The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-02-13
BARCUs REPLIES TO Lands.
Senator Points Out Why Memory of
Gen. Clark Should He HonOred.

Senator Points Out Why Memory of
Gen. Clark Should he Honored.
Senator James s. Barcus does not like the
criticisms of his bill offered by Representa-
tive Charles B. Lands and printed in the
Journal yesterday morning. He says the
representative from the Ninth district is
unfair and that he is badly off in his his
torical illusions. TT strikes me-" said
Senator Barcus last night. sarcastically.
that Lands might make better Governor
than historian" He argues for his bill in
the following:
ION the main proposition that George
Rogers Clark was hero and great mill
tary genius all are agreed. That he was
more than any other one man responsible
for the being of the State of Indiana no
one denies. The only objections made, and
these chiefly by Democrats, are, first, that
people would be inquiring who was George
Rogers Clark? second. that he was not
diana; third, that his views in later life
on the question of our attitude toward for
eign countries were not in accord with the
views of George Washington. These objec-
tons seem too trivial to warrant reply, but
for the sake of embarrassing the Repub-
lican members OF the Senate the objections
are persisted In and perhaps should have
moment OF attention. First. the Repub-
lican members of the Senate who supported
the bill believed that the people knew who
that there is doubt among the intelligent
people Of this State or in this Nation as to
what he has achieved is to assume that the
people have not read history, and to those
who display such lack of knowledge would
commend all the histories of the United
States In general, and In particular the
histories of Indiana written by John B.
Dillon, William II. English, Julia s. Conk-
lin and Jacob p. Dunn.
QUESTION OF RESIDENCE.
But If it Is true that the people do not
know what George Rogers Clark has &C
complshed then that truth is the most
potent argument in favor of the bill, for it
is high time that such ignorance should be
dispelled If it exists; but do not believe
it exists. The majority in the, Senate knew
that Clark was not technically a resident
of the State of Indiana when they voted
the memorial. but they rose above such un-
is conceded that Clark stands second to no
man in his contribution to the being and
welfare of the State; and this being true,
the denial of such recognition would amount
to a mere bubble. He had his home on the
soil which is now Indiana for thirty-five
years-from the time he conquered the
Northwest Territory In 1873 until 1914, when
in poverty and with wrecked body and
mind he was taken across the river to be
cared for by his sister. Mrs. Croghan.
Clark's detractors have cited his will as
evidence that he had chosen Kentucky as
his home, but they have carefully neglected
to tell us Of the bill in chancery which
prayed among other things that he was af-
fiicted with paralysis produced from apo
plexy, whereby he was deprived of the use
of his limbs and his mental faculties weak
ened and deranged.' and that in response to
that prayer upon the proof given the court
entered decree annulling the will. The
decree reads In essential part as follows:
"A verdict has been rendered in this case
by jury upon an issue out of chancery
to try the validity of the will that the
writing purporting to be the will of Gen
Clark is not his WILL" and it is now ordered
and decreed that said writing be set aside
and annulled.'
NO IMPROPERLY
But even assuming that Clark had never
been resident even of Indiana soil there
would be no special improperly in our
| Offering such a testimony in behalf of one
who has done much for the State. The
bill itself provides that the commission
to be appointed by the Governor shall IL
need be. ask for a special act of Congress.
| No special act of Congress. however. will
be necessary because statuary Hall is peo-
pied by contributions from different sources
and the States themselves have not been
| technical In choosing their subjects for this
| honor. Roger Williams. of Rhode Island,
was accented without. question. though he
died in 1856, ia years before there was any
State OF Rhode Island in the technical
| sense. Connecticut presented Jonathan
| Trumbuil. who died five years before there
was any State of Connecticut as part of the
| United States government. Wisconsin pre-
| sented Father Marquette. and his statue
| is In Statuary Hall now, though he had
been dead one hundred years before the
Declaration OF Independence and more than
| 80 years before there was any State of
| Wisconsin. l can see no reason why this
matter should be postponed further unless
| some one OF those who are Directing to
| Clark wants the place reserved until the
| director himself is dead In answer to the
/ third objection IL might be said merely that
| at that time public opinion greatly differed
| as TO whether the United States ought to
| side with France as against England. and
| also whether or not we should lend aid and
/ comfort to Spain. Thomas jefferson and
| George Rogers Clark were among those
| who believed that ought to repay our
| debt TO France and her favored son La
| fayette by helping France I'm her war
/ against England. Inasmuch as Jefferson's
theory met with Sufficient popularity to be
| one or the causes which moved the people
subsequently to elect him President then
| we ought not to deny to Clark this simple
| homage when his views were not more
offensive than those of Jefferson himself