The Princeton union., 1879-04-02
ing9" he asked. One answered $1,000
and the other $1,000. "Well," said ne, 81
get $4,000 more than both of you. I
guess I will keep on 'hollering.'"
FITZ JOHN PORTER.

FI1Z JOHN PORTER.
An Able Reviesv of the Charges BROUGHT
y AOatnst Him.
| One of the best reviews of the famous
Fitz John Porter case which we have ever
seen was the argument of Hon. John @.
Built, of Philadelphia, one of Gen. Porter's
counsel, before the late court martial at
West Point. 1t was delivered some time
since but has only just been made public.
The following summing up will be found of
interest:
/ We have endeavored to show you by the
testimony which we have introduced, and
by proper analysis and examination of the
testimony taken by the court martial, that
Gen. Porter was not guilty of disobedience
OF the order to march at A. M. on the 28th
of August; that the character of the night
and the obstructions in the road justified
him in not doing SO.
We have endeavored to show you that he
did not disobey the joint order of the 29th
to Mcdowell and himself; that he did not
retreat as charged; and there was not bat
tie, in the sense implied in the specifca-
tons, upon the 29th.
Let me here say to the recorder that do
not wish to contend that there was not a
battle, or that there was not heavy fighting
or hard fighting, and that some of the fight
ing there was probably as hard as was ever
known-I do not doubt that for a moment
All that we mean to say is that there was not
a general battle, continuous battle, battle
from morning until night.
That we have shown, We think, that Gen.
Porter did not violate any duty by failing to
come upon the battle-feld, as charged
against him.
That he was not guilty of any military
crime in not having attacked, as charged.
That the 4.3O order of the 29th was re-
ceived by him at too late an hour to have
been carried into effect.
That by its terms it involved an attack
upon Jackson's right and rear, and this could
not have been done by him.
That throughout the 29th of August, 1862,
his conduct was that of faithful and zeal
GUS commander, discharging his duty dis
creetly and wisely, and SO as best to serve
the interests of his government, and aid the
army of which his troops were part.
Now, the question may be asked, how it
came about that man who was SO jealous
In the performance of his duty, and, as we
allege, was SO faithful in it's performance,
could have been convicted by this court
martial of these offenses. was asked that
question last summer by an old lady, for
whom I have great respect, sitting upon the
piazza of the hotel. I felt a little perplexed to
know how to answer it. She asked a ques-
tion further which relieved me of my diff
Guilty; how it happened, if they thought he
was guilty of this offence, that they did not
find that he should be shot. Well, said to
her, that that reminded me of what I had
once heard in reference to an Arkansas Jury
who tried murder case; the evidence was
submitted, and the judge charged the jury,
who then went out to consult. They finally
came to the conclusion, and so found, that
the prisoner was guilty of murder in the
first degree, but with slight suspicion that
he was not the man, and therefore they did
not think he ought to be hung.
lrather think that is true in reference to
this petitioner; rather think the court
martial found Gen. Porter guilty of these
high military crimes just with slight sus-
picion that he was not the man. I think
that is the reason they did not sentence him
to be shot.
The truth is, they made several material
mistakes:
AS to Porter's location.
AS to retreat.
As to the presence of Longstreet.
AS to battle.
AS to time of delivery of 4:3O order.
Now the time has come, as we think, for
rectifying these mistakes. We think that,
after this long period of sixteen years, this
investigation can be conducted free from anv
bias or prejudice that the circumstances un-
der which the trial took place and the int1u-
thQf fhor, %ho ia,
ences that then made the minds of men in
famed, made them ready to receive extrava-
CANT statements, made them susceptible to
influences, to prejudice, to bias; influences
from which no man can be free under Ger
tain circumstances, have passed away. We
know that when there is any great national
disaster in any part of the world, when there
is series of defeats to an army or navy,
there must always be some one upon whom
the popular feeling can turn, aud upon whom
the consequences of that disaster can be Wis
tied. And when the feelings of the people
are aroused, when one of those popular COM
motions sets in, it ramifes, and extends and
seizes upon all classes; then it is that it is
almost impossible for the Judgment of any
man, care not how calm and deliberate he
| is, care not what his experience or integ-
rity may bet is almost impossible for the
human mind, frail as it is, to resist those in
! fuences and look at a question which in
wolves such issues, calmly, candidly ,lunbi
ased and unprejudiced.
| Now this record. as it seems to me, from
the beginning to the end and I speak with
due respect for the court martial and its
judge advocate-it seems to mo that this
record, from the beginning to the end, shows
the influences of which have been speaking
because while the results were produced in
the main by these stories of Gems. Mcdowell
and Pope, yet those stories had degree o1
inconsistency and contradictory about them
which think if they had been anylyzed as
they can be now, it would have been seen
how unreliable and contradictory they were
But it was time when the minds of men
did not weigh with the GOODNESS and deliber-
alton that can be employed at period six
teen years after the occurrence of the events
4 The examination of the witnesses and the
opinion of the judge advocate evince the
deep gloom and distrust that had seized upon
the minds of those who were conducting the
trial. Some phantom, not an exhibit in the
record, seems to have been constantly rising
before them to disturb their reasoning facul
ties and unsettle their judgments. The
simplest truths were ignored. The grosses