The advocate. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1901-1913, 1907-06-20
NOT PROVEN
Is Change Against
Soldiers
Says Foraker, by the testimony
presented to date before the
Senate Investigators.

Washington, June Ex-senator.
Foraker. Of Onio, tonight gave out
2 written statetaept samHing up, the
tssffpaoHy staken 'b fI4a ts com I.
mites on military affairs p IN 7 tftS
BfoWnsvi1Ie II qufrY1t efalfug ttsfaT
It fails to, show that any sofdfer
took part In the affray:J5 The stdfe-
ment," which the senator says, as he
makes: plain duty to the South, as
we'll as to the accused soldiers aaId
because he is more, familiar with
the testimony than anybody else"
Is an answer to a published state
ment that the testimony conclusNely
showed that the soldiers Of the 25th
battalion did the shooting. Foraker
says:
''The testimony given by the SOL
diers in their own behalf is not, il
my opinion, shaken/ by the testimony
given by the citizehs of Brownsville
That testimony, in the first place, is
but repetition of what was first
taken by the citizens committha and
afterwards more elaborately retaNen
by Mr.. Purdy. No important item
of evidence has been brought for
ward against the soldiers IN this ry-
animation. Ninety per cent Of what
the citizens have testified about had
relation to matters over which there
was no controversy.
For instance everybody comedies
that the town was shot up; that
somebody did it; that these people
who did 1t passed through the
streets and alleys where the shoot
ing was done, and that they had
guns or reyolvers or firearms OF
some sort and that one man was
killed and another wounded. the
only dispute is as to whether the
raiders were identified as soldiers
OF the garrisons.
There are two kinds Of evidence
relied upon to show that the soldiers
did 1t. One consists Of the shells and
bullets that we're secured from
streets and houses Of Brownsville.
The results of microscopic inspection,
interpreted in the light of other test
imony Of the case completely dis
posed Of this part Of the case. The
only other testimony is that Of peo-
pie who claim to have been eye wit
nesses to the shooting. This con-
sists OF various people who say that
when they heard the firing they
looked out Of the windows and
ilOuHSo anu oOWll udIk dIlSyS, where
there were no lights at distances
varying from 80 feet up to $50 feet
and recognized men who were doing
the firing as negroes wearing the
uniforms Of the United States sol
diers. The officers Of the battalion
have testified generally and specific
ally as to the darkness Of the night.
BY specifically, / mean have given
Specific incidents coming Within their
personal experiences that illustrated
how dark the night was. According
to this testimony, in the language Of
Major Penrose, the night was 50
dark that he could not distinguish
one Of his officers who were all
white men from one of The enlisted
men. who were all colorcd, at a dis
tance Of ten feet nor could he at
that distance tell anything about
how man was dressed.
"All" these officers have testified
that the claims of the citizens who
testified that they saw the raiders
and recognized them as soldiers at
the distances and under circumstance
es stated by them, areH utterly i'm
possible. These officers are intellig-
eht, high minded, honorable men.
At one time when the case was only
partially investigated they were of
the opinion and frankly stated 1t
that these. men were guilty but that
fact only stfengthans their testimony
as they now glve 1t thar the testi.