Indianapolis Journal, Indianapolis, Marion County, 12 October 1886 — Page 4

4

THE DAILY JOURNAL, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1886. WASHINGTON OFFICE—SI3 Fourteenth St. P. S. Heath. Correspondent. THE INDIANAPOLIS JOURNAL, Can be found at tlie following places: LONDON—American Exchange in Europe, 4.49 Strand. TARTS-*-American Exchange in Paris, 35 Boulevard des Capucines. NEW YORK—St. Nicholas and Windsor Hotels. CHICAGO—PaImer House. CINCINNATI—J. P. Hawley & Cos., 154 Vine street LOUISVILLE—O. T. Hearing, northwest corner Third and Jefferson streets. BT. LOUlS—Union News Company, Union Depot and Southern Hotel. WASHINGTON 1). C.—Riggs House and Ebbitt House. Telephone Calls. Business Office 239 | Editorial Rooms 242 Mr. Bynum deserves to bo thrown out of the Democratic party. —Indianapolis Sentinel. Mr. Bynum has forfeited the respect of every Democrat. —Indianapolis Sentinel. Vote for the devil, if necessary, to secure the election of a Democratic United States Senator.—-Isaac P. Gray, Governor of Indiana, at Loganspovt. So long as this management continues, it will remain exclusively partisan.—“ Dr." T. H. Harrison, president of the benevolent boards of the State. If I had my way, I would vote the inmates ®f the Insane Hospital.—“ Hon." Sim Coy, chairman of the Marion county Demooratic central committee. COUNT the money. Where is the money? OPEN the State treasury. Count the funds. New Hampshire is becoming excited over the question of a successor to the late Senator Pike. The inevitable Rollins bobs up serenely. mmmmaamammmmmmmmmmmmmmm Counterfeit ten-dollar silver certificates have been issued and circulated in the Northwest before the genuine bills are ready for distribution. Turn the rascals out. The same administration that honored “bloody usurpation" Keiley by appointing him to honorable places in the diplomatic service, refused the petty courtesy of allowing an honorable American citizen to be present at a reception of the Prince of Wales because he had presumed to criticise a member of the President's Cabinet.

The New York World regards the arrest of Lieutenant Rafael Pinale, of the Mexican army, an outrage, and thinks it should be “promptly dealt with by some competent authority.’' Usually the State Department attends to such matters, but wo do not blame the "World for not suggesting that Secretary Bayard be given the chance to make a fool of himself again. The New York Sun is treasonable when it makes the following amendment: “We add to the expression of our esteemed contemporary, the Kansas City Times, ‘The country needs Mr. Garland’—to get out." Will the President ever realize that his administration is hopelessly scandalized by the presence of this speculator in his Cabinet, even though it were faultless in every other respect? It is reported by the cable that sham butter has been introduced into India. This is probably an error for Indiana, where it has been sold to the managers of the InsaneTlospital for consumption by tho inmates, who are supposed to kuow nothing about the quality of the food they are fed. It is to be hoped that the heathen of ludia will not learn of the manner in which the insane are treated in this State. The gentlemen who run things in South Carolina for the Democratic party have come to the conclusion that it would be a useless expenditure of money to formally canvass the State, and will hold meetings in but one place in each congressional district. They have got ballot-box stuffing down to such a fine point that it is no longer necessary to do anything butawuifc the day when that little formality is attended to. Tiie New York Times expresses the belief that the President should be “especially grateful" to Mr. Lucius Swift for his careful and tnistwortby report of the manner in which the civil-service rules have been brought into contempt in Indiana by officials appointed by Mr. Cleveland. It is just such utterances as this that the word “rats" was devised to meet, and it does serve as a complete and satisfactory rejoinder, so far as the language is capable of expressing disgust with three-ply stupidity. A SPECIAL dispatch from Washington to the New York World touches on the probability of the President taking action on the unquestioned fact that the federal officials in this State have made civil-service reform a mockery and by-word, and says he has been ▼ery reticent on the subject, though several voluble members of the Civil-service Commission, and others, have been talking as though the fur would fly forthwith. This dispatch nays that a prominent Southern United States Sonator called on the President a few days ago, and afterwards declared that the President would tako no action in the matter. “He cannot afford to do it," said the Senator; “if he does he will completely destroy what little organization is left in the party. It is U 1 well enough to talk about removals, but

