Earl L. Butz: just plane stupid joke

Credit: fordlibrarymuseum.gov

Earl Lauer Butz was not one to soften his abrasive speech when discussing the issues facing the Department of Agriculture. He brushed off criticism, hitting back at his foes with with disparaging put-downs or jokes. When women across the country organized protests and boycotts in response to a sudden spike in food prices, Butz commented that if they did not have “such a low level of economic intelligence,” they would understand that prices had gone up across the board and that “you can’t get more by paying less.” He was more abrupt on another occasion, saying the boycotts were a result of "stupid women and crazed housewives."

Butz's remarks did not get him in trouble until November of 1974. Pope Paul VI had expressed his opposition to the use of artificial birth control as a way of controlling population growth and helping to alleviate hunger. At a press conference, Butz responded to the papal position in part by putting on a faux Italian accent and saying, "He no play-a the game, he no make-a the rules." Realizing that he had gone too far, Butz quickly asked the reporters to consider the joke off the record. But since this request has to be made before a statement to be honored, the wisecrack was fair game for the morning papers.

Catholics and Italians were enraged that a Cabinet official would make such a mockery of the Pope. The Archdiocese of New York led a campaign demanding Butz's resignation unless he apologized for the "crude, pointed insult directed at Pope John Paul VI, spiritual leader of the world's Catholics." The outcry was enough for President Gerald Ford to call for a meeting with Butz to ascertain what had happened. He subsequently rebuked the Secretary of Agriculture and ordered him to make a formal apology.

The apology was enough to settle the matter. But two years later, the public would be reminded of Butz's propensity for crude humor when he made a joke so appalling that it ended his government career.

Butz was born near Albion, Indiana on July 3, 1909. He grew up working on the family farm before attending Purdue University, graduating in 1932. He returned to the farm for another year of work, then became a research fellow with the Federal Land Bank in Louisville, Kentucky. He went back to his studies soon after, earning Purdue's first doctorate in agricultural economics in 1937.

Most of Butz's life would be centered around the university. He joined Purdue's faculty and became the head of the agricultural economics department from 1946 to 1954. He left the school for three years to serve as assistant secretary of agriculture under President Dwight Eisenhower. He again returned to Purdue in 1957 to become the dean of the College of Agriculture, remaining there for another 10 years. Butz tried to make a return to politics in 1968 by seeking the Republican nomination for governor of Indiana, but was unsuccessful. Instead, he remained at Purdue as the dean of continuing education as well as the vice president of the Purdue Research Foundation.

Butz was already a controversial choice for a Cabinet post when President Richard Nixon nominated him to replace Clifford Hardin as Secretary of Agriculture, but it was not due to his off-color wit. Rather, a number of senators were disturbed by his unabashed connections to large agribusiness concerns. Butz served on the boards of a number of these corporations, and when it came to smaller farms his philosophy was that they needed to grow and adapt if they wanted to remain relevant. "The family farm must be preserved but I do not want to lock it in concrete," he said during the confirmation hearings in the Senate. "If the family farm I grew up on had not adjusted we would be shucking corn by hand and we would be knocking potato bugs off potatoes with a wooden handle...The family farm has to adjust. It has to produce more in the days ahead to survive." The concerns about Butz's business philosophy, as well as his opposition to the free school lunch program and his call for cuts to food stamp aid, made for a divisive decision. Voting mostly along party lines, with Democrats and a handful of farm state Republicans opposed, the Senate was 51-44 in favor of Butz becoming the new Secretary of Agriculture.

Butz immediately pushed for a new approach to agriculture, putting a heavy focus on exports. He encouraged farmers to boost their production, increasing the size of their crops so the surplus could be sold overseas. Meanwhile, government subsidies to farmers would be sharply reduced. The system revamped the New Deal farm policies of price supports, government grain purchases, and letting some land lie fallow to avoid soil erosion; now the government would make direct payments to farmers based on a set price for a product. Both the New Deal and Butz models sought to get farmers a fair price for their crop in a bad year. With the Butz model, farmers were encouraged to grow as much as possible and sell at any price, since the government would make up the difference if their sale price was less than the government's benchmark.

Butz was trying to strike a delicate balance. The surplus sales would allow farm income to increase, while the cost of government subsidies would decrease and food prices would remain stable. But the combination of excess crops and reduced price supports could also harm farmers during surplus years, while heavy exports could lead to increased food prices and food shortages. A $30 million grain shipment to the Soviet Union in 1972 was the first major export, and it led directly to the spike in prices, food shortages, and subsequent protests and boycotts.

The policy was successful in its other goals, however. Farm income increased 20 percent between 1970 and 1976, while government subsidies fell from $3.7 billion to $500 million in the same period. Butz's supporters argued that the rising tide lifted all boats, helping to increase agricultural profitability overall. Food exports continued, including a 16.5 million ton grain shipment to the Soviet Union in 1975 and another one of 2.2 million tons in 1976.

But the ripple effect was also apparent in less savory ways as well. Poultry farmers were hit hard, as grain producers were able to corner the market on feed. Some were forced into contracts with food processors, having to ramp up production for little or no payout. Other poultry farmers were so desperate to keep feed prices manageable that they slaughtered any chicks they wouldn't be able to raise. More recent critics have suggested that Butz's policies inhibited agricultural progress in developing countries and helped increase obesity rates in the United States.

The fears that Butz would give preference to large agribusinesses while taking an "adapt or die" philosophy toward smaller farms were well-founded. Large grain exporters were allowed to buy up surpluses at bargain prices while further benefiting from subsidies. Officials from the Department of Agriculture often found high-level positions in agribusiness after they left government service. Susan Demarco, a founder of the Agribusiness Accountability Project, declared, "Secretary Butz is not a friend of family farmers; he is their funeral director." Carol Foreman, director of the Consumer Federation of America, said Butz was "a spokesman for the big corporate farmers, for the food processors, and for the grocery people. He's not on the side of farmers or consumers. He's on the side of people who buy from farmers and sell to consumers."

Butz brushed aside such allegations, saying that they were politically motivated. He defended his policies, saying that smaller farmers were less efficient. Stopping the exports and deferring more to small producers, he argued, would lead to less food production and higher government subsidies, while shortages and increased food prices would continue. Butz also criticized agricultural unions of being selfish, and he was unsympathetic to concerns about the use of pesticides and chemicals to increase crop yields. “Before we go back to organic agriculture, somebody is going to have to decide what 50 million people we are going to let starve," he said.

