Valley Spirit: December 27, 1865Go To Page : 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
The Department Reports: Report of the Secretary of War
(Column 5)Summary: Provides a brief synopsis of the final year of the war, along with a series of accompanying statistics, issued by Secretary Stanton.
Full Text of Article:Report of General Grant
Secretary Stanton enters at once into the figures and estimates, without any preliminary remarks, making a point at once by comparing the appropriations of the last Congress for military purposes and those which will be called for this year. The former were five hundred and sixteen millions; the latter thirty three millions. The report then goes on to explain the military situation a year ago and the operations of the year, a record extremely useful for reference but not necessary to reproduce here. The present situation is tersely stated as follows:
"All the armies heretofore arrayed against the National Government have laid down their arms and surrendered as prisoners of war. Every hostile banner has been hauled down; the so-called Confederate Government is overthrown; its President is a prisoner in close custody, awaiting trial; while its Vice President and three of its chief executive officers have been recently enlarged from prison by your clemency.--All the ordinances, laws, organizations created or existing under or by virtue of the so-called Confederate Government, have been swept away, and, by virtue of the so-called Confederate Government, have been swept away, and, by your sanction, the people of the insurgent States have organized, or are busily engaged in organizing State governments, in subordination to the federal authority."
It is only on reading this official record of the year that we can realize how tremendous has been the burden of a single twelve-month. A year ago the rebels still held Richmond as their capital; they occupied Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi and Texas with parts of Arkansas and Louisiana. Their principal army under Lee was entrenched about Petersburg and Richmond; another army under Hood was seeking to invade Tennessee and Kentucky; while another, under Kirby Smith, was threatening Missouri. Sherman was then upon his grand "March to the Sea" with no record in front or rear to tell how, when, or where he was coming out of the great interior which he had boldly penetrated. Truly has this been the year of the century.
The standard to which the army is being reduced is small, but the only reasons demanding greater force are a renewal of the insurrection or a foreign war. For either or both emergencies the resources of the nation are ample. These could be gathered with astonishing celerity. After the disasters of the Peninsula in 1862 over eighty thousand troops were enlisted, organized, armed, equipped and sent to the field. And ninety thousand infantry were sent to the field from the five states of Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, and Wisconsin in twenty days. Many of the disbanded veterans have their arms in the possession ready for instant service.
(Column 6)Summary: Explains that Gen. Grant's report, "a survey of the entire operations of all our armies," is an immense piece of work that should be read by all, but is too large to be printed in the pages of the Spirit.
Origin of Article: New York Times
What Was It For?
(Column 1)Summary: Although the war is being trumpeted by the Radicals as having been fought to free the slaves and to make blacks equal citizens, the article dares anyone who adheres to such views to confront an injured veteran and inquire if that was indeed the reason he fought. If the strife was truly caused by a desire to maintain the Union, it argues, then that goal can be achieved immediately. If, however, those individuals presently pressing for black equality and greater government powers try to force their will upon the country, the article hopes that they will be "forever haunted by the pale faces and sad countenances of the dead who will then have died in vain."
Full Text of Article:The President's Special Message
It would, of course, be a waste of time and breath to ask the men who are working so vigorously in the cause of disunion at Washington, what has been the object of the vast expense of blood and treasure of the past four years. They would not pause to think of an answer. For them it is enough to seize the opportunity of the hour, and, finding the country in a position on which they may thrive in politics, to keep it as long as possible in that condition. But it is worth the while of their constituents now to ask themselves this question, and to ask it seriously. War is a serious matter. The sweeping away of a million of human lives in the short space of four years, by bayonets and bullets, is no child's play, no commercial speculation, no politician's amusement. There is an account to be rendered, first to God, then to man and to history, for every drop of this blood which has been shed.--What was it for? American citizens, voting at the elections, sustaining their representatives at Washington, counseling with them, approving or disapproving what they do, are individually responsible for this blood.--Let them see to it that they are ready to give the account. If the sacrifice be made utterly vain by the madness of radicalism, if the rivers have run red for nothing but continual strife and long disunion, then the account will be fearful indeed. For it is not a thing past and forever settled. There is a heavy responsibility yet resting on every man in the country to see to it that this treasure of human life is not wrongfully expended.
