Franklin Repository: January 22, 1868Go To Page : 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
(Column 01)Summary: The editor praises General Grant and supports his nomination for President. He lists Grant's achievements in the Civil War and defends his actions since the war ended. He also claims that any charges of disloyalty on the part of Grant, especially when compared to Democrats and President Johnson, are preposterous.
Full Text of Article:"The M'Cardle Case"
We have learned by sad experience that although the Presidential term continues only four years by the calendar, it may seem to the nation from the numberless evils produced by a recreant administration as many decades. In other words, that the faults of our "Moses" and and not ourselves, may consign us to a journeying of apparently forty years duration in a wilderness of Presidential sins. We never call to mind the old watchwords.
"Tippecanoe and Tyler too"
without a stinging remembrance of the perfidy of the renegade successor of the honest Harrison, and we no longer think of Andrew Johnson and Abraham Lincoln as standing hand in hand before the people than we imagine Lucifer and Grant as friends after the rebellion above the skies. We would be fools beyond hope of improvement if we were not rendered more cautious in the future by the sad lessons of experience of the past. We know we must place in command of our forces a leader whose "trumpet gives forth no uncertain sound."
Foremost among the prominent and patriotic men proposed for the next Presidency, stands Gen. Grant. A larger number of loyal voters desire to see him placed at the head of the government at the next election, than wish to elevate any other favorite to the position. When he and his gallant forces had compelled the rebel army in the stronghold of Vicksburg to submit without conditions--when throughout the land every loyal tongue re-echoed the grateful praises of Gen. Grant, and the popular voice of the loyal masses of the North changed the hero's name from Ulysses S. to "Unconditional Surrender," in honor of his achievements along the Mississippi--no true Republican questioned the patriotism of the man. When Lee surrendered his shattered armies at Appomattox Court House, and every loyal heart in the country was aglow in the rejoicing for the preservation of the government, and with enthusiastic love for the chieftain leading the armies who had humbled the traitor host; when the union soldier on the well won battle-field, who had witnessed the struggle, and the wife and children around the fireside at home, to whom the hurried telegrams had quickly conveyed the glad tidings, each thanked God for Gen. Grant--no loyal man or woman doubted the patriotism of the commander whose every laurel was entwined with and inseparable from the folds of the American flag he had carried to victory. Then surrounded by his brave and loyal companions in arms, the patriotism of Gen. Grant was unimpeached and unimpeachable.
The scene soon changes. The assassin's bullet has done its work, and the wild joy of the nation is succeeded by the unutterable sorrow and the foreboding gloom which fell upon our souls when Abraham Lincoln was sacrificed. Andrew Johnson apparently fills his place; fills it as the treacherous fire-damp fills the place of the expelled air where the miner earns his bread or as in organic changes the merciless quick-sand succeeds the solid rock. Gen. Grant by virtue of his official position is thrown, per force, in in constant contact with Andrew Johnson, his commander-in-chief. Influenced, no doubt, by his superior officer's request, which military men generally consider almost equal to a command, Gen. Grant accompanies the President to the tomb of Douglas, and thus is dragged into the political stumping expedition from Washington to the far West, and so was thought by some persons to approve that disgraceful partizan tour, the mention of which will tingle with shame the cheek of every true American for a hundred years to come. The unspotted name of Grant has been blackened with even compulsive contact with the detested name of Andrew Johnson.
Gen. Grant has been thought too reticent in regard to political principles since the war closed, and many of us have been inclined to censure him because we would have him be more outspoken for the good cause than he has been. We would have him denounce the Johnson Administration in no carefully measured terms. We would have him continually reiterate his implacable hostility to treason and treason's friends. But are we therefore more loyal than he? We must not forget the natural reticence of the man--we must remember his profession, we must bear in mind the trying and difficult position in which the apostasy of his commander has placed him. When Grant was driving the rebel lines back further and further into the interior of Virginia, when his blows fell thick and fast upon the strong defences of the rebel capital; he was not always giving public vent in words to his intense hatred of the enemies of the republic. Actions speak louder than words, and no one then asked that Grant should be more outspoken in his sentiments with reference to traitors. A soldier is taught to act more than to speak. We must not forget that Grant might be able to guard the nation more successfully, and to oppose the evil plans of the enemies of the country since Lee's surrender more effectually, by preserving for a long time a silence as to politics, than if he had come to an open rupture with the Executive. There are a hundred reasons which might be given to explain why Grant's course since the rebellion is consistent with loyalty. Among others mark his letters to the President remonstrating against the removal of Secretary Stanton and General Sheridan.--Would a traitor in deed or in heart have penned those earnest appeals to Johnson's sense of right?
