The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1878-09-05
A. MEXICAN SOLDIER.
To Congressman Mckinley Who Voted Against
and Helped to Defeat the Pension BILL
An Open Letter with Pointed Re-
marks and Good Hits,

To Congressman Mckinley Who Voted Against
and Helped to Defeat the Pension bill
An Open Letter with Pointed Re-
marks and Good Hits.
Deerheld, Portage, Co., o.,
September 2, 1873
TO William Mckinley Jr.;
SR-In my short interview - very
short indeed-with you on. Friday last
| could not take the time from my allot'
ted stay in Canton to make the endeavor
to convince you of the fallacy of the rea-
sons you gave me for voting in Congress
against the bill to place the soldiers In
the war with Mexico on the pension
roles. take the earliest opportunity OF
addressing you this note on that subject
which l as possible--but not probable
constituent of yours, as we'll as others OF
your now constituents, feel some inter-
est. And in doing so, | disclaim any in
tention of making political capital for or
against you, but shall treat the subject
as one outside of political issues,
am certain correctly understood you
TO say you voted against the bill because
it embraced in its provisions those per-
sons who had served in the war with
Mexico, and who had also served as SOL
diers in the rebel army, |, however,
only inferred that without that provis-
ion-including only the soldiers from
the States other than the Southern--you
would have voted for the bill, If l. am
wrong in this inference you can correct
the impression.
will be as brief as possible in stating
why think your reasons are untenable.
1, The soldiers from the Southern
States in the war with Mexico perform
ed their whole duty to their country
equally with the soldiers from the other
States, and having performed that duty;
if any are entitled to Governmental, ia
vors, all are. Their subsequent conduct
can not initiate against that fact. lfthe
Government owes any favors, it owes to
all alike for like services performed. l
take it for granted that if worked for
YOU and in course of time we should have
a quarrel, you as lawyer agree with me
that YOU could not plead in bar against
anv sum might claim as due me, the
fact that had committed an assault and
battery upon you. The Southern men
performed their duty admittedly well,
and it would be ungenerous and unman-
lv to discriminate against them where
all were equally meritorious.
9. If your action in the premises was
intended-as l inferred and if l am
wrong, again you can correct meas q
punishment to those men for the part
they took in the late rebellion, it is
equally unmanly, if not cowardly: You
and both went into the service for the
purpose of preventing the threatened
disruption of the Republic, and to inhict
such punishment on those attempting
such disruption as circumstances in the
line of duty might dictate, In the effort
| succeeded to my satiJfaction. Probably
YOU did not. But theE | was private
soldier, and you were only major, and
majors were never considered as amount
ing to much in the army-a good dea
like the curl in pigs tail, more for or
nament than for use. 1t is possible thai
the opportunities for furnishing rebels
did not present themselves to you sutfl
ciently to wreak the vengeance you felt
but is it not trife Cowardly and unsol
dierlike to wreak that vengeance at thli
late day, aud behind their backs-to vote
at them when they can not vote at you
have on more than one occasion gave
to a rebel soldier the last "hardtack" anC
the last mouthful of 'sow belly" | had IL
my haversack, and no true soldier woe
do otherwise. Neither would true sol
dier deny to his con rades in arms any
honors or rewards that all are equally
entitled to, would you?
If it is 80 wrong to allow th'
Southern Mexican war soldiers equa
rights with their fellow soldiers from
other States, how do you feel over tn
appointment of Ackerman and Key tt
Cabinet positions, and Longstreet, Mos
by and other rebel officers to fat appoint
ments? Or does the fact that they wert
rebel officers make the difference? pre-
suming you approve Of such appoint
ments.
1t would have been more ingenious il
| YOU W udNO DdpOu yum OPpOpAuiOA W. 'tA
bill on the ground of a depleted treasury
as did Grant when he returned the bill
to equalize bounties, but at the same tim
found the treasury plethoric enough t.
increase his own salary $25000 per yea
and to give members of Congress an ex
ira steal of $4,000 apiece. If you shoul'
use this argument, please give me tn
| nrndik of the sI1pppgtiOn
In conclusion, sir, can conceive of n
use you can be to me or to my fellow'sol
diers in Mexico, so far as the advance
ment of our interests are concerned-o
the contrary we have your own declare
ton that you voted against those inter
ests, and presumably would do so agair
If there are any Mexican war soldiers i
the district who feel like voting agains
their own interests, advise them to vot
for you. Hoping you will give me credi
as you do Hayes, for good intentions
with respect &c, I remain,
C, S, BURR.