For what was it given? For what did the young men and the old men alike give themselves? If any one be so utterly mistaken as to imagine that this war was for the negro's equality, that these vast sacrifices were to place the black man on a level with the white man, let him stop the first wounded soldier he meets, who survives the conflict, and ask him what he fought for. Let him question those who have made the sacrifices. It will not do to go to the man who has grown rich on the war and its accessories, for he has had no part in the expense, and knows nothing of its objects.
From the very outbreak of the strife there were many men who designed to turn it into a revolutionary contest. They taught and preached that the whole social fabric was to be reorganized. They determined to make it a free fight, without much caring what happened so long as they could bring out of it their pet ideas triumphant over all the country, North and South. These men were few, but noisy, and a great many followed them, and believed in them. It is now time to reflect, and see whether it is the intention of the people to reorganize the American social system. We have again and again told our readers that the negro question lay below the slavery question, and that the settlement of the latter was of very small account as compared with the other, It is plain now that the abolition of slavery has but thrown us into the midst of the other question, and the status of the negro is to be made the subject of political discussion, turmoil, and future dissension. But for the present, let us, if possible, confine ourselves to the question, what was the object of the war--for what have we shed so much blood? And if we find that that object was the Union under the Constitution--the good old Union of the Fathers, and that we can have it now, at once, without a week's delay, complete, calm, peaceful; if this is within our grasp, let us have it.--Or if the people decide that, having fought for it, they do not want it, and will not have it, but demand some new form of government, some new social and political laws, let those who decide to go forward, to the ruin on their country, forever haunted by the pale faces and sad countenances of the dead who will then have died in vain.
(Column 2)Summary: Provides a copy of the address given by the President to the Senate, on Dec. 18th. The speech relates the condition of the states formerly in rebellion.The Age of Fraud
(Column 2)Summary: Mockingly suggests that just as previous periods of history have been referred to as "the golden age" and the "age of grace," the present era will be known to future historians as the "Age of Fraud" because of the rampant increase in corruption.
Full Text of Article:General Banks
Certain periods of the past are known as the "golden age," "the age of grace," &c. Future historians will find no difficulty in proving that the present is the Age of Fraud. Every newspaper, nearly, contains one or more accounts of frauds--nine-tenths of all of which are upon the Government, and by those "loyal" officers who have frequently blessed God and congratulated their country that they were better than other men--especially "copperheads." Thus, we read of frauds at Washington, by which department clerks, in collision with outside "loyalists," attempt to pass an immense amount of bogus claims for soldiers' arrearages and bounties through the Auditor's office. Then, we read of mustering offices in New York having made a "good thing" out of furnishing individual substitutes at State and Government expense. Then, of revenue officers at Philadelphia, who were too heavily interested in tobacco manufacture for the interest of the Government to prosper. And so on, from chapter to chapter, and from phase to phase--fraud, fraud, fraud! With the exception of a few insignificant scoundrels--just enough to keep the police force in organization--every thief in the country seems to be either in office or to have a bosom friend or a blood relations who is.
(Column 3)Summary: Questions how it is possible that Gen. Banks could have taken the Congressional Test Oath to represent Massachusetts in the House when, in fact, he was "for a long time Stonewall Jackson's Commissary General in the Shenandoah Valley."Restoration of Alabama
(Column 4)Summary: Because President Johnson officially sanctions the readmission of the southern states, the article avows that Congress has no right to oppose Alabama's state government nor those of any of the other former Confederate states.
Origin of Article: WorldAre the Southern States In or Out of the Union
(Column 4)Summary: Asserts that it is a contradiction to deny that the rebel states are part of the Union but then allow their residents to vote on constitutional amendments.
Full Text of Article:[No Title]
Can any of the Radical presses inform us how it happens, if the Southern States are not now States in the union, that they are permited to vote upon an amendment to the Constitution? If they are not in the Union, they not only have no right to vote but their votes are not necessary to effect the change in that instrument. The Constitution requires the votes of a certain proportion of the States composing the Union to effect an amendment, but it was not contemplated that States not in the Union should be counted on such a question.--Certainly, to participate in the formation or change of the organic law of a nation, is the exercise of the highest sovereign rights, and it is a contradiction in terms to say that the Southern States are not in the Union, and at the same time permit or require them to vote upon an amendment to the Constitution upon the plea that without their votes the amendment cannot be carried by the constitutional number of the States. They are either in the Union or out of it. If they are in the Union, they have other rights than the single one of voting upon an amendment of the Constitution, and if they are out if it, they have nothing to do with the Constitution or anything else pertaining to the Union. We call upon some of the wiseacres of the radical press to crack this nut.
