Decatur Democrat, Volume 24, Number 21, Decatur, Adams County, 26 August 1880 — Page 1

THE DECATUR DEMOCRAT.

VOL. 24.

READ THE RECORD. Garfield Tries to Legislate Gen. Hancock Out of Office. A Faitblui Officer so be Removed Because He Obeyed the Law and Would not Govern with the Sword. Hancock’* Support of Civil Law Made a Crime by Garfield. In January, 1868, Andrew Johnson was President, U. S. Grant was General of the Army, and Winfield S. Hancock was Major-General in command of Louisiana and Texas. November 29, 1867, Hancock assumed command and issued his famous Order No. 40. It contained these words: “When insurrectionary force has been overthrown a'nd peace established, and the civil authorities are ready and willing to perform their duties, the military power should cease to lead, and the civil administration resume its natural and rightful dominion. Solemnly impressed with these views, the General announces that the great principles of American liberty are still the lawful inheritance of this people, and ever should be. The right of trial by jury, the habeas corpus, the liberty of the press, the freedom of speech, the natural rights of persons, and the rights of property must be preserved.’’ From the Congressional Globe, Jan--13, 1868, page 489: Mr. GARFIELD. I ask unanimous consent to offer for consideration and action a bill to reduce and improve the military establishment by discharging one Major-General. The bill was read. It provides that the Army of the United States shall “be reduced by the dischaage from military service of the Major-General, who was last commissioned in that grade before January. 1868, to take effect from its passage, so there shall be but four Major-Generals in the Army. Mr. GARFIELD. I hope the bill will be allowed to come in, and then we can act on it in the morning. Objection was made, and Mr. Garfield said he would bring it up the first thing on Monday morning next. Major-General Winfield S. Hancock was commissioned Major-General on July 26th, 1866, and he was the last person commissioned in that grade before January, 1868. Thus we see that within six weeks after Hancock issued his order No. 40, Garfield, being at the same time chairman of the Millitary Committee, moved a bill to remove him from office. This was not to retire nor to pension him, but to punish him. This bill was not heard of again, but House Bill No. 439 came from the Committee on Reconstruction on that day (January 13, 1868), through Mr. Bingham. Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That for the speedy enforcement of the act entitled “An act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel States,” passed March second, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, and the several acts supplementary thereto, the General of the Army of the United States is hereby authorized and required to enjoin by special orders upon all officers in command within the several military departments within said several States, the performance of all acts authorized by said several laws above recited, at his discretion, by his order from command any or all of said commanders, and detail other officers of the United States Army, not below the rank of colonel, to perform all the duties and exercise all the powers authorized by said several acts, to the end that the people of said several States may speedly reorganize civil govern-

ments, republican in form, in said several States, and be restored to political power in the Union. Sec. 3. Anrf be it further enacted,

That the General of the Army may remove any or all civil officers now acting under the several provisional governments within said several disorganized States, and appoint others to discharge the duties pertaining to their respective offices, and may do any and all acts which by said laws above mentioned are authorized to be done by the several commanders of the military departments within said States; and so much of said acts, or of any act, as auauthorizes the President to detail the military commanders to said military departments, or to remove any officers who may be detailed as herein^Provided, is hereby repealed. The sth section made any interference by force with the orders of the General of the Army (Grant), or any refusal or neglect to carry out the statute, a high misdemeanor, punishable by $5,000 fine and two years imprisonment.

This statute aimed at compelling Hancock to obey the orders of Grant, the General, and not of Johnson, the President; and it empowered General Grant to remove Hancock if he obeyed Johnson and not Grant. It also gave the General of the Army full power to do everything he saw fit to do in each of the Military Departments without any control of the President.

Its real animus was the effort of Garfield, snd those who acted with him, to subordinate the civil to the military power iu all the South, and to remove Hancock because he recognized the law as superior to the sword. * The bill was put upon its passage, and the Congsessional Globe, of January 17th, 1868, contains the following speech from James A. Garfield in its favor: “I call attention to the oath that every officer and enlisted man takes before entering the Army. It is in these words:

“I do solemnly swear that I will bear true allegiance to the United States,” * * * ‘and will observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States, and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the rules and articles for the government of the Army of the United States.” Now, should the President of the United States give to the humblest officer of the Army an order contrary to the Rules and Articles of War or to the law’ of Congress, the subordinate can peremptorily refuse to obey, because the order has not been given in accordance with the rules and regulations of the power which commands both him and the President.

Now, if Congress can make laws assigning special duties to subordinate officers, such as Judge-advocates, quartermasters and barrack-masters, what new’ doctrine is this that it may not also assign special duties to the General of the Army? The volumes of statutes are full of laws of Congress commanding all classes of officers to perform all kinds of duties. It is now proposed to require of the General of the Army the performance of a special duty, namely, the duty of directing the operations of that part of the Army which occupies the States lately in rebellion. If the General should neglect this duty the President, as commander-in-chief, can call him to account for such neglect, but he cannot prevent his obedience to the law.

