Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1862-01-07

loss OF arms and munitions OF war, there va. q
sacrifice of nine hundred and thirty men.
Inc resolution TO which he (CoDkling) refer.
req was proposed out Of respect to the mem.
oery OF thoee men. and In difference to the pub
he property and eelf-r'spect OF the natirn. |,
was 70 inquire whether the military authorities
nave taken any steps whatever to ascertain who
is responsible for the slaughter of the sons ~
New York and Penney lvania
| !GeD. Stone, who was at the time 10 Command
is a member OF the regular army. Col Baker
was Q volunteer The respective friends OF
these gentlemen have raised q question as TO
me merits OF the case, involving the efficiency
OF regulars and volunteers.
lie (Conkling) had no toleration for such A
controversy, An inquiry was absolutely mecca
sary' The man that is to blame ehould fall
upon his knees aud ask pardon. If Col. B.k,r
was respor sble, most lsmentably has he suffer.
ed. IL Gen Stone is responsible, a greater
weight OF guilt never r,sied upon any other
man than upon him.
mr: ConkIing, 10 the course of bis remarks.
eald the government is spending two millions OF
uohaiS day' with over six hundred thousand
men ih the held. Whenever we have made an
advance, we have been outnumbered aud ieno
miniously defeated, and yet the House and the
country are denied the right of knowing who
are responsible. If we cannot have ipdemnity
ior the past, in the name of humanity. let us
nave security for the future. Let us know who
ls Responsible for the disgraceful disaster at
bail's Bluff He said after the publication of
Ao)utant-General Thomas's report relative 10
Gen Fremont, certainly no publication of any-
tnlng connected with the army should be sup
Mr.. Conkling was very pointed and severe in
MS comments. He offered preamble reoitine
the resolution heretofore adopted, and the re-.
eponse' concluding with resolution that the
answer 10 It is neither responsive nor satisfac-
wry .o tne house, aud that the Secretary of War
DO olrected to return it for further answer.
Mr. hlcnardson said he was opposed to the
they had nothing to do, and The sooner thsv %
stopped the proceedings the better for tbe
country. 'S
Mr.. Crittenden thought the House had M
power under the Constitution to INQUIRE into
ma"ers purely military. The army is under
.ne command OF the President, who is rtspopsi-
Die Tor Its operations. To interfere with this
.nere'ore' would be to attempt to extend our
circle OF jurisdiction. Even if we had the
right to make such an inquiry, did not public
policy forbid it2 Could war be su,cessfnllv
contested on such principle7 If faults have
oeen CON mitted, they are to be examined into
"hu Punisneu Dy the military tribunals Such
an inquiry now would lead to future similar en-
barrassments.
lie believed that the whole country had con-
hdence in Gen. Mcclellan. We had better
weaken our army than weaken the confidence
IN the General-in-Chief Auamy of hurep, led
oy ron, Is more to be dreaded than an army
OF lions led by hare.
mr. OonkiIng iurtber explained the obiec.
and purpose OF bis resolution tanI,in, o., M
Critteoden w "'''
Mr. Vallsndigbam said be wouli at all times
maintain a the subordination of the mllitry to
Ine civil authority. The British Parliam ept has
exercised the right of inquiry into the conduct
d. d the Crimean War; but here the Secretary of
war hav only exercised discretion allowed to
nlm oy the House, and it was now too late TO
complain of it. w
Mr. LoVeioy entered his protest against the
principle enunciated by the gentleman from
kentucky, having always believed the mililary
'nouid be subordinate to the civil powe. We
IRE waiting in the fruitless hope thai the rebel
ION will put itself down. The idea is, if we
iont L hurt anybody the rebels will return to
heir allegiance.