The bonds you sent are in Stevens' hands, I think ; at any rate, 
Pomeroy hfis sent them to some Kansas man, and I believe it is 
him. 

We have been steadily at work ever since we came, and have 

faccomplished a good deal ; but we h&^o one very important obstacle 

to overcome yet, and it depends entirely upon this whether we 

succeed. I am not very sanguine myself, and yet it is life or death 
15 



226 PKOOXEDINQS IN THB 

with Kansas. If bonds are not now sold, they never will be sold, or 
not for a long Mme to come. « * * 

Keep entirely "mom'' about the honcU, Do not say a word to 
any person alive, not even to yonr wife > for we want it as secret aa 
it can be till it is fixed. 



I>: H. Wkib, Esq. 



Yours very truly, 

J. W. ROBINSON. 



Washington, Deo. 10, 1861. 
My Dkab WjBia — 

A day or two since, I wrote you a line, but fearing you may not 

receive it, I repeat it now. 

It is a matter of uncertainty what day I may be able to start fbr 
the land of my £idoption, but I hope it may be as soon as the first of 
next week, to-day being Wednesday. The whole of this government 
machinery moves so terribly slow that no man can ever say, with 
even tolerable certainty, how long he may be detained by it. I had 
no idea, when I arrived in this city, that I should spend more than 
four days at the longest, and here I have been four weeks and 
more ,* and had not the interests of Kansas been jeopardized^ I 
should have left long ago ; but we have ^ waited and waited, and 
worked and worked, till I have become tired and worn out. We 
hope to succeed. 

We have removed obstacle after obstacle, and at last we have 
unexpectedly run against the President himself; and now are at 
work trying to overcome his objections.' I hope we may succeed, 
but the Supreme Ruler only knows what other things may present 
themselves when this is done. If we do succeed, Kansas will be 
placed upon tolerable decent footing ; if not, Ood only knows what 
will become of her, or how she will get along. There is no other 
prospect of disposing of bonds anywhere else in the ITnion. The 
money market is closed up ; no stocks but those of the Union are 
touched or looked at. 

Don't buy any more bonds, unless you want to be bitten. And, 
as I said in my former letter, keep ''mum entirely'' about bonds. 
Say nothing to nobody. 



laCPBAOHMBlfT OABIS. 227 

Pomeroy is quite indignant to think that Bbmebodj must haye 
Qfled hiB name in oonnection with the Kansas bonds, and sent him, 
and attempted to make a broker of him. He has not said mnoh to 
me about it, bat I hear it from others. So I want you to be yery 
careful, indeed, what you say, and especially say nothing about 
bonds in connection with Washington or any of the State officers. 

* ♦ 4c * 

Yours very truly, 

J. W. KOBINSON. 
D. H. Wbir, Esq. 



W>6HiNQT0N, Deo. 18, 1861. 
Fbiend Wbir : — * * * y^^ jji^y^ encountered every 
thing but death in trying to negotiate our bonds. We have altered 
proposition after proposition, and* met with obstacle after obstacle, 
until I have been discouraged, disgusted and thoroughly mad. The 
last one is Jim Lane, an enemy of Stevens, and, of course, 
would let his duty to the State rua into the ground, if he could 
gratify his personal hatred. I am still in hopes that we may be 
fortunate enough to effect a negotiation. * * * 

I had an interview with Hr. Lincoln, night before last, in his 
private parlor ; and he seemed desirous to do all he could, and 
promised to order the negotiation made if it was not seriously 
onposed by any of his Cabinet, or the people of our State. We 
shall try to conciliate Lane any way, and if we fail, he must take the 
responsibility. 

There are one thousand dollars of your bends. We shall have 
them put into the sale', if made at all, at whatever the State (or we) 
get for ours, of course ; but we shall get the seventy cents, as I had 
hoped, before leaving. We may, possibly, put the w^ole lot at 
sixty cents, but it will never hurt the State a dime, or will ever be 
heard of, but I shall thank God. * * * "ICeep still." 

Tours, &c., J. W. R. 

Q. What did you hear Dr. Bobinson say, in regard to the sale ef 
these bonds f 



1BI& PBOOEXDIHCW or iTHB 

. A. I mm a member <if the Investigttiing Oomaaiiee. Dr. Bolin- 
Beo stftted before that 0<Miimitiee, that Mr Hilljer and himsctf made 
a tale to SteTens at 60 cents on the dollar &r those bonds. 

Q. Did he state about arrangements being made with Stevens, 
prior to his goiog to Washine^ton f 

A. T6 the best of my recoUeotion, he did. 

Q. What did he state in relation to thai matter ? 

A. That he was at a consultation with the State officers about the 
bonds, and that they were clearly of the opinion that a portion of 
the State bonds oould be sold without limit. That he agreed to Mr; 
Stevens' proposiUon of sixty cents. 

Q. What did he say of an agreement between Mr. Stevens and 
himself? 

A. Don't remember positively as to any agreement between 
Stevens and himself. 

OB088 EXAMINATION BT DEYEN8S. 

, By Mr. Stanton. — ^Ave these letters the same as the origxnals yqa 
saw? 
A. Yes, Bir. 

Q. Were they oopied f^om the originals f 
A. They were copied, so far as any matter relating to the State 
bonds) 

Q. There are many ofmissions are there not ? 
A. Yes. 

Q. State what those omissions are 1 

A. One was in. relation to property of the State, such as chlSrs, 
tables, etc., being got together for the Legislature; stating what 
parties had borrowed them, and giving their names. Another 
omission was a description of Judge Comway's speech in the House 
of Bepresentatives. 

Q. Did jou^dompare the printed letters with the original ones |tt 
the time t 

A. I did compare. 

Q. Arn they correct copies 7 

A. They aca correct. In the line next to the last, it will be 
• ohearved it does not make sense— one word in that line was indis- 
tinct in the last letter, and we could not decide what it was. 



Q. Tou 8i5d Seeretary Bobiiuon t6ld you thA lihe State officers 
liad oome to the oonolusion^ they ought to sell the booAi' at what* 
ever price they could get^ did younpt ? - 

A. Yes, sir, that is my remembrance. 

Q. But that they differed in their conclusions as to what to 
take? 

A. I donH remember that he told me their conclusions as to that. 

By Case. — In the omitted paragraphs of that letter, what was the 
language used, or what was its purport f 

A. I could not remember distinctly. I cannot remember ez« 
actly. 

Q. Can you not state what was in the paragraph next to the 
first? 

A. It would be impossible for me to do— paid little attention to 
anything but the bond matter. 



[J. M. HUBBARD'S TESTIMONY.] 

Senator Hubbard was sworn in his place. 

By Attorney General. — ^Are you from Wabauna0e..CouAty 7 
A. I am. 

Q. Do you know of a paper called the Wabaunsee Patriot ? 
A. I have seen it. 

Q. How long was it publidied ? 
A. Perhaps six or eight weeks. 

Q. Wis it permanent or not ? 
A. I eaa't answer that question. 

Q. Where did the paper come from ? 

A. It came to the post office, our mul comes firom Topcka. 

Q. When did it commence ? 

A. I think about the Ist of October. 

Q. Was it continued during the publication of the Banking Law ? 
A. I should think it was. 

, Q. How long after did it suspend? 
A. Not very long after, I oannei give dates. 

« Is it published' now 7 
A« It is not 



280 PE0Cm>UrQ8 IN TBS 

Q. Ib there ai^ ofloe in Wabaansee, to your knowledge T 
A. Not aay. • 

By President. — ^Were yon a paying anbsoriber f 
A. I think not. 

Examination of this witness closed. 
On motion^ the Senate adjourned. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Saturday, June 7, 1862, 2 o'clock, P. M- 
Senate met pursuant to adjournment. 
President in the chair. 
Boll called. 
Quorum present. 

Absentees t-^Messrs. Bayless, Essick, Hoffman, Hdliday, Lynde,. 
HoDowell and Morrow. 

Attorney (General. — Mr. President : On the piart of the Board of 
Managers and myself, I would suggest, if the Court please, that it 
adjourn till Monday morning. We wish to call an important wit- 
ness, G^n. OoUamore, who will probably be here to-night or to* 
morrow. We are not prepared to rest here, nor do we lik0 to 
proceed, and therefore ask the indulgence of the. Senate by an 
adjournment. 

The request on the part of the State was agreed to, and the 
Court rose. 

dEr. Holliday. — ^Mr. President : I beg leave to offer the following- 
resolution. Accompanying it^ I desire to present these papers, 
purporting to be the certified returns' of an election held on the .^nd 
of June, in the Fifth District. The supposed vacancy was caused 
by the reported acceptance by the Hon. Edward Lynde, of a ebm- 
mission as Colonel in the service of the United Stated, ^hat 
question has before been referred to a committee, fifom whom we 
have had no report as yet. I move the adoption of t]lef(dlo#ing : — 



IMPMOBMENT CASES. 231 

Whereas, It appears bj returns presented to the Senate, that 
an election was holden on the 2nd day of June, inat.^ for a Senator 

» 4 

from the Fiflh Senatorial District: , . 

And Whereas, It appears by said returns, that Jerome Kunkle 
has receiyed a majority of all the votes oast at said election : 
Therefore, 

Eesolvedy That Jerome Kunkle be^ and he is hereby admitted to 
a seat in this body as Senator from the said Senatorial District. 

Mr. Denman. — The aotian imposed by the Sbaator from Shawnee, 
is certainly singular. We have uo evidence except common rumor, 
that Senator Lynde has accepted the Military Commission stated, 
and therefore, do not know that the seat is vacant. We know that 
the Senate has not declared it vacant I do not think that ihia 
body, assembled for the specnal purpose for which it has now met, < 
has the right to declare a Senator's seat vacant. It will be remem* 
bered, Mr. President, that counsel for the defense, in arguing their 
late motion against the jurisdiction of this body, declared that the 
Senate having adjourned tine die^ it could not now be legally 
assembled. The Attorney General met this, Senators will remember, 
by ike argument then advanced, that the (Senate, sitting as a High 
Court of Impeachment, adjourned on the 28th day of February, 
until the 2nd day of June j^ and that the adjpumment sine die, was 
that of the Senate in its legislative capacity. It was then affirmed, . 
that our present session being for a special purpose, was perfectly 
in accordance with legal principles. Under the vote of the Senate 
rejecting that motion, it was declared that we accepted this limita- 
tion of our powers, and that we were here in the exercise of the 
Senate's judicial functions, and not that of its legislative. The 
qjiestion would then arise whether we had the r^ht, sitting in that 
special capacity^ to declare the seat of a Senator vacant. To do . 
this in the case presented, would seem to me to be clearly beyond ^ 
our present functions. Mr. Kunkle's case does not present the same 
features as that of the Senator from Wyandott, Mr. Cobb^ who was . 
sworn in some days since. In the latter case, the Senate at the last 
session, acting in its legislative capacity, declared the seat vacant • . 
and Mr. Cobb presented himself here with the proper credentials,., 
and we could not have refused him the seat. We have decided by 
the acceptance of the position of the Attorney General, that we 
have no legislative functions ; that we are here as judges, and it 
does not seem to me that the power here asked to be exercised^ 
comes within sudh duties. 



282 PROOSSDINQS IN THE 

It may be saict that the people of this district have a right to be 
represented in tiiii^^ Court of* Impeachtnent. It is true, they have 
such a right. But the people elected Mr. Lynde, and i^ he fails in 
hk duty to theni, it !s their privilege to call hini to adcouni. This 
dereliction is between him and his constittitency. We ^ave no 
evidence that Mr. Lynde has aooepted a commission in the military ' 
se^ice of the United States; btlt admitting foi^ argument's sa^le 
that he has, stilt, it is my opinion that vre' have no right, at this ' 
tim)» ted session, \» ^kK^lare his • seat Tioittt. I ' ihink so ft>r the 
reiisons alMuiy glv^en, and say it now, bedti&e I do not wis& to be "■ 
at varianod- with my former votes in relation to Senators holdifig such 
cdmmiseions. That vote was cast at thd regular - session of the- 
Legislature, when the House wad also assembled, and the Senate 
was in ftiil possession of its legislative fiiwAions: Wh^n the evi- ' 
dence was presented that the gentlemen whose seats were t^en 
declared vacant, if holding oonmiissionB in the service, I immediately 
voted against theirright to remain. I would hbve done so in the 
caee of Mr. Lynfde had such evidence been given; But at the' 
present time, I think we are quite inedtnpetent to exercise sui^h * 
power, and trtust that we will not stultify •outselvM by any d(mbtM^'' 
exercise thereof. 

Kr. Holliday. — Mr. President: The imperfection of proof in 
this claim of Mr. Kunkle, seems to be the only argument which can 
be advanced against it. The same objection lies against all the 
members who are here filling seats, declared vacant at the last 
session. The same informality attaches to them, as in this case. The 
other objections urged by the Senator, does not strike me. as very ' 
stlrong. The organization of this body, is legislative in its character. 
That the default in the act shall not invalidate the election ' is the 
plain principle of our State Constitution. Such informalities as arc 
complained of, cannot render void the will of the people. Full 
publicity was given to the matter, and the Senate cannot refuse to ' 
recognise Mr. Kunkle's claim. The Senator from Leavenworth 
says that the want of represenation in this body is a question for the 
people and Lynde to settle between themselves. The argument is 
Weak and untenabU ; but to accept it. The people have made the 
isitoe, and send Mr. Runkle with their indorsement, desiring that 
he shall fill the chair upoccupied by Mr. Lynde. Our duty is to 
admit him. Let us do so, and thereby secure a representative in 
this body to them. 



IHP£AC£tM!EKT OASES. ' 233^ ' 

• It 

Hr. Stevens. — Mr. President : Let as eicamine this claiih t>j the 
light ofthe retimis here {jfresented. I am told that the ordinary 
TOte of Shawnee county alone is from fifteen hundred to two -titou^* 
sand. Jefferson county is also attached- if>, th^jd^triol^ ye^ the 
total nnmher of votes cast at the election of last Monday, was onljr 
two hundred and sixteen. Admitting i^tk^ this was a l^gjd electioui 
let us examine, for a moment, this total. May there not he other 
precincts to be heard from, and ha^^suffieiefit'tiilde^Wsp^efi'f^ 
send in their returns ? It is said that notice was given of the time 
and places of holding ekoidfin.. SuieljK^ then, the people were not 
so indifferent as this vote would show, to whether they should have 
a voice in this body or not ? If this is to be the way and the 
evidence on which Senators "may be admitted, why may not some 
parties go down tb* WoedaoA county, issue notices, hold an election, 
get a score or t^ of votes cast, and returning here, by Wednesday 
oc Th«n(daj(, eUim ihe seat of Mr. Hbffmai^ who is &o tepoHad lb 
have accepted a military twnnmBStQii:? .TheLcfaairgBBof infatinaUi^ f 
are, in this case, perfectly valid. I am informed that there are no 
returns filed in the office of Secretary of S^te. * AH' liere^ 7 per- 
ceive among these papers, what purports to be a retuhi of votes 
cast at Oskaloosa, certified to by Mr. Dutton, who, I presume, is Ae 
Oounty Clerk ; but no official seal, or other mark of validity attached, 
ss'to itr On th6 other side, is what purports to be a note fibit Mr. 
Dutton to Mr. Kunkle, in which he says that, if the election had' 
been better known, there wbuid hanre been more veites.ctot^ TheUe 
ti^nga will showthe character of this vqte^ and, I trusty the Senate 
will reject the claim. In thus speaking,. I mean fxo disrespect to 
Mr. Kunkle, whom I. have long known as a worthy gentleman. 

Mr. Sleeper moved, as a substitute for the origi^i^l resolution, 

^hai ti^e .f;]vole subject,, now under, pqi^sideratiopn^ be referred to 
the Committee on Elections, with instructions to iiiquixe. i^tiO., th^i 
supposed disability of Edward Lynde to hold a seat in the Senate 
fxpm the [fifth] Senatorial clistfiot, 

fUpoa. tbia the ayes and noes ..VfA^e .caUed, and resulted a4 
follows ; 

Those getttt^men vMng aye ifeftt ' ' 

Messrs. Cobb, Curtis, Denman, Essick, Holliday, Ingalls, Keieler| 
Knowles, Lambdln, Lappin, Mcfiowell, Rankin, Sleeper; Spri^ 
an* Mr. President— 15. ' ^ 



2SA FROOBXDINaS IN THS 

Those gentlemen voting no were 

Messn. Bamett, Baylesa, Gonnell, Hubbard, Bmb, Boberta aftd 
Stevene-*?. 

And 80 tbe motion preytiled. 

Hea^TS. Connell and Knowlea were appointed on standing Com- 
mittee on Elections, to fill yacancies. 

On motion, the Senate a4joiimed. 



SEVENTH DAY. 

SlNATX OHAM BIB > 

Monday, June 9, 1862. ) 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court ct 
Impeachment, met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the Chair. 
BoU called. 
Quorum present. 

Absentees — Messrs. Denman, Hoffiuan. Holliday, Ljmde and 
Morrow. 

Journal of Saturday read and approved. 

Present : — Hon. S. A. Stinson, and the' Board ot Managers on 
the part of the House of BepresentatiTes. 

Hens. Wilson Shannon and O. W. Smith, and N. P. Case, 
respondent's attorneys. 

Mr. Boberts, Chairman of Committee on Bleetions, submi^ed the 
following report : 

Mb. Pbssident: — ^Your Committee, to whom wa3 referred ^he . 
subject of the disability of the Hon. Edward Lynde to hold a seat * 
in this body, as Senator from the sixth Senatorial district, and 
also as to validity of the election of Mr. Kunkle, would recommend 
that the whole matter be indefinitely postponed, for ^be following 
reaaoAs: 

Ist. We find, on inquiry of the Secretary of State, that he has no- 
oflBcial information that Hon. Edward Lynde ha3 been oommissioni^d 
as a military oflBcer. 



IMPEACHMXNT CAS18. 23^'' 

2d. 'Hat no rettims of the election of Mr. Kunkle are to be 
found in the office of the Secretary of State. 

8d. It is not our provinee, aa a oommittee of the Senate, to act' as 
canvaaBers for any Senatorial district. 

THOMAS ROBERTS; Chainnan/ 

* 
""On motion of Mr. Connell, the report of the Committee was 

adopted. 



[DR. MBPrS TBSTDfONT.] 

Examination in chief resumed by Attorney Qeneral. ^ 

Dr. Teft called and sworn on part of State. 

Attorney Gknend.— Where do you reside? 
A. Topeka. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Dr. Robinson ? 

A. I am. 

> 

Q. Did you ever have any transaction with him, in relation to^ 
Stote bonds, last fall ? > 

A. I did. 

Q. What was it r 

A. He called on me at one time to borrow some bonds for a few 
days. It was some time in September, or early last fiUl. I loaned 
him four one hundred dollar bonds. . { 

Q. State what your conversation was in regard to these bonds.^ 
A. In getting the bonds, he said he wiMited to 9«»4 tham to Qen. 
Pomeroy, who had assisted him and who he waat^ to pay. He,. 
Pomeroy, could sell the bonds and take his ^ay out of them. . He 
said he would repay them in a few days. I let him have the bonds* 
under these considerations. About two weeks afjtec he calle^. 
again, and wished n^ to let him take the bonds to Washington ^d 
sell them. I consented for him to take them on. 

Q. What, if anything, was said by him of the price they CQuld be 
sold for? 

A. He stated, at the time I consented to let him take them 
to Washington, he had no doubt they could be sold fbr seyenty/ 
cents. 

Q. Did he state to whom they could be sold for wmatf cents V \ 



286 . PEOOnpINQS IN THB 

A. I understood to tbe Interior Department^ for the Indi«ii5|. in 
BOtne shape. I did not make particuhir inquiry. 

Q. Pid he- state aoythiqgy i£ bo, vha4| alH>tkl -a eommanifiatilBi 
from Pomeroy, to that effeot ? . . i ; > • 

A# I ivDidenitood him tiiat he had received a letter from General 
Pomerby, to the effect that they could be dispoeed of for seYeaty 
oehtiBjin that'urtiy. 

Q. How long, prior to Dr. Bobinson leaving for Washington, 
did you hear this conversation ? 

A. I judge it yma a cofoplp of weeks before. I could not state 
exactly. I took no minutes. 

Q. What else happened about those bonds, if anything, in regard 
to your getting your pay for them ? 

A. On his return from Washington, I called on him. He told 
me that Mr. Stevens had sold them, and he did not know exactly 
what he got for them ; that, in a day or two, he, Stevens, would be 
here, and he, Bobinson, would then settle the matter. When lUr. 
Stevens came. Dr. Bobinson asked me what he should give me. I 
told him whatever he eould aflford. He gave me a letter to Mr. 
Stevens, and he, Stevens, paid me two hundred dollars. 

Q. The bonds were all for $100 each, were ihey 1 
A. Yes sir. 

eEOSS'SXAMIKlD B7 DBRITSE. 

' By Gk)v. Shannon* — ^Did ytm say Secretary Bobinson gave you a 
letter to Mr. Stevens ? 
WitiMB.--I did. 

Q. Wh^re i^M Stevens r 
A. In the Aud!tO]^8 office. 

. By Dr. Bobinson,— pid you say I gave you a check 7 
I A. It was a letter or a line firom you to Mr. Stevens, telling him 
* to pay me S200« 

Q. It was a small piece of paper was it not ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you read it ? 
A. I did not read it. 

' Q. Was it opened or sealed ? 
A. It was an open letter. 

By Secretaiy Bobinson. — ^Waa ii aot an cider t 



IMFKAOHHSKT CASKS. 2S7 

A. I saj^MMM tliftt waa the hci about it, as Mr. Stevens paid it. 

Q. Please state how you was induced to believe it was an order 
to pay you a certain amount ? 

A. Because be paid not when I presented the paper. 

Q. At the time the Secretary borrowed those bonds, was he not* 
to return them or pay you what ever you considered a fair price 1 

A. the first time, whefi he borrowed them, I supposed jie wou)d 
' return the bonds. The second time he called I understood be 
would sell the bonds. 

Q. ^at wa§ the time he was goii^ to WaahingtoUi was it not? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was not the agreeme^ tp pay you a fair price ? 
A. Yes. 

.Q. When he came back he gave you tho letter for an amount 1: 
A. He did. 

Q. Did you not ejtpreps younelf as being s atis fi e d ? 
A. I did not complain, I said I was satisfied with what emtBhe- 
could afford. 

Q. Have you ever complained since to Dr. Bobinson ? 

A. I never complained to the Doctor, to my knowledge T 

Examination of witness closed. 



[L. C. WILMARTH'S TESTIMONY.] 

Q. Where do [you] reside ? 

A. About a mile and a half from Topeka. 

Q. Did you have any transaction with Dr. Bobinson in regard ta 
bonds of the State, last fall t 

A. Think I have had several iq the course of a year. 

Q. Was it prior to his going to Washington J 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was it? 

A. I remember one transaction about last September, near the> 
first. Robinson wanted to borrow one thousand dollars in bond^ of 

« 

me ; I had only four hundred dollars by me, which I let him have. 

Q. What conversation did you have at that time, in relation to 
those bonds ? I 



^iB paooxsDiHas in thb 

A. Nothing partionlar. He (Bobinson) stated that he wluited 
-Bome bonds to make a trade. He wanted them to use, and would 
retum them. 

Q. What conversation occurred after that F 

A. He came to me on Saturday night, and said he was going to 
TVashington and wanted to borrow my scr^ and bonds. I told him 
I*was using them. He said he would buy, he would like to get what I 
' iLad; as he could sell ; having made a trade-Huid he was going to 
Start for Washington in the morning. I gave him an order for 
some scrip I had in the Auditor*.? office. He did not draw this on 
account of some informality in the order ; he asked me if he paid 
me for those bonds in ten days, would that do. I replied yes. He 
asked me if he would send a draft within a month, if it would 
answer. I told him no. 

Q. Was there anything said by him as to the quarter in whicli he 
expected to sell the bonds J 

A. I canH say there was. I think he said Mr. Pomeroy had some 
money he wished to invest in Kansas bonds. 

GROSS BXAMINATION BT DEFENSE. 

Mr. Stanton. — Was that before he went to Washington ? 
A. Yes, he told me he would leave on the next Sunday,, but did 
not leave till Monday. 

Q. How long was it before he went to Washington that he bor- 
rowed these bonds ? 

A. It was some time in September — I don't recollect — know that 
he was gone three months. 

* 

Q. Do you know what time he left for Washington ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. At the time he got these bonds. Was there anything said about 
his going to Washington ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. He told you he had made a trade, did he J 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Had you been in the habit of exchanging scrip and bonds 
with him ? 

A. Yes, sir, often. 

Q. When he called on you prior to his going to Washington, did 
he say he wanted some bonds as he could sell them 1 



IMPEAOHMSNT 0A8S8. 289 

V ; 

A. Yes, At. 

Q. Did you get the idea that he wan^^d to dispose of them to 
Pomeroy 1 

A. He did not make such a statementj I made no inquiries. I 
think he said that Oeneral Pomeroy would like to invest in Kansas > 
bonds. 

Q. Did hti ever get scrip but once 1 

A. Yes, he did. Through some informality he only got tSO of 
the sonp at the time I gave him the order. I drew the balance 
myself. 

Q. Did he not give you a reoeipt for those bonda ? 
A« He did. 

Q. What did you do with that reoeipt f . 

A. I turned the receipt over to Mr. Dutton. About one week 
before Robinsqn can^ home, Mr. Dutton came . to me and said he 
would like to buy some bonds. I sold him someii among otheiSi this 
receipt of Bobinson's. 

Q. Did yom have anything to do with that receipt afterwards ? 

A, I did not suppose I ever would have ; but did eventually. 

Q. What did you get from Dutton fbr the reoeipt and bctods ? 

A. I sold bonds to Mr. Dutton for fifty dollars, but the receipt 
calling for four one hundred dollar bonds, was sold for^ one hundred 
and seventy-five dollars — ^less than the others. 

Q. Do you know what Robinson paid Mr. Dutton f 
A. I told Dr. Robinson I had given the receipt to Distton ; afMr- 
wards Dutton said he could net coUec^ iC Dutton warited me to 

« 

take the reoeipt and refund him the money. I went to Robinson 
and he said he would buy the bonds lor me. I told him Dutton 
would take scrip. Dutton went to him and he paid Dutton in 
scrip. 

Q. Do you know what the -scrip was turned over to Dtitton for f 
that is, I mean how much ? 

A. The amount as I understood it, was he returned Mr. Dutton 
four hundred dollars 'in scrip, for the four hundred dollars of bonds. 

BXAMINATION IN OHIXF RSSI7MSD. 

By Attorney Oeneral. — Was there anything said in regard to 
keeping quiet about the sale of the bonds ? 
A. I think not. 



240 PR00XBDIN08 IN THX 

1 * ^ -w 

Dr. E. Tefl re-called on part of the State. 

By Attorney General. — Were you .reqi^pte^ to keep quiet yi re* 
gard to tlie sale of these bonds 7 ' ,. 

A. He made the remark he did not wish anything said fho^i it ; 
particularly that Mr. Pomeroy's having anything to do with it. 

[J. F. CUMMINGS' TBSTimONYO 

J. F. .Cumn^ngs Te-<;alled on the part of the State. 
Attorney General. — ^I believe you have had some connection with 
the State Printing, have you not ? 
A. To some ei^tent. ^ 

Q. Do you know anything of the award of the contract fot the 
State Printing for 1861 ? 
A- Yes) sir. 

Q, Do yon know anything of the contra<^t awarded to If eiBRsn. 
IVask and Lowman f 
A. Not directly. 

Q. Do not know from any conversation with Dr. Robinson f 
A. I don't know of any conversation I had with the Secretary of 
State, in regard to thai printing. 

Q. Did yoti have any eonversation with Dr. Robinson in regard 
to it at that time ? 
A. Not at that time. 

Q. Do you know anything about the bond of Trask and Lowman 
"Mng fikd 7 

A. I do not of my own personal knowledge. 

Q. Did you ever see a bond pf tbeir's in jbh^ Secretjary's office 7 
A. I did not. I saw what purported to be a bond of Trask imd 
'Lowmail. 

By Gov. Shannon. — Did you read it 7 

A, I did not. I don't know if there was any. 

Q. What wsA the indorsement 7 
A. Bond of Trask and Lowman. 

Q. When did you see it 7 
A. In June, 1861. 

Q. When was the contract made 7 
A. In June, 1861. 



IMPSAOHMENT OASIS. 241 

Q. Do yoQ know of Trask and Lowman's haying made a bid ? 
A. I never saw any Bnch bid. 

Q. Do you know from any oonyersation with Robinson J 
A. No, only throngb Mr. Trask. 

Q. Was Secretary Robinson present at that oonyersation ? 

A. Tbere was some oonyersation in bis office with other gentle* 
men. I don't know if Robinson took part in it—part of the time 
Robinson was there. 

Q. Who were the other gentlemen ? 
A. Mr. Ross and Mr. Weir. 

Q. What was the conyersation, was it is regard to the bond-« 
while you and Secretary Robinson were there ? 

A. It was about getting Trask to withdraw a bond he had filed 
or was about to file. 

Q. What was said while Robinson was there ? 
A. I don't know. 

Q. What bond was that ? 

A. For the legislative printing. 

Q. What year? 
A. 1861. 

Q. Did the conversation extend to Bond and bid, or bond alone f 
A. To both bond and bid. 

Q. Was it before or after you saw it on Robinson's table ? 
A. I cannot say. 

Q. Was it about that time ? 
A. Same day. 

Q. Was the conversation about withdrawing the bond and bids t 

Objected to by defense. 

Attorney General. — ^I will ask the question in a different way. 

Q. Was that conversation in the Secretary's presence ? 
A. I cannot tell. 

Q. Was there any conversation while the Secretary was present 1 
A. The Secretary was in the office part of the time while Traiik, 
Ross and myself were there. 

Q. How long was the Secretary out in the forenoon ? 

A. I cannot say. 
16 



n 



242 PEoonDiNGs in the 

Q. Were yoa in more than onoe ? 

A. I was in seyeral times at short intervak. 

Q. At any one of the times was the Secretary present? 
A. He was. 

Q. Was he the first i 
A. I oannot say. 

Q. Was he the seoond 1 

A. I do not know which time. 

Q. Was he not every time you were there 1 
A. I think not. 

Q. What was the snbjeot of your oonyersation ? 
A. Our oonyersation was about the printing bid of Traak ft 
Lowman. 

Q. Was it each time ? 
A. Principally. 

Q. Was it each time that morning in relation to thai matter ? 
A. I think so. 

Q. What bond and bid were referred to in that conversation f 
A. The bond and bid of Trask & Lowman of 1861. 

Q. Did you see that bond after that time ? 
A. I did not. I heard Mr. Traak say, (putting his hand in his 
pocket,) "I have it here.'' 

Q. About what time in June was that ? 

A. During the first letting by contract of Legislative printing 
under the State law. 

Q. In that conversation, will you state what bond and bid was 
mentioned ? 

A. The bond and bid of Trask k Lowman for Legislative print- 
ing for 1861. 

Q. Where were they at that time f 

A. Part of the time they were in Trash's pocket, and a portion 
of the time in Secretary's office— during that day I mean. 

Q, Do you know of your own knowledge anything of the with- 
drawal of that bond — ^I mean of your own knowledge or from any 
conversation with Secretary Robinson ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What action did you take subsequent, predicated on that 
withdrawal f 



IMPSAOHMSNT 0A8X8. 249 

A. We filed our bond. 

Q. Was Trask & Lowman's bid higher or lower than your'B and 

A. I think it was lower. 

Q. Did you know what the amount of Traak's bid was ? 
A. Yea sir, I did. 

Q. From what source did you learn the amount of Trask's bid ? 
A. I learned it from Trask himself. 

Q. Had you a bid in the Secretary's office at thai time ? 

A. I had. 

Q, Was it for printing? 

A. Tea, sir. 

Q. What was done with that bid ? 

A. After the withdrawal of Trask's, or when he refused to file, 
I was notified that I should file my bonds. 

Q. Did you so file ? 
A. Tea. 

Q. Was that the only bid you filed ? 
A. It was an amended bid. 

Q. What was done with the original bid ? 
A. By the consent of the Secretary, it was withdrawn; he 
thought I had a right to do it, 

Q. By whose consent ? 

A. By Secretary Robinson's. 

Q. In what particular did your last bi<l difier from the original f 

A. Only that it was larger. 

*Q. What action was had on the bond or the bid of Trask ft 
Lowman f 
A. I can only tell what I heard from other parties. 

Q. Was there any action had on it ? 

A. I cannot tell of my own personal knowledge. 

Q. Did you hear from Secretary Robinson f 
A. Not from the Secretary. 

Gross examined by defense. 

Got. Shannon. — ^You say you saw the paper in the Secretary's 
office? 



t ^ 



244 VBOOSKDiNas ik the 

A. I believe it waa. 

Q. Did you examine the paper yoareelf ? 
A. I did not. ^ 

Q. Did you know any thing of its oontents F 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Was there any other indorsement on it? 
A. No, Sir. 

Q. Do yon know if the Secretary approved of it or not ? 
A. I do not. 

Q. At the time yon s&w the paper, who was there, Weir or Rob- 
inson? 
A. I oannot 8a.y; both of them may have been there. 

Q. At the time this bond was seen by yon, how long was it 
before the adjournment of the Leg^lature ? 
A. My impression is that it was after. 

Q. When was that ? 

A. I am pretty certain it was some time in June, near the 
adjournment of the Legislature or after. 

Q. Was not the printing almost done for which Traak & Lowman 
bid? 

A. The printing was about finished at the time the bid was put 
in. 

Q. Who had done it ? 
A. Mr. Boss and myself. 

Q. Who solicited Mr. Trask to withdraw the bond ? 
A. I did, sir. 

Q. Who else ? 
A. I cannot say. 

Q. You say, Ross and yourself bid the printing, were you con- 
cerned together? 

A. Yes, but he did the most; there was not much division. 

Q. Do you know, at the time he withdrew the bond, if his bid 
had been acted upon by the Secretary ? 
A. No sir, I do not. 

Q. At the time you amended your bid, had the Secretary acted 
on your first bid ? 
A. The time had not expired for receiving proposals, 



IMFSAOHUmT OASMB. 246 

Q, Had the Auditor, Treaiarer or Seoretuy acted on your bid, 
or not 7 

A, I belieye not, I do not aee how it oonld be done under the 
law. 

Q. Did you withdraw your fint bid f 
A. I did. 

Q. Before you amended it f 
A. I did. 

Q. Did you reoeive notice that your amended bid waa accepted f 
A. I did. 

Q. Did you file your bond f 

A. I filed my bond with the Secretary, and it was approTcd by 
him. 

XXAMINATION IN OHIXr RS8UMXD. 

By Attorney General. — ^What waa your bid for t 
A. My bid waafor the legialaliTe printing of 1861. It embraced 
the printing done, and what had to be done. 

0B088 SXAUIKATIOW BT DmiTSS BSSVMID. 

By Got. Shannon. — Did you, or any one elae^ to your knowledge, 
conralt with Secretary Bobinaon about withdrawing Track and 
Lowman'abidf 

A. I did not, or any other parties to my knowledge. 

XXAMINATIOH ZX OHIW BXaUJIXD. 

Bj Attorney General."-What became of your original bid t 
A. I don't remember whether it was amended or destroyed. 

Q. What is year best rseoUection in regard to the matter f 
A. I douH know. 

Q. Did you cTcr say any thing to Secretary Bobinson or Weir 
about it 1 
A. I did not. 

Q. Haye you no recollection about conyening with him at any 
time on that subject? 
A. I don't recollect. 

Q. Ton sqr you have no reooUectkm ? 

A. No recollection. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Track and Lowman 1 

A. lam. 



246 PROOXBDINQB IK THX ' 

Q. What is their peoaniarj responnbility 7 
A. I think they are good, as far as I know. 

OBOSS XXAHINATION BE8UMSD. 

QoT. Shannon. — Will you state what you mean when you say- 
filed ? 
A. I mean left— deposited. 

EXAMINATION IN OHIXT ABBUMU>. 

Attorney General. — Do you recellect of there being any other 
writing on the bond, ezoept what you have stated f 
A. I do not. 

By the President. — ^Aie 'yon aeqmdnted with the hand writing o 
John W. Bobinson f 
A. I am. 

Q. Whose writing was on the bond f 
A. The broad style of Trask. 

Q. How long after did you file your amended bid ? 
A. I filed my amended bid the day before. 

Q. From whom did you reeeire the note t 
A. From Secretary of State. 

Q. What day 1 

A. Probably the same day of the oonyersation alluded to. 

Q. Did you know, at the time you put in your amended bid, the 
bond of Trask and Lowman would be withdrawn J 

A. There was no bond of Trask and Lowman. Mr. Trask had 
BOt come up. 

0BQ88 XXAMINATION BB8UMXD BT BBTXHSX. 

Got. Stanton. — At the time you changed your bid, you say Tdlsk 
had not arriyed with his bond J 
A. He had not. 

Attorney General.— If it please the Court, I have sent for seme 
papers, in the Secretary's oflEice. I suppose they can be found in 
ten minutes, if the Court will take a recess for that time. 

Senate took recess for fifteen mmutes. 

The time having expired, the Senate was caUed to order. ' 

Attorney General. — ^I understand, may it please the Court, the 

defense show their inabilily to produce these papers, and I propose 

to prove, by Cummings, their contents. 



IMPSAOHMENT 0A8X8. 247 

Got. Stanton. — ^Mr. President : We wish to state that these 
]Mkpen were called for by a committee of the Legislature. They 
lure neyer been retnmed, and cannot be found. 

Attorney General. — ^We propose to prove their contents, as they 
are not to be fonnd where they should legally be. I do not wish to cast 
any reflection, after the statement made by Robinson. 

J. F. Gommings recalled. 

Attorney General. — State the amount of your first bid. 
A. Fifty-fiye cents per thousand ems. 

Q. State the amount of your seoond bid. 
A. One dollar per thousand ems. 

Q. Which bid did you get the contract on 1 
A. On the second or amended bid* 

Attorney General. — ^I wish this paper made a part of the record* 

[OOPT.] 

In the matter of the Impeachment of John W. Bobinson or his 

attorneys : 

Tou are hereby notified to procure, on this trial, the bid of Gum* 
mings for the legislatiye printing of 1861 ; the bond filed by Trask 
and Lowman, in your office, in regard to a pordon of the State 
printing (filed in June, 1861), and the bond of Traak and Lowman, 
for the legialatiTe printing, filed in June, 1861, in your office. 

8TIN80N, 

June 8, 1862. For the Managers. 

Attorney for defenii^ accepted service on the above, by indorsing. 

Attorney Gkneral— I now propose to put in evidence Public 
Documents, 1862. I also offer House and Senate Journals, 1861; 
especially page four hundred and eighty, line commencing " Also 
for.'* 



aXAlONAVIOH IK ORHf BXITOMXl). 

J. F. Oumminga recalled. 

Attorney General. — ^Do you know the amount of Trask and Low- 
man's bid r 
A. It was sixty-five cents per thousand ems. 



248 paooxxDiNQS in tex 

Attoniey GkneraL — Mr. President : We now propose to rest our 
oaMy vitb the understanding with the attorneys for the defense, that, 
at any time daring the proeeedings, we will be allowed to recall Mr. 
Hillyer, and to call Mr. Gollamore. 

Shannon. — ^We will agree to that. 

Attorney OeneraL — ^Then, it the Oourt please, on the part of the^ 
managers, with this understanding, we now rest our ease. 

Mr. President. — ^I believe Mr. Case was to open the argument 
on part of the defense. Is he ready 1 

Mr. Ingalls. — ^Mr. President : It is not my desire to interfere 
with any arrangement counsel may think proper to make in their 
conduct of this case ; but the course pursued by the person men- 
tioned, has been in such open and flagrant contempt of this body, 
that he must, in justice to ourselTes, be excluded from any further 
participation in these proceedings. I am informed) and am prepared 
to fortify my statements, by the affidavits of eminently respectable 
gentlemen, members of the bar in this city, that Mr. Case has 
publicly declared, on the street comers, in the halls and other places 
of common resort, both before and during the progress of the trials 
that this Senate is a jury packed against his clients, and that there 
is. bat one Senatar who^e verdict cannot be bought with money. 
No one can be more indiflbrent than myself to the vulgar assaulto of 
oalumny and slandef . Personally, I would pass them by as unworthy 
of the aUghtest consideration; but this man appears here, in an 
official oapaeity, and we are compelled to notioe the conteQ4>t of 
which he has been guilty. In insulting us, he insults the great 
State which we represent, and whose honor we are bound to main- 
ti^n* He has no further claim to the indulgence of a tribunal whose 
integriiy he has impeached, whose courtesy he has abused, and 
whose protection he has forfeited. Suitable means should be taken 
to prevent his further appearance; and, unless he voluntarily 
withdraws, I shall make a motion that he be refused a hearing by 
this body. 

Mr. Stanton. — Mr. President : I beg leave to say to yourself and 
Senate that I have no knowledge of sneh statements being made, 
and am extremely sorry that anything of this kind should occur. 
No feeling or suspicion would have induced me to make or concur 
in such remarks. No shadow of suspicion of this honorable body 
has ever crossed my mind. I am not able to say if such is the ease 



IMP£ACHMSNT CASKS. 249 

«r not. I think, at least| Mr. Case should be present when such 
charges are made against him. 

Senator Ingallsi. — ^I did not make a motion but merely a sugges- 
tipn, in order that ooimsel themselves might reaoh some satisfactory 
anfuigement. 

JndgeSmiih— We cannot now come to any eoncUudon. The 
tioaUe about the matter is to make up our minds without knowl«- 
edge. Mr. Case not being here, so far as we are concerned we are 
satisfied, and we will conduct the case as it ought to be conducted, 
and we r^t assured the Senate will do justice. We went into the 
trial with that oonvietion, and have it still. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Monday, June 9th, 1862, 2 o'clock, P. M. 

Senate met pursuant to adjournment, 

President in the chair. 

Boll called. 
Quorum present. 

Absentees — Messrs. Curtis, Denman, Essick, Hoffman, Lynde, 
Holliday, McDowell and Morrow. 

Mr. Case. — Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Senate : I un- 
derstand there is a feeling against me occasioned by remarks said to 
have been uttered by myself outside of this Court, charging that 
ihere was but one honest man in the Senate. No candid man would 
be warranted in making assertions of that character in reference to 
ihb respectable body. Belieying, from the remarks of Senators on 
this floor, that my continuing to appear as one of the attorneys of 
John W. Robinson, Becietary of State, will be used as an argumant 
prejudicial to his defense and acquittal, I respectfully withdraw 
from the defense. 



George S. Hillyer recalled. 

Attorney General. — ^You were one of the board to pass on bids 
lor State Printing, were you not ? 



250 FRO0SXBIKO8 IH THE 

A. I was. 

Q. What knowledge have you of the bonds of Trask & Lowman 
that were filed in the SecretaTy's offiee in June laatf 

A. The printing board held a meeting and awarded a eertam 
portion of the printing to Trask & Lowman. It was the LegisktiYe 
bill printing. The Seoretarj notified them that they were the 
saocessfnl bidders, and they came forward in due time with their 
bond. Afterwards I called at the Seoretvy's office, he being absent, 
and diseorered- the bond of Trask & Lowman on his desk. I 
examined it, and expressed myself satisfied 'with it in the presence 
of Mr. Weir. I don't recollect any filing on the bond, and think 
there was not. Mr. Trask saw me the same day, and asked per- 
mission to withdraw their bond. I told him it could not be done 
with my consent. I called at the Secretary's office perhaps that 
evening or next morning, the Secretary was not in, and the bond 
was missing. 

Q, In what capacity was Weir acting 7 
A. He was Clerk in the Secretary's office. 



Cross examined by defense. 

Gov. Shannon. — ^Did you at any time indorse your approval ob 
that bond? 
A. I did not. 

Q. Tou merely said you were satisfied, did you ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was the Secretary not present f 

A. He was not present either time I called. 

Q, Did you oyer inform the secretary 7 
A. No, sir. 

Q, Did you at any time tell the Secretaiy you had appiored oS 
U7 

A. I think not. 

Q. Did he not know you had seen itf 

A. No, sir; not till after the bond was abstracted. 

Q. I mean before 7 
A. No, sir. 



IMPBAOHMXNT OASES. 251 

Q. When you called, it wm upon the desk, and Weir was there, 
yon said, I believe ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was in his custody, was it J 

A. He was the only one in the office. 

Q. The next day, when you asked for it. what did Weir say J 
A. He stepped to the desk, turned over the papers, and said it 

was missing. He looked about among the papers and couldn't find 

anything of it. 

Q. Can you state any information you had as to the condition of 
things in Washington, whether they wanted things kept as secret 
as possible or not 7 

A. Not particularly, I did not think it best, so far as I was con- 
cerned, to correspond and publish the facts in relation to the matter. 
Parties might take advantage of it. ^ 

Q. In your conversation with Bobinson and others was there any- 
thing said about keeping it secret, — anything which rendered it 
necessary? 

A. I had no conversation with either Senator on the matter. 

Q. Do you know if any bonds had been offered at as low a price - 
as thirty-five or forty cents ? 

A. Not of my own knowledge. I have been so informed. 

Q. What was your information ? 
A. As you state, at a low figure. 

Q. Was there any consultation between you and Bobinson as U> 
the effect that would have on our negotiatious f 

A. When I first heard of it, I thought it would be no use to try 
to sell. 

Q. Don't you know that some bonds were offered to the Secretary, 
at thirty or forty cents ? 

Attorney OeneimL — Witness must speak (rf his own knowledge. . 

Mr. Hillyer. — I received information that bonds were offered at 
a low figure — about fifly cents. • , 

ft Q. Did yon suppose that those offers would affect your negotiations^ 
and did it influence you in your action and cause you to be secret ? 

Attorney Ghneral. — ^I object to the question. Hy reasons are 
because I wish the objection recorded, thai the Senate may bean 



252 PBOCUDXHOS IN THI 

them in miad. In my closing argument, I shall sift the valid from 
the invalid testimony. 

A. That was one consideration, among others, which induced them 
to keep the negotiation secret. 



Bzamination in chief resumed. 

Attorney General. — ^Did you ever go to the Interior Department 
to learn if the negotiations could be effected ? 
A. I did not. 

By the President* — ^Mr. Hillyer, at what price was the printing 
let? 

A. I do not recollect the figures. 

4). What time did the board meet T 
A. I cannot state that either, 

Q. How long after the printing was let, did the board have another 
meeting? 

A. We had a meeting to examine bonds aflier the printing waa 
'let. There is a certain time fixed by law, in which the bonds are ta 
ibe filed. 

•Q. Ton say the bond of Trask and Lowman was not to b% 
found? 

A. It was not 

Q. What action did you take upon it f 

A. We took no action. 

Q. When was the printing let to Cummings J 

A. It waa let at the same time that this printing was awarded to 
Xiaak and Lowman. 

The Board of Managers here closed their case. 

[ABOUMENT OF OBORaB W. SMITH.] 

The case was now opened on the part of the defense, by the Hon% 
<}60rge W. Smith. 

Mb. President and Gentlemen : 

Very unexpectedly I find myself compelled to open this caaa Ibr 
ihe defense. Fortunately, perhaps, for you who would have h/A to 
listen to it, I have been unable to prepax% an arguments Our 



»\ 



\ 



1 
•^ 



IMPEAOHMXNT OASES. 258 

position irill be tliat, from the eyidenee already given, nothing 
criminal appears against the defendant. The trial of impeachment 
is, in this, like a trial for indictment: the intent of the person 
charged mnst govern the criminality of the act. So far, the State 
has not adduced a single point on which to base criminal proceed-* 
ings. They may, perhaps, have made oat a civil case— <enongh to 
warrant the State to proceed against their bonds, in order to reoonrer 
the amount out of which the State claims to have been defrauded. 
This is the proper remedy. 

We shall deny, from beginning to end, that you have shown 
anything for which our client should be oonvicted. There may be 
some things adduced in testimony, which will require ezplanationy 
and for this purpose we shall call our witnesses. As this case, and 
those of the other officers, have naturally created a strong feeling and 
bitter sentiment, in the minds of the people of the State ; to stay 
this, and to satisfy this honorable body, we shall show that this 
respondent derived no pecuniaiy or other benefit from the transaction. 
No sane man will believe that a person will act corruptly, unless he 
intended to derive some benefit therefrom. We take this position, 
and declare that all the witnesses have failed, with the honorable 
Board of Managers and Attorney (General to boot, to show that Dr. 
Bobinson ever derived one cent from sale of these bonds. It is not 
to be believed, that a man would act corruptly without hoping to 
derive benefit therefrom. This our client has not done. 

My duty will be to consider here what has been proved, on the 
part of the prosecution . At the commencement of these negotiations, 
how did our State credit stand ? It was for sale on every street, at 
bankrupt prices. It is known to every member of this Senate, that 
the scrip could be purchased at fifty cents on the dollar at that time, 
while the State bonds were worth camparatively nothing. Dr. 
Bobinson had in his possession a large amount of these bonds ; he 
bad purchased scrip at low figures, and his salary as Secretary of 
State had been paid in the same way, which amounts he had bonded. 
It appears also that he had borrowed some. Having information 
which lead him to believe they might be sold at Washington, he 
sent them to Senator Pomeroy to sell for him. 

With that interest for the State which a faithful officer feels, Dr. 
Robinson went to Washington soon after. On arrival there, he 
found that other parties in Kansas had learned that the State bonds 
might possibly be sold there, and had sent theirs on to Mr. 



254 PE00XSDIN08 IN THl 

Pomeroy. Hence arose the desire of secreey, and the pnrpose ahown 
to keep the sale of the State bonds a perfect secret. We shall offer 
some evidenoe on this point. This will explain the use of the words 
^' keep mnm/^ and keep quiet/' found in the letters, given as testi- 
mony here, from Dr. Bobinson to Weir. 