the President has not the least idea of carrying anything of the kind into execution." There is no doubt that the Senator is right. No one not absolutely drowned in prejudice, and fanaticism has any idea that President Cleveland will dare to or care to make removals on account of violations of his order respecting the observance of the civil-service rules. The Democratic party is as intent on spoils to-day as ever in its history. They are the incentive of that party to action. ONLY THREE WEEKS. It is just three weeks from to-day until the people of Indiana will exercise the right of determining the policy of the State for the two years ensuing. On that day the men will be elected who will have control of the State and shape its legislation. There is but little time left for work, and it behooves Republicans and all who are opposed to the methods that have prevailed in the management of State affairs to work energetically, to the end that something better obtain than now disgraces and hurts the State of Indiana. It is pleasing to note that there are evidences of increasing interest among the people. The apathy that seemed to possess them at the outset of the campaign is giving way to a livelier interest, and it is apparent that from now on the issues will attract greater attention. There is enough in this campaign to enlist the co-operation of all the people who are not content that the business of the State shall be conducted on the principle of a close corporation, with a few politicians in charge who persistently refuse to make a showing of their stewardship. No people can allow such goings-on as have characterized the Democratic officials of Indiana and expect affairs to be properly and honestly conducted. It is evident that there is something rotten that they are afraid to divulge. Just what it is and just how serious it is, it would be impossible to say. Enough is known, however, to justify the gravest apprehensions. The State debt is being increased, and it is inevitable that taxation must likewise increase unless a halt be called. There are other abuses, too, that call for rebuke. The people should arouse at once, nor cease fighting until the last hour of the day of election. Every honest man is earnestly invited to assist ia the work of reform.

COARSENESS AND BRUTALITY. Tho President’s lack of appreciation of tho character and magnitude of the disaster that overwhelmed the city of Charleston, to the relief of which he contributed the sum of S2O, was characteristic of the man. It was in perfect harmony with the flippant and brutal words he uttered when he vetoed the bills passed for tlie relief of soldiers disabled in the service of their country. He seems to have no conception of distress, no idea of suffering, so dense are his powers of perception and so coarse his nature. It was like him to send S2O to help the suddenly impoverished people of Charleston because his nature did not reach to the height necessary to an adequate appreciation of the pressing needs of the people. It uyis like him to do that, for it was he who unfeelingly ridiculed the idea that a number of Union soldiers were injured by being thrown onto the high pommels of their saddles, though it is a fact that this was found to be so prolific of serious injuries to cavalrymen that tho old-fashioned saddles with high pommels were dispensed with and new ones substituted that had no pommels at all. Tho President’s cold-blooded sneer that “those saddles were very dangerous contrivances," was the truth, as discovered by honest service in the field, though the reform in the shape of*the saddles was not made till many a good soldier was permanently disabled by them. It was like this man who sent S2O to jeer at another veteran by declaring that “whatever else may bo said of this claimant’s achievements during his short military career, it must be conceded that he accumulated a great deal of disability." Many a man has gone to his death or permanent disability in the first few days of his enlistment. This phlegmatic President has no adequate conception of the possibilities of war, and laughs at the men who to-day are maimed and crippled by reason of honest service in the armies of their country. This is the kind of man the President is. He can have no idea of the finer sentiments that move high and noblo minds to quick and generous sympathy. Fat-witted and slow to move, except to minister to his own appetite, he has proved himself to be anything but high-minded and sympathetic. Up there in the woods, lazily enjoying himself in the way most agreeable to him, he heard of the ruin of Charleston without the least exhibition of interest, and the only tidings that came back from the President of the United States were that he had on this day caught a trout weighing a few pounds, or on that had tried to kill a deer; that he had amused himself playing cards on days w'hen the weather was unpleasant for out door sports, and so on, but never a word from him in sympathy with the poople thrown out of their crumbling homes and suddonty compelled to camp in such miserable contrivances as they could devise out of the scanty materials at hand. The government of tho United States, with contemptible indifference, did absolutely nothing to relieve the awful distress felt by the people of that city. This is the “lucky man from Buffalo." This is he who has never been moved to give utterance to a noble or noteworthy sentiment in his life that was not thrust into his mouth by some of his subordinates, who act as guardians of his conduct, as far as that is possible. Grover Cleveland has said or done nothing in all his life that has been for the good of the people who

THE INDIANAPOLIS JOURNAL, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 127 18867

