Pritchard's men surrounded the camp of Davis, and so far as the immediate capture of Davis was concerned they were instrumental in accomplishing it. It is claimed on the part of Harden's men that had it not been for Pritchard's advance-guard, which halted them when they were marching to the camp of Davis, they would have arrived there as soon as, if not sooner, than Pritchard's men, and been instrumental in making the capture rather than Colonel Pritchard himself. But the committee think that that fact does not necessarily follow, for it is neither necessary to admit it or deny it.

It is enough for me that the two commands occupied about the same position, as far as their distance from camp was concerned; and had it not been for Pritchard, Harnden would have captured Davis about the same time that Pritchard did; and that if Harnden had not been there, Pritchard and his men would have captured him as he did. The escort with Davis was so small that either party of our men would have been more than enough to make the capture; but the force of Davis was previously unknown; it had been strong, but had abandoned him, and was finally reduced by desertion, fear, and poverty to the meagre squad which yet, by the sympathy of a common misery, clung to his fallen fortunes.

It is proposed to divide this reward equally among these men. Pritchard was not in advance of Harnden, nor was Harnden in advance of Pritchard; but all the information that Pritchard had in regard to Davis was obtained from Harden, was volunteered by Harnden, and there is every reason to suppose that had not Pritchard happened to meet Harnden at Abbeville. it is very doubtful whether he would have turned his course so as to have succeeded in the capture of Davis at all.

However that may be, I say for the Committee of Claims, in regard to both of these regiments and their officers, that they did all in their power to accomplish the object for which they were sent out, and which they had in view. Both were equally meritorious, and with the men who were immediately present surrounding Irwinsville and ready to capture Davis as soon as the dawn appeared, are equally entitled to this award. I am not prepared to say that because one party happened to get there a few minutes before the other therefore that party is entitled to any more of this reward than the other; but that they are entitled to be treated both alike, with equal praise, equal merit, aud equal generosity. I must insist, that under all the circumstances, we should treat them all alike. All that I have intended in these remarks has been to state the reasons which have brought the committee to the conclusions embodied in the bill. I now yield ten minutes to the gentleman from Michigan, [Mr. UPSON.]

Mr. UPSON. Before proceeding with my remarks upon this subject, I desire to inquire of the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. WASHBURN] whether the bill is now open to amendment? I have an amendment which I would like to offer.

Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. In order that there may be no misunderstanding, I will say that the committee were unanimous in this report, and that the Committee of Claims of the last Congress were unanimously in favor of a report substantially similar to this. I have no authority from the committee to permit any amendment, but I will allow the gentleman's amendment to be read. Of course, if the House should see fit to vote down the previous question when the time comes, the amendment can be offered.

Mr. UPSON. I send my amendment to the Clerk's desk.

The Clerk read as follows:
Strike out the following:

To Henry Harnden, of the State of Wisconsin, late lieutenant colonel of the first Wisconsin cavalry, $3,000.

Officers and enlisted men of the first Wisconsin cavalry engaged in the pursuit and present at the time of the capture of Jefferson Davis:

Orson P. Clinton, second lieutenant company B: Walter O. Hargraves, sergeant major; James Aplin,

private company K, orderly for Colonel Harnden; Austin M. Hove, sergeant company A; David N. Bell, William Billsbeck, Martin M. Coleman, William Deyer, John Huntermer, Gotlieb J. Klincline, Sidney Leonard, James McStillson, George W. Silsbee, Christopher Stinebreck, Herbert Schelter, privates, company A; Luther L. Blair, Melvin T. Olin, and John Clark, sergeants company B; Thomas B. Culbertson, James McCrary, and Ezra H. Stewart, corporals company B: Albert L. Beardsley, Thomas Coleman, Rawson P. Frankiin, Sylvester Fairbanks, William Gill, William Grimes, Lewis Jacobson, Honore Leverner, William Matshie, Ira Miller, John Nolan, John Norton, Warren P. Otterson, Steven Pouquette, William A. Spangler, Frederick Stein, field, Joseph Smith, George Wright, and John Wagner, privates company B; George D. Hussey and J. M. Wheeler, sergeants company D: Gustavus W. Sykes (wounded,) L. Philip Pond, Joseph Myers, and George La Borde, corporals company D; Nelson Apley (wounded,) P. F. Anderson, Donald Brandor, F. Bublitz, J. S. Burton, Lawrence Bird, Joseph Beguen, A. J. Craig, Thomas Day, Thomas Dickerson, Jerrod Fields, James Foley, Jacob Gosh, D. H. Goddrich, Lewis Harting, N. M. Hephner, C. Helgerson, Henry Hamilton, A. E. Johnson, John Ludwick, N. F. Nickerson, P. W. O. Herron, J. A. L. Pooch, Alexander Pingilly, Arne Renom, Jerome Roe, Herman Stone, John Spear, Henry Sidenburg, J. H. Warren, C. W. Seely, (wounded,) privates company D.

Mr. UPSON. Mr. Speaker, on the 2d day of May, 1865, the President of the United States issued a proclamation, of which the following is a copy, offering rewards for the arrest of Jefferson Davis and others:

By the President of the United States of America. A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas it appears from evidence in the Bureau of Military Justice that the atrocious murder of the late President. Abraham Lincoln, and the attempted assassination of Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, were incited, concerted, and procured by and between Jefferson Davis, late of Richmond, Virginia, and Jacob Thompson, Clement C. Clay, Beverly Tucker, George N. Saunders, William C. Cleary, and otherrebels and traitors against the Government of the United States, harbored in Canada:

Now, therefore, to the end that justice may be done, I, Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, do offer and promise for the arrest of said persons, or either of them, within the limits of the United States, so that they can be brought to trial, the following rewards:

One hundred thousand dollars for the arrest of Jefferson Davis.

Twenty-five thousand dollars for the arrest of Clement C. Clay.

Twenty-five thousand dollars for the arrest of Jacob Thompson, late of Mississippi.

Twenty-five thousand dollars for the arrest of George N. Saunders.

Twenty-five thousand dollars for the arrest of Beverly Tucker.

Ten thousand dollars for the arrest of William C. Cleary, late clerk of Clement C. Clay.