We shall show how this respondent, with Hr. Hillyer, the Auditor, 
remained in Washington for three months, at their own expense, 
while the bond transaction was maturing; that Dr. Robinson, for 
two months, refused to take sixty cents on the dollar, and that he 
only acquiesced when advised that no sale could be effected else- 
where, if the State officers failed to effect one to the Grovernment. 
Under the advice of Senator Pomeroy, after these bonds had been 
twice withdrawn from the hands of Mr. Stevens, Dr. Robinson 
agreed to take sixty per centum for the bonds, in so doing, they 
may have mistaken the law ; but that violation will not, of itself, 
show a criminal purpose — an intent to defraud and cheat the State. 
The evidence shows that the Auditor, Mr. Hillyer, as well as Dr. 
Bobinson, were of the opinion that the law allowed them to negoti- 
ate fifty thousand dollars of the hundred and fiffy thousand seven 
per cent, bonds, at any price they could be obtained. Make a 
calculation on this basis, originally marked out— fifty thousand 
dollars at forty per centum, and the remainder at seventy per 
centum — ^and it will be seen that, under this view, the final sale at 
sixty cents was supposed to be a good bargain. And to this they 
were advised by one of our Senators : a gentleman who, from his 
position at the National Capital, would, without doubt, be entitied 
to advise in such a matter. This understanding of the law may be 
wrong ; but such a mistake does not prove criminality, on the part 
of this respondent, and he cannot, therefore, be convicted on the 
impeachment. 

I come to the war bonds. It has been shown that Secretary 
Robinson had nothing to do with them but countersigning them. 
No one accuses him of being connected with their sale in any 
way. The countersigning of them is a merely ministerial duty, 
which he could not have avoided. In this he is not even guilty of 
a civil offense. He is charged, here in this Court, with a misde- 
meanor for the act countersigning the extra bonds, so called. The im- 
peachment is null and void. The Secretary could not have avoided 
the countersigning, and had he refused, a writ of mandamtw could 
have compelled him to do the work. 



IMPIAOHMSNT 0ASX8. 256 

In relation to the Article of Impeachment, charging a misde- 
meanor against Dr. Robinson, on account of the payment of the 
Wabaunsee Patriot's account for publishing the banking law, there 
is not, gentlemen, one tittle of evidence been adduced to show that 
the Secretary knew anything of the transaction. The certificate to 
the account of Cummings was signed by his clerk. A principal 
would be liable, for money lost, to the State by a fraudulent 
certificate, but codld be charged with criminality from the transao- 
tion. But was there anything wrong in it ? What was the purpose 
of the Legislature, in ordering the publication of the banking law 1 
Was it not that the people might be able to examine it ? The 
people of Wabaunsee county were as much interested in the matter, 
as the more favored portions of the State, where newspapers 
abounded. It is in evidence that this paper was published at 
Wabaunsee, and circulated from one to two hundred copies in the 
county. Was it not a legitimate enterprise to start it for the 
purpose of informing the people of that county, in relation to the 
banking law ? The publication was made, the paper ceased some 
weeks after, for reasons given by the only witness produced by the 
State, and the proprietor made affidavit of the publication of this 
banking law. It was certified to by Mr. Weir, and if you could 
show that the act was wrong and that Secretary Robinson was respon- 
sible for what his clerk done, you must show that his intention was 
to defraud the State, before you can impeach him before this 
Court. 

For the other charge, in relation to the abstraction of the bond 
of Trask and Lowman from the office of the Secretary, the prosecu- 
tion itself does not dwell upon that count, and the evidence is so 
meagre that the defense need do no more than allude to the fact 
that the House of Representatives has failed entirely to support the 
averments contained in this article. 

Mr. President and Senators : I have thus briefly and imperfeotly 
marked out the course which the defense will pursue in this case* 
Tou are already wearied, and I will not further exhaust your patience 
by endeavoring to speak longer. I had no time for preparation. 
Of this fact you are fully aware, and are, doubtless, pleased by it. 
These men are officers of your State. It is right they be held 
strictly accountable for their acts. No one is more willing than 
myself to do this, if they are guilty. Had I been a member of the 
House of Representatives, I should advised the passage of a resolu- 



256 PROcESDiNas in the 

tion, bringing suit in the courts, on their bonds, to recover tbe 
amount out of which it is claimed the State was defrauded. This 
was the remedy then and is now : and unless you have evidence of 
criminal intent on the part of this respondent, it is your solemn duty 
to acquit. Even the doubt must inure to the benefit of the accused* 
We charge you to weigh well your responsibility. 



[E, 8. STEVENS' TESTIMONY.] 
Testimony for the defense. 

Hon. Robert 8. Stevens sworn on part of the defense. 

By Mr. Stanton. — ^Mr. Stevens will you proceed and state all the 
transactions about the bonds, which you had with Secretary Bobin- 
son and all the State officers. « 

Mr. Stevens. — In order to state understandingly, I shall be com- 
pelled to go back in point of time, before having any thing to do 
with the Secretary and Auditor. I left Kansas in the latter part of 
July, I86I, to go to the city of Washington, and I think on the 
30th or SIst of July, at Buffalo, I met Mr. Button, the Sute 
Treasurer, I bought of him a certain portion of the War Bonds. 
He had with him fifby-eight seven per cent, bonds, amounting to 
twenty-nine thousand dollars, which he told me he had been East, 
trying to sell, or on his way had endeavored to sell, and which seven 
per cent, bonds he had received from the Executive officers of the 
State, and was authorized to sell at seventy cents., at which price 
he offered them to me. I did not wish to purchase, but if he was 
willing, would take the bonds — ^try and sell [them] for seventy cents^ 
or return them if not sold. I gave him a receipt which is in evi- 
dence, and he gave me the bonds. I went to Washington and sold 
IwentyHBiz thousand dollars of the War Bonds to the Interior 
Department. I also, about that time, made a proposition to the 
Secretary of the Interior to sell him one hundred thousand doliar^ 
of seven per cent. Kansas bonds, which was not accepted. I started 
on my return to Kansas, coming by the way of Dayton, OhiOy 
bringing the twenty-nine thousand dollars of seven per cent, bonds 
with me, to return, and take uf> my receipt. At Dayton, I had an 
interview with R. G. Gorwin, who stated, that if I would modify 
my proposition to the Secretary of the Interior, as to price, he 
thought a sale could be effected. I wrote a new proposition to die 



IMPKAOHMBNT 0A8X8. 26T 

Secretary of the Interior ; at the same time I gave the bonds to Mr. 
Gorwin, taking his receipt therefor, together with the proposition, a 
copy of which, I now have. I then returned to Kansas, arriving 
here early in October. My desire was, to purchase bonds enough, 
with what I owned, to amount to one hundred thousand dollars, 
in case my proposition was accepted. Having understood that 
possibly Messrs. Clark and Stone's authority to sell the seven per 
cent, bonds had not expired. I submitted a proposition to them to 
purchase f, certain amount at forty cents. I received a reply, de- 
clining to accept this offer, for two reasons, which were : First, a 
doubt of their authority to sell — and second, as to the propriety of 
selling at so low a figure, if they had the authority. The reply was 
from Gen. Stone. About the 15th of October, I came to Topeka, 
and endeavored to purchase from fifty to seventy-five thousand 
dollars of bonds from State officers, authorized to sell. Two of the 
officers, the Auditor and Secretary of State, thought they could sell 
fifty thousand, at any rate they thought expedient, and before leav- 
ing, a statement was handed me, in writing, signed, (I think) by 
the Auditor and Secretary, saying they would sell me fifly thousand 
at forty cents, and twenty-five thousand at seventy cents. This 
arrangement was not perfected ; — sale or purchase was not made 
for the reason, that on presenting this paper to the Governor, he 
would not sign it — and I would not purchase without joint action 
of the Board. Before leaving, however, it was agreed for me to 
take on to Washington, bonds enough of the S500 bonds to make 
up fifty thousand dollars — $21,000 — and all the $100 bonds they 
thought would not be needed to take up scrip. They delivered to 
me twenty-one thousand dollars of the $500 denomination, and a 
portion of the $100 bonds — such as were complete — ^a portion in the 
book were not signed by the Governor. They delivered the book to 
me (containing the unsigned bonds,) which I took to Lawrence, to 
get the Governor's signature thereto. He signed the bonds, and I 
think I returned the book to the Auditor, by express. I was here 
at Topeka two or three days, and in that time the Governor went to 
Lawrence, which necessitated me to take the book of bonds to him. 
Such bonds as were delivered to me, I did up in a package, and sent 
to Washington by Dr. Woodward, and to deliver to Corwin and 
place with my others, to be paid for by the Secretary of the Interior, 
if my proposition was accepted. Immediately after delivering them 
to Dr. W. I started to Southern Kansas, to attend to some business. 
17 



2ii8 PB00BDZNO8 IN THl 

I leftmed tmbaequenily, that S. 0. Smith met Dr. Woodward on the 
way from Lawrence to Leavenworth, and he having bosineeB at 
Washington, took the bonda, and the Dr. came hack to Lawrence. 
Shortly after, I heard that the Auditor and Secretary had gone, or 
were going to Washington, and in a short time I received a letter 
from them, referring to the bonds, and desiring me to come on. I 
returned a reply, stating that when my business called me to Wash- 
ington I should come. If they had any business there, to attend to 
it. I received one or two more letters and a telegram, to which I 
replied to the same effect. I left Elansas on the 23rd or 24th of 
November, to go East, and arrived in Washington on the last day 
of November — on Saturday night ; I saw the Auditor and Secretary 
on Sunday, and on Monday saw Mr. Oorwin, who was assisting me 
in the sale. He informed me that it was difficult to make the sale. 
He suggested to me the seeing of the State officers, and obtaining 
their authority for me to act as State agent, accounting to the State 
for a certain amount, and taking all over, for compensation. 
Shortly after that interview with Mr. Corwin, we went to Mr, 
Pomeroy's room, and had an interview with him. On leaving his 
room, the Secretary, Auditor and myself went into an office, and I 
drew up a paper, or power of attorney, which they signed. It was 
signed by the Auditor, Secretary and Governor. The Secretary 
signed the Governor's name. I don't know what his authority was. 
He said he was authorised to so sign. There was nothing said by 
us as to the price I should pay the State for bonds. I then made 
a proposition to the Secretary of the Interior to sell them for eighty- 
five cents. The proposition was submitted by me to the Secretary 
of the Interior. He informed me that he had submitted it to the 
President, he being the only person authoriied to act under the 
treaties. The President declined to authorise the investment The 
Secretary said that would probably end the negotiations. I asked 
him if he had any objection to my getting the Congressional Dele- 
gation to call upon the President. He replied that he had not. I 
called on Mr. Pomeroy, and asked him to get the rest of the delega- 
tion and go and see the President. He said that he would. He 
informed me a few days afterwards, that they all went to the 
President's House and waited till eleven o'clock, without obtaining 
an audience. Gen. Lane, having business before the Military Com- 
mittee, of which he was a member, could stay no longer. Mr. 
Oonway also left without seeing the President, having business at 



IMPBAOHlfXWT 0A8XB. 259 

*tlie House of Bepresentatives. Gkn. Pomeroy remained, saw the 
Preeident and brought the matter before him. The President 
expressed his surprise at the bonds being those of the State. He 
. supposed them to be those of the LeaTenworth and Pawnee raiboad 
Company — and authorized him (Mr. P.) to say to the Seeretary of 
the Interior, that if he thought best to make the iDvestment in that 
way, to do so. It was thought best to get the written request of 
the united Kansas Congressional Delegation, to the President, llr. 
Gorwin drafted and handed me the letter, dated Deoember 16th, 
addressed to the President. I oopied it just as it read then, and 
reads now, saving the signatures. I went to the Capital, to the 
Senate Chamber, for the purpose of getting it signed. The Auditor 
and Secretary went with me. I called Mr. Pomeroy to the main 
entrance — masked him to read and sign it if willing, and hand it to 
Gen. Lane to sign. I remained at the door. Lane came out with 
the paper in his hand, remarking, as he handed it to me, ^* Bob, 
Pve not signed this letter, but you can come to my room to-morrow 
morning, and I will see you about it.'' I inquired if he could not 
decide that night, as I wanted to file the papers in the morning. 
He said, '< you can oome as early as you want to, and you can see me 
then." I then went to the Avenue House, where I boarded. In the 
morning I saw Lane, Beynolds and other gentlemen conversing. I 
called Beynolds and handed him the paper, asking him to get Lane 
to sign it. Afterwards I saw nothing more of either Lane or 
Beynolds till after 10 o'clock, A. M. Mr. Beynolds came into the 
Hall with Mr. Niles, an attorney of Washington, and went up to a 
room where Lane was. Niles went away soon after. I saw Bey^* 
nolds shortly after, and asked him to see if Lane had signed that 
paper, and to bring it to me, either with or without his signature, as 
I wanted it. Beynolds brought me the paper, and said that Lane 
said he would see about it the next morning. The next morning I 
handed the paper to the Secretary and Auditor, and asked them to 
try and get Lane to sign it. They brought back the paper without 
his signature. Some days prior I gave it to Secretary Bobinson, 
and asked him to get Conway to sign it. He returned it with Con- 
way's signature ; Conway signed it leaving a space below Pomeroy's 
between the two signatures for Lane's signature. After the paper 
iwas returned without Lane's signature, I took it to the Interior 
Department, stating to the Secretary that I could not get Lane's 
. signature, and if the negotiation could not be made without it, I 



260 PBOOSXDIlfOB IN THS 

would let the matter drop. He then told me it was not neoeasary, 
and I filed the paper, and on the 19th of December, I entered into 
a contract with the Secretary of the Interior, a copy of which is in 
evidence. I think, a day or two before this, I told the officer to 
decide as to the price I was to account for to them if the sale was 
made. They said seventy cents. I told them I would not pay over 
sixty cents. We conversed about it, and one of them (I do not 
remember which) proposed sixty-five cents, which I declined. We 
then returned to our hotels. A short time after, on the same day, 
Mr. Hillyer came to my room and said that the Secretary would not 
take sixty cents. I replied, ^^ very well, let the trade drop then," 
and thereupon he left, with the understanding that the nee^otiations 
were ended. That evening they came to my room, and said that 
they had concluded to take sixty cents. I drew a contract, allow- 
ing me all I could get over sixty cents. After that contract between 
the Secretary of the Interior and myself had been made, I under- 
stood that Qen. Lane had been there and protested against my 
carrying the money to Elansas, stating in substance what is in the 
deposition of the Secretary of the Interior, that he, (Lane) expected 
to be a candidate for the Senate before the State Legislature— that 
he had a majority of one in the State Senate, and if I had the 
money I would buy that one up and defeat him, (Lane.) After 
that contract was made, the same day, I think, Hillyer came and 
said that Lane was opposing my having anything to do with it, and 
suggested that somebody else should carry the money to Kansas. 
Hillyer appeared favorable to this, whereupon I delivered the bonds 
to him, and took my receipt, and told him to manage the bond 
matter himself. Hillyer disclaimed any idea of interference, saying 
that he was only stating what had been said to him, and the matter 
was fixed as before. After it was proposed to get the Congressional 
Delegation to call upon the President. I went to see Reynolds, 
whom I understood to be Lane's Secretary and business manager. 
I told him I was endeavoring to sell the Kansas State Bonds, and if 
he would take hold of the matter, I would give him a thousand 
dollars if successful. I had a conversation subsequent to that, with 
Reynolds, about Lane's going to see the President. Reynolds said 
that Lane would go. After the contract of December 19th, with 
the Secretary of the Interior was entered into, a few days before I 
got the money, Reynolds was in my room — said he was going away 
in a few days. He used the expression, " the old man will do what 



IMPBAOHMBNT OASSB. 261 

be could, to help it through ; " meaning by " old man/' Gen. Lane. 
I told him that I did not know that I had any need of his servioes. 
The oontraot was made, and the money would be paid in a few days. 
He (Keynolds) expressed himself ready to do what he could to dose 
it up. I told him he must not expect pay, unless he rendered some 
service — telling him Lane had even refused to sign the letter to the 
President. Before leaving, he was in my room again, and said that 
Lane would sign the letter when presented, and he (Reynolds) asked 
me for a memorandum of the contract between him and myself, 
which I sat down and gave him. I went to the Interior Depart- 
ment — withdrew &om the files, the letter to the President, and gave 
it to Mr. Hillycr, without Gen. Lane's signature. He went to 
Oen. Lane's room without me, and came out with the letter signed. 
I never went with them to Lane's room. I then took the letter to 
the Department and filed it. I was informed again that Gen. Lane 
had protested against my taking the money to Kansas. I went to 
Pomeroy, who said ho was in the Secretary's office when Lane pro- 
tested, but said Lane had agreed that he (Pomeroy) and Mr. Con- 
way might select a person to bring the money. They requested me 
to bring it. I did so, and settled with the Treasurer at sixty cents. 
I never informed the Auditor and Secretary what I got, or what 
proposition I made to the Secretary of the Interior. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^What amount of bonds were delivered to you 7 
Witness.— Eighty-seven thousand two hundred dollars. 
Q. What amount of bonds did you get paid for ? 
A. Fifty-six thousand two hundred dollars. 

Q. What became of the balance ? 

A. The remainder were left by me with the Secretary of the 
Interior. 

Q. Did you pay, or agree to pay to the Auditor or Secretary, 
tiny thing? 

A. Not one cent, sir. 

Q. Was there any understanding between you, expressed or 
implied? 

A. Not any, sir. 

Q. Was there any understanding between you and the Governor, 
Auditor or Secretary, or either of them, when you took the bonds ? 

A. I did not take them, except as stated. I left twenty-nine 
thousand dollars of the bonds at Washington. 



262 VBOCWMDUfQB IN THS 

Q. What ondentaiidiiig was ihere between you s&d the State* 
ofieera, when joa took the bonds from them? 

A. The understanding was, that I should see if I could sell them^ 
and acoount to the State. My reasons for answering their letters* 
as I did, were that I heard they had gone to Washington with a 
view to effect the sale themselves, they having had letters fiNHU 
Washington. 

Q. Was it in the power of these gentlemen to sell the bonds 
themselves ? 
A. I think not, at that time, fliis is simply an opinion. 

Q. Who was this Oorwin, you speak off 

A. Robert G. Gorwin, of Dayton, Ohio, attorney at Uw, and 
claim agent at Washington, doing business with the War and Interior 
Departments. 

Q. What is the relation between him and the Secretaiy of the 
Interior? 

A. There is some relationship existing on their wives' side, I 
really oannot tell how close. 

Q. What circumstances induced you to get Mr. Corwin to assist 

you? 

A. I had engaged Mr. Oorwin in other negotiations. He is 
known as a snoe ossfu l operator, so I interested him in this. 

Q. At what stage of the negotiation did these gentlemen give 
you the contract to receive all over sixty cents ? 

A. One or two days before I entered into the contract with the 
Secretary of the Interior. 

Q. Was it after the President had declined the proposition 7 
A. It was. 

Q. What was the value of these bonds in the New York market ? 
A. They had no established value. 

Q. What value in Kansas or elsewhere ? 

A. To my knowledge, there were no bonds selling— only for the 
redemption of scrip— rwhich cost from forty to sixty cents on the 
dollar — ^mostly forty and fifty. Seventy dollars in scrip would draw 
a hundred dollar bond. This would make the average value of bonds 
from twenty-eight to thirty-five cents. 

Q. Did you buy any bonds ? 



IMPSAOHMBNT 0A8B8. 268 

A. I bought Beveral thoiuand doUtfs in bonds. 

Q. What was the average oost of the bonds you bought 7 
A. I bought scrip at forty to sixty oents. I paid higher for some. 
The market value of aorip was about fifty oents. 

Q. Which one of the State officers was unwilling to sign the first 
paper? 
A. The (Jovemor, sir. 

Q. Did you say that he refused T 
A. I did. 

Q. Was that fact oommunioated to the Secretary and Auditor F 
A. Not by me. I simply told them that I did not desire to make 
the trade. 

Q. Where was the GoTcmor when you presented that paper to 
him? 
A. I could not undertake to state. 

Q. Was he here or at Lawrence T 
A. I cannot tell. 

Q. At the time the arrangement was made, do you know if they 
made an estimate as to the ameunt they would reeeiTe f<Hr flie 
bonds f 

A. They did, as a reason for consenting to my proposition. 

Q. What was their estimate f 

A. Fifty thousand at forty cents, thirty-seyen thousand two 
hundred at seyenty cents. They concluded that the sale at sixty 
oents was the better way. 

Q. At any time during the negotiation, did you, or any body else, 
communicate the fitct that they must keep quiet 1 

A. I firequently told them that if they expected me to succeed, 
they must keep the matter secret. 

Q. What were your reasons 1 

A. Mr. Gorwin, and afterwards the Commissioner of Indian 
Affairs, told me the fact was known in Kansas, that I had sold war 
bonds, and had offered for sale seven per cents. The commissioner 
said that when he was in Kansas in October, he had had offered him 
thirty thousand dollars of bonds, at from forty-eight to fifty-^six 
oents ; he was opposed to purchasing State bonds, especially these, 
because had had others offered him at so much lower rates. 



264 PEOOBEDINGB IN THB 

Q. Did you communicate Uiis to the Auditor and Secretary 7 

A. I did. 

Q. Did you have intercourse with Pomeroy, pending these nego- 
tiations ? 

A. I saw him frequently. 

Q. Do you know if bonds were sent to Pomeroy from Kansas f 
A. He told me that some had been sent to him ; that one thou- 
sand dollars of bonds, belonging to Weir, had been handed by him 
to Mr. Hillyer. 

Q. Did he complain of it ? 

A. I do not think I ever heard him complain. 

Q. Did he caution the Auditor and iSecretary against having 
bonds sent to him ? 
A. I don't remember. 

Q. How many interviews did you have with Lane before making 
the contract with the Interior Department ? 

A. I never had apy talk with him on the bond subject, except 
what I have reported as occurring at the door of the Senate Cham- 
ber. I went once to Lane's room alone, on a different matter, at 
Lane's request, and met him onee at Willards', in the office. 

Q. Was it at the door of the Senate Chamber he handed you the 
letter ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he read it ? 

A. He did not say anything about it. 

Q. Did you try to conceal it from Lane that you were trying to 
negotiate with the Interior Department ? 

A. I took no pains to conceal or publish. The fact was known 
in Washington. 

Q. Was that letter complete when you handed it to Pomeroy ? 
A. Saving the signatures, it was just exactly as it now reads. 

GROSS EXAMINED BT THE STATE. 

Attorney (General. — ^What other bonds, besides the eighty-seven 
thousand two hundred, were included in the sale, and paid for to 
you by the Secretary of Interior ? 

A. He paid me four thousand four hundred dollars for bonds 
belonging to J. W. Robinson, two thousand six hundred for HiUjer. 



IMPEACHMENT CA8S8. 265 

This included Weir's thousand, and fourteen hundred dollars of my 
own. 

Q. Gould the State officers have negotiated those bonds in the 
way they did, if your contract had not been made ? 
A. I don't think they could. 

Q. Were the bonds ever delivered to the Secretary or Auditor, 
except the time referred to in your direct examination ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you conclude your contract with the Secretary of Interior 
before getting Lane's signature ? 
A. I did. 

Q. Was the paper signed by Conway and Pomeroy when it was 
filed? 

Q. It was signed by Pomeroy and Conway, and bore date 19th 
December. 

Q. When you tore up the receipt, had the contract been entered 
into ? 

A. I think it had not. They were delivered up twice. The first 
time the contract was not made. 

Q. When were the bonds delivered to Hillyer, before or after the 
contract had been made with the Secretary of Interior ? 

A. Once before I executed the contract of December 19th, 1861, 
with the Secretary of Interior, and when they (Hillyer and Robin- 
son) refused to allow me to retain all over sixty cents, I declined to 
act any longer in the negotiation ; told them to take their bonds 
and return me my receipt. This was done; but in a short time they 
returned to my room, and agreed to allow me to retain all over sixty 
cents, as is stated in the contract. Again, immediately after the 
execution of contract of December 19th, 1861, with the Secretary 
of Interior, (the next day, I think,) Auditor Hillyer and Secretary 
Robinson came to my room. Mr. Hillyer went on to state to me 
Senator Lane's action and his opposition to my carrying the money 
to Kansas. Mr. Hillyer seemed to talk as if he wished to gratify 
€kn. Lane, which ofiended me. Whereupon, I called for my 
receipt given him for bonds. He took out the receipt and gave it 
to me, when I told him to take their bonds and make their own 
teade, with some other remarks of a similar import. Hillyer was 
much Borpiised, and disclaimed any wish, on hia part, to comply 



266 PBOCoaBiKOB in thi 

with Oon. Lane's demands, or any desire to have me quit die 
negotiations. After some further oonversation, I consented to 
continue on, finish the trade, and get pay if possible. Icannot state 
positively whether the bonds were in my room, at the time of thia 
last conyersation, or at the Interior Department. But my impress* 
ion is that I still had them, though I am not positive. 

Q. Did you ever pay John W. Bobinson anything J 
A. I did not, sir. 

Q. To any agent ? 
A. Not a cent. 

Q. To any one for him 7 
A. Never did, 

Q. Have you donated anything sinoe the first of July ? 
A. Not a cent. 

Q. Any one for you ? 

A. Not any one, that I know. 

Q. Did Oorwin f 

A. Not a cent to my knowledge. 

Q. Any one for Gorwin ? 

A. Not a cent to my knowledge. 

Q. Either to Bobinson or Hillyer ? 
A. Not a cent to my knowledge. 

Q. Direct or indirect 1 

A. Neither to one or the other, directly or indirectly. 

Q. Any one for them ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Any one connected with them f 
A. Not to any one for them. 

BXAMIKATION IN OHIXV EB8UMXD. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^What amount did you pay them for their indi- 
vidual bonds t 
A. Seventy cents. 

Q. When did you make the settlement? 
A. Some time in January, I think. 

Q. Why did you give them seventy cents ? 
A. While in Washington, I let Mr. Bobinson have 11800, be- 
cause he wanted to purchase stationary in Chicago, on his return ta 



IMPEAOHMSNT 0AAB8. 267 

EauBSB. I let Mr. Hilljer ako have $1^000. AfWrwards Dr. Teft 
presented an order from Robinson for 1200. It was a note or letter. 
I paid some to Weir bj HiUyer^s directi<Hi. I paid a small amount 

to the Post Master for . Wben I asked them how we should 

settle, they said seyentj cents, which I paid them. I settled with 
Secretary Robinson on the 24th of January, 1862. The other sums 
were paid as on a nmnhig account. 

Q. Had you any previous agreement as to what you would pay 
Secretary Robinson for his private bonds f 
A. No, he wanted me to put his bonds with the rest. 



[GOV. CHARLES ROBINSON'S TESTIMONY.] 
Gov. Charles Robinson was then sworn on the part of the defense. 

By Mr. Stanton.^Govemor, will you state whether before the 
Secretary and Auditor went to Washington, you had any oonversa- 
tion with them in regard to what the law authorised the bonds to be 
•old for ? 

A. There was some conversation. I don't remember but one of 
any importance touching price. It was thought by the Secretary 
and Auditor that $50,000 of the seven per cent, bonds could be sold 
at any price. They were the first to suggest that view, or it was 
suggested in this conversation. I never thought in reading the law 
there never was any difierence. I could not give any opinion at 
that time, and when I examined the law, I came to a different 
opinion from them, and refused to agree to anything of the kind. 

Q. Was this conversation held with a view to the execution of the 
trust imposed in you gentiemen ? 
A. It was held to aseertain what we had a right to do. 

Q. Bid you make any effort in conjunction with them to seU } if 
•0, what did you do ? 

A. I don't know that I ever did. I telegraphed to New York 
at the request of the Legislature, to ascertain at what price they 
could be sold. 

Q. Bid you telegraph any where but to New York ? 
A. No, sir. 

GROSS EXAMINATION BT THE STATS. 

By Attorney General. — Did you predicate your, opinion on 
chapter seven, section second, of the laws of 1861 f 



"268 FROOnBINQS IN THX 

A. I predicated my opinion on tliat. 

Q. Were all your attentions oalled to that ? 

A. We referred to it in onr oonverBation. 

Q. Did yon ever authorize the sale for less than seventy cents 1 
A. I did not. 

Q. Bid you authorize the balance of the officers to employ an 
agent? 
A, No. 

Q.' Did you authorize either the Auditor or Secretary to employ 
an agent ? 
A. No, sir. 

By a Senator. — ^What authority did they have to use your name 
in Washington ? 

A. I did not understand that they had any authority. I made a 

remark at the conversation mentioned, from which they inferred 

probably, they had such authority ; to the effect that if they oonkl 

make any arrangement I would agree to it ; supposing it would of 

voourse, be a legal arrangement. 

.On motion, the Senate adjourned. 



EIGHTH BAY, 

. Senaitb Ghambke, ) 

Tuesday, Ji une 10th, 1862. ) 

Senate of the State of Kansas sitting as a High Oourfe of 
Impeachment met pursuant to adjoummaut. 

President in the Chair. 

Boll called. 

Quorum not being present. 

On motion, the Sergeant-at-Arms was sent for absentees. 
Sergeant-at-Arms returned T/ith Messrs. Lappin, McBowell and 
Bees. 

Quorum present. 

Journal of yesterday xfaA and approved. 



IMPXAOHMXNT 0A8SB. 269^ 

Present.— Hon. S. A. Stinson and the Board of Managers on the 
part of the House of Sepresentatives. 

Hons. Fred. P. Stanton, Wilson Shannon and George W. Smith, > 
Bespondent's attorney's. 

Mr. Stanton announced to the Senate, that the defense desired 
no further examination of witnesses, and thej were ready to submit 
the case. 

The Attorney General announced that the prosecution had no 
further testimony to offer. 

[ARGUMENT OF W. R. WAG8TAFF.] 

Hon. W. R. Wagstaff of the Board of Managers, in opening 
the argument on the part of the prosecution, said : ^ 

Mb. Pbxbident and Senators : 

It has fallen to my lot to present the opening argument in this 
case; in behalf of the prosecution. The aim of the remarks will 
be to present fairly such eYidence aa ascertains and makes clear ih» 
truth of the material allegations set forth in the Articles of 
Impeachment preferred by the House of RepresentrtiYcs against^ 
John W. Robinson, Secretary of fitate of the State of Kansas. I 
oonfess my inability to present the facts on the part of the prosecu- 
tion with that force and clearness that will hereafter be exhibited- 
in setting forth the grounds of defense by the opposing counsel, 
who rank among the most ready and skillful debaters, not only iU' 
the forum, but in the cotmcils of the nation. But, while I confess 
the superior ability of the defendant's counsel, — ^their surpassing 
eloquence and powers of oratory, I oppose them with facts, — plain,, 
simple and convincing ; and present a case with all the elements 
necessary to try itself; and, upon the truth of the charges preferred 
in the Articles of Impeachment, as shown by the evidence submitted, 
willingly abide the result, whether for or against the prosecution. 

Senators, I ask in behalf of the Managers, and in behalf of all 
the people of Kansas, no unrighteousness ; no regard to the person* 
of a man on account of his poverty ; no regard to the person of a 
man on account of his wealth or political station ; but I do ask that, 
in righteousness, you judge your neighbor. 

In view, then, of the important and mutual responsibility resting 
on the Representatives of the people of Kansas, in rendering a 



270 PBOOBSDIlfOS IN THB 

• 

proper and rightful judgment upon the official oondnot of one of 
iheir honored and dlBtinguished public servants, let ub conrider the 
law and the facta which ought to control the mind in arriving at a 
just judgment in this case. 

The first Article of Impeachment charges, substantially, that 
John W. Robinson, Secretary, acting with others as agents for the 
State of Kansas, empowered Robert S. Stevens to sell $87,000 of 
seven per cent, bonds at any amount over sixty cents on the face of 
the bonds, and pay to the State no more than sixty cents ; that 
said Robert S. Stevens, with the full knowledge of Secretary Rob- 
inson, sold fifty-six thousand dollars of said bonds at eighty-five 
cents, and accounted to the State at only sixty cents on the dollar. 
The said John W. Robinson betrayed the trust reposed in him by 
the State. 

The statute authorizing the issuance and sale of the bonds in 
question, is an act entitled " An act to authorize the negotiation of 
(me hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of the State of 
Kansas, to defray the current expenses of the State,^' found on 
pages 102, 103 and 104, of the laws of 1861 ; and an act supple- 
mental thereto, approved June 3, 1861, and found on pages 104 
and 105 of the same year. That John W. Robinson was, prior to 
the 3rd of June, 1861, ever since, and still is, Secretary of the State 
of Kansas, is shown by the public reoords, and admitted by the 
counsel of the defense. It will be seen that the first act to whiah 
zeference has been made, authorizes the issuing of tlie bonds of the 
State to the amount named, while in the second section of the 
supplemental act, the Governor, Auditor and Secretary, or a 
majority of them, are authorized and empowered to sell these bonds 
of the State of Kansas. It is provided, however, that no bonds 
shall be sold for less than seventy cents on the dollar, and that the 
proceeds arising from the sales, shall be paid directly into the 
Treasuiy of the State, Some bonds were prepared, but none sold 
till after the passage of the supplemental act } and of course the 
whole amount of bonds authorued to be issued, would go into the 
hands of the agents appointed by the supplemental act for ssle. 
The rates fixed by law at which the bonds might be sold by the 
afents named, is clear and unmistakable ; and by no known rule of 
interpretation adopted in any enlightened judicial tribunal on earth, 
can be construed to mean anything besides a limitation of the power 
of the agents of the State, to sell said bonds at any sum less than 



IICBXAOHMBNT OASIB. 271 

Mveniy oents on the dollar. That John W. Bobinoon well knew 
the proviaionB of the law to whioh your attention has been called, 
18 a &ot too apparent to deaerve a passing notice. George S. 
Hillyer, Auditor, and acting agent with the Secretary for the sale 
of these bonds, boldly declares in his testimony, that by the consent 
and acts of himself and Secretary Robinson, and no others, the 
bonds were sold to Robert S. Steyens at sixty cents on the dollar. 
Well might a brayer man than Auditor Hillyer, under ordinary 
circumstances, shrink from the responsibility of such a statement, 
but when he makes that declaration, he knows that his acts are of 
record, and that, oyer his own official signature and that of John 
W. Robinson, is a certificate in which it is distinctly set forth, that 
for all the bonds belonging to the Stste, which the said Robert S. 
Stevens may sell, he is to pay into the State Treasury the sum of 
mtj cents on each and every dollar. The fact is of record and in 
Court, and from the responsibility of that act there is no escape. 
John W. Robinson, Secretary of State, is guilty of a willful and 
deliberate breach of official duty — a^breach that will not admit of a 
doubt, — ^an infraction of the law that precludes the possibility of a 
quibble. 

That the State of Kansas has lost, and lost largely in this trans- 
action, is a fact too well established by the evidence, to be contra- 
dicted or disputed. It is also well established by the evidence, that 
Robert 8. StevemI, his friends and co-workers, realise, out of this 
single bond transaction, in the short space of twelve days, in good 
money, the round sum of twenty-two thousand dollars. Senators 
will look in vain for some rational ground to justify or extenuate 
the conduct of John W. Robinson in this transaction. For nearly 
three months prior to the negotiation of these bonds, and till after 
the sale was consxunmated by Robert 8, Stevens, the Secretary and 
Auditor were present in the City of Washington, and there for the 
sole purpose of negotiating the seven per cent, bonds of the State of 
Kansas, and with all the facilities at their command necessary to a 
ftill and complete knowledge of the facts and circumstances, in 
anywise connected with the sale. They did understand ; they were 
fully advised of the whole transaction, and were as well informed of 
the acts of Robert S. Stevens in the premises, as they were of their 
own. 

After the sale of the bonds, the Secretary and Auditor return 
home, and say to their friends, " We know not what the bonds sold 



272 PBOOBIDINOS IN THB 

for to the Interior Dep<irtment ; but Robert S. Steyens sold our 
private^ bonds, amounting to several thousand dollars, with the 
bonds belonging to the State ; the State bonds were sold at sixty 
cents on the dollar, but Mr. Stevens very generously accounts to us 
for our private bonds at seventy cents on the dollar." The learned 
counsel for the defense have, indeed, attempted to palliate the 
conduct of the Secretary and Auditor. Mr. Stevens is placed upon 
the witness stand, and gravely informs the Senate he never told the 
Secretary the price for which he sold the bonds, and the Secretary 
never inquired. It was certainly unnecessary for Mr. Stevens to 
inform, or for the Secretary to inquire of, an affair transpiring before 
his own eyes. Such cobwebs cannot conceal the guilt of the 
accused, nor protect against the just penalties of a violated law. 

About the time the signatures of the Secretary and Auditor were 
attached to that remarkable certificate, by which the bonds of the 
State were sold at sixty cents on the dollar, the same signatures, 
with the name of the Governor added thereto by Secretary Robinson ^ 
are solemnly subscribed to a power of attorney, drawn up in due 
form of law, and delivered to Robert S. Stevens, authorizing and 
empowering him, the said Robert S. Stevens, to negotiate and sell 
for, and in the name of the State of Kansas, one hundred and fifty 
thousand dollars of the seven per cent, bonds. This power of 
attorney — for reasons not explained by the parties who executed it — 
was dated back, showing, on its face, October 26th, 1861, when, in 
fact, it was executed in Washington City about the first of Decem- 
ber, 1861. That the Secretary and Auditor had, in the execution 
of these wonderful state papers, in view the sale of the bonds at a 
higher rate than sixty cents on the dollar on the face of said 
bonds, is apparent from the documentary evidence, taken from the 
records in the office of the Interior Department, in the City of 
Washington. On the third day of December, 1861, at the City of 
Washington, in the District of Columbia, and the real date of the 
certificate of sale and power of attorney, Robert S. Stevens, Esq., 
submitted a proposition to Hon. Caleb B. Smith, Secretary of the 
Interior, to sell to him, as trustee for certain Indian tribes, the 
entire issue of the seven per cent, bonds of the State of Kansas, 
amounting to one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, at eighty-five 
cents on the dollar. This proposition, after passing the usual 
routine of examination — ^best known and understood among the 
officials at the capital of our nation — ^was accepted; and, on the 19th 



IMPSAOHMENT CASES. 278 

day of December, 1861 — onlj twelye days after the proposition was 
first submitted — ^the contract, for the sale of the bonds at eighty-five 
cents on the dollar, was conolnded between C»leb B. Smith, Secre- 
tary of the Interior, and Bobert S. Stevens, who pretended to act 
as agent for the State of Kansas. Of the one hundred and fifty ' 
thousand dollars of the bonds, authorized to be issued by the State, 
sixty-two thousand dollars had been used by the Treasurer, Mr. 
Dutton, in the redemption of State scrip, at seventy cents on the 
dollar, leaving a balance of State bonds to be disposed of, under 
this contract, of about eighty-eight thousand dollars. 

Senators will pardon me for a statement of the case which may 
partially recapitulate facts already noticed. The State of Kansas 
places bonds in the hands of the Secretary and Auditor to negotiate, 
with special instructions not to sell, in any market, for less than 
seventy cents on the dollar; they repair to Washington City to 
execute the trust reposed in them by the State ; and, being advised 
before their arrival at the city, that the best market for the bonds 
would be in the office of the Interior Department ; and, after having 
remained in the city for near three months, and until after the sale 
had been consummated, they return to Topeka^ prior to the first day of 
January, 1862, and prior to the assembling of the State Legislature. 
No report is prepared, and none submitted to the Legislature, in 
regard to the manner of the execution of the trust. In the course of 
time, a resolution of inquiry is passed by the Legislature, inquiring 
whether or not the trust had been executed ; if so, when, and in 
what manner ? The Legislature are then informed that the bonds 
have been sold at sixty cents on the dollar, to Robert S. Stevens, 
and that the expenses incurred by the State in and about the 
negotiations of the bonds, amounted to about four hundred dollars. 
This four hundred dollars is charged as the expenses of the Secretary 
and Auditor, at Washington City, in the negotiation of the seven 
per cent, bonds, and is drawn from that portion of the sixty per 
cent, paid into the Treasury on the sale of said bonds. The Secre- 
tary and Auditor purposely conceal the fact that, the same day they 
sold the bonds at sixty cents on the dollar, the purchaser sold to 
the Interior Department at eighty-five cents on the dollar. The 
whole conduct of the Secretary and Auditor, in this bond transac- 
tion, goes to establish one of two facts : — that these State officers 
were fools or knaves. It is not to be supposed, for a moment, that 

they are fools. 
18 



274 PB00EXDING8 IN THX 

The Second Artiolo of Impeaclmient oh&rges that the negoiiatioB 
of the seven per cent, bonds of the State of Kanaaa, was carried on 
and oonsnmmated secretly in the City of Washington, by the Seom- 
tary and Auditor, What evidence do we find to establish the tmtk 
of this allegation ? On the 210th page of the statutes of 1861, the 
12th section and 4th paragraph, declares that the Secretary of State 
shall report annually, at least ten days before each regular session 
of the Legislature, to the Governor, any matters pertaining to hk 
office. The regular session of the Kansas Legislature assembled at 
Topeka, on Tuesday, the 14th day of January, 1862, affording 
ample time for the Secretary to prepare, as he was bound by law to 
do, any matters pertaining to his office. The matter of the negotia- 
tion of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of the 
State of Kansas, was one of the most important and responsible 
trusts committed to his charge as one of the officers of the State ; 
and yet, strange to say, not a single word is said in any of his 
reports, for the information of the State, upon that subject. The 
most charitable construction that can be placed upon such official 
neglect and mbconduct in office is, that, in the opinion of the Secre- 
tary and his co-workers in the negotiation of the bonds, that the 
time had not yet arrived for the disclosure of their work at Wash- 
ington, and that the transaction should still be kept a secret. But,^ 
however fair the inference may be from the facts stated, that a part 
of the concocted plan of the Secretary and Auditor, at the City of 
Washington, was to keep their conduct, in this matter, a profound 
secret, we are relieved from any doubts in misinterpreting the conduct 
of Secretary Bobinson, by his own written declarations in the City 
of Washington, and forwarded by mail to his private secretary, D. 
H. Weir. We refer to the letters in evidence in this case, and 
found at length on pages eight and nine of the printed report of the 
special committee, appointed by the House of Representatives to 
investigate the accounts of the^ Auditor and Treasurer of the State ;* 
the sale of the bonds of the State of Kansas, &c., January 80th, 
1862. The first letter is dated Washington, December 8th, 1862, 
in which we find the following sentence : " We want nothing said 
about bonds at ail — ^not a word.*' It will be recollected the Secre- 
tary was writing from Washington City, to his private secretary at 
Topeka, and when he used the word thercy he meant that nothing 
should be said at the Capital <* about bonds at all — ^not a word ;" 

•a— pp. of thij Tolumt, M. U, and U. 



IMPS4GHM9NT 0ABS8. 275 

:«DLd ibeiiyTtfGfter proaounoiag a self-reprimand for his own inditcie^ 

.tion fornttntioiimg Senator Pomeroy'0 name in oonneodon with tbie 
bonds, wihen, says the Secretary, the Senator has sworn to keep 

this name ^entirely away from the name of the bonda. The 

• Secretaiy .ases, in the oonchiding part of the letter, the fol* 
lowing lapifoage : " Keep entirely mvm about the bonda. Do 

mot say .a vword to any person alive, not even to yonr wife; for 
we want it as secret as it can be, tiU it %$ fixed*' Two days 
after thb ^•aztraordinary caution, John W. Robinson writea agaiB' 
from Washington to his private secretary at Topeka, Kansea^ 
urging upon him more strongly and forcibly the necessity of secrecy, 
in regard to* the sale of the bonds, using these words : ^* And, as I 
said in myi former letter, keep mum entirely about the bonds. Sajf 

. nothing to inobody. So I want you to be very careful, indeed, what 
you say, and especially say nothing about bonds in connection with 
Waahington or any of the State officers." And still later, on the 
18ih day of December, the day before the sale of the State bonda of 
Kansas was consununated at eighty-five cents on the dollar, his coa- 

> clttdiBg admonition to his firiend, D. H. Weir, in regard to the 
bonds is, ^^Keep still." After considering the testimony, to which 

\ we have called attention, if John W. Bobinson, Secretary of State, 
is not guilty of secretly ent^ing into an agreement for the sale of 
the bonda of the State of Kansas, as charged in the secoAd Article 

v<ki Impeachment, will Senators explain why John W. Bobinaoft 
failed, neglected and reftised, in the discharge of his official duly, 
to report to the proper officers of State, his doings in regard to theae 
bonds ? aod'Awhy it was that, in writing from Washington City, to 

I his clerk in Topeka, who was, at the time, his legal ai^d acwedited 
egent, and for whose acts he was offieially responsible, he, time after 
itae, •warned; him to keep still — keep entirely mum about the boada 
«-*do not say a word to any person alive, hot evea to your wife, for 
we want it as 9ecret as it can be till it is fixed t 

The Third Article of Impeachment charges, substantially, that the 

. seven per cent, bonds were issued, with coupons lattaehed, and dated 

July 1st, 1861, and when the bonds were sold to the Interior 

IXapartment by Bobert S. Stevens, the alleged agent df the State tf 

Kansas, about the first of January, 1862, when the coupons for the 

: first semi-annual interest wa3 due, and which had not then accrued 

. agunst the State, and the said Stevens, with the full knowledge and 



^•* 



276 PROOEEDINGB IN THB ^ 

consent of the said Secretary Robinson, presented said coupons ta • 
the Treasurer of State, and receiyed the full amount of semi-annual 
interest upon bonds amounting to 3} per cent, upon the sum of ' 
eigbty-seven thousand two hundred dollars. Caleb B. Smith, Sec- 
retary of th^ Interior of the United States, in his deposition and 
in answer to the question — " Please state the circumstances in > 
relation to the withdrawal from these bonds of the coupons for the * 
semi-annual interest due in January, 1862,'' says : — ^^ There was a 
'coupon on each of the bonds for six months interest, due January, 
1862. The money was paid for the bonds very near the laat of 
December, 1861, and as there were a very few days intervening be- 
tween the purchase and the time when the coupons were payablci 
I agreed that the coupons should be cut off and retained by the - 
State.'' Here, then, according to the well known business customs « 
of the country, and. according to the laws of the land, the d^yerj ^ 
of the coupons to Mr. Stevens, while acting as agent for the Audi- - 
tor and Secretary, was a delivery to them. And these officers— 
trustees for the State of Kansas — ^in the honorable discharge of an . 
official duty, should have canceled or destroyed the coupons, thereby * 
relieving the State from any liability on account thereof. But, on < 
he contrary, the Secretary and Auditor exhibited a wanton reck* 
lessness, seldom witnessed even in the most ordinary business ■ 
transaction, by allowing their agent, Mr. Stevens, to present and 
draw from the Treasury of the State, the coupons for the semi- 
aniraal interest on $87,200, amounting to 8} j^r cent, on said sum, . 
which was drawn in money from the Treasury of the State, by which : 
the State was swindled out of the sum of $3,062. The evidence is 
brief, direct, and in point. Senators are requested to examine the 
testimony in regard to this article carefully, especially that of ' 
Treasurer Sutton, before a final decision is made up. The evidence . 
shows John W. Bobinson guilty of the charges alleged in the third 
Article of Impeachment. 

The Fourth Article charges that John W. Robinson, while acting 
as agent of the State, and without authority of law, appointed 
Bobert S. Stevens, to negotiate and sell the bonds of the State of 
Kansas, and delivered to him a large amount of said bonds, and took 
no security to preserve the State from loss, while he so held, &c. . 

It is a well settled principle in law, when one penon b acting in 
the capacity of an agent for another, that the agent has no power * 



IMPSAOHMSNT 0ABX8. 277 

to transfer his authority to any other, without an express grant for 
that purpose. John W. Robinson oommitted a breach of official 
duty, in appointing Robert S. Stevens to act as agent for the State 
of Kansas; an act against law and void. That he took no security 
from Mr. Stevens to preserve the State against loss, while he held 
and negotiated said bonds, is fully shown by all the proof, without 
a single circumstance intervening to raise a doubt as to its truth. 
When the Legislature enacted the law authorising the negotiation 
of $150,000 of the bonds of the State of Kansas, Stone and Clark 
were appointed agents of the State to effect the negotiation of the 
bonds, and before entering on the duties of their trust were required 
to give bonds in the sum of $300,000 to the State, for the faithful 
discharge of the trust. What a contrast between the conduct of 
John W. Robinson and the Legislature of the State ! The contrast 
shows gross neglect of duty on the part of John W. Robinson—- 
.his total disregard of the interest of the State, and of the responsi- 
hility of his trust. 

The Fifth Article of Lnpeachment charges that the said John W. 
Robinson, Secretary of State, George 8. Hillyer, Auditor of State, 
conspired with Robert S. Stevens, and did secretly, in the City of 
Washington, in the District of Columbia, consummate the sale of 
oertain bonds of the State of Kansas, at eighty-five cents on the 
dollar, and accounted to the State for only sixty cents on the 
4ollar. 

Wharton's American Criminal Law, page 786, says : — ^^ A com- 
bination is a conspiracy in law, whenever the act to be done has a 
necessary tendency to prejudice the public or oppress individuals 
by unjustly subjecting them to the power of the confederates, and 
living effect to the purposes of the latter, whether of extortion or 
mischief." The same distinguished author, on pages 794 and 790, 
in treating of the proof necessary to sustain the charge of conspiraoy, 
says : — *' The proof of the combination charged must almost always 
be extracted from the circumstances connected with the transaotioa 
which forms the subject of the accusation. In the history of 
criminal administration, the ease is rerely found in which direct aftd 
positive evidence of criminal combination exists.'' 

To hold that nothing short of such proof is sufficient to establish 
a conspiracy, would be to give community to one of the most 
dangerous crimes which infest society. Hence, in order to discover 



278 PBOCVBBINGS IN THE* 

<M)ii8piraior8, we are forced to follow ihem through all the deyioos': 
Windings in which the natural anxiety of avoiding detection teaches 
men so circumstanced to envelop themBelves, and to trace their* 
movements from the slight, but often unerring marks of progress, 
which the most adroit cunning cannot so effectively obliterate as 
to render them unappreciable to the eye of the sagacious investi- 
gator. It is from the circumstances attending a criminal, or a series 
of criminal acts that we are able to become satisfied that they have 
been the resuhe, not merely of individuals, but the products of 
concerted and associated action, which, if considered separately, 
might seem to proceed exclusively from the immediate agents to 
them ; may be so linked together by circumstances, in themselves 
slight, as to leave the mind fully satisfied that these apparently 
isolated acts, are truly parts of a common whole ; that they have 
sprung from a common object, and have in view a common end. 