Grant has spoken seldom and briefly upon the civil political questions of reconstruction; but when he has spoken, traitors have never been encouraged. We have had proof of the weight and value of words in the vehement, blatant reiteration of devotion to the union and enmity to traitors with which Andrew Johnson used to regale our ears before he changed his shell. Fate forbid we should measure a leader's loyalty by the number of his words.
But even for the sake of argument, take the absurd position that Gen. Grant has no love of country in his breast, that the stars and stripes are no more than any other flag to him, that if it suited his purpose, he would as soon fight with traitors, as against them. Suppose Grant is at heart as selfish as the first Napoleon and as treacherous as Benedict Arnold. What motive would he have for turning against the men he has led to successful conflict, the flag he has carried to victory and the people who have enabled him to attain a fame, peerless throughout the living world. We can well understand how Andrew Johnson--disgraced by his shameful inaugural day might estimate lightly his chances for becoming the Republican candidate for the Presidential chair in '68, and naturally desiring to be placed in that position by a larger vote than the single ballot of J. Wilkes Booth, might cast about him for a party who would nominate him for the coveted place. We can understand how he might hope to captivate the rebels of the South and their Democratic allies of the North, and unite them in a well drilled party, who might make him President next fall. His conduct is far from inexplicable. How different with Gen. Grant! His laurels sit as fresh upon his brow, in the eyes of a vast majority of the loyal men of the country, as they did when the cannon were booming from the Atlantic to the Pacific in honor of his victories. He has led a million soldiers to battle for a principle, which must be a right or a wrong principle, and if a wrong principle, his name is forever coupled with oppression and crime. Is it to his interest to proclaim that principle false? He has fought on many a bloody field where thousands of men fell that a government should be preserved. Shall he rock that government to its foundations by joining its enemies at home? He has carried the American flag victoriously on scenes of carnage, until, while he lives, his own honor is inseparably united with the honor of that banner; shall he join the ranks of those who have trailed it in the dust? Imagine, for the sake of dispute--he is all ambition, all selfishness--his very ambition, his very selfishness would fasten him loyally to the United States government as the love of life ties the shipwrecked sailor to the floating mast.
No theory leading us to doubt his loyalty, his devotion to the government could stand a strict analysis or even a gleam of common sense, more than the sensitive plant can bear, unchanged, the touch of the human hand. Gen. Grant is the loyal people's favorite man, their strongest man and a surely true and loyal man for our next Presidential term. Around him we will rally with unfaltering confidence, and when the votes are counted next November, the wail of traitor disappointment and dismay, and the shouts of loyal exultation and gratitude welling up to Heaven will call to mind the day when Lee surrendered.
(Column 02)Summary: This article comments on a Supreme Court case designed to question the constitutionality of the reconstruction acts.
Full Text of Article:Congress
Peculiar interest attaches to what is generally known as the M'Cardle case, now regularly docketed and ready for trial in the Supreme Court of the United States. It involves the question of the constitutionality of the reconstruction measures of Congress, and of the power of Congress in general over the States lately in rebellion. The facts in the case are simply these:--M'Cardle is a citizen of Mississippi, who was arrested and imprisoned by order of Gen. Ord, late commander of the Fourth Military District. The Judge sitting in that State refused an application for a writ of habeas corpus in his behalf on the ground that, under the reconstruction acts, he had no power to interfere. M'Cardle's friends, or perhaps we should say the opponents of reconstruction, are therefore determined to bring the matter before the Supreme Court. They have two purposes in view in doing so, viz: to secure M'Cardle's release, and to get a decision upon the constitutionality of the reconstruction acts. The case came up at so late a period that its place on the docket is No. 320. It cannot be reached in the ordinary course of business under a couple of years.
Several weeks ago Judge Black, who is counsel for McCardle, nominally, but for the entire body of anti-reconstructionists, in reality, filed a motion to advance the case on the docket so that it might be argued at an early day. The Court heard the arguments of counsel on this motion but have not as yet decided it.--Should the motion to advance the case on the docket fail, it is not likely that the case will ever again be heard of, for it is more than probable that before the case can be regularly reached the question of reconstruction will have determined itself. Should the motion succeed, however, and the case be argued any time soon, it will have an importance that cannot well be over estimated.
(Column 02)Summary: The editor justifies the acts of Congress against President Johnson as just and necessary. He insists Johnson acted against the wishes of the nation and that Congress has the nation's true interests at heart. He then lists the latest laws considered by Congress to limit Johnson's power.