The Provost Marshal General of the United States is directed to cause a description of said persons, with notice of the above rewards, to be published.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington, this 2d day of May, in the year of our Lord 1865, and of the [L. S.] independence of the United States of America the eighty-ninth. ANDREW JOHNSON.

By the President:

W. HUNTER, Acting Secretary of State. Subsequently on the 10th day of May, 1865, the arrest of Jefferson Davis was effected near Irwinsville, Georgia, by the fourth Michigan cavalry regiment, under the command of Lieu

tenant Colonel B. D. Pritchard. After the capture of the assassins of the late President, there being numerous conflicting claimants for said murderers, and for the rewards offered the rewards offered for the apprehension of the by proclamation, as aforesaid, for the apprehension of Jefferson Davis and others, a commission was appointed by the Secretary of War, consisting of E. D. Townsend, Assistant Adjutant General, and Joseph Holt, Judge Advocate General, to examine and determine the respective claims, and thereupon the following order was issued and public notice thereof given:

[General Orders, No. 65.]

Ordered, That

WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, WASHINGTON November 21, 1865.

1. All persons claiming reward for the apprehension of John Wilkes Booth, Lewis Payne, G. A. Atzerodt, and David E. Herold, and Jefferson Davis, or either of them, are notified to file their claims and their proofs with the Adjutant General, for final adjudication by the special commission appointed to award and determine upon the validity of such claims, before the 1st day of January next, after which,time no claims will be received.

2. The rewards offered for the arrest of Jacob

Thompson, Beverly Tucker, George N. Saunders,
William G. Cleary, and John H. Surratt are revoked.
By order of the President of the United States:
E. D. TOWNSEND,
Assistant Adjutant General,

The Secretary of War, in a communication to this House on this subject of date of April 18, 1866, (Ex. Doc. No. 90, first session ThirtyNinth Congress,) states that—

"Claims continued to be presented after the expiration of the time specified in that order; and on the 16th instant, a year having elapsed from the date of the murder of Mr. Lincoln, it was considered that ample time had been allowed and the commission were directed to make their final report."

The final report of said commission was made January 13, 1866, and their findings and awards, without the evidence, will be found in said Executive Document No. 90, first session Thirty-Ninth Congress, and by it the reward for the capture of Jefferson Davis was awarded to Lieutenant Colonel Pritchard and the fourth Michigan cavalry under his command, as stated in the present report of the Committee of Claims now under consideration. The entire evidence upon which said awards for the apprehension of Jefferson Davis were made will be found in Senate Executive Document No. 64, first session Thirty-Ninth Congress, having been communicated to the Senate by the Secretary of War in compliance with a resolution of that body calling upon him for the

same.

The reports and evidence on behalf of the claim of Lieutenant Colonel Henry Harnden, three officers, and one hundred and forty-eight non-commissioned officers and men of the first Wisconsin cavalry, for arrest of Davis, is contained therein, and the report of the conimission states that the said claimants were adjudged to be not entitled to the reward under the terms of the published offers. (House Ex. Doc. No. 90, first session Thirty-Ninth Congress, pp. 22, 23.) The subject having been referred to the Committee of Claims in the House of the ThirtyNinth Congress, Mr. HOTCHKISS, from said committee, on the 24th day of July, 1866, reported a bill authorizing the payment of the various rewards offered for the capture of the assassins, and for the capture of Jefferson Davis, the said bill, so far as the captors of Davis were concerned, following out the finding and award of said commission, and of which the bill presented by me was a copy. Said bill was ordered to be printed and the further consideration of the same was postponed till the next day. On being taken up in the House, that portion of it relating to the reward offered for the arrest of Jefferson Davis was objected to, and it being just at the close of the session and little time left for debate, and as delay would be likely to kill the whole bill and thus defeat the payment of claims for the other rewards, a substitute was adopted leaving out from the bill all that part of it relating to the reward offered for the capture of Jefferson Davis, and the bill thus substituted passed on or about the last day of the session, with some amend

ments. Up to this time no application or claim for the reward had been made on the part of any one save the officers and men of the fourth Michigan and first Wisconsin cavalry, although the report of General Wilson and his recommendations in regard to the capture and the reward were returned and filed with the

evidence before the commission which made

the finding and award heretofore referred to, and notwithstanding the publication of the order for the presentation of claims as hereinbefore stated.

On the 15th January, 1867, on the motion of one of the Wisconsin delegation in the House, [Mr. COBB,] an order was passed for the Committee of Claims to take certain testimony in the case, which testimony, as far as taken, was, on the 2d March, 1867, just at the close of the session, ordered to be printed, and will be found in Miscellaneous Document No. 82, second session Thirty-Ninth Congress. It contains a further report of General Wilson, and also a further statement, with an application or claim on his part, of date of January 27, 1867, for a portion of the reward. Also, the

testimony taken again of Lieutenant Colonel Harnden; and new and enlarged affidavits again made and filed by Orson P. Clinton and J. J. Aplin, and an original affidavit of George L. Wright, all of the said first Wisconsin cavalry, being all, except Wright, the identical persons whose reports and affidavits were filed before the said commission, on behalf of the said first Wisconsin cavalry regiment, and which will be found in Senate Executive Document No. 64, first session Thirty-Ninth Congress; and being, therefore, only a restatement, with additions, as they might deem proper, of the evidence in support of their claim. But the committee did not see proper, or did not have time, to call upon or examine further any of the officers or men of the fourth Michigan cavalry, or to call for their evidence before the commission; and, in that respect the evidence in said House Miscellaneous Document No. 82, second session Thirty-Ninth Congress, if, perhaps, we except General Wilson's new report and statement, is entirely ex parte.

I am not aware that any additional testimony has been taken in this case by the Committee of Claims of this Fortieth Congress, though one or two official reports may have been referred to them; and I have also presented in the House and had referred to them the affidavit of Lieutenant J. G. Dickinson, adjutant of the fourth Michigan cavalry, who was present at the capture, and who is particularly referred to by General Wilson in his report of January 17, 1867. (See House Mis. Doc. No. 82, second session Thirty-Ninth Congress, p. 11.)

