The Milan exchange. (Milan, Gibson County, Tenn.) 1874-1978, 1874-05-21
Honesty VS.. Loyalty.

/ In the House of Representatives, one
day last week, two members of Congress
ventilated the record of each other. The
letters of one member, showing personal
and pecuniary intimacy with the Wash
ington City Ring,-the member being
Chairman of the Committee on District
Atfairs,-were read to the House. There
upon the member thus inferentially ac-
cused of dishonesty charged that his accu-
ser had served in the Rebel Army, and
! produced some letters showing that this
man approved of the Rebellion. Then the
two members stopped. One had charged
/ the other with dishonesty; and the man
thus accused replied that his accuser had
been traitor and "a Rebel. a few days
later the American Bank Note Company
| of New York, in answer to a cOmmunica-
ton from the Treasury Department, dis
closed scheme by which the Treasury
| Department was Systematically robbed by
| the engravers and printers in its employ !;
and the men thus accused of robbery re-
spOnded that the New York Company
! had engraved notes for the Treasury OF
! the Confederate Government. The ans
wcr TO the charge OF stealing, in this case
as in the other, was that the accuser had
| been in sympathy with the Rebellion.
/ Under the system of slavery it was rule
of law in the slaveholding States that no
white person should be held to answer for
any criminal charge made by negro nor
should the testimony of any negro be
heard in the trial of any case where a
white man was party. The proceedings
at Washington seem to recognize the same
principle, substituting participation in the
! Rebellion for the color of the skin; and,
entrenched behind this principle, official
dishonesty defies investigation, defies ex'
animation, defies conviction.
| 1t is universally conceded that, at this
time in our national history, the great
struggle is between dishonesty in office
and the right of the people to dislOdge it.
The Investigations in the United States
| Senate show that, for series of years, ii
has been practice to purchase seats in
! that body, and that these seats have not
/ thus been purchased for the mere honor
/ of the office, but for the opportunity the
place afforded to make money. 1t is un-
| necessary to refer to the revelations of the
| Credit MObilier affair to show that the
abuse of official position for pee mary
| gain has been more general than Is con-
| sistent with legislative purity. For years
/ the integrity of the men employed in tidu-
ciary capacities has been undermined, and
we have had innumerable instances of
paymasters, cashiers, and officers OF every
degree, charged with the custody OF pub
| lie money who have proved false to their
/ trusts. This disease has extended to pri-
vate business. and the record of robbery
and defalcatiOn in banks, corporations,
and private establishments has been un-
precedented. But the example of Otfi-
cial dishOnety has been most baletul in
| its effect upon State, county, and city Otfi-
ciaIs. The changes in office in 1873, by the
Farmers and other popular movements,
unmasked a thousand or more dishonest
treasurers in all parts of the country.
| These facts show that the great struggle of
the daV is whether this general corruption
and dishonesty shall retain possession OF
the Governments, National, State and mu-
nicipal. or be dislOdged.
The War, of necessity, made loyalty the
chief virtue for the time. But the War
has been succeeded by ten years of peace,
and the LOYALTY that covered dishonesty
during the War can claim no such eXemp-
ton now. 1t is nOanswer to detected theft
to say that the thief was = ''lOyal" during
the War. 1t is not sufficient excuse for
robbery to say that the rObber did not en-
list in the Rebel ranks. Nor is 1t any de-
fense to a charge of official dishonesty that
the accuser was dislOyal, or Rebel, or a
Copperhead, during the War. That kind
of defense, always questionable and dis
reputable, has become threadbare, and its
use at this date is an insult TO the inte!li-
gence of the public, and an insult to every
man who is a patriot and not thief.
Wherever there is case of official dishOn-
esty, where professions of loyalty are used
as a shield or veil to the crimes practiced
beneath it, the punishment of the guilty
should be more prompt and severe than in
ordinary cases. The man is guilty OF a
double crime, and shows that his loyalty is
not real, but assumed for purpose. 1t is
time that the public should put peremp-
tory stop to any further professions of 10y
atty when the question at issue is whether
the officer is thief or nOt.-ChicGgO 1ii-
bune.