The adequacy of the evidence in a prosecution for a criminal 
conspiracy, to prove the existence of such a eonspiracy, like other 
questions of the weight of evidence, is a question for the jury. 
The offanse of eonspiraoy, in fact, is rendei^d complete by the base 
engagement and association of two or more perflons to break the law^ 
without any a^ being done in pursuance thereof by the ^Kmspira* 
tors. The actual hct of conspiring may be inferred, as has been 
said, from circumstances, and Um concurring conduct of the defen- 
dants need not be proved* Any concurrence of action, on a material 
point, seems to be sufficient to enable the jury to presume coneunr* 
ence of sentiment ; and one competent witness will -suffice to prove: 
the co-operation of any. individual cou^rator.'^ 

We haTe, in the' onset, under this article of impeachment, read;. 
Krom authority that will not be called in question, to show what 
isombibation in law constitutes a conspiracy, and the proof, and the 
•haracter of the proof necessary to sustain charges preferred against 
^KHispirators. The combination of Secretary Robinson, Auditor- 
fiillyer and Rofcei^ S. Stevenfei, to efllect the negotiation of the bonds^ 
••f the State of Kansas, secretly and in violation of law, is sufficiently 
shown by the proof referred to in considering the preceding articles 
^ impeachment. The confession of a party charged with the 
commission of a criminal offense, when made freely and without 
restraint, is admissible according to the rules of evidence adopted 
in courts of law, and is to be regarded as proof of great weight 
and construed strongly against the party making such confession. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 279 

In a letter from John W. Bobinson, Secretary of State, dated at 
Washington, December 18, 1861, to D. H. Weir, his clerk at 
Topeka,he8aj8 : — ^^ We have altered proposition after proposition, and 

met obstacle after obstacle, until I have been discouraged, disgusted^ 
and thoiy)ughlj mad. The last one is Jim Lane, an enemy of 
Stevens' /' &c., thus declaring in terms, what all the proof in the case 
goes to establish, that the Secretary, Stevens and others, concurred 
in sentiment and co-operated in acts in the negotiation of the bonds. 
But the concluding paragraph advances one step farther, and de- 
velops the fact that the Secretary knew that Bobert S. Stevens had 
sold the bonds of the State of Kansas to the Interior Department 
for more than sixty cents on the dollar. Here is the concluding 
paragraph of the letter. Mark well the language : " There are one 
thousand dollars of your bonds. We shall have them put into sale, 
if made at all^ at whatever the State (or we) get for ours, of course ; 
hut we sKaU get the seventy cents, as I had hoped, he/ore leaving. We 
may possibly put in the whole lot at sixty cents, but it will never 
hurt the State a dime, or will ever be heard of, but I shall thank 
God. Keep 9tiU!" " But we shall get the seventy cents, as I had 
hoped, before leaving I" What locality had the Secretary left 7 
Some two or three months before the writing of this letter, the 
Secretary and Auditor had lefbTopeka, Kansas, and moved directly to 
the City of Washington, and this is a portion of a letter written at 
Washington Oity, and sent home by mail to his clerk. And that 
letter was written only the day before the eontraot for the sale of 
the bonds of the State of Kansas, at eighty-five cents on the dollar, 
was concluded between the Secretary of the Interior and Bobert S. 
Stevens. In the language of the law before quoted, '* The proof of 
the combination charged must almost always be extracted from the 
circumstances connected with the transaction which forms the sub* 
ject of the accusation.'' In the history of criminal administration, 
the case is rarely found, in which direct and positive evidence of 
criminal combination exists. To hold that nothing short of such 
proof is sufficient to establish a conspiracy, woulc^ be to give com- 
munity one of the most dangerous crimes winch infest sooiety.'^ 
What, then, we ask, are the circumstances connected with the tran- 
saction which forms the subject of this accusation f In the month 
of July, 1861, Bobert S. Stevens left Kansas, went to Washington 
City, and there sold about thirty thousand dollars of the War Bonds, 
at ninety-five cents on the dollar, which bonds he had previously 



280 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

porohased from Mr. Dutton, State Treasurer, at forty cents on the 
dollar, realiiing in this transaction a handsome profit of about eigh- 
teen thousand dollars. Mr. Stevens was encouraged with his success 
in the sale of the War Bonds, and finding the faith and credit of 
the State of Kansas, furnished a good basis for private speculation, 
concluded to extend in that line th^, sphere of his actions. About 
the first of September, 1861, he met Mr. Dutton, Treasurer of 
State, at the City of Bufiido, in the State of New York. Mr. 
Dutton then and there delivered to said Stevens $29,000 of the 
seven per cent, bonds of the State of Kansas, and took his receipt, 
stating that the bonds should be sold at seventy cents on the dollar, 
or returned to the State. Whereupon Mr. Stevens returned to the 
City of Washington, and submitted a proposition to the Secretary 
of the Interior Department of the United States, to sell one hun. 
dred thousand dollars of the seven per cent, bonds, but failed of 
success. Unwilling to yield his chances of success with Kansas 
State bonds and Kansas State officers, he concluded to renew his 
efforts, and extend the circle of operations. With this object in 
view, he goes from Washington City to Dayton, Ohio. There he 
meets one Bobert G. Corwin, an attorney at law, and a brother-in- 
law of Caleb B. Smith, Secretary of the Interior of the United 
States. An interview takes place immediately concerning the seven 
per cent, bonds of the State of Kansas, in which Mr. Stevens in- 
forms Mr. Corwin fally as to his plans, prospects, and of the rejec- 
tion of his proposition by the Secretary of the Interior. Mr. 
Corwin suggests a modification of the original proposition made by 
Stevens ; the change is agreed to, and another 'proposition, in ac- 
cordance therewith, is prepared to be submitted to the Department 
of the Interior, for the sale of one hundred thousand dollars of the 
bonds of the Stote of Kansas. The $29,000 of the bonds delivered 
by Dutton to Stevens in the City of Buffalo, New York, are now 
handed over to Robert G. Corwin, together with the amended pro- 
posal to sell, which Mr. Corwin takes with him to the City of 
Washington. Two bold financiers are now fairly in harness to 
speculate in the faith and credit of the State of Kansas. The one 
goes from Dayton, Ohio, to Washington City, the other returns to 
Kansas, his adopted State. 

Where now is the $29,000 of the bonds, that were to be sold for 
seventy cents or returned to the State ? In the hands of Bobert G« 
Corwin. Soon after leaving Dayton, Ohio, Robert S. Stevens is in 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 281 

the city of Learenworth, and there proposes to buy the bonds of 
the State from Messrs. Clark and Stone ; they declined to accept 
the proposal for two reasons : First, becanse they had no power to 
sell : Second, the price proposed would not justify the State to 
accept. Two yery good reasons. 

Aboht the 15th of October, 1861, Robert S. Stevens is at Topeka, 
the Capital of our State. That day, or the next, John W. Robin- 
son, Secretary of State, George S. Hillyer, Auditor of State, 
Charles Robinson, Goyernor, and Robert S. Steyens, Esq., are 
assembled in council. The particular subject under consideration is, 
that proyision of the law which declares the seven per cent, bonds 
shall not be sold by the State officers for less than seventy cents 
on the dollar. The history of the law is fully reviewed, for the 
purpose of forcing a construction in opposition to an express limita- 
tion of price for which the bonds were authorized to be sold. Sec- 
Tetary Robinson and Auditor Hillyer expressed themselves fully 
convinced that, inasmuch as the Legislature had enacted a law 
authorizing the issuance of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars 
of the bonds of the State of Kansas, payable in fifteen years, draw- 
ing interest at seven per cent, per annum, and had authorized Messrs. 
Stone and Clark to sell these bonds without fixing any price, and to 
report their doings to the Legislature within a given time ; and in 
the event of no sale being made by these agents, to return the bonds 
io the State ; and moreover, as fifty thousand dollars had been issued 
under said act, and placed in the hands of Clark and Stone, who 
having fiuled to sell said bonds, returning the same to the Legisla- 
ture then in session ; and who had also surrendered their trust j and 
aa the supplemental act was passed after the surrender of these bonds 
to the State, therefore, a majority of the State officers were fully 
authorized under the supplemental act to sell or discount fifty thou- 
aand dollars of bonds at any price whatever, limited only by their 
discretion. (Governor Robinson declared that such a construction 
was novel — left his mind in doubt — and for the present he would 
not consent to it, but would hold the subject under advisement, and 
left the council. Secretary Robinson and Auditor Hillyer then sold 
to Robert S. Stevens fifty thousand dollars of the seven per cent, 
bonds, at forty cents on the dollar, and twenty-five thousand at 
seventy cents on the dollar, making $75,000 of the seven per cent, 
bonds. These two State officers then executed and delivered to 
Robert S. Stevens a certificate or statement of the amount of bonds 



282 PBO0XXDINO8 IN THB 

sold to him, and specifying the price for which they were sold. 
Under this arrangement, they delivered to Robert S. Stevens 
twenty-one thousand dollars of the seven per cent bonds, which, 
with the $29,000 which had been previously delivered to him at 
Buffalo, New York, made up the fifty thousand dollars at forty per 
cent. At this time, other bonds, in a book, which were incomplete 
for the want of the Grovemor's signature, were delivered to R. S* 
Stevens. The bonds that were incomplete, together with the twenty- 
one thousand dollars, were conveyed by Mr. Stevens to Lawrence^ 
where he obtained the signature of the Governor to the unsigned 
bonds, and returned them by express to the Auditor and Secretarj 
at Topeka. The twenty-one thousand dollars he delivered to Dr. 
Woodward, with a letter of instructions to Robert G. Corwin, to be 
delivered to him at Washington City, and placed with the other 
papers of Stevens, and to be paid for by the Secretary of the Interior, 
if his proposition was accepted. The bonds, with instructions, were: 
delivered as directed to Mr. Corwin, by S. C. Smith, cashier of the 
Lawrence Bank. The fifty thousand dollars of the bonds being 
accounted for, we leave Robert S. Stevens at the Sao and Fox 
Agency, where it became necessary to give personal attention to some 
Indian contracts. 

Shortly after this transaction, John W. Robinson,. Secretary, and 
George S. Hillyer, Auditor, commenced preparing to go to Wash* 
ini^n City. Before leaving for Washington, John W. Robinsoa 
was anxious to borrow seven per cent, bonds; he wanted $1,000 
from S. C. Wilmarth, and got $400, and a day or two before he left,, 
said that Senator Pomeroy wanted to invest in Kansas State bonds ; 
he got $400 of bonds from Dr. Tefb, of Topeka, and informed hin^ 
at the time, that Pomeroy could sell the bends ; and when Dr. Teft 
consented that Secretary Robinson might take the bonds to Wash* 
ington, Robinson informed him that the bonds could be sold to the* 
Interior Department, for the Indians, at seventy cents on the dollar; 
that he had a letter from Gen. Pomeroy to that effect. As soon as 
Robinson had collected all the outstanding seven per cent, bonds he 
could on his own private account, and scrip which he bonded, mak- 
ing in all about four thousand dollars, he started for Washington 
City. In a day or two thereafter, Gkorge S. Hillyer, also left for 
the same place. Hillyer arrived at the City of Washington a. day 
or two before Robinson. The Secretary and Auditor are now in the 
City of Washington for the purpose of negotiating the bonds of the 



IMPSAOHMENT OASES. 283r 

State of Kansas, and Stevens is still at tbe Sac and Fox Agency., 
fiillyer has in his possession seyen per cent, bonds, his own priyate^ 
property, amounting to fourteen hundred dollars ; two hundred for 
Treasurer Dutton ; for Weir, clerk of Robinson, about f 1,000 ; for 
the Bt^te of Kansas, $37,200 ; and Secretary Robinson, on his own 
account, about four thousand dollars. A correspondence by mail 
and by telegraph was opened and continued between the Secretary 
and Auditor at Washington City, and Robert S. Steyens, until the 
Utter, on the first of December, 1861, arrived at the City of Wash- 
ington. On the third day of December, 1861, as heretofore showur 
the bonds were sold to Stevens at sixty cents ; on same day the 
proposition was submitted by Stevens to the Interior Department,^ 
for eighty-five cents on the dollar, and during all the time this \ 
negotiation was pending in the Interior Department, and until after 
its consummation on the 19th day of December, 1861, the Secretary,. 
Auditor, Stevens and Corwin were together in the City of Wash-* 
ington, and all these, from their own showing, for the purpose of ' 
effecting the negotiation of the seven per cent, bonds of the State 
of Kansas. 

From the facts, a combination between the Auditor, Secretary,;, 
and others, is clearly shown, to sell the bonds of the Statetof Kansas . 
in violation of law ; and the acts by them performed, in; the negoti- - 
ation of the bonds, have a tendency to prejudice the public, and to 
efibct the purpose of the conspirators,' not only of extortioD but of ' 
mischief. These are sufficient, according to the rules of evidence 
in Wharton's Criminal Law, to convict tho parties here charged o£ ' 
a conspiracy. In followmg these conspirators through thedevioufr* 
windings of this bond transaction, there is seen, in almost every' 
movement, an anxiety to avoid detection, and to conceal their con- 
duct from the eye of the sagaeious investigator. The Secretary and 
Auditor declare there was only one contract for the sale of the bondd 
to Robert S. Stevens, and that one waS made in Washington City; 
on the 8d day' of December, 1861. Auditor Hillyer declares he^ 
took thirty-seven thousand two hundred dollars of the bonds with 
him to Washington, and there he found the other fifty thousand . 
dollars of the bonds in a safe at Washington, bu(^ in whose care he 
does not state. When asked how came these bonds at Washington,., 
he is unable to tell — he knows not. The Secretary not informed ; 
he, too, is ignorant on this point. Singular, indeed, that these two 
men, having the sole custody and charge of these bonds, cannot tell. 



2B1 mooKSDiVGs in thk 

Kow or in what way the fifty thooBand dollars t£ ib» ftonds k88Mn1I 
out of their hands and found their way into a safe in the City oF 
Washington. How came B. S. Stevens in the possession oT l^ese 
bonds J They were handed to him by Mr. Button, State Treafforer* 
This is strange conduct. Mr. Button had no legal authoiii;^' tJ» 
handle or dispose of the bonds* The receipt of Stevens to BUttoit 
for twenty-one thousand dollars of the bonds, is Atei Ottob«r2S)^ 
1861. Button says he delivered these bonds tb Stevens VytSift 
Hlireotion of the Secretary and Auditor, but th^ have no i«Bolln»- 
^on on that point. If it be true that the Secretary and Auditeir 
had no knowledge of the transit of these bonds ftom their landli^ tN» 
a safe in the City of Washingten, is it not passing strsngfi* tflniy 
should execute a power of attorney, authofizing. R. S. Stosrans Urn 
•sell all the bonds, at the City of Wasbingtou, on. or abosi; the- fisift 
of Becember, 1861, and date it back to the 25tlL of Oetob«9; IMB J 
M, S. Steveus, on his part, first ezplaina the* arrangemsAt and the 
^iiUinner in which the bonds came inte his hands, and how tiiBj were 
taken to Washington, and into whose hands placed ; ani then 
gravely informs us that the contract of 2&tk of October^ ][961,lkiled 
hecause Governor Bobinson refused to n^ the certilaa^ie of sale 
given him over the signatures ef tibe Seeitttasy and Auditot-. After 
fifty thousand dollars of the bonds had beea delivered te> bim by a 
majority of the State officers a«ihoriied by laiw to sell^ and after he 
Ihad placed the bonds in the hands of Bebect G. Oorwift» hia partner 
: at Washington City, he tore up the cettificate of sale. Tee, he tore 
•it 'up, as he could afford to do, to muk» apartmenia for the eon« 
« sciences of the Secretary and Auditer,. so that they eoiiM solemnly 
' declare they did not reeoHect, and in fact never bad made, any 
^ arrangement for the disposal of the bonds, besides the one at 

Washington City. Whether this transaction shows concurrent 
< sentiment and concurrent conduot between John W. BobinsoQi. 

(}eorge S. Hillyer, B. S. Stevens and others, to sell the bonds ate 
^ eighty-five cents on the dollar, and account to ibe State for «|)^ 
• sixty x)ents on the dollar, is a question we now leave for Senat«ft ta 
« decide. 



The Sixth Article charges John W. Bohinson with procnring the 
-publication of the banking law, in a newspaper called tjhe Wabaun- 
«0ee Patriot, when he well knew that no wach newsparier was in fkct 
jpublished in the county of Wabaunaeat In the State, nf Kansas. 



IMPSACHMEKT 0A8SB. 285 

Tk6|nroof 18, that in tbe fall of 1861, the publication of a news- 
paper ealled the Wabannsee Patriot was oommenced in the Tribune 
effioe at Topeka, in Shawnee connty, Kansaa, by J. F. Cammings, 
and continued for eight or ten issues, and then ceased to exist. The 
banking law was published in this paper, and about one hundred 
copies of each issue sent from the Tribune office by mail, for circu- 
lation in the county of Wabaunsee. Soon after the publication of the 
banking law had been completed, Mr. Cummings made out his 
account — ^amounting to three hundred and forty dollars — against the 
State, for publishing the law in the Patriot ; presented it to D. H. Weir, 
then clerk and acting Secretary of State, who certified to its correct- 
ness, and a warrant was drawn on the Treasury for the amount. 
This warrant was assigned in blank to Bobert S. Stevens, and the 
money drawn from the Treasury. We have before referred to the 
law which makes the Secretary responsible for the acts of his clerk, 
and it is now unnecessary to repeat. 

The 43d section of the banking law, found on page 100 of the 
statutes of 18ol, provides that this act shall be published in one 
newspaper in each county in this State, when praoticable, &c. The 
language clearly means, in each county where a newspaper is 
actually — not constructively — ^published. Were the opposite con- 
struction adopted, the law might be published in the New York 
Herald, Tribune, or Day Book, and fifty or one hundred copies sent 
by mail, to a nominal local editor, in the county of Wabaunsee, in 
Kansas, the account audited, and a warrant drawn on. the Treasury 
of this State, and that, too, with as much apparent consistency, as 
actually to print the law in the Wabaunsee Patriot, published in the 
office of the Tribune, in the City of Topeka, Shawnee county, 
Kansas, and to claim constructively its publication in the county of 
Wabaunsee. Whatever circumstances may be claimed to justify 
the publication of the banking law in the Wabaunsee Patriot, it ia 
a fact that for each issue of the paper, thirty-four dollars was, dur* 
ing its publication, drawn from the State Treasury; that the whole 
transaction is a petty peculation, a fraud in law, and derogatory to 
the character of the public functionary who would give it oounte- 
tance or sanction. 

Article Seventh charges that John W. Robinson oountersigned forty 
thousand dollars of the War Bonds of the State of Kansas, under 
the act of May 7, 1861, when, by law^ he was only authorised to 
countersign bonds to the amount of twenty thousand dollars. 



.286 PRoonDiNOS in the 

The law under which the artiele i& flramed is foand on pages 205 
and 206 of the Statutes of 1861. The first section d the law au- 
thorizes the Treasurer of this State to borrow the sum of twenty 
thousand dollars, or such part of that sum as may be necessary to 
repel inyasion, suppress insurrection, &c. The total sum which the 
Treasurer is authorised to borrow is twenty thousand dollars, with 
the privilege of borrowing any sum less than the amount namad, 
thereby clearly limiting the power to borrow any sum larger than 
the amount fixed in the law. The second section authorises the 
Treasurer to prepare bonds to the full amount of said law, fixing 
bounds beyond which the Treasurer shall not go in the preparation 
of the bonds — the full amount of said loan, the sum of twenty 
thousand dollars, and no more. The said bonds, to the full amount 
mentioned, and np more, shall be signed by the Governor and Treas- 
urer, countersigned by the Secretary of State, and shall have the 
seal of the State of Kansas attached, and registered by the Auditor 
of State. Every limitation applicable to the amount of the loan, 
and to the amount of the bonds to be prepared by the Treasurer, 
applies with foil force to the power of the Governor and Treasurer 
to sign, and to the power of the Secretary to countersign the bonds. 
They are authorised to execute twenty thousand dollars of the bonds, 
and no more, and every bond executed beyond the sum specified is 
illegal, and a usurpation of power on the part of the State officials. 
That it was not the intention of the Legislature that bonds to any 
given amount, under this law, should be prepared and executed, and 
placed in the market by the State officers, and then discounted at 
any rate, so as to raise twenty thousand dollars, must be apparent 
-from the time fixed for their full payment, and the rate of inteiest 
which they draw. We read the words of the law : "And shall be 
payable in two years from the time said loan ia effected, tmd shall 
1i>ear interest from said time, at the rate of ten per cent, per annum; 
iBaid interest payable annually at the office of the Treasurer of State. 
The faith and credit of the State of Kansas are hereby pledged for 
the repayment of said principal and interest, when the same shall 
become due and payable. The loan herein authorised shall be made 
(upon the bonds specified and provided for in section two of this act." 
Gould any man, the most inexperienced and humble, who can read 
•nd is possessed of the most ordinary knowledge of the Bnglbh 
language, fail to understand the plain meaning and intent of this 
statute to be to limit the power of the State officers, in the issuance 



IMPXAOHMXNT 0A8B8. 287 

of these bonds to the earn of twenty thousand dollars. To suppose 
tiiat distinguished and highly intelligent gentlemen, the Gh>yemor, 
Secretary and Treasurer, clothed with the business and executiTe 
powers of the State of Kansas, should, through ignorance, miscon- 
strue thb statute to mean they had power to issue one hundred 
thousand dollars of War Bonds, and then sell them at twenty per 
cent, upon the face of said bonds, for the purpose of raising twenty 
thousand dollars in money, is a reflection on the intelligence of the 
poople and of the one hundred representatives who composed the 
Legislature which enacted the law, not to be entertained for a single 
moment. 

The proof is. that the Oovernor and Treasurer signed, and the 
Secretary countersigned forty thousand dollars of the War Bonds, 
and that Treasurer Dutton sold thirty-one thousand dollars of the 
bonds so executed to Bobert S. Stevens, at forty cents on the dollar-^ 
eleven thousand dollars of the bonds beyond the amount authorised 
by law to be issued. The Governor, Treasurer and Secretary, in 
executing forty thousand dollars of War Bonds under this law, have 
inaugurated a rule of construction unknown in courts of justice } 
and had the Secretary withheld his sanction, and refused to coun- 
tersign more than twenty thousand dollars of the bonds, the State 
would have been saved from a policy which must prove most ruin* 
ous and destructive to its finances and to its credit. 



Article Eighth charges that John W. Bobinson, acting in oonjuno- 
tion with the Auditor and Treasurer, on the 10th day of June, 1861* 
awarded to Trask & Lowman, of Lawrence, Kansas, the Legislative 
printing for the year 1861, as the lowest bidders, and, after bonds 
had been filed as required by law, the said John W. Bobinson con- 
sented to the withdrawal of said bid, and the contract was awarded 
to the next lowest bidder, whereby the State sufiered great pecun- 
iary loss. 

It appears, from the testimony, that Trask & Lowman, and Cum- 
mings, and Boss had bid for the Legislative printing for the year 
1861 ; the bid of the latter was in the name of Cummings. The 
bid of Trask ft Lowman was 65 cents per 1,000 ems; the first bid 
of Cummings was 55 cents per 1,000 ems. Before any award was 
made by the State officers, Oummings withdrew the first bid, and 
filed an amended bid at one dollar per 1,000 ems. The printing 



288 PROOEKDINaS IN THE 

board afterwardB held a meeting, and awarded the contract to Trask 
& Lowman, for the Legislative printing. The Secretary, John W. 
Sobinson, notified Tragk & Lowman that their bid was accepted, and 
to appear and file their bonds. According to notice, Trask & Low- 
man executed and deposited their bond, which was examined by the 
Auditor, in the presence of D. H. Weir, clerk of Secretary Robin- 
son, and by him approyed; but the approval was not indorsed on the 
bond. The same day, Mr. Trask asked the Auditor for leave to 
withdraw the bid and bond, which was refused. The same evening, 
or next morning. Auditor Hillyer called at the office of the Secre- 
tary of State, inquired of D. H. Weir for the bond, and the bond 
was missing. About the time the bond and bid were missing, Cum- 
mingp, Trask, and others, were in the oflice of the Secretary of State, 
and Cummings asked Trask to withdraw the bid and bond. The 
subject 01 withdrawal was freely discussed. D. H. Weir was pres- 
ent during the time of the discussion, and a portion of the time 
John W. Robinson, Secretary, was also present. Afler a full dis- 
cussion, the bid and bond of Trask & Lowman were withdrawn. 
Trask afterwards told Cummings he had the bond in his pocket. 

The circumstances connected with this transaction show that John 
W. Robinson knew and consented to the withdrawal of this bid and 
bond. The bid withdrawn was for the Legislative printing, at 65 
cents per 1.000 ems, for the year 1861; and the bid of Cummings, at 
one dollar per 1,000 ems, being the next lowest, was accepted, and 
the contract let accordingly. It is useless ijo exemplify or illustrate 
the circumstances attending this transaction. The affair itself shows 
a fraud upon the State, and a guilty knowledge on the part of John 
W. Robinson of that fraud. 



The order of the Articles of Impeachment, as prefen^d by the 
House of Representatives against John W. Robinson, Secretary of 
State of the State of Kansas, has been followed, in the remarks 
submitted, without regard to the logical arrangement of the argu- 
ment. The object in view, during all the time, has been to state 
facts as they occurred, with coincident circumstances, showing 
the connection of the facts with the matters under consideration. 

At a time when American citizens are called, by the constituted 
authorities of this nation, from their homes, and are in the tented 
fields all over the land for the purpose of suppressing a monstrous 



IMPXAOHMKNT 0A8B8. 289 

rebellion, and on account of which eyerj department of our govern- 
ment is Btmggling under a great iGlnancial presure^ the first Legisla- 
ture of the infant State of Kansas is in session at her Capitol; and, 
for the purpose of assuming the proper financial character among the 
sister States of the Union, the Legislature enacts a law, authorizing 
the issuance of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of bonds, to 
defray the current expenses of the State^ and constitutes John W. 
Robinson, with two others, agents to negotiate the bonds, under 
certain limitations^ specified in the act. 

There never will be a time, in the history of this State, when a 
loyal people will \o(jk with more confidence and profound respect to 
the ability and integrity of public functionaries to discharge^ faith- 
fully, any tru»t committed to their charge, than did the people of 
Kansas look to the board of State officers to negotiate these bonds. 
But who can describe their disappointment, their regret, their just 
indignation, when they find that confidence betrayed by those in 
whom they had confided, the dignity and credit of the State pros- 
tituted, to selfish purposes, in a little, dirty traffic for lucre and 
emolument ! 

Senators will bear in mind that there is a real distinction between 
extortion and knavery, on the part of a public officer, and a State 
necessity, even in times of great peril. That distinction has been 
graphically drawn in one of the speeches of Mr. Sheridan : " That 
imperial tyrant, State necessity^ is yet a generous despot; — bold is 
his demeanor, rapid his decbions, and terrible his grasp. But what 
he does, he dare avow; and avowing, scorns any other justification 
than the great motives that placed the iron scepter in his hand. 
But a pilfering, prevaricating State necessity, that tries to skulk 
behind the skirts of justice — a State necessity that tries to steal a 
pitiful justification from whispered accusations and fabricated ru- 
mors — no, that is no State necessity : tear oflf the mask, and you see 
coarse, vulgar avarice; you see peculation under the gaudy disguise, 
and adding the guilt of libelling the public honor to its own private 
frauds." 

History is said to be philosophy teaching by example. A recur- 
rence to the fact that the ancient Empire of the Moguls was trans- 
ferred into the hands of a company of London merchants, may serve 
to point out the danger to our State by allowing executive officers 
to assume and exercise powers not granted to them by law. Consent 

to a usurpation of power, on the part of rulers, and there remains no 
19 



290 PaOOESBINGS IN THE 

security for the liberty of the people. The Moguls are described as 
the descendants of a throne, once the loftiest in the world — a virtu- 
ous, industrious and happy people. Yet it is recorded, in the 
history of the rise and progress of British power in India, that, on 
account of the gradual assumption of powers by Warren Hastings, 
governor general, these people were^ in time, reduced to stipulate 
with the servants of traders for subsbtence; and the dethronement 
of princes converted into a commercial transaction, and a ledger 
account kept of the profits of the revolution. 

While we claim, in behalf of the people of Kansas, all the virtue 
and intelligence possessed by any like number now on the stage of 
action, yet if they permit their public servants to exercise powers 
beyond those granted by the State, to discount bonds to fill their 
own pockets, and, for all practicable purposes, to mortgage the 
property of the people for the payment of the interest and the 
redemption of the bonds, it will not be long until a ledger account 
of the profits of the Kansas State bonds will be kept with the Wall 
street brokers, in the city of New York; and, if the people of Kan- 
sas are not made to stipulate with the servants of these brokers, we 
have failed to profit by the example of history. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Two o'clock, p. M. 
Senate met pursuant to adjournment. 
President in the chair. 
Roll called. Quorum present. 

Absentees — ^Messrs. Essick, Hoffman, HoUiday, Lynde, Morrow, 
Rees, Spriggs and Stevens. 

Hon. Wilson Shannon proceeded with his argument on the part 
of the defense. 
[Copy not furnished. — ^Pbintxb.] 

On motion, Senate adjourned. 



IMPSAOHMXNT OA8S8. 291 



NINTH DAT. 

Senate Ohambxb, \ 

Wednseday, June 11, 1862, 9 o'clock, A. M. j 

Tbe Senate of the State of Kansas, gitting aa a High^Ooort of 
Impeaohment, met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the chair. 

Boll called. Quorum present. 

Absentees — Messrs. Denman, Essick, Hoffman, Lappin, Lynde 
and Stevens. 
Journal of yesterday read and approved. 

Present — Hon. S. A. Stinson and the Board of Managers, on the 
part of the House of Representatives. 

Hon. F, P. Stanton, respondent's attorney. 

[ARGUMENT OF HON. F. P. STANTON.] 
Hon. F. P. Stanton, in oommencing hie argument on part of the 
defense, said : 
M&. Pbbsident and Senatobb: 

In approaching the argument of this case, I am fortunate iik 
having been preceded by the eminent gentleman who has just 
addressed you, on behalf of the officers accused } the great burdea 
of argument and explanation has been taken from my shoulders. 
In other respects, however, I am not so fortunate; for the argument 
pf Gov. Shannon has been so dear and lucid, so satisfactory and 
exhaustive, that little is left for me to say. Were not the question 
so oomplicated in its bearings as to admit of some additional illus* 
trations, I would gladly rest the case upon the argument already 
presented for the defense. I will endeavor to avoid the ground 
already occupied by my colleague, although I am aware how difficult 
it will be to keep out of the luminous track which he has pursued. 
Before entering ujpon my argument of the main question, I beg* 
that you will permit me to say a word upon a point which was 
argued at the outset, and has been passed upon by the Senate: — ^I 
mean the question of the legality and constitutionality of your 
session at the present time. I would not now offer a word on that 
subject, if I had not been represented as tkreatening the members of 
this body with a deprivation of their pay. 



292 PRoosEBiNas in the 

I based my argument of that qacstion upon two positiye provis- 
ioDfl of the Constitution : First, Upon that clause which prohibits 
either House from adjourning, for more than two days, without the 
consent of the other. Second, The section which proyides for pay 
of members and which confines the compensation to sessions of the 
Legislature. From these provisions, I draw the conclusion that 
separate sessions of either House were not only not contemplated 
by the Constitution, but were in direct conflict with its letter and 
spirit. I think the argument was legitimate and fair. When I 
suggested that any member might test the question, by applying for 
a mandamus to compel the proper officer to audit and settle his 
account for per diem and mileage, I did not mean to say that mem- 
bers would be compelled to take that course ; for I supposed the 
Auditor would be protected, as a mere ministerial officer, in settling the 
accounts for which an appropriotion was made by the last L2gi6lature. 
But I thought it possible some member might think the question of 
sufficient interest and importance, to be settled by the Supreme 
Court of the State, upon his own application. While I am still 
confident of the soundness of my argument, and of the utter incom- 
petency of this body, sitting at the present time, I disclaim any 
intentional disrespect to the Senators, either individually or col- 
lectively. 

It may not be improper for me, before quitting this subject, to 
call your attention to the fact, which I learn from the Secretary, 
that the proceedings of the Court, held during the session of the 
Legislature, were never read to the body nor examined by the Presi- 
dent, nor have they ever been signed by any officer or other person 
whatever. I have already shown that they were not incorporated 
in the journal of the Senate. There is, therefore, no record of those 
proceedings, and especially of the assumed adjournment over to the 
first Monday in June. The rough notes, kept by the Secretary, are 
in his possession; but they have never been transcribed or in any 
way authenticated. I take it for granted that this record cannot 
now be made good; for records do not thus rest in the memory of 
individuals; and to allow the defect now to be remedied, would 
introduce a principal in every way too dangerous to be tolerated in 
transactions of such magnitude. 

But you have decided the question, holding yourselves to be con- 
stitutionally organised as a Court of Impeachments; and we, after 
due deliberation, acting for the best interests of our olienta, have 



IMPSACHMENT CASSS. 298 

held it to be oar duty to enter into the investigation, and to make 
the same defense which we would if we believed this body to be 
regularly and constitutionally empowered to act in the premises. 

Having thus, Mr. President and Senators, assumed the functions 
of a High Court of Impeachments, you will permit me to inquire, 
briefly, as to the character and the solemn duties of such a tribunal. 

No higher or more important functions have ever been devolved 
upon any body of men. Yqu sit as judges between the State and 
its highest officers — the great body of the people on the one hand) 
and a single individual on the other. If, on the one side^ you have 
it in charge to protect the interests of the whole community, and to 
maintain the purity of the public administration, on the other you 
have power, not, indeed, over the lives of individuals, but over what 
is dearer than life — honor and reputation. Tou assume to pronounce 
the civil and political destiny of the defendants. Tou wield a power 
which may ruin character, destroy fortunes, cut off all the hopes and 
prospects of life, and crush the hearts of others than those against 
whom your judgment may be launched. With such tremendous 
issues placed in your hands, you cannot fail to approach the decision 
of this case with the most solemn sense of responsibility, and with 
entire freedom from all those popular prejudices and passions, which 
might, unduly, bias or control your conclusions. On this subject, 
I will ask your permission to read a few passages from Judge Story's 
work on the Constitution. His words are so much more succinct 
and pertinent than any words of mine could be — so much more 
weighty and well considered — that I am sure you will take them to 
heart in your decision of this case, and, with perfect impartiality, 
freedom from party spirit, popular prejudice and passion, and with 
utter blindness to any consideration, except those of truth and jus- 
tice, you will pronounce a judgment worthy of yourselves and of the 
high judicial position in which you are placed. 

Mr. Stanton read from pages 216^ 217 and 248, 2nd volume, and 
sections 748, 744 and 777, as follows : 

'*The great objects to be attained in the selection of a tribunal 
for the trial of impeachments, are impartiality, integrity, intelligence 
and independence. If either of these is wanting, the trial must be 
radically imperfect. To secure impartiality) the body must be, in 
some degree, removed from popular power and passions, from the 
influence of sectional prejudice, and from the more dangerous influ- 
ence of mere party spirit. To secure integrity, there must be a lofty 



294 PBOOKIDINGB IN THX 

sense of duty and a deep responsibility to future times, as well as to 
God. To secure intelligence, there must be age, experience and 
bigb intellectual powers, as well as attainments. To secure inde- 
pendence, there must be numbers as well as talents, and a confidence 
resulting at once ^m pennanency of place, and dignity of station, 
and enlightened patriotism. 3ic sk :|c « 

'^ The subject is itself full of intrinsic difficulty in a government 
purely elective. The jurisdiction is to be exercised over offenses 
which are committed by public men in violation of their public 
trust and duties. Those duties are, in many cases, political ; and, 
indeed, in other cases^ to which the power of impeachment will 
probably be applied, they will respect functionaries of a high 
character, where the remedy would otherwise be wholly inadequate, 
and the greivance be incapable of redress. Strictly speaking, then, 
the power partakes of a political character ; and, on this account, it 
requires to be guarded in its exercise against the spirit of faction, 
the intolerance of party^ and the sudden movements of popular 
feeling. The prosecution will seldom fail to agitate the passions of 
the whole community, and to divide it into parties, more or leas 
friendly or hostile to the accused. The press, with its unsparing 
vigilance, will arrange itaelf on either side, to control and influence 
public opinion ; and there will always be some danger, that the 
decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of the 
parties, than by the real proofs of innocence or guilt. * * * 

'^ But it may well be conjectured, that the real grounds were^ to 
secure an impartial trial; and to guard public men from being 
sacrificed to the immediate impulses of popular resentment or party 
predominence. ***** 

If a mere majority were sufficient to convict, there would be dangei^ 
in times of high popular commotion or party spirit, that the influ- 
ence of the House of Representatives would be found irresistible." 

When I remember the whirlwind of passion which swept through 
the House of Representatives at the last session, when these 
impeachments were inaugurated, I tremble for the interests of my 
clients, and for the demands of justice. We are not yet so far 
removed from those exciting events, that we can hope to be entirely 
calm and self-possessed ; but I appeal to your conscience as judges, 
against your prejudices as public men and politicians. 

A court of impeachment ought to be in a great measure, unem- 
barrassed by the strict techanical rules which prevail in ordinary 
courts of justice. 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 295 

From Story, 2Dd vol. pages 228 and 235, sections 756 and 763, 
I read the following, having reference to this important point : 

^' The necessity of a numerous court for the trial of impeach- 
ments, is equally dictated by the nature of the proceedings. This 
can never be tied down to such strict rules, either in the delineation 
of the offense by the prosecutors, or in the construction of it by the 
judges, as in common cases serve to limit the discretion of courts in 
favor of personal security. There will be no jury to stand between 
the judges, who are to pronounce the sentence of the laW; and the 
party, who is to receive or suffer it. The awful discretion which a 
court of impeachments must necessarily have^ to doom to honor or 
infamy the most confidential, and the most distinguished characters 
of the community, forbids the commitment of the trust to a small 
number of persons. ♦ * * * * 

''In the next plaoc; it is obvious, that tffi strictness of the forms 
of proceedings in cases of offenses at common law, are ill adapted to 
impeachments. The very habits growing out of judicial employ- 
ments ; the rigid manner in which the discretion of judges is 
limited, and fenced in on all sides, in order to protect persons 
accused of crimes by rules and precedents ; and the adherence to 
technical principles, which, perhaps, distinguishes this branch of 
the law, more than any other, are all ill adapted to the trial of 
political offenses in the broad course of impeachments. And it has 
been observed with great propriety, that a tribunal of a liberal and 
comprehensive character, confined as little as possible to strict forms, 
enabled to continue its session as long as the nature of the law may 
require, qualified to view the charge in all its bearings and depen- 
dencies, and to appropriate on sound principles of public policy, 
the defense of the accused, seems indispensable to the value of the 
trial. The history of impeachments, both in England and America, 
justifies the remark. There is little technical in the mode of pro- 
ceeding ; the charges are sufficiently clear, and yet in a general 
form ; there are few exceptions, which arise in the application of 
the evidence, which grows out of mere technical rules and 
quibbles." ****** 

Now, Mr. President, I do not mean to insist that any 'principle of 
substantial right shall be disregarded, either in the admission of 
testimony or in the application of law. But you are clothed with a 
more enlarged and liberal authority, to be guided rather by the rules 
of common sense and impartial justice, than by the accurate forms 



296 PROCEEDINGB IN THE 

and rigid principles which always apply in the ordinary adminis- 
tration of criminal law. It is your privilege to judge of motives 
and purposes-to interpret them liberally and fairly, and to con- 
sider all the circumstances which attend a particular action, calcu- 
lated either to aggravate or mitigate its criminality Those W 
and liberal principles are applicable alike in favor of the defense, 
as in aid of the prosecution. 

But, Mr. President and Senators, it must not be supposed that a 
court of impeachment under our constitution, has any arbitranr 
power of iuelf, to declare that to be a crime or misdemeanor, whioH 
is not such at the common law. On the contrary, this court has no 
more authority, in that respect, than any other court. It can only 
administer the law and punish offenses ; it can neither enact the one, 
nor define and establish the other. It is true, no positive statute is 
necessary in order to deilie impeachable offenses ; they are already 
defined in that admirable and all-comprehending system of the 
common law which we derived from the mother country, and adopted 
in full, when we incorporated the peculiar proceeding by impeach- 
ment in our constitution. On this subject let us see 2nd Story, 
pages 264-5, and 267, sections 795-6-7. 

" Resort, then, must be had either to parUamenUry practice, and 
the common law, in order to ascertwn what are high crimes and mis- 
demeanors; or the whole subject must be left to the arbitrary 
discretion of the Senate for the time being. The latter is so incom- 
patible with the genius of our institutions, that no lawyer or states- 
man would be inclined to countenance so absolute a despotism of 
opinion and practice, which might make that a crime at one time, or 
in one person, which would be deemed innocent at another time, or 
in another person. The only safe guide in such cases must be the 
common law, which is the guardian at once of private righto and 
public liberties. * * * 

" The doctrine, indeed, would be truly alarming, that the ooinmon 
law did not regulate, interpret and control the powers and duties of 
the court of impeachment. What, otherwise, would become of the 
rules of evidence, the legal notions of crimes, and the application of 
principles of public or municipal jurisprudence to the charges 
against the accused j * * 

The same rules of evidence, the same legal notions of crimes and 
punishmente prevail. For impeachments are not framed to alter the 
law, but to carry it into more effectual execution, where it might be 



IMPIAOHMXNT 0A8X8. 297 

obstructed by the influence of too powerfal delinqnente, or not 
easily discerned in the ordinary course of jurisdiction, by reason of 
the peculiar quality of the alleged crimes. * * 

'^ Congress have unhesitatingly adopted the conclusion, that no 
previous statute is necessary to authorize an impeachment for any 
official misconduct ; and the rules of proceeding, and the rules of 
evidenoe, as well as the principles of decision, hare been uniformly 
regulated by the known doctrines of the common law and parlia- 
mentary usage. In the few oases of impeachments which have 
hitherto been tried, no one of the charges has rested upon any 
statutable misdemeanors. It seems, then, to be the settled doctrine 
of the high court of impeachment, that though the common law 
cannot be a foundation of a jurisdiction not given by the constitu- 
tion or laws, that jurisdiction when given^ attaches^ and is to be 
exercised according to the rules of the common law ; and that, 
what are, and what are not high crimes. and misdemeanors, is to be 
ascertained by a recurrence to that great basis of Americaa 
jurisprudence.'' 

If, then, the principles of the common law prevail in caaes of 
impeachment, we must look there to find what constitutes crime or 
misdemeanor. And now I assert, that according to the common law 
there can be no crime of any kind, or of any degree, without a. 
criminal intent. This is a universal principle — it is the very sub- 
stratum which underlies the whole system of criminal jurisprudence^ 
according to the common law. It is to be found in every elementary 
book, and is reiterated in every form, in all the coar where 
criminal proceedings are reported. '* A breach of officiaU jc^one 
corruptly" is an offense according to the common law. The 
criminal intent, aa well as injury to the country, is indispensable to» 
constitute the crime. 

Not only is it necessary that there should be the criminal intent,, 
it is indispensable, also, that the intent be proved. I am well aware 
that in many cases, and especially in cases where a positive law is 
violated, the criminal intent will be presumed. But the effect of 
this legal presumption is merely to throw the burden of proof upon 
the accused. He may still show by positive testimony, if he can, 
that the criminal intent was wanting, and thereby relieve himself 
from the criminal charge. 

• WhniM, 74» mi Wbtttm 79{ U (km^Mi, 15. 



298 PROCSEDIKGS IN THE 

Mr. Stanton here read several passages from tlie arguments in the 
Senate of the United States, upon the occasion ot the impeachment 
of Judge Chase, and also that of Judge Peck. The reasonings of 
the Senate, I cannot quote, because their debates, if they had any, 
were in secret session. But the points upon which the deciBion in 
both cases turned, are to be asc0Ttained from the reported arguments 
for the prosecution and for the defense. From the passages read, he 
showed in both the cases referred to, the motiyes and feelings which 
prompted the action of the accused in the matters complained of in 
the articles of impeachment, were the chief, if not the only grounds 
of contest. No one seems to have entertained the idea that either 
one of the impeached officers, could be guilty of any crime or mis- 
demeanor, unless a bad or criminal motive could be established. 

But, I insist that the principle stated, although now here denied 
in argument, is virtually admitted by the very form of the articles 
of impeachment themselves. In all of them, except the 4th and 
7th, there is contained a charge either of guilty knowledge or of 
fraudulent intent. As to the 4th and 7th articles, they are utterly 
defective for the very reason that they do not charge any criminal 
intent,' nor indeed anything, which by any fair construction, can be 
made to constitute a crime or misdemeanor. 

Mr. Stanton read the effective clauses in each one of the several 
articles of impeachment above mentioned, contending that these 
direct and pointed charges w^re inserted in the respective articles, 
because tliey were necessary in order to constitute the offense, and 
were therefore necessary to be proved. This is no mere technical 
requirement ; it is matter of substance, essential to the proper ends 
of justice. 

The first article of impeachment contains these averments : 
^* That under said agreement, and with the full knowledge and con- 
sent of said Robinson, said Stevens proceeded to sell and deliver a 
large amount of said bonds, to wit : The amount of fifty-six thou- 
sand dollars of said bonds at the rate of eighty-five per centum on 
said amount of fifty-six thousand dollars, all of which was well 
known to said Eobinson ; that the said State was by said agreement 
defrauded out of its just rights, in that said State was entitled to 
receive the full amount for which said bonds were sold, while in 
truth, and in fact, with the full knowledge and consent of said 
Robinson, said bonds were sold for eighty-five per centum upon the 
dollar of the amount of said bonds." 

Now, Mr. President, the gravamen of this charge is that the 



IMPSAOHMENT CA818. 299 

defendant had '' full knowledge" of the particulars of Mr. Stevens' 
negotiation^ and; with that full knowledge, consented thereto. But 
nothing is further from the truth ; for if there is any one thing 
fully established by the testimony in this case, it is the fact that 
John W. Bobinson was deceived and misled; or, at least, kept in 
entire ignorance of the true character of the negotiation between 
Mr. Stevens and the Secretary of the Interior. I think the course 
indicated by the Attorney General is a virtual admission of this 
fact ; for he informs me in advance, that he will read authorities to 
establish the principle that a violation of law necessarily implies a 
criminal intent. This would be wholly unnecessary, if either crimi- 
nal knowledge or bad motive had been made to appear. But, in 
truth, such knowledge or such motive is not only not proved by the 
testimony ; it is, on the contrary, actually negatived by it. I shall 
proceed now to consider the testimony as it bears upon this point. 
But before entering upon that subject, I will call your attention for 
a single moment, to the condition of the State and the low ebb of 
its credit, at the time of the transaction in question. 

Mr. Stanton read several letters addressed to the Governor, com- 
plaining of the impossibility of obtaining supplies for the volunteers 
on the credit of the State, and urging the necessity for instant 
action in procuring funds or establishing an available credit. He 
also referred to the correspondence of the Governor with Duncan, 
Sherman & Co. of New York, and others, referring to the fact that 
the bonds of the State were without value in the market, and could 
not be disposed of at all. Within our borders. State scrip waa 
selling at from forty to fifty cents on the dollar, and this, converted 
into bonds at seventy, brought the latter down to the low rate of 
from twenty-eight to thirty-five. 

It was when the public credit had fallen to this deplorable con- 
dition, that the defendant was called upon to negotiate the bonds of 
the State, for the purpose of raising means to carry on the ordinary 
operations of the government. The Legislature was soon to meet, 
and there was no provision for the accommodation of the two 
houses, for stationery, or for the compensation of members. If 
State scrip was to be used, every thing would cost at least three 
times its cash value. 

At this juncture, Mr. Stevens made a proposition for the pur* 
chase of the bonds. The Secretary of State and the Auditor, in 
their anxiety to effect a sale, endeavored to evade the limit imposed 



800 PB0CEEDIN08 IN THE 

upon tbem by the law authoruing them to negotiate tbe bonds. 
Tbey adopted tbe view that tbe amount of $50,000 could be sold 
witbout limit, according to tbe provisions of tbe first law, wbile tbe 
remainder was limited to seventy by tbe explicit terms of tbe sup* 
plemental law. Tbey tberefore agreed to sell $50,000 at forty, and 
about $25,000 at seventy, making an average of fifty. But tbe 
Qovernor, taking a different view of tbe law, refused to sanction 
tbis arrangement, and tbe negotiation was, for tbe time being, 
abandoned. 

I am very free to acknowledge tbat, in my judgment, tbe con- 
struction placed upon tbe law by tbe Secretary and Auditor, was 
erroneous ; but tbere is notbing to sbow tbat it was disbonest, or 
tbat tbey were actuated by any otber motive tban an earnest desire 
to replenisb tbe treasury of tbe State. It is not at all strange or 
suspicious, tbat tbey sbould endeavor so to construe tbe law, as to 
enable tbem to sell at a rate considerably above tbe market value of 
tbe bonds. Tbey could not tben bave known anything of tbe terms 
upon which Mr. Stevens subsequently sold to tbe Indian Bureau, 
nor indeed, of tbe fact tbat be bad any prospect of selling tbem in 
tbat quarter. 

It was at tbis juncture tbat tbe defendant, John W. Robinson, 
received letters irom Senator S. C. Pomeroy, advising him to send 
on such bonds of tbe State as belonged to him individually, and 
informing him tbat there was a prospect of selling tbem upon 
advantageous terms. Tbis circumstance sufficiently explains tbe 
fact which has been rather severely commented upon, that the bonds 
belonging to tbe State, or some of them, were sent on to Washing- 
ton in advance of tbe defendants going. The Secretary and 
Auditor doubtless bad some obscure idea, derived partly from Mr. 
Stevens and partly from Gen. Pomeroy, that tbe bonds could be 
sold at Washington. With tbat impression tbey went. 

On their arrival at Washington, tbey made application to tbe 
proper source for information — ^to tbe Senators and Representative 
of Kansas. General Pomeroy advised these gentlemen to wait for 
tbe arrival of Mr. Stevens — be bad been successful in selling tbe 
Kansas war bonds to tbe Government, and be was tbe proper person 
to conduct tbe pending negotiation. Accordingly, we find tbat tbe 
Auditor and Secretary immediately commence telegraphing Mr. 
Stevens to come on. Tbe latter, however, took bis own time, con- 
fident; I suppose, tbat he held tbe negotiation in bis own hands. 
He bad previously made a proposition for tbe sale of these very 



IMPIAOHMSNT OASES. 301 

bonds to the Secretary of the Interior, relying upon his ability to 
get control of them by the very fact that he had occupied^ and, so 
to speak, forestalled the only market in the country, where they 
could be sold at anything like a fair rate. 

It is not my business, nor is it important to the defense in this 
case, to discuss the conduct of Mr. Stevens. He is a Senator now 
sitting on this floor ; and I may say without impropriety, that the 
Senate itself has not looked upon his proceedings as dishonest or 
dishonorable ; otherwise, they would hardly permit him to occupy 
a seat, with a right to vote upon this trial. At the last session^ 
after the development of this whole case, an effort was made to 
remove him, but it proved to be ineffiectual. 

