blindfold one’s self in order to investigate an object.”
Mr. Dilworthy appeared in his place in the Senate and offered a
resolution appointing a committee to investigate his case. It carried,
of course, and the committee was appointed. Straightway the newspapers
said:
“Under the guise of appointing a committee to investigate the late
Mr. Dilworthy, the Senate yesterday appointed a committee to
investigate his accuser, Mr. Noble. This is the exact spirit and
meaning of the resolution, and the committee cannot try anybody but
Mr. Noble without overstepping its authority. That Dilworthy had
the effrontery to offer such a resolution will surprise no one, and
that the Senate could entertain it without blushing and pass it
without shame will surprise no one. We are now reminded of a note
which we have received from the notorious burglar Murphy, in which
he finds fault with a statement of ours to the effect that he had
served one term in the penitentiary and also one in the U. S.
Senate. He says, ‘The latter statement is untrue and does me great
injustice.’ After an unconscious sarcasm like that, further comment
is unnecessary.”
And yet the Senate was roused by the Dilworthy trouble. Many speeches
were made. One Senator (who was accused in the public prints of selling
his chances of re-election to his opponent for $50,000 and had not yet
denied the charge) said that, “the presence in the Capital of such a
creature as this man Noble, to testify against a brother member of their
body, was an insult to the Senate.”
Another Senator said, “Let the investigation go on and let it make an
example of this man Noble; let it teach him and men like him that they
could not attack the reputation of a United States-Senator with
impunity.”
Another said he was glad the investigation was to be had, for it was high
time that the Senate should crush some cur like this man Noble, and thus
show his kind that it was able and resolved to uphold its ancient
dignity.
A by-stander laughed, at this finely delivered peroration; and said:
“Why, this is the Senator who franked his, baggage home through the mails
last week-registered, at that. However, perhaps he was merely engaged in
‘upholding the ancient dignity of the Senate,’–then.”
“No, the modern dignity of it,” said another by-stander. “It don’t
resemble its ancient dignity but it fits its modern style like a glove.”
There being no law against making offensive remarks about U. S.
Senators, this conversation, and others like it, continued without let or
hindrance. But our business is with the investigating committee.
Mr. Noble appeared before the Committee of the Senate; and testified to
the following effect:
He said that he was a member of the State legislature of the
Happy-Land-of-Canaan; that on the— day of—— he assembled himself
together at the city of Saint’s Rest, the capital of the State, along
with his brother legislators; that he was known to be a political enemy
of Mr. Dilworthy and bitterly opposed to his re-election; that Mr.
Dilworthy came to Saint’s Rest and reported to be buying pledges of votes
with money; that the said Dilworthy sent for him to come to his room in
the hotel at night, and he went; was introduced to Mr. Dilworthy; called
two or three times afterward at Dilworthy’s request–usually after
midnight; Mr. Dilworthy urged him to vote for him Noble declined;
Dilworthy argued; said he was bound to be elected, and could then ruin
him (Noble) if he voted no; said he had every railway and every public
office and stronghold of political power in the State under his thumb,
and could set up or pull down any man he chose; gave instances showing
where and how he had used this power; if Noble would vote for him he
would make him a Representative in Congress; Noble still declined to
vote, and said he did not believe Dilworthy was going to be elected;
Dilworthy showed a list of men who would vote for him–a majority of the
legislature; gave further proofs of his power by telling Noble everything
the opposing party had done or said in secret caucus; claimed that his