The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1880-09-30
GENERAL HANCOCK ANDTHE WAR
GLAlieS.
A FaryOrite Republican Argument
Disposed Of--a Hope for Hold
rs of "Rebet Claims"

New York, Sept. 24.-General Hancock
has written letter on the subject of war
claims, in reply to letter from Theodore
Cook, of Cincinnati. The correspondence is
as follows;
"Cincinnsti, Sept. 20, lSS0.-General W.
s. Hancock, Governors Island, New York
Dear Sir / enclose slips cut from the Ga
zette and Commercial, of this city, both of
them newspapers of large circulation and in
fluence in Ohio and Indiana, referring, as you
will see, to the much harped-upon subject in
our politics of rebel claims. The newsps-
pers and Republican stump speakers are
constantly asserting that if you are
elected president the claims of
disloyal people of the south FOR
losses sustained in the war will be- allowed
and paid nv the United States. Thay fur
Their direct special attention to the fact that
this charge has been made against the Dem
ocratic party, and that you its candidate for
president, have not desired 1t. This warfare
is made in all seriousness and maintained
with great oarnestness, and repeated day after
day III the press and in speeches. You are
known in the country as frank, honest
soldier, now the representative of tle Demo.
cratic party, ind having right TO speak for
it. Whatever you may say the people will
hear and believe. l submit the matter to
your good judgment rs to what you should
utterance at all. Very respectfully, yours,
THEODORE Cook"
General Hancock replied as follows:
Governors Island, N. Y, Sept, %, $780,
To Theodore Cook, esq, Cincinnati, Ohio. -
Dear Sir: Your letter of the Goth instant
has been received. regret that you are
disturbed about that bugbear, Southern war
claims The people cannot DO misled by it.
To suppose that rebel claims or claims in
the interest Of persons who were in rebellion,
can in any way or in any degree be counten-
anced is an imputaton of disloyalty such as
used to be made against Democrats, even
when they were in arms defending the
country. SO far as it touches me
denounce it. The government can never
pay a debt or grant pension or re-
ward of any sort for waging war upon its
own existence, nor could be induced TO APP
prove or encourage payment of such debt,
pension or reward. Nobody expects or wants
such unnatural action. To propose it would
be an insult to the intelligence and honor of
our people. When rebellion was crushed
the heresy of secession in every form and in
every incident went down forever. 1t is a
thing of the dead past. We move forward,
not backward. If were president | would
veto all legislation which might como before
me providing for the consideration
or payment Of claims of any kind
for losses or damages by persons
who we're in rebellion, whether psrdoned or
not. In relation to union war claims, the
governments obligations to lis defenders come
first. They are lasting and sacred. The pub
lie laws Of civilized nations do not in general
recognize claims for injuries to property re-
sulting from the operations of war. Never
theless our government has treated with great
indulgence the claims for losses and damages
suffered by union men from the military OPP
eratons of the war of the union. But as
hostihties were closed more than fifteen years
ago, claims of that nature-now mostly N
the hands of brokers or persons other than
the original sufferers-sre becoming stale,
and, in my judgment, might be fairly consid-
cred barred by the lapse of time, and if
hereafter entertained at all should be subject
ed to the strictest scrutiny.
Yours, very truly,
WINFIELD s. HANCOCK"