The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-02-17

II
not the slightest mention Of anything Mr. Foote said did
or thought about the bill except his vote In m favor
Besides the foregoing, which bears directly upon the
subject Of compensation the whole debaie SO fun Of re-
marks showing that the sole idea that Of comforting
honor that IL would require much space 20 extract
them Be far from sustaining your allegation that it
understood the ball carried pay the debate coneusyey
proves the understanding TO have been that You could not
get pay without subsequent legislatonp
To this Gen. Scott replies, Opp ZIG, 227)
Writing TO the Attorney General June l6 from New
In reply % your famous volunteer argument against
me- wrote Sumo external historical circumstances
may be here Adduced Though sapfuoas in my view 10
show the intention OF Congress in passing the resolution
we are in respect the revival Of pay
and emoluments annexed 10 the rank of lieutenant general
Writing from memory, and TO help him to a reference
said-thongh have not the paper within reach that
seeing notice Of certain debate IN the National Intel
gencer Of February ID 1851 induced the day
70 address note 10 the Hon. Mr. Fooe the subject
which after landing be- Il think had read to the Senate
just before the question: Shall the resolution pass he
and other senator's assured the time the changed
several votes in my favor II was believe printed in the
debates; but have copy AT hand.
Catching al srars, you take the pains TO tell me- first
that the debate referred TO is in the particular Intel
gsncer that named, which reminds that ought TO
have added the Union the Republic Baltimore SUM-
hs same datethe four papers which daily saw in Wash
ngton second that my note to Gen. Fooe read
or alluded TO just bor' but just after the question and
third, that by comparing the yeas and nays the
subject OF the day before with the final division given
In the Congressional Globe change of votes appears
Remarking that now June l6 not within reach
Of one Of the named journals of that date
confirm my memory may be that instead of writing my
note changed several Uo ought 10 have said il changed
several senator's from opponents 10 supporters
them the Hon General Cass and Hon Mr.. Gwin their
on the same resolution on two subsequent occasions
will show"
The Secretary reioins, Up. 1878
Not having fairness enough retract your assertion
in regard TO that note have changed several you
deaEor TO sustain by citing the votes of Senators Cass
and Gwin Now the OF these senators in favor of
WprP mt nUlV nd
not have been those of which you assured the
time bat according to your history of the bill they
given nearly two years after the event in question: and if
General Cass was in truth yoa assert converted the
support OF the bill by the knowledge that would grant
you money be used most extraordinary language before
giving the vote that marked his conversion for he then
said (Cong Globe 1861 II shall aeper h0e 10 see
the day hen any peeaary rewards tciH Be conferred on
military men except pensioners for injuries actually Sustained
an The line Of their duty, Ggreeabty 10 present system
Inhs letter page 22s, General Scott cites ether au-
tbores to show it understood in the Senate that the
bill would carry pay
The same bill joint resolution passed the Senate
the third time, December 81 1852 by SOTO H. but
laid in the House of Representatives till February
1885, when without debate it passed by vote of l26 TO
s. and the Hon Mr. Preston says incidentally in letter
10 me Of November g. 1855, without any inquiry The bill
would have passed in amy shape which did give over
$4,000 This know So the Hon. Gen. Shields chair
&C. wrote to me- December % 1859 the day that The
bin finally passed the Senate TO avoid any miseoncep-
ton MISREPRESENTATION hereafter declared openly that
it would give you incl additional pay. This met with
objection from any quarter Those who opposed IL did
protesting that they all willing to give any sum or
any ncrsase of pay which might propose The Hon
Mr. Fshs letter to another volunteer dated June I6
1885, relating to the vote strongly corroborates the
preceding Copies of these letters were given in nv
argument addressed the Attorney General of the last
mentioned date and have been read by you And repeat
that any amount of testimony to intention and to the
effect might be obtained from the members of the
last Congress-
The Secretary replies, (pp. 23T, 23s y
"No less unfortunate than all your other attempts to
the intentions of Congress to grant you money
reference TO the debate in the Senate in December 1859
You give brief extract from letter written by General
Shields to show what be said that occasion not having
the whole letter before me, prefer to rely General
Shiedss statement reported in the published record Of
debates Congressional Globe page SD which were as
| follows:
emolumens greater pay General Scott?
&c Mr.. Shields. free say that il Is nv intention
| and wish that il should.
a'Mr Petit That would be an inducement for me to
\ vote for it But wish to ask further question
a'Mr Shields viii reply to this first That is mat
within the discretion of the President of the United
States ne orepes cogsrs pay Of Itself 1t ia merely intend
service But If the President Of The United States assigns
command proportional has breua rank then he i,
entitled 10 pay accordiny thai rank IN no other case
80 thai i TN depend upon the President Of the United
| Sates'
According these representations you could obtain
without previous assignment duty by the Pres
loenI5 he your would only such
gnmen the idea of pay was by necessary mpIica
ton excluded But was the rank conferred
than you claimed increased OF nav and arrears for
due you by law independent of any act Of
the President; and this the claim which YOU have
ceeding in having allowed and which you bring General
Sheldss letter to prove known and sanctioned by
| the Senate"
Somewhat similar TO the brevet claim was
The Claim Of per diem Cherokee Commissioner
This subject incidentally introduced BY General
Soft Up l62) stating, with apparent object but to show
how far he had been trusted that the instructions under
which he had conducted the Of the Cherokee In
dans written by himself and signed by President
Van Buren, The Secretary Up I7l thinks it very little
his credit acknowledge this because he had founded
upon these instructions claim for the allowance of seven
thousand dollars per diem which though twice rejected
under Mr. Van Burens administration was allowed in that
Of his successor warranted by the peculiar terms in
with the instructions couched The Secretary re-
marks with severity upon the fact that the words used
mted construction which Mr. Van Buren could not have
intended when he signed the paper and that General Scott
afterwards obtained the benefit of the latent ambiguity
Communion Military Contributions
appears that in May 1854 the Secretary of the Treas
ury transmitted to the War Department list Of officers of
the army who had public money in their hands among
whom was General Scott On the 22d Of Nav 1854 the
Secretary advised General Scott of the fact stating that
the he had rendered for military contribution
money received by him in Mexico still anadjusted for
service which explanations General Scott had render