(Column 4)Summary: Announces that the American Freedmen's Aid and American Union Commission have been consolidated with Bishop Simpson as the organization's president.[No Title]
(Column 5)Summary: Contains a copy of William Stenger's response to allegations made by D. Watson Rowe, his opponent in the recent election. Rowe asserts that Stenger did not actually win the contest for District Attorney.
(Names in announcement: William Stenger, D. Watson Rowe)Editorial Comment: "We publish below the answer of W. S. Stenger, Esq., to the petition of D. Watson Rose, Esq., in the matter of the contested election for the District Attorneyship of Franklin County. It will be noticed that the answer says nothing in regard to the Texas vote, for the reason that Mr. Rowe has not amended the petition claiming the benefit of this vote. We presume has not amended because he is doubtless convinced of the fact that the Texas returns are false and fraudulent. The answer raises the question of the legality of the deserter vote in every shape:"
Full Text of Article:
To the Honorable the Judges of the Court of Quarter Sessions of Franklin County, Pennsylvania.
The answer of William S. Stenger to the complaint of Jacob I. Suesserott and twenty-four others in the matter of the election of District Attorney for Franklin County--held October 10th, A. D. 1865 and filed in your Honorable Court on the 6th day of November A. D. 1865, humbly showeth--That it is true, as stated, in said complaint, that according to the enumeration of votes made by the Board of Return Judges of the county of Franklin on the 27th day of October A. D. 1865, there were cast for D. Watson Rose for the office of District Attorney of Franklin County three thousand five hundred and fifty-five votes, and for your respondent for the same office, three thousand five hundred and fifty-eight votes showing a majority of the votes in favor of your respondent. But your respondent wholly denies that the said election was undue, and that there was a false return thereof--and that the said D. Watson Rowe and not your respondent was duly elected District Attorney of said County, and should have been returned as elected--all of these said several allegations of the said complaint, the said respondent, in this his answer, traverses and denies and your respondent for further answer in this behalf saith--that he is not aware and is ignorant whether or not the following persons cast their votes for him for the said office of District Attorney as stated and alleged in the said complaint, to wit: Curtis Dulelhon and George Miller at the election held at the public house of Jacob Elliot, for the part of the Township of Montgomery--John Tolhelm at the election held at the house of John Adams in the Borough of Greencastle for Antrim Township, and part of Peters and Montgomery Townships, and Abraham Sheely at the election held at the public house of David Taylor in the South Ward of the Borough of Chambersburg, and your respondent further saith--that even if it be true--as is alleged in said complaint (but which your respondent does not admit because he is wholly ignorant of the fact) that said above--named persons did cast their ballots for him for said office, yet your respondent doth aver that the said persons were qualified electors of the County of Franklin and that their said votes were legal and true, and your respondent doth further say, that it doth not appear from the said complaint that the said above named persons were not qualified electors of the County of Franklin--that as to the said supposed disqualification set forth in the said complaint, to wit: "that the said named voters were at the time of the said election, deserters from the military service of the United States having been drafted into said service and having failed to re-report to the Provost Marshal of the 16th District of Pennsylvania, comprised in part of the said County of Franklin, for muster into service according to law and remaining at the date of said election registered in the records of the said Provost Marshal's office as deserters." Your respondent saith, that he is ignorant whether or not the said alleged disqualification was and is true in point of fact, but that if it be true in point of fact, (which your respondent doth not admit, because he hath no knowledge upon the subject) the said supposed disqualification hath no existence under the Constitution and laws of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And the failure to answer the draft notice of a Provost Marshal does not and cannot under the Constitution and laws of this State, deprive an otherwise qualified elector, of the elective franchise, and all attempts to do so under color of such pretense are unconstitutional and repugnant to the laws of this State.
