The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-04-12
From the Union Of April llh.
ssThe Galnhfn Claim,


"Some days since the Republic, the organ of
General Taylor. requested that the Democratic
press would suspend its remarks touching this
matter, until the committee of investigation APP
pointed by the House of Representatives should
make its report. We most cheerfully determined
that as far concerned, the request should
be complied with, and that would not seek,
either by publishing our own views. or the views
Of correspondents, to create prejudice in the
public mind unfavorable TO the Secretary of War.
We did not for moment suppose that the Re
public, after making the request TO which we al
Jude, would feel itself at liberty TO publish any
thing in advance of the committees report which
was calculated to bias the public favor Of Mfr.
Crarpfords conduct Indeed, considered il as
being in effect pledged to abstain from such pub
locations, unless they were rendered necessary in
order to repel unjust assaults. But ii seems that
we mistaken, and that the Republic, while
requesting that the Democratic press should be
silent, intended to do what II could to obtain
verdict for the Secretary of War before the testi
mony was heard. True, the organ Of the Presi-
dent has abstained from editorial comments on the
Galphin claim since the appointment Of the inves-
fighting committee; but in its issue Of saturdsyit
publishes communication from William Cost
Johnson, esq, defending and justifying the pay
ment Of interest the Galphin claim. Ii il not
our purpose to reply TO Mr. Johnson's arguments,
although think that could refute them
without performing difficult task; but we feel
that fully justified. under the circum-
Stances in publishing communication, or rather
part Of a communication, written in reply TO Mr..
Johnson's card. or opinion, or argument, or what
ever else hcpleases TO call it,"
The communication of Mr.. JOHNSON, to
which the Union alludes, had no reference
to the conduct of Mr.. CRAWFORD what
ever. II was merely an argument on the
propriety of allowing interest on the Gal
phin claim-a purely legal question
the decision Of which has nothing under
heaven to do with Mr.. CRAwFoRD's con-
duct and relations to that claim.
Suppose that Mr.. CRAWFORD had
formed an erroneous judgment on legal
question, how does that affect his con-
duct and relations" TO the final adjudica-
ton Of case involving that question :
The only point touched in Mr.. WILLIAM
CosT JoHNsoN's communication was the
soundness Of Mr.. MEREDrTH's or Mr..
REvERDY JoHNsoN's judgment on legal
point, which is a fair matter Of public dis
cussion at any and all times, and upon
which we have not closed our columns to
gentlemen Of any or all sides. We are
open 10 conviction on that subject, when
ever il becomes of interest 10 examine il.
We have no doubt that il is question
on both sides Of which there is a great
deal TO be said. We apprehend, how
ever, that il is not legal question that
we have now to grapple with. The grave
questions now submitted to the American
people do not involve the propriety Of
paying interest on a claim. That is
most Insignificant part Of the pending con-
troversy.
The allegation of the Union that we are
seeking I" verdict for the Secretary Of
War before the testimony is heard" is an
ungrounded charge. We seek no verdict
for anybody in the dark. We have ex-
pressed no opinion whatever upon any
point involved in this matter, from its in.
ception to the present moment, with the
view Of blasting the public mind one way
or the other. Nor shall we express any
opinion till the report Of the investigating
committee is before Congress.