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


of any other bill to be reported thereafter
1t was not intimated that his committe,
thought that anv further legislation wa
needed. So conservative was Gep Warner
, that he went around TO the Republican sid,
one morning TO find out who had made GER
tain remarks, found on page 3I45 of tn,
Record, credited to him, approving Gov
Harris speech in favor of changing the pen
sion laws, declaring that he had said moth
ing of the sort
Il. He insists, like Beecher's dog, tha
would for years keep barking in the hole il
which he had seen the woodchuck run, tha
Col. Taylor did not make that speech. In
the face OF all the proofs, he dwells on ar
immaierial matter What the people wan
to know is, whether the remarks Col. Tay
lor made on July 9Th are true. He insist.
that his remarks are personal, in the face o
the statement of Hon. Ed. Mcpherson, tha
there is nothing personal in them, and thai
he has carefully examined the remarks, ano
found them strictly parliamentary.
IS. He says, in answer to the charge thai
he violated the law and abused the franking
privilege, that four-ffths of the speeches
made in Congress are printed in this way
In examining several hundred We have been
unable to find single instance,
10. He says he voted against increasing
the pensions of the widows of officers We
want him to show a single case in which
he voted to increase the pension OF the
widow of private soldier. This paper will
show where he did the contrary.
II. He says that he was opposed to the
Mexican Pension Bill because it gave a pen
sion to soldiers who had only served four.
teen days in the Mexican war. There was
no evidence before the House that there
were any such Mexican soldiers. The Ian
guage of the bill was: "actHaYy SeYUed foar-
teen days with tie army and nary of the
United SSafes in Mexico" and these SOL
diers get nothing unless they are dependent
or 62 years of age. What hollow pretense
for voting against bill that gives three and
a half million of dollars to Mexican soldiers
and twelve million dollars to deserving
Union soldiers and their dependents.
How empty is any excuse that pretends
that he voted against the bill because the
same provisions are not made for the SOL
diers of both wars, when one war is fifteen
years later than the other, and especially
when this bill appropriates three times as
much for the Union soldiers as it does for
the Mexican soldiers, and as is stated by the
Pension Office, the appropriation for the
not extend over few years. All the other
members OF the House who objected to the
Senate bill did so because it Disseminated
against the Mexican soldiers.
I8. The statement that this election fea-
ture in Warmers bill, which is so strongly
objected to, was put in at the instance of
Com. Dudley, is not sustained by any proof,
and is in direct conflict with Gen. Dudley's
letter. Gen. Dudley simply said that his
bill would relieve "some of the difficulties"
complained OF, and Col. Taylor has always
held that the third and last section of War
ner's bill was good, as it dispenses with proof
of prior soundness.
10. Gen. Warner was in Congress over
three years, and when Col. Taylor laid be-
fore him and the audience the Congressional
Records, and asked him to turn to the page
where he had ever done anything for the
Union soldier, or for their widows and or
phans, or fer their aged and dependent par
ents, he did not attempt to point out the
place. When he made statements that
could be proved by the Record, if true, the
Record was laid on the table before him, and
he was asked to point out the proof, and he
failed to do so.
TO- He declares that the bills that Col.
Taylor introduced would bankrupt the
world The two bills which Col. Taylor
introduced proposed to equalize the bounties
and to repeal the present limitation of ar
rears. These and other provisions are rec
commended by the Grand Army of the Re
public, in its memorial to Congress, and
strongly recommended By Com. Dudley and
most of the Republican members of Con-
gress. The only expensive provisions in
these bills is the repeal of the arrears limi-
tation, which is now made part of the
National Republican platform. We can
better afford to have this money in circula-
ton, where it will give prosperity to the
country, than we can afford to have it with
drawn from circulation and locked up in the
Treasury.
IL. The reader will please turn to Col.
Taylors remarks on the Mexican pension
bill, and see whether every word is not fully
established. The proof shows that Gen.
Warner never reported to the House but
one bill, and that was AN impeachment to the
soldier, adding new burdens and requiring
new proofs, and for this reason it was re-
jected by the Senate. That no other bill
was ever introduced and put on its passage
by this committee looking to the ameliora-
ton of the helpless soldier.
p. Col. TAYLOR showed by letters from
the various officers of the government that
Gen. Warner rewrote eighty-two eighty
thirds of one speech, made 1873 changes in
another, struck out whole pages and insert
ed whole pages in another; that he printed
speeches which he never spoke (besides tax
ing a general leave for all of his friends TO
speak on his own bill), and that he falsifed
the Record in changing the meaning of his
remarks on the Mexican pension bill, assert
ing that he had done what he never had
done. This was done, not because it was of
any special moment, or because any one
doubted his right to revise his speeches, but
to show that he was the last man who had a
right to complain of any one else, especially
when Col. Taylor was doubly fortified, in
that (Ist) he had spoken six minutes, which,
under the rules of the House, gave him an
unlimited right of revision; (2d) he had
leave to print under which he could have
printed 100 pages if he had not spoken
word.
q. Gen. Warner failed'to explain why it
was that it tock him and his committee four
months to prepare one little bill of three
sections, accompanied with little report of
three lines. If the other committees had
been as slow as this, Congress would have
been out of business for several months.
Other committees reported bills, and pre-
sented elaborate reports explaining them,
months before Gen. Warmers committee
was heard from. The soldiers are not to be
triaed with in this way.