elected him to the high office for which he has shown such stupendous lack of appreciation. It will go into the history of this country that he never did anything for it; never was aware of its grandeur; never grateful for the possibilities that worked such fairy miracles for his slow-witted nature to fail to understand. After all this tho people need no longer be surprised by anything he does that should not be done, nor that he omit many a beautiful and noble thing that he should do. There is nothing in the man heroic, nothing to serve as an example before the people. It is very painful to a person who has read in the Sentinel of the awful wickedness of making a partisan use of a non-partisan —such as it is claimed has been the report of the civil-service reform committee upon the Insane Asylum—to notice the despicable and dishonorable use that is being made of an alleged report by the State Board of Health, also a non-partisan organization. Judging from what has been said in the columns of our esteemed contemporary about the heinousness of the crime of using the civil-service report, we shall expect the severest reprobation to bo visited upon the miscreants who are prostituting a harmless document, sent to the Governor in strict non-partisan confidence, by an entirely non-partisan board, who spent half an hour the other day looking througa the Insane Hospital. Such a breach of propriety must throw our esteemed contemporary into a perfect hysteria of indignation, a condition, by the way, which is liable to become chronic unless heroic measures are taken to keep it from undue excitement. The Richmond Telegram says: “There has been so much horror in Demoocratic bosoms over the ‘partisan political’ use that has been made of the report of the Civilservice Reform Association on the Insane Hospital that we are surprised to see a disposition already, in Democratic journals, to make a ‘partisan political’ use of this report of the State Board of Health. The Indianapolis Sentinel hastens to apply its ts editorial, ‘a complete vindication,' to the report, and assures us that it contains the ‘God’s truth of the whole business.’ If we have read our lesson in propriety aright, as it came hot from the Sentinel’s owu lips, this is outrageous." Harmony broods like a dove of peace over the Democratic party, if the administration organs are to be believed, but there are kickers who show a disposition to perforate the roof regardless of the hovering twins, harmony and reform. One of them, the Buffalo Times, jumps into the arena with the following warlike declaration: “The distribution of federal patronngo, so far as Buffalo is concerned, has been niggardly in the extreme. Tho men who have worked hard and long in campaigns without reward or even the hope of it, have been ignored in making selections, and their wishes have been pushed aside without receiving consideration from those they aided in elevating. There is no disguising this, nor that it has been the means of souring the disposition of sturdj* workers. There is still in the hearts of Democrats here veneration for Democratic principles, but how long will it continue if their preferences and rights are ignored by those who ought to them and give them a hearing. * * * It must be evident to those who are said to have the ear of the President that this refusal to recognize the Democrats of Buffalo must work an irreparable injury to the party in this part of the State, and the sooner the fact is made clear in Washington the better it will be for all concerned.” Evidently this is a case in which promises, and “taffy," and reform cant will no longer serve. Offices they must have, or to Hill they will go. Mr. Cleveland will have to drop the ‘ ‘reform" racket long enough to look after his New York fences a little—“fences" in that State being highly important possessions.

There is no doubt, judging from the dishonest statements made to explain away the fact, that there i3 a Democratic ring in the enjoyment of the thousands borrowed by the State for the purpose of finishing the new State-house and insane hospitals. These thousands are kept out of the pockets of the raen who have laid the brick and done the work on those structures. The contractors may have paid them, it is true, but they have had to sacrifice 7 and 8 per cent, of their claims to do so, and it is not to be imagined that they can pay as good wages as though they were in the receipt of their money as they earn it. In this way the Democratic ring are making money at the expense of the laboring men of the State, and wages are run down becauee of their greed. This was one of tho many dishonest reasons why the gerrymander was arranged. It was intended that the people should not be given a chance to dispossess these plunderers. Our friends of the Sentinel seem to be much disturbed about Hon. Will Cumback. It may interest them to knew that Colonel Cumback, on the day of the State convention, tendered his services to tho State committee, which were gladly accepted, and that more than three weeks ago ho made a series of appointments fur speeches, which will begin to-day at Plainfield. Mr. Cumback had a number of lecture engagements he had to discharge, and for the last few days has been quite ill, but hopes to be able to be on tho stump from now till tho day of election, telling tho people “the God’s truth about tho whole business." Both the Democrats and the Democratic Aid Society are liable to hear all they will want to from Mr. Cumback before the campaign closes. Since the Sentinel has manifested so much interest in the matter, we presume it will hasten to publish his speeches in full. There are at least four leading Democrats who heard Mr. Bynum call the late Mr. Hendricks a liar, a sneak and a hypocrite. The epithets were used by the Congressman in ono of tho State offices. Possibly it may be necessary to call these witnesses before the trial is over.