Ford retained Butz following Nixon's resignation, but there were rumors that he was not long for the post. In 1975, it was suggested that Ford considered Butz to be too much of a liability for his 1976 election chances and that he planned to appoint a new Secretary of Agriculture before then. In fact, Butz had sought to leave the post for personal reasons the year before, but Ford convinced him to stay on. When Jimmy Carter became the Democratic nominee for President in 1976, he made it clear that he would not keep Butz in the Cabinet if he was elected.

In August of 1976, Butz was flying back to Washington from the Republican National Convention with singers Pat Boone and Sonny Bono as well as John W. Dean III, who had served as White House Counsel under Nixon and testified as a key witness for the prosecution in the Watergate scandal. Dean had recently finished a prison term for his role in Watergate and had been hired by Rolling Stone magazine to cover the convention. Boone asked Butz how the GOP could attract more black voters.

Butz replied, "The only thing the coloreds are looking for in life are tight pussy, loose shoes, and a warm place to shit."

The comment made it into the Rolling Stone article penned by Dean, though it was attributed only to a Cabinet official. New Times magazine investigated further, analyzing the itineraries of Cabinet members and naming Butz as the offending party. The comment was lewd enough that most newspapers could only paraphrase it. But once members of both major political parties learned of the statement, they began to call for Butz to resign or for Ford to fire him. Ford again gave Butz a "severe reprimand" for "highly offensive" rhetoric, and Butz again issued a public apology.

This time, the controversy didn't go away. The Carter campaign criticized Ford for a lack of leadership, saying he too easily forgave officials for their misconduct and that Butz's remarks were offensive enough that he should have been fired. The public had not forgotten Ford's hasty pardon of Nixon in the wake of Watergate; the Butz incident, Carter's campaign charged, was just another attempt at whitewashing. This time, it seemed that Ford was hoping the scandal would evaporate so that Butz could stay in the Cabinet and help direct more of the farm vote to Ford.

With the pressure continuing to mount shortly before the election, Butz announced that he would resign. He said “the use of a bad racial commentary in no way reflects my real attitude,” and hoped that the action would remove any suspicions that Ford or his administration were racist. But Butz was not entirely contrite. He complained that he had been repeating an old joke, and that the remark was taken out of context. "This is the price I pay for a gross indiscretion in a private conversation," he griped. Butz also said he would continue to advocate for Ford during his campaign unless the President asked him not to. Ford accepted the resignation, saying it was "one of the saddest decisions of my presidency." John A. Knebel, the undersecretary of agriculture, took over the position.

Opinions differed on whether the comments truly reflected Butz's beliefs. Sympathizers suggested that no one was likely to come out unscathed if all their private conversations were made public; Butz was simply a victim of a bad joke that became publicized, they argued. Critics said Butz's offensive comments had enough of a pattern that they implied disdain for certain racial and ethnic groups. The Carter campaign continued to criticize Ford's leadership and handling of the situation, accusing the President of waiting until after the release of opinion polls to decide what to do.

Butz again returned to Purdue to serve as dean emeritus of the school of agriculture, but also became a much sought-after lecturer on farm issues. Risque language continued to be a trademark of his, but none of his comments elicited further controversy. Butz was critical of Democratic farm policies in general, but was more complimentary of Carter due to the new President's agricultural background. "Say what you will about his being a peanut farmer and all that born again baloney, he is a very skilled politician," Butz said in a 1977 speech. "He is the most skilled politician who has been in the White House since Franklin D Roosevelt."

When Butz got in trouble again, it was related to his lectures but not to their content. He was charged with fraudulently understating his 1978 federal taxable income by failing to report more than $148,000 earned in the talks. In May of 1981, he pleaded guilty to the charge. Butz said he had been very busy at the time and that he willfully decided to file in a lower tax bracket. "I was not in a strong cash flow position as of April 15," he admitted. "I could have borrowed money. I didn't." Butz was sentenced to 30 days in jail and five years of probation, and also ordered to make restitution on his unpaid taxes. The plea was part of a deal in which the government agreed not to investigate Butz's taxes from 1977. He served 25 days behind bars before his release.

The sentence did not have any major effect on Butz's lecturing circuit or his work at Purdue. His talks were successful enough that he was able to make a $1 million donation to the school of agriculture in 1999. Butz's earlier indiscretions would hurt him one last time in 2005, when Purdue considered naming a lecture hall for him. The plan was met with student protests and ultimately scrapped. Butz died in his sleep on February 2, 2008.

Sources:  "Butz is Confirmed to Cabinet Position" in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune on Dec. 3 1971, "Catholics Want Earl Butz Removed" in the Tuscaloosa News on Nov. 27 1974, "Pope Remark by Earl Butz Under Attack" in the Observer-Reporter on Nov. 29 1974, "Earl Butz: Controversial Figure Regarding Today's Food Prices" in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune on March 7 1975, "Earl Butz: A Controversial Man and His Agriculture" in the Palm Beach Post-Times on Jun. 27 1976, "President Reprimands Earl Butz" in the Eugene Register-Guard on Oct. 2 1976, "Butz' Ouster May Be Soon" in the Eugene Register-Guard on Oct. 3 1976, "Earl Butz Resigns Under Pressure" in the Observer-Reporter on Oct. 5 1976, "Earl Butz: Profile of a Barnburner" in the Miami News on Oct. 6 1976, "Butz' Words Paraphrased in Most Family Newspapers" in the Miami News on Oct. 6 1976, "'Private Joke' Ignited Public Furor" in the Miami News on Oct. 6 1976, "Earl Butz Wanted Resignation Later" in the Spokesman-Review on Oct. 12 1976, "Earl Butz Predicts Global Warfare if Food Production Doesn't Rise" in the Montreal Gazette on Aug. 29 1977, "Earl Butz Pleads Guilty to Income Tax Evasion" in the Toledo Blade on May 23 1981, "Earl Butz, Ex-U.S. Agriculture Secretary, Dies at 98" in Bloomberg on Feb. 3 2008, "Earl L. Butz, Felled by Racial Remark, Is Dead at 98" in the New York Times on Feb. 4 2008, "Earl Butz, History's Victim" on Slate.com on Feb. 4 2008, The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals by Michael Pollan, The New Encyclopedia of American Scandal by George C. Kohn

Joseph Barker: the street preacher mayor

Photo credit: brooklineconnection.com

To Joseph Barker's supporters in Pittsburgh's 1850 mayoral election, their candidate was a shining example of a straight-talking man who had been punished for exercising his First Amendment rights. To his foes, Barker was little more than a foul-mouthed hooligan who gave free reign to bigots.

