The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-09-25


reference to his record in opposition to
the principle of the States pensioning
Confederate soldiers and his earnest adj
vocacy of liberal pensions by the Fed
cral government for those men who de-
serted the Confederate and enlisted in the
Federal army seems to have touched a
sore spot. The answer that ne makes to
it that both his father and brother We're
Confederate soldiers is no answer at all.
Nobody has reflected upon his father or
his brother. If they had served in the
Federal army, their career would not
cause any sensible man to think any
more or any less of the Senator. He is
to be Judged by his own public record
His offensive sheer that Mr. Craigs faith
er never served in the Confederate army
was an unworthy utterance, for be knew
that Mr.. Craig's father was a minister OF
the gospel of the Baptist church. The
public is not concerned about pedigree; it
is concerned with the record only OF
men asking high honors at the hands OF
the people of the State.
Mr.. Craig made the point at Kinston
that though Mr. Pritchard was strongly
in favor of the principle of pensioning by
the Federal government deserters from
the Confederate army, he opposed in 1883
the principle of pensioning by the State
government of Confederate soldiers who
did not desert when they became cold
and hungry In the matter OF deserters,
Pritchard brushes away every objection
and glories in the fact that his bill puts
five million dollars in the pockets of the
deserters He defends the principle of pen
sioning these men and then takes great
credit for imposing taxation amounting
to over one hundred thousand dollars on
the people of North Carolina to secure
pensions for the deserters But in 1883
when the Democrats sought to establish
the principle of pensioning the Confed-
crate soldiers, he sought to prevent its
recognition. and plead the poverty OF the
people as his reason for the opposition.
as well as his objection to certain pro-
visions in the bill. He not only voted
against it but his party sought to dodg
going on record. The News and Observer $
account of that day said on the 25th OF
January, 1885:
'sAt the conclusion of the roll call and
before the vote was announced. Mr..
Overman called the attention of the
House to the fact that there seemed to
be some lodging on the part of the Re-
publican members, and they were then
allowed to vote, which they did, many of
them trying their utmost not to vote"
When the time came for passing bill
establishing the principle of pensioninG
dcserters from the Confederate army,
MIR. Pritchard did not either try his ut
most to dodge or did not go on record
against the principle. He said in his
Kinston speech that, though he had
voted against the 1885 pension bill, which
established the principle that deserving
Confederate soldiers should be pensioned,
he subsequently, in 1901 voted with Alli-
ance men to increase the pensions. This
does not excuse or palliate his original
vote. Then the proposition was that the
State ought to pension Confederate SOL
diers. The amount of the pension was
MOI so material as the PRINCIPLE. In
1901 the question was as TO the amount
If Mr.. Pritchard had voted against con-
structing the Panama canal. and after
wards. when the government had fully
been committed to its construction
OVER HIS VOTE AGAINST IT, it would
be no defense of his vote against the cana
that he lad later on voted for appro-
priations to continue the work. The
analogy is perfect. In 1885 the thing
sought for was TO commit the State tt
The principle that, inasmuch as Confea-
crate soldiers had volunteered at its
call. il was the duty of North Carolina
10 nension it's Confederate soldiers. Mr.
pritchard and nearly all of his party, III
spired bv the Federalistic idea of State
rights. voted against the principle OF pen
sions for deserving Confederate soldiers