The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1863-01-30
Annual Report OF the Adjutant Gem
eral..Omcial Meanness Intensified.

| ROIUS Will UuO VOJSOVs oc W. pAOSuulC, lu6U
it should be examined and noticed in THE
PIONEER. That is a courtesy to which we
very willingly address ourself; and if our
comments shall take the nature of unfa-
vorable criticism instead of compliment,
the reason of it is to be found in the char
acter of the Report, rather than in any
prejudice against its author.
The Report makes up a volume of near
ly six hundred pages. Three-quarters of
the Report is composed OF tables, the pub
LEGATION of which cannot be accounted for
on any other hypothesis than that of fur
nishing profitable job to the public
printer. The illegitimaoy of this printing
can be realized when we state that, if the
Adjutant General of New York had pursued
a similar plan Of publication, his Report
would have comprised at least forty thou
sand pages, at cost to that State of from
one hundred and fifty to two hundred
thousand dollars. The fact that Minnesota
is smaller and has less force in the service, is
nojustification for the printing ofunneces-
sary matter because our resources are
limited in proportion to our numbers and
the cost of this publication falls as oner-
ously on our Treasury, as the two hundred
thousand would on the Treasury of New
York.
The first thing that the most casual
reader of the Report will notice, is, the
entire absence of the official reports of the
officers in command of our frontier forces
during the Sioux war. These reports
would furnish the most complete aud salts
factory account Of the most remarkable
series of events that have occurred in the
history Of any frontier people on this con-
tinent. But, instead of thus spreading out
before our people and the world the accu-
rate and succinct history which these mil
itary reports would furnish, the Adjutant
General ignores them entirely, and pub
fishes in their stead his own version ofour
| frontier disturbances. And this version,
we undertake to say, has never been sur
passed in any account of the same length,
by equal dement's of inaccuracy, favorit-
ism, and injustice. These blemishes are
so marked, that they can be accounted for
only on the assumption that the Report
was prepared under the eye Of the Gov
ernor of the State who, in this, as in va
rious other instances, has falsifed, and
procured the Justification of, documentary
facts and records, in order to mould his
own chronic preferences and prejudices
into the history of the State, in the place
of the plain truth of events.
We cannot, of course, go over the
whole Report of the Adjutant General, in
single article, and expose the errors of
omission and commission with which it
abounds. But we will take single case,
as sample of the whole. Our people all
know from contemporary publications, the
part borne in this Sioux war by Major Jo-
sEpH R. Brown. They know that, next
to the distinguished services rendered by
General SIBLEY, who was in command, the
part played by Major Brown contributed
most to the reclamation of the white pris-
oners captured by the Sioux, and to the
successful issue of the campaign.
That the gallant and meritorious con-
duct displayed by Major Brown, during
this Sioux war, should have been publicly
recognized by a suitable appointment in
some of the Regiments recently organized,
was not to be expected from the Admin
istration of Gov. RAMSEY. The Governor
still remembers that Brown was men,
| Der of the Board of Canvassers who de-
cided that RAMSEY was not elected Gov
ernor at the first election under the State
Constitution; and RAMSEY attributes to
Browns superior arithmetical ability his
failure on that occasion. That was a
crime never to be forgiven; and conse-
quently BRowS had nothing to expect
from RAMsEY's Administration, in recog-
milton of services, however important they
might have been to the success of the
campaign.
But, Major Brown had reason to expect,
that, in the official report Of the campaign,
by the Adjutant General of the State, his
services would be recognized in connec-
ton with those of other officers with whom
he was associated. His expectation has
not been realized. RAMsEY's Adjutant
General, in reporting the battle of Birch
Ooolie, although he sometimes mentions
the services of Captains GRANT and AN
DERsoN, yet with an extent of meanness
without parallel, entirely ignores the name
of Major BROWN; although the official re-
port Of COL SHELLEY shows that the Major
was in command, and although the same
report of the Adjutant General gives
unmistakable evidence that the Majors