Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1879-02-19
WAR CLAIMS.
SPEECH OF
Hon. Benjamin H. Hill,
OF GEORGIA
Delivered in the United States SEN
ate, January 27, 1879.
"Magnanimity In Victory Is n higher ylr-
tue than Courage In Battle"
WAR CLAIMS.

B
having under consideration the bill Is. Nc. 1851
for the reliei Of Warren Mitchell
Mr.. HILL SAID
Mr.. President ! suppose that we
had as well meet here as anywhere the
question made by this bill. | shall
vote against il because | think II ought
not to pass. | am not driven to this
course by what is called policy, because
the gentlemen on the other side are
seeking to make political capital out
Of this and like claims. ] am influ.
enced by no such consideration. On
the contrary, II | were Influenced in
this case by the precedents which Re.
publicans have set us in previous Con
gresses, should feel constrained TO
vote for the passage of this bill. /
know that by act Of Congress the
United States Government have paid
some very large claims for cotton
seized by General Sherman at Savan-
nah and if the Senator from Massa-
chusetts Mr.. Hoarl, as is s-implied by
the question he propounded to the
Senator from Kentucky Mr.. Nc.
Crecry] takes the position that none
of the cotton seized by General Sher.
man at Savannah ought to be paid for
by the Government, then the Senator
from Massachusetts, takes position
against the payment of claims that
have been allowed by the United States
Government and by act Of Congress.
But | have not Investigated TO see
which way that Senator voted on the
question. 1t would be entertaining
and interesting to examine and see how
he did vote. One claim for cotton
seized at Savannah by General Sher-
man, amounting to over $500, 900, was
paid by the votes OF Republican Con-
gress when the House and Senate were
both, ! believe, abouttwo-thirds Repub-
lican.
Mr.. CONKLING. What case was
that
Mr. HILL. The case of Lamar.
That was a very large claim. 1t Ger.
tainly had very little loyalty behind it
to push it through. Isuppose we must
conclude that that case was large
enough TO go through Congress by its
own momentum.
Mr.. DAWES. Was not that judg-
ment of the Court of Claims ?
Mr.. HILL. | have no recollection
that ii was. 1t may have been passed
upon by the Court OF Claims. do not
remember.
Mr. DAWES. think il was.
Mr. HILL. Certainly there was
nothing in that case which made IL
better than this and many others either
before that Court or before Congress.
do not know how that got through.
Mr.. DAW ES. / do not affirm that il
was, but will inquire. think it was.
Mr.. HILL. only say 10 the Sena-
tor from Massachusetts, that whether
it went through one tribunal or another,
| happen to know it went through un-
der Republican auspices. mention
this simply to show that do not think
our friends on the other side should be
at this late day exceedingly virtuous
on this subject of loyal claims. have
not made the examination. Others
profess to have made that examination,
and they say not only this claim but
claims amounting to hundred million
dollars of like character have been
paid by tho Republican party during
the last ten years. ! do not know
whether they have or not | am moi
a man TO delvc in this kind of records
but certainly we do know that very
large number have been paid, amount
ing to very large sums of money. So
if should follow precedents in this
case, the precedents set by gentlemen
on the other side, | should feel II my
duty to vote for this bill.
am willing 10 concede, too, that
this gentleman now asking relief al
the hands Of the Senate is not in The
character of great many others. He
is most evidently an honest man from
all the evidence | have. know hin
but slightly personally but | have {
great many letters from great many
persons in relation TO him, and an
satisfied from all the evidence that h,
is not only an honest man, but that b,
is incapable of preferring claim be
fore this body, or any body, that hi
does not believe TO be just and right
believe all that the Senator iron Ken
lucky has SAID on that subject rs cor
rect. So | do not vote against thi
claim because | have any suspicion
that the gentleman who prefers 1t il
any other than an honest, correct man
and that he sincerely believes his claim
ought to be paid.
But, Mr.. President, vote agains
this bill because, in my judgment, II il
what we call par excellence war claim
and | am against the payment OF al
war claims, whether they be loyal o
disloyal, unless il be perhaps some few
exceptions in favor OF religious, educa
tlonal, and charitable institutions an'
there are very few even of that char
acter that | will except lvote agains
their payment upon principle. i bav
considered this question very carefully
and for long time, and to-day is tn
fret occasion l have expressed publicl.
my views upon the subject, because
did not desire 10 express them unit
after careful consideration Of the ques
tion.
Now, why do ! vote against thi
claim 2 II is, as have said, empbat
cally o war claim that is, II 10 clair
for compensation by reason Of losse
incurred during the war and by act Q
war. My first reason for not votin
, tor II is that we cannot pay all Of tbi
kind Of claims. They would bank
rupt the Government. 1t Is imposs
bic that tho Government should be ey
! pected TO pay all these claims an
, claims standing on as good footing q
this in every respect. If we canno
, pay them all, TO undertake to pay som
is unjust TO the rest II 10 an unjus
discrimination and why should It b
made ?
On this subject of loyalty !. Is e car
Gus spectacle TO witness in the Senai
of tho United States my exceller
friends on the other side who are an,
ious to prove that this gentleman wa
disloyal, and therefore vote again
a this claim, and some gentlemen on tb
side seem exceedingly anxious TO prov
2 that he was loyal and therefore vi
= . vote for bis claim. shall not troub
myself to consider that question. Th
. question of loyalty 10 ono that muI