The Birmingham age-herald., 1905-07-02
THE SOUTH IN 1860,

By Savoyard in the Washington Post.
 In discussing Congressman Jenkins Memorial day speech I called attention to some chimney corner history with which he closed his remarks, and in an- swer to what l said, MT. William Edgar Rogers has cited some "Crowner's quest" treason, which I shall try to investigate. MT Rogers insists that there was a southern conspiracy to break up the union, but he absolves the southern peo- pie from imputation of guilt and lays 1t all on the southern leaders. He com plains because, it the time the war broke out, the bulk of the army was concen- trated on the borders of Texas and New Mexico. He sees treason in that. There was reason for the bulk of the army to be there 1t was the Comanche coun- try, and there was no more real treason in the presence of the army there than there was in the presence Of the army farther north when General Miles was after the Sioux. many years later The army was where the hostile Indians called it.
 Then Mr. Rogers finds treason in bill Jefferson Davis was instrumental in hav- ing passed against the opposition of every northern senator authorizing the Secretary of War to sell arms to volun- teer military companies. At that time the Senate contained sixty-six members, thirty-six of whom were from the north. John J. Crittenden voted for the bill
 Was he a conspirator? Andrew Johnson voted for it. Was he a conspirator? Mil- ton S. Latham voted for it. Was he a eonspirator? That bill was discussed by William Pitt Fessenden. He saw no 1 treason In it-not even "Crowners quest l treason. Ben Wade saw no treason in
 it. Under the bill 1t was as easy for a | Moc nhllca at fc n
 buy arms as it was for a similar com-
 pany In South Carolina to buy them. 1 Guy Hawkes. is not in every cellar. l Now we come to John B. FloyG, and l right here l shall remark that in the fa-
 nous memorandum left by Edwin M. Stanton he discusses, criticises and de-
 nounces Floyd, but he says not a word
 about the army being in Texas or New l Mexico, and he does not even mention | that Floyd sent arms to the south. Stan ton was a lawyer. MT. Rogers says;
 "On February IS. 1861, the military com
 mittee of the House of Representatives
 made a detailed report showing that
 Secretary Floyd had issued 115,O00 mus I kets and rifles to the states of Georgia,
 the two Carolinas and Louisiana, all of
 which were seized by the authorities of
 those states and were subsequently used
 against the general government"
 Secretary Floyd did no such thing. and
 the committee did not say he did any
 such thing. What Secretary Floyd did
 was to transfer from northern arsenals,
 that were oversupplied, muskets to
 southern arsenals. that were under r-sup- | piled There was a date in the report of
 that committee, not only important to
 the discussion of the transaction, but
 indispensable to that discussion. Why | did MT. Rogers ignore the date? I know of no reason other than that 1t defeated l his theory. It was In December, 1858 that Floyd ordered these muskets south. | That was some months before the dis
 ruption of the democratic party. ten
 months before the election of Lincoln. | Floyd left three muskets at the north | where he sent one to the south. He had | the authority to send every musket
 south. He had all of 1860 to get them | south. A most lame and impotenf traitor
 that, Every single thing connected with | the removal of muskets from overflow | ing northern arsenals to empty southern | arsenals he was authorized to do by | the law of the land.
 Let me imagine a hypothetical case. | Suppose Attorney-General Moody or | President Roosevelts cabinet should en- ter upon the exhilarating and patriotic | duty of octopus-chasing. Suppose he were to employ special counsel. Suppose
 
 counsel should proceed to paralyze a ten | tacle of the octopus with an action of battery, as Dogberry would designate 1t. Then suppose that MT. Moody should countermand certain orders of the spe- cial counsel Suppose all these things that I have imagined. MT. Moody would be within the law, but no securer behind the statute than John B. Flsyd was, who was obeying statute enacted when John Quincy Adams was President. make no doubt that William h. Iatt' within the past three years. has oone exactly and identically what Floyd dio in 1859. I'll bet it has been done within the last ten years. As for what Mir. Rogers says aoou' sending guns to Galveston-that is only difYerence of opinion. Floyd sent them there under authority of law, but MT Rogers says he was too prompt. Let Il go at that.
 Now let us discuss the real question