Little is known about Barker's early life. He was born around 1806 in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. According to the Lawrenceville Historical Society, there are indications that Barker held some minor elected positions in the 1840s. However, he was best known as a corner preacher, dressed in black with a cape and stovepipe hat, giving sermons twice a week on what he saw as the ills of society.

Barker typically took a nativist route, shouting denunciations of Catholics, Freemasons, and any Protestants who were opposed to his ideals. The harangues also criticized slavery and intemperance, and occasionally veered toward local politics when he lambasted politicians and the state of the Pittsburgh police. Barker had his supporters, including one particularly vehement follower named Hugh Kirkland who sometimes assisted him in his spectacles, but he frequently irritated those trying to keep the peace. On one occasion, he was ordered to serve 30 days in the workhouse for an anti-Catholic speech.

In November of 1849, a riot broke out after one of Barker's particularly pugnacious speeches against the Catholic clergy. He was quickly charged with blocking the streets and using "indecent, lewd, and immoral language calculated to deprave the morals of the community." A jury found him guilty, and Barker didn't help his case by threatening and swearing at the jury and judge, Benjamin Patton, at his sentencing. He was sentenced to one year in prison and a $250 fine.

Barker's supporters upheld him as a symbol of free speech and took an unusual strategy in trying to win his freedom. A mayoral election was scheduled for January of 1850, and they began a write-in campaign to name Barker to the office. Pittsburgh had about 36,000 people at the time, and sources differ about whether the turnout was high for a municipal election or low because people generally ignored these elections due to rampant corruption. When the results were tallied, Barker had eked out a win over two other candidates, earning 1,787 votes to the 1,584 for Democratic candidate John B. Guthrie and 1,034 for Whig candidate Robert McCutcheon.

With the mayor-elect still behind bars, Barker's swearing in became a farcical episode. Governor William F. Johnston agreed to pardon him so he could serve his term in office, but the document did not arrive in time for the scheduled day. When a mob threatened to break Barker out of jail, the sheriff relented and released him temporarily. Patton was chosen to give the oath of office to the man whom he had jailed just months before, but the judge took the occasion well. "Permit me, sir, to say that I hope you will more then realize the expectations of your friends," he said. With the pardon still nowhere to be found, Barker was returned to the jail to spend his first day in office behind bars before his freedom was finally approved.

To the surprise of his critics, Barker cooled his fiery demeanor and set about pursuing a number of reforms in the city. He introduced a program to test scales of merchants to ensure they weren't cheating customers, a move that reportedly enraged one vendor so much that she threw a slab of butter in the mayor's face. Barker also ordered crackdowns on vice dens, gambling, and drunkenness; sought enforcement of the 10-hour workday; and instituted a ban on prize fights.

Despite the tangible reforms, Barker's nativist streak was clearly visible in other decisions. On one occasion, a German steamboat band sought to bar the use of the calliope by a band on a nearby vessel since the instrument was drowning out their own music. Barker refused, commenting, "The calliope is an American institution, and the brass band is a damned imported Dutch institution. I am for America all the time." He also had the Catholic bishop and Mother Superior of Mercy Hospital arrested and fined $20 because the hospital's sewer line was allegedly creating a nuisance; he refused an appeal since a judge wasn't readily available. There were some indications that Barker's administration was encouraging more incidents of harassment against Catholics and vandalism of their institutions. Parishioners took shifts to guard churches and Mercy Hospital amid rumors that they would be set ablaze.

Barker's term was also distinguished by bitter feuding with the police department. He fired several night officers for alleged misconduct and replaced them with his own friends. When the police commissioners reinstated the night officers, Barker had them arrested. In a dispute over a prisoner, he also ordered the arrest of a jailer and the sheriff. The actions created two separate police forces, of the regular officers and Barker's appointees, and they sometimes came to blows. A tentative peace was struck when the police resumed the major duties of keeping the peace while Barker's men were relegated to minor duties such as lighting streetlamps. A court finally forced Barker to disband his own force.

Barker was arrested on several occasions during his tenure. There are conflicting reports about how many times he was taken into custody, including one where the police arrested him during the staffing squabble, but several accounts mention a string of arrests in October of 1850. He was twice charged with assault and battery, and in one of these incidents he was accused of trying to kill a man named John Barton. Barker was also charged with the abduction for interfering in a child custody matter. He was acquitted of all of these charges, though he was convicted of the more nebulous charge of "misdemeanor in office."

Running for re-election in January of 1851, Barker was only able to garner a quarter of the vote; Guthrie returned as a candidate and was successful. Barker returned to street preaching and was soon convicted of sparking another riot. He made two more unsuccessful bids for mayor, in 1852 and 1854. He remained a colorful personality, getting thrown out of the state senate chamber for going on a rant there, picking up more charges of obscenity and drunkenness, and earning several sentences sending him to a work farm. As the Historical Society of Western Pennsylvania put it, he "rapidly sank into obscurity, a victim of intensified drink, fanaticism, and epilepsy."

Barker's demise was characteristically dramatic. He was walking along the railroad tracks in Manchester, returning from an August 1862 rally supporting the Northern cause in the Civil War, when an oncoming train struck and beheaded him.