This sketch or history of the proceedings in this case, with references to the documents where the evidence is to be found, and sug gestions as to the circumstances under which it was taken, has been deemed necessary to facilitate its examination and to lead to a proper understanding of its merits. The claim of the fourth Michigan cavalry has once been favor. ably reported on by the commission appointed by the War Department, and approved by the Secretary; and subsequently a bill to carry out said award has once been reported by a former committee of this House, while by the same commission the claim of the first Wisconsin regiment has once been rejected. The claim presents itself in two aspects, first before the commission, and, secondly, before this House. Before the commision, and in the first session of the Thirty-Ninth Congress, the parties claiming the reward were comprised in the fourth Michigan and first Wisconsin cavalry.

Now, the parties claimants are more numer. ous, but in each instance Lieutenant Colonel Harnden and the witnesses he brings with him have unwisely, as it seems to me, seen fit in presenting their claim on behalf of the first Wisconsin cavalry to assail the honor of Lieutenant Colonel Pritchard, as if acknowledging that, without making good their charges against him, their claim had no just foundation. The aforesaid commission appointed by the Secretary of War to examine and determine upon the evidence, the merits of the respective claims, in their report to the Secretary announcing their finding, use this language in giving their conclusion upon the evidence before them, expressly referring therein to these charges made by Colonel Harnden:

"The arrest of this chief traitor was effected on May 10 last, near Irwinsville, Georgia, by the fourth Michigan cavalry regiment, under the command of Lieutenant Colonel B. D. Pritchard, who started upon the pursuit with his command, from Macon, Georgia, on May 7. The reward in this case, however, is also claimed by Lieutenant Colonel Henry Harnden, who, with his regiment, the first Wisconsin cavalry, also engaged in the pursuit, arrived upon the ground but a few minutes after the command of Colonel Pritchard had taken possession of the camp of Davis. Without discussing at length the charges which have been nade by Colonel Harnden in regard to the course adopted by Colonel Pritchard upon this pursuit, it will be sufficient to observe that upon a careful con sideration of all the evidence these charges are not deemed to be sustained in any particular; and it is concluded by the undersigned that the latter officer, both in the pursuit and the capture, acted in entire good faith toward the former, and cannot be held

responsible for the momentary unfortunate collision which took place between the two commands. "The charges in question not being sustained, it must be held that the regiment or detachment of Colonel Pritchard were the actual captor, and that it is among the officers and men who constituted such detachment that the specific reward for the "arrest" of Davis is to be divided.

"At the same time it is proper to bear testimony to the valuable services upon this occasion of the first Wisconsin cavalry and its commander, and to note that, while the Michigan regiment is deemed under the terms of the offer to be entitled to the reward, the activity and zeal displayed in the pursuit by the other must commend it to a hardly less honorable mention than its more fortunate ally."

This finding having been approved by the Secretary of War, the said claim and charges and his friends as if in the nature of an appeal restated are now pressed by Colonel Harnden from that decision, and to Colonel Pritchard and the fourth Michigan cavalry it becomes a matter of far higher and more important consideration than any mere pecuniary reward. The report of the Committee of Claims accompanying their present bill, after quoting the aforesaid testimony and report of General Wilson of January 17. 1867, and also the last statement of Colonel Harnden on oath, made 29th January, 1867, before the Committee of Claims of the Thirty-Ninth Congress, and giving an extract from the report of General Thomas of June 1, 1868, (probably 1865,) makes this extraordinary statement, namely:

"From this testimony may be gathered the facts of the capture of Jefferson Davis and the merits of the contest between the fourth Michigan and first Wisconsin regiments. That contest was one of truechivalry, in which both parties rendered the most honorable service in the field, and it ought not, in the opinion of the committee, to be now degraded into a controversy for the pecuniary reward."

The report then refers to affidavits of Lieu tenant Clinton and privates Aplin and Wright, of Colonel Harnden's regiment, but gives no extracts from, and makes no reference to the report or affidavits of any officer or private of the fourth Michigan cavalry in regard to the capture, nor even to the prior reports or recommendations of either General Wilson or Colonel Harnden, so that the facts, according to the report of the committee in regard to the contest between the fourth Michigan and first Wisconsin cavalry, are to be gathered entirely from the ex parte statements of the officers and men of the first Wisconsin cavalry, and the last statement of General Wilson, after he had been apparently importuned to make some further declaration to favor Colonel Harnden's cause; but the statements of the officers and men

of the fourth Michigan regiment apparently are not deemed worthy of notice or even of mention in the case. I have too high an opin ion of the committee, and especially of the gentleman who made the report, to believe that this omission was intentional, but it is so remarkable that I must conclude that the reports and affidavits of the officers and men of the fourth Michigan regiment must have been by contain some statements totally at variance some mistake overlooked or forgotten, for they with the testimony of Colonel Harnden, and somewhat seriously affecting the "merits" of what the report styles the "contest" between said regiments.

As the committee in their report quote from the finding and award made by Assistant Adjutant General Townsend and Judge Advocate General Holt, the commission appointed by the Secretary of War to examine and determine the respective claims for the reward offered for the capture of Jefferson Davis, and as they in effect overrule and set aside the same in their report and bill it is fair to presume that they have examined all the evidence upon which the award of said commission was made. That evidence will be found in Senate Executive Document No. 64, first session ThirtyNinth Congress, communicated by letter from the Secretary of War, April 30, 1866, in compliance with a resolution of the Senate calling upon him for such evidence, and is comprised in the following list, given at the commencement of said communication:

1. Report of General J. H. Wilson, dated May 19, 1865.

2. Report of Colonel Minty, dated May 18, 1865.

3. Report of Lieutenant Colonel Harnden, first Wisconsin cavalry, dated May 13, with indorsements.

4. List of officers and men of the first Wisconsin cavalry reported as engaged in the pursuit.

5. Report of Captain Hathaway, fourth Michigan cavalry, dated May 15, 1865.

6. List of officers and men of the fourth Michigan cavalry reported as actually present at the capture.

8. Lieutenant Colonel Pritchard's report, dated May 25, 1865.

9. Brevet Brigadier General Minty's letter of July 6, 1865, forwarding report of Lieutenant Colonel Pritchard, dated July 2, 1865, with two inclosures.

11. Supplemental report of Lieutenant Colonel Harnden, sworn to December 11, 1865, with inclosures.

12. Copy of proclamation by the President of May 2, 1865, offering reward for the apprehension of Jefferson Davis and others.