So much for the constitution of this section. I now come to inquire why this legislation is needed. It is because this Congress, in its work of restoring to their places the States lately in rebellion, authorized the President to assign the officers of the Army to the duties prescribed in the law: and the President has made such use of that authority as to obstruct and delay the restoration of those States.

Without violating the letter of the law he has been able, in a great measure, to hinder the full and efficient execution of the law. His acts and those of his advisers are, to-day, the chief obstacles to the prompt restoration of

DECATUR, ADAMS COUNTY. INDIANA. AUG. 26, 1880.

rebel States, and Congress proposes to remove those obstacles by transferring the power to the hands of one who has shown his willingness to obey the laws of the Union.

Mr. Speaker, I will not repeat the long catalogue of obstructions which he has throwq in the way by virtue of the power conferred upon him in the reconstruction law of 1867, but I will allude to one example, where he has pound in a Major General of the Army a facile instrument with which more effectually to obstruct the work of reconstruction. This case is all the more painful because an other toise meritorious officer, who bears honorable scars earned in battle for the Union, has been made a party to political madness which has so long marked the conduct of the President. This General was sent into the district of Louisiana and Texas with a law of Congress in his hand, a law that commands him to see that justice is administered among the people of that country, and that no pretense of civil authority shall deter him from performing his duty, and yet we find that officer giving lectures in the form of proclamation and orders on what ought to be the relation between civil and military departments of the Government. We see him issuing A GENERAL ORDER IN WHICH HE

DECLARES THAT THE CIVIL SHOULD NOT GIVE WAY BEFORE THE MILITARY. We hear him declaring that he finds nothing in the laws of Louisiana and Texas to warrant his interference in the civil administration of those States. It is not for him to say which should be first, the civil or the military, in that rebel community. It is not for him to search the defunct laws of Louisiana and Texas for a guide to his conduct. It is for him to obey the laws which he was sent there to execute. It is for him to aid in building up civil governments, rather than preparing himself to be the presidential candidate of that party which gave him mq sympathy when he was gallantly fighting the battles of the country.” The bill passed the House—yeas, 124, all Republicans; nays, 45, all Democrats—James A. Garfield votingyea. (See House Journal page 216.) The record is made up: It is Hancock. the soldier-civilian and the law, against Garfield the disgraced-civilian and the sword above law. Choose Ye.

In glancing over the columns of the leading Republican papers, it is easy to discover that they are even now looking for a soft place upon which to fall in November. The New York Tribune no longer claims Ohio, New Jersey and Connecticut as certain for the Republican ticket. True, it still claims that the Republican party can carry these States, but the claim is no longer positive. With regard to Maine, the Tribune speaks ambiguously. ‘‘The shrewdest Republicans,” says the Tribune, “fully believe Maine can be carried, if the Republicans take care to carry out their full vote, and draw over to themselves all the voters who feel that the National success of the Bourbon Democracy is not what they want." There is no confidence in such talk as that. “Ohio can be carried by the Republicans with reasonable efforts, says the Tribune. No certainty in that, and Indiana shows “probabilities decidedly in favor of Republican success." It will be seen that from the Tribune s point of observation all is doubt. In New Jersey, Republican success, says the Tribune, is “possible,” and as for Connecticut, the Tribune at the best can only chirp that the Republican candidates have a '■'■little the advantage.” As for New York, the Tribune virtually gives up the State by saying that New York is not yet “quite ready for the contest.” If there is anything in the movement of Republican straws, it is easy enough to see that the Tribune does not believe that the wind is favorable for Republican success.—lndianapolis Sentinel.

WASHINGTON. Washington, Aug. 24, 1880. conkling’s pound of flesh. A gentleman who is well into the secrets of the Republican managers arrived here to-day from New York, and says that Merritt’s removal as Collector of that port may be expected any day. Conkling has demanded it as the only condition upon which he will go into the campaign. When the charge was made several weeks ago, the Administration begged for a little time, and has since been trying to placate Mr. Conkling in some other manner, but finding this impossible, has decided to drop Collector Merritt. Almost simultaneously with the announcement of Collector Merritt’s removal will come the announcement of dates and places were Conkling will raise his voice for the ticket. BAD BOOK-KEEPING IN THE TREASURY. The census clerks w T ho were detailed to compile statistics of the Government bond-holders in the United States will be greatly delayed by the condition of the books of the Treasury. The Treasurer can, upon short notice furnish the total amount of bonds outstanding, but in individual cases purchases are entered promiscuously in the record, and no index is arranged to aid in finding them when desired. The census compilers are required to prepare their lists alphabetically, and the full address and amounts of bonds held are also taken. In consequence of the badly-kept records, which contain millions upon millions of bonds disposed of, the clerks have an enormous task before them. TYNER AND BRADY, Who have found use for Postmaster General Key during the past three years and a half in signing contracts and other official documents of the Department which they have prepared for him, organized a meeting at the Department to-day to pass resolutions of respect for the retiring Postmaster General. To-morrow these resolutions, engrossed by some expert penman of the Department and framed in gilt, will be handed the good-natured old gentleman, regrets at the parting will find expression in tearful voices, and then comes the long-haired, autocratic Maynard, whose approach on the Capital has been hardly less alarming to the clerks of the Post-office Department than would be the invasion of the Capital by armed rebels from the South. After Maynard arrives the President will sign Longstreet’s commission as minister to Turkey, to succeed Maynard. it DORSEY LOOSE IN INDIANA.

