The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1866-06-20
Logic of the Club.

| Gen. Rousseau represents in Con
gress the Louisville (Kentucky) dis
trict. He served i'll the army, and was
made a Major-General. He command
ed division in the army, and was re.
| lieved by Gen. Grant. He was electeC
to Congress by the Union men of Louis
vile. OF late he has been taking ar
active part in politics, and has become
| a persistent defamer of the UnioL
party. He made speech a few days
ago, in which he undertook to reply tc
the many things said to him and o
him, in debate, during month pre-
| ViOus. He was promptly answered by
| Mr.. Ginnell of Iowa, who INDUCED IL
line of personality which was so of
| fensive as to call for the interpOsitioL
of the Speaker. This took place or
Monday. On Thursday, Rousseau
who had been nursing his wrath with
strong potations, placed himself in
Grinnell's path as the latter was leay'
ing the Capitol, and struck him with q
cane, inflicting no very great personal
| damage; indeed, his intention, as stat
ed by himself, was to "disgrace," moi
hurt, his victim.
This conduct is wholly unjustifiable
Rousseau is II large and strOngly-built
man, able, perhaps, in personal con-
fiict, to whip any other man in the
House. He attacked man greatly i'll
ferior in size and physical strength
How did his castigation disgrace his
victim? Does not all the disgrace in
the affair attach to the bully who
armed, waylays smaller and weaker
person, ali unconscious of the attack
and unarmed2 Who is there that
would not prefer to live in history as
the victim than as the victor in such a
brutal and cowardly assault?
Rousseau knew the peaceful habits
of the man he was about TO strike; he
knew that the wool-grOwer was not n
man who carried arms, and was not
physically able to defend himself from
shower of blows upon his head and
shoulders. He knew that he would be
safe in any act of violence he might
commit upon the member from Iowa,
and he therefore knew it would be
cowardly. How soldier could think
of such an act to redeem his character
from a supposed impeachment of cow
ardice is difficult to explain. What
ever may have been his record in the
army, this flight" with a weak, un-
armed man will add nothing creditable
to his fame among honorable men.
The language of Mr.. Grinnell in de-
bate was ineXcusable. He had no right
thus to violate the rules of the House
and the rules of good breeding. He was
unparliamentary and ungentlemanly.
Had Rousseau struck him then, under
the impulse of sudden passion, while
the insulting epithets were sounding in
his ears, there are those who would
have excused the violence on the score
of the provocation; but, when he let
that occasion pass, and slept upon the
outrage three nights, and had got sober
half dozen times, his conduct sinks,
in public estimation, to the level of that
of any other bully.
Mr.. Rousseau has the credit, such as
it is, of reviving the logic of the club.
Preston S. Brooks, in his day, enjoyed
the glory of having struck an unarmed
man sitting in chair, and of having
beaten him TO senseless condition.
Brooks had any number of gold-mount-
ed canes and services Ofsilver presented
to him for his valourous assault upon
a defenceless man. Perhaps Brooks
avoided expulsion from the House by
resigning, and that is possibly the best
thing Rousseau can do. He can then
go home, and may find Kentuckians
who will applaud his brutality to the
extent of giving him cane and silver
cup, and keg of Bourbon. The House
of Representatives is no place for him;
he has lost whatever standing he may
have had; and we doubt whether even
Vallandigham will permit him to show
himself at any Democratic meeting in
Ohio.