DEMOCBACY AND SOLDIEKS. Attitude of tbe Democratic Administration Toward the Boys in Blue. Ex-Union Soldiers Turned Out of Office and Replaced by Men Who Fought Against the Nation in the Confederate Armies. High Premium Paid by the Democratic Party to Those Who Wore the Gray. President Cleveland’s Sneering and Brntal Vetoes—Treatment of a Soldier’s Widow— A Contrast with Abraham Lincoln. SENATOR HARRISON'S SPEECH. How Ex-Union Soldiers Have Been Treated by the Democratic Administration. The following is a speech made by Senator Harrison with special reference to the relation of the Democratic administration to the exUnion soldiers: Fellow-citizens—There are some things connected with this administration of special interest to soldiers, and I will ask their attention while I state them. I know the power of the soldier vote is diminishing; thecolurnn is moving on, and from its head, the aged and infirm are dropping into the grave. I know there are not so many Union soldiers to vote now as there wore in 1865, and yet, ray comrades, there is atili a large body of the surviving veterans of that war, and if they are as faithful to them selves as they were to the country, they have the power to rebuke those who now show a disposition to forget the liberal promises with which they sent the boys to the field in 1861. Some of you went out Democrats and came back Democrats. But politics cannot break the bond of comradeship. I honor you as I honor any other soldier. I give you increased honor, because, in many cases you went to the war in spite of the beguilements of those to whom you had been accustomed to look for political advice. What liberal promises were made, my comrades, in 1861 and 1862! Ah! when the stress of war was on, when the old ship was in the storm, how profuse were the promises made to the boys! Shall they be forgotten now? Shall our people in these times, when increasing years and infirmities are bringing to many of the old soldiers needs they never felt before, forget them? I pledge myself, and I am sure I can pledge the Republican party, to be faithful, generous and liberal to the soldiers that survive, to care for them, and to honor them until tho last veteran of the war sleeps his last sleep. [Applauso.] It was not, perhaps, much to be wondered at that when this administration came in the apf (ointments to officemider it should be enormousy to the advantage of the confederate soldier. There is not a citizen or soldier here to-night who docs not know that at least ten times as many confederate soldiers havo been appointed to office under this administration as Union soldiers. I say it was to be expected, because the seat of Democratic power now, as before the war, is in the South, and when the offices came to be distributed it was to be expected. I suppose that nearly all tbe offices in the Southern States should be filled by confederate soldiers. If the same rule had been applied in the North we should have less cause to complain; but I appeal to any Democratic soldier who hears me, whether that is true in Indiana. Last fall I ascertained by careful inquiry that up to that time there had been 361 Union soldiers and eleven soldiers' widows turned out of office in this State by this administration, and only ninety soldiers and one soldier’s widow appointed. The Civil-service Association of Indiana report that: In the internal revenue districts, practically a clean sweep has been made. In the Indianapolis district. of fifty-six former incumbents fifty-three have been succeeded by Democrats. Fifty-two soldiers were formerly employed; now there are but four.

