Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1856-10-16

| ihOcO WV 'O'uhNNNtN1 Wv aNi
lowing general statement:
Il will say for Col. Fremont. tha'
VIXEN I went into the investigation o
this transaction | had some pref judice;
which thought perhaps might be un
founded. and which am now satisfied
were unfourded. The prejud;ces which
had been impressed upon my mind have
been dispelied by the investigation OF
all his conduct in California, and | am
/ prepared to bear testimony upon this &C.
casion 10 tho correctness OF his whole
line of conduct as an officer and as dis
| bursting agent. Not one dollar can be
traced to his hands; no property can be
traced TO his hands for which lie cannot
give the Government satisfactory vouch
ers that it has been appropriately and
properly applied"
Let il be borne in mind tina! Mr. Cor
man was Chairman of the Committee oil
The House before whom the investigation
with refe rence 10 the California claims
wa5 made. And further. that Mr.. G..
was "DcmOcrat Ia high standing"
Mr.. McLanahan. Of Pa, in some re.
marks on the subject. said
"Upwards of 5000, ,000 Of claims were
presented 10 the Commissioners. They
allowed and passed favorably on some
S3l, 600, the balance, about $4,000,
were not sustained by evidence. and
were consequently rejected. OF the $751; :
O0O allowed. the claim OF Sl9, ,500-on
which Col. Fremont was imprisoned in
London, was unanimously allowed, and
placed first on the list submitted TO us by
the Commissioners. This is the only de.
mand against the Government in which
Col. Ffemon, appears to have the slight
est personal interest"
The debate from which we have made
extracts, shows that Col. Fremont had
no interest in any other claim than for
Sl9, 800. which the Board of Commits
sioners unanimously allowed. The con
ilicting accounts, the irreconcilable diff
erencrs, &C.. we've not chargedble TO Col.
Fremont. We would like to publish the
debate on this point. but we have not
room al this time for more than The fol-
lowing extract from the remarks of Mr..
Gormap.
The claims which are there stated.
originated in this wise. Col Fremont
when there, when necessary, sent q gunrd
of men to take the property OF The cit
izens-mules, horses and caii,e--for the
public use. The owners came and made
claim 10 Col Fremon: as civil and mill
tary Governor of California. for compen-
sat;or fcr their property. Colonel Ere
mont laid all the claims presented to
him before the Board. The cac6 was
precisely similar to that Of the army o.
the United States in Mexico. ! have
done the same thing myself on march
| have forced men 10 give me mules
when those on which the soldiers rode
gave out. | have seen the same thing
often done by other officers of the
army. The owners OF the property
would follow 10 The next town. and there
would receive certificate that such and
such property had been taken for the pub
lie service. which they presented 10 the
Quartermaster, who sometimes paid for
it. If these charges were made by Mex
leans ! would not bo amnzed if the same
articles had been charged for cne hun
dred times"
One thing more is worthy Of notice.
Not one member of Congress who spoke
on these claims, either directly or by in.
sinuaiion. made any charge of dishonor-
able conduct against Col. FREMoyr. Mr.
TooMBs. who opposed the passage OF the
4 - J.
a remark which might be construed into
a charge against Col. Fremont's in:egri
w, had his attention called to the
fact, when he promptly disarowed an
| such intention. Here then were al
these accounts which ore now pornded
before the country with a view to dam
age the reputation of Col. Fremont. be-
fore Congress. They were discussed free
IL end fully, ard yet there was not. in
the House or in the Senate, one man tC
cast doubt upon the integrity of Ere
mont-.nOt enc,
Should not this fact of itself cause ev.
cry man who makes such charges at thi:
day, blush aud hide himself from The
gaze Of all honorable men.
Now for the other charge. DIR. Fitch
said Col. Fremont deserved no honor fol
his exploits in California. Now we pro
pose TO see how that accords with the
sworn testimony Of James Buchanan be
fore this same Court spoken Of above -
James Buchanan in answer 60 this ques.
ton:
"Do you know who was the person in
actual command of the land forces of the
Government Of the United States in Cal
ifornia, in the year one thousand eight
hundred and forty seven, and in the
month of March in that Year,"
Gave the following answer:
Col. Fremont, the defendant, was in
California at the commencement Of hos
tilities between the United States and
the Republic of Mexico; he the'e raised
and commanded battalion of Calilor.
MIA volunteers. consisting of about four
hundred men; his services were very val.
uable he bore conspicuous part in the
conquest of California, aud in my opin.
ion is better entitled 10 be called the
"Conqueror of California" than any 9th
er man; he continued in the actual com
mand OF this battalion throughout the
month of March. lSI7. but there were
other troops in Callfornia-ot troops
of the United States-upder the com
mand of Gen. kearney, who was after.
ward the Military Commandsnt and Gov.
OF California, as have already stated in
IA ha H. a..