The Daily empire. (Dayton, Ohio) 1865-1867, 1866-08-25


pIRRs AND ruE PEOPLE.
We kno,o that the name Of Gen. George
Crook was attached to the call for the Army
officers johnson Convention at Cleveland,
toitt0H his kRoi0lodge or consent. Il was
signed 10 it BY one OF the Presidents "lc-
pondents'--a man who made good record
IN nc drJaY but Who, before the war, was
one of tde most notoriously unscrupulous
Democratic politicians IN that party.
Il IL by such frauds as this that the Prcsi-
dent and his "satraps" hope to deceive the
people.
lfthe name Of Gen. Crook was forged, to
that call, u Is natural 70 infer that similar
liberties were taken with other names.
The most noticeable point Is. that while
It charges with forgery a imam who made n
good record in the army it fails TO en-
Tighten the public upon the one important
point. Doss General Crook mdorse he
poiicy Of me Prcsident2
Nothing indicates the extent of the dcs-
peration of radicalism in this county so
clearly as the above. Il Is sore point 10
the journal, no doubt, that General CRooK
together with General WARD and General
McCooK) support the policy Of the Presi-
dent. But it should behave itself decently.
1t ought not lightly to make a charge of
forgery, which involves not only General
SreEDMAN 1--WE suppose) but also Generals
GUSTAV, MEnEpITH, ROUSSEAU ard McCooK
for they have been guilty, according to
the Journal of issuing call with a forged
name on i'll
The facts are few and simple. II will be
repembercd that a meeting was held Mt
WmLARD's Hotel in Washington to appoint
u committee of five 10 call the Convention
alluded to. At that meeting Gen. Crook,
Gen. GUSTAV, Gen. MEREDITH, Gen. Nc
Cook and Gen. ROUSSEAU were appointed
a Committee to draw up the call for the
Convention. The meeting was public
one; its proceedings were published; and
Gen. Crook name was paraded In the
Washington papers as one of the Commit
tee. If Gen. CROOK had been absent from
the city at the time, his appointment and
his failure to withdraw, would have had no
Significance. But at that time, Gen. CROOK
was in Washington City; and was Soel
tn0wR as supporter of the policy of tile
President. The Committee met and drew
up the cali which we have published. Now
the great point which the journal makes is
that Gen. CROOK did not sign his name to
that call, and did not know of his signature
being put to it. We do not dispute this
fact because we have no knowledge on the
point. The Committee knew, we should
think, Gen. Crooks views far better than
the editor of the journal, and knowing that
he concurred the sentiments of the call,
his name was, probably, signed as n matter
of course. This is what the Journal calls
forgery! This is the basis upon which It
makes charge, involving the characters of
Generals McCooK, GUSTAV, MEREDITH,
STEEDMAN and Rousseau!
But the real question is not who signed
the name to the paper; but does General
CROOK indorse the sentiments of the call?
does he support the policy of the Presi-
dcntY is he opposed to the policy of tile
Radicals? The Journal, seeming to have
such intimate acquaintance with the sig
nature of the name, ought to have been
able to enlighten the public upon that
question also!
We propose to answer, and to speak ,ohat
zoe kno1.
General CROOK does indorse the state
ments of the call; he does support the
policy of the President; and he does OPP
pose the ruinous policy of the Radicals.
Let the Journal deny these statements if it
dare--Or bet another 'bg apple" as it did
on General McCooK and General WARD.
The public are very much surprised at
the great indifference manifested by Gen
eral CROOK at the so-called "forgery"! 1t
has been before the people several days,
and was published in the Washington pa
pers right under lis nose. He took it very
quietly Much more so than the awfully
offended man at the Journal Office! When
afriend of his starting west asked him what
he should say about it; he told him that
''he need'Rtg 90 ont Of his lody' to dispute the
signdtwel
General GEORGE CROOK is no politician,
but he has very decided views upon the in
terests of the country. He is a military
man and makes no pretensions TO play the
role of the statesman. But he knows well
that the success of Radicalism is a throw
ing away of the fruits of our victory. lie
is modest and unassuming gentleman,
who does not thrust his opinions upon
Others; and while he performed, in the
army, the service of dozen political brig
they did to denounce his fellow-citizens,
or traduce their character. ALL HONOR 10
SUCH a MANI