Full Text of Article:The Senate
Congress is addressing itself right nobly to the work before it. Its earnestness since the holiday vacation is refreshing, and promises beneficent results. It is simply doing its duty. In some particulars it is a tardy performance of that duty, but in others it is prompt, bold and decided action; just what is needed, and what the country will thank it for. The restoration of Secretary Stanton, was a simple act of justice, and demanded not only by considerations of justice, but necessary as a denial of the Executive's right to displace him; a rebuke to the former usurpation and a vindication of the law. The bill requiring more than a simple majority of the Supreme Court Judges to decide an Act of Congress unconstitutional, is not yet a law, but surely will be after the President has had an opportunity to exercise his veto prerogative. Its passage is required by the highest interests of the country, and made particularly important at this time by the muttered threats of those prominent in the ranks of the rebel sympathizers that a majority of the Court are of the opinion that the reconstruction Acts of Congress are unconstitutional. The new Reconstruction Act is intended to cure the defects that experience has shown to exist in the original and supplemental acts. It declares that neither the Executive nor the Courts shall recognize the pretended State governments created under Mr. Johnson's military proclamations as valid. The only need or aim of this enactment is to deprive Mr. Johnson of a pretext for involving the country in strife and bloodshed. Congress had already enacted that his pseudo State concerns were void. But he has constantly manifested a desire to override, in some way, this determination of Congress. To prevent any future efforts to do so, Congress makes further opposition to its laws on his part so distinctly and palpably criminal that, should he attempt it, impeachment would become the inevitable remedy.
The second section places the five military districts under the command of Gen. Grant, but in no way disturbs the previous and necessary subordination of Gen. Grant to the President, or interferes with his supremacy as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy.
The third section repeals those clauses of the Reconstruction act which authorizes the President to appoint civil officers at the South, and authorizes the General of the Army to appoint them.
The fourth section forbids the President to sue the Army and Navy in defense of the abolished provisional governments.
The fifth section renders any person who interferes with the orders of the General-in-Chief liable to punishment as for a high misdemeanor.
All this has an air of earnestness about it that inspires the loyal people of the country with confidence in an early and satisfactory settlement of our difficulties. This legislation has been made necessary by the factious and unreasonable course of Mr. Johnson. That he will forego any opportunity he may have to defeat it in its free and legal operation, we cannot doubt, but let Congress continue on the alert, and persevere in its determined purpose to restore the government on principles of justice and liberty, and Mr. Johnson will be impotent to avert the glorious consummation of our hopes.
(Column 03)Summary: The paper reports on the return of Secretary Stanton to his office by the Republican Congress despite the efforts of President Johnson to remove him.
Full Text of Article:Wallace
The Senate, in executive, session on Monday of last week, by a vote of thirty-five yeas to six nays, adopted the report of the Military Committee, refusing to concur in the suspension of Secretary Stanton by the President, and that gentleman on Tuesday re-entered upon the duties of his office. Official notice of the action of the Senate was given to Gen. Grant, and that officer immediately surrendered the War Department to Mr. Stanton, and notified the President of his action. Meanwhile the President refuses to recognize officially the old Secretary, whom he removed in a spirit of vindictiveness, and has notified Gen. Grant, that in future all orders in reference to the army, given by the Executive, will be sent to him for execution. Everything relating to the War Department is in a muddle at Washington, and all kinds of rumors are rife as to the future action of Mr. Johnson, who is evidently in a dilemma as to the course events have taken within the last few days. Even the best friends of the President acknowledge that he has been checkmated. What the next move will be is not known. Secretary Stanton holds undisputed possession of the office, which is said he will occupy until legally removed.
(Column 04)Summary: The paper warns voters against the tactics of Wallace, chairman of the Democratic State Committee, who allegedly planned to commit fraud in the coming elections. The editors claim that Wallace issued "secret circulars" offering premiums for Democratic votes and plans to stuff ballot boxes with tickets cast in the name of deserters and dead men.