Sources: The Political Graveyard, the Lawrenceville Historical Society, "Today in History" in the Pittsburgh Press on Jan. 7 1943, "Like Fiery Mayor-Father, Barker Dies in Obscurity" in the Pittsburgh Press  on Mar. 13 1948, "Joseph Barker Had Knack for Getting Into Trouble" in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Jan. 11 1950, "Political Opportunist Was Colorful Character in Pittsburgh History" in the Tribune-Review on Jan. 27 2002, "Jailed Street Preacher Elected Mayor" in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Apr. 2 2002, "Winner of the First Joe Barker Memorial Award is..." in the Pittsburgh Catholic on Nov. 12 2007, "Let's Learn About: Mayor Joseph Barker" in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Oct. 29 2009, "Mayoral Madness" in the Pittsburgh Magazine in May 2013, History of Pittsburgh and Environs, Volume II, Pittsburgh: The Story of a City, 1750-1865 by Leland DeWitt Baldwin and Ward Hunter

John W. Hunter: giving the lie

Image from National Magazine

The first scandal to put John Ward Hunter's name down in newsprint involved a much more serious charge than the blemish his brief congressional career would later receive. In 1864, he was charged with forging checks during his duties at the United States Custom House in New York City, where he had been employed for over 30 years. Upon looking through a bundle of checks received by the Custom House, an assistant auditor had caught a couple of suspicious ones, one for $4,200 and another for $5,600. Both checks had been presented to assistant treasurer John J. Cisco but not paid over; the checks also bore the signature of Hunter, then serving as assistant auditor.

The case went to trial in April. Cisco was the star witness for the prosecution, saying the handwriting on the checks was a perfect match for Hunter; he testified that the assistant auditor wrote with certain peculiarities that he had not seen replicated anywhere else. Hunter's bank accounts had also shown a recent increase through large cash deposits. "The defense might bring all the world here with speaking trumpets to swear that Hunter was an angel, but it would all turn finally upon the question of his signature," the New York Times summarized in an account of a cross-examination where Cisco was essentially asked if Hunter was a decent person. "It was agreed that the prosecution should concede that Mr. Hunter had always borne a good character."

The defense lawyer proved masterful enough that Hunter's character was not his primary argument in the case. Instead, he focused on Cisco's steadfast testimony that the signatures on the checks belonged to Hunter. A stockbroker and photography analyst both testified that the signatures themselves were forged. The latter witness was especially compelling, as he compared prints of a genuine signature and the ones on the checks. Under magnification, the characteristics on the check suggested that the signature had been constructed from multiple pen strokes rather than a natural flow. A bookkeeper in the Custom House was also able to forge an impressive copy of Cisco's signature; the imitation put the assistant treasurer's recognition skills into question, as he was forced to admit that the forgery looked identical to his own.

The prosecution's case crumbled under further arguments by the defense. The defense explained the cash deposits as a result of many years of savings on his wife's part, combined with Hunter's duties as the executor of an estate. They also questioned why investigators had not taken a serious look at other men in the Customs House who would have had access to Hunter's signature. Cisco was accused of putting pressure on District Attorney E.D. Smith to issue a warrant of arrest for Hunter, and Smith took the stand himself to confirm that he acted on urgent requests from Cisco. Hunter himself testified very briefly. When asked if he wrote the two signatures, he replied, "I never did, nor did I ever see them before the day of the discovery." He answered only one other question, saying he did not know who wrote the signatures.

Immediately after Hunter's testimony, Smith asked for Hunter to be found innocent. He asked for reparations to be paid to him "for the wrong that has been done to him." Cisco also softened in his opinion on the matter. Three months after the trial, he wrote an apology to Hunter and included a check covering the assistant auditor's legal expenses. "Not a doubt rests on my mind of your entire innocence, and I deeply regret the erroneous theory on which I acted," said Cisco. "It was a serious mistake, which I regret should have been made."

Hunter was born in Bedford (now part of Brooklyn) in New York in October of 1807. After his school days, he began working as a clerk in a wholesale grocery store in 1824. From there, he made the switch to banking work and his long career with the U.S. Custom House. He started out as a clerk in 1831, and five years later he was appointed assistant auditor. He only stayed on for about a year after his success in the trial, then resigned to take a position as treasurer of the Dime Savings Bank in Brooklyn.

By some accounts, Hunter first entered the House of Representatives in 1864. However, these seem to be mistaken, as contemporary newspapers fail to mention such an election result. More likely, he first came to Congress following the death of Republican Representative James Humphrey in June of 1866. Successfully running as a Democrat to fill the vacancy, Hunter did not try to keep the seat in that year's regular election. He only served for a matter of months, from December of 1866 to March of 1867.

Hunter did not make much of a lasting impression during this service, but he did manage to earn a rebuke during a heated debate. On January 26 of 1867, Republican Representative Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania said that he intended to press his Reconstruction bill to a vote on the 28th. By the New York Times account, Stevens didn't sound so enthusiastic about it, since he didn't think the proposition was ready and didn't expect to get much done; he also said only five minutes would be allowed for each congressman to speak on the matter. Other Republican congressmen also suggested that the bill was somewhat unsound, but that they would get behind it. Roscoe Conkling of New York criticized Stevens, claiming he was responsible for delays on the vote because the committee on Reconstruction that Stevens chaired had failed to assemble in time to be productive. James Mitchell Ashley of Ohio supported a final vote on the measure, but admitted that the GOP had not arrived at a conclusive policy. Ashley chaired the Committee on the Territories, and had previously backed a substitute plan they were working on as advocated by the Southern Republican Association; however, he said he figured recommitting the bill to committee would kill it. Stevens added that his measure had passed muster with his committee on Reconstruction, and that the House could vote it down if they so desired.

The discussion on the issue ended up devolving into a racially-charged war of words over the Civil War and the proposed reform measures for the South. Elijah Hise, a Kentucky Democrat, suggested that the Republican Party was in favor of disenfranchising the majority and only favored suffrage for those they deemed loyal, including "Negros and interlopers in the Southern states." John Winthrop Chanler, a Democrat from New York, asked Ashley whether he would recognize a state government if it were based solely on the black vote. After a back-and-forth exchange, in which Chanler suggested that Ashley was reluctant to answer, the Ohio congressman finally proclaimed, "If there is a single state of the American Union in which there is not a loyal man except black men, I would clothe them with the right of franchise and every other right under this government."