There are Democratic soldiers in Indiana of repute and intelligence, and many of them were candidates for these places, but they did not get them. In the beginning of the Forty-sixth Congress the Democratic party came into control of the Senate, and they at once looked about to possess the patronage. They introduced a resolution intended to give the control of all the appointments to the Democratic Sergeant- at-arms and the Secretary of the Senate. When this resolution was offered, Senator Edmunds moved to amend by adding the following: But no officer or employe of the Senate who served in the forces of the United States in suppressing the late Rebellion shall be removed except for cause, stated in writing to the President of the Senate, and approved by him in writing. The yeas and nays were called upon this amendment, and every Democratic Senator, including Senator Voorhees, voted against it. What next? Senator Carpenter then moved, as an amendment, this: But no office or employment made vacant by the removal or dismissal of a person who served in the forces of the Union during the late war shall bo filled or supplied by tho appointment or employment of any person who served in the confederate army during the late war. That is, you should not put out a Union soldier and put in a confederate soldier. The yeas and nays were called again, and every Democratic Senator present voted against this amendment and every Republican Sonator for it Every Democratic Senator voted that Union soldiers might be displaced and confederate soldiers put in their places. I had occasion in the Fortyseventh Congress to inquire as to the number of soldiers employed in the departments at Washington under the Republican administration, and 1 found that about 40 per cent, of all were soldiers or soldiers’ widows. I then looked into the condition of things about the Senate, which was under Democratic control, and I found that only a little over 14 per cent, in the Secretary’s office were Union soldiers, while 22 per cent, had served in the confederate army. I found, also, that in the Sergeantat arms’s office seventeen persons, or less than 16 per cent, of the force, had served in the Union army, and sixteen persons, or a little less than 15 per cent., in the confederate army. That was the first advent of the Democratic party to power in the United States Senate, and I ask Democratic soldiers why it was that their Indiana Representatives, who had control of appointments thore, could not secure a larger per cent, of Union soldiers employment about the Senate. I found that the aggregate salary paid to Indianians employed about tho Senate was $15,000, and that only ono soldier from cur State was on tho pay-roll, and he was getting $720 per year. The House of Representatives was Republican in the Forty-seventh Congress, and 1 found that over 50 per cent, of its employes were Union soldiers. But let us look at one or two special appointments made by Mr. Cleveland. Mr. Lawton, of Georgia, was appointed minister to Russia, but inquiry developed the fact that he had never had his disabilities romoved. This man was selected to represent this government at the court of Russia, tho administration forgetting, probably, that the Czar was on our side during the war. [Laughter and applause.] There was another distinguished rebel, Mr. Keiley, of Virginia—distinguished chiefly for unrepentant disloyalty—who had to bo honored. They had a hard time getting a place for him. They first sent him to Italy, and she would not receive him. They tried Austria, and she would not have him; and finally they located him in Egypt. [Laughter.] He is the man who declared that this government was a “bloody usurpation.” My Democratic soldier friends, if you had been selecting a man to represent this country abroad would you have picked that kind of a man, and is this tho sort of work you intend to endorse, when in VoUr platform you indorse this administration? THE CASE OF A SOLDIER’S WIDOW. I alluded a little while ago to the treatment of an Indiana soldier by this administration, now, let me tell you of its treatment of a soldier’s widow. Down upon the Ohio river, at the town of Cannelton, there is a postoffice of the fourth class. gouio months before

President Arthur’s administration expired, the aged postmaster then feeling himself unable loneer to discharge the duties of the office, resigned, and upon my recommendation his daughter, Mrs. Isabella De La Hunt, was ap pointed postmaster. She was the widow of Maj. De La Hunt, of the Twenty-sixth Indiana In fantry. He went to the war a Democrat, and came home a Democrat. At Pea Ridire he was shot through the arm, and the arm was disabled. On his recovery from that wound he went back to the front, and in another engagement, shortly afterwards, was shot through the body. His natural vitality of constitution overcame these wound, and, thus disabled, he returned to the home from which he had gone out He was elected to a county office as a Democrat, and edited a Democratic paper until his death. When he died he left his widow, and one boy to her care. She had been acting as deputy in this postoffice, and naturally succeeded to the appointment when her aged father retired. This administration had been in power but a few months, when some miscreant filed charges at the Postoffice Department against her. She wrote to the Postmaster general, and asked to be advised as to what charges were filed, and he would not answer. Finally she ascertained that the charge was “offensive partisanship.” The editor of the Democratic paper wanted the postoffice, and some miscreant was found vile enough to silo charges against this Democratic soldier's widow. What had she been guilty of? Why, when her husband died be left her as a part of his small property this Democratic paper. It must be kept going until it could be sold, for a newspaper, when stopped, loses much of its value. She applied to her brother-in-law, who