Presbyterian Union Convention
(Column 01)Summary: Rev. J. A. Crawford and Elders William G. Reed and George F. Platt, all of Chambersburg, attended a Presbyterian Church conference in Harrisburg. The delegates passed resolutions promoting union between all the Presbyterian congregations in the region in following the "Westminster Confession of Faith."Festival
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. A. Crawford, William G. Reed, George F. Platt)
(Column 01)Summary: The Union Sabbath School of Fayetteville held a festival in the Fayetteville Methodist Church. The event included musical performances by students and school officials and addresses by Rev. Kennedy and Col. Wiestling.Greencastle Items
(Names in announcement: Prof. R. A. M'Clure, Cyrus Cort, Rev. Kennedy, Col. Wiestling)
(Column 01)Summary: Greencastle formed a building association, and elected the following officers: A. F. Schafhirt, president; Jacob R. Smith, vice-president; J. C. M'Lanahan, treasurer; J. Deardorff, secretary; John Goetz, W. H. Davison, William Kreps, Jacob Fleming, and J. R. Burk, directors. The First National Bank of Greencastle elected the following to its board of directors: J. C. M'Lanahan, Jacob Shook, George W. Zeigler, John Rowe, John Ruthrauff, A. B. Wingerd, John Wilhelm, S. A. Bradley, Jacob B. Crowell, Benjamin Snively, Jesse Craig. Mrs. Also, Mary M'Dade of Greencastle celebrated her 100th birthday.Hotels Sold
(Names in announcement: A. F. Schafhirt, Jacob R. Smith, J. C. M'Lanahan, J. Deardorff, John Goetz, W. H. Davison, William Kreps, Jacob Fleming, J. R. Burk, Jacob Shook, George W. Zeigler, John Rowe, John Ruthrauff, A. B. Wingerd, John Wilhelm, S. A. Bradley, Jacob B. Crowell, Benjamin Snively, Jesse Craig, Mary M'Dade)
(Column 02)Summary: Jacob Sellers sold Chambersburg's Washington House Hotel to William Rupert for $12,900. Daniel Miller sold the hotel at Graeffenberg Springs to Samuel Secrist for $7,000. Peter Stenger sold Loudon's Western Hotel, kept by John Treher, to Peter Burkholder for $1,570.Election of Bank Officers
(Names in announcement: Jacob Sellers, William Rupert, Daniel Miller, Samuel Secrist, Peter Stenger, John Treher, Peter Burkholder)
(Column 02)Summary: The stockholders of the National Bank of Chambersburg elected a board of directors, including William McLellan as president.Musical
(Names in announcement: William McLellan, Barnard Wolff, William L. Chambers, Edmund Culbertson, James C. Eyster, George W. Immell, Samuel M. Linn)
(Column 02)Summary: The citizens of Fayetteville organized a singing society.Burning of Chambersburg
(Names in announcement: R. F. M'Elroy, George H. Cook, A. B. Shively, J. Burns White, Prof. R. A. M'Clure)
(Column 02)Summary: Maj. H. R. Hershberger of Chambersburg is painting a panorama depicting the burning of Chambersburg as well as other scenes of the Civil War.A Good Old Age
(Names in announcement: Maj. H. R. Hershberger)
(Column 02)Summary: "Aunt" Jinnie Paine died in Chambersburg at age 100. "The deceased was for many years unable to perform any labor, and having no relatives, was supported mainly by the Methodist Church, of which she was an acceptable member."Bank Election
(Names in announcement: Jinnie Paine)
(Column 02)Summary: The First National Bank of Waynesboro elected a board of directors.Arrested
(Names in announcement: Alex Hamilton, George Besore, Daniel MickleySr., Henry Good, W. S. Amberson, James H. Clayton, Joseph Price, Daniel Hollinger)
(Column 02)Summary: Chief Houser arrested a German named John Shultz, who was charged with stealing nine hams and a lot of flitch in Lebanon, Pa.Sudden Death
(Names in announcement: Chief Houser, John Shultz)
(Column 02)Summary: John Berryhill, Sr., died suddenly of a paralytic stroke at the Chambersburg residence of his son-in-law, D. O. Gehr.Church Dedication
(Names in announcement: John BerryhillSr., D. O. Gehr)
(Column 02)Summary: The citizens of Orrstown will dedicate their First Lutheran Church on Sunday.Married
(Column 04)Summary: John M. Gilmore of Chambersburg and Miss Ellie Applegit, daughter of Samuel Applegit of New Jersey, were married in New Jersey on January 15th by the Rev. Heber H. Beadle.Married
(Names in announcement: John M. Gilmore, Ellie Applegit, Samuel Applegit, Rev. Heber H. Beadle)
(Column 04)Summary: John Shrader of Franklin and Miss Susan R. Odair of Maryland were married at Beaver Creek on January 7th by Elder Jesse H. Berry.Married
(Names in announcement: John Shrader, Susan R. Odair, Elder Jesse H. Berry)