And your respondent doth further allege as additional reasons why the said above named voters were qualified electors--that it does not appear from said complaint, that they were ever adjudged to be deserters from the military service of the United States, by any court, civil or military, which the said Act of Congress, under which the disqualification is supposed to arise, contemplated should be done before the pains and penalties therein prescribed, should be incurred. And your respondent saith that it does not appear form the said complaint, that the right of the said voters to cast their ballots, was challenged at the time they offered their said votes to the proper election officers, nor was the question of the said voters being deserters from the military service of the United States, then raised and tried by the said several Boards of Election officers. And so the said respondent saith, that as to the aforesaid, four votes charged in the said complaint to have been illegally cast for him, the said respondent, there was no undue election and false return.
And for further answer to the said complaint, the said respondent saith that the said Board of Return Judges, of the county of Franklin, on the said 27th day of October, A. D., 1865, in enumerating the votes cast for the said D. Watson Rowe, for District Attorney of said county, did count and embrace in their enumeration, which made the number of votes cast for the said D. Watson Rowe, three thousand five hundred and forty-five. The following fraudulent and illegal votes, to wit:--the vote of John Repp, of Antrim township, in the county of Franklin, purporting to have been cast at Miner Hospital, at an election there held on the 10th day of October, A. D., 1865. It not appearing upon the poll book or return of said election, that ten or more votes were at the said hospital on the day of the said election who were unable to attend their company poll, or their other proper place of election. Also the votes of Thomson McGowan, of Green township, in the county of Franklin, a clerk in the Paymaster General's office--of Theodore McGowan, of the same township, Captain and Assistant Adjutant General--and A. M'L. Crawford, of the same township, tow of whom cast their votes for the said D. Watson Rowe, for District Attorney, which said votes, or at least one of them was illegal and fraudulent, because your respondent verily believes that on the said day of this election, and at that time, the said Thomson McGowan and A. M'L. Crawford voted they were not, nor was either of them, in actual military service under any requisition of the President of the United States, or by the authority of this Commonwealth. The said votes of the said Thomson McGowan and A. M'L. Crawford, not having been cast at the proper poll of their place of residence, but as appears from the return thereof, at Camp Fry, in the City of Washington and beyond the limits of Pennsylvania. Also the following fraudulent and illegal votes, to wit:--the votes of William Barker, Hugh Parker and John Avery, who on the said 10th day of October, A. D., 1865, voted for the said D. Watson Rowe, at the election poll in Quincy township, they being at the time of casting their aforesaid votes, aliens. Also the vote of Benjamin Mazingo, Samuel , [unclear], [unclear], [unclear], Young [unclear], [unclear], who on the said 10th day of October, A. D., 1865 voted for the said D. Watson Rowe, at the election poll in Qunicy township, they being at that time disqualified from voting, by reason of not having been assessed and not having paid tax within two years immediately preceding said election.
And the said responded further said that by reason of the enumeration of the herein before specified illegal and fraudulent votes by the said Board of Return Judges of Franklin county, on the said 27th day of October, A. D., 1865, in favor of the said D. Watson Rowe for the office of District Attorney. The number of votes cast for him, the said D. Watson Rowe, was illegally and wrongfully increased from three thousand five hundred and thirty to three thousand five hundred and forty-five votes, and the majority of your said respondent was by this said false and fraudulent enumeration, made by the said Return Judges as aforesaid, reduced illegally and fraudulently, from eighteen to three, all of which said several traverses of facts contained in the said complaint, and allegations of new facts contained in this answer, your respondent prays, may be fully inquired of by your Honorable Court, and the questions so raised and involved be decided and determined by your Honors as to truth and equity may appertain, and your respondent as in duty bound will ever pray, &c.
(Signed) W. S. Stenger
Trailer: W. S. StengerCongressional
(Column 6)Summary: Reports that the Senate approved a bill on Dec. 19th, providing $500,000 to destitute American Indians in the Southwest. In the House that day, a measure was introduced requiring all U.S. officers in Utah to disavow the doctrine of polygamy. Three days later, Thad Stevens put forth a bill to enforce confiscation laws--the proceeds would be used to pay for certain pensions and damages.