Copies of the said report of General Wilson, with that of Captain Hathaway, Lieutenant Colonel Harnden, and Colonel Minty, with the indorsements thereon, as transmitted by General Wilson, are also continued in Senate Executive Document No. 13, second session ThirtyNinth Congress, communicated by the Secretary of War, January 31, 1867, in obedience to a resolution of the Senate. Yet, notwithstanding the report of the committee accompanying, this bill overrules and sets aside the finding and award of this commission. It does not once allude to the aforesaid evidence on which it was founded, or any part thereof, but bases its conclusions wholly, as would seem, so far as the fourth Michigan and first Wiscon sin cavalry are concerned, upon the subsequent statements of General Wilson and Colonel Harnden, in Miscellaneous Document No. 82, with the exception of the brief reference to the report of General Thomas; and it would seem as if the evidence on the part of the fourth Michigan cavalry had never been seen by the committee, or had been wholly overlooked and ignored, and even the sworn statement of Lieutenant Dickinson, of the fourth Michigan cavalry, which gives a full statement of the transaction, and particularly of the interview between Lieutenant Colonel Harnden and Lieutenant Col. onel Pritchard, at Abbeville, and which was presented by me and referred to the committee on the 18th of December, 1867, seems also wholly to have escaped the attention of the committee or to have been considered immaterial and unworthy of notice.

As Lieutenant Dickinson's statement of the capture of Jefferson Davis has never been printed, and as it contains some matters which 1 deem material and pertinent, and as controfirst report of Colonel Harnden, and also in verting some of the statements contained in the his sworn statement of December 11, 1865, filed before the commission, and in the affidavits accompanying the same, I will now send it to the Clerk to have it read.

The Clerk read as follows:
STATE OF MICHIGAN, County of Wayne, ss:

Before me, a notary public in and for said county,

personally appeared J. G. Dickinson, of the city of Detroit, county and State aforesaid, who being by me duly sworn, deposes and says that he was first lieutenant and adjutant of the fourth Michigan cavalry during the month of May, A. D. 1865, and was with his regiment during the pursuit and capture of the rebel Jefferson Davis and party, on the 9th and 10th days of May, A. D. 1865, in the vicinity of Irwinsville, Georgia. That he was personally present at the meeting and interview of Lieutenant Colonel B. D. Pritchard, commanding the fourth Michigan cavalry, and Lieutenant Colonel Harnden, commanding detachment first Wisconsin cavalry, on the afternoon of the 9th day of May aforesaid, near Abbeville, in the State of Georgia, and heard the whole of the conversation between those two officers at that time; and deponent further says that during said conversations Colonel Pritchard did not tell Colonel Harnden that he should remain at Abbeville or at any particular point, but told him in general term that his (Colonel Pritchard's) orders were to take possession of all the fords and ferries on the Ocmulgee river below Ilawkinsville, as far as the strength of his command would permit, and to scout

the country on both sides of the river for the purpose of the capture of Davis and others; and deponent further says that he has good reason to believe, and does believe, that Colonel Harnden did not and could not have understood from what Colonel Pritchard said during said conversation that he (Colonel Pritchard) was going to remain at Abbeville, from the fact that Colonel Harnden met Colonel Pritchard on the west side of Abbeville, and continued to ride with him at the head of his column until it had passed Abbeville on its way down the river from that place about a quarter of a mile, when Colonel Harnden struck across the country to the road on which he said the first Wisconsin cavalry had passed out, leaving Colonel Pritchard and his command still moving down the river on the river road; and deponent further says that he was with the detachment of the fourth Michigan cavalry, under command of Colonel Pritchard, which effected the immediate capture of Davis and party, on the morning of May 10, aforesaid, and was cognizant of all orders issued by Colonel Pritchard to his command, and of the movements of the same, and knew that all such movements were executed with the most strict fidelity toward Colonel Harnden and his command, and that no effort was made to reach Irwinsville in advance of Colonel Harnden and his command. And that Colonel Pritchard and all of his command was surprised on their arrival at that place to find that neither the train or Colonel Harnden had reached there, as Colonel Harnden had told Colonel Pritchard at Abbeville that he should go through to Irwinsville before he went into camp that night; and deponent further says that he was present and participated in the immediate seizure and capture of Davis and party, and that Colonel Pritchard had the camp of Davis surrounded for more than an hour and a half before he attacked the same, and that the actual seizure had been made complete from five to ten minutes before the first shot was fired between the detachment of the fourth Michigan cavalry, under Lieutenant Purinton, and the first Wisconsin, and any statements to the effect that the first Wisconsin was fought back while the capture was being made is incorrect, and all statements to the effect that the fourth Michigan cavalry waylaid the first Wisconsin is unqualifiedly false and without foundation in fact or otherwise; and deponent further says that he was present at another conversation between Colonel Pritchard and Colonel Harnden immediately after the capture of Davis, in which Colonel Harnden stated frankly and voluntarily that he did not think that he would have captured Davis in the manner he was moving, as his advance (which was a sergeant and six or seven men only) would have given the party notice in time for Davis, and those who desired to escape, to have fled before the rest of his force could have come up sufficient to make the capture.

J. G. DICKINSON.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23d day of February, 1867.

DAVID B. BROWN, Department Clerk of the Circuit Court, for Wayne County, Michigan. [Stamp.]

Mr. UPSON. The material statements in this affidavit are substantially corroborated by the report of Colonel Minty, the two reports of Colonel Pritchard of May 25 and July 2, 1865, the affidavits of Lieutenant Purinton and of Lieutenant Boutelle of the fourth Michigan cavalry, who were both personally present at the capture of Davis, and at the unfortunate collision immediately thereafter between the two detachments, in which two men of the Michigan regiment were killed and Lieutenant Boutelle severely wounded, and several men of the Wisconsin regiment were severely wounded, all of which evidence will be found in said Senate Executive Document No. 64, first session Thirty-Ninth Congress; and they also seem to be supported by the reports and indorsements of General Wilson, found in the same document. The reports of Colonel Pritchard of May 25, 1865, of July 2, 1865, beginning on page 24 of said document, contains a very full, clear, complete, and candid statement and history of the transaction, and its material facts are also sustained by the general current of the whole testimony.

