Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1906-12-21
IN THE SENATE.
CONTINUED from Page One.)

en- by a Self-cOnstituted citizens COM
mittee and no OathS administered.
Foraker then went through the evil
ience in question. reading extracts
from the testimony and eliminating as
"eye Witnesses those who said they
had not seen those who did the shoot
ing, until he had reduced the number
of actual eye witnesses to eight. AS
to these he remarked that their tcsti-
mOny was utterly unsatisfactory and
insufficient" to find the men guilty
of the crime of which they were charg
his respects to Major Blockson, who
made the report. The major, he said,
was Il native of GAINESVILLE. @. His
father was an ardent Nallandingham
Coppcrhead Democrat or a school
known To entertain violent antipathy
to the negro. Major Blocksom. For
aker continued, had evidently Develop
ed an enthusiastic admiration for on"
of the witnesses. a Capt. Mcdonald of
he Texas Rangers as evidenced by tn"
statement in his report that This man
was so brave that he would charge
hell with a bucket Of water
~ would like to crosS-eXamino a man
so brave as that" remarked the sen-
ator.
Replying to a question from Knox as
| to whether there was no other evidence
| eXcent that furnished in the BlOcks0m
report, Foraker said he had been I'M
| bic to discover any other and in this
| he believed The President had been
| misled. "Should the military commit
tee be given authority to examine Wit
| nesses?" Foraker said: 81 think l can
get some testimony that will throw adj
ditional light on this matter, indeed. l
know l can"
Foraker repeated several times dur
| ing his speech that he believed the
President had been imposed upon
But" he added, 81 believe he is big
enough man and just enough man TO
undo what he has done when he finds
out the true situation"
| When he had concluded he gave no.
| tice that he should modify his resolu-
| ton asking for investigation should
| the military committee deem it neces-
| Sary, SO as to make it mandatory in
| the committee to go into the matter.
Coming to a defence of the President,
| Lodge remarked that he was not one
| subject, made up his mind in advance
He preferred to reach his conclusion af-
ter he had examined the evidence. This,
he had not had time to do He had read
enough of the testimony to ascertain
that there were two sides OF this ques-
tian and he should like to be informed
| about both sides. There was question
of justice involved, not only to the men
discharged, but to the President and
the secretary Of war, who had given
much time and consideration tc the
painful duty imposed upon them. Re
ferring to the criticism of the officers.
he said he believed it incredible that
reputable army officers would deliber-
ately falsify their reports because one
of them was the son of a Democrat and
another was born in South Carolina.
Lodge pointed out that the record OF
the 18th Regiment showed that at four
| other times since 1885, it had been IN
| yolyed in similar escapadeS. Turning
, his attention to the testimony, he Sc
cured consent to have much of it in
serted in the Congressional Record with
his remarks.
Scott concluded the debate by COM
nenting that today he had been in cen
yn-sation with retired army oftcer
who had commanded the 18th Regiment
for 16 years and declared it to be as re-
liable as any in the service. Negro
: troops he said, We're the only ones Whc
| never failed to win n battle against the
| indians.
IF l have studied the history of the
Spanish- war accurately he
| concluded 81 am right in the cOnTlu-
sion that if it had not been for the lotf
Cavalry possibly we would not today
have the privilege of having that gal
liant soldier that splendid President IN
the White House"