was a Republican, to conduct the paper for her until she could sell it. After trying to edit a Democratic paper for a few weeks [laughter] he found himself unequal to the task [renewed laughter] and said to Mrs. De La Hunt, “I will have to run this paper ns a Republican paper; there is one other Democratic paper here already," and so, for a short time, until it was sold, he conducted it as a Republican paper. Mrs. De La Hunt had nothing to do with its management, but this miscreant went back to the files of that paper and hunted up some Re publican editorials and filed them in support of charges against her. and she was removed, although the paper had been sold eight years before. All of the facts were brought to the attention of the department, but to this day that Democratic editor runs that postoffice, and Mrs. De La Hunt struggles as she can to maintain herself and that soldier’s boy. I want to road you a letter she wrote, or rather a card she published. It seems to me I have rarely read anything more full of spirit than this letter. She said: Had the government seen fit to remove me without alleged cause, as it had an undoubted right to do. I should remain silent; but when I am sacrificed by falsehood I may be excused if I protest against it. I have this to say, that whoever has sworn to any act of partisanship on my part in the conduct of the postoffice here has committed willful perjury, and I dare him to appear before auy open tribunal and make good his accusation. I call upon him to stand forth in the glare of honest sunlight and exhibit himself to this community as the author of this calumny. Let him do this and bring from the files of the starchamber court at Washington the specifications to which he has affixed his infamous name, and I pl- dge myself to prove their utter falsity. So conscious am I of the rectitude and impartiality of mv conduct in the discharge of my official duties that I do not hesitate to appeal to you, one and all, irrespective of your political preferences, for the truth of this assertion. Somebody in this community has sworn to a lie to accomplish that which could not be done through the instrumentality of truth. For this I now publicly brand him as a perjurer. Ido not propose to lie under the false accusation of any untruthful coward who thus resorts to secret assassination of character to accomplish an unjust object. Hence I appeal in this Eublic manner to the honor and consciences of all onost men and women to condemn, as I know they must* this infamous attempt to do mo an injury. I say to the government—take your postoffice, but not undor false pretenses. Do this and I will utter no word of complaint, however unjust it may appear. Excuse me. my frionds, you who have known me from my childhood and are witnesses of my daily and official life, excuse mo if I manifest some fooling over this wrong. I cannot help it. War, with its natural and inevitable results, struck down my husband, my protector and support. It was the act of an open foe on the field of battle, whom I try to forgive; but that the government, to preserve which he sacrificed his life, should connive with secret assassins and false witnesses to strike down his family without an opportunity of vindication is a national disgrace, and an act too cowardly and base for absolution. Isabelle De La Hunt. Cannelton, Ind., Aug. 31, 1885. [Long continued applause.] But though the falsity of these charges was thus exposed, this Democratic administration still excludes the soldier’s widow from the little postoffice at Cannelton, and she fights the battle of life as best she can.

WORK OF THE GRAND ARMY. My comrades, I have here the report of the employment committee of the Grand Army of the Republic at Washington. Most of you are members of that organization. You know it is thoroughly unpartisan. I want to read you what they say in regard to the employment of soldiers in the departments. Major Burke, who signs this report as commander of that department, is a Democrat. He says: While the employment commiitee of former years were principally engaged in securing employment for applicants, and with fair success, the present committee have, we regret to report, owing to conditions that will be mentioned hereafter, received but little encouragement in proportion to the amount of labor ezpended in this direction. Indeed, this has been an “off year’’ for the class wo represent. This, my comrades, is the statement of a Democratio soldier, who has been engaged in trying to secure plaoes for soldiers at Washington. He says: This year of Democratic administration “has been an ‘off year’ for the class we represent,” namely, the Union soldiers. I quote further from his report: The gloomy forebodings of Commander Alexander, in his address to the last department encampment, seem to have been realized. But we have the pleasure of knowing, however, that in the few cases whore employment was secured much real misery was relieved and a few homos and firesides made happier. By far the greatest amount of our labors for the last year has been expended in seeking the reinstatement of comrades discharged from their positions in the executive departments, and in endeavoring to secure the retention in their places of those who had employment. As far as we can learn, there have been seventyeight comrades of the G. A. R. discharged from government emDloy during the last year, also a largo number of ex-Union soldiers and sailors who are not affiliated with us, and many of the wards of the Grand Army. Os those comrades who have been discharged or who have been requested to tender thoir resignations, this committe has been solicited to uso its influence in securing a reversal of departmental action in thirty-seven cases, in which we rave been successful in ten cases, and this has been effected only by constant and repeated importunity. Speaking of the correspondence upon this subject, he says: A few weeks