The facts as shown by all the testimony may be stated substantially as follows: some days before the capture of Davis General Wilson had ascertained that Jefferson Davis and family with a train of a few followers and an escort was moving southward through Georgia toward the Ocmulgee river, evidently seeking to escape, and he at once sent out various detachments to intercept his train and capture him, giving his subordinates information of the general course in which Davis and party were moving. Colonel Harnden with his detachment was sent eastwardly through the country north of the Ocmulgee river, to discover his trail and if possible to intercept or follow and capture him. Colonel Pritchard, with his

detachment, was sent down the south bank of the Ocmulgee river, the general course of which is southeast, to guard the fords, picket the river, and scout it on both sides for the same purpose, and if he found Davis and party had crossed the river to pursue and capture him. Harnden, on his expedition east, struck the trail of a train some distance north of the Ocmulgee, which he believed belonged to Davis and party, and followed it south to where it crossed the Ocmulgee at Brown's ferry, near Abbeville; and, after some little delay by an accident in getting over the river, he crossed and learned that the train had, early on the morning of the 9th of May, 1865, moved on in the direction of Irwinsville, which is some twenty or twenty-five miles south and a little to the east of Abbeville. Harnden had just sent on his command in pursuit toward Abbeville when Colonel Pritchard appeared, coming down the river to Abbeville, having also just learned that a train had crossed the night previous at Brown's ferry. Harnden rode up to meet him as he came into Abbeville, and accompanied him as he moved down the river through Abbeville, informing him that he was pursuing the train toward Irwinsville, and that he thought Davis's family was with it, but Davis probably was not, as he had been reported as traveling by himself with a small escort. Colonel Pritchard, in the conversation, offered Colonel Harnden some of his men, which offer Harnden declined, as he deemed his force was strong enough, and Pritchard continued moving down the river, while Harnden, leaving him, rode across the country to overtake his own men. This was between two and three o'clock p. m.

Pritchard says he told Haruden before parting that it was useless for him to follow on the same road with him, (Harnden ;) mentioned to him what his orders were, and that he should continue down the river and act as circumstances might dictate, and Harnden said he should press forward to Irwinsville before he encamped if the train went to that place. No plans of action were agreed upon between them, as neither of them knew anything about the roads. Colonel Pritchard, after continuing down the river some three miles, found a negro guarding his master's wagon, broken down in the road, and from him learned such information of the passage of the party over Brown's ferry as satisfied him that Davis was undoubtedly with the party. Learning, also, from the same negro and a lady living close by that there was another road leading to Irwinsville, about fifteen miles down the river road from Abbeville, at a point known as Wilcox's mills, Colonel Pritchard, feeling that no effort should now be spared on his part to insure the capture of the party, decided at once to pursue the party by way of the river road, believing that if they were hard pressed at any time by Colonel Harnden they would be likely to abandon the direct road in order to escape, and might drive over the road by which he (Colonel Pritchard) would approach Irwinsville, and if Colonel Harnden pressed forward to Irwinsville as he had intimated, the party would then fall between the two commands. As the distance by this new route was much greater, and as Colonel Harnden's command was then two hours on its way, he could not anticipate reaching Irwinsville in advance of him.

Selecting a part of his force, and leaving the remainder under Captain Hathaway to picket the river, &c., he started at four p. m., reached Wilcox mills at sunset, halted an hour and fed and refreshed his horses, and then proceeded by a blind wood's road some eighteen miles, mostly through a pine forest, to Irwinsville, without seeing any traces of the train or of Colonel Harnden, and arrived there about one o'clock on the morning of the 10th.

Surprised at this they began to make inquiries, and by representing themselves as confederates they soon learned from the inhabitants that a party had encamped about sunset near a mile and a half out, toward Abbeville, and

some of the party had been in the town during the evening. Pressing a negro for a guide, Colonel Pritchard moved up cautiously near the camp and surrounded it, sending Lieutenant Purinton with twenty-five men to the rear to cut off all possibility of escape, and giving him orders to carefully ascertain the character of any men he might meet before firing upon them.

This was about two o'clock in the morning, and after waiting about an hour and a half, thus keeping watch, with the first appearance of dawn a dash was made on the camp, which was imm..diately captured without firing a shot. In about five or ten minutes after this capture of Davis and his party the collision occurred between Lieutenant Purinton's men and the Wisconsin cavalry, which was attended with such serious results, and which probably would have been wholly avoided had Sergeant Hussey, when challenged by Lieutenant Purinton, properly disclosed himself or answered to the challenge instead of retreating, as stated by Colonel Harnden in his first report of May 13, 1865; but which, as it occurred, was clearly a misadventure, the result of mutual misapprehension, and far from the intention of either party, both unquestionably acting in good faith, in ignorance of the identity of each other, and if any error occurred on either side it was an error of judgment. Neither party at that time knew anything of the reward that bad been offered for the capture of Davis, nor could they have any possible object or motive to induce them thus to assail each other.

I come now to notice the most unpleasant feature in the subsequent history of this case. Colonel Harnden in his first report, while claiming that he understood from his conversation with Colonel Pritchard at Abbeville that he (Colonel Pritchard) was going into camp at Abbeville, and hence that he had no intiination of the presence of Union troops near Irwinsville where the collision occurred, and while expressing his regret at the occurrence did not seem disposed to be harsh or censorious in his judgment so far as Colonel Pritchard and his command were concerned. His superior officer, Colonel Lagrange, in forwarding that report saw fit, however, gratuitously to make an indorsement thereon, wantonly and unjustly, if not maliciously, assailing Colonel Pritchard. That indorsement is as follows:

HEADQUARTERS SECOND BRIGADE, FIRST CAVALRY DIVISION, M. D., MACON, GEORGIA, May 14, 1865. From this report it appears that Lieutenant Colonel Harnden faithfully discharged his duty, and no blame can attach to him in relation to the unfortunate collision between his detachment and Colonel Pritchard's, which he had every reason to believe remained at Abbeville. It is, however, a source of painful regret that the satisfaction experienced in this consummation is clouded by the knowledge that an act having every appearance of unsoldierly selfishness, in appropriating by deception the fruits of another's labor, and thus attaining unearned success, resulted in unnecessary bloodshed, and a sacrifice of lives for which no atonement can be made. What may have been intended merely as an act of bad faith toward a fellow-soldier resulted in a crime, and for this closing scene of the rebellion, inglorious in itself but historie by circumstance, it is difficult to repress a wish that accident had afforded the Government a representative above suspicion. Respectfully forwarded:

0. H. LAGRANGE, Colonel Commanding.

By some means, and contrary to military regulations, as I am advised, this report and indorsement was soon after published in the Cincinnati papers, and copied with comments by the press generally, while Colonel Pritchard's report was only forwarded to the War Department in the usual way. Colonel Harnden at first seemed conscious of the great wrong and injustice which was done to Colonel Pritchard by this act, and endeavored to disclaim all connection with it, as would appear from a disclaimer published in the Nashville Press and Times of the last of June, 1865, as follows:

"A Disclaimer.-An article appeared in our paper last week under the head of Personal, in which, after several sentences commendatory of Brevet Brigadier General Pritchard, the gallant officer whose command captured the confederacy in petticoats,' the following passage occurs: We shall have something to say hereafter regarding the false and vil

lainous charges made against him by the jealous officer,' &c. On Saturday we had a visit from Lieutenant Colonel Henry Harnden, who feard that the public might take the reference as applicable to himself. He authorizes us to say that he neither published nor caused to be published any charges against General Pritchard; that he would disdain to do such an act; and that he knew nothing about his report of the campaign, in which he indulged in no reflections, and the indorsement of Colonel La Grange appearing in the newspaper, until he saw both in print. The warmest relations exist between General Pritchard and Colonel Harnden, and the prompt manner in which the latter has come forward with his disclaimer is creditable alike to his head and heart."-Senate Executive Document No. 64, first session Thirty-Ninth Congress, p. 34.

So far, then, all appeared to be well as between these two officers; and yet, on the 11th day of December, said Harnden made oath to a new statement or report of the capture, addressed to Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt, and claiming a share of the reward, in which, after giving his new version of the affair, he makes the following strange, new, unworthy, and insinuating statement, namely:

"Had we not been waylaid and fired upon by the fourth Michigan cavalry, we should, without a doubt, have captured Jeff. Davis even sooner than it was effected."

This statement is also made in the face of the fact that is shown in his same deposition, that he was then approaching Davis's camp, without even knowing where it was, and with an advance guard of only seven men; and this statement or claim laid before the commission he attempts to fortify by having it also sworn to, in a somewhat general or qualified way, by J. J. Aplin and Orson P. Clinton. (Senate Mis. Doc. No. 64, first session Thirty-Ninth Congress, p. 37.)

This also, notwithstanding General Wilson in forwarding Colonel Harnden's first report, with Colonel La Grange's aforesaid indorsement thereon, had properly rebuked Colonel La Grange, and vindicated Colonel Pritchard, by adding his indorsement thereon as follows: after the indorsement of General Croxton had been first appended to the report and following that of Colonel Lagrange, namely:

HEADQUARTERS FIRST DIVISION, C. C., M. D. M.,
MACON, GEORGIA, May 15, 1865.

As an act of justice to all parties I recommend that this report, together with that of Lieutenant Colonel Pritchard, be forwarded to the Secretary of War, with the request that they be published in the Army and Navy Gazette. Respectfully forwarded.

JOHN T. CROXTON, Brigadier General Commanding.

HEADQUARTERS CAVALRY CORPS, MILITARY DEPARTMENT MISSISSIPPI, MACON, GEORGIA, May 19, 1865. Justice to a brave and skillful officer impels me to say I do not think the strictures of Colonel La Grange warranted by the facts. Colonel Pritchard would have been more culpable had he have remained in camp, knowing the object of his search had already passed on. I am unwilling to believe him intentionally guilty of any act unbecoming a good soldier.

Colonel Harnden and his command are certainly, on the other hand, entitled to a full share of the credit in apprehending Jeff. Davis, and in no way to blame for the collision between his own command and that of General Pritchard.

Respectfully forwarded; the recommendation of General Croxton approved.

J. H. WILSON, Brevet Major General.

The vindication of Colonel Pritchard was as soldier-like and manly on the part of General Wilson as the rebuke of Colonel La Grange was timely and deserved.

Alike manly and just was the indorsement of General Wilson on the report of Colonel Minty, accompanying that of Captain Hathaway, narrating the circumstances of the capture of Davis, and which is as follows:

HEADQUARTERS CAVALRY CORps, MILITARY DIVISION MISSISSIPPI, MACON, GEORGIA, May 9, 1865. Respectfully forwarded: a comparison of the inclosed reports with that of Colonel Harnden, first Wisconsin cavalry, will show that Colonel Pritchard acted in good faith with Colonel Harnden. I must, therefore, and in view of all the facts, respectively recommend that medals of honor be given to the officers and men of both regiments actually engaged in the pursuit south of Abbeville. In the distribution of the reward, the families of the two men killed should be amply provided for.

J. H. WILSON, Brevet Major General.

Defeated, as we have seen, before the commission, and his claim rejected, he next appears before the committee of the last House, and makes a new and enlarged statement, and somewhat amplifies and reiterates his charges and insinuations against Colonel Pritchard and his men, again calls to his aid Aplin and Clinton with new affidavits, and a further affidavit from one George D. Wright, in which affidavits, among other things, pretended hearsay statements are given of persons whose names are not stated, and who are in no way identified, other than that they are alleged to have been with the Michigan men, and affidavits thus patched up to fit the case he proposes or hopes to dignify into evidence to support his charges.

all the evidence and reports before the commission, and to their report and the affidavit of Lieutenant Dickinson, to show both the fallacy and injustice if not maliciousness of these charges thus reiterated and attempted to be substantiated. I should be sorry to be compelled to believe that a desire to obtain a share in the reward has originated or prompted these charges; but it is suggestive that until the claim for the reward was made before the commission by Colonel Harnden he had never made any such statement or imputation against Colonel Pritchard and his regiment.