One thing is certain, Mr. Stevens was the first to initiate the 
negotiation with the Secretary of the Interior. His genius con- 
ceived the enterprise, and his skill conducted it to a successful 
conclusion. The whole scheme was of his own invention, and he 
is undoubtedly entitled to the legitimate fruits of his exertions. If 
he had invented some mechanical contrivance for saving labor and 
effecting great results, he would have been entitled to a patent right, 
and might have derived immense profits from the community, aod 
no one would question his integrity or honor. In this case, how- 
ever, his projective faculties have taken a different direction. He 
takes advantage of the necessities of the State, and uses his infor- 
mation and his peculiar opportunities for his own individual 
advantage. Whatever else may be said, one thing is certain : Mr. 
Stevens did not profess to be acting for the benefit of the publip. 
His own interests were paramount. He does not olaiin the 
character of a public spirited, disinterested patriot, who holds the 
interests of the State superior to all personal considerations, and all 
private gains. He has chosen his paxt ; and doubtless he has doae 
80 with a perfect willingness to accept the oonsequenoes, both 
personal and political. 

No one can tell, for no one has asked the question, what sacrifices 
Mr. Stevens was compelled to make in order to accomplish this 
negotiation. We know, at least, that he employed Mr. Oorwin, on 
account of the supposed influence of that gentleman with Ihe 
, department. We also know the means used to get the influence aad 
support of Gen. J. H. Lane. It does not appear how many other 
nmilar transactions were concluded in the process of the negdila- 
tion ', but it is evident that this was one of those jobs, not unusual 



802 PB00SSDINQ8 IN THS 

at WaahingtoD, which a^ to be aoeomplbhed only by meamr of the 
most powerful influences, put in operation by the laviah and un- 
BorupulouB use of money. I doubt yery much whether the result 
could eyer hare been accomplished without the application of such 
means. I do not mean to say that the President and Secretary of 
the Interior would not haye preferred that the benefit of the nego- 
tiation should have enured entirely to the State. Doubtless, if the 
case had been fairly presented to them, they would have insisted 
upon this result. But the misfortune is, they could never under- 
stand — ^they were not permitted to understand all that was going 
on among the outside parties to this negotiation. The whole game 
was to weave such a web of plausible influences atound the depart- 
ment, as to prevent the slightest suspicion of any wrong in any 
quarter. 

Now it is perfectly plain that the defendant and his colleague 
were made the innocent dupes of this deep laid scheme. It was 
easy to conceal from them the terms of the negotiation. Neither 
Pomeroy, Lane nor Conway, knew these terms, although each one 
of them gave his influence to help the matter along. The Seore- 
taiy of the Interior and Mr. Corwin both say the terms were not 
definitely fixed until about the close of the transaction. 

Mr. Stevens testifies that he did not communicate the particulars 
to the defendants. It was obviously his policy and his interest to 
keep the particulars as much as possible to himself. He had pro- 
posed to sell to the government the whole issue of bonds by the 
State, amounting to one hundred and fifty thousand dollars. About 
ffizty thousand dollars of this issue were outstanding. His purpose 
was to buy up these outstanding bonds, and this purpose would have 
been defeated if the particulars of the negotiation had been made 
public. There is testimony to the effect that the defendant was 
informed of offers having been made to the Oommissioner of Indian 
Affidra of a large amount of these bonds at a low price. Publicity 
of the negotiations would have brought in more offers of the same 
kind, and it is apparent how seriously they would have interfered 
with the successful termination of the sale. 

Herein is to be found the complete explanation of the expressions 
used by the defendant in his letters to his olerk, Mr, Weir, whieh 
have been proved in this trial. Those letters themselves, taken in 
eonnection with the other testimony, fully explain the consideratioBB 
which induced the defendant to insist that no information should be 



IMPEAOHMXNT 0A8X8. 303^ 

made public about the sale of the bonds. The whole spirit and 
tenor of these letters show the honest intentions of the defendant^ 
and his earnest desire to relieve the State from her pecuniary 
embarrassments. There b not a single expression which indicates 
any corrupt personal interest in the negotiations. Remember, these 
letters were written in perfect confidence to an intimate acquaintance 
and an official associate. Had there been anything wrong, it would 
most probably have appeared here in the most unmistakeable terms. 

Mr. Stanton read extracts from the letters^ and commented upoa 
them in the spirit of the foregoing remarks, insisting, that, far from 
indicating corruption on the part of the defendant, they gave 
evidence of integrity, good faith, and earnest solibitude for the weK 
fare of t^e State. 

All the occurrences which attended the progress of the negotia- 
tion, seemed to co-operate in keeping up the delusion under which ^ 
the State officers were acting. At one time the President refuses -• 
to approve the purchase of the bonds. At another, Gen. Lane 
makes fierce opposition. The President consented to the arrange^ 
ment only upon condition that no members of his Cabinet, and no 
influence from Kansas should oppose it. * 

Now, Mr. President and Senators, I have no hesitation in saying^^ 

(and the experience of every man who knows the true state of things; 

in Washington will bear me out in the statement,) that Mr. Stevens 

could have prevented this negotiation, if the defendants had not 

contented to his terms. It was his proposition then pending before 

the department. He had the option to withdraw it, and, by indirect 

influences, to oppose and defeat the ultimate sale. A very slight 

obstacle would have accomplished this defeat. I say nothing of the> 

propriety and fairness of such action on his part ; I only say that 

he had so managed the whole affair that he had the issue in hig 

own hands. 
When Mr. Stevens demanded that the Secretary and Auditor 

should allow him all over sixty cents which he might obtain for the 

bonds, and they indignantly refused the proposition, taking back 

4he bonds and canceling the receipt, there is no reason for suppoe» 

ing that there was any sham or pretense in the incident. Mr. 

Stevens felt and knew his power. He had the parties completely 

under his oontrol, and he felt perfectly safe in pushing the matter 

to this extremity. The Secretary and Auditor must either go home 

without money, or they must come to his terms. In this extremity^ 

ihe advice of Gkneral Pomeroy was taken, and he advised that 



-304 PBOOUDINGS IN THX 

they flbonld take sixty cents, if they could get no more. This 
he admits in his own testimony^ ayerring at the same time that he 
did not know the terms of Mr. Stevens' sale to the department, nor 
the limitation of the law, prohibiting a sale at less than seyenty 
cents. 

Such, Mr. President and Senators, are the facts is this case. I 
presume no man in this body believes that either the Secretary or 
Auditor acted corruptly in this matter. I have heard no such inti- 
mation. All the testimony concurs in disproving it. The character 
of the parties, their manner and bearing, their explanations all 
concur in producing the conviction that if thoy have done wrong 
at all, that wrong was done ignorantly and innocently. The case is 
like that of one who acts honestly upon wrong advice, gi^n by an 
attorney. Gen. Pomeroy was in a situation to know all the exigen- 
cies of the case. He was in the most friendly relations with the 
government, and he advised the parties to accept the terms proposed 
|>y Mr. Stevens. Unless you can deliberately come to the conclu- 
sion that these officers made the advice of Oen. Pomeroy a mere 
piytext, you must acquit them. 

But let us look at the transaction a little more narrowly. Wit- 
nesses speak of a sale of the bonds to Mr. Stevens at sixty cents on 
the dollar. This was not the legal effect of the transaction. Messrs. 
Robinson and HiUyer constituted Mr. Stevens their agent for the 
Bale of the bonds. In their letter of attorney, they recited the law 
•under which they acted, and agreed to give him as compensation for 
this services, all that ho might obtain beyond six^ cents. The law 
Was 1)iBding upon him as well as upon them, and he had full notice 
of its previsions. 

Now, it is too plain for argument, that the original law authoriied 
the expenses of the negotiation to be paid out of the proceeds, and 
the supplemental law does not alter or repeal this provision. The 
requirement that the proceeds of the sale shall be paid into the 
State Treasury, is to be construed to mean that the net proceeds are 
to be thus paid. If the defendants had gone into Wall street. New 
York, and employed a broker at a compensation of one fourth of 
one per cent., and this amount had been deducted from the pro« 
oeeds, noone would have complained. But the defondants have 
allowed ten per cent, (if they supposed Stevens would sell at 
seventy,) or twenty-five per cent, if they knew he was getting 
eighty-five. 



IMPSAOHMSNT 0ABS8. 805 

This is the true legal effect of the arrangement. The defendant 
did not authoriie Stevens to sell at less than the limitation of the 
law ; but they agreed to give him, as compensation for his services, 
all that he should receive over sixty cents. Technically and 
strietly, this was not a violation of the law. It may have been an 
abtue of their powers under the law. But it is criminal or not, ac* 
cording to the circumstances and exigencies of the case. If they 
knew (as they did not) that Stevens was getting eighty-five cents, 
then they agreed to give him twenty-five per cent. If they sup- 
posed he was getting only seventy, then they intended only to allow 
him ten per cent. Now, it will be readily seen that the knowledge 
of the parties is all important, in fixing their guilt or innocence. I 
grant that an abuse of their powers under the law may be so 
fiagrant, and the allowance so extravagant, that the transaction 
would of itself import criminality. But no such criminality can be 
Imputed, nnle^fl the parties accused were acting with a knowledge 
of the facts. If they were deceived and misled, however errone- 
ously they may have acted, they cannot properly be convicted of a 
crime or misdemeanor. 

It may be said the parties were criminally negligent in not seek- 
ing correct information from the proper quarter. This, also, is a 
question of fact which must be determined by all the circumstances. 
One who knows the difficulty of access to the departments at Wash- 
ington, will not be surprised that these defendants relied entirely 
upon their Senators and Bepresentatives. These have access to the 
departments at all times, and they have the means in their respec- 
tive houses, of instituting inquiries into all the most secret opera- 
tions of the government. I insist that these two inexperienced 
gentlemen, f^sh from the prairies of Kansas, were perfeotly justi- 
fiable in relying upon the advice of the public agents of the State 
at the seat of government. 

Mr. Stanton next eonsidered the specific charges contained in the 
third and fifth Ardeles of Impeachment, relating to the removal and 
subsequent payment of the coupons due on the 81st of December 
last. ' He claimed that the charge was entirely unsustained by the 
proof, inasmuch as the bonds were actually sold before the oouponi 
were due. It is not competent to try a defendant upon one ohargo, 
and convict him upon another, wholly different in its eharaoter. 
Bat he insbted that the true ground of defense, upon these partica- 
lar oharges, is the entire ignorance of the parties as to the with* 
20 



B06 PR0GXSDING8 IN THE 

drawal of idese coupons, and their want of any participation wliateyer 
in the benefit of the arrangement. He asserted that coupons are not 
usually withdrawn from bonds before their maturity, and that the 
defendants therefore cannot be presumed to know any thing so much 
out of ihe ordinary course of such transactions. 

Upon the sixth Article of Impeachment, little was necessary to 
be said. The charge seemed to be based upon the idea that a paper 
could only be published where it was actually printed; whereas, the 
the place of publication may well be, and often is, different from the 
place where the printing is actually done. 

It could not be a matter of any consequence to the State where 
a paper was actually printed, so that it was circulated among the 
people of the county in which the information was to be promulgated. 
The assertion that the State had been defrauded was, therefore, 
wholly false. But, in fact, the testimony showed that this bill was 
approved by Mr. Weir, the clerk in the Secretary's office^ and it 
does not eyen appear that the Secretary himself ever saw it. 

Little need be said of the last Article, in reference to the with- 
drawal of the bond of Trask & Lowman. That bond was never 
favorably approved by the printing board. It does not appear that 
it was ever seen, much less approved or filed, by the defendant. 
There is no pretense that, in either of these cases, the defendant 
was corruptly interested in the transactions to which they refer. The 
business seems to have been done altogether by Mr. Weir, without 
any participation on the part of the Secretary. 

Upon the seventh Article of Impeachment, based upon the coun> 
tersigning, by the defendant, of the ten per oent^ bonds, usually 
termed ** the war bonds,'' the counsel referred to the act of Con- 
gress of March 24th, 1844, authorizing /<a loan for a sum not 
exceeding twenty-five millions of dollars." — 3d Stat, at Large 111. 
He read 'the first two sections of this law, and compared them with 
the first two sections of the law of Kansas, authorizing a loan of 
twenty thousand dollars. The two statutes are substantially identi- 
cal, in the legal effect of the language adopted. In the former, the 
President is authorized **to borrow, on the credit of the United 
States, a sum not exceeding twenty-five millions of dollars;" in the 
latter, ''the Treasurer of this State is authorized to borrow the sum 
of twenty thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary." 
By the second section of the first act, the Secretary of the Treasury 
was empowered to issue certificates of stock, ^^/ar Ae $um to he hor- 



IMPEACHMENT CABEB. 807 

rowed by this act;" while by the second section of fiie law of 
Kansas, the Treasarer is directed to prepare bonds *^ to the full 
amount of said loan.'* These are the operative words of the two 
laws respectiTely, and, so far as I can see, they are not, in any 
respect, qnalified by any other prorision of the respective statutes. 
The only clause in the act of Congress, which might be tortured 
into such a qualification, is found in the concluding words of its 
second section^ in which the Secretary of the Treasury is required 
to lay before Congress " an account of all the moneys obtained by 
the sale of the certificates of stock, in manner aforesaid, together 
with a statement of the rate at which the same may have been sold/' 
But it is plain that a mere requirement to report the rate of sale, 
does not, of itself, fix the rate, or in any way qualify the authority 
to make and sell certificates of stock, " for the sum to be borrowed/' 

Now, by reference to the report of the Secretary of the Treasury , 
which will be found in the Book of Finance, it will be seen that a 
contract was made with Jacob Barker for five millions — ^part of this 
twenty-five million loan — at the rate of eighty-eight cents on the 
dollar, with the condition that, if any part of the same loan should 
subsequently be sold, upon terms more favorable to the lender, the 
benefit of the same terms should be extended to the persons then 
holding the stock of the first issue. Portions of the twenty-five 
millions were afterwards sold at eighty cents on the dollar, and sup- 
plemental stock for the difference was thereupon issued to the holders 
of the first issue; so that all the stock sold was virtually sold 9} 
eighty cents on the dollar. 

Senator McDowell. — ^Will the gentleman allow me to ask whether 
more than twenty-five million of stock was issued f 

Mr. Stanton. — ^The whole amount of this loan was never takenj 
for the reason that the Oovemment was bound by the condition 
above mentioned; and, having taken in payment for the loan, sus- 
pended bank paper, which was twenty-five per cent, below par, it 
WiB claimed that the Government was liable to make good this dif* 
ference to the hddexf of the first issue of stock. To avoid these 
troublesome questions, a new loan was authoriaed. 

But the Senator will easily see that the ftot, that the whole twenty, 
•ve million of stock were not issued, can make no differenoe in point of 
principle. The question is, whether the law anthorised the issnanoe 
ef suffcient stock to produce the amount of twenty-five miUions of 



308 PROOUDINOS IN THX 

% 

dollars^ and whether more than the nominal amount named might 
have been pat upon the market. 

The Seoretaiy sold at eighty, and issued stock accordingly. If 
he had obtained the whole twenty-five millions, he would have 
issued thirty millions of stock. If he got only five millions ot 
money, he must have issued six millions of stock; and so in pro" 
portion. 

Now, if this precedent is good for anything, it shows clearly that, 
under the law of Kansas, the Treasurer was fully authorized to issue 
bonds sufficient to produce the sum authorised to be borrowed, ris : 
twenty thousand dollars. Not being able to sell the bonds at par, 
he must necessarily issue more than that nominal amount of bonds 
in order to realise the sum required ; therefore, it was no violation 
of law to do so. 

The Treasurer was required to prepare the bonds, and he alone 
WH8 authorized tu dispose of them. The other State officers were 
only required to authenticate the bonds which the Treasurer was to 
prepare and present for their signatures. The defendant, at present 
on trial, was only required to perform the subordinate act of coun- 
(ersigntng them. He would not be guilty of an impeachable offense, 
even if the Treasurer had issued more bonds than the law authorized. 

It is an extraordinary feature in this case, that the Treasurer, who 
prepared the bonds and sold them at forty cents on the dollar, with- 
out any participation on the part of the other officers, has not been 
Impeached or even censured. I do not admit that any crime has 
been committed at all; but if any crime has been committed, un. 
doubtedly the Treasurer is, by far, the greatest criminal. It has 
not been shown that even he had any corrupt or criminal motive in 
disposing of the bonds; and it is certain that he obtained the full 
market value for them. The Qovemor, Secretary of State and the 
Auditor had no connection whatever with the transaction. How 
they ean be, to any extent, criminated, it is utterly impossible for 
me to understand. The failure to impeach the real offender, if there 
be any at all, is a virtual admission that the charge against the 
defendants is trivial and incapable of being sustained. 

In conolusion, Mr. President and SenatdrS; I have only to ask 
whether you ean say, beyond all reasonable doubt, that any one of 
these charges has been fairly made out by the testimony. Oan you 
•ay, under all the responsibilities of your position, that what mm 
done by these officers, was not, in their judgment at least, for the 
beet inlereeli of the State f By the sum realised, the publio oredit 



IMPEAOHMSNT 0A8K8. 309 

liM been greatly improyed; and, if these proceedings bad not been 
instituted, and tbe conclusion of the negotiation prevented, the 
business of the State would now be transacted upon a basis of cash. 
The accruing taxes would have paid all liabilities^ and there would 
have been no probable interruption of our future progress. 

I do not pretend to say that the transaction in Washington ought 
to be approved. But I do say, with great confidence, that the 
Auditor and Secretary must have come home without any money, i^ 
they had reftued to accept such terms as Mr. Stevens chose to exact. 
They are entirely free from all taint or suspicion of corruption ; and, 
whatever may be your judgment, they will walk forth from this 
tribunal, conscious of their own integrity^ self-sustained, even in the 
face of a conviction, and able to meet their fellow-citisens serenely, 
in spite of your condemnation. 

On motion, the Senate adjourned. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Two o'clock p. M. 
• Senate met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the chair. 

Roll called. Quorum present. 

Absentees — ^Messrs. Hofiman, Hollidaj, Lynde, Morrow, Sleeper 
and Spriggs. 

[ARGUMENT OP HON. S. A. STINSON.] 
Mr. Stinson, in closing the argument on the part of the State, 
said: 

Mr. Prssidsnt, and mat it pleask this Hono&ablx Court : 

It is with no ordinary feeling of diffidence that I come to the 
performance of my appointed task. The army of able counsel on 
behalf of the defendant, of great learning, large and varied experi- 
ence, and high and well established fame, as well as the magnitude 
of the issue involved, may well suggest the wish that the weighty 
responsibility of concluding the argument, on the part of the prose- 
eution, had been intrusted to an older and an abler man; but my 
official position, and the wishes of my colleagues, leave me no choice. 



310 ^ PBOOEBDINOS IN THX 

I should bo doing Tiolence to my own feelings, did I not, in the 
outset, pause to pay the kumble tribute of my admiration to the 
distinguished eloquence which has been eyoked in aid of this defense ; 
and if, in anything, I shall have occasion to differ from the argu- 
ments or conclusions of my opponents, I shall do so with becoming 
deference, and only when the truth, which is more to be revered 
than age, position, or eloquence, shall seem to bid me do it. 

John W. Robinson, Secretary of State of the State of Kansas, 
has, by the House of Representatives, been, at your bar, impeached 
for misdemeanor in office; and it shall be my duty to attempt to 
show that, by evidence, the House has made good that impeachment. 

I am aware that, in trials of this peculiar and most important 
character, it is a time-honored and most respectable custom for 
counsel to give an historical and argumentative review of the origin 
and history of this judicial anomaly — ^proceeding by impeachment. 
If I shall honor this custom by its breach, I would most respectfully 
beg this honorable Court to attribute my apparent short-coming to 
my respect for your intelligence and my sympathy for your long 
suffering, rather than to a lack of sufficient learning and ability. 
There is no such mystery in these proceedings, or in your office, as 
to require elaborate explanation to those who are familiar with the 
ordinary parctioe and rules of our courts, and who are well grounded 
in the eternal principles of truth and justice. 

I feel that no words of mine are necessary to impress upon this 
honorable Court a proper sense of the solemn responsibility devolved 
upon you. All that this world has for this defendant, is here staked 
upon the issue. The severe eye of a jealous people scans your ac- 
tion, that no feeling of sympathy or compassion, or other unworthy 
consideration, swerve you from the plain line of duty. The defend- 
ant, the people, posterity and your G-od, will hold you, and each of 
you, to a strict accountability for the manner in which you shall 
discharge this most important trust. In this prosecution, I have no 
personal or partisan prejudice to indulge. I come here, with my 
colleagues, representing the honor and the interests of the people 
of the State; and feeling that if, by this investigation, this defend- 
ant's innocence appear, then will the people have cause for joy; 
while his crime and his disgrace will bring shame upon the name of 
Kansas. We seek not this man's ruin.9 All we have to do— all our 
position will warrant us in doing — ^is to elicit the whole truth in 
regard to the matters with which he stands charged; and then, if 



IMPSACHMBNT OASIS. 311 

tbe law and tbe eyidence pronouncs him guilty, his puDishmeAt 
must follow, and he and we all must suffer for his orime. Even as 
the sins of the father are visited upon the children, so is the dis* 
grace of the ruler visited upon the people. Every man in Kansas 
to-day feels a sense of personal humiliation, when he remembers 
that, in the first year of the existence of Kansas as a State, three of 
her chief executive officers were impeached for misdemeanor in office. 
Our good name abroad has suffered, and is still suffering, from this 
obloquy. It has given new life to the enemies of Kansas everywherei 
and confirmed their malicious slanders upon our people ; and now, 
if this defendant; and those who, with him^ stand accused at your 
bar, can go forth from this trial free from taint of crime or dishonor, 
there is not an honest man in the State, or a friend of Kansas any- 
where, who will not rejoice at the result. But the evidence and 
the judgment will go forth to the world together; and, if the evi- 
dence shows his guilt, and your verdict acquits him, you, and the 
people, will become, in the eyes of all the world, not only sharers 
in his disgrace, but participators in his crime. 

The House of Bepresentatives, here prosecuting, does but dis- 
charge a duty to the people, to posterity and to constitutional lib- 
erty; for it is standing guard upon the only barrier which the 
Constitution has ereeted between a free people and the licentious- 
ness of their rulers. 

As this case now stands, it is disembarrassed of many of those 
delicate and difficult questions which have almost invariably arisen 
in proceedings of this character. For the purposes of this argu- 
ment, it may be taken as conceded that this defendant is an officer 
liable to impeachment; that this Court has jurisdiction to try him, 
and that the articles preferred by the House of Representatives are 
sufficient, if proved, to warrant his conviction. Before I proceed 
to discuss the evidence, I will call your attention to some proposi- 
tions of law, to which a merited prominenco has been given by the 
defendant's counsel. It is essential, before you can convict, that we 
.prove that the defendant has committed a misdemeanor, substantially 
as charged in some one of these articles. For the meaning of the word 
«jttisdemeanor, as used in our Constitution, we are, by common con- 
sent, remitted to the common law. Blackstone says : ** A crime, 
'^r misdemeanor, is an aot committed, or omitted, in violation of 
^public law, either forbidding or commanding it." This definition 
does not, in words, give the cardinal element of the offense — ^the 
(unlawful intent. I freely concede to my opponents all the impor- 



812 PROCESDINOB IN THE 

tanoe which they have here labored to give to this element, primarilj 
essential as it is to constitute a crime or misdemeanor. It is the 
unlawful intent, manifesting itself through unlawful acts, which 
the law seeks to punish. I have seen, from the very outset, how 
ingeniously and speciously this question of intent was to be distorted 
to suit the purposes of counsel; but I mistake the intelligence 
of this honorable Court, if I fail to disentangle you from the web 
of sophistry, which the gentlemen, with so much skill and pains,, 
have woven. I think that, in their interpretation of the law of 
intention, they must have relied, not only upon that weight which 
their solemn and impressive utterance and great legal reputation 
would give to their views in the minds of those who were not theo- 
retically versed in the intricacies of the law, but also somewhat upon 
the inexperience of their adversary. How certainly they have 
abandoned those pleasant ^^ ancient ways,'' of which Gov. Stanton 
spoke so feelingly, in another branch of this case, and started out 
upon a new and unbeaten track. They would make this a pure 
question of conscience. The law may have been violated by this 
defendant; he may have intended to do the act, which is a violation 
of law; he may have intended to violate the law; the public may 
have suffered great wrong by his unlawful act; and yet all these 
elements of a crime or a misdemeanor are not sufficient, unless we 
can show the existence of some purpose which, independent of the 
violation of the law, involves moral turpitude. And this strange 
and startling doctrine is sought to be fortified by authority. I see 
before me a volume of Greanleaf on Evidence, from which the gen* 
tleman read; and, with the permission of the Court, I will read, 
from this book, an extract which has heretofore been cited. I read 
from dd vol. Greanleaf on Evidence, sec. 13 : 

^^ Another cardinal doctrine of criminal law, founded in natural 
justice, is, that it is the intention with which an act was done, that 
constitutes its criminality. The intent and the act must both con- 
cur to constitute a crime. Actus non facU reum, nut menB tit rea. 
And the intent must therefore be proved, as well as the other mate- 
rial facts, in the indictment. The proof may be either by evidence, 
direct or indirect, tending to establish the fact : only inference of 
law from other facts proved. For, though it is a maxim of law aa 
well as a dictate of charity, that every person is to be presumed 
innocent until he lis proved to be guilty; yet it is a rule, equally 
sound, that every sane person must be supposed to intend that 



IMPKACHMSNT 0A8B8. 813 

which IB the ordinary and natoral oonsequenee of his own propoBod 

act." 

The intent— that isi the intent to do the act — and the act mnst 
both ooneor. It is not even necessary that a person should intend 
to violate the law in order to render himself amenable to its penal- 
lies. If a man even be ignorant of the law, and do an act in viola* 
tion of its provisions, intending to do the acty he is answerable 
criminally. The gentlemen have, in their argument, confused 
intention with motive. The motive which induces the helpless 
vagabond to steal a loaf that his little ones may not die of hunger, 
may, in the sight of God^ wipe out the transgression it induces; 
but so poor and inflexible are human laws, that we cannot go behind 
the intent to steal, to ascertain the motive which prompted the theft. 
The law deals not with the individual consciences of men ; its stan- 
dards of right and wrong are arbitrary, and of its own creation. 
When it prohibit^ an act, the man who intentionally does that act 
comes under its ban. The necessities of government and society 
demand that it should be so, or else every man will become a ban 
unto himself. The infinnities of our Unite natures set bounds to 
human investigation, and psychological science has not yet even 
pretended that it could dive down into the hearts of men, and drag 
their black thoughts up into the clear light of day. Even the 
martyr who, firm in his convictions and in his faith, braves the 
wrath of the violated majesty of the law,' rather than peril his sou) 
by yielding obedience to what he believes its unholy commands^ 
must be content to submit to earthly punishment, and look^ for his 
recompense, to that great future, when the disembodied spirits of 
men shall come up for judgment, and the innermost recesses of the 
heart shall reveal its every motive and thought. The law, in respect 
to this vexed question of intention, is simply this and nothing more : 
it being established that an act has been committed in violation of 
laW; it must fVirther be shown that the person charged intended to 
do the act. With his motive, the law has nothing to do; it deals 
solely with his unlawful intention. The lack of a motive to commit 
a crime is sometimes urged in argument to show that the defendant 
has not done the act complained of; but never before was a corrupt 
motive made the essential test of criminality. 

These propositions are of especial force in such cases as the one 
at bar. The nature and importance of the trusts reposed in a public 
officer, require that he should be held to the strictest accountability ; 



314 PAOCSSBIIfOB IN THS 

aod it ia a general dootrine, which oannot be oontrorerted, "that 
whenever the law, statutory or common, casts on one a duty of a 
public nature, any neglect of the dnty, or aet done in violation of it, 
ia indictable ;" and, if indictable, then it mnat be because it is s 
orime or a misdemeanor — ^these two words being convertible terma 
as used in the Contitution. Under an indictment, for that violation 
of public duty of which we here complain, the man would be laughed 
to scorn^ in any court of justiee, who should ask that the judge 
charge the jury that, unless they should find, from the evidence, 
that there was some moral turpitude — some actual intention to cheat 
the State, and to receive the proceeds of the fraud — then they must 
find for the defendant. The charge would be : " The law prohibits 
this defendant from selling the State bonds at less than seventy 
cents on the dollar, and, in order to convict, you must find, from 
the evidence, that the defendant sold the bonds for less than seventy 
cents, and that he intended to sell them for less than seventy cents;'' 
and if you, as judges of the law, find this prohibition, then you 
must proceed to inquire, in regard to the facts, as I have just indi- 
cated. As I have before intimated, ignorance or mistake of law 
will excuse no one from the penalty for the breach of it. Even 
though a person may not know of the existence of a law prohibiting 
a oertain act, yet, if he intentionally commit that act, he must 
answer criminally. This proposition goes even to this extent, aa 
laid down in Qreanleaf on BvidencCi vol. 8d, sec. 20: 

*^And the rule is applied to foreigners, charged with criminal 
acts here, which they did not, in fact, know to be such, the acts not 
being criminal in their own country." 

The only exception to this rule, of which I am aware, is one rather 
intimated than affirmed, that misapprehension of law may sometimes 
be shown to repel the charge of corruption in an officer, whose duties 
require the exercise of a discretion, and not even then when '^the 
mistake is induced by gross ignorance and carelessness, partaking 
of a criminal quality." So that even if it were here established by 
the testimony that this defendant acted under a mistake of law, it 
could not shield him, for his duties, in the premises, were purely 
ministerial, so far as the limit on the price of the bonds is concerned; 
and the mistake, if any such there waa, was of that groas character 
aa to partake of the criminal quality — ao gross that even the inge- 
nuity of counsel fail to suggest even a plausible ground for his 
pretended construction of the law. In the exercise of your judi- 
eial functional you are not, and cannot be, abaolved from the 



IMPSAOHMXNT 0A8X8. 815 

binding foroe and effeot of thefle essential and primary principles in 
the administration of justice, without wbioh all legid restraints will 
be loosened, and society dissolved into its original elements. Illos* 
trations are hardly needed to show how weak and desperate is thia 
attempt to distort the law; yet take the case of the ignorant man 
arraigned on charge of a violation of the license law, and he pleada 
that he sold the liquor in his dwelling-house, and introduces hia 
own frequent declarations to show that he did not construe the law 
to prohibit the sale in a private house. These distinguished lawyeia 
would hardly insist that this was a good defense* Following the 
precedent here sought to be established, the liquor seller might 
proceed to show that his motive waa good, and prove, by a physician^ 
that the man to whom he sold, needed the stimulant. How absurd 
these propositions sound when practically applied; and yet these 
absurdities are involved in the legal argument of this defense. 

I have thus attempted to explode these fallaeies, not that the 
prosecution has need here to insist upon any rigid rule, but thai 
such legal heresies might not pass unchallenged. I regret that I 
am compelled thuB rudely to assail the law laid down by the defensei 
ss my distinguished friend, Gov. Stanton, seemed, by some passing 
remarks, to feel that his legal opinions had hardly been received 
with the deference due their sourcci and to entertain, almost, a 
feeling of personal grievance at being arrayed against such pigmiee 
aa the humble conductors of this prosecution. That due weight mighl 
be given to his views, he has kindly and considerately told you thai 
he once occupied the most responsible position of chairman of the 
judiciary committee of the House of Bepresentatives of the United 
States; and here modestly, and with a tender pity for our weaknesSi 
I doubt not, he paused, leaving to me the pleasant task of recount- 
ing some other of the honorable positions he has held. His name 
may be found upon that memorable roll of decapitated martyrs-^ 
the Oovernors of Kansas; and he has been — almost — a Senator of 
the United States from the State of Kansas. With becoming modesty 
we acknowledge our weakness, and here gratefully own that whatever 
of credit or reputation may attach to us in this proceeding, will be 
but a reflected luster from the gentlemen who have so ably conducted 
this defense. 

There is cue other preliminary matter deserving some sligkl 
notice, before I proceed to examine the evidence. My opponents 
have here volunteered a sort of half-way defense of Hon. Robert S. 



816 PR00SXDIN08 IN THB 

SteTens, who has plajed a somewhat conspicaoiu part in this inres- 
ligation. Mr. Stevens is not on trial. I am neither disposed to 
assail or defend him. It may be that in the pnrlieus of those 
departments, of whose oomiption we have heard so mnoh — ^it may 
be that in the gambling whirlpool of Wall street, such transactions 
as those with which this trial has implicated Mr. Stevens, are most 
righteous and commendable. I am not here to test the elasticity of 
a broker's conscience. By the standard which these gentlemen 
have sought to erect, I presume Mr. Stevens' intentions were good. 
But we have been told that Mr. Stevens possessed great skill, expe- 
rience and learning in the matter of wheedling the public depart- 
ments at Washington. That, like inventors in mechanics, he was 
entitled, in morals at least, to a patent for his method of selling 
bonds, whereby he realised all the way from twenty-five to fifty-five per 
cent. The gentleman warmed under the inspiration of the subject, 
and likened Mr. Stevens to the inventor of the steam engine. For 
a moment I was captured by the idea ; but fortunately remembered 
Oen. Butler's remark to the city council of New Orleans, in regard 
to some of its action. He admitted that its novelty would entitle 
the inventor to a patent, but he doubted its usefulness. The most 
Appropriate illustration was the apple-paring machine, which the 
gentleman so glowingly and graphically described as a little instru- 
ment, upon which you placed an apple, and, by a few turns of the 
wheel, peeled it handsomely. Stevens' invention is similar in its 
oonstruction, if not in its effect. He put the State on' his little 
machine, and, with a few turns of the wheel, he peeled it to the 
oore. So much, in passing, for Hon. Robert S. Stevens. 

I propose to discuss the several Articles of Impeachment, so far 
as they relate to the seven per cent, bonds, together, applying such 
testimony to each as shall, in my judgment, go to sustain that spe- 
eific charge. The main features of all this class of articles are the 
same. 

After repeated failures, and when tht most hopeful had began to 
despair, Kansas was suddenly admitted into the Union — the first 
fruit of the rebellion. No provision had been, or could have been 
made, to meet, by legitimate revenue from taxation, the expenses 
incident to putting in active operation the new form of government. 
In this emergency, the Legislature passed an act authorising the 
issue and negotiation of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of 
the bonds of the State. This law reads as follows : 



IMPBAOHMENT 0A8B8. 317 

Chaptbb YI. — An Act to authorise the negotiation of one hon* 

dred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of the State of Kansas, 

to defray the current expenses of the State. 
Be ft enacted hy the Legislature of the State of Ka/Mo* : 

Section 1. That Austin M. Clark and James 0. Stone be and 
they are hereby auiiorised to negotiate the bonds of this State to 
the amount of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, immediatelj 
upon the passage of this act, bearing a rate of interest not ezoeeding 
seven per cent, per annum, payable semi-annually in the city of 
New York, which loan shall be paid and reimbursed in fifteen years 
from the time when the same is negotioted; whic£ money, so bor- 
rowed, shall, on being first duly appropriated therefor, be applied 
to the defrayment of the current expenses of the State of Kansas. 
That said commiBsioners are hereby directed to inform the State 
Legislature, within seventy days from the passage of this act, the 
terms on which they can negotiate the loan proposed, and no final 
action shall be had by said commissioners until they shall receive 
the consent of the Legislature, or, in case of the adjournment of the 
Legislature, the oonsent of the Governor, Auditor and Secretary of 
State, or a majority cf them, to the terms proposed. 

Sec. 2. That the bonds mentioned in section first of this act shall 
be made with coupons attached, issued and signed by the Treasurer, 
and countersigned by the Governor and Auditor, and shall have 
the great seal of the State attached, which bonds shall specify the 
the rate of interest and the time when the principal and interest 
shall be paid, and each bond so issued shall not be for a less sum 
than five hundred dollars, and shall specify thereon to whom the 
same shall be made payable. 

Sec. 8. That the proper officers of the State of Kansas shall cause 
to be levied and collected, each 'year, with the other taxes of tK^ 
State, a sufficient amount to pay the interest as the same aooruei, 
on all bonds issued under the provisions of this act, and, also, to 
levy and collect a tax sufficient to create a sinking fund for the 
final redemption of such bonds, which taxes, when paid into the 
State Treasury, shall be and remain a specific fund for sud purposes 
only, and shall not be appropriated or used in any other way except 
as is heremafter provided. 

See. 4. That the tax above mentioned, in section three of this 
aet, levied and collected to create a sinking fund for the final si^ 
demption of all bonds issued under this aot| shall be invested anai^ 
ally, by the Treasurer of the State of Kansas, in the bonds of the 



818 PROCSXBIIIOS IN THX 

United States^ and in bonds of the State of Kanaas, at their market 
value on the New York City Exchange, or, in case the flame cannot 
be obtained at par or under par, then, and in that event, he ia 
anthorised to invest the money arising from the said tax, annually, 
in the bonds of other States on which the interest is paid promptly 
and regularly, and which bonds he shall procure at as low rates as 
the same can be purchased, which bonds shall be held and retained 
by the Treasurer until the principal of the bonds issued under this 
act shall become due, and shall then be disposed of at the highest 
market rates, and the proceeds of the sale of such United States or 
ether State bonds, purchased as aforesaid, shall be appropriated to 
the redemption of the bonds issued under this act. 

Sec. 5. That whenever the interest on the above mentioned bonds 
shall become due, the same shall be paid by the Treasurer of the 
State, upon presentation at such banking house, in the dty of New 
York, as may be designated in the bonds issued under this act, and 
the coupons for the interest then due shall be taken up by said 
Treasurer, canceled and filed in his office. 

Sec. 6. The Treasurer of the State is hereby authorised, and it 
is made his duty to obtain, blank bonds, with suitable devioee 
to prevent counterfeiting, and of such material as he may deem 
proper. 

Seo. 7. That all money realised by the State of Elansas from the 
sale of bonds issued under this act, after paying all the necessary 
expense of issuing the bonds and the negotiation of thsm, be and 
the same is hereby appropriated to the exclusive purpose of defray- 
iag and paying any and every legitimate and lawfril expense thai 
has been incurred or may hereafter be incurred in administering and 
eariying on the State government, and shall be and remain a specific 
ftind for these purposes only, and shall not be appropriated or used 
for any other purpose. 

See. 8. The credit of the State is hereby pledged to the payment 
of the interest and principal of the bonds mentioned in this act, ae 
Ike same may become due. 

Sec. 9. That as soon as the said persons, mentioned in section first 
«f this act, shall succeed in negotiating the sidd loan, they shall 
fbrthwith pay the same into the treasury of the State. 

Seo, 10. That, before entering upon the duties herein specified 
ittd oonfided to them, the said Austin M. Clark and James C. Stone 
shall ezeeule their bonds to the State of Kansas, with good and 



IMJPSAOHMllIT OABSi. 819 

fnfficient securities, to be approyed I^ the Govenior of this State, 
in the sum of three hundred thousand dollars, eonditioned that thej 
will well and truly perform the trusts herein reposed, and pay into 
ihe Treasury of the State of Kansas all ^ums of money they may 
receive on the sale of said bonds. 

See. 11. That, in ease said Olark and Stone shall fail to negotiate 
the loan authorised by this act, upon the terms authoriied by this, 
act, that then, and in that case, they shall reiom said bonds, or so- 
many as remain undisposed of, to the Treasurer of State, who shaU 
safely keep the same. 

Sec. 12. It shall be the duty of the State Auditor to register, in 
a book proyided for that purpose, the bonds issued under this act, 
which said registry shall show the date, number, amount, and to 
whom is made payable each of said bonds. 

Sec. 13. That this act shall take effect from and after its publi- 

oation. 
Approved May 1st, 1861. 

I hereby certify that the above bill became a law by publication 

in the Tepeka Recwdy M«y 8d, 1861. 

J. W. ROBINSON, 
Seeretcuy of SUue. 

Hark the peculiarly stringent provisions of this bill. The com* 
missioners, men of koown wealth, probity and honor, are intrusted 
with no absolute discretion in the matter. During the session of 
the Le^Iature they were to report to that body, and receive its 
assent before any negotiation could be made, and after the adjourn- 
ment of the Legislature the State officers were substituted in their 
stead. Even with all these restrietions and limitations upon their 
power in the premises ; so cautious and prudent wa6 the Legislature^ . 
that these> eonmtssieiien were by thei law competent' to give a bond 
in the sum of three htrndred-thtotnand dollars. I shall have occa- 
sion heceafter to contrast the prudence and caution of the Legisla* 
tore with the oonduetof those iawhom these bonds were after* 
wards intrusted. Messrs. Stone & Clark having, forwmie cause, 
failed to negotiate these bonds, a supplenlentaty '&ot was subse- 
quently paseedi which- m as foilown t 
CHAPTsa VII^^Av Amp supflemeiitiry'to *< An Aefrio authorise 

the negotiMMUjof one hnidcad and' fifty thcrusand doOan of the 

bonds of the State of Kansas to defray the current expenses of 

the State,'' approved May 1, 1861. 
Be ii enacts hjf the LegtUahure of . the StaU of Kan$a$ : 

Section 1. The Treasurer of State is hereby authoriied and 



f 



320 PEOonBiNOft iir ths 

directed to prepare one hundred thoaaand dollam of the bonds 
prorided for in an act entitled " An Act to authorise the negotia- 
tion of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of the 
State of Kansas, to defray the current expenses of the State, in 
sums of the denomination of one hundred dollars each." 

Sec. 2. That the GoTcmor, Auditor and Secretary of State of 
the State of Kansas, or a majority of them, are hereby authorised 
and empowered to negotiate and sell the bonds of the State, the 
issuance of which is proyided for in the act authorizing the nego- 
tiation of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of 
the State of Ejmsas, to defray the current expenses of the State, 
approved May 1, 1661 ; I^wided, however, That no bonds shall be 
sold for less than seventy cents on the dollar, and that the proceeds 
arising from the sale thereof, shall be paid directly into the Trea- 
sury of the State. 

Sec. 3. It shall be lawful for the Treasurer to receive, in pay- 
ment for said bonds, the circulating notes or bills of any specie 
paying banks of any State, and, also, such warrants as may be 
issued to the members and officers of the Senate and House of 
Representatives, Justices of the Supreme and Judges of the Dis- 
trict Courts, Reporter of the Supreme Court, for services rendered 
or to be rendered when said services are performed, and, also, such 
other amounts as may be provided in the general appropriation bill 
for the current year ; but this act shall not be so construed to per* 
mit payment to be made in the bills of any bulking institution now 
In existence in this State. 

Sec. 4. That the Treasurer shall be and is hereby authorised, 
upon presentation of the warrants mentioned in the third sectioB 
of this act, to receive the same at par and issue the bonds men- 
tioned in the first section of this act, at their current value; iVo* 
videdj That this shall not be so construed as to authorise said 
Treasurer to dispose of said bonds at a price less than seventy cents 
on the dollar. 

Sec. 5. That this act shall take effect and be in force from and 
after its publication, and the Seerataiy of State is directed to pub* 
lish the same, immediately upon its approval by the Ck>veraor, in 
m daily paper published in Topeka, which shall constitute suoh 
publication. 

Approved June 8, 1861. 

!rhus, theui the Governor, Seetetaiy of State and Auditor, were 



C 



A 



IMPKAOHMBNT 0A8XS. 821 

intniBted with these bonda. An amoant of about sixty-two thoa* 
sand dolhtrs of them was used in redeeming State sorip, in acoor- 
dance with the provisions of the supplementary act. The balance 
remained in the hands of the State officers to be sold. The first 
step b to intrust Mr. Dntton with some twenty-nine thousand 
dollars. This seems to have been a sort of venture, without any 
specific object. If I remember rightly, they oautionsly took 
Dntton's receipt, so that the State might not suffer. Mr. Dutton, 
somewhere in the East, casually meets Mr. Stevens, who had juat 
concluded a highly satisfactory operation in the way of our war 
bonds, and half jocularly, it would seem, hands over the twenty- 
nine thousand dollars of bonds to him, and Dutton carefully takes 
Stevens' receipt for them. Stevens goes to Washington and at- 
tempts to sell. tbe»e bonds and fails. On his return, at Dayton, 
Ohio, be meets a mysterious gentleman of the name of Corwini ' to 
whom he in trusts the twenty-nine thousand dollars worth of bonds, 
and I prei^uiiiv, tukex Corwin's receipt. Thus from State officers to 
Dutton, from Dutton to Stevens, from Stevens to Corwin your 
bonds were bandied about from hand to hand, from East to West — 
these bonds which your Legislature refused to intrust to commis- 
sioners of its own appointment, save upon condition that they 
should give a bond in the sum of three hundred thousand dollars. 
Right here, without going one step farther in this case, is there not 
that culpable carelessness which partakes of the quality of crime. 
Mr. Stevens then comes to Kansas, and for the first time in this 
transaction, we find the tempter and the tempted together. He 
proposes to buy some thousands of State bonds, and ofiers, in the 
face of the plain letter of the law, forty cents on the dollar. Then 
it is that those conversations of which we hear so much were had. 
Then it is that the Secretary and Auditor begin to raise around 
their contemplated scheme the halo of their good intentions. Then 
it is that John W. Bobinson tells George S. Hillyer. and George 8. 
Hillyer tells John W. Robinson, against all the recongnised canons 
of interpretation, that the Legislature did not intend, what its words 
express. They sntertain the proposition of forty per oent. — ^they 
consent to ij(, and this most illegal and iniquitous arrangement b, 
by their own testimony only defeated by the failure to proeun the 
^vernor's signature. Bead the second section of the supplemen- 
tary act. I have not the heart ^riously to argue the proposition 
4hat these men never labored under any suoh insane delusion. Thej 
21 



PBOOCVDINOB IM THX 

MA read, and jet tliey pretend that they thought that there was a 
limit on the one hundred thouaand one hundred dollar honds, and 
none on the fire hundred dollar bonds; and they proposed to 
arrange the matter, so as to make the one hundred dollar bonds 
bring seventy per oent. at the expense of the others. Even this 
of itself -was a fraud, and a patent attempt to evade the will of the 
Leg^lature, even as that will was interpreted to their benighted 
understandings. They never thought any suoh thing. This is a 
mere ^* dodge/' and a lame one at that — it does not rise to the dig- 
oity of a quibble. It is the worst among the many bad features in 
this case. A lawyer's practiced ingenuity has failed even to suggest 
a doubt. I pity the man whose desperate cause compels him to 
come here with such a poor, bold, pitiful plea. These parties might 
have saved themselves from contempt, if not from disgrace, had 
they come here unembarrassed by this defense. We do not know 
that this defendant or Mr. Hillyer is deeply versed in the oracles of 
the law, yet, when this grave question is presented, and doubts are 
suggested, did they seek the advice of any lawyer 7 The constitu- 
tion has provided that there shall be an Attorney General, whose 
duty it is made by law to advise the officers of the State. Was his 
advice ever sought ? If some of these steps had been taken, and 
their interpretation sustained, these gentlemen might perhaps, with 
some plausability, take shelter behind the boundless stupidity of 
their advisers. 

Secretary Robinson and Hillyer contract to sell to Stevens bonds 
at forty per cent. They give him thirty-one thousand dollars of 
bonds, and such is the haste with which this transaction is oonsum- 
mated that they deal out to him bonds only partially executed — 
bonds lacking the signature of the Governor. The terms and con- 
ditions of this agreement no man knows. The Governor refused to 
ratify the contract, and yet the proper guardians of the bonds do 
not seek to recover them. Under no earthly contract or agreement 
they permit them to remain in Stevens' hands, for what purpose we 
can only surmise. The Legislature authorised the issue of the 
bonds of the State for another purpose than to furnish Hon. Robert 
8, Stevens with speculating capital. This lot of bonds meets with 
as many adventures as the last. Stevens takes them to Lawrence, 
gives them to Woodward to take somewhere j Woodward gives 
dkem to Smith, and at last they are landed in their destined haven, 
and committed to the custody of John W. Oorwin. Here, then, are 



IMPSACHMSNT 0A8S8. 828 

fiftj thooMmd dollars of the State bonds being handed through the 
departments at Washington. While thej are yet the property of 
the State, they ftimish to the harpies who throng the avenues of 
the public officee, a basis for speculating off the National Govern- 
ment. No wonder the bonds could not be sold; no wonder they 
had no market value. It is not in such hands that capitalists look 
for a safe investment. 

Having thus disposed of the property of the State, and finding 
still an empty Treasury, the Secretary and Auditor suddenly burn 
with patriotic fire, and seek to emulate the example of President 
Lincoln. I admired the skill and ingenuity of my most eloquent 
and venerable friend, Gov. Shannon, thus likening small things to 
great; and I, and every man within the sound of his voice, was moved 
by the earnest and patriotic words with which he depicted our coun- 
try's glory and her dangers. He seemed, for a time, to forget the 
lawyer — to forget his case, and to talk like an inspired patriot. I 
listened with delight and admiration; and the flight was none the 
less grand^ now that it becomes my painful duty to clip the wings 
with which he soared. The Legislature was about to meet, say 
they; State scrip was sadly depreciated, and, to the minds of these 
State officers, an empty Treasury was as formidable a foe to the 
government as an armed rebellion; and, therefore, because President 
Lincoln, when the whole continent was heaving with the throes and 
the convulsions of the terrible eivil war which was then bursting 
upon us, overstepped the bounds of his constitutional authority to 
avert the impending min; therefore Hillyer and Bobinson were 
authorised to trample under foot the laws, that the Legislature 
might not lack mucilage and ink. Thb is the argument denuded 
of its plumage. Before passing from this moral plea, behind which 
the gentlemen have made a moat determined stand, I propose, even 
at the risk of interrupting the course of my argument, to dispose, 
at once and forever, by facts and figures, of all this talk about the 
exegencies and necessities of the State. This strain has aceomp*»> 
nied their whole argument. Bspeeially have they made it applicable 
to the war bonds, of which I shall have to speak hereafter. Not a 
dollar of the proceeds of the seven per oent. bohds everMachtd 
Kansas, until after the mutiaqr of the LegisJatnre; so that these 
gentlemen ought have had the law changed, if neoessi^ eompelMy 
rather than viokted. As to the war bonds, they were sold in Jua0 
— sold, say the gentlemen, to repel an invaauvi which was 



824 



PB00SKDIN08 IN THl 



on oar borders. This justified the sacrifice of ten per cent, bonds, 
payable in ten years, at the rate of forty per cent. Fortunately I 
have before me the reports of the Auditor and Treasurer of this 
State. I read from the Treasurer's report, made in January, 1862 : 

Amount received from sale of Bonds — ^thirty-one thou* 

sand dollars, a 40 cts. $12,400 00 

By amount of Auditor's warrants redeemed, 3,568 54 

Balrnce in Treasury, 8,881 46 

So that over eight thousand dollars of the twelve thousand four 
hundred realized, remained in the State Treasury from June to 
January, untouched, I now read from the Auditor's report : 

WAR EXPSKSES. 