Local and Personal--The Sabbath School Festival
(Column 2)Summary: Contains a glowing review of the Sabbath School Festival, "the grandest affair" ever witnessed in the Lutheran Church on Christmas night.Local and Personal--Lecture
(Column 2)Summary: Announces that Rev. J. W. Weightman will give a lecture in the Court House on Dec. 29th. The subject of the address will be "Prison Life Among the Rebels in 1862."Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. W. Weightman)
(Column 3)Summary: On Dec. 19th, Joseph Upperman and Mary Ann Neck were married by Rev. M. Snyder.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. M. Snyder, Joseph Upperman, Mary Ann Neck)
(Column 3)Summary: Rev. William F. Eyster presided over the ceremony between James H. Speer and Lisle F. Emrich on Dec. 19th.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. William F. Eyster, James H. Speer, Lisle F. Emrich)
(Column 3)Summary: On Dec. 19th, Rev. William F. Eyster married Dr. A. R. Long and Mary J. Emrich.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. William F. Eyster, Dr. A. R. Long, Mary J. Emrich)
(Column 3)Summary: On Dec. 21st, Capt. Albert E. Thomas, of Gettysburg, and Annie M., daughter of Col. James R. Boyd, were married by Rev. Thomas Creigh.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. Thomas Creigh, Capt. Albert E. Hunter, Annie M. Boyd, Col. James R. Boyd)
(Column 3)Summary: On Dec. 21st, Rev. Thomas Creigh conducted the ceremony uniting James Agnew, of Williamstown, Lancaster county, and Lizzie H., daughter of John L. Rhea, in matrimony.Married
(Names in announcement: James Agnew, Rev. Thomas Creigh, Lizzie H. Rhea, John L. Rhea)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 25th, N. N. Hublen, of Dauphin county, and Rebecca Mitchell were wed by Rev. C. H. Forney.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. C. H. Forney, N. N>. Hublen, Rebecca Mitchell)
(Column 4)Summary: David Frantz, of Shippensburg, and Millie J. Shaffer were married on Dec. 19th, by Rev. P. S. Davis.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. P. S. Davis, David Frantz, Millie J. Shaffer)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 20th, John Budder, of Westmoreland county, and Sarah Ann Fannestock were married by Rev. P. S. Davis.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. P. S. Davis, John Budder, Sarah Ann Fannestock)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec.21st, Rev. P. S. Davis wed Josiah Burkholder and Elizabeth Cook.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. P. S. Davis, Josiah Burkholder, Elizabeth Cook)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 19th, Rev. J. Dickson presided over the marriage ceremony uniting Jacob W. Shaffer, of Harrisburg, and Carrie Fuller.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. Dickson, Jacob W. Shaffer, Carrie Fuller)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 21st, S. A. Bowers was married to R. M. Patton, in a ceremony conducted by Rev. J. Hassler.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. Hassler, S. A. Bowers, R. M. Patton)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 14th, Rev. J. Smith Gordon performed the ceremony uniting Daniel Clippenger and Mary Elizabeth Wineman in marriage.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. Smith Gordon, Daniel Clippenger, Mary Elizabeth Wineman)
(Column 4)Summary: on Dec. 21st, Henry Rosenberry and Sarah Jane Murphy, daughter of William Murphy, were wed by Rev. J. Gordon Smith.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. Smith Gordon, Henry Rosenberry, Sarah Jane Murphy, William Murphy)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 11th, Ternes Tasree, of Warren county, Pa., married Mary H. Neff in a ceremony conducted by Rev. H. A. Schlicter.Died
(Names in announcement: Rev. H. A. Schlicter, Ternes Tasree, Mary H. Neff)
(Column 4)Summary: Josiah Gamble, 23, died in Shippensburg on Dec. 17th.Died
(Names in announcement: Josiah Gamble)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 20th, John Newlin, late member of C. C. 112th Regiment, Heavy Artillery, Pa. Volunteers, died. Newlin was 45.Died
(Names in announcement: John Newlin)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 17th, Kate P. Jeffries died at age 3, from the Membrane Croup.Died
(Names in announcement: Kate P. Jeffries)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 18th, Mary Franklin Jeffries, 5, died from the Membrane Croup.Died
(Names in announcement: Mary Franklin Jeffries)
(Column 4)Summary: On Dec. 8th, George Garlinger's infant son died at the age of 11 months.Died
(Names in announcement: George Garlinger)
(Column 4)Summary: Mary Deardoff, wife of Joseph Deardoff, died on Dec. 13th, at age 26.Died
(Names in announcement: Mary Deardoff, Joseph Deardoff)
(Column 4)Summary: James Roberts, 64, died on Dec. 16th, near Bridgeport.
(Names in announcement: James Roberts)
Description of Page: This page contains advertisements.