It is sufficient for me to refer the House to

We next come to the new recommendations of General Wilson. General J. H. Wilson, in his last report of January 17, 1867, on this subject, uses the following language, which is quoted by the committee in their report in this

case:

"In my correspondence with the War Department just after the capture I recommended, probably without due consideration, that the reward of $100,000 offered by the President for the capture of Davis (or that part of it remaining after the families of the men killed in the pursuit had been amply provided for) should be divided according to the law of prize among the actual captors, and that Colonel Harnden and his men should receive medals of honor specially commemorating the part they had taken in the pursuit. This recommendation has not been carried into effect, but the commission, of which General Townsend was president, disallow the claims of Colonel Harnden, and recommend that the members of the fourth Michigan cavalry, scouting and picketing the Ocmulgee river, over thirty miles north of Irwinsville, as well as the actual captors,' shall be included in the distribution of the reward, on the ground that they were performing service of a most important precautionary character.' With just as much reason every other man of the entire cavalry force then on duty in Georgia should also be included in the distribution, as they were performing service of a most important precautionary character incidental to the immediate purpose of the expedition, and such as could not, without an imputation of neglect of duty, have been omitted to be provided for.' Colonel Harnden and his detachment, who were actually within gun sound of the capture, certainly deserve more consideration in this case than any one who remained behind, no matter upon what duty he was engaged. I am therefore compelled, in equity and justice, to respectfully recommend, in the further consideration of this matter by the proper authorities, that the strict law of prize be observed. Under this law it seems to me that Colonel Harnden and Captain Yeoman should receive share and share alike with the officers who were actually present at the capture.'

Had General Wilson looked at the report and recommendation of Colonel Pritchard of May 25, 1865, which is referred to by the commission in giving their decision, he would have found that Colonel Pritchard did not insist that strictly any but those of his regiment present at the capture had a right to the reward; but when he advised that those of the regiment picketing the river should share in the reward, he added, "and when I say this I believe Í but utter the wishes of a large majority of both officers and men." If those who were present at and participating in the capture and entitled to the reward were willing that their fellow members of the regiment on duty at the river should share with them in the reward the rights of no one else were violated in allowing it, and the rule of law was not changed. No one else had any right to complain, not even General Wilson, on that account, nor can he justify any change of his first recommendation on that ground. But this extract from General Wilson's last report also shows this important fact, that up to January 17, 1867, he had never

considered Colonel Harnden or his men entitled to share in the reward, and had not recommended that they should share in it. He had only recommended that Colonel Harnden and his men should receive medals of honor; nor does he now recommend that the men of the first Wisconsin should share in the reward, but only that Colonel Harnden himself, and Captain Yeoman, of the first Ohio cavalry, should receive share and share alike with the captors.

Yet the committee, in their report and bill, allow shares not only to these officers but to all the men serving under them, and disregard the law of prize advocated by General Wilson as well as adhered to by the commission. Never has General Wilson considered the first Wisconsin cavalry as among the captors of Davis, and entitled to share in the reward. Having a high regard for General Wilson, his services and his manly, soldierlike qualities, I desire to speak only in praise of that gallant officer. But in preparing his last report, as he was about to prefer a claim of his own for a share in the reward, in changing a little his recommendation it would have been a delicate matter to have so enlarged it as to include only himself, especially when it is possible he might have been greatly importuned by officers and friends for whom he doubtless had a high personal regard.

He briefly presented his claim to the committee as follows, referring therein to his said report:

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 27, 1867. Having given all the orders and instructions, as commanding general of the cavalry corps, military division of the Mississippi, for the movement and disposition of the troops which resulted in the capture of Jefferson Davis and his suite, I have the honor to ask that a portion of the reward offered by the President under proclamation dated Washington, D. C., May 2, 1865, to which I am entitled under the law of prize, be paid to me.

I have also the honor to ask that the reward offered for the capture of Clement C. Clay, jun., under the same proclamation, or that part of it to which I am entitled, may also be paid to me, the said Clay having surrendered in person to me at Macon, Georgia, May 11, 1865.

The full facts and particulars in these cases are set forth in an official report, dated January 17, 1867, now in the hands of General Grant.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, J. H. WILSON, Lieut. Col. 35th Inf., Brev, Maj. Gen. U. S. Å..., late Maj. Gen. Vols., commanding Cav. Corps, M. D. M. Chairman of the Committee of Claims, House of Reps.

The reward was offered for the arrest of Jefferson Davis, and when that rule of distribution to the actual captors is passed, there is no fixed line of discrimination, and it then becomes an arbitrary matter, or rather one of caprice. The reward was offered not for information which might lead to his arrest, nor for vigilant efforts, labors, and services, however meritorious in pursuing and endeavoring to arrest or capture him, but which did not succeed. The actual arrest was to be the crowning work, which was to earn, achieve, and receive the reward. This was the work of Colonel Pritchard and his men, of the fourth Michigan cavalry. While, therefore, strictly as a matter of right under the terms of the award, we do not consider that General Wilson or Captain Yeoman and his men are entitled to share in it; yet our estimation of and regard for them is such that, under the circumstances, we would not object to the bill reported by the committee, on account of the provisions it contains in their favor, preferring to yield to their recommendations where it does not affect our honor. But Colonel Harnden and his regiment not only are not entitled by the terms of the offered reward to share in it as a matter of right, but they have seen fit, in presenting their claim, to base it upon a charge against the fourth Michigan regiment of the commission of an act most diabolical and dishonorable in its nature, and for the commission of which no possible motive or object is shown to have existed, and which charge is wholly unsupported by the facts.

They cannot, then, claim a share of the reward as a matter of right nor by the law of courtesy, nor can the fourth Michigan consent

Col

to the allowance of their claim as thus presented and urged, without contributing to their own dishonor. Far be it from us to disparage the first Wisconsin cavalry or their services as soldiers. The Union soldiers of all the States during the late great rebellion wrote their own glorious and patriotic record in imperishable characters on the brightest page of their country's history. But we are called upon to defend Colonel Pritchard and his men from what we consider a most foul and unjust imputation and aspersion which owns Colonel Harnden as its author, and hence we have spoken. onel Pritchard, for gallant and meritorious services in the war, was made a brigadier general of volunteers by brevet, and I am proud to number him, as well as many of his regiment, as among my constituents. My honored colleague from the third district, [Mr. BLAIR,] who so ably and patriotically filled the executive chair of my State during the four long, ploody, and devastating years of the war, assisted him in organizing his regiment and issued to him his commission, and will not fail to bear testimony with all my colleagues to his worth, his integrity, and high standing both as a soldier and as a citizen.