Jane SS 

97 

Jnl7 <4 
90 

AoR. 90 
19 
91 

Sept. • 
17 

Ooi. 99 



C. Bobinioa 

L.C.Wnnutfth 
K. Morrow 



LewiiWiM 
P. W. GiUs 
M.K. Smith 
C. Robinion 

R. Morrow 
Fry k Rntf oU 
Qoo. 8. HUlyar 



MetMDser to WMhlBtton to proouro 

arms, Ao. 
Use of horse Acj orfftniiins militia 
ProTiaiona fomished troop* 



.1 



«t 



•t 



Expreee ohargea on mtmitioni of war 
Proritions rarnished troopf 
Servioei and horae and hu^p hire 

ProTifliona fumiehed troope 

Hone and bnny hire 

On aooount oiTrr A Raiiril 



• 407 18 


88 00 


1,653 67 


7:115 


75 00 


97 44 


11 05 


7 50 


58 90 


599 50 


180 00 


5 75 


900 00 


91 00 


•9,460 54 



•90,000 00 



These figures fall like a shower-bath upon the metaphors of the 
Qovernor. There is but one item expended which looks to the 
defense of the border. One might well imagine, from the siie of 
OoT. Robinson's bill for buggy hire, that he had driven a flaming 
chariot along the Missouri line, from June to January. 

We left Messrs. Bobinson and Hillyer contemplating a patriotic 
sacrifice. They would go to Washington, and, with their financial 
ability and experience, rescue the credit of the Slate from dishonor. 
Bteyens had nodiing to do with this pilgrimage. It was with some 
difliculty that we ascertained that there was anything but a blind 
Ihtality urging them to Washington. It was not eren agreed — so 
they would have us believe-^-that Robinson should go. By diligent 
inquiry, howcTer, we find that Senator Pomeroy had written to this 
defendant that bonds could be sold in Washington, and it was 
understood that they might be purchased by the Interior Depart- 
ment, which, before that time, had bought our war bonds. In order 
to counteract the impression that there was any sort of concert of 
aetioB in regard to tUi matter, Hillyer says that Bobinson left here 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 825 

for Chicago, nnoertain as to going to Washington. Thus, then, 
according to Mr. Hillyer's account, he left him to sell the Stale 
bonds, when fifty thousand dollars of them were beyond his reach 
and control, in the hands of Stevens or his agents; and well know- 
ing that he alone could do nothing in the matter, as, by the law, 
only a majority of the board could act. It may be that Stevens was 
not consulted or advised of this trip. It may be that Robinson had 
not determined to go. It is possible, but it is not probable. The * 
facts, before and subsequent to that time, point to another and a 
different conclusion. Robinson showed his faith by his works. 
Before he left for Washington, he purchased State bonds on specu- 
lation. At last, both these worthies reach the capital. Their os- 
tensible mission is honorable and honest. The natural course-'-so 
we would all think — would have been for them to have attempted 
to sell the bonds. They knew the head of the department, where 
they expected to sell them; and it would have seemed every way 
appropriate that they should have waited upon him and explained 
the object of their visit. But here we are met with a class of testi- 
mony which we are so unfortunate as to be unable to counteract. 
The gentlemen give us the benefit of their congressional experience, 
and talk about the corrupt purlieus of the departments at Wash* 
ington, so beset and invested with difficulties that they can be 
approached only through certain dark, mysterious passages, known 
only to the initiate. It may be — as we humble citizens have been 
taught to believe — that the portals of the departments stand open, 
and that an honest man, on an honest errand, may receive a patient 
and respectful hearing, even from the highest of the peoples' servants. 
It may be that it is only those who love darkness rather than light, 
that seek the devious, hidden paths, so graphically described. 
There is a back door to every house. Not one engaged in this 
prosecution has ever achieved the high position of a congressional * 
seat, and we cannot say that this is as I have attempted to describe. 
These men, at any rate, cannot say that our explanation, so charitable 
to the government, is not true. They never saw the Secretary of 
the Interior, or any other officer of the government, while they were 
the agents of the State of Kansas; and only when they assumed the 
more congenial functions of the secret agents of Stevens. It is true 
they saw Senators Lane and Pomeroy, and Representative Conway; 
and an attempt is made — another lamentable shift — ^to saddle the 
responsibility of this transaction upon them. They were elected to 



326 PBOOSSDIMOS- IN TBI 

dboharge the daties belonging to their offioeSy and not u the guar- 
dians of State officers, who might prove too weak in mind or morab 
to resist the first opportunity which might offer for a betrayal of 
their trusts. They say they were advised not to go to the Seeretaiy 
of the Interior, but to employ Stevens. Such advice, of itoelf, 
must have put them on their guard, if they were not, as the evi- 
dence shows, seeking for that very advice. Without one word or 
effort, through weeks of profitless lingering in Washington, they 
hold up their feeble, helpless hands, as they would have you chari- 
tably believe, and implore the assistance of Stevens, who^ alone, is 
all-powerful to save them and the State. The departments are, to 
them, awful and mysterious temples, within whose sacred precincta 
only the anointed priests may tread; and of these, in their eyea, 
Stevens stands high and conspicuous. They have not even applied 
to a broker to assist them, whose customary commission, we are told, 
is one-quarter of one per cent. They employ Stevens, or they sell 
to Stevens; at any rate, Stevens gets the bonds, and that seems 
to have been, throughout, the great object to be attained. We have 
been told that delegated power cannot be delegated; but that mat- 
tered not. Messrs. Robinson and Hillyer had probably prepared 
themselves with a convenient mistake^ in regard to this ancient 
maxim. If the State had desired the services of this distinguished 
negotiator, he would probably have been employed; but then^ like 
Messrs. Stone and Clark, he would have been compelled to give a 
bond — an inconvenient and, sometimes, an impossible instrument. 
They employed him of necessity, they say. Let us see how much 
he had to do with selling the bonds. Mr. Seeretaiy Smith was the 
man first to be approached and won; and he emphatically says, in 
his testimony, that he was unfavorably disposed toward the ne- 
gotiation, until he was convinced, by the representations of Gkn. 
Pomeroy, that the investment was a safe and good one for the funds 
of the Indians. He, at least, was not manipulated by the skillful 
hands of Stevens. The President's sanction was necessary, and this 
was obtained by a letter from our congressional delegation; and 
none of us would like to believe that the influence of Stevens was 
necessary to induce them to serve the interests of the State. The 
transaction, divested of Stevens, looks easy and fair, the only cloud 
and mystery about it being the employment of Stevens, and the 
sub-agent, Mr. Corwin, whose exact connection it is difficult to trace, 
although an imputation has been attempted, as it seemed to me, 



IMFIAOHBairT OAOS. 83S7 

when oast apon Beoretary Smith, by showing that Corwin was related 
to him. 

These are the facts as thej appear from the testimony; and yet 
for weeks they waited, looking hopefully to Stevens to oome and 
engineer this plain and honest business. It is testified that they 
were imploring him to oome and help them, and that he, at times, 
was coy, and at times defiant. None of this remarkable correspon- 
dence is before the Court, and we are left to vague conjecture as to its 
singular contents. He had fifty thousand dollars of the State 
bonds, and these they never sought to get into their possession ; but 
they wanted his aid — ^his powerful presence. At last, overcome by 
their much importunity, Stevens goes to Washington, and, from the 
jMSCounts here given, one would suppose he spent weeks in overcom- 
ing their scruples, and perfecting the arrangement between them. Yet 
he arrived there on the night of Saturday, the SOth of November, 
and the agreement, under which he took the bonds, is dated on the 
3d of December. Do you believe that all the transactions — some 
graphically described, and others darkly hinted at — took place in 
this brief interval ? 

It is in these days that more good intentions are devised by this 
defendant. He who lately was willing, and did barter the bonds 
at forty per cent., suddenly becomes obdurate. He believes, so his 
friends here say, that sixty per cent, is the best price which can be 
realized, and that it would be for the interests of the State to sell 
At that price; but still he manfully clings to seventy per cent. 

Why does he do this? Why is this parade here? To show that 
he hesitated to violate the law? To show that he never mistook 
its provisions, and, for a time, was determined to stftnd by them ? 
The attempt to show this, even if it be false, or the introduction of 
the testimony, if it be true, lets the light through this shabby, 
flimsy pretext of mistaking the law. Here, at last, we find him 
acknowledging that, before he violated the law, he knew the aot 
he contemplated to be unlawful. He refuses to yield; and then 
they would have you believe St:2vens, with an assured profit of over 
twelve thousand dollars, even at seventy cents, tore up the contract! 
Stevens and the Auditor and Secretary seem, by their account, 
to have had a desperate encounter. They waxed wroth on either 
side; but no blood was spilled, and the State only suffered. This 
tearing up of receipts — this giving over of bonds — was a cheat and 
A sham — just such a cheat and sham as these three would have 
concocted, had they been conspiring to defraud the State, as we 



828 PBOCEBDIHQB IN THK 

ebai^ ; but admit it all, and it but sbows that he knowingly, in- 
tentionally and willfally riolated the law. Finally, all his fastidioui 
Bcmples overcome, this remarkable document ie executei : 

This certifies, that we have employed and constituted R. S. Ste- 
vens an agent on the part of the State of Kansas, to negotiate and 
sell all the seven per cent, bonds of said State, issued in accordance 
with the provisions of an act of the Legislature of the State of 
Kansas, approved May 1st, 1861, and an act supplementary thereto, 
approved June 8d, 1861, authorizing the issue and sale of one 
hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of said State; and 
we hereby agree to give him, for his services as such agent, all and 
whatever amount of money he may receive for said bonds over and 
above sixty cents (60 cts.) on the dollar; that is to .say, for all the 
bonds belonging to the State, which the said Stevens may sell, he 
is to pay into the State treasury the sum of sixty cents (60 cts.) on 
each and every dollar. 

Witness our hands this 8d day of December, A. D. 1861. 

JOHN W. ROBINSON, Secretary of State. 
GEORGE S. niLLYER, Auditor of StaU. 

This instrument is variously interpreted by the parties. Mr. 
Hillyer says that he and the Secretary considered the contract a 
sale to Stevens of the bonds; but their notions of the force of lan- 
guage have been shown to be remarkably confused. I care not 
^ which shape this modern Proteus may assume — purchaser or agent 
— the fraud and illegality clings to the transaction still. When he 
put his name to that paper — ^he, a sworn officer of the State, viola- 
ted his official oath ; violated the laws he was especially bound to 
respect and execute, and betrayed the interests of the people who 
had honored him with their confidence. Call it recklessness — call 
it carelessness — call it any thing — and yet, with this act recorded 
against him, whatever your verdiot may be, he cannot go forth from 
this trial, as his counsel proposes to send him, ^'pure and stainless, 
without the smell of fire upon his garments.'' This very receipt, 
contract or nameless thing, mentions the very law which it violated. 
Stevens binds himself to nothing. He makes no contract or stipu- 
lation on his part. No bond here to save the State harmless. We 
have only the personal responsibility of Mr. Stevens to look to for 
the money, out of which we believe the State has been defrauded. 
Has not the State suffered wrong in this? But this is not enough. 
A sort of letter of attorney is needed before Stevens can be fully 



IMPXAOHIIXNT CA8X8. 82^ 

accredited to use the name of the State for his own parposes. This 
docnment needs the signature of the Grovemor. He is not prosent 
He has, as the testimony shows, refused to sanction any sale for less 
than seventy cents; and yet John W. Robinson makes another 
patriotic sacrifice, and signs the name of the Goyemor to this paper, 
which is to be used in furtherance of a scheme to sell the bonds at 
sixty per cent. Here we might well pause to permit Robinson and 
Hillyer to retire for a few moments, and express to each other the 
entire innocence of their intentions. They have, unfortunately, 
omitted any special declarations, as to the honesty of this transac- 
tion. This letter, the one bearing date the 25th of October, pur- 
porting to be signed by Oovernor, Secretary of State and Auditor, 
was a matter of no little moment in this transaction. Secretary 
Smith says, upon the faith of that letter alone, he conducted his 
negotiations with StcTens as the agent of the State. It was made 
and signed in Washington, somewhere between the first and fifth of 
Pecember. It bears date at the city of Topeka, on the 25th day of 
October. Why was the QoTcmor^s name signed? Because it was 
essential to carry out this scheme — ^to further this fraudulent and 
illegal transaction. Why was it antedated? It was in order that 
the fraud might not be suspected or disooTcred, if it should be 
ascertained that the (JoTemor was in Kansas, and not in Washing- 
ton. Tell not of the equality of your laws, when the poor, ignorant 
beggar's mouth is closed, and he is precluded from showing what 
dire and terrible necessity drove him to the commission of a crime, 
mayhap to prolong his miserable existence ; and these State officers 
— men in high places — ^men intrusted with the execution of your 
laws — are allowed to. produce here their manufactured hopes and 
fears — ^their concocted intentions — their shameless pleas of igno- 
rance and mistake — ^to avert the just punishment of their misde- 
meanors! Thus fortified, Stevens, with the constant advice and 
assistance of the State officers, sells the bonds at eighty-five cents 
on the dollar. This defendant and his colleague become suddenly 
inspired with an energy in singular contrast with their torpidity, 
during the preceding weeks. Now, may it please this honorable 
Court, where is the first word of legal or competent testimony tend* 
ing to show that Hillyer and Robinson might not have sold these 
bonds without the assistance or intervention of Stevens? We have 
the unsupported and somewhat interested opinion of Stevens on the 
point. We have the testimony of counsel in their congressional 
experiences. 



880 PROOSSDIlfOS IN THS 

Mr. Stanton. — ^I did not tMtifj. 

Mr. Stinson. — ^I meant this remark in no diarespeotflil sense. I 
referred to the congressional experiences irhich I understood you 
and GrOY. Shannon to fayor the Court with. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^The Attorney General is mistaken ; I gaye no 
congressional experiences. 

Mr. Stinson. — Then I will throw the burden on Gov. Shannon. 
He must stand it, for he is not here to defend himself. 

The only reason seems to be that they understood from Senator 
Pomeroy that they better not try. Take this testimony together, 
and if it all be true, that distinguished senator seems to hare been 
drawn into the meshes of this web of conspiracy and fraud. H« 
testified, in his deposition, that he is ^^a laborer/' The scripture 
says " the laborer is worthy of his hire." Let us, for the honor of 
the State, if we can, so liberally and charitably construe this testi- 
mony, as to exclude the idea that the laborer received his hire in 
this transaction. Even this allusion may do injustice to an inno- 
cent man ; but he who touches pitch must be defiled. The people 
of the State will gratefully accept, and, at the same time, earnestly 
insist upon a full explanation of Mr. Pomeroy's connection with 
this transaction. 

For his services Stevens received twenty-five dollars for every 
sixty which was paid the State. What were these services f Mr. 
Stevens has been upon the stand, but his lips were sealed. The 
vague conjectums of oounsel, which hint at dark and even dishonest 
work, are our only guide. Has the State of Kansas fallen so low, 
that to sell her first issue of bonds, she must resort to tricks and 
dishonest practices? If the selling of the bonds could be fairly, 
openly and honestly done, then it is admitted this defendant and 
Hillyer might have sold them. If they could not be so sold, no 
public officer had a right to mingle the name of the State in a 
scheme concocted with iniquity and fVaud. Again, I protest against 
these covert insinuations which so meaningly and darkly hint at 
the all-pervading atmosphere of corruption about the public offices 
at the national capital. This government is hardly worth the blood 
and treasure which is being poured out like water for its preserva- 
tion, if it can be approached only through chicanery and corrup- 
tion. This money, so received by Stevens, is, according to the 
latest interpretation, compensation for selling the bonds. It may 
have been compensation, but there was a great deal of it. There 



mraAOHianiT oasis. 881 

is no ftuthority in the kw Mjwhere authoriiing the employment of 
sub-agents by the Stste officers in this transaction, and no provisions 
made for their payment. True, the original act says the expenses 
of selling may be dednoted from the amoant reoeired, bnt the snp* 
plementary act, under whioh this defendant got his authority, pro- 
vides that all the money received from the bonds shall be paid 
directly into the State Treasury. These men could not touch a 
dollar, or a dime, or a cent of that money, for expenses, or anything 
else, until the Legislature authorised them to do it. Waiving this, 
however, what does the word '^expense" mean is this connection? 
Does it mean wholesale bribery? Does it mean the lavish out- 
pouring of money for the purposes of corruption ? It means legiti- 
mate and neoessaiy expenses, incurred, by the proper officers, in 
traveling, and otherwise, for the purpose of selling these bonds. 

Compensation is a new word for this thing, sii^gested by the 
ingenuity of counsel. Hillyer and Robinson, who seem to have 
exercised no little skill in manufacturing a defense, never dreamed 
of this novel and amusing idea. They say they sold the bonds for 
sixty per cent, which, being intepreted by counsel, means they sold 
them at seventy per cent, and gave ten per cent, for selling. This, 
indeed, is strategy. All we know is that the State, through the 
oontraot of this defendant and Hillyer, agreed to part with all its 
property in these bonds for sixty per cent., and that this was what 
the State received, leaving the legitimate expenses of the sale unpaid, 
as Mr. Hillyer testifies. 

I must recall one statement. We have before us a monument of 
the services rendered by Mr. Stevens to the State, and for which he 
was so generously compensated. He made a contract with the 
Seoretaiy of the Interior by virtue of that letter of attorney and 
credit, with a false date and a spurious signature. That contract I 
must read : 

It is agreed, between the United States, by C. B. Smith, Secre- 
tary of the Interior, and the State of Kansas, by R. S. Stevens, 
Agent of the State, duly appointed to sell the bonds of said Stale, 
that the United States shall purchase the bonds of said State, dated 
July 1, 1860, and payable in fifteen years, in the State of New 
York, with interest at the rate of seven per cent, per annum, pay- 
able annually in New York, to the amount of one hundred andflffy 
thousand dollars, and which is the whole amount of the issue of 
said bonds, and which bonds are to be paid for at the rate of eighty- 
five per cent, of their par value. 



892 PBOOEBDIUQB IN XOX 

195,600, of fudd bonds are deliyered to the Seoretary of the 

Interior at this time, and he has paid to the State of Kansas, on 

aoooont of the same, the snm of $65,000 ; and no further sum ii 

to be paid until the residue of said bonds shall be delivered, when 

the balance of the purchase money shall be paid. 

CALEB B. SMITH. 

R. 8. STBVBNS. 

Department of the Interior, Dec. 19, 1861. 

The State of Kansas is here used for the purposes of Mr. Steyena' 
speculation. But eight j-seven thousand dollars of bonds were at 
that, time the property of the State, and as to the rest of the one 
hundred and fifty thousand dollars, Mr. Stevens has transformed the 
sovereignty into a stock-broker. Eighty-seven thousand dollars of 
these bonds are now in the Department of the Interior. We have 
received pay for but about fifty-six thousand, and under the con- 
tract we cannot receive a dollar for the remaining thirty-one thou- 
sand until we go into the market and buy up our own bonds and 
fiilfil our contract. It is hard enough upon the people to pay the 
taxes necessary to support the government without raising a capital 
BOW to purchase back her bonds, at par, which she issued within 
the year at seventy per cent. We cannot rescind the contract, for 
we have not the money we have received to pay back. Thus ingeni- 
ously has this financial agent of the State conducted our matters, 
under the eye of the Auditor and Secretary of State. So long as 
Stevens got twenty-five per cent, on fifty-six thousand dollars he 
was safe. If he could complete the contract advantageously, he 
would do it, and appropriate the profits. The agent was to receive 
all the profits and the principal to bear all the losses. They eon- 
nived the idea of selling these bonds to the Seoretary of the Inter- 
ior before they left for Washington, yet they were as silent as the 
grave. This defendant, in his communications, sets the seal of 
secrecy on the lips of his confidential clerk and friend, Weer. His 
letters are in evidence, and his counsel dwell with charming earn- 
estness on their pious tenor. Let them have all the benefit of his 
patriotic invocations to the Deity, and then these letters show a 
singular anxiety to keep from the people of Kansas a transaction 
in which every one of them was as much interested as the defend- 
ant. If their business and intentions were honest would they have 
feared publicity ? What harm would it have done if every bond 
issued by the State, and in the hands of private parties, had been 
sent to Washington, or even to the Secretary of the Interior 1 His 



IMPIAOHMSKT 0A8S8. 88S 

object was to seonre the control of the whole issue. This object 
certainly would hare been facilitated, rather than retarded, by hay- 
ing it known that the people could get eighty-fire per cent., or any 
other reasonable price^ for the bonds which they held. The Secre- 
tary of the Interior did not advise secrecy. His negotiation was 
the pnblic act of a public officer. No I this secrecy was another of 
those indices which mark the character of the whole transaction. 
It had a double purpose. To preyent the remonstrance and inter- 
ference of the people, and to forward the scheme of their real prin- 
cipal, Mr. Steyens. If the matter could be kept a secret, Bteyens 
could buy up the bonds, and in the name' and by the authority of 
the State, fleece individuals as he had already the community. It 
shows the complicity and the conspiracy which we have charged.' 
The bonds remain the property of the State, subject to the uncer- 
tain and shifting claim of Mr. Stevens upon them, up to about the^ 
20th of December. These bonds were dated in July, 1861, with 
coupons for the semi-annual interest. The first of these ooipons 
become, by their terms, due on the first of January, 1862. TheB» 
coupons are generously intrusted to Mr. Stevens by the State oftoen.^ 
They make no inquiry or stipulation in regard to them when they 
consent to receive sixtyper cent. Stevens sepamtes the oonpona 
from all the bonds and pays the amount of them, himself, out of 
the sixty per cent, coming to the State. This amounts to the prett|r 
sum of three thousand dollars. The honesty of this transaotio* 
has, thus far, failed to find a vindicator upon this fioor. You — ^th# 
people of the State — ^have paid three thousand dollars interest oa 
bonds which were constructively in your own treasury. 

While these transactions are being consummated, these men, thea 
present, in the eye of the law, managing the whole matter, say thai 
they did not know what Steyens was getting for the bonds — did nol 
know to whom or when he sold them, although they suspected— -did 
not know what became of the bonds — in fact knew nothing but 
Stevens. If you believe these men, the heathen fatalist, before his 
wooden idol, had more of "free agency'' than they in the presence 
of Stevens. Olay, in the hands of the potter, was not more plastic 
than they. Stevens' offer and contract were among the publie 
records of the Interior Department. They, the legaUy accredited 
agents of the State, employ a subordinate, giying him all their 
powers, and more than they ever possessed, and never by word or 
sign sought to know how he was exercising those powezi , or t^ 
•lamine the stipulations made by him, on behalf of the State. 



SSi PROCSSDINaS IM THS 

They neyer eyen aaked Stgyens. Their crwn private bonds were in 
StevenB^ hinds, and yet, such was their childlike confidence, they did 
not even ask or inquire in regard to them. All this may be true ; 
but if true, was not their blindness willful — ^their carelessness pre- 
meditated and criminal ? A man may not plead his ignorance of 
fact, when it is his duty to know and he has ayoided knowledge. 
They are estopped from denying that they did not know this whole 
transaction. The means of knowledge were within their reach and 
they willfully shut out the light. We have a right to say they 
knew it, and they have no right to deny it. To Topeka they return 
before the session of the Legislature, and yet, within the annual 
message of the GKiyernor, or in the report of the Auditor, is there 
o*e word about this great financial achieyement? The first report 
of this transaction^ which reaches the representatiyes of the people, 
eomes through rumor, and not, till the aid of the machinery of an 
uiyestigating committee is inyoked, are the facts and terms, in regard 
to this arrangement^ brought to light. Thus the prominent features 
of thb branch of the case present themselyes to my mind. I would 
be willing to risk the case on the gentlemen's own interpretation of 
die law, and leave it with you, who have followed me through the 
dark and devious ways trod by this defendant^ to say if human 
testimony, in such a case, can establish moral guilt, whether he is 
not morally as well as legally guilty. Remember the source Arom 
which our evidence has, of necessity, been drawn. Every word of 
Hillyer, which implicated Robinson, implicated himself, and the 
instinct of self preservation is too strong, at least in a weak man's 
breast, not to influence and color his testimony. Such operations 
do not beget honesty, as is evidenced by Hillyer's transaction with 
Weir. He took his bonds to sell for him. He got seventy per 
cent for them — ^paid Weir sixty per cent.; and theui after the 
investigating committee met, and he was about to be exposed, he 
pud the other ten per cent. 

StevenSi so prominent in all this sohemCi would hardly be dis* 
])osed to betray his tools. Men who contemplate crime, make no 
public proclamation of their intentions on the street. To cover 
their tracks is their aim. Like all conspiracies, this one is difficult 
of proof. They can never be shown by positive testimony, but 
must always be wrought out from circumstanoes. But we are tdd 
that we have failed to prove a motive— we have traced no money 
into this d^fendant'^pocket. Inever, for amomefit, dreamed that,if 



IMKAOHlffmT OAtBB. dSS- 

tkeae men had been paid to aansl in deft«ading the ^ State, thej 
wonld confess it. I know not that they reoeiyed a single dollar ; 
it is not material as affecting the question of their guilt, although 
it might change its degree. It may have been a suggestion — a 
nod— a hint. It may have been oonreyed in some such ingenious 
way, that these gentlemen, so liable to mistakes, haye mistook its 
source. They may^ wiUi criminal and careless- prodigality, have 
emptied the coffers of the State into the pockets of their friend.. 
The great, black fact is, that the State, through the instrumentality 
of this defendant, has been defrauded. 

If, then, I hare succeeded in shewing you tkat the law forbid 
the sale of these bonds at less than seventy per cent., that John W. 
Robinson sold them for less than serenty per cent., and that he 
intended to sell them for less than seyenty per cent., I claim that' I 
have made out a case of misdemeanor in ofice, substantially aa 
charged in the first Article of Impeachment. In pronouncing him 
guilty, you do not say that eveiy allegation is proved, but you do 
say that enough of the matters charged in the article have been, 
proved to constitute a miBdemeaaor. This is Uie rule even in an 
indictment, and it is every where laid down that charges preferred 
upon trials of impeachment are to be construed with the utmost 
liberality. But I claim that we have proved every word of this 
article. If we have not, by facts and oireuaastaaees, shown a guilty 
knowledge on the part of Uiis defetadant, we have placed him in a 
position where the law charges him with knewledf^B. At any rate, 
he knew that the beiid8 could be sold for more than sixty per cent.,, 
aa wc halve proved by all the cireumstaftees, and h^. the testimony of 
Billyer» We are not bound to dbow that he knew- the price to a. 
cent, as we have charged it^ say. more than is the prosecutor in an« 
indictment for larceny bound to ehow the value oi the article stolen, 
to be as alleged. Does not the evidence show that this illegal act 
was done secretly, as charged in. Article 2 J, Upon the same prlnci^ 
ple9 for which I have contended. tha( the charges in the first article 
are made out, I claim that you must, convict under Article 8. We 
have made out a misdemeanor substantially, if not literally, aa 
.charged in thia article* . The gist of the offense here charged, is 
t^at he permitted StcvonB to tal^e the coupons^ the property of the 
StattCi and conv<^ them into . money for his own, use. The only 
defense, is tecih^iagal, not aabvUntial. They seek an acquittal upon 
immaterial di^ta, and not upon the facte. 

Article 4, charges a misdemeanor. It charges a usurpation of 



3S6 PROOUDINQB IN THB 

power in offie^ and there is no pretense that it is not proved. That 
there was a oonspiraey substantially as charged in Article 5, this 
testimony indubitably establishes. How else can you reconcile the 
t^onstant intermeddling of Sterens with these bonds — ^the lack of an 
attempt even to sell them to any other person-^-the mysterious trip 
to Washington — Sterens' equally mysterious appearance there — ^the 
illegal contracts, willfully entered into between him and Hillyer and 
the defendant— the feigned signature of the Oovomor to an instru- 
ment in aid of their illegal enterprise — ^the secrecy with which it 
was conducted — ^the earnestness with which this defendant devoted 
himself to Stevens' interests — save upon the hypothesis that there 
was a preconcerted arrangement and agreement between these 
parties to do what they did. 

[Mr. Stinson here read authorities, and commented upon the law 
in regard to conspiracy.] 

Take this testimony and weigh it carefully, and ii under the law 
and the evidence you can say <* not guilty" upon these charges, then 
so be it But if you are disposed to exercise the quality of mercy 
t6wards this defendant, remember that mercy to him may be cruelty 
to the State, and that this midahe unpunished may be but a piece- 
dent for others, and the next Legislatore may have to investigate 
another and additional issue of one hundred and fifty thoutend 
dollars of bonds, made under a mistake of law, equally plausible 
with the one which is attempted to be shown here. 

While on the subject of bonds, may it please the Honorable 
<;ourt, I will depart from the order in which the articles are num- 
l>ered, and beg your attention to the charge in regard to the war 
bonds, contained in Article 6. The h/ots averred in this article an 
not denied. This defendant did countersign fbrty thousand dollais 
of war bonds. The law und^r which these bonds were issued, mads 
as follows : 

Chaptbr Lin. — ^An Act to authorise the State of Kansas to 
borrow money, to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, and to 
defend the State in time of war. 
3e ii enacted py the Legidature of ike State of Katuae : 

Section 1. That the treasurer of this State be and be is hereby 
authorised, to borrow the sum of twenty thousand dollars, or so 
much thereof as may be necessary, to repel invasion, suppran insur- 
rection, and to defend the State in time of war; but the money thus 
raised shall be applied exclusively to the object for which the loaa 
Is hereby authorised. 



IMPBAOHlfJUIT OA0B8. 887 

See. 2. That the treaanrer shall prepare bonds, in annul net leaa 
than three hundred dollars, to the full amount of said loan, with 
suitable devices, to prevent counterfeiting ; which said bonds shall 
be signed by the Governor and Treaaurer, countersigned bj the 
Seoretaiy of State, and shall have the seal of the State of Karnna 
attached, and registered by the Auditor of State, and shall be paya- 
ble in two years from the time said loan shall be eflbcted, and shall 
bear interest from said time, at the rate of ten per cent per annum, 
Haid interest payable annually at the office of the Treasurer of thin 
State. 

Sec. 3. That the loan authorised herein shall be msde upon the 
bonds specified and provided for in section two of this act. 

Sec. 4. It shall be the duty of the prq|>er officers of State to cause 
to be levied and collected, each and every year^ a tax sufficient to 
pay the annual interest on said debt ; and the principal thereof, 
when the same shall become due, and the proceeds of Raid taxes are 
hereby specifically appropriated to the payment of said principal and 
interest. 

Sec. 5. The faith and credit of the State of Kansas are hereby 
pledged for the repayment of said prineipal and interest, when the 
ume shall beoome due and payable. 

See. 6. That this act shall take effect and be in force firom and 
.after its publioalion ) and, immediately after this act shall receive 
the signature of the Governor, it shall be the duty of the Secretary 
of State to publish it in some newspaper published at Topeka, 
Kansas, at least one time, which shall be deemed a sufficient pub- 
lication. 
Approved, May 7| 1861. 

It would seem that a law so plain would hardly need the ud of a 
legal interpreter, and that all efforts, to find a meaning different 
from that so simply expressed, must result in confusion. By com- 
parison with the law in regard to the seven per cent, bonds, it will 
be seen that that act was '^ to authorize the negotiation of bonds." 

This is " to borrow money." The treasurer is authorised to 
borrow twenty thousand dollars. The loan ereated by borrowtng 
twenty thousand dollars is of course twenty thousand dollars. The 
treasurer is authorised to prepare bonds to the '' amount of said 
loan.'' Yon authorise a man to borrow one hundred dollan for yom^ 
and give your note fbr the amount tff the loan, could he, under thalf 
authority, okimthat he had a right to sign a note fcr three kundred 



388 p&ooxsDuro8 ir ths 

doUaiSy and aell it for oii<a hundred ; yet that ib tkis case. From 
oontemporaneons acta let oa gather the intention of the Legislature. 
The seyen per cent, bonds were payable in fifteen years. The war 
bands to be issued for money borrowed were payable in two years 
£Eom this date, with interest at ten per cent. The Legislature 
limited the price of the seven per cents, at seventy cents on the 
dollar, and ean it be belieyed that they intended to put it in the 
power of any person to dispose of the war bonds at forty per cent ? 
Qov. Shannon has called the attention of the Court to act of Con- 
gress passed in 1814. While there b some similarity between the 
first section of this act^ and the first section of the one now under 
examination, yet it will be seen that the whole tenor and contem- 
plation of the law are diffei^nt. The Secretary of the Treasury is to 
receive bids for the bonds to be issued, and to report to Congress the 
amount for which they shall be sold. There are no such provisions 
in our law. Even the gentleman's congressional researches have 
friled to show that the Secretary of the Treasury issued more than 
the amount of the loan. Here forty thousand dollars of bonds 
have been issued under this law^ and they have derived their 
authenticity and vitality from the act of this defendant in placing 
his official signature — ^his warrant of their legality and genuineness 
upon them. Yet, it is claimed, that as he is a mere ministerial 
afficer, in thia particular, it waa his duty to sign everything which 
was brought to him. (Jov. Shannon brings here a '*strag^ing 
Missouri case/' and we are obliged to trust to the infirmity of human 
recollection for the report, to support the monstrous doctrine that 
even though this law did not authoruBC the issue of more than 
twenty thousand dollars of bonds, yet the courts, by mandamus, 
would compel the ministerial officer whose duty it was to sign these 
bonds, to sign as many as might be brought to him, r^;ardlesa of 
the law. Suppose Robinson, when he had signed twenty thousand 
dollars of war bonds, had refused to sign more, b there any judge 
b Christendom, or in heathendom either, who would have com- 
pelled him to lend hb aid to a plain violation of law. 

Let us hope, for the credit of Missouri, that she has heresuffisred 
from the misconceptions or the lack of recollection of her reporter 
in thb behalf. 

I have alwaya snppoeed that even miniaterial oflieers were ae- 
eomtabls beingi, and I know they have bean so held every where, 
^seapl^ perhsfa, in Missouri. These bond«, to be isBoed formonej 



IHFBAOHMSIfT 0A8B8. 889 

bovrowed, were aaerifioMi, to the man who hai racked out the finao- 
oud lifts of the State, at forty per cent. Thirty-one thousand were 
0old, and the j yielded^ when melted down in StcTens' patent crucible, 
twelve thousand four hundred dollars. But we are told that we 
have virtually abandoned this charge, because the House did not 
impeach Button, the Treasurer, who in this defense figures as the 
greater criminal. I know not what induced the House to stay its 
hand, when Mr. Dutton was reached. Perhaps they were weary of 
their labors in cleaning the Augean stables of corruption into which 
the ezeeutiye officers of the government had been converted. 
Perhaps this simple lapse of the TreasuMr seemed almost a virtue 
when compared with the iUegality—the fraud — the corruption which 
seemed to mark every step of this defendant's official career. At 
any rate, this defendant cannot be lugged out of this court on the 
broad shoulders of Treasurer Dutton 

*' JU Bbmm old AseliifM bon." 

Has the State suffered any damage by this act 1 These bonds 
were sold in June — thirty-one thousand dollars of them. They are 
payable in two years, that is, in June, 1868. Two years interest, at 
ten per cent., will then make the whole debt over thirty-six thou- 
sand dollars. For the use of twelve thousand four hundred dollars 
for two years, the poor struggling State of Kansas has to pay over 
thirty-six thousand dollars— one hundred per cent. Tes ! we were 
paying one hundred per cent, on over eight thousand dollars of this 
money, when it was constructively, at least, in the Treasury from 
June to January. 

Gov. Stanton. — But the expenditures which, this loan was intended 
to meet had been made. 

Mr. Stinson. — ^I know that may have been, but the money was 
there, and the people were paying one hundred per cent, on it. 
Four thousand dollars for the poor privilege ^ having eight thou-> 
sand being idle finr six months in the Treasury. Away with thia 
shabby plea of State necessity, and let thia scandalous infamy out 
in the light. Oo home, if you in cpnsoienoe ean^ aiid tell to the 
poor farmer, who out on the lone pndrie, through sun-shine and 
storm, is enduring toil and deprivation^ that he may rear for himself 
and family a. home — go tell the labdter, b^nding^over his mai^ tasks, 
ihat he may efce out painfUlly his own and his ehOdnaf s daily 
bread, that though the law has been violated — ^Ihe Treasury plun^r 
dered-— usel^fli debts inoiumd, and the fltaite%ou|id t^ the payneni 



MO PBOCBSDIMOfl IN THB 

of intereflt at one hundred per oent., end that taxes for all these 
things are to be added to their heavy burdens, and yet you ean find 
no guile in these State officers. These bonds were worth par — ^they 
were sold at ninety-five per cent., and yet all sorts of incompetent, 
irrelevant and pointless testimony has been adduoed here to show 
that they had no value. 

I leave the sixth article with you, without comment. 
Upon the last article, I have but a word te offer. To borrow 
a metaphor from Gov. Shannon, this printing business is but a 
shrub of rascality, growing at the foot of the stately mountain 
of fraud, we have been explonng. Tho well known and almoei 
proverbial proclivities of printers to fatten off the public printing, 
induced the framers of th^constitutipn to attempt to prevent the 
evil, by providing that the public printing should be let to the 
highest bidder. The object being to i^cure competition, and pre- 
vent extravagant prices being paid. We find in the transaction 
referred to io the last article, that this object was hardly attained. 
Trask & Lowman had bid for the State printing — their bid wss the 
lowest, and they were entitled to the contract. They handed in a 
good bond, to secure the faithful performance of their contract. 
Gov. Shannon here takes fire, and in a strange and most incompre- 
hensible manner charges down on Trask k Lowman with wholesale 
accusations of fraud. He talks like an expert — says the bid was 
too low, and was put in to cheat somebody else. The only reply to 
all this is, that theie is no testimony showing or hinting at jmy 
fraud on the part of these men. I will put my testimony against 
Gov. Shannon in this matter, and answer for them as honest men in 
this transaction. Having got the bond in the office, we have to rely 
on the testimony of Mr. Oummings, who though a good, is not what 
is termed a swift witness. He is not one of those communicative 
gentlemen; who rush into a court of justice and unbosom them- 
selves of all they know, unsolicited. He is indeed reserved ; yet 
he faithAilly, and truly, I doubt not, answered all my questions. 
Prom him we learn that this bond of Trask k Lowman caused no 
little trepidation among the erafl. Quite a number of those inter- 
ested met in the Secretary's office, and there openly — the Secretary 
being sometimes present — ^were endeavoring to persuade Trask to 
withdraw his bond— the bond which he had no right to withdraw, 
beoause it had become the property of the State. While this eveiy 
way appropriate disousaon is going on, the bond lies conveniently 
•o a table, within reaoh. The bond disappears, and Oummings, 



IMFKAOHMSKT CA8X8. 841 

friih tlie eOBMnt of the SeeretMry, nuMs kis bid from sixty-fire oenti 
to one doUer per ^oiuMuid ems. 

If notking more, this transactioo shows the extreme recklessness 
with which the business of the office of this defendant was managed. 

And now my task is done ; and, in eonclnsion, I can bat again 
express my regret that the House of Representatives and the State 
of Kansas have not been more ably represented in this important 
branch of the proceeding. If the evidence does not convince, 
beyond a reasonable doubt, of the guilt of this man, then send him 
forth to the world with every stain upon his fame wiped away, and 
give him the benefit of that sympathy which is the due of a 
wronged and persecuted man. But be just to the State, as you 
are merciful to him, and if his crime — ^h» misdemeanor — ^is proved, 
sternly pronounce your righteous judgment. If the guilty now 
escape, corruption will boil and bubble in your State government, 
until the people shall rise, in their majesty and might, and, with 
relentless hands, purge and purify their offices. If this defendant 
b guilty, I stand here for the people of Kansas and demand your 
judgment. If he is guilty, brand him with your blighting con- 
demnation; and let him stand, like the tree which Christ cursed on 
his way to Jerusalem, blasted, blackened, and withered — a monu- 
ment and a warning, in all coming time, of the just yet terrible 
retribution which the State of Kansas inflicts upon her unworthy 
and faithless officers. 

On motion, the Senate adjourned. , 



TBNTH DAY. 

SXNATX OhAMBSR, ) 

Thursday, June 12, 1862, 9 o'clock A. M. J 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court of 
Impeachment, met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the chair. 

Boll eailed. Quorum present. 

Absentees — ^Messrs. Hoffman, HoUiday, Lappin, Lynde, HoDow- 
•11 and Morrow. 
Journal of yesterday read and ^iproved. 



MB PBOaU0INW IN XBM 

On motion of Mr. Oobb, the Senate went into ezeeniiTe 
for the conflideration of the case of State of Bjuisas against John 
W. Bobinson. 

Afternoon spent in execntive session. 

On motion, Senate adjourned. 



ELBYENTH DAT. 

Senate Chambbb, \ 

Friday, June 18, 1862, 9 o'clock, A. M. j 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court of 
Impeachment, met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the chair. 

Boll called. Quorum present. 

Absenteesr-Messrs. Bssick, Hoffman, Hubbard, Lynde, Morrow, 
Sleeper and Stevens. 

Journal of yesterday read and approyed. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, the Senate went into ezecutiye session 
ibr the further consideration of the case of the State of Kansas 
against John W. Robinson. 

After some time spent therein, the doors were thrown open, and 
the Senate resumed its usual order of business. 

On motion, the hour of three P. M. was appointed for a final 
decision of the case of the State versus John W. Robinson. 

On motion, the Senate adjourned. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Two o'oLoeK P. M. 
The Senate met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the chair. 

Roll called. Quorum pteeent. 



IMPSAOHMBNT 0A8M. 84S 

Mr. BteTena called for the reeding of the report of the special 
coDimittee on printing. 

The Secretary then read the report.* 

Mr. Ingalla. — ^Ma. President : It ia my opinion that, after the 
presentation of this resolution, the whole matter was referred to the 
committee on printing, of which I am a member. No action hu 
been taken bj that, committee, and, to my knowledge, they have 
not held a meeting since. It will be remembered that, on the same 
day after this report was presented, the reporters, appointed by the 
President, sent in their resignation, on the ground that it would be 
impossible for them to prepare the matter for the use of the printers 
each day, as required by the resolution. There the matter rested; 
and I do not think this work can be placed in the hands of the 
printer, without some further action on the part of the Senate. 

The President. — ^The Senator is correct in his statement. At the 
same time a suggestion was made by the Senator from Leayenworth, 
Mr. McDowell, after the statement was made by the reporters, that 
the depositions and testimony be prepared and printed as fast as 
possible, for the use of Senators. The Senate acquiesced in this, 
and I, therefore, employed copying clerks, and placed the matter im 
the hands of the printers. 

Mr. McDowell. — ^I introduced a resolution to the effect as stated 
by the President; but as the Senate agreed to the suggestion therein 
contained, it was not voted upon. 

Mr. Sterens. — Mr. President : My object in calling attention 
to thb subject, was to ascertain the position in which Senators con- 
sidered it stood. I met Mr. Cummings, the printer, in the hall of 
the Ritchey Block; after the adjournment of the session this morur 
ing. I spoke to him in relation to the printing of my own testimony 
— a matter which Senators will remember came before them. I was 
informed that Mr. Cummings had not receiyed any of the copy of 
that testimony, and stated to him that the Senate did not wish it 
printed. Mr. Cummings disputed the right of the Senate to control 
the printing, after it had been put into his hands. Supposing it to 
be perfectly competent for the Senate to control its own printing, 
or to suppress matter not already published, I determined to bring 
the subject before the Senate. I haye no action to propose, and am 
perfectly satisfied with the explanation of the Chair. 



844 PROOKKMIVGS IN THE 

The oaae of tlie impeaohment of John W. Robinson, Secretarj of 
State of Kansas, was then resumed. 

High Court of Impeachment. ^ 

State of Kansas, I 

against | 

John W. Bobinson. j 

The Managers on the part of the House of Representatires at- 
tended, aooompanied by the Attorney General, Hon. S. A. Stinson. 

John W. Robinson, the respondent, by his counsel, also attended. 

By the President pro tern. — The hour of three haTing arrived, 
the Senate will now pronounce judgment in the case of John W. 
Robinson, Secretary of State for the State of Kansas. 

The first Article of Impeachment was read by the Secretary pro 
tern. The President pro tem. then took the opinion of the members 
of the Court respectively, in the form following : 

Mr. , how say you ? Is the respondent, John W. Robinson, 

Ouilty or Not Ouilty of a High Misdemeanor, as charged in thu 
Article of Impeachment ? 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty, in response to the Chair: 
Meesrs. Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Curtis^ Bssick, Holliday, Hubbard, 
Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, McDowell, Osbom, Rankin, Rees, 
Roberts, Sleeper and Spriggs — ^17. 

Those voting Not Guiltt were Messrs. Barnett, Ingalls, Den- 
Bian and Lappin — 4. 

When Mr. Bayless' name was called, he rose in his place and 
said: 

Mr. President : — I vote Guilty upon these charges for this rea- 
son : Where the respondent, John W. Robinson, is charged with 
knowing what Mr. Stevens, his agent, received for said bonds, vis : 
eighty-five cents on the dollar, the law holds that John W. Robin- 
son is presumed to know what his agent, Mr. Stevens, sold these 
bonds for, to wit : eighty-five cents upon every dollar of said bonds. 

When Mr. Cobb's name was called, he rose in his place and said : 
Mr. President: — ^I hold it due to myself to state that I believe 

this article to charge a breach of oflicial trust, and in that light I 

vote Guilty. 

When Mr. ConnelFs name was called, he said! 
Mr. President: — I vote Guilty for these reasons: l«t. That 
John W. Robinson employed an agent to dispose of these bonds 



IMPXAOHMXNT CA8I8. 346 

witiiMit aathoriiy of law, and in bo doing he became responsible for 
liiB acts. 2d. That if Stevens acted as agent of the State, he wai* 
morally and legally boand to return to the State the whole amonni, 
«igkty4lTe per oentum, for which he sold the bonds; if he was not 
the agent of the State, and had bought the bonds of the psrties 
authorised to dispose of them, they were certainly guilty of misde« 
meanor, in disposing of them contrary to law. 8d. That in consent- 
ing to receiye sixty cents on the dollar from Stevens, whether as- 
agent or owner of the bonds, they violated the law, knowingly and 
willfully, and are, therefore, responsible. 

When Mr. Keeler's name was called, he rose and said : 
Mr. Pbxsidxnt : — ^My reason for voting Guilty is that I believe 
John W. Bobinson guilty of a breach of official trust. 

When Mr. Stevens' name was called, he rose and said : 
Mr. Prxsidsnt : — I respectAilly ask the Senate to excuse me 
from voting. I ask this, sir, not because I have any doubt what- 
ever of the innocence of the respondent, for I have no such doubt }. 
but because I am charged, in the article, as being a joint actor and 
participator in the commission of the alleged High Misdemeanor, 
and my vote would be, indirectly, judging upon my own acts. For 
this reason alone, I ask to be excused. 

Mr. Stevens was excused from voting. 

Whereupon, the President declared that seventeen Senators hav- 
ing voted Guilty and four Not Guilty, John W. Robinson is pro- 
nounced, by the Senate of the State of Kansas, Guilty of the charges* 
contained in the first Article of Impeachment exhibited against him 
by the House of Representatives. 

The Secretary then read the second Article of Impeachment, and 

the President proceeded to take the opinions of the court in the 

preceding form. 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty in response to the Chair : 

Messrs. Bayless, Cobb, Curtis, Knowles, Lambdin, McDowell, 

Oebom, Rankin, Roberts and Spriggs. — 10. 

Those voting Not Guiltt, were Messrs. Bamett, Connelly 
Denman, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Lappin, Rees 
and Sleeper. — 11. 

Whereupon the President declared that ten gentlemen having 
voted Guilty, and eleven gentlemen not Guilty, John W. Robinson, 
Secretary of State, is acquitted by the Senate of the State of 



346 PBO0ESDINO8 IN THE 

Kansas of the oliarges as contained in the second Article of Im- 
peachment, exhibited against him by the House of Representatives. 

The Secretary then read the third Article of Impeaohment, and 
the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the 
previous form. 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty in response to the Ohair : 
Messrs. Cobb, Curtis, Essick^ £nowles^ Lambdin, McDowell, Rankin 
and Spriggs. — 8. 

Those voting Not Guilty, were Messrs. Barnett, Bayless, Gon- 
nell, Denman, HoUiday, Habhard, Ingalk, Keeler, Lappin, Osbom, 
Rees, Roberts and Sleeper. — IS. 

Whereupon, the President declared that eight gentlemen having 
Yoted Guilty, and thirteen gentlemen Not Guilty, John W. Robin- 
son^ Secretary of State, is acquitted by the Senate of the State of 
Kansas of the charges as contained in the third Article of Impeach- 
ment, exhibited against him by the House of Representatives. 

The Secretary then read the fourth Article of Impeachment, and the 
President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the previous 
form. 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty, in response to the Chair : 
Messrs. Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Curtis and McDowell. — 6. 

Those voting Not Guilty, were Messrs. Denman, Essick, Holli- 
day, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, Osbom, 
Hankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper and Spriggs. — ^16. 

When Mr. Hubbard's name was called, he rose and said : 
Mb. President : — I desire to state in explanation of the vote I 
«m about to give, that while I have no doubt of the truth of Uie 
facts stated in this article, I do not think they constitute a hiffk 
mudemeanor, I therefore vote Not Guilty, . 

Whereupon, the President declared that five gentlemen having 
voted Guilty, anfl sixteen gentlemen Not Guilty, John W. Robin- 
son, Secretary of State, is acquitted by the Senate of the State of 
Kansas, of the charges as contained in the fourth Article of Im- 
peachment, exhibited against him by the House of Representatives. 

The fifth Article of Impeachment was then read by the Secretary, 
and the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the 
previous form. 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty, in response to the Chair : 



IlfPSAOHMBNT 0A8E8. 847 

Mesflrs. Bajless^ Cnrtifl, Snowies, Lambdin, McDowell, Roberts and 
flpriggs. — 7, 

Those voting Not Guilty, were Messrs. Barnett, Cobb, Connelli 
I>Btiman, Bssiek, HoUiday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Lappin, 
Osbom, Bankin, Rees and Sleeper. — 14. 