Last Saturday night Ex-Senator Dorsey, Secretary of the National Republican Committee, left New York, and since then all persons were informed at the head-quarters that Mr. Dorsey had gone West to look after his sheep in New Mexico. The truth is, Mr. Dorsey went West to look after the flocks in Indiana, and for the next three weeks he can be found at Chicago, giving money and directions to the herders in that state. Dorsey saw that Indiana needed close watching, and, as he is depended upon to do all the inside management for the National Committee, while Chairman Jewell does the talking, he chose Chicago as his base of operations in the desperate work to be done in that state. The Indiana Democrats will feel the force of this man’s ability in the handling of the machinery of politics. Hesitating at nothing, so long as success can be obtained, he will introduce into that State schemes and tricks which will open wide the eyes of the honest Hoosiers. BLACKMAILING SOLDIER CLERKS. Four years ago, when the collector for the Republican Committee was going through the War Department demanding the 2 per cent, assessments, he collected from the general service clerks—who are enlisted men —as well as from the civilian clerks. The attention of General Townsend was called

to the matter. He promptly decided that it was directly contrary to law for soldiers to subscribe to any political fund. Besides this, he ordered the collector to return the money he had illegally obtained. But such is the urgency of the Radical demands that this experience of four years ago is unheeded, and the law is being openly violated iu order that money may be raised to aid in the election of Garfield. Horace Greeley Giving Jell l>avls IIi« Freedom. [lndianapolis Sentinel.) The Journal hopes to make capital for Albert G. Porter by giving the vote of Hon. Franklin Landers in favor of removing the disabilities of Jefferson Davis. It will be remembered that Jefferson Davis was captured and held as a prisoner of war in Fortress Monroe for nearly two years. Horace Greeley was of the opinion that Jefferson Davis ought to be tried and set at liberty. The Government would not try him; so Mr. Greeley set about the work of giving Jefferson Davis his freedom. Mr. Greeley thought it was right, but when he met with Ben. Wade, of Ohio, he for a time desisted from doing what he thought was right. Ben Wade stood in the front rank of the Republican party. He was a man of terrible bluntness, and when he met Mr. Greeley in Washington, whither he had gone to put his name on Jeff Davis’ bond, Ben Wade, an Ohio Senator, sai him : “You, Mr. Greeley, are not the right man to go upon the bond.

You must recollect,” he urged, “that you are not a simple citizen; you are a representative man of the Republican party. The people believe that Jeff Davis ought to be tried as a traitor, convicted as a traitor, and hung as a traitor and, whether they are right or w’rong, you, as editor of the New’ York Tribune, and a trusted leader of the party, can not afford to do this thing.” The point we want to make is this: That Horace Greeley, a “representative man of the Republican party” and a “trusted leader of the party,' in defiance of Ben Wade, did go on Jeff Davis’ bond, and Jeff Davis went free and is still free. “The scene in the Court room,” when Mr. Greeley signed Jeff Davis’ bond, says Mr. Greeley’s historian, May 13, 1867. “was one of great impressiveness. Mr. Greeley had scarcely laid down his pen, when the prisoner grasped his hand and uttered a few words of grateful acknowledgement. Mr. Greeley returned the greeting, and in a, few homely sentences expressed his gratification that he HAD BEEN ABLE TO DO HIM A SERVICE. Will the Journal please state what it thinks of Horace Greeley’s service to Jeff Davis ?”

General Walker, superintendent of the census has promptly stopped the mouths of the bloody shirters who when the census demonstrated that there had been as great a comparative increase in population and prosperity in the South as elsewhere, set up a dismal howl about “frauds” in the census returns. He says there is no reason to suppose that there have been any frauds, and any falsification of the returns under the census arrangements would have been impossible. The bloody shirters are much disappointed at this. Nothing would please tnem so much as to have the South a howling wilderness. At about the same time Hancock was fighting the great battle of Gettysburg and spilling his blood in defense of the country he loves, Garfield left the army and begged the voters of his district to send him to Congress. He was elected but by a greatly reduced majority. His country needed his services more in the field than in Congress but his opportunities for selling his influence were not so great in the field as in the halls of Congress. There were no Credit Mobelier swindles that he could engage in at the front and he left the field and the soldier boys to engage in Congress frauds.

NO. 2i.