elapsed, but in the meantime our comrades in the departments were being rapidly displaced, and feeling that our appeal had not been as effectual as we had a right to expect, we again concluded to memorialize the President and request his official interposition in their behalf. And again: It is estimated that of the total number of employes in the departments in Washington the soldier element Is about 30 per cent., and it is believed that nearly 40 per cent, of all who have been discharged came from that class—there is certainly are large percentage against us. It almost, indeed, amounts in some places to ostracism and a practical nullification of law. I ask the soldiers here to bear in mind that this comes from a Democrat and a Grand Army man, who had taken upon himself this unrequited labor of endeavoriug to secure placos for soldiers without regard to politics. Now another extract: Heretofore, while there may have been some reason to find fault with the appointing power in failing to appoint, there has been but little opportunity to criticiso for failure to retain, our comrades in office. Provided a comrade had a good personal and official record, he felt tolerably secure in his position, and that without regard to party affiliation. That is what this Democrat says as to what was done* under Republican administration: It was believed, and the belief was put into practical effect, that even though an ex-Union soldier was so offensively partisan as to cast his vote against the dominant party, yet such an act on his part did not operate as a bar to his holding an office under the federal government, nor outweigh'the good he had done the Union in lighting her battlen at a time when offensive and defensive partisanship, ou the righ 'o, was at a premium. Then what? Wo have seen & oomrado whose army rac-oi .1 was of the very best, and whose civil-servico record was irreproachable, degraded from a uigh position which ho won by meritorious service, and his pla<-e Ailed by one who was in armed rebellion against the government. One other oxtract: A remark has boen made by one holding a prom ineut position in one of the executive department*,

that“the soldier business is playec out." Perhaps it is with some people, who ware too cowardly to risk their precious bodies to the shot and shell of rebellion, and the deprivations, sickness and arduous dutios incident to army life, but preferred to remain behind and furnish moldy hard tack, rotten beef, shoddy clothing and chicory coffee to those who were fighting their battles. Would it not be will for those who were in the soldier business from 1861-65 to give a practical demonstration of the falsity of this statement? While in other fields of labor organizations against oppression have done much to ameliorate the condition of the oppressed, might it not bo best to ascertain what strength there xnay be in a solid column of 300,000 men, against those who feel inclined to sneer and laugh at the claims of the exUnion soldiers and sailois? The soldiers have organized what is known as the “National Veteran Rights Association." It is an organization outside of the Grand Army, and has for its special object the taking care of the soldier in the way of seeing that his rights to office are recognized, and in any other way they can be of help. Mr. Odell, of this State, is chairman of the general committee, and Major Burke, of whom I have just spoken, is chairman, of the executive committee. I want to read you what those men say: In the year 1885 the discharges of ex-Union soldiers from publio employments went cn almost unchecked. and with such rapidity and constant recurrence as to excite a well-grounded fear in the minds of men that the laws of 1865 and 1876 wero, in fact, no longer regarded as in existence. Here was. indeed, an emergency which the Grand Army ot the Republic was comparatively powerless to meet, and which called imperatively for some organization through which the veterans of tho civil war could meet tne danger, and defend not only their own rights, but thS sanctity of the laws. They say again, speaking of the Pension Office: Particularly in the Pension Office, a bureau of the Interior Department, we have reason to believe our efforts have availed much to save our veteran comrades from dismissal for political reasons only. During the first year of the present Commissioner’s occupancy of his office he had discharged, according to hi* own showing, not less than fifty Union soldiers, and in not more than two or three of such cases has any reason whatever for removal, other than political reasons, been disclosed. This onslaught upon brave moil—honorably discharged, maimed and crippled soldiers—and worthy women, the widows and daughters of our dead comrades, went on till after the organization of the Veterans’ Rights Union. Wo sooa thereafter called the attention of both the Commissioner and the .Secretary of the Interior to the statute of 1876, of the existence of which they had apparently been ignorant, or which, if they knew of it, they had totally ignored. Failing in our appeals to these men—one a Union and tho other a confederate soldier—we appealed directly to the President of the United Stares. We have reason to believe that, unless tho public general understanding is utterly at fault, the Commissioner of Pensions has latelv been relieved of the power he had hitherto exercised, through the Secretary of the Interior, to appoint or remove employes of his bureau, and this by direction of the President. That was a mistake. The power to remove still exists, and is still being exercised. Now. my comrades, this is not my testimony, nor is it from Republican sources. It is testimony from non-partisan sources as to the treatment Union soldiers have been receiving at Washington. the president’s vetoes of pensions. But I come now to consider the President’s attitude towards the soldiers. President Cleveland will be known as the great