When Mr. Cobb's name was called he rose and said : 
Mr. Prbsidbnt :-^This seems to me to be a new article, charg- 
ing a conspiracy to cheat and defraud, and in explanation of my 
TOte, I will say, that I do not think the charge is proved. I there- 
fore vote. Not Guilty. 

Whereupon, the President declared that seven gentlemen having 
voted Gmilty, and fonrteen gentlemen Not Guilty, John W. Robin- 
son, Secretary of State, is acquitted by the Senate of the State of 
Kansas, of the charges as contained in the flfUi Article of Impeach- 
ment exhibited against him by the House of Representatives. 

The Secretary then read the sixth Article of Impeachment, and 
the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the 
previous form. 

Those voting Not Guilty, were Messrs. Barnett, Bayless, Cobb, 
Connell, Curtis, Denman, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, IngallSj 
Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, Osborn, Rankin, 
Rees, Roberts, Sleeper and Spriggs. — ^21, 

^ Whereupon, the President declared that no gentlemen having 
voted Guilty, and twenty-one Not Guilty, John W. Robinson, Secre- 
tary of State, is acquitted by the Senate of the State of KansMi, 
of the charges as contained in the sixth Article of Impeachment 
exhibited against him by the House of Representatives, 

The Secretary then read the seventh Artiele of Impeachmeat| 
and the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the 
previous form. 

Those voting Not Guilty, were Messrs. Barnett, Bayless, Cobb, 
Connell, Curtis, Denman, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, 
Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin. Lappin, McDowell, Osborn, Rankis, 
Rees, Roberts, Sleeper and Spriggs. — ^21. 

When Mr. Cobb's name was called he rose and said : 
Mr. President : — ^I vote Not Guilty on the ground, that the 
charge contained in this article is not a misdemeanor. 

Whereupon, the President declared that no gentleman having 
voted Guilty, and twenty-one Not Guilty, John W. Robinson, Sec- 



848 PB0CXSDIN08 IN THB 

retaiy of State, is aoquitted by the Senate of the State of EanaaSy 
of the charges as contained in the seventh Artiele of Impeaoh* 
ment, exhibited against him by the House of Bepresentatives. 

The Secretary then read the eighth Article of Impeachment^ and 
ihe President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the 
prerious form. 

Those voting Not Guilty, were Hessrs. Barnett, Bayless, Oobb, 
Oonnell, Curtis, Denman, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, IngaUs, 
Keeler, Knowles^ Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, Osbom, Eankis, 
Rees, Roberts, Sleeper and Spriggs. — 21. 

Whereupon, the President declared that no gentlemen having 
voted Guilty, and twenty-one gentlemen Not Guilty, John W. 
Bobinson, is acquitted of the charges as contained in the eight 
Article of Impeachment, exhibited against him by the House of 
Bepresentatives. 

, The President then rose and recapitulated the votes thus : 

On the first Article of Impeachment, seventeen gentlemen having 
voted OuiUjfy and four Not GuUfy ; on the second, ten gentlemen 
having voted OuHtjff and eleven gentlemen Not Guilty ; on the 
third, eight gentlemen having voted GuUty^ and thirteen Not 
GutUtf ; on the fourth, five gentlemen having voted GutUjfj and 
sixteen Not Guilty ; on the fifth, seven gentlemen having voted 
Guilty , and fourteen gentlemen Not Guilty ; on the sixth, twenty- 
one gentlemen having voted Not Guilty ; on the seventh, twenty- 
one gentlemen having voted Not Guilty ; on the eighth, twenty-one 
gentlemen having voted Not Guilty — ^it therefore appears, that 
John W. Bobinson is found Guilty of High Misdemeanor in office, 
as charged in the first Article of Impeachment, and is acquitted on 
second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth Articles. 

The President then proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in 
the following form : 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court «f 
Impeachment, having found the respondent, John W. Bobinson, 
Secretary of State for the State of Kansas, guilty of a High Mis- 
demeanor ; is it the opinion of the Court that John W. Bobinson 
should be removed firom office ? 

Mr. Holliday moved that the Senate go into Bxecutive Session, 
which motion was lost. 

The question recurring on the Proclamation of the President, 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. S49 

those gentlemen Toting in the affinnatiye, were Messrs. Bamett^ 
Bayless, Oobh, Oonnell; Cnrtis, Essiek, Hnbbard, Keeler, Knowles, 
Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, Oabom, Rankin, Bees, Boberts, 
Sleeper and Spriggs. — 18. 

Those gentlemen Toting in the negatiye, were Messrs. Penman, 
HoUiday and Ingalls. — S. 

Whereupon the President declared that it is the judgment of thft 
Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Ooort of ImpeaoliH 
ment, that John W. Bobinson be, and is remoTed from the office of 
Secretary of the State of Kansas. 

The President then proceeded to take the opinion of the Senate 
in the following form : 

That the Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court 
of Impeachment, haying found John W. Bobinson Guilty of a 
High Misdemeanor, and having remoyed him ttcm office ; is it the 
opinion of the Senate that the said John W* Bobiasom, be di«}iiali- 
fied from holding an office of Profit, Honor or Trust, under 4he 
Constitution of the State of Kansas f 

Whereupon, the ayes and noes were taken,|and the feUowing gen* 
iieman voted in the affirmative, Mr. Knowlet.— *!. 

And those gentlemen voting in the negative were Messrs. Bamett, 
Bayless, Cobb, Gonaell, Curtis, Denman, Bssick, HoUiday, Hubbard. 
Ingalls, Keeler, Lambdiu, Lappin, McDowell, (Mbom, Bankin, 
Bees, Boberts, Sleeper and«Spriggs.^^. 

Whereupon, the President declared that one gentleman having 
voted in the affirmative, and twenty gentlemen in ibe negative } ii> 
is not the opinion of the Senate, that John W. Bobinson shall be 
disqualified from holding an office of Profit, Honor or Trust, under 
the Constitution of the State of Kansas. 

TBIAL OF GEOBGB S. HILLTBB. 

Messrs. Bayless, Cobb, Knowles, Lappin and Bankin came, 
forward and took the following oath : 

Ton, and each of you, do solemnly swear, that in all things per* 
tainiog to the trial of impeachment of George S. HiUyer, you will 
do impartial justice, according to ihe law and evidence^ so help 
youGkxl. 

The President— The Senate of the Sute of Kansas, sitting as a 
High Court of Impeaoh»ent| announeee its readiness to proceed 



860 P&OOXXDINGS IN THB 

witk the trial of George 8. Hillyer, Auditor of State of EaoBM. 
Are the attorneys ready T 

Attorney General. — ^BIe. FassiDSNT : By agreement of eoanael 
and the Board of Managers, all the eyidenee heretofore offered in 
the matters of impeachment of John W. Robinson, will be oon- 
ridered as evidence in this case, (except that of George S. Hillyer,) 
as fully as if the witnesses had l)|en sworn and testified in this case, 
and the depositions and documentary testimony had been offered and 
lead in this case. 

Present. — Hon. S. A. Stinson, Attorney General, and the Board 
of Managers on the part of the House of Representatiyes. 

Hon. F. P. Stanton, Wilson Shannon and George W. Smith, 
eounsel for Respondent. 

George S. Hillyer appeared in person. 

All parties announced themseWes ready to prooeed with the trial* 

O^eral J. 0. Stone oalled and sworn on part of the prosecution. 
Attorney General, — General, you reside in Leavenworth, I 
believe? 
A. Tea, sir* 

Q. Were you in Washington during the past season ? 
A. Tes, sir. 

Q« What time were you there ? 

A. I left Leavenworth about the fiM of December, and arrived 
in Washington three or four days after. 

Q« What do fou know in tegtad to the sale of bonds in Wash- 
ii^gton, laat winter ? 

A. I know nothing of it, but hearsay on the streets, or what was 
Udd me by the offioen. 

Q. What do you know from Hr. Hillyer in regard to it ? 

A. I met Mr. Hillyer, and mentioned the rumored sale of our 
bonds, telling him that, as I had been a great deal about Washing- 
ton, I would assist him if I could. He thanked me, and said he 
thought they would get along, and that Mr. Stevens was assisting 
them. After that, when I met him, he said they were getting 
along very well. Afterwards, that they had had a difficulty with 
the Secretary of the Treasury about it. 

Q. Was anything ever said to you by the Sti^t^ officers in relation 
%b this transaetioid ? 



IHPSACHMENT 0A8B8. 351 

A. No Aing tlMt I recoiled. 

Q. Bo you know aDjtbiDg further in relation to it ? 
A. Nothing farther 

Q. Ton were one of the commiBsioners appointed under the first 
act to negotiate the State honds, were you not ? 
A. Yes, Bir. 

0&088 XXAMINAHOH BT DBVBIISl. 

Mr. Stanton, — ^Will you ftate whether, during the negotiations^ 
you advised Oen. Lane to oppose them ? 

Witnesi.-^No, sir ; I advised him to be very cautious in the 
matter, as there would probably be an election for U. S. Senator in 
Kansas, and it would not do to allow money to be brought here till 
after that election. My reason fbr this was, that I heard Mr. 
Stevens was a candidate for the United States Senate, and I thought 
it would not be prudent to let him have that amount of money at 
that time. 

Mr. Stinson. — General Stone makes a statement that he deems it 
necessary for him to return to Leavenworth to«mornm morning ; 
therefore, we wish to examine him in the case of Govomor Rob- 
inson. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^We have nb objectian. 

^General Stone was then sworn and testified in the case of State 
of Kansas against Charles Robinson, Governor. 

On motion of Mr, Ingalls, the case of George S. fiillyer was 
postponed till to morrow morning. 

Mr. Stevens offered the following resolution : 

Retolvedj That witnesses in attendance at this trial be allowed 

the sum of dollars per day for each day's actual attendance, 

and the same mileage as is allowed officers for serving subpeuas. 
Accounts for attendance and mileage to be verified by oath of wit- 
ness, and approved by the President of the Senate. 

Mr. Ingalls. — Mk. President: I trust the Senate will give this 
matter careful consideration before taking final action. As one 
member of the Senate. I am earnestly opposed to defrauding the 
State, and oppressing the already over-burdened tax payers by any 
such action as that contemplated by the mover of this resolution. 
I entertain very serious doubts whether the witnesses for the defense 

•gst twaamewiMit cf trial of OhariMRobtaMD. 



3^2 PEOOBXDIMOS IN THS 

nhould be paid by the State at all ; certainly mot, usleea tkagr ka?e 
exeroiaed the privilege of subpena, with a yery frugal and guarded 
diBcretion. That thia has not been done ie a matter <^ eommen 
notoriety. The moat proAiae and inezplieable use of the authority 
of thia Court has been indulged in by aome of the attorneys for the 
respondents, and, I presume, that it is within the knowledge of 
OTory Senator that nearly all the inhabitants of Topeka and Shaw- 
nee county have been summoned to appear here as witnesses in one 
or the other of the cases before us. Soor^ of idlers and yagabonds 
have attended the opening of our session, from day to day, with the 
ATOwed purpose of drawing their fees horn the Treasury of the 
State. The adoption of the resolution proposed by the Senator 
from Douglas, will justify the defense in the course they hare 
adopted in summoning their pimps and minions, the loungers on 
the streets, hostlers, bar-keepers, hangers-on, and all the vile rabble 
that infest the purlieus of a capital. 

So far as the State is concerned the condition is diffirent. 
Through its House of BepresentatiTcs, it has ordered this prosecu- 
tion, appointed its agents, and for their conduct it must be held 
responsible. I therefixre moTc, as an amendment to the resolution. 
the following proTiso : 

jFVovu2mI, That no witnesses for the deftnse shall be allowed 
compensation except those actually called. 

Mr. Essick.— Mb. PuxsiDBirT : I call the attention of Senators 
to the fact that the witness must swear to his bill of expenses before 
the Secretary, and the same must be approTcd by the President. 
' There is also a law of the State regulating the amount to be paid 
%o witnesses, on the part of the State, when summoned by the Lag- 
islature. 

Mr. Ingalls. — ^I am credibly informed that there are persons in 
Topeka who declare they know nothing of the ease, and * yet will 
.Mtempt to collect their fees. 

Mr. Sterens. — ^Mb. Pbbsidbrt: Let me ask the Senator how he 
proposes to act in relation to witnesses who, in good faith, hsTS 
come here fWnn a distance 1 Some discrimination should be made, 
cTcn if they have not been called. 

Mr. Ingdls.— How is it possible to discriminate J It is to be 
regretted, but the innocent must suffer, some times, that the just 
thing may be done. 



XMPSACHMKNT GAS£8. 853 

Mr, Cobb. — ^Mb. President : I think that the appointment of a 
43ommittee to inyestigate the matter^ will be the best method to reach 
the oase. 

Mr. SteTeBS.^*MR. President : Some of the witnesses I haye 
alluded to have been here and have already sworn to their accounts. 
Others have gone, but expect to return, at some future day, and 
prove them in due form. 

Mr. Ingalls. — ^Mb. Pkksident : I am just informed that the 
counsel for the defenso intended to impeach Senator Lane, and that 
to accomplish this purpose thirty or forty witnesses were in attend- 
ance here from ],:iwrencG. From some cause, unknown, the inten- 
tion was abandoned. The witnesses were not called. They came 
from a distance. They attended in good faith, and the State is now 
to be asked to assume their expenses^ to the' amount of several 
hundred dollars — paying this exorbitant sum for the cheap vagaries 
and exploded theories of the defense. 

The suggestion of the Senator from Douglas is impraeticable. In 
the case of John W. Robinson, also, the number of witnesses sub- 
penaed was eighty-three, of whom only eight have been in attend- 
ance, and but two have been sworn. Under the Senator's resolution 
^he State may be compelled to pay more than two thousand dollars, 
for what should have cost not more than a hundred. I trust the 
Senate will not permit such an outrage to be consummated. 

Kr. Cobb.— Mr. President : I move, as a substitute, that the 
whole matter be referred to a committee of three, with instructions 
to report to-morrow morning. 

Mr. Stevens.— I withdraw my motion. 

Mr. HoUiday.— Mr. President : I think that Mr. Cobb's motion 
is the best offered. I have been informed by witnesses, brought 
her^ from a distance, that they knew nothing of the case, but they 
came in good faith, because subpenaed. Here is my friend Judge 
Wakefield — ^has been here every day of the session — and it is but 
fair that he should receive his fees. 

Mr. Cobb. — ^Mr. President : This committee will consider the 
plan offered by Mr. Stevens, or adopt some other just way. 

The substitute of Mr. Cobb prevailed. 

The chair appointed Messrs. Cobb, Hubbard and Sleeper, said 
^omnuttM. 
On motion, the Senate adjourned. 



354 PROOEEDINQB IN THX 



TWELFTH DAY. 

Senate Chamber, \ 

Saturday, June 14, 1862, 9 o'clock A. M. ) 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court of 
Impeachment, met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in the Chair. 

Roll called. Quorum present. 

Absentees. — ^Messrs. Den man, Essiok, Hoffman, HoUidaj, Lappin 
and Ljnde. 

Journal of yesterday read and approved. 

Present. — Hon. S. A. Stinson, and Board of Managers on the 
part of the House of Representatives. 

George S. Hillyer, the Respondent, appeared in person, attended 
by his counsel. 

Mr. Cobb, chairman of committee on the payment of witnesses' 
fees in the case of the State of Kansas, against John W. Robinson, 
made the following report : 

Mr. President : — ^Your committee to whom was referred the 
matter relating to auditing the claims of witnesses in attendance at 
this court of impeachment, would submit their report as follows : 
We recommend that a committee of three be appointed to investi- 
gate and audit all claims of witnesses subpenaed on the part of the 
defense, in the cases at bar, and not sworn, the sitting of which 
committee for such investigation, shall be at such times and places 
as they may adopt. 

> 

In case they approve a claim, they shall indorse the bill, stating 
the amount allowed in the indorsement which shall b^ signed by 
the chairman, and which approval shall be proof of its validity. 
The powers of this committee shall cease at the rising of this session 
of the Senate. 

That all other claims of witnesses be allowed as of course upon 
the usual and proper showing. That this committee be instructtd 
to allow the claims of no one except it appears that he has responded 
promptly and in good faith to the process of the Senate, and left 
his business and came here for that purpose. That the &ts and 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 355 

Biiteage of all witnesses be the same as that allowed by law in the 
District Courts. 

STEPHEN A. COBB, 

Chairman. 

Mr. Ingalls. — Mr. President: Is this committee to sit until the 
meeting of the next Legislature ? I understand that eighty-three 
witnesses have been subpenaed to appear here in the case of John 
W. Robinson alone^ which at two dollars per day, would amount to 
$2,000 or $25,00. I should think the Secretary, with some other 
gentlemen, might be authorized to audit these claims in vacation. 

Mr. Cobb. — ^The witnesses in the District Court must come up and 
swear to their accounts before judgment is entered. I am not 
willing to confer such unlimited authority on any one outside of 
this body, although I have entire confidence in our Secretary. 

Mr. Ingalls. — ^I made the suggestion for a good purpose, and not 
to afford any one an opportunity of either slandering or compliment- 
ing the Secretary. 

Mr. Stevens. — ^Mr. President : We have no right to make a ^ 

law for witnesses. We should pay the just accounts of all those 

who have been here. It is not likely that the President will audit 

the accounts of witnesses whose claims are bogus. Those who have 

been here in attendance and whose claims are not audited, may have 

their remedy in memorialiiing the next Legislature, or they can sue 

out a vyrit of man<fainu8. These decisions of yours do not make 

the law. Last winter, the House of Representatives entered into an 

agreement with several printers', whereby a less sum per thousand 

ems than their contract prioes was be paid them. Mr. Cummings 

of the Tojyeka Tribune, has lately sued out a writ of fnandamux 

before the Supreme Court, and compelled the State to pay him the 

full contract price, without regard to the conditions made by the 

legislative committee. The State can be compelled to pay these 

witnesses' fees. They were summoned in good faith, and those who 

have attended have a right to their dues. 

Mr. HoUiday. — ^I wish to ask the Senator from Wyandott, what 
will be done with the remainder of these aecouiits F 

Mr. Cobb. — The probability is that these claims will lay over till 
the meeting of the next Legislature. 

Mr. Stevens. — How can you compel witnesses to await the sitting 
of the Legislature, when they have a legal claim for fees 1 



356 PB00SEDINQ8 IN THB 

Mr. Essiok. — ^I am in favor of adding the President and Seoietarj 
to the committee. 

Mr. HoUiday. — ^This is good as far as it goes, but I will go 
farther. Let this committee submit the claims acted upon, to the 
Senate, and let the bills be prepared as usual, the whole Senate to 
be an investigating committee. I, therefore, offer the following 
amendment: 

Resolved, That when a claim is approved, that the committee 
shall report the same to the Senate for its approval or disapproval, 
and, if the same be approved, the usual order shall be drawn bj the 
Secretary and President. 

Mr, Stevens offered the following as an amendment to the amend- 
ment of Mr. HoUiday: 

Resolved, That the fees of witnesses shall be two dollars per daj, 
and mileage at the rate of ten cents per mile. 

The roll was called on the question, '^ Shall the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Douglas, to the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Shawnee, prevail V* Lost. 

The roll was called on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Shawnee. Lost, 

The question '* Shall the original report of the committee be 
adopted," resulted as follows : 

Gentlemen voting aye, were Messrs. Barnett, Bayleas, Cobb, 
Gonnell, Curtis, Denman, HoUiday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Eeeler, 
Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, Boberts, Sleeper and 
Spriggs.— 17. 

(Gentlemen voting in the negative, were Messrs. Bssiok, Rankin, 
Rees and Stevens. — 4. 

And so the report of the committee as submitted, was adopted. 

Mr. Barnett rose to a privileged question, and read the following 
statement : 

Mr. Prssidbnt : — Since the rendition of the judgment of die 
Senate yesterday, in the case of John W. Robinson, statements of 
a startling character have been made to myself and another Senator. 
Statements, which if true, must render the entire proceedings of 
this body, not only null and void, but disgrace the entire State ; 
that I feel compelled to bring the matter to the knowledge of the 
Senate, and insist that some action be taken thereon before another 
step is taken in the other cases, to be hereafter considered. 



IMPXAOHMSNT 0A8X8. 357 

It has been stated, Mr. President, that sometime during Thurs- 
day; the 12th inst., a Senator of this body, approached a gentleman 
of this city, (not a member of the Senate^) and told him that seven- 
teen Senators would, as matters then stood, yote to impeach John 
W. Robinson. But that he, (the Senator,) could control three or 
four Totes, and if he could be paid three thousand dollars in cash, 
he would get up in the Senate, advocate an acquittal, and thus 
secure it by means of the votes he could control. This Senator 
further stated that his vote alone would secure an acquittal, as but 
seventeen Senator's, including himself, could be induced to give a 
verdict of guilty, and that he would, for $8,000 in cash, vote for 
acquittal. 

During the afternoon of Thursday, the same person called on the 
Senator, and offered him $3,000 in scrip, in case his vote and in- 
fluence was cast as he proposed. The Senator .declined to take 
scrip, saying, ^^ it was not enough." Again, on Friday, at noon, 
the party called upon the Senator with $3,000 in cash, and told him 
he was ready to give it on the condition proposed by himself. The 
Senator replied, '^ It is too late." 

Mr. Barnett. — I wish this paper to go on the Journals, and the 
Senate to take action on it. These are grave statements, and if 
there is a member of this body of the character charged, the affair 
should be investigated. 

Mr. Curtis. — Mr. President : I should like to know if this 
Court was constituted to impeach itself ? If we listen to all the 
threats and rufhors that are, or may be set afloat^ we will have more 
on our hands than we can attend to. 

Mr. Barnett. — ^The gentleman who was conversing with me, said 
he was the person to whom the offer was made, and who offered the 
money. He did not give me the name of the Senator, and said he 
would not do it under any circumstances. 

Mr. Ingalls. — ^Mr. President : As I did not vote with the ma- 
jority, no suspicion can be attached to me, but, as a member of this 
Senate, I feel that a charge of so grave a nature, involving not only 
our own reputation^ but that the good name, family and fortune of 
a man, has been sacrificed for money, ought to be investigated at 
once. The matter deserves at our hands a serious and immediate 
investigation. It is our duty to demand from the Senator from 
Brown^ the name of his informant; and to summon the party to 



^58 PaOOSEBINQS IN THS 

appear before the Senate and testify as to this matter. While we 
are discussing preliminaries, it may be that the party is escaping to 
the Indian Reservation, beyond the jurisdiction of the Senate. Let 
OS have immediate action. 

Mr. Cobb. — ^I feel it due to myself to have this matter investi* 
gated. I am one who voted for the conviction of John W. Robin* 
son ; I did it conscientiously, and if there is one who voted dis* 
honestly, let us know him. 

Mr. Roberts. — ^Mr. President : I feel as though we ought to 
purge our own body before we proceed any further. 

Mr. Keeler. — ^Mb. President : I am one who voted for the con- 
viction of John W. Robinson. I think it waa a just judgment; but 
let us have an investigation ; for I now give notice that, if this 
matter is not cleared up, I will move for a reconsideration of the 
verdict of the Senate^ and ask for a new trial. 

Mr. Cobb submitted a resolution, appointing a committee of five 
to investigate the charges, and report to the Senate. 

Mr. Rankin. — ^Mr. President : I am opposed to the appointment 
of such a committee. Let us have an investigation here and im- 
mediately. I prefer the subject should come before the Senate, 
and, therefore, oppose the raising of the proposed committee. 

Mr. Hubbard. — Sir, the whole Senate is competent to examine 
this matter. Let us have it at once. We can as well attend to it 
in a body as otherwise. I trust that we shall postpone the trial of 
Mr. Hillyer, and proceed at once to examine into this grave charge. 

Mr. Denman asked for the reading of Mr. Oobb's resolution, whioh 
was done, and then withdrawn. 

On motion of Mr. Essick, the following order was adopted : 
Eesolvedy That the Senator from Brown be requested to inform 
the Senate of the name of the person with whom he had the con- 
versation referred to, and that the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed to 
bring him before this body immediately. 

Mr. Bamett. — ^The name of my informant is J. F. Cumminga, the 
editor and proprietor of the Topeka Tribune. He informed me he 
would not appear. The information was given in presence of another 
Senator. 

Mr. Stevens. — Mr. President : I would suggest that a subpena 
be issued for Mr. Cnmmings. 



IMPBAOHBiXNT 0A6S8. 859 

Hr. Ingalk. — Vr. Pbssident : I do not believe in waiting for a 
-flobpena to issue. Bj time tKat is done, this person may be out of 
the jurisdiction of the Court. If this charge is not true, it is a 
gross violation and contempt of this body; and we have a right to 
demand the presence of this individual. I hope the Sergeant-at- 
Arms will be sent forthwith to bring this man Cummings before 
the Senate. 

The Sergeant-at-Arms was ordered by the President to go in 
search of J. F. Cummings, and to bring him before the Senate 
forthwith. 

Mr. Stanton submitted the following motion on the part of John 
W. Robinson: 

The counsel for John W. Robinson move the Court to set aside 
the judgment in his case and grant a new trial, upon the ground 
that one or more Senotors, in pronouncing the defendant guilty^ 
averred that the decision was based upon the opinion that a princi- 
pal is presumed, in law, to have notice of all the acts of his agent, 
and is criminally responsible therefor, which opinion is against law 
and subversive of justice. 

• WILSON • SHANNON, 
FRED. P. STANTON, 
GEO. W. SMITH. 

Mr. McDowell offered the following resolution, which was adopted : 
Resolved, That the President of the Senate be and he is hereby 
authorized to examine any and all witnesses, touching the matter 
brought before the Senate by Mr. Bamett, the Senator from Brown 
•county; and if any Senator desires to ask the witness or witnesses 
any question, he must do it in writing through the President. 

The^ Sergeant-at-Arms returned with J. F. Cummings in custody, 

President. — ^Mr. Cummings, charges of a grave nature, relating 
to the vote of a Senator, have been stated here by a Senator, and 
that you have knowledge of this. The Senate require you will 
state what knowledge you have of the transaction. 

J. F. Cummings was now sworn to testify m relation to the alleged 
matter of corruption, set forth in the statement of Mr. Bamett. 

Mr. Stevens. — ^Mb. President: I suggest the reading of Mr. 
Bamett's statements. 

Secretary read the statements niad^ by Mr. Bamett. 



360 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

President. — Mr. GumniingB, you will notice your name b not in- 
cluded in that statement, but at a subsequent time, Mr. Barnett, io 
response to a vote of the Senate, stated that his information came 
from yourself. / 

President. — ^Mr. Cummings, did you make such statements; if so.. 
who was the Senator? 

Mr. Cummings. — Let me read that statement. 

The paper was handed to Mr. C. After reading it, he said : 
Now, what do you want to know ? 

Mr. President. — Did you make those statements to Mr. Barnett 1 
Answer. — Not in full, as is here noted. Some of the statements 
here I made. 

Q. Did you, in substance ? 
A. I did; to some extent. 

Q. Tell us what you did state. 

A. I don't think I can give the statement made to Mr. Barnett. 
A man may take a drink sometimes, and I can't state what occurred. 
My memory is bad. 

Q. Did any Senator make any such proposition as is there con- 
tained ? 

A. I talked with several Senators. I think if I had had two or 
three thousand dollars in cash, I could have made such an arrange* 
ment. 

Q. Did any member propose such a thing : to vote against a con- 
viction, in case you furnished him an amount of money ? 

A. If he did not propose it to me, I might ^have proposed it to 
him. 

Mr. Barnett. — Mr. Cummings, did you not tell me these thingtl' 
A. I think probably; no very definite proposition was made. 

Q. Did yon not tell me you pulled out your pocket-book, with 
three thousand dollars, and offered it to him, and that he refused, 
and said ^' It was too late'' f 

A. I think it probable that I did so— don't recollect. 

President. — Mr. Cummings, did any member of the Senate pro- 
pose to yon to vote against the impeachment of John W. Robinson, 
if you would furnish him an amount of money, or any other considera- 
tion f 

A. He may not have done it directly. 



IMPXACHMXNT 0A8XS. 861 

Q. Didheindureody? 

A. That wag my understanding of it. 

Q. What was the oonversation at the time? 
A. There was a good deal of oonyersatiiw. 

Q. Give us the substance. 
A. Don't think I can do it. 

President. — ^Does the witness refuse to answer the question ? 

Witness. — ^I want the Senate to understand that I sometimes take 
a drink. My head is muddled. If the Senate will wait till Mon- 
day, I shall be better able to answer their questions. 

Mr. Cobb. — ^Mr. Prbsident : This examination and the conduct 
of the witness is certainly disgraceful. It is trifling with the dig- 
nity of the Court. My resolution for a committee was ruled down. 
I certainly think it more desirable and more likely to attain the 
end we seek, than the^ present inyestigation. This is a reckless 
disregard of the reputation of Senators. Any gentleman's character 
is at the mercy of this witness, who, by his own showing, is unfit to 
testify. He is in contempt of the Senate; and I trust that he will 
be compelled to answer. 

Mr, Stevens. — ^I think, Mr. President, that we should go slow in 
this matter. What we want is knowledge. We may punish the 
witness by imprisonment; but when the Senate adjourns, he will go 
free. 1 suggest that, in order that the examination may be more 
regular, that Senators ask, in writing, such questions as they desire; 
or that the Attorney General, and one of the counsel for the defense^ 
be requested to ask the [questions. In that way, we will probably 
get at something more definite. 

Mr. Cobb. — ^I think it altogether wrong to allow the matter to 
proceed in this shape. The reputation of the Senate, and of each 
individual member, is at the mercy of the innuendoes of this wit- 
ness. A committee will reach the matter far more satisfactorily. 

Mr. McDowell. — I trust, Mr. President, that the Senator from 
Brown will be allowed to resume his examination. 

Mr. Bamett resumed the examination of the witness, with the 
following question : 

Q. Did you not tell me that, after you offered the Senator the 
scrip, he said something to you about going to John W. Bobinson ? 

Witness. — ^I don't recollect that he did. 



862 PBOOiBDiNas in thi 

Q. Did you not tell him that Robinson had no money ? 
A. I did. 

Q. Who did the Senator refer yon to? 

A. He referred me to another Senator, to find out how Senators 
would vote. 

Q. That is; how many would vote for impeaohment 7 

A. Yes; to find the number of those who would vote guilty. 

Q. Did you not state that you went to him with three thousand 
dollars in money, and he said " It was too late V 

A. I believe I told you that I said to him that he might draw 
upon me for a certain amount. 

Q. Did he say <<It was too late "7 

A. My impression is that he said something of the kind. 

Q. What did he say when you offered him the money? 
A. I didn't offer him money. I said he might draw. 

Q. Did the Senator tell you the amount, three thousand dollars, 
was not enough ? 
A. He did not say. 

<Q. When was this? 
A. Yesterday, I think. 

Q. What time? 

A. Between nine and four. 

Q. Before the Senate assembled in the afternoon? 
A. liy recolleotion is not dear, but I think it was. 
Q. Where was it? 
A. On the street. 

<i. You know where it was? 

A. I have a pretty good reoollection of where it was. 

Mr. Stevens. — Mr, President : We shall arrive at no results in 
in this way. I would suggest, in order to get on with the examin- 
ation, that the President, or some one else, be authorised to question 
him direct, and reduce the questions and answers to writing. The 
reputation of both Senate and Senators is at stake, and we should 
use all our power to arrive at the facts. I move that Uie Attorney 
General, and the attorneys for the defense, should question the 
witness. 

Mr. Stanton. — I shall be under the necessity, and I speak for my 



IMPSAOHMBNT 0A8X8. 86S 

aasoeiAtes, to beg to decline and be ezooBed from taking any part in 
these proceedings. They remain entirely in the hands of the Senate, 

Cobb.— I admire the wisdom of counsel. We are certainly able 
to interrogate this witness within onrselTCS. 

Mr. Denman. — I suggest that Senators Ingalls, Cobb and Stevens, 
be appointed as a committee to question this witness. • 

^ Mr. Ingalls. — ^Mr. Pbesidbnt : I must most respectfully decline, 
in advance of any such motion. I do not wish to appear, as in that 
ease I might seem to do, in the light of a prosecutor, by showing 
that this verdict of guilty was obtained by collusion and fnuA* 
Gentlemen will readily appreciate my position, I trust. 

Mr. McDowell. — I move you that the President ask such questions 
as he may think best, and that Senators will write out their ques- 
tions and submit them through the President. 

The motion prevailed, and the examination of Mr. GummingS 
was resumed by the President. 

The President. — Did you have a conversation with Mr. Bameti 
in regard to certain propositions made by you to any member of 
this body, for the purpose of obtaining his vote against the im* 
peachment of John W. Robinson ? 

A. I had. 

Q. What is the Senator's name ? 

A. I refuse to answer. I think that in a pecuniary transaction 
between mo and a member of this body, or any other, I have a per- 
fect right not to be interrogated. 

Mr. Cobb. — ^I submit, Mr. President, that we had better let this 
question pass for a while. 

President. — ^Where was this conversation ? 

Witness. — ^I had different conversations. I believe I talked once 
with Mr. Bamett. That wss yesterday afternoon. 

Q. What wss the conversation ? 
A. I had rather let him state it. 

Q. Was it given in the statement shown you from Mr. Bameti? 
A. To some extent, it was. 

Q. Did any member of the Senate, on Thursday last, state to you 
that there were seventeen members of the Senate ready to vote to 
impeach John W. Bobinson f 

The President read a portion of Mr. Bametf s statement to the 
witness. 



af64 PROCSEBINOS IN THE 

Witness. — ^It may have been on Thnrsday. I think probably it 
was. I have had conyersations with several Senators on the snbjeet 
ever since this body hu been in session. I so understood it, (the 
seventeen votes) from a member of the Senate. 

Q. Did that Senator inform you that he could control three or 
four votes, ilbhe could be paid three thousand dollars, or any other 
consideration 7 

A. He said that if he took a certain position in the matter, as for 
instance, in favor of John W. Robinson's acquittal, other Senators 
would go with him. This was the substance of his remarks. Ho 
did'nt say how many. 

Q. Did he say anything about considerations ? 
A. That matter was talked of previously. 

Q. What did he previously say in regard to considerations J 
A. He said that it was supposed, or presumed^ I was a friend of 
the State officers. I told him I was to every man. He said that if 
I would get him so much money, he would vote against impeach- 
ment. He said that $5,000 waa little enough ; that Bob Stevens 
had shystered the State officers, and ought to pay it now. 

Q. What did you reply ? 

A. That I had a certain amount of money, or its equivalent in 
my pocket ; that I never had had a word with any of the State 
officers or their attorneys in regard to the matter, but that I would 
give him what I had, and afterwards look to John W. Robinson or 
the State officers for my pay. 

Q. Did you state to him what you had in your pocket, that you 
was willing to give ? 

A. I don't recollect whether I did or not. I don't think that I 
made the statement to him, as to the amount I had in my pocket 
I may have done so. 

Q. What did you have in your pocket at the time Y 
A. I had State scrip, and a few t20 Treasury Notes. I think I 
may have had $4500 in scrip. 

Q. What is your recollection as to the amount you were willing 
to give? 
A. About $2,000. 

Q. Was this to be in scrip f 

A. He understood from me that I had nothing but scrip ; he 
wanted money. 

Q. Did he refuse to take the scrip 7 



IMPSAOHMSNT CA8S8. 465 

A. He refosed to take anything from me, at that time. 

Q. What did he say, when you refused to give anything hut 
ecrip? 

A. When I said to him, " I have got so much here, and you oaa 
take that/' he replied : "Tou had [better] go and see Bob SteTens, 
and find out firom him just how the matter is going : {hat seventeen 
will certainly vote for impeachment ; that Bob had got the money 
and ought to pay if 

Q. For what reason did he refuse to take anything from you ? 

A. I never really offered anything to him. K I had had it in 
my fingers, I don't think it would have been refused. But I under- 
stood that he wanted somebody else to give the money first, as he 
did not wish me to loose by the transaction. 

Q. Did you have a conversation with the same Senator, subse- 
quent to that timc; on the same subject ? 
A. I did. 

Q. When was it ? 

A. On yesterday, before the afternoon session of the Senate. 

Q. Bo you reooUeot where this conversation took plaoe J 
A. I do. 

Q. Where was it 1 

A* On Kansas Avenue, between 6th and 7th streeto. 

Q. What was the conversation ? 

A. I told him he might draw on me for $8,000, if he wanted to, 
and he replied " It was too late/' 

Q. Did he say anything further at that time 1 

A. He said he would like to see me before three o'doek. I did 
not see him again. 

Q. What was the amount he last told you he would take to vote 
against the imi^aohment of Robinson ? 

A. I think that at the time the matter was not set up in thai 
shape. Nothing was said about that, except in Uie first oonveiaap 
tion, then he said he ought to have 16,000. 

Q. Did he say. at any time, that he would vote againat the im- 
peachment of John W. Bobinson for $6,000 f 

A. He held out that idea, very emphatically. 
'"Mr. Cobb.— Mb. Pbesidbht : I have listened patiently, thus ht, 
to these very exfaraoidinaiy proceedingi. Early in the examination, 



866 PROOXIDINOS IN THE 

I submittod a motion for the appointment of a committee of inyes- 
ligation. I now propose to renew that motion is this form : 

Eesolvedf That a committee of five be appointed to inyestigate 
the charges of bribery and corrnption against a member of this 
body, with full power to send for persons and papers^ administer 
oaths, and t^ compel the attendance of witnesses, and replies to 
their interrogations, to report to the Senate on its re-assembling 
Monday morning. 

S^y object, Hr. President, in offering this resolution, is -for the 
purpose of dispatching business. I think a better and clearer in- 
Testigation can be had through this committee. The scene here is 
eertainly disgraceful. The witness has evidently been inebriated^ 
and by his own statement his head is not clear this morning. I 
shall press this motion to a Tote. 

Mr. Keeler. — I trust, Mr. President, that we will proceed with 
the* investigation. Unless this matter is thoroughly sifted, I, for 
one, will refuse to sit as a judge in the case now pending. We owe 
it to ourselves to remove this dark cloud, and to cast out from us 
any Judas who may be found in our midst. Unless the matter is 
thoroughly examined, I again give notice, that if I can, legally, I 
shall move for a new trial in the case of Dr. Bobinson. 

Mr. Rankin. — I submit, Mr. President, if we are not now in a 
fair way of getting a full and legal investigation by this exaihina- 
tion in open Senate ? I hope the motion will not prevail. 

Mr. Koberts. — I think it will facilitate matters, and enable us to 
get at the truth, and shall therefore vote for raising the committee, 

Mr. Stevens. — ^Mr. President : This motion of the Senator from 
Wyandott, seems to me, to effect no other purpose than to cut off 
the right of Senators to investigate this matter themselves. It ie 
claimed that its adoption will expedite business. How will it ? We 
are getting at the substance of the charge, it seems to me, in as 
speedy a way as can possibly be accomplished before any committee. 
I heard of this charge for the first time, last evening. Since then, 
investigating the affair, important statements have eome to mj 
knovf ledge. I shall probably ask some questions, and call other 
witnesses. Let us go on with the open investigation. The case has 
progressed so far, the people have heard it, and it is but proper that 
.the whole. matter be made public. If, as has been intimated, I have 
heen " shystering,^' let the Senate and the community know the 
same. If there is a fraud, let us have it, and if, in the estimation 



IMPXAOHMSNT CA8X8. 367 

of any Senator, that would have ceased to be a frand wlien I paid 
him $5,000^ let the Senate, by all means, know his name. I desire 
to push the investigation throughly. 

Mr. Cobb. — Mb. President : I. do not believe the gentleman, 
from Douglas is any more earnent than I am in this matter. And 
I am extremely anxious to get at the bottom of it. As the inves- 
tigation is now being oondncted, we may act hastily. The innuendoes 
of this witness may affect the Senate. The danger is, that we may 
drive from this body some innocent member of it, with blasted 
reputation and character destroyed. The matter deserves a calm 
and serious consideration. A fairer investigation can be had before 
a committee, upon whose report the S.qnate can act. It does not 
invalidate the action of this body, but as it seems to me, affords a 
fuller and fairer investigation^ 

Mr. Eoberts.-7-Mi^.. President : /The, proceedings, as they now 
progress, are -blind and futUeu Chaiges are made here against an 
imaginary Senator. There were seventeen of us who voted guilty. 
Let us first get at the name of the Senator. Jf there is any who 
may be charged with this corruption. I am opposed to groping 
blindly any longer. 

Mr. Stevens. — The Senat«r from Wyandoti indieates, Mr. Presi- 
dent, that I desire to urge this matter to a hasty conclusion. ' This 
is not my wish or desire. I want the Senate to take days, or weeks, 
if necessary, in the investigation ; to call other witnesses, bring, 
rebutting testin^ony, if necessary. Let us have the facts of the 
oonversation between this Senator and the witness. Suppose he 
refuses to answer the second question as to the Senator's name, when 
it is again asked, we may get at the facts by other questions. I 
have sent up a question which will start a new track, and perhaps 
throw some light on the subject. 

Mr. Cobb. — ^I trust that the Senate wjill not allow this witness to 
be released from the custody, of the Sergeant-at-Arms, until the 
Senate dismiss him. 

The question thea recurring on the motion of the Senator from 
Wyandott, the roll was called, and the motion was lost by the fol- 
lowing vote : 

Messrs. Cobb, Knowles and Roberts voting aye. — 3. 

Messrs. Bamett, Bayless, Oonnell, Curtis, Denman, Essick, 
HoUiday, Hubbard, logalls, Keeler, Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, 
Bankin, Bees, Sleeper, Spriggs and-Stevens voting no. — 18. 



368 PROOSEDINOS IN THB 

The examinatioD of J. F. Cttmrnings was than resamedi Kr. 
Stevenfl asking the following question through the President : 

Did this Senator, in any conversation, say that he could receive 
any sum of money, or any other consideration for voting for con- 
viction ? 

Witness.— He said he might get an office, worth t2,000 a year, for 

voting for the impeachment. 

By the President.— Was any third person present during any of 
your conversations with this Senator ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you communicate that conversation to John W. Robinson ; 
and if so, what was his reply ? 

A. I did, and he said " Uiat I might do as I pleased, that he had 
offered me nothings and no one else, to prooure his acquittal." 

Sy a Senator. — ^You stated that, if you made the arrangement, 
^ou would look to the State oSoers or John W. Bobinson, for the 
repayment of the money. Ton afterwards stated that you had no' 
conversation or understanding with the State officers, or their 

^attorneys. 

Did you have any conversation or understanding with any one, 
representing one or more of them, or was anything said to you about 
securing a vote or votes, to acquit John W. Bobinson J 

Witness. — I have had no conversation with John W. Bobinson, 
nor with any of the State offioers, or with any of their attorneys, or 
any one of them, in relation to the procuring of any suoh arrange- 
ment. 

The President— How did the Senator finally vote in the case of 
John W. Bobinson 1 

Witness. — ^I reflise to answer the question. I was not here, and 
don't know how he voted. 

By aaggestion of a Senator, the Journal recording the votes was 
shown the witness, who still refused to answer. The examination 
was resumed. 

Q. What motive prompted you to engage in this transaction with 

said Senator f 

A. The Sanatof himself prompted me ; I had no suoh idea until 
be made the proposition. It was generally understood, in outside 
^ oireles, that die man could not be convicted. 

^ Q. Did you ever^ before the judgment of the Senate was rendered, 



nmAOHMKNT CA«U. M» 

eommiiDiMU any of tbia oooTtzMlion with Mr. SteY6iii| or wpe^k 
to him about it T 

A. I think not I wanted} or intended to aee Mr. SterenSi but 
think I had no eoaTenation with him before the judgment I know 
I did not. 

Q. To whom did you speak about thii conTeraation f 
k. To one of Robinaon'f attomeya. 

Q. Whioh one ? 

A. Oeorge W. Smith. 

Q. What waa the anbatanee of the oonrerMition f - 
A. I gaye him to nnderatand that I had oiTeTed ao maeh money, 
oa my own responsibility, and that afterwards I ' would expeet to 
have the money returned, if none was handed to me before. He 
thought I was " shystering/' and wanted to make money out of it. 
Since that time I hare been informed, that he has said I was about 
right, that it wm sympathy, and not money, that prompted me. 

Q. Haye you eonyersed with the Senator since that time 7 
A. I haye. 

Q. When and where ? 

A. I eonyersed with him thia momiAg in a room of the Bilobio 
Bloek. 

Q. What room? 

A. It waa in the third story, a room occupied as a sleeping room„ 
T belieye, by two of my boys. We were talking mostly abomt pri* 
yate matters. 

Q. Waa the subject of the impeachmemt of Bobinaea talked rf at 
that time ? 
A. It waa. 

Q. What waa said about the impeachment T 

A. Our conyeraaiion waa generally about priyala natlefa* The 
impeachment waa thrown in aidfway^ The aim asd adbatsfaoe 
was a priyate and pecuniary tranaaction between him and mfaal^ 

Q. Did that peeuniaiy aqid priy»la tranaaetiea relate to Ihe 
impeachment 1 
A. It did) somewhat. 

Q. What waa then said in ragard lo the impnaehnani 1 
A. I refuae to anawer. I uudessloed: 0J^ oonyecsaiies to be .|iee* 
fectly priyate. 



S70 PROCEEDINGB IK TUT 

Mr. Cobb. — Mft. PbesIdent : If tbis question does not crimiaate 
the witness himself, we have a right to an answer, I trust the Senate 
will maintain its dignity. 

The witness again refused to answer. 

Mr. Hubbard. — ^This witness is in open and flagrant contempt of 
the Courts and some action should be taken in the matter. 
The question was waived and the examination proceeded with. 

Bj the President. — Where did you first meet the Senator this 
morning ? 

A. Met in a haU or stairway in the Ritchfe block. 

Q. Was the Senator a Republican ? 

A. I don't think he has any political predilections. 

Q. When did you have the conversation with George W. Smith 
referred to ? 

A. I don't recollect. It was two or three days since. 

Q. What Senatorial District does the Senator represent f 
A. I refuse to answer. 

Q. What counties are represented in jiis district ? 
A. I refuse to answer. 

Q. Is it on the north or south side of the Kansas river 7 
A. I refuse to answer. 

By a Senator. — Did the Senator when ho said he oould get an 
eflce or place worth $2,000, in case he voted for the ^conviction of 
John W. Robinson, state what kind of an office, if it was a State 
oSoe, or an office under the United States 7 

Wit noo B j ^B e intimated it would be an office under the Genera) 
Government. I don't think Gov. Robinson would appoint 7itm to 
any office. 

Q. Did he state, or give you to understand, who would get this 
diee for him, or assist him in getting the office referred to f 

A. He intinatad that it would pome tiirough our Senator or 
Senatonat Washington. 

Q. Did h« name any Senator's name in connection with it ? i 

A. I think he mentioned J. H. or James H. or Jim Lane's name* 
in connection with it. 

Mr. Gurt!S.--4l[B. PftBSiDBKT : I ask that the oath, administered 
III the witness, be again read. It is very evident he does not under- 
stand its nature or else willfully evades it He has been sworn ta 



IMPBACHMBNT 0A8KB. 371 

'* tall the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth." To 
refuse to tell what is directly bearing upon the allegation is an 
eTasion of the requirementa of an oath. The manner of the witness 
•hows, also, a disregard of the obligations imposed upon him by 
this oath. 

The Secretary read the oath to Mr. Oumnungs. He replied : 
I know what it means. I shall tell only part <tf what oeeurred, 
however. 

Mr. Curtis. — This reply shows that the witness docs not know the 
nature of this oath, or consider it binding. I hope the Senate will 
take some action in the matter. 

EXAMINATION OF J. F. OUMMINGS RK8UMKD. 

By the President. — Did you tell George W. Smith what Senator 
it was? 
Witness, — I did not. 

Q. Have you told any person what is the name of the Senator 
referred to ? 
A. I have not. 

Q. What is the name of the Senator ? 
A. I refuse to answer. 

Q. Why do you reftise to answer T 
A. I reftiso to answer that question. 

Mr. Cobb. — Mr. President : This bringii us to a point where 
action, on the part of the Senate, ia necessary. This witness is in 
contempt. We owe it to ourselves to take some step in the matter. 

Mr. McDowell. — ^With the permission of the chair, I will move 
tjiat the Senators now he awom, and that eaeh be qweetioned as to 
his knowledge of the matter alleged by the Senator from Brown. 

Mr. Ingalls. — ^Who makes that motion ? 

Mr. McDowell. — I do. 

, Mr. Ingalls. — ^Does the Seuator from IieaMnworth intend that 
each Senator shall be sworn separately and interogated as to hi* 
knowledge of the alleged corruption J 

Mr. McDowell. — I do« In making this motfaa, Mr. President, I 
l^el it due the Senate} as well as myaelf, thai we eaeh and all purgs 
ourselves of this charge. Let each Senator be sworn m hiif plMt' 



372 PBOcximifos in thb 

to.answMr^ tralji saoh qoestioiui m mi.7 be proyoanded in relaiioo 
to bifl knowledge of the charges. 

Mr. Easiok. — Beea A% Senator mean all questions fhat may be 
asked? 

Mr. Ingalls. — It seems to me, Mr. President, that the course pro- 
posed by the Senator from Leavenworth would open the field to 
unlimited interrogation. The matter can be brought within tlie 
compass of one or two questions. If the Senator will withdraw his 
motion, a substitute can be easily arranged, covering all he desiies. 

Mr. McDowell withdrew his motion. 

Mr. Ingalls. — I move that Mr. Cummings, the prisoner at the 
bar, be remanded to the custody of the Sergeant-at-arms, to awMt 
the further action of the Senate. 

The motion prevailed and Mr. Cummings was removed from 
the bar. 

On motion of Mr. McDowell, the Senate adjourned till twe 
P.M. 



AFTERNOON SR88ION. ' 

Two o'cumL P. M. 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, siUing as a High Court of 

Impeachment, assembled. 

President in the chair. 

Boll oalled. Quorum present 

Mr. IngaDs moved that eadi Senator be swbm in his phcebythe 
Secretary, and the fiiUowing questions be propounded to htm by the 
Secretary of the Senate : 

1st. Have you ever had any conversation with J. F. Cummings 
in reference to the impeachment of John W. Bobinson f 

2kid. If yeft, stale when, whave, and what was the substance of 
said conversation? 

