Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-01-30

But, Mr.. Speaker, oppose, not the in
,vestigatioD 10 reference to the price paid
although Fort Brown Is ia my district
and although the Forty-eighth Congress
has appropriated this SUN Of money
which is pronounced to be less than tn,
property is worth, not for The site alone
but for the use and occupation TO
more than forty years. 1 am no
opposed to an Investigation OF THU
question. II by any accident, If b,
any negligence OF the committee OF
appropriations, or of the gentleman from
Indiana Mr.. Holman), the Forty eight
Congress passed law eppropriatius
more money for this property and its ust
and occupation for over forty years thar
they were worth, then l, as representa-
tive of the people Of this country, do not
propose to stand in my place here and op
pose any Investigation Of that question.
| the price is either excessive or fraudulent
the people of this country ought not to be
compelled to pay that price.
DO not oppose any Investigation oil
me question whether $16S, 600 was toe
much or not for the fee of the property
and for its use and occupancy since the
year 1916, when the Fort was erected by
General Taylor; but l do oppose, Mr..
Speaker, the extension OF the rights OF
this special committee of investigation
to inquire into the necessity for the con.
tlnuance Of Fort Brown. / do 1t, first,
because the history of this country shows
thst such an Investigation is unnecessary
and useless. Suppose that the gentleman
from Nebraska and the other distinguished
gentlemen on the com mittee on military
AffAirQ In hpfpn In 70 fhic
House saying the continuance OF Fort
Brown was necessity, and as against
that produced letters from the COM
handing general OF the Department OF
Texas, and the commanding general of
the army, what would the gentleman dc?
And ask the gentleman from Nebraska,
ask him to answer the question now,
ii THAT sub committee is appointed will
you not Inquire from the COmmander-in-
Chief OF the army and from the COM
mander Of the Department of Texas
whether it is necessary to continue Fort
Brown opposite the city Of M,tsnoras?
The gentleman, II he pleases, will answer
the question right now.
Mr. L.ird-I fad General Sher nan in
his report and letters
Mr.. Crain-The gentleman will please
answer my question. II that committee
is appointed would you not call On GEN
eral Sheridan and General Stanley, the
commsnder-in-chief OF the army and the
commander of the department OF Texas,
to testify whether it is necessary to con-
tinue that fort2 Or would you act on
your own judgment?
Mr.. Lsird-I would act on military au
thority. The military authority is against
the continuance Of the post. We have
letters frem General Sherman and 9TH
ers.
Mr.. Crsin-General Sherman is not in
command of the army now.
Mr. Laird-He was in his time.
Mr.. Crain-I hsve letter from General
Sheridan, In which he asserts that the
OF Fort Brown is necessity.
I will read 1t,
ARMY OF UEITED STATES.
WASHINGTON, d. c., Jan. IL, 1885.
HON. w. III. GRAIN, House of Repf sentatives.
SIR: In reply to your letter OF the 81 Inst L
have the noror to inform you that have been
familiar with Fort Brown. Texas, since 1854 1t
Is tn ated On the east bar of tie Rio Grande,
near Brownsville, Texas, and opposite the Mex
can town of Matamoras, and during the war
with Mexico was averv Important ststion. l: [
Is now connected By rail with Point Ysabe, 122
miles dis ant on the Calf of Mexico. bar has no |
United States an there ere no other railroads |
IN nat section of Ts1 So. 1, is the priacipal |
trading sown for that region ct the state. and
through IL much of the commerce Of Northeast |
ern Mexico finds its outlet to the gulf. Mata- |
moras Mexico, has population of shout 10000; |
Vile, Texas, of about 5000, and between |
them and near the nre ent pos: the changes In |
the channel of the Rio Grande through the &C |
ton of he periodioa. overtlows Is ntinuallT !
liz Ia to tran. fer territory from this country TO
Mexico, or the reverse. with all the possibili |
ties of confusion and trouble consequent upon |
such conditions.
F these various reasons I believe a garri
son should be maintained ut Fort Brown, aud
most lib ely for long ime to come The pres. |
ence of larg force Is not necessary, but It
will probably always be advantageous to keep
,here about two or three companies for such
EN- erg encies as might arise az, owing to It's
rather isolated position, troops cannot readily
be assembled there, and l also estsem 1t of
great importance 10 con nue. tie post "a q
check on smuggling, which IS very prevalent
al ng that portion # sae Rio Grande. Very
truly, yours, 2. III. SHERIDAN,
Lieutenant-General.
Now, the gentleman has told US that If
this subcommittee were appointed it
would look to the general Of the army
for information upon the question wheth
er this post should be continued or not.
and when l produce and read upon this
floor with the acquiescence-nas, with
the consent, because 1 asked the general
OF the army for his consent-When pro-
duce and read upon this floor State
ment made by him officially, to the effect
tina: 1t is necessary to continue the post,
why, ask, ought this House to author |
ize the committee on military affairs to
make special investigation on the SUBJ
ject? l repeat what have said, that DO
not oppose,a an Investigation in regard to
the price for the fee, for the use 81 occu.
pancy, and If the gentleman from Ne
braska (Mr. Laifdl will permit me to
state the proposition that he and the gen
tleman from Indiana (Mr Holmap) made
to me
Mr.. Laird will.
Mr. Crain-I have the permission OF the
gentleman from Nebraska to make this
statement When the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr Holmsr) and the gentle
man from Nebraska (Mr. Lairo( ap-
preached me on this SUBJECT in the last
Congress, told them both that individu-
ally I WAS perfectly willing there
should be an investigation Of this charge
Of excess in payment, but that l would
oppose an Inquiry as to the necessity OF
.he continuance of the post, and they then
made the proposition to me, both OF them
that they would strike out Of tn ,
resolution the part which provides for an
OF that question ii would
agree that the other part Of It
should pass To that did agree; but, as
the gentlemen know, obstacles were inter
posed ut the other end of the capitol
no ont of tho