The daily union., 1856-12-24

---------~---~-------~----------S~s
under the government and which makes the officer subject
the orders OF other officers set him according 70
law carefully eIpunged from the printed form The
parchment SO that General Washington and he alone In
the history Of the government snbjeS only the Or
ders of the President OF the United States Was this
commission incOn parby higher than that OF heu
tenant general by breye-he only which has been Or
could be- conferred General Scott under the joint reso
luton Of the last Congress q.
As command" Gen. Scott entered upon his brilliant
campaign in Mexico as commander OF a portion OF the
armies in the late with that nation The fact r
rred matter OF history having an obvious bearing
upon the question Of position and in spirit Of IN
kindness that General Scott was at the commencement Of
the with Mexico in the military service OF his
ry-n the profession which he had chosen in youth and
pursued through lie-and that it was not until he
ceived second order and till after Gen Tay had
sent thrill Of grateful aud exulug joy through tho
heart Of the county by the achievements OF our army at
Pao Alto Resaea and Monterey that he proceeded TO take
the command OF one column IN the held; whilst the
Father of his Country called rom his retirement al
Mount Vernon command all the armies raised be
raised by the United States and TO command them an
anticipated against the French republic whose arms
already crowned with mpershable glory by the VIC
tories of Napoleon Bonaparte in Italy and possessed the
generals and the troops which In few short years were
destined TO conquer nearly the whole of Europe
How will the people Of country regard this most
arrogant assumption of superiority in position and "o
aad which, it is urged, should have induced the Pcs-
dent in the absence OF law TO make regulation viola
on Of all precedent as to comparative pay proper snd
pay by the way OF tons in order TO give TO- uensfa
Scott by double raons the of two thousand elgh
hundred and eighty dollars per annum for that spge
item, more than was assigned to General Washington
Gen Scott and his Jealous, but not oyersdscreet friends
will learn that there is limit to public patience when
such preenous claims upon the treasury persseny
insisted upon and made the ground OF bitter complaint
against the President who has been actuaed by motive
but render the most ample justice to General Scott in
all respects *.
In our article the other day, when we published the
Presidents decision in this case commented upon what
considered hasy and indiscree advice the part
of the New York Express when 1t intmated the hope that
Gen Scott would reject the pancep Of ten housaui
dollars allowed by tbe President The position assumed
by the Intelligencer 1--WE take it for granted without
the appreciation of Gen. Scot induces to say, in
addition, that in opinion, General Scott after assal
ing thus the decision Of the President and un-
just cannot consistently with manlincss honor take
the ten thousand dollars additional back pay awarded in
the settlement OF his account He bound either dis
approve of the assaults referred Congress and
the threat that the Presidents decision is there 10
be reversed and that instead Of ten thousand dollars ad
dona back pay he is to receive between thirty and forty
thousand This is obviously the only consist
with the honor of General Scott and Just to the
President Let the people, through their Representatives
pass upon the question, inteligbly and distinctly pre-
sented.
FIom the Union, Nov, 0, s5a,
THE PRESIDENTS DECISION IN THE CASE OF
GEN. SCOTT.
In the brief remarks with which the National Intei-
gencer closes for the present its against the
President and Secretary of War; for their alleged violations
OF berality and benigny in regard the back pay of
Lieutenant General Scott there misstatements
iact which is due to truth that should correct 1t
not true as stated by the negencer, that the reply in
our last issue to the comments Of that journal the ac-
tion of the President in the Of General Scott eaua
ted from the War Department; is it true that the
opinion of the Attorney General was given pon The
reqasion q The President The first of these assertions
being untrue, the poisoned thrown by the ntei.
gencer in its retreat misses the mark at which it aim
ed The second IL is charitable believe was an error
or oversight after all that has been said in reference
to the in which the Secretary of War called for
the Attorney Generals opinion. To express desire as
the lntegencer does for copy of the stament which
the Secretary of War with the letters of Gen Scott in
support Of his claim being the view of government Off
Ger on claim which properly bfore him. must be
teint on the part of that Journal knowing its editors
do that General Scott has long since been furnished with
copy OF the paper OF which it would be difficult for
them, considering their relations to him. get sight
Without going further into the merits of the decision Of
the President we invite attention the following SEN
sibe views on the matter of controversy TO Gen. SCOTS
BACK pay by the special correspondence Of the New York
Tmesviews which the entitled to confederation
because they appear In an opposition journal;
WAsHSsros, Saturday, Nov. ., 1855.
The statement of a Washington democratic paper that
$751; So4 has been awarded to Lieutenant General Scott as
arrears OF pay under the resolution of Congress conerng
upon him bis present rank is entirely erroneous The ac
count as made by the Paymaster General and sent to
General Scott in pursuance OF special written order tho
President states balance in his favor O3-being the
difference between his Comm anding General and that
OF Lieutenant General for eight years and half
he gave information Of the Secretary Of War anJ ~
Gen Scott, statement OF his reasons for the allowance Of
this amount and about four pages length This
exposition was sent TO Gen. Scott by the Secretary OF War
along with the opinion Of the Attorney General which
e eighty manuscript pages. The President concurs with
the Attorney General the points that resolution roy
wing the office OF lieutenant general carries pay with H. and
that the act OF 1877 and the explanatory August
lS42 giving to certain commanding officers double raons
docs not apply to the grade Of lieutenant general Upon this
latter point turns the whole difference between the President
and Gen. Scott Tho OF 1907 or 1885, creating the rank
Of lieutenant general specified, among other allowance
ory ratons per dsyequa TO S240 per month. The act a.
lowing double ratons TO the commanding general passed Ii
l9I did not apply to the rank OF general fo
that grade was established months The
passage Of the law. The OF August 1874 il also held
to be nspPicSbie 10 the present case po
co mention OF the four Eve grades which double
ratons shall be confined and Of course that Of
general Is not mentioned, because not 10 existence al
tua. &c The substance OF the Presidents decision h
therefore, that the resolution Of last session revyes the Of
fee Of eutenapt general and the specific rate Of pay og
nally attached to H.
understand that General Scots account presented BY
himself claims eighty raons per day for eight years and
Of 1872 the of lieutenant general under It's special
mention Of the rank Of major general in command of the
The difference between the value OF forty and eighty
raon per day S240 per month"; 81 $50 per year, and
amounts in eight years and half to 80, ,4s0.
have doubt having examined the law, that the Presi
dents construction Of is right and that In executing he
could have made other decision than he has done Gem
raj and generous in the world but executive Of
cer he bound by the letter and spirit OF those Of Con-
gress which he is appointed to administer.