8rd. Did you, ever at any time^ make any proposition or intima- 
tion to J. F. Oumwimg^ that any peeuniaiy or other consideration 
we«ld iniuenoe your demsion, or that of any other Senator, in said 

r 



IMFEAOHMBNT CAOBB* 878 

4tli. H«?6 joa had any coDTeiaaiion or iniarview with J. P. Oom- 
(hia morning, or at any time to-day, in the third atoiy of tha 
Bitohey block in ihe City of Tdpoka? 

6th. Do yon know anything toncdiing tha mallor now undar oon- 
«ideiation before the Senate, except from the testimony and state- 
ments made to-day in the Senate ? 

The motion was adopted. 

Mr. logalls. — I move that the Sergeant-at-arms bring Kr. Cam- 
miogs before the bar of the Senate. I make this motioni Mr. 
President, because I consider it bat fair to the witness that he 
ehonld be present, before Senators answer these questions, in order 
that he may have an opportunity to purge himself of the contempt 
of which he has been guilty to this body. I submit, to the consid- 
eration of the Senate, whether action should not be postponed until 
Mr. Cumminga is before the bar. 

The motion was adopted. 

Mr. Cummings appeared before the bar in the custody of the 
Sergean t-at- Arms. 

The President.^Mr. Cummings, a motion has been adopted by 
the Senate that the following questions be propounded to each Sen- 
ntor, who will answer them under oath. It is thought proper that 
yon should be present. The Secretary will read the motion and 
questions. 

The Secretary then read them. 

The President. — Mr. Cummings, if you now desire to answer the 
question which was propounded to you this morning, as to the name 
of the Senator, you have an opportunity to do so. 

Witness. — And I still refuse to answer. 

On motion, the roll was then called and eaoh Senator answered 
thereto, except Messrs. Lynde, Morrow and Hoiinan, who had pre- 
viously been excused from the call. 

Mr. Ingalls. — ^Me. P&xsident. I suggest, in order to give a 
l^eater solemnity to this important occasion, that each Senator shall, 
on his name being called, rise in his place and remain standing 
while the oath is administered by the Secretary, and the questions 
anawered. 

Bach Senator present, exoept Mr. Sleeper, stood in his place and 
«ook the following oath : 



S74 PEOCXKDiiros nr ths 

Yoa do BoIemBly swMur that jon will true answers make to sack 
qnestioDB as may be propounded to yoa by the Secretary, tonohmg 
the charges made by Senator Bamett, so help you Ood. 

Mr. Bamett, in answer to the first interrogatory, said : I had a 
oonveraation with him yesterday, the substance of which is in the 
statements presented by me this morning. I have had no other 
conyersation. To the second he said : Yesterday evening, in this 
room, after the adjournment of the Senate, I had the conversation 
related in that statement. To third, fourth and fifth he answered 
in the negative. 

Mr. Bayless, in answer to the first interrogatory, said : I never 
spoke to him in my life. 

Mr. Cobb answered all in the negative. 
Mr. Connell answered all in the negative. 
Mr. Curtis answered all in the negative. 
Mr. Denman answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Essick answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Holliday, in answer to the first interrogatory said : ' I have 
had several conversations with Mr. Gummings in regard to the case 
of John W. Bobinson. In answer to the second said : M^ social 
and business relations with Mr. Cummings have been very intimate. 
I have talked with him, as with other persons, frequently on the 
subject. I cannot now recollect any particular occasion, or the exact 
purport of any such conversation ; but in no such conversation was 
any reference had to the charges made by Senator Barnett. To the 
third interrogatory he answered in the negative. To the 4th he 
said : I have; but such conversation was wholly private, and had 
no reference, whatever, to the impeachment case. To the 6th he 
replied negatively, except as above stated. 

Mr. Holliday. — ^Mb. Pbcsident : In explanation I wish to state 
to the Senate that my position, as President of the Topeka Town 
Association, brings me into frequent relations with Mr. Cummings, 
who acknowledges most of the deeds. This business leads me to 
his office daily. I make this statement becffUse of a remark made 
in executive session, the day before yesterday, while the subject of 
impeachment was under discussion by the Senator from Lyon, Mr. 
Sleeper. It will be remembered that I advocated a postponement of 
the judgment. It was asked why Senators were urgent in the mat> 



IMPKAGHMXRT 0ABB8. 87S 

t6T f The Senator from Ljon 0poke, ia hU teat : ** Beeaoae thej 
did not wish to wait to sell out." I spoke to him afterwards on the 
matter and he said : " The remark was caused by the fact that 
Gummings was blowing, on the street, that he could buj the Senate 
for Dr. Robinson, for two or three thousand dcrflars." 

Mr. Hubbard answered all the interrogatories in the negative. 

Mr. Ingalls answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Keeler answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Knowles answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Lambdin answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Lappin, in answer to the first interrogatory, said: I have. 
To the second: Mr. Camminge ssked me how I voted on the re- 
moval of Dr. Robinson, and I informed him. To the third, fourth and 
ifth, he answered negatively. 

Mr. McDowell answered all in the negative. 

Bfr. Osbom answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Rankin answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Rees answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Roberts answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Sleeper took the following affirmation : 

You do solemnly affirm that you will true answers make to suoh 
questions as may be propounded to you by the Secretary, touching 
the charges made by Senator Barnett ; this you do most solemnly 
affirm, under the pains and penalties of perjury. 

In answer to the first interrogatory, said: I have. To the sec- 
ond : Mr. Gummings came to me one day this week, in this house, 
and said : ^^ That a Senator had offered to sell out his vote.'' I 
ssked for his name, which he refused, and further said it was not 
in the power of the Senate to make him tell. To the third and 
fourth he answered in the negative. To the fifth : Only the con- 
veisation to which I alluded. 

Mr. Spriggs answered all in the negative. 

Mr. Stevens, in answer to the first, said: Never, so far as the 
same relates to the matter under consideration, until last evening. 
To the second: Last evening, in this hall; it was, in substance, 
•ameas stated by Mr. Barnett. To the third and fourth, negative. 
To the fifth : Nothing but what I have heard from third parties. 



876 PROCEEDINOS TN TUR 

Baoh Senator baving answered the questioas propounded to bim, 
Mr. Sleeper rose and said : 

Mr. Prebident : — As tbe remark may seem barsb, to wbicb tb« 
'Senator from Shawnee has alluded as made bj me, I wish to mak« 
this explanation : Some Senators wished to postpone, to wbicb I 
was opposed. The question was asked wbj the matter was urged, 
to which I replied, as stated by the Senator. That Senator thought 
the remark was personal, and asked an explanation, which I gaTe, 
as be has stated. I did not follow up the matter, as I did not oon^ 
aider Cummings' remarks worthy of notice, or a matter of much 
consideration. 

President. — Mr. Gummings, I baye put this question, and I re' 
peat it : '' What was tbe name of the Senator V* 

Witness. — And yet I refuse to answer. It may become neoesaary 
for me to give the name in order to vindicate myself, but at pres- 
ent I do not wish to make any reply other than I have done. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, the Senate went into executive session. 

After some time spent therein, the doors were thrown open, and 
the Senate resumed the usual order of business. 

Mr. Cobb offered tbe followiug resolution, which was adopted; 

Resolved, That it is tbe opinion of tbe Senate, that tbe chargei 
against a member of this body of corruption, are untrue, and thai 
no further action be taken in tbe premises. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, J. F. Cummings was discbaiged from 
4ihe oustody of tbe Sergeant-at-Arms, and sent hence without day. 

On motion. Senate adjourned. 



THIRTEENTH DAY. 



Senate Chamber, ) 

Monday, June 16, 1862, 9 o'clock A. M. J 

Tbe Senate of tbe State of Kan^^as, sitting as a High Court of 
Impeadiment, met pursuant to adjournment. 

President in tbe chair. 
Quorum not present. 

Sergeant-at-Arms sent for absentees, and returned with Mr. Hoi* 
liday. Quorum now present. ' 



IMPEACHMENT CASB8. 87? 

Journal of Saturday read and approved. 

Present — Hon. 8. A. Stinson and the Board of Hanageze, on tlit 
part of tbe House of Bepresentatives. 

Hons. F. P. Stanton, Wilson Shannoui and Oeorge W« Smitis 
eounsel for respondent. 

(George S. Hilljer appeared in person. 

Hr. Ingalls offered the following resolution, whieh was adopted : 
Resolved^ That no farther proceedings, in the oases now pending, 
be printed for the use of the Senate. 

The case of George S. Hilljer was resumed. 

John W. Bobinson called and sworn to testify on the part of the 
State. 

[JOHN W. ROBINSON'S TBSTDCONT.] 

Attorney General. — ^Doctor, are you acquainted with George 8. 
Hillyerf 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He has been acting as Auditor, has he net? 
A. I think he has. 

Q. Will you state what connection he had with the sale of the 
seven per cent, bonds ? 

A. I think he was the principal offieer who aold the bonds. We 
were both engaged in the sale. 

Q. Where were they sold ? 
A. In Washington, 

Q. Who to 7 

A. B. S. Stevens. 

Q. At what price 7 
A. At sixty cents. 

Q. When did Stevens first make propositions to buy these bonds^ 
or any part of them ? 

A. Some kind of proposition or random talk was had, about the 
middle of October. 

Q. Where was that talk had 7 

A. The first talk wss had in the Governor's ofiSoe; I don't re- 
member any other. 

Q. What talk did you have in the Governor's office 7 



^78 PBOOEXDINOS IN THB 

A. It was simply a talk between tbe OoTernor, Hillyer and mj- 
solf, in relation to our authority) under the law, to sell the bonds. 

Q. Was Mr. Stevens present at that time J 
A. He was, a part of the time. 

Q. Was any proposition made by him, at that time, to purchaM 
the bonds, or any part of them 7 

A. We talked about selling a part at forty oents and a part ak 
aeyenty cents. This might be called a proposition. It was talk to 
that effect, at least. 

Q. Were any bonds delirered to him in accordance with that talk 
or agpreement ? 

A. No, sir, not that I know of. 

Q. Was apy written proposition made to this effect by Hillyer, or 
Hillyer and yourself, with Stevens ? 
A. I donH remember. 

Q. Were any bonds, at that time, deliyerad to Mr. Stevens 7 
A. I don't remember. It was the first time I had any oonnection 

with the sale. I never saw any delivered. They never were in my 

possession. 

Q. Do you know, from Mr. Hillyer, that any bonds were delivered 
at that time to Mr* Stevens f 

A. I don't remember that he told me anything about it. 

Q. Did you not know that any bonds were delivered to Mr. Ste- 
vens; prior to Mr. Hillyer's going to Washington ? 

A. Only from hearsay. I heard that Mr. Stevens carried some 
bonds to Lawrence for the Governor's signature. 

Q. Did you hear from Hillyer ? 

A. Could not tell whom I heard it from. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with Hillyer in relation to de- 
livering any bonds to Mr. Stevens? 
A. Not to my recollection. 

Q. For what purpose did you go to Washington ? 

A. I went principally to visit my friends, not having the least 
idea, when I started, that I should have anything to do with the 
sale of bonds. 

Q. Did you know, when you left for Washington, where the State 
bonds were 7 

A. I supposed Mr. Hillyer had them. 



IMPKAOHMSNT CASKS. 87* 

Q. When did you tnl become connected with the negotiation of 
these bonds f 

A. At Washington. I signed some paper there which made Mr. 
Stevens agent to sdl the bonds. 

Q. At whose solicitation did yon sign those papers ? 

A. It was a mntual agreement. Mr. Hillyer and Mr. Sterens 
asked me to sign it, and I had no hesitation, thinking it was the 
best that could be done. 

Q. At whose instance (if any State officer) did Mr. Stevens oobm 
to Washington I 

A. I think Mr. Hillyer telegraphed to him, which telegram I 
signed. There might hare been a letter seat. Think there was. 

Q. Among the depositions there is a paper purporting to be signed 
by the Gk>Temor, Aaditor and yoonelf. Where and by whom was 
that paper signed I 

A. It was signed in the city of Washington, by Mr. Hillyer and 
myself. I signed the GoTcmor's name. 

Q. By what anthority did yon put the Oovenior's signature to 
that paper f 

A. I supposed by his authority, at the time. 

Q. At whose request did you do it f 

A. The question was debated. Some one had suggested that I 
should draw up the instrument, on account of my being the best 
penman. Then it was suggested to sign the GoTcmor's name. 
Some remark was made that we knew he had given us authority se 
to do. 

Q. By whom was that remark made f 

A. I think it was made by Mr. Hillyer. 

Q. Which paper was executed first: the paper authorising him 
to retain all over sixty oents, or the paper with the Ooremor's signa- 
ture to it f 

A. The paper with the Governor's name to it. 

Q. Were they not executed at the same time ? 
A. I think not. 

Q. How much difierence in time was there between them I 
A. I could not tell. I was very busy about other matters whm 
the papers were signed. 

Q. By whom was the negotiation principally made on the part ^ 
the State? 



|90 PBOCSDINOB IN THB 

A. I ^on't irnnt to shirk my portion of the iwpoDribilify. I think 
Hr. Hillyer spoke to the parties n great many more times than I 
did. 

Q. Was any effort made by Mr. HiUyer to diqKiseof bonds is 
Wsshington, exoept to Mr. Stevens 7 
A. I think Mr. Hill^ said he had made snch an effort. 
Q. To whom were these bonds sold by Stevens ? 
A. To the Interior Department, as I have heard. 

Q* Did yon and Mr, Hillyer have any eonversation with Mr. 
Stevens as to the place or parties to whom these bonds were to be 
ioldr 

A. Yes, sir« I think he informed ns that if tliey were dkposed 
ft£ai all, it wo^ld be to the Interior Department. 

Q. Do yon know of Mr. Hillyer making any inquiries at thei In- 
terior Department for the sale of these bonds f 
A. Not of my own kni;^wledge. 

Q. At what price were they disposed of by Stevens ? 
A. Since I came back to Kansas, I have heard they were sold at 
eighty-five cents. 

Q. Before you left Kansas, were you aware they could be disposed 
of in Washington ? 

A. No, sir, I was not aware of it. 

Q. Had you any reason to believe they could f 
A. I heard something about selling some bonds; not those, how- 
ever, belonging to the State. 

Q. Do you know what induced Mr. Hillyer to go to Washington 
to dispose of the bonds ? 

A. The desire to put funds in the Treasury, under the idea ihey 
eonld be sold there* 

Q. Did you have any communication with him prior, in relation 
to it? 

A. I do not remember whether I did or did not. 

Q. Did you communicate to him your belief that any of the State 
bonds could be sold in Washington ? 

A. I don't remember the circumstances, but think it likely I 
«d. 

Q, At what price did you have reason to believe they could be 
ioM for in Washington 7 



IMnAOHMXNt 0A8X8. 88t 

A. Well, sir, that was in nfereniee to a private tFanaaetioii of mj 
own. I should be glad to hare the Senate excuse me from answer- 
ing . It had nothing to do with the State. 

Q. Did you communicate what knowledge or information you had 
in relation to the sale of bonds, to Mr. Hillyer t 
A. My impression is that I did. 

Q. Was it not upon that knowledge and information Mr. Hillyer 
went to Washington f 
A. No, sir^ I think not. 

Q. Did you hsTe any conversation with Mr. Hillyer, as to whera 
in Washington they could be disposed of T 
A. I think I did. 

Q. Where? 

A. That was a matter equally private, which concerned myself 
and another indiyidual, and no one else. 

Q. What time did you and Mr. Hillyer arrive in Washington t 
A. I started on the 28th of October. Mr. Hillyer the next day* 
I should have gone two weeks earlier, but failed to obtain some 
money. I arrived ii^ Washington about the 8th of November. Mr. 
Hillyer arrived the day before me. 

Q. Then you arrived in Washington the fast weeks in November 

" youf 

A. It could not have been later than the 10th or llih. ' 

Q. To whom did you say they were sold f 

A. To Mr. Stevens. 

Q. At what price 1 

A. At sixty cents on the dollar. 

Q. How many f 

A. I think t87,000 was about the amont whioh wei* la ba ^M. 

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge, or ham Mr. Hilteer 
t^ any konda were antmated to Mr. Stevens prior to yeuv going to 
Washington f 

A. No, sir, I do n^ot. Aal said befere, I did not keep a^ run 
of the bonds. I never had one in my hands befengbg to theSitalM 
that I know of. 

Q. What other bonda wefe pkeed in Mr. Stevens' ha^ij f hmiiB 
those belonging to the State t 
A. Several iadividnah had bonds, which were put in Mr. 



382 PBOonDiNQs in tbb 

Q. Did Hr. Hilljer have aoj ? 
A. I think he did. 

Q. About what amount 1 

A. Over tl,0OO. I think about t2,000. 

Q. Were they sold to Stevena t 

A. They were. 

Q. At what price 7 

A. Mr. Stevens gave him seventj cents, I believe, 

■ 

Q. What price was agreed upon between Mr. Hillyer aod Mr. 
Stevens at the time he sold his individual bonds to him ? 
A. I don't know that there was any price agreed upon at all. 

Q. Was the SUte then the owner of tl50,000 of bonds ? 
A. I cannot tell. Don't know what amount was paid in. 

Q. Did you not know that a considerable portion had been used 
in redemption of State scrip t 

A. I knew that some had been, but did not know how much. 1 
never visited the Auditor's office on that business, and don't know 
aaything more of the transactions of his office than I do of yours. 

Q. Do you know anything in relation to the coupons, what be> 
eame of them ? 
A. I think they went to Mr. Stevens. 

Q. Were they delivered with the bonds to Mr. Stevens ? 
A. I think so. 

Q. What time were the bonds delivered to Mr. Stevens J 
A. I cannot tell from any data that I have now. It was not Ipng 
before I started home. 

Q. Were they delivered before or after the agreement betweea 
you, and Hillyer and Stevens T 

A. I don't know certain. ' ' 

Q. Was it before, ot after? 
A. I thiak aft«r. 

• Q. Was any arrangement made by you and Hillyer, with Stevens, 
in relation to the coupons ? 
A. I ihSnk the understanding was, that they should go with the 

Mttds. 

Q. Then the understanding between you was, they were to be sold 
to Stevens 1 
A. That was my 



IMPEACHMENT 0A8B8. 383 

Q. Was it understood between yoa and Mr. Hillyer 'f 

A. I have never said a word about it to the geatlcuiau since. 

Q. At the time ? 

A. I don't think much was said. 

Q. What was the conversatioa between you and Hillyer, in re- 
l^ard to it ? 

A. There was only a word or two. I don't lem^mber distinotlj^ 
I never looked at the law, not expecting to have anything to do with 
the sale of the bonds. 

Q. Was it in regaid to it If 

A. 1 think it was. I cannot reuieinber any distinct conver^atiou 
about it. 

Q. For what purpose was the power of attorney, signed by Gov> 
ernor, Secretary and Auditor, executed ? 

A. I can state no other object but what was contained in the in- 
strument. I had no other object. 

Q<. Was it not made to facilitate Stevens' operations with the 
department J 
A. The primary object was to facilitate the sale. 

Q. Was it not made with a view of the sale to the Interior De> 
partment ? 
A. Yes, sir, I suppose 16 was. 

Q. Why was it dated on the 25th of October ? 
A. I do not know that I could teH you. I have no recollection 
ihmt it bore any other date than that on which it was written. 

Q. By whom was the paper written ? 

A. Originally, in Mr. Stevens' hand wrhkig. I donH know that 
I cf^ed Ihat papers There was one p^per copied by me. I woaM 
Mi swear that it was that* paper, but have «a inqirSBsiott thpt It Was 
ihat one. 

OBOM axamivxp by thb Bsrailn. 

Q. When you speak of the contraet, do you mean anything more 
IbMi what appears by the paper ? 
A. I tihkik I have stated thai once, ihat I did not. 

Q. This is the paper to whibh I refer.* Is thb the 
traei you made f 
A. Thai is the only eoniraoi, as I understand it. 

It, 



4iM VBOOlBDIIfOS in THS 

Q. Do y<m iWBifmber if this dooamont ir«A ezeoufeed near Ike 
^|06e of iho negotiatioDB f 

A. Yes, rir, yeiy near the oloee of the negotiations. 

Q. Do joa remember withdrawing the bonda from llr. Stevtua" 
haiidBi before thia contract was made 1 

A. I remember this : that I had an idea we could sell the benda 
at scTcnty cents. Mr. Hillyer came once, and said Mr. 8t«rena 
wduld not giro mere than six^ cents, and I refiised to take less 
than sizty-fiTe cents. I then went to the Capital to hear General 
'f«iie speak. 

X). Was it after that, yon executed this paper t 

A. It was towards the reiy laat day of my being in Washia^;ton. 

Q. Why was it dated the third of December 7 
A. I did not know that it bore any other date than that npon 
^hich it was executed. 

Q. Do you remember who drew this paper 1 
A. My impression is, that Mr. StCTcns did. I would noi swear 
U It. It is only my impression. 

Q. Did you, at any time, hsTc any infonaatio& that the bonds 
could be sold for eighty-ftYc cents 1 
A. No, sir, not till after I got back to Kansas. 

1). What was the highest amount yoa supposed thcf couM be 
^eold/or? 

A. I had raasoB to expect they could be sold at scTCAty cents. 

Q. Did yotti ai any time, believe they could be soldiiNr aoiu than 
seventy cents f 

A. No» sir. If I had« I should not h»?e aeeedad to the trade. 

"Q. Was yov infeniatioB ecttmunieailed ftankly lo Mr. Eilly«rt 
A. I spoke to him aersral tlmee aWul il The scfcntj eeHtS' 
-which I wan to receiTc fbr my own. 

P. What induced yra to svppcM it wa» neoessBsy to emplej Mr. 
^Sterena, to negotiate these bends I 

A. Oen« Pomeroy was the principal man who induced me to b*' 
'belicTe that Mr. Bterens was-the only man. He said hm himm 
relationa with Mr. Smith was of su/sh a character. 

Q. Did Ckn. Pomeroy decline to make the nq;ottatieiia hinisein 
A. Tee, sir, he did. 

<2- ]>U1 yom tpply to Urn to maka it? 



IMPSAOHMUIT OASIS. 886 

A. Yes, sir, we did the very day I got there. 

Q. Had Mr. Hillyer any interyiew with Gen. Pomeroy before 
year arrival 7 

A. I think he told me he had. 

Q. Was his information from Mr. Pomeroy, the same as your 
own ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you and Mr. Hillyer, or either of you, communicate your 
conclusions to General Pomeroy about taking sixty cents ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was his advtee on the subject ? 

A. After I refucMsd to take sixty cents, Mr. HIilyer said it would 
do the State great injustice in her then condition. I aaid I would 
go to Mr. Pomeroy. I did so, and told him all about it, and he ad- 
vised me to stay. 

Q. Did you communicate this conversation to Mr. Ilillycr T 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did you suppose Stevens was getting for the bonds t 

A. I did not know, he said he could not afford to pay more than 

*• 

«ixiy cents. 

Q. What light did you look on the difference between sixty cents 
and the amount he got ? 

A. As pay for him in making the negotiation. 

Q. Did you know or suppose^ he employed other persons to assist 
htm in making the negotiations ? 
A. Yes, sir, I supposed he did. 

Q. You said in your letter to Mr. Weir, you had called on the 
President. Was the statement correct ? 

A. I was at the President's levee; mentioned the bonj matter to 
him after the close. 

Q. Did you say the coupons were attached to the bonds when 
Stevens got the bonds, or did you know anything about it, of their 
being detached by Stevens ? 

A. If I have any distinct remembrance of it, it is that I saw Mr. 
Stevens in his own room, taking off some coupons, whether on the 
bonds of the State or not, I do not know. 

Q. Do you remember if Mr. Hillyer declined to sign the Gov- 
ernor's name to the paper ? 
25 



386 PROCESDINQB IN THE 

A. I think be told me I had better do it. 

Q. Did he not say you bad better do it if you bad the authority ? 
A. That question was discussed, I thought I had such authority. 

Q. Did he not say he had no authority ? 

A. I don't remember that he used such a remark. 

Q. You had no authority to sign, only this kind of a paper, did 
you? 

A. No other paper. 

Q. What was the Governor's expression when he authorized you. 
as you supposed, to sign his name ? 

A. It was that he would consent to any arrangement that could 
be made^ to sell the bonds. 

Q. You inferred from that circumstance, you had authority to 
sign this paper '( 

A. I had no doubt of it. 

Q. Did Mr. Stevens, or any one else, pay Mr. Hillycr for thc«i 
negotiations ? 

A. Not to my knowledge. 

Q. Or promise him anything direct or indirect ? 
A. Not that I have heard of. 

Q. Was anything paid to you ? 

A. Not a farthing. I know I was $250 out of pocket when 1 got 
home, and I always expect to be. 

Q. Was there anything in the conduct of Mr. Ilillyer, to lead 
you to believe that he was doing it for anything else than serving 
the public 7 

A. That is the only motive I supposed, or now believe, be had. 

Q. What information induced you to believe it was necessary to 
make thiv sacrifice to get the negotiation accomplished ? 

A. It was stated in Washington, and, among other persons, by 
Gen. Pomeroy, that the bonds of other State.^ were being pressed 
upon the market at forty cents. One of the north western States at 
forty cents, and if we made any noise, ours could not be sold at all. 

Q. What information did you have, that led you to believe Mr. 
Stevens would incur any expense in making this negotiation 1 

A. I had no definite information, but owing to the character of 
those assisting Mr. Stevens, I thoight his expense must be heavy 
indeed. Any gentleman who will go to Washington on similar 
bnainesfl, will be satisfied of that fact. 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 887 

Q. Can you state from your own knowledge, that it was in the 
knowledge of Mr. Hillyer, that it was necessary to make this sacri- 
fice, in order to negotiate the bonds ? 

A. He thought it was necessary to sell the bonds at that pricei 
or they could not be sold at all. 

Q. Had you an idea that Mr. Stevens was getting seventy cents ? 
A. I supposed he might be getting seventy cents. I thought so 
from a certain private transaction of my own, sometime before. 

By a Senator. — ^Did you know that the war bonds had been sold 
to the department at that time ? 

A. I heard so. I did not know that Mr. Stevens had sold them 
nor who had bought them. 

Q. At what price were they dold to the department ? 
A. I heard at forty cents. 

[Q. W. COLLAMORE'S TESTIMONY.] 

Gen. CoUamore was called and sworn on the part of the prose* 
cution : 

Q. Gen. Do you know anything of the negotiation of the seven 
per cent, bonds 7 

A. I do not. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^We do not desire to cross examine. 

Attorney General. — In behalf of the Board of Managers, I wilF 
rttate we rest our case. 

Mr. Stanton. — The defense do not wish to offer any testimony. 

Attorney General. — ^May it please the eoort, we waive the open^ 
ing. I do this not for any sharp practice over the gentlemen, but 
because we think it not necessary. 

[ARGUMENT OF HON. F. P. STANTON.] • 

Hon. F. P. Stanton then addressed the Senate as follows : 

Mr. President and Senators : 

I would have nothing to say in this case^ but would let it pass 
to your consideration without any argument, were it not thatj^in 
Robinson's trial certain points were made by the Attorney General, 
in conclusion, which we had no opportunity to answer ; and one of 
the Senators, in announcing his vote against the accused^ stated a 
principle, which I believe to be unsound in law, as applicable to 
the circumstances of these cases. 



388 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

The Attorney General assumes the ground that motiye or intent 
has nothing to do with a case in which there is a violation of a pos- 
itive law. It is sufficient, according to his view, if the party 
intended to do the unlawful acty no matter what may have been his 
motive or object. 

This position seems to me to be not only inconsistent with the 
authorities, but utterly abhorrent to every mind imbued with the 
true principles of criminal justice as established by the common 
law. In all cases where errors and violations of law are committed, 
by persons having any thing like a judicial discretion, the penalties 
of crime are never inflicted unless a bad motive be established by 
proof The same principle applies equally to ministerial officers 
whenever it becomes their duty to construe and execute laws. I 
apprehend that no such sweeping declaration of tho entire imma- 
teriality of motive in criminal cases, was ever heard before in this, 
or any other country, where the common law prevails. If the prin- 
ciple be sound, then every political officer in the land will be liable 
to impeachment for every mistake, involving a violation of law, and 
no purity of motive, or innocence of intention, will be sufficient to 
screen him from the consequences. 

I congratulate the defendantS| however, convicted though they 
may be, upon the fact that the prosecution has been compelled to 
resort to such a ground in order to secure a triumph through your 
decision. The judgement of this body will be of little consequence, 
if it be based upon a principle which acknowledges the moral inno- 
cence of the parties condemned. You may possibly deprive the 
Secretary and Auditor of their positions for the unexpired portion 
of their terms, but you cannot deprive them of their good name, so 
long as you acknowledge them to be free from the taint of all cor- 
rupt or sinister motive. 

I have alluded to the reason, given by one of the Senators, for hii 
vote to convict, on the trial of John W. Robinson. I understood 
him to say that in pronouncing the defendant guilty upon the firrt 
article of impeachment, he did so because the law held him to be 
affected with knowledge of all his agent's acts, and made him crim- 
inally responsible therefor. I deny the soundness of thfa position, 
and I deny also its applicability in this case. 

From the vote of Senators, in the case of Secretary Robinson, I 
take it for granted that the first Article of Impeachment is the only 
one upon which the present defendant will be liable to be convicted. 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 889 

I ahall therefore confine my attention to that article alone. The 
•ubstance of the charge is this : that the defendant, Hillyer, aathor- 
iied Stevens to sell the bonds at any price oyer 60 cents, and to 
acconnt to the State for only sixty ; that Stevens sold at 85, with 
the fall knowledge of Hillyer ; that inasmuch as the law limited 
the sale to 70, and Hillyer had full knowledge that the sale was 
made at 85, the State was defrauded out of iu just rights. These 
are the effective statements of the charge. 

Now I assert that the most material part of this statement is 
entirely untrue — proved to be so by the most positive and unshaken 
proof. I assume that the asserted knowledge of the defendant is 
the very gist of the offense described in the article ; otherwise, it 
would not have been reiterated, over and over again, as it has been 
in this carefully drawn Article of Impeachment. HiUyer knew that 
Stevens ioa$ getting 85 per cent, for ike hands. Yet he agreed to 
arcept, for the State^ only 60 per cent. Such is the charge ; but in 
order to correspond with the proof, it ought to run thus : Hillyer 
did not know what Stevens was getting for the bonds ; and^ in his 
ignorance, he agreed to accept, for tlie State, only 60 per cent, I insist 
that these two propositions, one of which is true and the other false, 
are as different and repugnant as two propositions can be. The 
latter represents the facts as they are established in testimony ; the 
former is the substance of the charge as presented by the House of 
Representatives. 

In the former trial I endeavored to show how the Secretary and 
Auditor had been designedly kept in ignorance of the facts by Mr. 
Stevens. Yet, in spite of this concealment by the agent, I under- 
stand it to be insisted that, even in a criminal case, a party is held 
to have knowledge of facts which his agent studiously conceals from 
kim, merely because the relation of principal and agent exists 
between them. This is not a case in which the parties ai% engaged 
in a conspiracy, or in which the one is accessory to the crime of 
another. It was no crime — ^no violation of law — for Mr. Stevens 
to sell the bonds at 85 per cent. That was a perfectly lawful act. 
If there was any crime at all, it was in agreeing to take 60 per cent., 
knowing the bonds could be sold at 85. This knowledge is the very 
body of the crime ; yet this is to be presumed, by force of some 
arbitrary rule of law, and in the teeth of overwhelming testimony 

to the contrary. 

The contract between the two State pffieers and Mr. Stevens, has 

been spoken of as a sale of the bonds to him at the rate of 60 per 



390 PB00SEDINO8 IN THX 

cent. ; bat this is not the legal purport of the instrument, as will 
be seen at once upon reading it as follows : 

[Copt.] 

This certifies that we haye employed and constituted B. S. Steyens 
an agent on the part of the State of Kansas to negotiate and sell 
all the seyen per cent bonds of said State, issued in accordance with 
the proyisions of an act of the Legislature of the State of Kansaa, 
approyed May 1, 1861, and an act supplementary thereto, approyed 
June 3, 1861, authorizing the issue and sale of one hundi0d and 
fifty thousand dollars of the bonds of said State; and we hereby 
agree to giye him for his seryices as such agent, all and whateyer 
amount of money he may receiye for said bonds oyer and aboye 
sixty cents (60 cents) on the dollar ; that is to say, for all the 
bonds, belonging to the State, which the said Steyens may sell^ 
he is to pay into the State treasury the sum of sixty cents (60 cents) 
on each and eyery dollar] 

Witness our hands this third day of December, A. D., 1861. 

JOHN W. ROBINSON, Secretary of State, 
GEO. W. HILLYER, AiidUor of StaU. 

Now, according to the terms of this instrument, Mr. Steyens was 
not constituted the agent of these defendants^ but the agent of the 
State. It may be a question whether they had the power of substi- 
tution^ but they undoubtedly assumed to place him in the position 
of agent for the State for the sale of these bonds. The relation, 
therefore, of principal and agent does not exist between the parties. 

Neither does this instrument import a sale of the bonds to Mr. 
Steyens at 60 per cent. It is simply a stipulation that he shall haye 
all oyer 60 per cent, as compensation for his seryices. Nor does this 
paper, in terms, authorize Mr. Steyens to yiolate the law of Kansas 
in the sale of the bonds, for the law is referred to in it, and there- 
fore yirtually made a part of it. View the matter in whateyer 
aspect you may, you can make of it nothing more nor less than t 
contract to allow a contingent compensatio'n to Mr. Steyens, depend- 
ent upon the rate at which the bonds might be sold. To this com- 
plexion it must come at last; and then it follows that the wisdom or 
foUy^ the innocence or criminality of the defendant, is to be deter- 
mined by the state of their knowledge as to the yalue of the bonds 
and the probable rate at which they could be sold. The extraya- 
gance and enormity of the difference between the sum to be paid to 
the State, and that which was to be receiyed by Mr. Steyens, giyw 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 391 

character to the transaction ; and just in the proportion that this 
diffevence was known to the defendants, were thej responsible for 
consenting to its extravagance and enormitj. 

They were prohibited from selling the bonds at less than 70. 
They were, therefore, responsible for the difference between 60 and 
70. The arrangement with Mr. Stevens allowed him 10 per cent. 
at all events. But this is a very different compensation from 25 
per cent. If the defendants had any good reason to know or believe 
that Mr. Stevens would receive this large amount, they might be 
called upon to justify themselves. The facts, however, were artfully 
withheld from them. They were alarmed at the prospect of entirely 
failing in the negotiation ; and, in the view which they had of all 
the circumstances; they evidently felt not only authorized but com- 
pelled to submit to the terms demanded. But I have already argued 
this point, and I forbear a repetition of the argument. It is for 
you to determine, not whether it was wise and prudent for them t9 
make the contract, but whether it was criminal and impeachable. ' 
An honest mistake— even a great error of judgment — is always 
excusable when the motive is good. 

The Attorney General, in concluding the case of John W. Bob- 
inson, made an appeal which, I am sure^ in his cooler moments^ wheo 
not excited by the conflict of argument, he would never have made. 
Hs warned you of the greeting you would receive, at the hands of 
the people, if you acquitted the defendant. He spoke of the 
ploughman on the prairies, and referred you to him for eonsidera- 
tions to control your judgement here. 

The extraordinary principles of law, oQntended for in this case, 
are kindred in their character to this extraordinary appeal. They 
are worthy of each other, and I commend them both — the principles 
of law announced, and the popular appeal — as fit accompaniments 
to grace the results of this trial. 

You are judges. You have taken an oath to do justice according 
to the law and the testimony. You ought to be very far removed 
from popular influences ; and, above all, such appeals to ignorant 
prejudice and passion. I appeal to your consciences and to the 
sacred obligations which rest upon you, to do justice, " without fear, 
favor or affection." 



S92 PR0CBEDINQ8 TN THE 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Two o'clock, p. H. 

The Senate, sitting as a Uigb Court of Impeachment, met pur- 
suant to adjournment. 

President in the chair. 

Roll called. Quorum present. 

Present. — Hon. S. A. Stinson, and Board of Managers, on the 
part of the House of Representatives. 

Hons. Fred. P. Stanton, Wilson Shannon and George W. Smith, 
counsel for respondent. 

George S. Hillyer appeared in person. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, the same order was ohserved in the 
ease of George S. Hillyer, as was ohserved in the case of John W 
Rohinson. 

The President. — Gentlemen, jou hare heard the eridence and 
arguments upon the case of George S. Hillyer, and you will prepare 
to vote upon the first Article of Impeachment, which will now he 
read by the Secretary, 

Secretasy read the first Article. 

The President then took the opinion of the membem of the Court, 
respectively, in the form following : 

Mr. , how say you ? Is the respondent, George S. Hillyer, 

GUILTY or NOT GUILTY of a High Misdemeanor, as charged in 
this Article of Impeachment f 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty in response to the Chair: 
Messrs. Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Curtis, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, 
Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, McDowell, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, 
Sleeper, Spriggs and Mr. President. — 17. 

Those voting Not Guilty were Messrs. Barnett, Denman, Ingalls 
and Lappin.— 4. 

When Mr. Cobb's name was called, he arose in hii place and 
•aid: 

Mr. President : — ^Allusion has been made to the votes of Seia- 



IMPXAGHMENT CASES. 89B 

tors on this floor in some instances, as tbongb there was danger of 
their action conforming to the measure of popular opinion at home^ 
rather than to the justice of the case at bar. When he entered 
upon the duties of Auditor of the State of Kansas, George S. Hill^ 
jer, with uplifted hand, in the presence of his Ood^ took a solemn 
oath to support the Constitution and the laws. When I entered 
upon my duties as Senator and judge in this bodj, I also took a 
solemn oath to do justice to the respondent and the State, according 
to the law and the evidence. That no opinion of my constituent* 
or elsewhere can influence my vote, I do not deem it necessary to 
disclaim. In the confines of my own breast, by the law, and the 
eridence before me, I have tried him ; and I now perform the most 
solemn duty of my life, when I pronounce Oeorge 8. Hillyer Ouiltt 
upon the first Article of Impeachment. 

When Mr. Stevens' name was called, he rose in his place and 
said : 

Mr. President : — ^For the same reasons as in the case of John . 
W. Robinson, I make the same request of the Senate that I did 
then : to be excused from voting, 

By consent, he was excused. 

Whereupon, the President declared that seventeen Senators bar 
ing voted Guilty ^and four Not Guiltt, George S. Hillyer ift- 
pronounced, by the Senate of the State of Kansas, OuiUy of the 
charges contained in the first Article of Impeachment, exhibited 
against him hf the House of Bepresentatives. 



The Secretary then read the second Article of Impeachment, and 
the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the 
preceding form. 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty in response to the Chair: 
Messrs. Cobb, Curtis, Knowles, Lambdin, McDowell, Kankin, Eob^ 
erts, Spriggs and Mr. President. — 9. 

Those voting Not Guilty were Messrs. Bamett, Bayless, Connelly 
Denman, Essick, HoUiday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Lappin, Bees 
and Sleeper. — 12. 

Whereupon, the President declared that nine gentlemen having 
voted Guilty and twelve gentlemen Not Guilty, George S. Hill« 
yer, Auditor of State, is acquitted, by the Senate of the State of 



-894 PEOCEEDINOS IN THE 

Kansaa, of the charges contained in the second Article of Impeach- 
ment, exhibited against him by the House of Representatiyes. 



The Secretary then read the third Article of Impeachment, and 
>the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre- 
vions form. 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty in response to the Chair : 
Messrs. Cobb, Curtiss, Lambdin, McDowell, Eankin and Spriggs. 
—6. 

Those Toting Not Guilty were Messrs. Barnett, Bayless, Connell, 
Denman, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler^ Knowles, 
Lappin, Kees, Roberts, Sleeper and Mr. President. — 15. 

Whereupon, the President declared that six gentlemen having 
voted Guilty and fifteen gentlemen voting Not Guilty, George 
S» Hillyer, Auditor of State, is acquitted, by the Senate of the 
State of Kansas, of the charges contained in the third Article of 
Impeachment, exhibited against him by the House of Representa- 
•tives. 



The Secretary then read the fourth Article of Impeachment^ and 
ihe President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre- 
vious form. • 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty in response to the Chair: 
Messrs. Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Curtis and McDowell. — 5. 

Those gentlemen voting Not Guilty were Messi:s. Barnett, Den- 
man, Essick^ Holliday; Hubbard^ Ingalls, Keeler, Knowles, Lamb, 
din^ Lappin, Rankin^ Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs and Mr. 
President. — 16. 

When Mr. Essick's name was called, he arose in his place and 
said : 

Mr. President : — In reference to the fourth Article, I believe 
Mr. Hillyer guilty of the facts charged, but do not think they con- 
stitute a misdemeanor. Hence I shall vote Not Guilty. 

Whereupon, the President declared that five gentlemen having 
voted Guilty and sixteen gentlemen voting Not Guilty, George 
S. Hillyer, Auditor of State^ is acquitted, by the Senate of the State 



IMPEACHMENT OASES. 395 

of Kansas, of tlie charges contained in the fourth Article of Im- 
peachment, exhibited against him by the House of Representatives. 



The Secretary then read the fifth Article of Impeachment, and 
the President prooeded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre- 
vious form. 

The following gentlemen voted Ouiltt in response to the Chair : 
Messrs. McDowell and Spriggs. — 2. 

Those gentlemen voting [Not Guilty were Messrs. Bamett, 
Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Curtis, Denman, Essiok, Holliday, Hubbard, 
Ingalls, Eeeler, Knowles^ Lambdin, Lappiu; Rankin, Rees, Roberts, 
Sleeper and Mr. President. — 19. 

Whereupon, the President declared that two gentlemen having 
voted Guilty and fourteen gentlemen Not Guilty, George S. 
Hillyer, Auditor of State, is acquitted, by the Senate of the State 
of Kansas, of the charges contained in the fifth Article of Impeach- 
ment, exhibited against him by the House of Representatives. 

The Secretary then read the sixth Article of Impeachment, and 
the President preceded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre- 
ceding form. 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty in response to the Qhair* 
Messrs. Knowles, McDowell, Roberts and Spriggs. — 4. 

Those gentlemen voting Nor Guilty were Messrs. Bamett, Bay- 
less, Cobb, Connell, Curtiss, Denman, Essick, Holliday^ Hubbard, 
Ingalls, Eeeler, Lambdin, Lappin, Rankin, Rees, Sleeper and Mr. 
President. — 17. 

Whereupon, the President declared that four gentlemen having 
voted Guilty and seventeen gentlemen voting Not Guilty, George 
8. Hillyer, Auditor of State, is acquitted, by the Senate of the 
State of Kansas^ of the charges contained in the sixth Article of 
Impeachment, exhibited against him by the House of Represen- 
tatives. 



The Secretary then read the seventh Article of Impeachment, and 
the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre* 
vious form. 



896 PBOOBEDINQS IN THX 

The following gentlemen voted Not Guiltt in response to the 
Chair: Messrs. Barnett, Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Curtis, Denman, 
Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, 
Lappin, McDowell, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggt and 
Mr. President— 21. 

Whereupon, the President declared that no gentlemen haying 
TOted Q-uiLTY and twenty-one gentlemen having Toted Not Guilty, 
George S. Hillyer, Auditor of State, is acquitted, by the Senate of 
the State of Kansas, of the charges contained in the seyenth Artiele 
of Impeachment, exhibited against him by the House of Represent 
tatiree. 

The President then rose and recapitulated the vote thus: 
On the first Article of Impeachment, seyenteen gentlemen having 
voted Guilty and four Not Guilty; on the second, nine gentlemen 
having voted Guilty and twelve Not Guilty; on the third, six gen- 
tlemen having voted Guilty and fifteen Not Guilty; on the fourth, 
five gentlemen having voted Guilty and sixteen Not Guilty; on the 
fifth, no gentleman having voted Guilty and nineteen Not Guilty, 
on the sixth, four gentlemen having voted Guilty and seventeen Not 
Guilty; on the seven th, twenty-one gentlemen having voted Not 
Guilty; it, therefore, appears that George S. Hillyer is found Guilty 
of High Misdemeanor in office, as charged in the first Article of 
Impeachment, and is Acquitted on the second, third, fourth, fifth, 
sixth and seventh Articles. 

The President then proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in 
the following form : 

The Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court of 
Impeachment, having found the respondent, Gkorge S. Hillyer, 
guHty of a High Misdemeanor, is it the opinion of the Court that 
George S. Hillyer should be removed from office? 

• 

Those gentlemen voting in the affirmative were Messrs. Bayless 
Cobb, Council, Curtis, Essick, Holliday, Hubbard, Keeler, Knowles, 
Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs 
and Mr. President. — 18. 

Those gentlemen voting in the negative were Messrs. Denman 
and Ingalls. — 2. 

Whereupon, the President declared that it is the judgment of the 
Senate of the State of Kansas, sitting as a High Court of Impeach* 
ment) that George S. Hillyer be and is removed from the office of 
Auditor of the State of Kansas. 



IMPBAOHMENT OAS^B. 397 

The President then proceeded to take the opinion of the Senate 
in the following form: 

That the Senate of the State of KanBaB, sitting as a High Court 
Impeachment, haying found George S. Hillyer guiUif of a High 
Uisdemeanor, and having reraored him from office, is it the opinion 
of the Senate that the said George 8. Hillyer he disqualified firom hold- 
ing an office of profit, honor or trust, under the Constitution of the 
State of Kansas? 

The following gentleman voted in the affirmative : Mr. Enowles. — 1. 

Those voting in the negative were Messrs. Bamett, Bayless, Cobb| 
Gonnell, Curtis, Denman,£s8ick,Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, 
Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, Rankin, Bees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs 
and Mr. President. — ^20. 

Whereupon, the President declared that one gentleman having 
voted in the a^rmative and twenty gentlemen voting in the nega- 
tive, it is not the opinion of the Senate that George S. Hillyer shall 
be disqualified from holding an office of profit, honor or trusty under 
the Constitution of the State of Kansas. 

TRIAL OF CHARLES ROBINSON. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, notice was given to the Managers of 
the House and the Counsel, that the Senate was ready to proceed 
with the trial of Charles Robinson. 

Messrs. Bayless, Cobb, Knowles, Lappin and Rankin, came for- 
ward, and took the following oath : 

*^ You do solemnly swear, that in all things pertaining to the 
trial of Impeachment of Charles Robinson, yon will do impartial 
justice, according to the law and evidence. So help you Gh>d.'' 

The following agreement was submitted by counsel : 
It is agreed, in open Court, between the Managers and Counsel: 
on the part of the House of Representatives, and the Respondeniy 
that all the evidence heretofore oiFered in the matters of Impeach- 
ment of John W. Robinson and George S. Hillyer, be considered 
as evidence in this case as fUly as if the witnesses had been sworn 
*and testified in this ease, and the depositions and testimony had 
been oiFered and read in this case. 

EviBiNOX of Gen. J. G. Stone, mentioned as being taken on 
Friday^^in the case of Charles Robinson, as per agreement : 



898 PBOOSEDINGS IN THE 

Attorney Qeneral. — General^ what, if anything^ do you know of 
Oovernor Robinson's connection with the bond sale in Washington ? 
Witness. — Not anything. 

Q. Do you know of any arrangement between the Governor and 
Hr. Stevens, prior to the sale ? 
A. I do not. 

Q. Did you ever h^ar him allude to the war bonds f 

A. I don't know that I ever heard him allude to the war bonds. 

. Attorney General to the Defense. — You can take the witness^ 
. Mr. Stanton. — We do not wish to cross examine. 
Gen. Collamore called and sworn on the part of the prosecution- 
Attorney General. — I believe you have been acting as Quarter- 
master General of this State, have you not ? 
A. I have. 

Q. What do you know of the war bonds issued under the act of 
May 7th, 1861 ? 

On entering upon the duties of the office, those bonds were 
promised to me by Governor Bobinson, to subsist and pay the ex- 
penses of transportation of the Kansas volunteers. At that, time I 
supposed the Governor had control of them. About that time, a 
purchase of bacon was made of Mr. Morrow of Lawrenee, under an 
agreement that he would take the war bonds at 100 cents on the 
dollar. I learned, subsequently, that the Governor had no control 
over those bonds. But before I was appointed, and before the 
bonds were created, I had written to parties East to ascertain if they 
could be sold there. The negotiation had so far proceeded that one 
gentleman wrote to me to send on the bonds. This was before I 
learned that the Governor had no control of the bonds. They could 
have been sold at par. 

On the third of July, I met Mr. Dutton, who had control of the 
war bonds, at Lawrence, and asked him if he has disposed of those 
bonds ? My object in the inquiry was to ascertain if, by producing 
my vouchers, I could obtain the money on them, I having spent 
nearly S10,000. He was quite reserved in his manner towards me ; 
00 much so, that I followed him to Topeka. He left in the stage, 
and I came in my buggy. I met him in the office of Governor 
Bobinson, and asked him <* what he would sell $10,000 of those 
war bonds for, providing I found a purchaser V^ He replied 
" that was an impossibility f to which I replied, '' I thought not/' 



IMPEACBMENT OASES. 891^ 

and then repeated my interrogatory. He then said he was going 
the next day to Chicago to negotiate) these bonds, and if any one 
had offers to make, he would consider them when he came back. I 
told him T had expended a large amount of money in subsisting 
and transporting the first and second Regiments, Kansas volunteers, 
and asked if I had my accounts audited, and a warrant drawn on 
the Treasury, if he would give me a corresponding amount of those 
bonds. He said '* no I" This was on the evening of July third, 
in the presence and hearing of Governor Robinson. On the morn- 
ing of the fourth T met G ov(»rnor Robinson near the Topcka House, 
and spoke to him of the strange behavior of Mr. Button. The 
Qovernor said he thought Mr. D. did not understand my proposi- 
tion, and that he would sec him about it. I asked him to do so, and 
in case that he agreed, to have him leave a portion of the bond^ 
with Mr. Hilly er, to be delivered to me on passing my accounts. 
Uc subsequently told me in 1 .awrence that Mr. Dutton had agreed 
to my proposition. 

I subsequently wrote to Mr. Wood word, the Governor's private 
Secretary, for him to see Mr. Hillyer. His reply is dated 10th of 
July. If it is proper, I will read the contents of the letter, or so. 
much thereof as refeni to the transaction. 

[Copy.] Executivk Office. 