Under these provocations, Ashley launched an attack on the more conservative elements of the Republican Party as well as the Democrats in general. He raised the question of whether deposed Confederate president Jefferson Davis and other such rebels would be worthy of sitting in Congress, and accused Republican President Andrew Johnson of being a leader of a negative campaign that was just as injurious as the war. "The assumption, the brazen-faced assumption, of men here, who, during the entire war, were in secret alliance with the rebels, coming here now and joining hands with the apostate at the other end of the avenue [Johnson], who is their leader, the recognized leader of a counter-revolution or negative rebellion, as I said awhile ago, passes comprehension."

Charles Winfield, an outgoing Democratic representative from New York, demanded an explanation for the remark. Ashley clarified that it was something of a blanket denunciation, encompassing draft dodgers, conspirators against the North, and people who had been opposed to further funding or manpower for the war. When further pressed by Winfield, Ashley admitted that he could not indict specific members of the House with these accusations, but supposed by their votes that such people might be sitting in the chamber. "I do not propose to be tried on general reputation," Winfield shot back. "I desire to say for myself, and so far as I know for my associates on this floor of my own school of politics, that the insinuation that we are or ever have been in alliance with the rebels is utterly untrue, and if intended to apply to us it is a base and unfounded slander."

At that point, Hunter chimed in, "And I say that, so far as I am concerned, it is a base lie."

Schuyler Colfax, an Indiana Republican and Speaker of the House, chided Hunter for speaking out of order. Hunter was backed up by Samuel Jackson Randall, a Democrat from Pennsylvania, who also spoke out of turn to say that Hunter's statement was truthful even if it didn't abide by the House rules. Ralph Hill, an outgoing Indiana Republican, took a different opinion. He immediately made a motion to censure Hunter because he "transgressed the order of this body."

Most of the representatives didn't care about the squabble. A vote to table Hill's resolution failed with 75 opposed and 32 in favor, but 84 congressmen didn't even participate. The discussion on the censure resolution dissolved into another scene of bedlam. Francis Celeste Le Blond, an Ohio Democrat, suggested that Ashley's statements were far worse than Hunter's passing remark. "When you come down to the debate today in which my colleague participated, using the language which has been just read from the Speaker's desk, I ask the gentlemen what more offensive language could be used to any man who was an American citizen and willing to abide by the laws and the Constitution of his government," Le Blond concluded. The argument brought applause from the galleries, and Schuyler promptly scolded the spectators. When William Elias Niblack, an Indiana Democrat, muttered that the applause was on the Democratic side, Schuyler took offense. Apparently thinking that Niblack was hinting that he only tried to quell the applause supporting the Democrats, Schuyler said he had always asked the galleries to be decorous and threatened to have the spectators removed if they did not quiet down. Niblack apologized, saying the remark was meant to be private and that he did not mean to offend.

In response to Le Blond's suggestion, Hill said the House had allowed similar language to slide in recent debates and that he was getting tired of it. "I thought they had gone far enough; that when we had reached such a point that every day or two we must hear the epithets 'lie' and 'liar' bandied in this House it was time someone should interpose," he said. When Niblack asked if being labeled a traitor was also an example of offensive language, Hill replied that the term could be seen as a compliment depending on the circumstances. Being called a liar, by contrast, was offensive under any circumstances and he wanted the House to make an example to prevent further incidents.

The censure carried 84-34, with 81 congressmen not voting. The tally took place after one representative tried unsuccessfully to be excused, reasoning that he could support neither Hunter's outburst nor Ashley's insinuations. Schuyler delivered the brief punishment: "No deliberative body can preserve its self-respect, or command the respect of its constituents, which tolerates the use of offensive language, condemned by gentlemen everywhere, as well as by parliamentary law. For having transgressed the rules of the House it is resolved that you shall be censured by the Speaker. Having thus declared the censure of the House, you will resume your seat."

Hunter gave a similarly brief address, explaining that he meant no disrespect to the House and spoke in a "moment of irritation at a false charge." Hill was satisfied enough with his contrition that he asked for the censure proceedings to be stricken from the record, but other representatives objected. One was Ashley, who got in the last word by essentially reiterating his earlier argument and delivering his own rebuke to Hunter. He said that men often speak on the spur of the moment in a heated debate, but that he had not been called to order himself during any of his eight years in the House; Ashley added that he had not meant any offense either, but in clarifying his list of Union enemies he gave the same categories, complete with the Congress-encompassing qualifier "here or elsewhere."

The New York Times reported that Republicans "generally voted for the resolution, yet Hunter had the sympathy of many of them who considered the language of Mr. Ashley totally uncalled for, and though, according to the ruling of the chair heretofore, not strictly out of order, yet as great a violation of the dignity and the decency of the debate as was Mr. Hunter's impulsive remark." The newspaper added that the debate "furnished an unusual amount of interest to the galleries, which were well filled in anticipation of a debate on the Reconstruction question."

After leaving Congress, Hunter made an unsuccessful bid for state assembly and served on the Board of Education. He was nominated for the postmaster's position in Brooklyn, but not confirmed by the Senate. Then in 1873, Hunter won the race for Brooklyn mayor, serving from 1874 to 1875. He apparently lost this job after crossing Democratic party boss Hugh McLaughlin by refusing to appoint a certain water commissioner. The Bankers' Magazine reported that he was instrumental in supporting the construction of the Brooklyn Bridge while in office, and he became a stockholder in the endeavor. In 1886, former commissioner of the Brooklyn public works Thomas W. Adams sued Hunter for $10,000, saying Hunter had publicly accused him while mayor of allowing fraud and corrupt contracts; the outcome of the suit was not reported.

Hunter left politics in favor of a return to his work as treasurer of the Dime Savings Bank. National Magazine claimed that it is "to his financial skill and his reputation for unswerving integrity, much of the success of that bank is due." He became the bank's director as well as the director of a trust company and two insurance firms. In his spare time, Hunter was active in the Old Brooklynites and the Tree Planting and Fountain Society. He suffered a series of personal tragedies in 1881. Three of his children died over the course of a four-month period, including a naval lieutenant who died of poor health and a commission merchant who killed himself in a park in Fall River, Massachusetts. When Hunter died in Brooklyn in April of 1900, he was survived by only one child (a daughter) as well as five granddaughters.

