New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1894-08-22


| with certain old friends of mine and of
my father, learned that they we're as
much interested as myself, and l assure
you we would have tried these legal
remedies long ago had we known that
the commission had decided to violate
the law, the facts, and all history as we
now know they have decided.
81 had hoped that the matter could
and would be settled outside Of the
courts, and my brother and I hare only
| taken this action as last resort. The
attorney general wrote the chairman of
the commission on the subject some days
ago, and on my arrival here I was urged
to await his reply before taking legal
action. Time is important. just now and
we learn that the monument is already
going in position, so I waited until to-
day and then, as no reply came from the
chairman, We filed our petition. You
will understand that we could not CON-
mence proceedings on mere rumor or
supposition, we had to wait until we
learned definitely what action the COM
mittee proposed to take.
"We ask that the monument shall be
placed on the battle ground proper-the
site of the corral where the fight was
as the law directs. With the exception
of Capt. Grant, do not know a single
man that was in the fight that wants it
put any other place. Capt. 10 Ander-
son who commanded company there,
and won great renown for his heroic and
efficient conduct, wrote long ago to the
Globe that it should be placed where the
men fought and died, and he preferred
subscri ption to pay for the land. DR..
Daniels and w. H. Grant, members of
the commission, ,have always been in favor
Of the battle grounds. Others of the old
soldiers have written and expressed
themselves very vigorously on the same
side.
GAS to the evidence that Capt. Grant
was not the commander, and that nv
father was,the important evidence seems
all one way. We shall show it by Gen.
Sibley's field and order book, by his off,
cial reports and other communications
by the adjutant generals records, by
standard histories, by the testimony of
living witnesses, and by much other evil
dence. If any mans name is placed on
that monument my fathers mast be.
81 hope it will not be considered i'm
proper if my brother and are jealous Of
the reputation and record Of our father.
We feel that now, when he is in his
grave, it is our duty to defend and pre-
serve them. We feel too, that VIC have
the sympathy of the people of Minneso-
ia, who desire that this monument shall
record and perpetuate only true history
and give credit only where Credits due.
We have had much substantial sympathy
and assistance from numerous old citi-
zens and soldiers, for which we can new
er be sufficiently grateful, and We have
every reason to believe that we shall
prevent the co:summation of this pro-
posed injustice and violation of truth
and decency."
Asked what effect the legal proceed
ings would have upon the proposed ded-
ication ceremonies, Mr.. Brown replied :
81 presume it will stop them; but the
blame for that will be placed where it
properly belcngs.s 1t is probable, how
ever, that when the commission learns
the extent and nature of the evidence in
the case it will reconsider its action, vol
unfairly, without being forced to do it's
unmlstakable duty. The matter can be
corrected before Sept. and 1 trust it
will be. In the meantime the legal in
vestigation will be pushed as rapidly as
possible. st. Paul Globe.