Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1884-09-18

soldiers, and defed him TO point to single
bill. speech or act, and the Marietta states
man did not dare attempt ii, but passed all
this in silence. 1t was further shown how
be had been an obstructionist all through
this last session of Congress, and how the
committee, of which he is president, had
been the graveyard of every important pen
sion measure submitted TO them. Colonel
Taylor then showed how General Warner
had elaborated as the General had
termed il, q speech which had been made in
Congress, and then revised and extended-at
least one hundred and thirty eight changes
and then had it printed in some back alley
Job house, to save money, and then sent them
out under his franking privilege, in direct
violation of the laws of the government, as
charged by those at the head OF this depart
ment.
He then showed how Warner had stood
in the way of widows and orphans and SOL
diers, and especially had he opposed the
granting of a pension to Irene Baker, poor,
helpless imbecile girl, whose father had lost
his life by reason OF service in the late war.
A special act was introduced to grant her
pension for life and reported on favorably
BY the committee, and it was opposed by
Gen. Warner, but carried over his head, ex-
Confederate soldiers condemning his obstina-
cy. Warner had claimed that provision
of his bill was the same as proposed by the
Senate, but Taylor met this by statements
from Gen Dudley, Commissioner of Pen
sions, and others of the Department. show
ing that it is very different. By this time it
was evident to the thoughtful part of the
audience that Gen. Warner had challenged
the wrong man. Taylor was calm, self-pos
sessed, gentlemanly and courteous, while
Warner was angry and full of epithets, with
not one word of proof in the case, and his
reiteration that Taylor had not made the
speech had no more effect than that of any
other man who was a thousand miles dis
tant, without any means of knowing what
was done.
He utterly failed TO sustain the charge he
had made SO ungentlemanly, and finding that
bull-dozing would not do he became greatly
aroused. Taylor's points were all well made,
and even the Democrats commend his manly
course, while they were disgusted with Gen
Warner, and ashamed of his dishonest and
foul attempt to cast reproach upon Taylor.
Warner showed himself a conscienceless
demagogue, and the passion he manifested
was sufficient to convince the audience that
he was conscious of his failure in the case.
Gen. Warner attempted to introduced new
matter into his closing speech, demanding
where Col Taylor was during the war, when
he was suppressed by the commotion of the
audience. He then began to describe his
own course in the war. but failed to make
the impression he designed. The debate then
closed, and Col Taylor's friends bore him
aloft through the crowd to the street, and of
course the Democrats attempted the same
thing with Warner. No Democrats were
heard to condemn Col. Taylor's course in
this discussion, while both parties condemned
unsparingly that of Gen. Warner, and it is
admitted by all that his foul means betrayed
groundless charge, and that his ability has
been hitherto greatly overestimated.