Sources: The Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, "The Custom-House Forgeries Cross-Examination of John J. Cisco" in the New York Times on Apr. 12 1864, "The Custom-House Forgeries" in the New York Times on Apr. 14 1864, "The Sub-Treasury Forgeries" in the New York Times on Apr. 21 1864, "Conclusion Of The Hunter Case" in the New York Times on Apr. 24 1864, "Close Of The Hunter Case" in the New York Times on Apr. 25 1864, "Vindication Of Assistant Auditor J.W. Hunter" in the New York Times on Sep. 24 1864, "Excitement In The House" in the New York Times on Jan. 27 1867, "Thirty-Ninth Congress, Second Session" in the New York Times on Jan. 27 1867, "Review Of The Week" in the Lewiston Evening Journal on Jan. 30 1867, "Brooklyn City Government For 1874" in the New York Timeson Jan. 1 1874, "Suicide Of Mr. W.A. Hunter" in the New York Times on Mar. 25 1881, "Death Of Lieut. Hunter, U.S.N." in the New York Times on Jul. 19 1881, "Thinks His Character Defamed" in the New York Times on Mar. 4 1886, "John W. Hunter Dead" in the New York Times on Apr. 18 1900, National Magazine: A Monthly Journal of American History Volume 19, Bankers' Magazine Volume 60, The Great Bridge: The Epic Story of the Building of the Brooklyn Bridge by David G. McCullough, Record of an Examination Under a Warrant by Kenneth G. White, Journal of the House of Representatives of the United States Being the Session of the Thirty-Ninth Congress, Record of an Examination Under a Warrant by Kenneth G. White, The Congressional Globe Volume 58 Part 2

William Stanbery: taking a licking

Image Unavailable

On the morning of April 13, 1832, William Stanbery was walking down Pennsylvania Avenue when he was approached by Sam Houston. The former Tennessee congressman and Governor, and future president of the Texas Republic, asked Stanbery to confirm who he was. When the Ohio congressman did, Houston called him a "damned rascal" and proceeded to beat him with his hickory cane.

Stanbery struggled unsuccessfully to resist the assault, a task made more difficult by a right arm that had become basically useless after the Battle of Tohopeka. However, he was not completely unprepared. Stanbery pulled out a pistol, put it to Houston's chest, and fired.

One of the largest cities in the Lone Star State may well have had a different name if the gun had not misfired. Houston continued his assault, at one point lifting Stanbery up by his legs and striking him "elsewhere." He was finally dragged away from the hapless man by two companions he had been walking with, Senator Alexander Buckner of Missouri and Representative John Blair of Tennessee.

Stanbery was born in Essex County, New Jersey in 1788. After studying law in New York City, he moved to Ohio in 1809 and began practicing in Newark, in Licking County. He served as a member of the state senate from 1825 to 1825. After the death of Representative William Wilson in Newark in 1827, Stanbery was chosen as his replacement for the House of Representatives. A Jacksonian Democrat, he began serving in October of 1827 and was re-elected in 1828. He was also elected in 1830, but this time as an Anti-Jacksonian Democrat.

The incident on Pennsylvania Avenue had its roots in a statement Stanbery made in Congress in March of 1832. During the course of his criticism of President Andrew Jackson's Indian policy, he asked, "Was not the late Secretary of War [John Eaton] removed because of his attempt fraudulently to give Governor Houston the contract for Indian rations?" By some accounts, Houston attempted to enter the House after hearing of the remark, and was restrained by his friend James K. Polk, a Tennessee congressman and future President of the United States.

By all accounts, Houston sent Stanbery a letter demanding to know if his question, which had been printed in the National Intelligencer, had been accurately transcribed. Though a rather formal request, it was essentially the prelude to a challenge for a duel. Stanbery refused to acknowledge the letter, which only further enraged Houston by failing to acknowledge him as an equal. Stanbery must have been aware of this, as he started carrying two pistols for protection. The assault occurred about two weeks after he made his remarks in the House.

Shortly after the incident, Stevenson sent a letter to Andrew Stevenson, the Speaker of the House, letting him know the circumstances that had caused him to be absent from the chambers. The House voted 145 to 25 to arrest Houston on the grounds that he had violated congressional immunity by assaulting Stanbery for remarks made on the House floor.

The trial was seized upon by the press as a Jacksonian vs. anti-Jacksonian showdown. Members questioned whether Stanbery's remarks had been slanderous or if he was expressing freedom of speech, and whether Congress even had the authority to try Houston. Until President Jackson sent him a finer set of duds, Houston attended the hearing in his buckskin coat. He was represented by Francis Scott Key, the author of the national anthem, and argued that Stanbery's charges had been disproved at trial, that he had not been "lying in wait" for the congressman as some had suggested, and that he was upset over the newspaper report rather than the remarks themselves (a defense undermined by the fact that the proceedings were reported verbatim). Stanbery said that he did not mean to accuse Houston himself of fraud, though he later wavered on that point. He characterized Buckner's testimony of the assault as "destitute of truth and infamous;" he withdrew the statement and apologized soon after.

In a stirring final statement, Houston invoked his patriotism and received a good deal of support from the galleries; one woman even declared, "I would rather be Sam Houston in a dungeon than Stanbery on a throne." In their vote, the House convicted Houston of contempt of Congress in a 106-89 vote and gave him a reprimand.

Not satisfied, Stanbery managed to set up a committee to investigate Eaton and Houston for fraud in relation to the Indian rations, but the panel found both men innocent. He was more successful in getting a criminal assault indictment against Houston, for which Houston was given a $500 fine. Unfortunately for Stanbery, Jackson remitted the fine. In an editorial in the Globe, Houston declared of Stanbery, "Nothing but the blackest malignity can justify the perverseness and vindictiveness of this man!...His vices are too odious to merit pity, and his spirit too mean to deserve contempt."

Things went from bad to worse for Stanbery in 1832. In July, he aimed a barb at Speaker Stevenson by proclaiming, "And let me say that I have heard the remark frequently made, that the eyes of the Speaker are too frequently turned from the chair you occupy toward the White House." James Bates, a Jacksonian congressman from Maine, motioned for a vote to censure Stanbery for unparliamentary language.

Charles Mercer, an Anti-Jacksonian congressman from Virginia, disputed the censure. He said the remark had not been recorded, and that a day had gone past before the proceedings on the censure got underway. While the appeal was pending, Stanbery's mouth got him in trouble again: he declared, apparently to Stevenson, "I will make a motion that is in order; I make a motion that you leave that chair." Polk moved to censure Stanbery on those remarks, but withdrew the motion.