veto President. All of our Presidents prior to President Cleveland vetoed altogether 110 hills passed by Congress, and President Cleveland vetoed in the eight-months’ session of the last Congress 114. He is four ahead of all his predecessors. I want to call your attention to some of hi peculiar views upon these subjects, as expressed in his veto messages. As Mayor of Buffalo, he vetoed a bill passed by the Council of that city appropriating S3OO to aid in the exercises of Decoration Day. He said it was a misuse of public money. As Governor of New York he vetoed a bill “authorizing the board of supervisors of Chautauqua county to appropriate money for the purchase of land upon which to erect a soldiers’ ami sailors’ monument," and said in hla message: “It is not an agreeable duty to refua# to give sanction to the appropriation of money for such a worthy and patriotic object, but I cannot forget that tho money proposed to bo appropriated is public money, to raised by taxation, and that all that justifies its exaction from the people is the necessity of its use for purposes connected with the safety and substantial welfare of the tax-payers." We have a law in this State authorizing counties to erect soldiers’ monuments, but we would net have had it if Mr. Cleveland had been Governor when the bill passed the Legislature, for he would not allow one county in New York ta spend a little money to purchase a plot of earth on which the base of a soldiers’ monumonfc might bo rested. Mr. Cleveland very queer notions as to the things that promote the public safety. Upon what granite rock was the public safety rested in 18(31? It was upon the patriotism of our people; and will any one say that to build these shafts of honor to the men who died upon the battle-field, that the Nation might live, does not conduce to the public safety? I believe that a soldiers’ monument, tasteful, magnificent in proportion, crowned with the statue of tho typical soldierbuilt in every county in Indiana—will do more for the safety and prosperity of the State than all the peace officers within its borders. ! Applause.) Such a monument inspires and lifts up men. Again, the Legislature of New York passed a bill to give a sum of money to the soldiers of thft First New York Regiment, which had served iQ the Mexican war. These soldiers had received no pension from the United States, and the Legislature of New York passed a bill giving them a pension for a limited number of years. Mr. Cleveland said, in vetoing the bill: I am by no means certain that the legislation thug proposed involves a correct principle, or that the appeal on which it rests should be answered by favorable action.

Hero is another of his vetoes as Governor of New York. A man belonging to ono of the State regiments under their militia laws was ordered out for duty, and in the exercise ofTsaid duty was permanently disabled. The Legislature passed a bill giving him a small sum of money in recompense for his injury, and Mr. Cleveland vetoed it. Two such * instance* are found in the official volume I hold in my hand. Since he has been President he has vetoed a large number of pension bills. Why were these private pension bills passed by Congress? You know, my comrades, how many of you are unable to make the technical proof required at the Pension Office. Y’oucaunot find the comrades or officers to give the evidence you requiro—some technical reason bars the way and your claim is rejected. But here has been faithful service for three or four years, much evidence has been furnished, but not enough. Y'our claim is rejected, and many of you—very many of my comrades in Indiana—have appealed to me to give them relief by special bill, and in every worthy case I have responded to the appeal and scores of such bills introduced by me for the relief of deserving soldiers have passed Congress. I have not time to discuss those veto messages in detail, but I will give you one or two illustrations. I have mentioned one case before, that of Sally Ann Bradley. She was the wife of an Ohio soldier who weut to the war in its early stage. The patriotio example of the father inspired his boys, and four sons—all of the male members of the family—were soon at the frdut fighting the battles of their country. The husband was wounded at Murfreesboro by a shell in the back, and when the war was over, and the boys came home, two of that v7‘dow'g sons did not answer to the muster-out roll-eaJ* they had died in battle, upon Southern fields. The other two boys came home, one with the loss of an arm. the other with the loss of an eye, and the husband returned disabled, as I have said, by a shell wound. After some years, during which the husband had drawn a small pen* sion, he died. The widow could not prove that her husband diod of the shell wound. The boys were unable to tako care of the old mother—they were crippled and poor. The widow, now past seventy years of age. was left practically nlono in the world, awl with her the question wan, will the country, to which I gave my sons, aud for whom my husband suffered wounds, care for me. or must I go over the hilla to the poor-house? Congress passed a bill giving her sl2 per month for the few years she had yet to live, it went to Mr. Cleveland for his signature, and ho vetoed it He said that he did not think that a gift of this kind could be made out of. the public moneys properly. I will colt your attention to another case, that of Dudley Branch, an Indiana soldier. He belonged to Corapapy F, of the Seventh Indiana Infantry. He enlisted on the 4th day of September. 1861, and was discharged in September. 1804. He states that he was ruptured at the buttle of Port Republic: that our army woe driven back, and in the retreat he noticed a comrade, who had been wounded, lying on the field; that he left hi place to help this wounded comrade from the field. In crossing a fence he fell and ruptured* himself. No one saw him injured, for lie fie