Arizona silver belt. [volume] (Globe City, Pinal County, Ariz.) 1878-19??, 1883-06-30
GEN. CROOKS vICToRYdN

which fascinates the inexperienced
and ignorant, To those who analyze
deeds, and frame their opinions upon
facts, the glamour is more diaphonous
than the sophisms of a pettifogger or
the thin veil which vice wears to hide
its shame. What are the facts? SIM
ply these: Crook knew that he ran no
risk in going into the Sierra Madres,
and did not have fight while there.
What do We base the assertion upon?
The statement made by the captured
Mexican women to that effect, the pub
lished diary of Lieut.. Forsythe, and
the information given us last Tuesday
morning directly from man who
was with the troops. We have no
prejudice against Gen. Crook, person
ally, and we are not on the other hand
afflicted with the prevalent hero wor-
ship, which prevents so many of our
contemporaries from beng truthful
and just. Let us analyze. Crook
knew he had no reason to fear resis-
tance-the Indian (Chiricahua) who
came into San Carlos previous to
Crooks passage into the Sierra Madres
expressed the desire of his compatriots
to make terms by which they could
come back to San Carlos, and >the
General knew it. More than that, he
knew that in the nature of things the
Indians could not have much ammu-
milton, because of the quantity used in
their raid, and the fact that the efforts
of Lieut.. Davis, at Tucson, to get in
dictments against storekeepers there
for selling arms and ammunition,
made the latter careful and cut off the
regular supplies from the Indians.
The proof that they had no ammuni-
ton and wanted to surrender is found
in the fact that they made no fight.
Gen. Crook says in his General Order,
No. 10" that "there was no loss on our
side In the last few years, with the
exception of the time when Major
Chatfee whipped the White Mountains
so signally, the loss has been all "on
our side" It's inconceivable that a
fight could occur and no casualties
come to the troops unless the Indians
like Barkis, "were willing" There
was no fight, Proof? Lieut.. For.
sythe says. in his diary (and every
days doings were carefully inscribed)
date of May 18th, "The command had
marched about six miles when again
they were stopped by scout from
Crawford with the following dispatch
15th-1:10 p. m. Indian scouts ran
upon one buck and ten squaws and
killed then before , intended 10 at
tack the camp, but | must now.
(Quiescant Indians they to wait til
Capt Crawford's snow arrived.) Ant
the gentleman from whom we got tn,
{ information, who was in Globe OF
Tuesday, said positively that only ont
squaw was killed. Fight? There wa'
only killing of ten squaws, accepting
Crawford's statement, who of cours,
had no arms, and buck who wa
willing to give up what he had. Gen
Crook compliments Capt. Crawford OF
his heroism,--what shocking farce i
is in the face of Crawford's own state
ment that he killed helpless women
What sort of a victory is that in whicl
, the conquered are granted immunlt,
from punishment and are permitted
to carry their arms in the face of thei
ccnquerors? What sort of a victor,
is that in which general starts will
1888 captives, and reaches home will
$50? Where is the sense in CROWN,
, jubilant over a man who conquer
women and children and brings then
to feed upon the brothers of the mel
they have murdered, upon the gov
ernment whose laws they've outraged
while their husbands are still KILN.
in Mexico? In the light of late event
we have no word of praise for Gen
: Crook. We blamed him for his tardi
ness in the first of the fight, we ar
! disgusted with his newspaper victory
, we shall be Mortified with what mus
J be its inevitable results.
A somewhat voluminous programm,
is laid ont by the American Banker