Bates' resolution was accepted in an 82-48 vote. Stanbery remained unrepentant, saying, "I neither deny, retract, nor explain the words I used the day before yesterday, but do now re-affirm the words I then used." In a curious incident, John Quincy Adams, former President of the United States and since a Republican representative from Massachusetts, asked to be excused from the vote on the censure. Adams said the vote was unconstitutional because it was based on inference rather than a recorded statement. He maintained his silence after the House refused to excuse him, and a committee was set up to determine if punitive action should be taken.

The vote to censure Stanbery was 93-44 in favor. He was the first member of Congress censured, and lost the nomination for Congress later in 1832.

Stanbery returned to law work, and apparently retained some of his old standoffishness. "Old Bill" sometimes didn't pay his debts on times, and at one point a sheriff approached him on the steps of the courthouse in order to arrest him. Glaring at the sheriff, Stanbery told him he would step inside the courthouse and handle the case. There, he drew up a document reading, "That William Stanbery, an attorney-at-law and officer of the court of the great State of Ohio, while engaged in the practice of his profession, had been wantonly and maliciously arrested on the steps of the court house, in violation of the Constitution and in contempt of the majesty of the great State of Ohio." The embarrassed sheriff said he would let Stanbery go if he didn't fall behind again.

In 1873, Stanbery died in Newark, Ohio.

Note: I'll be visiting friends in Minnesota over the weekend, so I won't be starting on another entry until I return. Apologies for the delay.

Sources: The Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, The Political Graveyard, "In Lieu of Manners" in the New York Times on Feb. 4 2001, Sam Houston by James L. Haley, State Centennial History of Ohio by Rowland H. Rerick, Memoirs of Lucas County and the City of Toledo edited by Harvey Scribner, Sam Houston: The Life and Times of the Liberator of Texas by John Hoyt Williams, The Raven: A Biography of Sam Houston by Marquis James, Register of Debates in Congress, A Congressional Manual by Joel B. Sutherland

Evan Mecham: the faux pas factory

Image from sonoranalliance.com

Governor Evan Mecham's legacy, such as it is, seems mostly to be his ability to offend any state resident who wasn't a white, straight, conservative male. While these embarrassments started his decline, it was a financial scandal that removed him from office.

Mecham was born in Duchesne, Utah in 1924, and attended the Utah State Agricultural College. He left school before graduation to join the U.S. Army Air Corps during World War II, and became a fighter pilot. He survived being shot down on one occasion and was held prisoner for 22 days; he was later awarded a Purple Heart and Air Medal for his service.

In 1947, Mecham returned to school, this time at Arizona State University. Once again, he left early, this time to open up a car dealership in Ajo. It was successful enough that he moved to Glendale later on to open another one, and the business made him a millionaire. Less successful were several short-lived newspapers Mecham launched.

In 1952, Mecham took his first stab at politics with a run for the state house of representatives. In 1960, he was elected as a Republican to the state senate and served one term. In 1962, Mecham won the Republican primary for U.S. Senate on a platform critical of the United Nations and a recent Supreme Court decision limiting prayer in public schools. However, he failed to gain enough support from the party to succeed in the general election. Mecham also made four unsuccessful bids for governor in 1964, 1974, 1978, and 1982.

It took a third party to help Mecham win the gubernatorial race in 1986. In that year, independent candidate Bill Schulz split the Democratic vote and brought Mecham into office despite the lack of a clear majority. Mecham ran on a platform of tax relief and political reform, and urged such measures as lowering taxes, encouraging economic development, establishing a 50-year plan to address the state's water needs, investing in solar power, decreasing state spending, and phasing out state offices that were not needed. While in office, he established an Arizona trade and tourism office in Taiwan, supported legislation allowing the governor to choose pro-tem judges to handle drug cases, and advocated raising the highway speed limit from 55 to 65 miles per hour.

Mecham's most well-known and infamous decision was announced at his first State of the State address in January of 1987: he declared Martin Luther King, Jr. Day canceled as a state holiday. In 1983, President Ronald Reagan had signed a bill declaring the third Monday in January a national holiday to honor the late civil rights leader. However, the decision followed three years of debate in Congress, and the holiday did not officially go into effect until 1986. Mecham said he had been advised that the state could be sued for the $3.5 million in lost productivity from the new holiday if it remained in place. He further contended that his predecessor, Democratic Governor Bruce Babbitt, had illegally created the state holiday by executive order after the state legislature had rejected the measure by one vote.

The result was a boycott of Arizona by civil rights and other groups, with 45 conventions choosing to cancel arrangements they had made in the state. These groups included the National Newspaper Publishers Association, which represented 134 black-owned newspapers and canceled a convention in Arizona; the Democratic Party, which moved a finance council meeting from Tucson to California; and the National Black Nurses Association, which also moved its convention out of Arizona. Looking back on the debacle, Time reported that Mecham's attempt to save $3.5 million had resulted in $25 million in lost business due to the boycotts.

Mecham was also criticized for nominating people with problematic backgrounds for state positions. There was a liquor commissioner suspected of involvement in a murder in Mexico, a special assistant who left upon being charged with extortion, a tax commissioner who had not filed his own state taxes, and a state investigator twice court-martialed while a Marine. Receiving the most attention was an education commissioner who said teachers should not contradict the beliefs of a student, even if the student believed the world was flat.

As Mecham's term progressed and more troubles befell him, newspaper articles noted the increasing number of groups he offended with off-color remarks or other actions. The list included blacks, women, gays, liberals, Jews, Japanese-Americans, and Catholics. He suggested that Jews should face up to the fact that they were living in a Christian nation; that working women led to increased divorce rates; and that the eyes of visiting Japanese businessmen "went round" when they heard of the country's golf courses. He defended himself against charges of racism, stemming from his decision over Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and his support of a textbook that made a reference to black children as "pickaninnies." Time referred to him as a "veritable faux pas factory." A joke book began circulating with such quips as, "What do Mecham's political appointees have in common? Parole officers." Across Arizona, motorists sported bumper stickers reading, "Pickaninny: what we did for Governor."

