National Republican., 1883-01-04


From the zeal with which the senator from
New Jersey (AIr. Sewell) labored in this
cause IL might be supposed that lie thought
10 would be an honor to New Jersey TO have
This citizen of hers restored TO the army.
Mr. sewell. do think it would be an houor to
the state and to tho nation. It did not think SO
would not urge It.
Mr.. Congor said the avowal Of the senator
from New Jersey showed that man may be-
come so dcluded by the pursuit of n iavorite
object rs to think that an honor which the
rest of the world would regard as a great dis
grace New Jersey was an old state, whose
soldiers were always famous for patriotism,
and she did not need to add to the list man
whose patriotism had to be created by
lava man who had confessed his guilt in
the face of the whole world by asking tue
President to pardon him.
Mr. Sewell denied that Gen. Porter had
ever asked pardon for any guilt"
Mr. Conecr repeated that he had appealed
TO the President TO pardon his crime and to
relieve him from thc consequences Of the
Judgment Of the court martial.
Mr. sewcu. Ycs 10 relieve MIN from the CON
sequences Of the judgment. but not TO pardon his
crime.
Mr.. Conger insisted that his statements was
correct. Tho advisory board, he said had
beeu appointed In tit of "gush and had
made is recommendations in the same spirit.
Yet even that board had not declared Porter
lnnONenlt OUb MAJ IUub lOG nlul lub pltd
usually made for tho pardon of criminals
namely, that he had suffered enough. He
(COuger) warn any northern man who voted
for this bill that no matter how many PEN
sions he obtained for soldiers or how many
pension arrears act he voted for, he could not
deceive the people. But he had no fear that
the bill would ever become law. 1t might
pass the senate now but IL would not pass the
house, either in this congress or the next be-
cause, although the political friends of Porter
would have q large majority in Che next thOuse,
the members would have heard from the peO-
pie in the meantime, and members of con-
grcss were sometimes afraid to meet their
constituents when they had dono some up
popular thing.
Mr.. Cameron. Of Pennsylvania. And dema-
gOguCs always arc
Senators Mcpherson and Sewcll appealed to
Mr.. EToar TO withdraw his motion to postpone
the bill for a week, but he declined.
Mr.. Logan said he had supposed that the
senate would not think of voting to reverse
the action of n court without taking time to
examine the evidence. He did not ask any
body to read what he had said but he thought
senators ought TO read the evidence. He did
not believe there were five senators who had
! ever read the record in this case. The con-
tcmptuous manner in which the facts in the
case were treated by those who were deter
mined TO force this man back into tho army
| ana give MIN u CeTbllCdlC OF HOOu COH-
duct during the war was very remarkable,
and would excite much inquiry and comment
| throughout the country The unanimity
| with which tho democratic party in the
| senate was voting to restore this man was
| suggestive of what was to come in the future.
What did il mean2 How would the country
| understand IL? lie had believed that the
men who emerged from the smoke of battle
waged against the government of their
| country and came into the senate had so far
| forgotten the passions of the past that they
would be ready to examine facts and weigh
evidence before voting on question Of this
kind, but that appears to be mistake. The
vote on this bill showed that they were pre-
pared to restore to the army men who had
been false to the government in its struggle
against the rebellion.
Mr.. Cockrell said that If any man who had
left tho army and gone into the rebellion ever
applied for reinstatement, he would give him
notice in advance that he could not have his
| vote.
Mr.. Logan said he had been speaking not of
men who had gone into the rebellion, but of
mon who had been dismissed from the union
army. There were 1l5 officers who had been
dismissed under a sentence like that pro-
nounced on Fitz-John Porter, and If he were
restored there was no reason why they should
not be. Continuing his remarks about preiu-
dice governing the action of senators on the
other side, Mr.. Logan asked Mr.. Brown
whether he had ever read the testimony in
the Porter case In reply to an inquiry by
Mr.. Brown, Mr.. Logan said he had appealed
to him because he appeared to be the senior
senator on the democratic side, and also be-
cause they were on very good terms.
Mr.. Brown expressed his regret that Mr..
Logan should accuse senators who favored
this bill of acting from prejudice and said
that as he had been singled out by that sena-
tor he would say a few words about his own
action upon questions growing out of the war.
He reminded the senator that he had earnestly
supported Mr.. Logan's bill TO restore Gen.
Grant to the position Of general of the army
and said he had taken pleasure in so acting
as to show that he believed that the war was
entirely over. Coming to n matter more
closely connected with the pending case, he
had strongly favored the promotion of Gen
Pope as u major general. Gen. Pope had been
in Georgia as q military Dictator and had be
hayed as well as anybody could in that posi-
ton, and, although he had been leading fed
elal officer hc (l1rown) took pride in his cle
walton.
AS to the case of Gen. Porter, he regarded
the trial by cOurt-martail rs in the routine o
criminal proceeding, and he applied the
rule usually applied in such cases, and gave
the accused the benefit of the doubt He un
derstOod that to be n fundamental prinCipa
of English and American law.
Mr.. Frye. 1t must be reasonable doubt
MIR. Brown. Yes, IL must be n reasonable doubt
and think there is a reasonable, a very reasOna
BILE doubt in this case, And, while the senate
from Illinois (AIr Logan has made II strong cast
from his own standpoint, the doubt in my mind i
increased by the action of the Schoteld board.
know something of Gen. Terry, who was on tina
board. He. TOO, was one Of our military dictators
and / regard him as very high toned ant
honorable soldier and gentleman, Now the sona
} tor from Connecticut (Mr. HawleyJ tells us tina
Gen. Terry went upon that board against his owl
protest. that he told the president that hi
mind was made up that Porter wa
a Recommendation that he be reieveC
from the penalties inflicted upon him by thu
court martial. The action othat board has hucl
to do with raising the doubt in my mind; bu
matter which side he belonged to, as u military
man has probably had few superiors in the world
When Gen. Porter was convicted the evidence
from the confederate side was of course lnaucessi
BILE, but the SCholeld board and Gen. Grant have
hHd the benefit Of all the evidence and they have
both como 10 the conclusion that the finding o
the court martial was errOneous--nOt owinl
to any fault on the part of the member
Of the, court: but because they ,haC
this case was before the senate on
former occasion l read most Of the testimony ant
| from what have read and from the judgment o
, the Schoheld board and of Gen. Grant / bay,
come TO the conclusion that there is a reasonabl,
ters guilt and shall give him the benefit OF tha
doubt in the vote that shall cast In this case
And while some of my colleagues on this side o
the chamber may be satisfied beyond doubt ihe
favor entertain the reasonable doubt that dI
. Hnd give him the benefit of II as l do.
, feel IL my duty TO do that, aud do II with M
disposition TO harrow up tbe feelings ofauybody
north or south. know There Is Il strong feeling u
I the nor h in one quarter In Gen, Porlers favor
I and have no doubt that there may be iu NuOthe