(Column 04)Summary: John F. Johnston and Miss Maggie M. Besore, daughter of Henry Besore, all of Waynesboro, were married on January 9th at the residence of the bride's father by the Rev. W. E. Krebs.Married
(Names in announcement: John F. Johnston, Maggie M. Besore, Henry Besore, Rev. W. E. Krebs)
(Column 04)Summary: George B. Hawker and Miss Annie Fry, both of Waynesboro, were married on January 9th by the Rev. D. Sheffer.Married
(Names in announcement: George B. Hawker, Annie Fry, Rev. D. Sheffer)
(Column 04)Summary: Upton Trout of Mercersburg and Miss Jennie Metcalfe of Waynesboro were married on January 12th by the Rev. D. Holsinger.Married
(Names in announcement: Upton Trout, Jennie Metcalfe, Rev. D. Holsinger)
(Column 04)Summary: James Wolff of Franklin and Miss Alice Funk, daughter of Jacob Funk of Maryland, were married on January 7th by Elder E. S. Smith.Married
(Names in announcement: Franklin Wolff, Alice Funk, Jacob Funk, Elder E. S. Smith)
(Column 04)Summary: John Mackey and Miss Clementine Basore, daughter of J. J. Basore, all of Fannettsburg, were married on January 8th by the Rev. J. Smith Gordon.Married
(Names in announcement: John Mackey, Clementine Basore, J. J. Basore, Rev. J. Smith Gordon)
(Column 04)Summary: Jacob Henninger and Miss Laura Shrader, both of Bridgeport, were married at Bridgeport on January 1st by the Rev. John W. Smith.Married
(Names in announcement: Jacob Henninger, Laura Shrader, Rev. John W. Smith)
(Column 04)Summary: Daniel W. Snively and Miss Effie M. Brumbaugh of Greencastle were married on December 26th by the Rev. I. G. Brown.Married
(Names in announcement: Daniel W. Snively, Effie M. Brumbaugh, Rev. I. G. Brown)
(Column 04)Summary: Alexander Campbell and Miss Sue Brewer, both of Peters, were married near Church Hill on January 14th by the Rev. I. G. Brown.Married
(Names in announcement: Alexander Campbell, Sue Brewer, Rev. I. G. Brown)
(Column 04)Summary: D. C. Clark and Miss Maggie S. Sharp, both of Newville, were married in Newville on December 26th by the Rev. P. H. Mowry.Married
(Names in announcement: D. C. Clark, Maggie S. Sharp, Rev. P. H. Mowry)
(Column 04)Summary: Lieut. William A. Mackey and Mrs. Maggie E. Kerlin, both of Dry Run, were married on January 8th by the Rev. William A. West.Married
(Names in announcement: Lt. William A. Mackey, Maggie E. Kerlin, Rev. William A. West)
(Column 04)Summary: Thomas Kennedy and Mary Jane Witherspoon, daughter of William Witherspoon, all of Franklin, were married on December 23rd by the Rev. J. A. Crawford.Died
(Names in announcement: Thomas Kennedy, Mary Jane Witherspoon, William Witherspoon, Rev. J. A. Crawford)
(Column 04)Summary: Mrs. Catharine Angle, wife of William Angle, died at Welsh Run on January 7th. She was 67 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: Catharine Angle, William Angle)
(Column 04)Summary: John Filer died in the Corner on January 7th. He was 55 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: John Filer)
(Column 04)Summary: Mrs. Rachel Brubaker of Church Hill died on January 10th. She was 68 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: Rachel Brubaker)
(Column 04)Summary: John M. C. Mills died in Shady Grove on January 1st. He was 55 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: John M. C. Mills)
(Column 04)Summary: Mrs. Elvina Eyster, wife of Lewis B. Eyster, died in Chambersburg on January 12th of consumption. She was 42 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: Elvina Eyster, Lewis B. Eyster)
(Column 04)Summary: Mrs. Mary George died in Greencastle on January 12th. She was 61 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: Mary George)
(Column 04)Summary: Miss Mary Adams died at Doylesburg on December 26th. She was 73 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: Mary Adams)
(Column 04)Summary: Mrs. Mary Gaston died in Amberson's Valley on January 9th. She was 68 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: Mary Gaston)
(Column 04)Summary: Gen. Kenton Harper, son of the late George K. Harper, died at "Glen Allen," Augusta County Virginia on Christmas Eve. He was 66 years old. "In private life the deceased was a most estimable man. For forty years he was a member of the Presbyterian church, and his pastor publicly testified at his funeral to his ever consistent christian character."
(Names in announcement: Gen. Kenton Harper, George K. Harper)
Description of Page: Advertisements appear on this page.