With the questionable appointments and offensive statements as its basis, a recall effort began within the first year of Mecham's term. Political leaders, including former Republican Senator Barry Goldwater, Democratic Congressman Morris Udal, and ex-Governor Babbitt joined in the cry for his resignation. Mecham dismissed the recall effort, saying it was doomed to fail because the person who started it, Republican businessman Ed Buck, was gay. He also said he enjoyed the support of former Republican Governors Jack Williams and Paul Fannin, then a U.S. senator.

Nevertheless, the recall signatures swelled to 350,000 by November of 1987: 6,000 more than the number of votes Mecham received in the general election and 130,000 over the minimum limit needed to certify the petition and establish a recall election in May of 1988. Adding insult to injury was the "Evan Mecham Eco-Terrorist International Conspiracy," a group named for the governor that made its debut act in late 1987 by sabotaging ski lifts at a resort in Flagstaff. Despite his rising unpopularity, Mecham declared, "These people don't have a prayer of getting me out of this office because the people are with me."

The recall had been well underway, but it was spurred on in October of 1987 when it was revealed that Mecham had not reported a $350,000 loan to his campaign by developer and lawyer Barry Wolfson. State law required elected officials to report any debt of $1,000 or more, together with the identity of the lender. The money had been loaned in 14 promissory notes, and it was questioned whether Wolfson's support had influenced two appointments to the State Housing Finance Review Board. The board's duties included awarding bids of industrial development bonds for low-income housing, and at the time Wolfson was being sued for fraud and racketeering in the alleged misuse of $368 million in such bonds. In January of 1988, Mecham was criminally indicted on six counts of perjury, fraud, and filing a false campaign report.

Both the house of representatives and senate in the state legislature were dominated by Republicans, but the legislators had had enough. In February of 1988, the house of representatives voted 46-14 to impeach Mecham on the basis of the $350,000 loan. The house also charged him with inhibiting an investigation into a death threat against a former lobbyist who testified before the grand jury about the loan, as well as an illegal loan of $80,000 of state money to buoy up his car dealership. Mecham was removed from office, Democratic Secretary of State Rose Mofford was named acting governor of Arizona, and the recall election (now a moot point) was called off.

In April, the state senate voted 21 to 9 to convict Mecham on charges related to obstruction of justice and the illegal loan. It dismissed the charge related to the $350,000 so as not to inhibit the upcoming criminal trial on that issue. Mecham was officially removed from office, the first governor to be impeached in 59 years, on the anniversary of Dr. King's assassination. However, a senate vote to prevent him from running for political office again failed to achieve the two-thirds majority necessary to pass. The senate also approved payment of about $202,000 to compensate Mecham for the legal fees he incurred while governor.

Mecham had claimed that the failure to report the $350,000 loan had been an innocent mistake on the part of his brother and campaign manager, Willard Mecham. The prosecution argued that Mecham had been willingly trying to conceal the funds, but a jury acquitted him of all criminal charges. The loan itself had been repaid in full by the end of 1987.

Though Mecham's decision to cancel the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday is seen as one of his biggest blunders, the issue over the holiday was not quite over. Three months after impeaching Mecham, the senate rejected a bill to establish the day as a state holiday by two votes, with some legislators complaining that Democratic efforts to create the holiday were heavy-handed. The holiday was finally ratified in Arizona in September of 1989 when Mofford signed it into law; at that point, Arizona was the 47th state to recognize the holiday.

Mecham tried unsuccessfully to run for governor once more in 1990, and also failed to take the Republican nomination for the Senate from the incumbent, John McCain, in 1992. Three years later, he became the chairman of the Constitutionalist Networking Center, an organization advocating the election of people who were strict constructionists in regards to the U.S. Constitution. He spent much of his time saying that he had been the victim of conspiracy, working for a time as a radio talk show host and newspaper columnist. In 1999, he published a book entitled Impeachment: The Arizona Conspiracy, where he said his impeachment was "pure and simple raw political power exercised by those who wanted to remain in control."

Besides the joke books and bumper stickers, Mecham's brief term also sparked an amendment to the Arizona constitution that required a runoff election in the event that no majority winner emerges, as was the case in Mecham's gubernatorial contest. In 2008, Mecham died in Phoenix after suffering for several years from Alzheimer's disease.

Sources: The American Presidency Project, National Governor's Association, "ML King: Slain Civil Rights Activist Is Finally Honored With National Holiday" in the Daily Collegian on Jan. 17 1986, "The GOP's Silver Lining" in Time on Nov. 17 1986, "Headliners: A Holiday Dispute" in the New York Times on Dec. 28 1986, "Newspaper Group Calls Off Meeting in Arizona as Protest" in the New York Times on Jan. 22 1987, "Black Nurses Shun Arizona" in the New York Times on Mar. 7 1987, "Mecham Campaign Loan Subject of Inquiry" in the New York Times on Oct. 22 1987, "Recall Backers Have The Signatures, But Mecham Just Scoffs" in the Deseret News on Oct. 25 1987, "Mecham Not 'Knowingly Guilty'" in the Deseret News on Oct. 26 1987, "Evan Mecham, Please Go Home" in Time on Nov. 9 1987, "Mecham Repays Controversial Loan" in the Washington Post on Dec. 13 1987, "House Impeaches Arizona Governor" in the New York Times on Feb. 6 1988, "Arizona Senate Ousts Governor, Voting Him Guilty of Misconduct" in the New York Times on Apr. 5 1988, "Senators in Arizona Vote to Pay Fees For Ousted Governor" in the New York Times on Apr. 7 1988, "Mecham Cleared of Concealing Loan" in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Jun. 17 1988, "Arizona 47th State to Honor Dr. King With Holiday" in the Los Angeles Times on Sep. 23 1989, "Evan Mecham, Ousted Governor, Dies at 83" in the New York Times on Feb. 23 2008, "King Holiday Loses Again in Arizona" in the St. Petersburg Times on Jul. 2 1988, "Evan Mecham, Ousted Governor, Dies at 83" in the New York Times on Feb. 23 2008, "Evan Mecham, 83; Was Removed as Arizona Governor" in the Washington Post on Feb. 23 2008, Encyclopedia of Terrorism by Harvey W. Kushner, Biographical Dictionary of American Newspaper Columnists by Sam G. Riley