Centre Democrat. [volume] (Bellefonte, Pa.) 1848-1989, 1880-04-08
The Case OF Fitz John Porter.

From thc New York Herald
Our esteemed contemporary, the Sun,
in its comments on the case OF FItZ
John Porter, should remember that
the original trial was generally looked
upon at the time by decent people,
who knew the facts, as one of the very
scuryiest of oil scurvy acts of military
injustice of which the infamous Stan.
ton and the not less Infamous Holt had
then been guilty. Holt was narrow.
minded, bitter and unscrupulous Ken.
lucky partisan, driven out OF Office in
Mississippi for his bloodthirstiness, who
had been made the judge advocate.
general Of the War Office, and was
about as fit to hold such an Office as
Scroggs or Jeffreys. Stanton was fiat
terer who tried to stand we'll with Pres.
ident Buchanan after the election of
November, 1860, and so long as there
were Executive drippings Tor his little
pan. When buchanan was at an end
Stanton turned upon his former com.
panioDs and allies. The accusation OF
Porter and his trial were political oper.
ations throughout. The person really
aimed at in the Porter prosecution was
not Porter but Mcclellan, whom Stan
ton and Holt did not dare accuse and
try. The trial took place when the
rivslries. jealousies snd animosities IN
the Union army were ut their whitest
heat. and when the time serving and
truculent Stanton was the convenient
fountain-head of promotions and brev.
cts on the one hand, and of disgrace
and danger on the other hand. Holt,
"a IA Judge acknowledgement. was the
public prosecutor in courts. martial as
the representative of the President, and
at the same time the official adviser OF
the court. Holt threw himself into the
trial and the efforts to convict Porter
with the ferocity OF French subaltern.
Under the law and the rules of the
War Office then in force the judge ad
| vocate general. was required to present
! the facts of the case to the President
when the proceedings were laid before
him for his approval or disapproval.
| Holt's report of the facts, instead Of be-
| ing a judicial exposition, was more par.
! tisan than the speech before the court.
/ President Lincoln, whom Stanton and
Holt both despised and hated, bad not
time to carefully weigh the testimony
piece by piece. He had to coniide 10
somebody. Stanton and Holt harried
and bullied him into an approval Of the
sentence. Stanton threatened him with
an exposure OF his domestic diff culties
if he hesitated. The prosecution OF
Porter had been set afoot in order TO
get in foul blow against Mcclellan, as
we have said, under the form Of militia.
ry judicature. The wretched Stanton
and the not less wretched Holt were
both prosecutors and judges. Nearly a
generation afterwards, when new and
complete evidence has been obtained,
and when the War Office is in possession
Of all the facts, a new trial has been order.
ed by President Hayes. Three Of the best
and bravest of the general officers OF
the army have been ordered TO sit as
| judges. The Government has assigned
its most capable judge advocate TO the
prosecution. The trial has been pa.
tient, a thorough and public trial.
The court has found unanimously that
the first sentence was unjust, and there.
fore unlawful. The Republican leaders
have thereupon decided that resistance
to a congressional recognition of the
military judgment of a military court is
to be made military measure. What
do decent Republicans think of this ?
And how long are such things to be
tolerated in a country calling itself
Christian and civilizedl
|