LxECUTivE Office. > 

Topeka, Kansas, July 16, 18(52, J 



Gi:n. Collamore. — Dear Sir : I am informed by Mr. Hillyer^ 
that he is not authorized to deliver any bonds during the absence of 
the Treasurer. Says, Dutton remarked to him that he had no 
authority to negotiate the bonds for anything but cash, and that for 
cash, he would as soon sell to Gen. Collamore as to foreign parties. 
Mr. Hillyer knew not that you tried to get a cash proposition from, 
him. Says Mr. I), must have misapprehended your motive. Mr. 
H. suir^ests that you have vour accounts audited as soon as con- 
veniout, and be prepared to present your warrants for payment as 
soon ail the Treasurer returns ; sajs you will receive the ca.sh on 
them, for Dutton is determined to negotiate the bonds at some rata 
before returning. Very Truly, 

J. B. WOODWARD. 

I dropped the subject then till some time in August, when some- 
thing induced me to write to Dr. Woodward again. I wrote, in- 
quiring if there was any funds, and received the following reply 2. 



KX) PB00XXDIN08 IN THl 



State or Kansas, Bxioutivb OFnoB,! 



Topeka, SeptemW 8, 1861. 
GsN. G. W. GoLLAMORB. — Dear Sir : On mj arriral hoHie, last 
erening, I found joors of tlis 8l8t alt. The State Treasurer is in 
town, but is as destitute of funds as when jon last saw him, not 
hating negotiated the bonds, as he anticipated. ICj priyate opinion 
is, that his failure to raise the money, has been a great souroe of 
mortification to him, being so confident prior to making the effort, 
that it could easily enough be done. 

If I can make any inquiries that will be of serrice to you in any 
way, I will do it with pleasure. 

Yours Truly, 

J. B. WOODWARD 

By Attorney General. — At the time you bought bacon, to be paid 
in war bonds at par, did you agree to pay market price or not ? 

Witness. — ^Before purchasingi I had the bacon examined by a 
^ntleman whose opinion on the subject was better than minQ. He 
pronounced the price a fair one for the article. I had told him that 
it was to be paid for in war bonds, and that they could be sold at 
par. 

Q. At the time you proposed to take bonds to the amount of your 
vouchers, what had been expended besides f 
Jl. I could not say, sir^ only what came under my own obseiration. 

'Q. In your official capacity as Quartermaster Ckneral, are not the 
'expenses superrised by you f 
A. Tes, nr. 

^. Would not all legitimate expenses be shown by your Toueheis 
A. They should be. 

Q. Would the Touchers show the whole expenses incurred for the 
two first Regiments ; transportation, &of 
A. Oertainly they should. 

Q. Was this proposition made in presence of the GoTcmor f 
A. It was. 

Q. Was it overstated by you in presence of the Governor, that 
they oould be disposed of at par f 
A. Yes, sir. 

' Q. At what time 7 
A. In the months of May or June, I think. 

'Q. Oould they have been disposed of at that time for parf 



▲. Th%j oottld, sir. 

Q. To whoBi w«re thej aold, if jou know ? 
A. I odIj know by eommon report. 

Q. Did yon ever kaye any other conTersation with OoTOrnor 
Robinson, in relation to these bonds, other than that you have 
stated? 

A. In the month of May or JTnne, I may have stated to Oot- 
emor Robinson, seyeral times, that these bonds eonld be sold for 
100 oents on the dollar, but not since. I found the Governor had 
no eontrol over them. I thought then, and still think, that he sup- 
posed at the time he had such eontrol. 

Q. Did you have any eonyersation in relation to these bonds, prior 
to the passage of the law ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the substance of that conversation ? 

A. To this Sfffbot : That I had written to some eastern fUends isi 
relation to selling the bonds, should they be created. 

Q. Did you state to him the information you received in reply ? 
A. I will not be positive that I did. 

Q. What was that tnfonnation t 

A. I oaanot stele without rAfemnoa to the letter received by sse 
ftom Boston. 

Q. How early in the season did you have your fast conveisation ; 
when you told him you could sell at par t 
A. I should think not ftr from the month of June. 

Q. Did you ever have any conversation with the Oovemor in re- 
gard to the amount that was to be issued J 

A. The aoMunt was named as t20,000. That was the amount 
that Oovemor Robinson said I could have to use. 

Q. Who was the bacon purchased of? 
A. Robert Morow* 

OnOSS BXAMIIIATIOM BT MMnilSB. 

Mr. Stanton. — ^Will you state from whom you received informa- 
tion that thcee bonds could be sold at par ? 

A. Geoig* L. Steams. I %Iso wrote to Governor Andrsw. I 
have seen Mr. Stearns sbce, and not only his letters which I have 
nowy but he himself has iM mt the bondn oeuld have been sold. 

Q. After they weie iMmd did yon inlbiB Dntton T 
A. No, sIb. 



402 mOCBlDINOB IH TBS 

Q. Did you infonn Gk>T. Bobinson f 

A. I informed the Qovernor that tliey oo«)d be eold for one han- 
dred oentB on the dollar. 

Q. When did yon give him the information ? 
A. On the third of Jnly. 

Q. Where was it T 
A. In Ihs offoe. 

Q. In this city ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who was present f 
A. Mr. Dntton. 

» 

Q. Why did yon not inform Mr. Dntton where the bonds could 
be negotiated? 

A. Mr. Dntton was about to take them to Chicago for this pur- 
pote, and he behaved so strangely to me that I did not wish to have 
any more to do wilh him. 

Q. Yon had the good of the State at heart, Mr. CoHamore, why 
did you not tell Mr. Dntton that it wss Mr. Steams who wrote yon 1 

A. His behavior at the time, and refusal to name any price at 
which he would negotiate, as, also, his refbsal to take par, made me 
think it was of no use. 

Q» Did you offer him an hundred cents on the dollar t 
A. I did. 

Q. For how many? 

A. To the amount of my vouchers. 

Q. How much was that? 
A. Seveal thousand dollars. 

Q. Did he decline ? 
A. He did. 

Q. Upon what grounds ? 
. A. He did not state hia grounds. 

Q. Did Mr. Dntton ever bftr you those bonds ? 

A. In the month of March, last, the early part, I came here and 
nw Mr. Dutton. I presented him a warrant for about f7,000, for 
payment. He had not the money in his safe, and wetat to Law- 
rence, with me, to obtain it. We ibere saw Mr. Sntth, df^hier of 
the Lawrence Bank, who remarked he could do nothing tiB he eaw 



IMPBACHMSKT CA8B8. 408 

tlM Qvwnar^ After tuning the GKnrernor, Mr. Dutlon oalled on bm 
•Md aiked me to take • draft, or note of Boberi 8. Steyens, oa 
lliirty days, whioh I refiued. At a aubseqnent interriew, he aeked 
ne to take 15,000 in War Bonds. I asked kirn if he weald pay the 
warrant I held on the treasury of the State of Kansas 1 He replied 
by repeating his interrogatory, '^if I would aocept the t6,000 in 
War Bonds 1" I answered by repeating my interrogatory again. 
He then replied, *' If you will not reeeire the bonds, I will pay yon 
jn money.'' 

Q. Did yott refuse to take those bonds ? 

A. They were net offered to me only in the mftnner I have stated. 
I did not refuse them. 

Q. Did yon take those bonds 1 
A. He neyer offored me any bonds. 

Q. Did you ever oall for those bonds f 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did yon e?er knve any of these bonds in yonr possession T 
A. I never saw one. 

Q. Did you ever make any other offer for those bonde — that is in 
money f 

A. No, sir— other than what I have stated in my direct ezamina- 
tiaD) ss made in the Oovemor's office on the third of July, last. 

Q. Did you make s proposition f 
A. None— other than that. 

Q. At any time subsequently ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever make a proposition to Mr. Carney to take them 7 
A. I stated to Mr. Carney that I would leave the bonds with him 
as security for the purchases I was making for the State. 

Q. Was it a part of the eontract with Mr. Carney, if you could 
not sell the bonds, diat he sliould take them at certain rates ? 

A. Mr. Carney reAised to give credit to the State, preferring te 
'gi?e credit en my own individual accounts. He refhsed to reeeire 
the bonds as security, preferring to leave them with me for sale, as 
I then had a prospect of selling them at par. 

■ 0. What necessHy was tbere to let Mr. Oam^ have them if you 
eould get par for them ? 
A. It was necessary to have the goods at once fbrthe Volunteers, 



404 pm>0KX>iira9 iff tbb 

tnd if 1m woaUl gire Medii lo tli« fltat*, I psopdoed to kiire At 
bonds whh him M aeoorit^. He doolinodi ud pvopootd to give om 
OTodit. 

Q. Did the Gk)Tetkior not say, in any conyersation, that he would 
use his influence to get the bonds for yon ? 

A. No, sir. He had promised them, and spoke about my haring 
them. It was not fbr some time that I knew Gk)y. Robinson had no 
eontrol oyer them. I made a jonrney to Topeka to obtain them, 
and was told that the seal had not arriyed to plaoe upon theoL 
I did not then know that the Goyemor had no oontrol over than. 
I said nothing'fidrther to him after I found this out 

Q. When was it he promised you the bonds for sale ? 
A. In the early part of May. 

Q. Do you remember Ooy. Bobinsen calling on you, at any time, 
and asking where these bonds could be sold f 
A. I do not. If he had done so I should haye reooUectad it 

Q. Did you net tell Oeoige W. Sauth he had oalled en you, nnd 
you refused to tell 1 
A. No, sir. I neyer told him anything of the kind. 

Q. What did you tell him on that subject t 
A. Nothingi sir. 

ISLAIflVATIOlff nr OHtH MMmJWOk* 

By Attorney Goneral. — Did Dutton or Bobinson eyer ask yo^ to 
whom these bonds could be soldf 

w 

A. Neyer, sir. 

By Senator,— Gould all the war bonds haye been aold at jpar f 
Witness.— Tee, sir, 

Q. Was no arrangement of any kind eyet made by you w^th Mr. 
Carney in reference to these war bonds? 

A. Neyer. 

Q. Did you neyer, while you wort tsptetbg to havu t|a di^poii- 
^on of ihese bonds, haye any uadenlaading or telle with Mr. Chir- 
qey as to what you if ould do with the bonds, with him, in eate jm 
got them into your poss easion f 

A. Nothing farther than whai I haye stated. 

Q. At the time you made the offsr to Dutton, on the lUi4 of 
July, what amount of money had you expended fet the State t 
A. Seyeipl dMiwd doBan. 



mnAOBXENT 0ABS8. 405 

Q. Wlifti time did you lutTe jovr aoeoteto andlUfd 1 
A. On the letk or 17tk of lasl Jtawury. 

Q. At what time did you tint reorive infenitAtion from Mr. 
fiteanifl that the war bonds conld be told at par t 
A. Some time in Jane, I tbink. 

' Q. On what day did yon receive Mr. Steama' letter ielRnrg yon 
to fend him the war bonds, and that he wonld take Aem at par? 
&. I eonld not tell, without reftrenoe to his letter. 

■ 

Q. IKd any of the ilupplies, furnished by yon to the State o{ 
Kansas, belong to any society Sast 7 If they did, or oyer did, state 
Iriiat society, and what connection, if any, Mr. Stams had with that 
society. 

A. Mr. Steams was chairman of the New England Kansas Belief 
Committee, of which, at that time, I was acting as agent. At the 
time of the call for volunteers, by the Preiiident, I had, stored, 
sereral hundred sacks of flour, belonging to that committee, which 
lour was made into bread for the rolutteers, and charged at prices 
as named in bills audited by the Auditor, which bills have been paid 
and account veadered to the committee. 

[H. B. DOTTON'8 TESTIMONY,] 
fi. B. Dutton called and sworn on part of prose<nition. 

Q. At what time were the war bonds issued f 

A. They were issued last June, and dated July first. 

Q. What oonversation, if any, did you hare with Governor Kob- 
inson in relation to the sale of the bonds ? 

A. I asked him ff it was necessary that nearly the amount 
mentioned in the bill, should be raised. 

Q. Were those bonds signed by him f 
A. They had his signature Co them. 

Q. What amount was signed f 
A. Nearly f40,000. 

Q. What amount did he suggest should be sold? 
A. I den't think he ever told me. 

Q. Was he aware of the sale to Stevens ? 
A. Not at that time, that I know of. 

Q. Did he know the price they weie to be sold at, before the sale 7 
A. No, sir. not to my knowledge. 



409 psoonMNOB nr xoM < 

Q. Do you remember tlie oenTefMiiioii between Ckn. Oollamoie 
tad the Ck)Tenior, «Uaded to by Qen. OoUamore f 
A. I do. About that time. 

Q. Will you state tbe eonyenatioii f 

A. I met a gentleman at Lawrenoe, wkom I afterwards found to 
be Gen. Collamore. I did not know bim then, and told him 80, 
when he spoke to me about the war bonds. He then introdueed 
himself, telling me that Oovemor Bobinson had promised him the 
Ijionds. I told him the QoTemor had no oontrol oter them. He said 
he would go up to Topeka and see the Gk>vemor. I oame up in 
the stage, and Oen. Collamore arrived shortly after. I wss in the 
QoTemor's oflioe while he was there. During the oonyersation, he 
said the bonds could be sold at par. I did not pay much atteniioa 
to this. 1 had heard others say the same thing. He asked me 
t^en to take a certain amount of scrip, and give him bonds whioh I 
declined. Afterwards, the Goyemor told me, as I was about te 
start East, that I had better leave the bonds for Oen. Collamore. 

Q. At the time he proposed the scrip, did you know it was re* 
ceived for his account for the support of troops J 
A. I did not know there were any such accounts. 

Q. Did he explain that his account^ or scrip were for the subsis- 
tance of the troops f 
A. I believe he did, 

Q. Did you know those accounts were payable out of the war 
funds r 

A. I presumed the accounts were so payable. 

Q. Did he present his accounts to you ? 
A. Only his person. 

Q. Did he make you an offisr for the bondaf 
A. No, sir, not to my recollection. 

Q. Did he teU you to whom, or whei« they eould be sold at |sr f 
A. He said they CQuld be sold at par. 

Q. Did you ask him where or to whom diey couhlbesoldatparr 
A. I did not. I did not believe they could be sold ^i par, and 
don't yet. 

Q. Where did you leave the bonds for Mr. GoUamore f 
A. I left them here in my safe. 



IMFBAOBIUUIT OASIS, 407 

"Q. Did joa leare them with Mr. HUlyer? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did yott promise to do so 7 
' A. I neTor did. 

Q. Did yoa inform him you hsd left them for him ? 
A. I do not reoolleet weing him sgsin till Jsansry last. 

Q. Did you then ofler him the honds ? 

A. At the first time scrip was oflbrsd me, I offered him the 
honds r ^^ 

Q. Did he take them ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he refnse to take them 7 

A. He eraded the question. I asked him '^ if he would take 
the honds I had kept for him J" He replied, " will yon pay my 
aooount" I asked him again, to which he replied as before. This 
I considered an etasion. 

Q. Where are those honds now J 
A. In my safe. 

Q. Coald Gen. OolUmore have had them at any time by presenting 



scrip? 
A. Tea, sir. 

Q. Yott kept them there for that parpose, did you ? 
A. I did. 

IXAMINATIO!! IN OHIIF RIStJMSD. 

*Q. When did you offer them to Gen. Collamore f 
A. Some time in ICaTch. 

Q. Where r 

A. In Lawrence. 

Q. Where did you meet him t 
A. Met him here. 

Q. What was his business here 1 

A. To get his accounts paid, I suppose. 

'Q. Was it ^d then? 
A. It has been paid. Not that day. 

'Q. Where did you go with him f 

A. Went to Lawrence. 

Q. Did you offer him the bonds here f 



4D8 pBfMODTiroi yk vrv 

A. No, sir. 

Q. How long did yott remain at Lawrence with him ? 
A. I was there two or three days. 

Q. Did you offer him the bonds before yon had the trouble about 
getting the m6ney ? 

A. I offerod him the bonds the next day after I got to Lawrence. 
The bankers told me they had not, got the money. 

Q.. DM jFOtt haye the bonds witik yo« 1 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever tender them to him ? 
A I nerer handed them to him. 

Q. Where were they ? 
A. In my safe. 

Q. Ton say they are there yet ? 

A. They are there yet. I did not take them down with me, be- 
eanse I did not^ nor never have supposed he wanted them. 

By a Senator.— Where is the balance of $9,000 of those war 
bonds? 
A. In my safe. 

Q. Hare you any other bonds on hand now except those $9,000 T 
A. No, sir. 

[JOHN W. ROBINSON'S TESTIMONY.] 

John W. Robinson called and sworn on part «f the pvoseeutioii. 
Q. What, if anything, do you know of Qofvennor Biobinson 
signing the war bonds ? 

A. I knew that he signed them. 

Q. What amount ? 

A. My impression is that he signed the whole amount used— $81,- 
000. I don't know whether he signed the rest, 

Q. Did you ever have any conyersation with the Governor in 
regard to those bonds f 

A. I do not know whether it was Mr. Dutton or Gt)vemor Rob* 
inson, who came to me for my signature. I Vent into Dutton's 
office and signed them. 

Q. Do you remember any conversation with the Governor, about 
those bonds J 



IlfFXAOHinBNT CA8X8. 40^ 

A. I donH remember anything about them, ezeept the signing of 



Q. j^fore yon left Washington, what, if any arrangement wan 
made by yon, and the Governor and Mr, Hillyer, about the disposi- 
tion of the seven per eent. bonds ? 

A. No real arrangement was made, as I haye stated before ; we 
had a oonveisation about them. 

Q. Was anything said about selling the bonds to Mr. Stevens F 
A. Mr. Stevens said he would purchase the bonds. 

Q. What proposition did Stevens make at that time t 
A. I do not remember that he made any propoeiUon^ but Mr,. 
Hillyer and myself had an undezstanding that we eould sell a por* 
tion at forty cents, and the remainder at seventy cents. 

Q. Did he offer you, at any time, prior to your going to Washings 
ton, less than seventy cents ? 
A. I would not swear that he did. 

Q. Did the Oovemor know^ prior to your leaving fbr Washington^ 
you would sell at sixty cents, if you could get no more f 

A. The conversation alluded to was long before we went to^ 
Washington. When I came back, I heard that the GK)vemor bad 
eaid he thought we could not sell the bonds at all. 

Q. Did you receive any written communication from him while^ 
in Washington f 

A. We did not, to my knowledge. 

Q. Was he aware that Stevens intended to purchase them J 
A. I do not know that he knew. 

Q. Prior to the sale in Washington, was the Oovemor aware of 
the transaction f 
A. I cannot say that he was. 

Q. Have you heard him say anytUng about it^ since you came 
backr 

A. I have heard him converse about it, several times since our 
arrival home. 

Q. Did he, at any time, consent that they might be sold at less 
than seventy cents ? 

A. In no other way, but the one I have alluded to. As I said, 
I understood him as agreeing to any sale that we might make. 

' Q. Do you know if the Oovemor was interested with Mr. 
Stevens f 



410 PR0CX1DIN08 IN THX 

A. No, air. 

Q. Do you know of hb receiriiig any emolument from SfceTWtt, 
on the sale of thoee bonds ? 

A. No, sir, not a farthings direct or indirect. 

Q. Do you know of hia intrusting the State bonds to Stereaa ? 
A. Don't know anything about it. 

Q. Did the OoTcrnor sanction the sale of the bonds after jofii 
returned ? 

A. I heard him say, " that as a matter of policy, that it was the 
best thing that could haye been done, but that he had examined 
the law, and that he would not haye sold less than seyanty cents/' 

OSOM SZAMIIf8I> BT BXFXN8K. 

Q. You say, when you understood the Ooyernor to say you could 
Aell at less than seyenty cents, the contract had failed ? 
A. There was no contract whateyer. 

Q. Did he say he had examined the law ? 
A. No, sir, he did not say anything about it. 

<). Was Hillyer present f 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was any body else 7 

A. I think ICr. Steyens was in the room part of the time. 

Q. You say the Goyemor could not haye known of your pro- 
codings in Washington, because you knew nothing of it yourself f 
A. I neyer heard that Goyernor Robinson knew anything of k. 

By a Senator. — Did the Goyernor say, or agree, that if sixty 
«eats could be got for the bonds, they ought to be sold J 

A. As I haye said, the first conyersation was a discussion as to 
the necessity of getting money into the State Treasury. No certaia 
4erms was mentioned. Some one broached the idea, that t50,000 
«f the bonds could be seld at forty cents on the dollar. 

By the President. — I will ask you the question that is in the re- 
port of the inyestigating committee, that is : Had the board 
authorised any one to sell the bonds prior to your going to Wash- 
ington? 

A. No, sir, I think they had not. Some suggestrons were made, 
but they all fell through. Ur. Steyens made a propoeitioii or oiler, 
but I know not what it was. I wish to state, in regard to the 
«nswer to that question as printed in the pamphlet report of the is* 



OAflM. 411 

nbkigtliag oommitlee, <lie aiifwvr is inooneei, tod I requested them 
io ftlkm miB to eoneoi it; tliejr told me I shoiiM, but I was nerer 
iflbided the <^portwiity* 

OBOM BXAMUrBD vt DBimiru. 

Mr. StsDton. — ^Did you ny you asked the oommittee to oorreot 
this answer or allow yoa to do so T 
Witness. — ^Tes, sir, I did. 

[GEORGE 8. HILLTBB'8 TESTDCONT.] 

G^rge 8. HiUyer oalled and sworn on the part of the State : 

Attorney General. — ^Do yoa know anything of the GoTemor's 
signing the war bonds J 
Witness. — ^Tes, sir. I know that his name was attaohed to them. 

Q. Did you ever hare any eonrersation with him in relation to 
tiiemr 

A. Nerer, not a word. 

Q. Prior to your going to Washington, did yon hare any eon* 
rersation with the GoTemor as to the prioe they should be sold s4 f 

A. We had a oonversation in the Gkyrernor's room, as stated ia 
the Seeretar/s evidence. 

Q. What was the substance of that eonrersation f 

A. It was a general conversation in relation to the bonds. 

Q. Was any price Sxed to negotiate, and consented to by the 
Ooremor ? 

A. I think not. Our discussion was in relation to the general 
power of the board, and the limits at which we might sell. 

Q. Did Goremor Robinson know you were going to Washington 
to sell the bonds f 
A* I do not know if he did or not 

Q. Did he assent to you and John W. Robinson going to sell 
themf 

A. I don't McoUeet whether we had any diseet oeoTersataon with 
the GoTomor about it The Sectetary did not know whether he 
would go to Washington or not, when ha loft Kamns. 

Q. Was the GoTomor aware that Sterens was to purchase the 
bonds f 

A. I don't know that he was. 

Q. Have you heard him say he was aware Stevens would nego* 
tiais ihem? 



41S nMMVSMHOs nr 

. i(. i htuft hftd hift Uitb ooiiTtfiilioii wUk liki. I leportad Hm 
tnuupaotu^ whm I Cime back, and lli«fiBoenxi]roiBto; lisftkoiigM 
it was a good thing tka bonds were aold, but Teiy little ma said. 

Q. Did he tTerexpieM any diaaeBit or aiBent to the tranaaotion 7 
A. Noy aixi neither aaient nor diasent. 

Q. Were yon present at the time of tiie oonmrsation aUiiddd to 
by Seoretary Robinson ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he assent then as to the prioe I 

A. I don't know that there was any prioe mentioned. If any- 
ihfng was said about the prioe, I haye forgotten. Nothing resulted 
from that oonversation. 

0B088 BXAMINBD BT D1FEN8B. 

Q. Did you understand the (Joremor to assent or dissent to the 
sale of 60,000, without limit 7 

A. He said something about examining the law, but did not 
inale kny other remark. 

Q. Did he say he would examine; or had examined- the law 7 
A. He said he was not posted, and so expressed himself. 

Q. He did not assent, then, to your opinion as to the priee 7 
A. I think not. 

Q. WheUryou went to Washbgton« did you expect to get seren^ 
eents7 
A. I e:q»ected to, if I sold at all ' 

Q. Durlig your stay in Washington, did yo« ionefepoBid with the 
fioyezoor!^ 
A. I think I wrote him two or three letters. 

Q. Did he oyer adyise you wUle in Washftaigtai, in legird to'the 
iale7 . 

A. I neyer got a letter from him. 

Q. Than he^Niuld not assent to your sale at sixty eents 7 
A. 1 never sentioned to him the prioe of the bondsj, but merely 
mentioned, I was making effi>r(a to sell, and hoped to sueceed. 

Pxesediition here rested their:eiw. 

[B. 8. STEVENS' TESTIMONY.] 

Senator B. 8. Steyens called and sworn on part of the defense. 
Q. Will you state if you oyer applied to Gh>yemor Bobinson for 



41ft 

liiMe bonds, and if h% ever oonsenied to lell them for lew then 
WTenty oentef 

A. I did, sir. As I stated in my eridenee a few dajs sinoe, the 
Auditor and Secretary were of tfie opinion diat 50,000 of the bonda 
eonld be sold for less than seTen,ty cents on the dollar. They gave 
me a statement, signed by themselves, offering to sell that amount aft 
fbrty cents. Some time subsequently, I offered the paper to the 
^vernor to sign, which he daeliaed doing, 

Q. Did he give his reasons for not signing ? 
A. He said he had examined ilwbw, and did not think it gave 
nuthority for the sale, at that price f 

Q. What did you do with that paper J 
A« I destnqfed it 

' Q. Was you in the Governor's room during the conversation 
alluded to heretofore r 

A. I was in the Governor's offce once or twice, but did not hear 
•ay of the conversation. 

Defense rested their case. 

George 8. ^iUyer recalled. 

By • Senator. — ^Why does not the amount reeelTed ftr the bosdai 
•how the same in the Auditor's r^KWi f 

A. The reason wasy the money had not then eome into the 
Treasury, and I ezpeeted to make another report in selatiott to the 
pale of the bonds. 

Hon. Davies * Wilson announced on behalf of the Board of 
Managers, that in th«r oj^on, that this case presented featurse 
^Uhrernt ftom that in the other eases, that it would be his iutj io 
yts e u t en atgument in lehition to those pointSi which duty has 
devolved upon me nifcer unexpectedly ; if the Senate will adjeuru 
tffl 7 o'ohMik, he would then endeavor to present the case to them 
hi behalf of the House of Representatives. 

On motion of Mr. Ingalls, took a recess till 7 o'obok in th« 
evening. 



4H nMomires m 



BYBNINO SESSION. 

nie hour of se^en liaying arriyed, the Senftte was called to order. 
[AEaUMBNT OP DAVIES WILSON.] 

Hob. Dayies Wilaon, in opening the argmnenlB on the pari of iht 
proBecniion, aaid : 

: Hr. BBmtaimaT and Gkhtlbmsn op thb High Oodrt of 
Impsaohmbiit : 

In appearing before you, sunonnded by 00 brilliant an aaeembly, 
and in presence of this array of diBtingaished eoonael, I feel my 
want of skill worthy the dignity and gravity of the occasion. So 
long haye we been occupied by the details of these trials^ ttat we 
may hare lost a full appreciation of the weighty import of these 
matters, and by familiarity with the proceedings, we may foiget 
how much they concern the accused, and ourselves and the people 
of the State. Well might I hesitate, therefore, recalling theoe 
things, were it not for the remembrance that I am here to defend 
.the honor, and guard the wrifaie of the State. If it be true of 
any one, it certainly cannot' be laid to me that there exist any 
liidden or unworthy mottres, to aiet or to speak. While I have no 
plurtgr jeatouay to gratify, no personal luvenge to wreak, no petty 
malice to indulge — so I have no favors granted or sought to bid mt 
pause. 

Who is the respondent 1 The Gh>venior of the State ; the meet 
exalted personage known to our laws— the head and firont of our 
body politic. Nay ! were it'possible, he is more than that — Gharlos 
fiobinson. He it. is, wh^ in the night of our history, was like a 
fall, bright moon, cool and clear, illuminating, our darkness by Us 
wisdom, and if he emerge from this eclipse without spot ot loM, 
well may we all rejoice, and no one more than L He who but a 
short time ago defended and guided this people, and whom that 
people, in the fulness of their gratitude, invested with the purple 
of supreme authority and granted the soepter of their power, is 
here arraigned by that same people to answer the charges of high 
misdemeanor in office, of prostituting that authority, and abusing 
that power. 

No eitisen of the State can feel more kneely than I do, how mmA 



IMPEACHMENT CA8E8. 415 

of shame that would bring to the people, were not honor and justice 
to he vindicated by the prompt punishment of the offender, eyen 
though he be Charles Robinson — Governor. As Brutus sternly 
preserved the honor of his name, though by the sacrifice of his own 
son on the altar of justice, so the people of Kansas, would merit 
anew the high laudation of their friend, now the chief in the 
national councils, as the most virtuous people, by surpassing, if 
need be, even Brutus. Precious as may be our tried friends and 
trusted leaders, yet more precious should be purity and integrity. 
And when, in these venal days, is given us the privilege of proving^ 
our allegiance to virtue^ and honor and truth; even at so great a 
price, let us be bold to set an illustrious example, and declare that 
here at lea.st, there arc none so exalted, none so protected from 
process of law^ none so powerful as to do wrong, yet fear do» 
penalty. 

[ do not propose to speak to you at any length of the charges^ 
the law or the evidence in the case. My colleague la far more able 
to present the argument to you than I am, and my strength will 
not enable me to do more than to state the main points very briefly. 

The first article recites the illegal signing of what are termed 
" War Bonds,'' to the amount of fifty thousand dollars. The re- 
maining four articles charge complicity with the illegal sale of the 
seven per cent, bonds, in various ways, all which are included in the 
charge of conspiracy. T frankly admit that no evidence has been 
elicited sustaining any of the charges of such complicity, except, 
so far as various eircuniKtances seem to point to the conspiraoj 
charged. It need excite no surprise that such a conspiracy cannot 
be positively est^blisheti ; for the only witnesses to that charge, are 
ihey who thcmselvci^ are charged as fellow-conspirators. Nor is it 
absolutely necessary to have such proof, for it is permitted to draw 
an inference of conspiracy from acts and circumstances. Those act» 
and circumstances have been so fully discussed^ not only in the 
arguments in the preceding cases, but among yourselyts, that I will 
not underlakc to repeat thutu. 

The first charge, however, presents a new phase in this catte, dit 
fercut from its corresponding charges in the e^ij»e of the Secietairj 
of State, or in that of the Auditor. 

The law authorizing the issuance of *' War Bonds," providcS|ii^ 
Ihe first section, for borrowing twenty .thousanji dollars and no 
more ; next for the preparation of bpnds to the amount of the loaa^ 
mnd no more ; and then for the execution, or signing of those bonda 



416 PEOOHDINOS 19 THl 

4 

by At Gk)Tenior and Treaannr. The Saatetaiy lavequred to oova- 
teraign these bonda, and die Auditor to register them ; bat it has 
been elaimed that these are merely " minisiertar' acta. Were it 
indeed tme, in sueh a sense, that neither the Auditor nor the Seere- 
tary eoold be held to any liability for the orer-issae, yet the reapon- 
aibility of the GoTemor is greater, and his aot is far more impor- 
tant. He it is who, by signing these bonds, binds the State. 
Without his aot, these bonds oould nerer exist) and if the aota 
acquired of the Auditor and Seoretary are merely '^ ministerial'' 
and not discretionary, if they oould be compelled by order of oourti 
to register and ooontersign as many bonds as the Tresaurer and 
Ooremor saw proper to prepare and execute, as counsel hare 
asserted, surely the Treaaurer and Ooremor act in no such capacity, 
and must be held responsible for any illegal or fraudulent inane. 
^The Gk)Temor, as well as the Treasurer, becomes the agent of the 
State in the matter, and hence responsible to the State, for what he 
kas done. 

I regret that I was unable to hear the able argument of the dis- 
Unguikhed gentleman who, in considering this question, quoted an 
aot of Oongress, similar to the statute now under consideration, and 
claimed that it should be a precedent for the construction of our 
statute. I remember, howcTer, that the law of Oongress requires 
a report to be made of the " rate'' at which the sales mi^ be 
effiftcted, clearly contemplating and proTiding tn " rates." But no 
jpart of our statute contemplates any rate of disoount whateTcr. 
If or was it prorided that these bonds should be disoounted. STca 
the Qoremor himself, in a mesiMge to the House of Bepieaenta- 
iives, at the same sesrion at which the bill passed, speaks of "the 
debt of $20,000'' which thelaworeatea— notof " the debtof t40«- 
000." The inference is clear that this issue was not only illegal, 
but that the Goremor so regarded it 

Not only is the aot of the Ghiremor illegal, and one that he knew 
to be illegal, and one for which he must be aooountable, but it i^ an 
aot of great injury to the State. For oonriider that the people aie 
eompeUed to redeem those bonds in two years, and pay ten per oeni 
inteieat annually upon tfiem, that thus they must be taxed eighteea 
thousand six hundred doUata each yeat^— to be paid not in warranli, 
er sorip or labor, but in hard odn ; and that the benefit to them is 
itterely the pleasure of using tweWe thousand six hundred doUao 
a t&w weeka sooner than it could be oolleoted by taxation, and you 
^vill appreeiafte the natuie of the transaction, and the great wsoof 



• 



impeaohmeKt gases. 417 

done to the State. Every drop of sweat that falls from the brow 
of the laborer in your fields, gleams with the hard earned money 
that is wrung from his scanty treasures, by this violation of law. 
Every field has a row of grain to be sold to pay the tax that is 

created by this high misdemeanor. 

« 

Thus, Senators, at the bidding of the House of Representatives, 
And on behalf of the people in whose name they act, I have laid 
this case before you. Once wronged, Kansas found a champion on 
every loyal hearthstone, and the gifted and learned Cicero of the 
United States Senate, did not hesitate to defend her at the peril of 
his life, — ^but now this new ** crime against Kansas'' is perpetrated^ 
not, as heretofore, by armed enemies from beyond her borders, but 
by her own favored, honored and trusted children, and the mantle 
of her championship has fallen upon shoulders as humble as mine. 
In her name, Senators of Kansas, I appear before you ; in her 
name I impench her Governor of high misdemcauors in office, and 
I call upon you, by the love and filial piety you owe the State of 
your adoption^ which has confidingly placed her honor in your hands, 
to vindicate and defend her. 

For more than five hundred years, the process of impeaohment 
has been the constitutional defense of our Anglo SajFon raoe^ 
against official usurpation and corruption. The annals of those five 
oenturies of English historv, contain many a record of the trials of 
men high in office, for infidelity to their trusts* Nor is the history 
of our own nation, nor that of the several states wanting in such 
examples. Before this most august of tribunals, the unjust judge, 
the faithless chancellor, the corrupt minister and secretary, and the 
oppressive Qovemor, have been summoned, and there are but few 
records of darker deeds than their trials unfold. Extortion, bri- 
bery^ theft, tyranny and treason, have been there exposed ; but vain 
would be the search among the annals of crime, whose magnitude 
has made them historic, for a precedent to this. 

Perhaps the most memorable impeachment, is that to whJoh 
reference has already been made more than once before you ; that 
of the Governor of a great State, a trial, the causes and incidents 
of which, have been delineated by the pen of the historian and 
poet, the voice of the orator and the pencil of the artist. Just 
seventy-five years ago, Warren Hastings was impeached by the 
House of Commons for plundering the Indies, of which he had 
been Oovemor. His guilt is unquestioned ; yet how is 'his offense 
27 



418 PROCEEDINQS IN THE 

extenuated by comparison with that of which your Governor now 
stands accused ! Warren Hastings, appointed by an English com- 
pany, ruled over a people to whom he owed neither gratitude nor 
allegiance, and whom^ as an Englishman, he regarded his inferiors 
in rights and in blood. Your Governor was the elect of the people, 
their servant and not their ruler ; they in all respects his equals, 
and he owing them both gratitude and allegiance. The Indians 
were a conquered people, had already been oppressed by native 
despots^ and had few aspirations for independence. The people of 
Kansas were American citizens, they had secured their long en- 
dangered independence, and had vindicated their manhood, and 
their Governor was chosen to sustain and protect them. What 
Hastings sent to England^ he took chiefly from the wealthiest of his 
subjects. Your Governor robbed the poorest of his fellow-citizens. 
Hastings extorted millions, boldly and greatly. Your Governor 
stole thousands secretly and meanly. Hastings robbed his subjects 
for the benefit of his masters. Your Governor defrauded his 
masters, for the benefit of a few unknown speculators. 

But the circumstances of the people of Kansas added new infamy 
to the crime. Here was the battle field between Slavery and Free- 
dom on this continent. Freedom summoned the men who loved 
Justice more than Riches, and Right more than Honors. For her 
sake they came, sacrificing social position, home^ wealth and refine- 
ment, to wage a four years' war against enemies in the field and in 
eabinet. Insult, robbery and murder vainly strove to intimidate 
them; the bribes of Peace and Wealth, especially alluring to a 
people contending against odds, and weighed down by poverty, were 
oficred only to be spurned. At last they triumphed, and a new 
star, (never star more steadfast,) shone in our National Heavens. 
There stood Kansas, like a dowerless maiden — Freedom her sole 
birthright. Fidelity her single Jewel. Cheerfully she assumed the 
burdens and responsibilities of a State Government she was ill able 
to bear ', asking only from those who sought to administer it, that 
that they should be true to Liberty. 

Thus honored and trusted by a gallant, but hitherto unfortunate 
State, these officers might have protected, if they could not enrich 
her; to respect, if they could not give her power; and the grati- 
tude of a magnanimous people would have added its rewards, to 
that of unsullied honor. They chose to betray the people by whom 
they had been trusted, to dishonor the emose which had honored 



IMPEACHMENT CASE^. 419 

them, and verily tLej have their reward. " The crime of Judahls 
written with a pen of iron and with the point of a diamond." 

I need not to multiply reasons for the conviction of the respon- 
dent. Your oath demands it, for you have sworn '* that in all 
things pertaining to this trial you will do impartial justice, accord- 
ing to the Idw and the evidence." State pride demands it, that 
Kansas^ so lately the favorite of the nation, become not a by- word 
of reproach and contempt. Your prosperity demands it, that the 
burden of taxation be not hurled prematurely and wrongfully upon 
our young State, banishing the thriftful emigrant from her soil, 
yet denying the comforts that taxation should purchase. Freedom 
demands it, that her devotees be not branded as the accomplices of 
fraud. Morality demands it, that the coming generation be not 
corrupted by the example of great public crime, prosperous and 
unrebukcd. 

Not only does Kansas await your verdict : the nation awaits it, 
still hesitating to pronounce her last born worthy of her love. 
£urope itself, will take up your decision, and if it be unmerited 
'' acquittal" will brand with it Democracy, thus characterized by a 
people who have boasted to defend it. 

Citizens — Senators — ^Men ! — I leave the verdict to you. 



Hon. Wilson Shannon replied for the defense : 
Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Senate : 

I do not arise, at this late hour, to weary you with an argument. 
I doubt not that every member of this honorable body, as well as 
the counsel, are gratified that these proceedings are drawing to a 
close. In behalf of our client, we can do no more than refer to the 
arguments already advanced. I do not know that my honorable 
colleague or myself can add to the arguments already advanced, or 
say one word to enhance the the weighty reasons which have been 
presented to you during the progress of this case; neither do I think, 
by such endeavor, that we could affect the decision which, in your 
minds, you have already arrived at. , 

No claim has been made of complicity, on the part of Governor 
Robinson, with the sale of the seven per cent, bonds. The good 
sense of my eloquent friend, to whom we have just listened, has 
not claimed any such complicity. All the testimony proves that 
the Governor was not engaged in the transaction. These facts are 
sufficient to warrant my not making more than an illusion to that 
subject. 



420 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

^Tliis body has already decided, in relation to the signing of the 
war bonds, that it was the duty of the State Treasurer to issue, and 
the Governor and Secretary only signed them. This signing is held 
not to be a misdemeanor, by the decision you haye made in the case of 
the Secretary. That decision was a just one. To it there was not 
a dissenting voice in this honorable body. Each of these gentlemen 
signed the war bonds, in the discharge of their official duty. If 
this was a misdemeanor on the part of the Governor^ it was equally 
so on the part of the Secretary. This you have settled in the nega- 
tive, and you can do no less or more in the case now before you. 

We do not, therefore, propose to argue the case further, but rest 
the defense here, confident that Governor Kobinson will, by your 
verdict, be sent forth blameless of wrong-doing to the State. 

Attorney General rose and closed : 
May it please the Court : 

I should not say one word in closing, at this late hour, and after 
the able argument of the gentleman who opened the case in behalf 
of the Board of Managers, were it not that it might be considered 
an abandonment of the case. The evidence is before you. The ar- 
guments of counsel have brought forth the hidden subtleties of the 
law that bear upon the case. Nothing that we can say further 
will add or take away. It rests with you. All the House of Rep- 
resentatives ask of you is that you remember the solemn responsiblities 
that rest in your decision. The future of the State lies in your hands. 
We leave the case of Charles Robinson, Governor of Kansas, in the 
hands of the Senate, confident that their verdict will render justice 
between the State and this defendant. 

On motion of Mr. Cobb, the same order was adopted in the case 
of Charles Robinson, as was observed in the previous cases. 

The President then proceeded to take the opinion of the Court 
in the following form : 

Mr. , how say you ? Is the respondent, Charles Robinson, 

Guilty of High Misdemeanor, as charged in the first Article of Im- 
peachment ? 

The following gentlemen voted Guilty in response to the Chair: 
Messrs. Curtis and Lambdin. — 2, 

Those gentlemen voting Not Guilty were Messrs. Bamett, Bay- 



IMPEACHMENT CASES. 421 

less^ Cobb, Connell, Denman, Essick, Hollidaj, Hubbard, Ingalls, 
Keeler, Knowles, Lappin, McDowell, Rankin, Bees, Roberts, Slee- 
per, Spriggs and Mr. President. — 19. 

When Mr. Steyens' name was called, he arose in his place and 
said: 

*Mb. President : — For the same reasons as before stated, I agaia 
ask to be excused from voting. 

Whereupon, he was excused. 

Whereupon, the President declared that two Senators haying 
Toted Guilty and nineteen Not Guilty, Charles Robinson, Gover- 
nor, is acquitted, by the Senate of the State of Kansas, of the char- 
ges as contained in the first Article of Impeachment, exhibited 
against him by the House of Representatives. 

The Secretary then read the second Article of Impeachment^ and 
the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre- 
ceding form. 

All the Senators pronounced Not Guilty on this Article^ viz : 
Messrs. Barnett, Bayless^ Cobb, Connell, Curtis, Penman, Essick, 
Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalb, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, 
McDowell, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs and Mr. Presi- 
dent.— 21. 

Whereupon, the President declared that no Senator having voted 
Guilty and twenty-one Not Guilty, Charles Robinson, Governor, 
is acquitted, by the Senate of the State of Kansas, of the charge? 
as contained in the second Article of Impeachment, exhibited against 
him by the House of Representatives. 

The Secretary then read the third Article of Impeachment, and 
the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre- 
vious form. 

All the members pronounced Not Guilty on this Article, vit : 
Messrs. Barnett, Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Curtis, Dgnman, Essick, 
Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, 
McDowell, Rankin, Rees, Roberts, Sleeper, Spriggs and Mr. Presi- 
dent.— 21. 

Whereupon, the President declared that no Senator having voted 
Guilty and twenty-one Not Guilty, Charles Robinson, Governor, 



422 PROCEEDINGS IN THE 

is acquitted, by the Senate of the State of Kansas, of the charges as 
contained in the third Article of Impeachment, exhibited against 
him by the House of Bepresentatives. 

The Secretary then read the fourth Article of Impeachment, and 
the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre- 
yious form. 

All the Senators pronounced Not Guilty on this Article, vis : 
Messrs. Bamett, Bay less, Cobb, Connell, Curtis, Denman, Essick, 
Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalb, Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, 
McDowell, Bankin, Bees^ Boberts, Sleeper, Spriggs and Mr. Presi- 
dent.— 21. 

Whereupon, the President declared that no Senator haying voted 
Guilty and twenty-one Not Guilty, Charles Bobinson, Goyernor, 
is acquitted, by the Senate of the State of Kansas, of the charges as 
^'outained in the fourth Article of Impeachment, exhibited against 
him by the House of Bepresentatiyes. 

The Secretary then read the fifth Article of Impeachment, and 
the President proceeded to take the opinion of the Court in the pre- 
w'louB form. 

Mr. Essick yoted Guilty, 

The following gentlemen yoted Not Guilty: Messrs. Bamett, 
Bayless, Cobb, Connell, Curtis, Denman, Holliday, Hubbard, Ingalls, 
Keeler, Knowles, Lambdin, Lappin, McDowell, Bankin, Bees, Beb- 
erts. Sleeper, Spriggs and Mr. President. — 20. 

Whereupon, the President declared that one Senator haying yoted 
Guilty and twenty Not Guilty, Charles Bobinson, Goyernor, is 
-acquitted, by the Senate of the State of Kansas, of the charges as con- 
tained in the fifth Article of Impeachment, exhibited against him 
.by the House of Bepresentatiyes. 

The President then rose and recapitulated the yotes thus: 
On the first Article, two gentlemen have pronounced Guilty and 
nineteen Not Guilty ; on the second Article, there is an unani- 
mous yote of Not Guilty; on the third Article, there is an unani- 
mous yote of Not Guilty; on the fourth Article, there is an unani- 
mous yote of Not Guilty; on the fifth, one has said Guilty and 
twenty Not Guilty; hence it appears that there is not a oonstitu- 



IMPEACHMENT CA8E8. 423 

tional majority of votes findiug Charles Robinson Guilty on any one 
Article. It, therefore, becomes my duty to declare that Charles 
Robinson stands Acquitted of all the Articles exhibited by the 
House of Representatives against him. 

Mr. Cobb offered the following order, which was adopted : 
Mr. President : — I move you that a committee of three be ap- 
pointed to notify his Excellency, the Governor, of the final action 
of the Court of Impeachment^ in the cases of the State against John- 
W. Robinson, Secretary, George S. Hillyer, Auditor, and Charle»« 
Robinson, Governor. 

Whereupon, the Chair appointed Messrs. Cobb, Rankin and Curtis, 
committee. 



On motion of Mr. Ingalls, the following resolution was adopted : 
Resolved, That five hundred copies of the procecdinprs in the cases 
of impeachment of John W. Robinson, Secretary of State, George • 
S. Hillyer, Auditor of State, and Charles Robinson, Governor, in- 
cluding the preliminary proceedings in the House of Representa- 
tives and Senate, together with the journal and official report of the 
arguments and debates, be printed and bound in leather for distri- 
bution as follows: Three copies to each member of the Senate', and" 
one to each officer theieof; one copy to each of the Managers and 
counsel ; one copy to each member and officer of the last House of 
Representatives; the remainder to be distributed according to the 
throe first provisions of the second section of chapter, forty-eight o£ 
the laws of 1861. 

Mr. Connell offered the followinc: resolution : 

Resolved^ That the Hon. , be appointed to superintend the 

printing and binding of the proceedings of this Court of Impeach- 
ment, (as set forth in a former resolution adopted by this body.) 
For which service he shall receive the sum of dollars foi 

every day thus necessarily employed. And the Auditor of State 
shall draw his warrant upon the Treasury for the amount of his 
services, properly authenticated by affidavit. 

Mr. Stevens offered to amend by inserting in the first blank, th* 
name of J. J. Ingalls, and in the sceond blank the sum of five 
dollars. 

Amendment accepted, and the re.'^olution was adopted. 

On motion of Mr. Rees, the Senate took a recess of half an hour. . 

The time having expired, the Senate was called to order. 



424 PROOKKDINQS IN THK 

Mr. Stevens offered the following resolution which was adopted : 

Resolved^ That the Secretary of the Senate be directed to tran- 
scribe the Journal of the proceedings of the Senate, sitting as a 
High Court of Impeachment, in a book to be provided for that 
purpose, to be deposited in the office of the Secretary of State, and 
that for such service he be allowed the same price per folio, as is 
cUlowed by law for transcribing the Journal of the proceedings of 
the Senate at its regular sessions. 

On motion of Mr. Stevens^ the following resolution was adopted : 

Resolved^ That all depositions, exhibits, and instruments in 
writing, offered in evidence on the trial of John W. Robinson, 
George S. Hillyer and Charles Robinson, or either of them, by 
either party, be deposited by the Secretary of the Senate, in the 
office of the Secretary of State, to be by him preserved as are other 
■ records. 

^n motion of Mr. Stevens, the following resolution was adopted : 

Resolved^ That the pay of the Reporter and Assistant Reporter, 
. ihall not extend more than twenty days after the adjournment of 
the Senate. 

Mr. Ingalls offered the following resolution, which waa adopted : 

Resolved, That the thanks of the Senate are hereby extended to 
the Hon. T. A. Osbom, for the distinguished ability, uniform 
courtesy, and strict impartiality, with which he has performed the 
delicate and arduous duties of President of this body at its present 
:iesaion» 

Mr. Cobb, chairman of the committee appointed to inform the 
llovernor of the proceedings of the Court of Impeachment, sub- 
mitted the following report : 

Ma. Pbxsidxnt : Your committee who were charged with the 
'duty of presenting the official transcripts of the records of the 
Court of Impeachment, so far as relates to the final orders of the 
same in the cases of the State against John W. Robinson, Secre- 
tary of State ; George S. Hillyer, Auditor, and Charles Robinson, 
Governor ; to his Excellency the Governor, would report that they 
kave performed their duty in that behalf, by presenting the same 
to him, in his office at Topeka, this 16th day of June, A. D. 1862. 

Mr. Cobb, chairman of committee to audit claims of witnesses, 
submitted the following report : 



VtnACBMMn 0A8B8. 4M 



Mb. Pebsidxht :— Tov oommitiea on olaimi of wttMOMS, im- 
port that ihoj lukTO audited iho following acooonts : 

John Franeis, $ 21,00 

6. KimbaU, 7,00 

J. Humplureji, 18^00 

€(eo. A. Bunt, 7,00 

OKver Paul, 7,00 

8. 0. Smith, 8,00 

P. KimbaU, 7,00 

P.. KimbaU, ...... 7,00 

L: AUen, 8,00 

B. P. Kellam, 8,00 

Dr. Beming, 8,00 

Loring Panunrorih. .... 8,00 

$114,00 

On motion of Mr. Ingalla, tho oommittae appointed to avdit the 
ekims of witoesfles, and the oommittee appointed to iafonn thi 
QoTernor of the prooeedings in the Oonrt of Impeaehmeni, weie 
dfaeharged. 

On motion, the Senate of the State of Kanaaa, sitting aa a High 
ODwri of Impeachment, adjourned without day. 



E R R A. T A. . 



Page 909, oerenth line from foot of page, for *< army " 
real ** anaj." 

Page SIS, eighteenth line from top of page, for ^'bar " 
real ''law.** 

Page SIS, thirteenth line from foot of page, for ** compe- 
teM'' read <<oompeUed/' 



y t 



^' 



•"«» Z a 1347