By virtue of the suffrages of a vast majority of the people of his State, he has held for two years past the honorable and responsible office of commissioner of the general land office of the State, for which office he has recently been renominated by acclamation.

The people of Michigan who know him, honor, trust, and confide in him, and will continue to do so; and while we say nothing, as we know nothing, against the character of Colonel Harnden, outside of his connection with this charge, we do know Colonel Pritchard, and his repu tation and his honor, the honor of his regiment and of his State alike forbid that we should consent or vote to reward Colonel Harnden and his men for thus unjustly assailing him and his regiment in connection with this transaction, which has now become a matter of history.

Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. UPSON] has in the course of his remarks referred to the charge that the first Wisconsin cavalry were waylaid and fired upon by the fourth Michigan cavalry, and that but for this the former would have captured Jefferson Davis. I wish to say that the committee did not base their report on any such ground. We do not say whether that charge is correct or not.

Mr. UPSON. Colonel Harnden predicates his claim on that charge.

no.

Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. Oh,

Mr. UPSON. That is the charge which was made before the commission, and repeated in an affidavit before the committee.

Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. We understand that Colonel Harnden made that charge; but the committee, without attempting to determine the correctness of that charge, say that even if the charge were unfounded Colonel Harnden gave the information leading to the capture; he had been on the track; he had been riding day and night; he had encamped during the dark hours of the night, and started out at three o'clock in the morning with his regiment ready to make the capture. Now, even though the other party hap pened to get to the scene of the capture, as the affidavit says, five minutes sooner, that did not seem to us a reason why they should receive the entire reward.

Mr. UPSON. I wish to correct the gentleman in one respect. He will find by Colonel Pritchard's report, and by the affidavits in the document to which I have referred, that Colonel Pritchard obtained from a negro and from a lady residing three miles below Abbeville, information that Jefferson Davis was with the party

Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. But the gentleman must be aware that that was subsequent to the information he received from Colonel Harnden; that up to the time he met

Colonel Harnden he had not heard anything of the kind. I know it is claimed that subsequent to the time when Colonel Harnden told him that Davis had gone to Irwinsville, he was on the track; but it was not claimed by Colonel Pritchard that he had heard one word in reference to the whereabouts of Jefferson Davis before that.

Mr. UPSON. Another point is this: the evidence shows that Colonel Pritchard's party had surrounded Davis's camp an hour and a half, not five minutes, before the other party arrived.

Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. I yield ten minutes to the gentleman from Michigan, [Mr. BLAIR.]

Mr. BLAIR. Mr. Speaker, I have been anxious that this important bill might be considered in Committee of the Whole, or in some such manner that the facts might be fully brought to the attention of the House, in order that the questions involved might be properly decided. I deny altogether that we have any special care as to the particular persons who may receive this money. This question reaches further than that. This bill proposes to unsettle the finding that has heretofore been made in regard to this transaction. The committee do not deny that this capture was made entirely by the fourth Michigan cavalry; but they undertake to weaken the statement of this matter which has heretofore gone forth to the country. These and other matters I should like to consider; but I am unable to do so in the ten minutes allowed me, and I must speak directly to the point.

Now, sir, it is within the recollection, I suppose, of everybody in this country that soon after the assassination of President Lincoln in April, 1865, his successor, President Johnson, issued a proclamation bearing date May 2, 1865, in which, upon evidence in the department of military justice, he charged Davis with being accessory to the assassination of Mr. Lincoln. Upon that ground he offers a reward for various persons, and among others a reward of $100,000 for, the arrest of Jefferson Davis, not to troops, not to soldiers, not to anybody in particular, but to any person or any single individual, any one who should arrest Jefferson Davis-not to any regiment which should well conduct itself; the reward was offered to nobody or for any other purpose than the single one of the arrest of Jefferson Davis as a criminal, not as a traitor to his contry at all, not as president of the southern confederacy, but only and simply because he was charged with being an assassin this reward was offered and was to be given to whomsoever should make this arrest. I submit, sir, that statement disposes of the whole view the committee have taken.

The chairman of the committee, in the outset of his remarks, stated that, strictly speaking, none of these people would be entitled to this reward. Why not? There is no restriction. It would go to the soldier, it would go to the troop of soldiers, it would go to the civilian, or to the sheriff or constable, or to any number of persons who might make the arrest, but it is confined to the persons who shall arrest Davis. There is no denial by the committee or any one else that the arrest was made by Pritchard and a detachment of the fourth Michigan cavalry. They did make the arrest. He captured Jeff. Davis and lodged him in Fortress Monroe and came to Washington and reported the matter to the Secretary of War, who ordered a commission to examine in reference to the capture, and that commission declared he was entitled to the reward, with his detachment of the fourth Michigan cavalry.

This is a plain, unvarnished statement of the case. Now, Lieutenant Colonel Harnden says he is entitled to a part of the reward. He is not pretended to have captured Jeff. Davis, but it is claimed he acted as meritoriously as those who did. Very likely. I should say that the whole Army did the same thing. I am not about to find fault with anybody on this subject at all. It may be very true that

he acted as meritoriously as Colonel Pritchard and his men. But the fact nevertheless remains that Colonel Pritchard did in fact make the capture.

Now, in my own State this question is one of great importauce, and I feel it pretty hard that the Representatives of that State should be confined to twenty minutes in defending the claim of this officer and his men. But we must do the best we can in the limited time. We say that upon the plainest principles which are applied in all such cases this reward belongs to these men. But it is said in the argument of the committee-with some force it is true that the allowance was made by the commission of the Secretary of War to all Pritchard's men, including those who were not present. But, sir, why? Simply because Pritchard and those who were present agreed to it. If they chose to take a reward which belonged to them and divide it with their comrades, that harms nobody and nobody has a right to complain. It does not alter the principle. I maintain that if five men of Colonel Pritchard's force without an officer had arrested Davis they would be entitled to the reward. Ay, if one man, and he a civiliau, a man who had never served in the Army at all, had arrested Davis and brought him in, he would have been entitled to the entire reward. Can there be any doubt of it? Is it not entirely clear?

Now, sir, this was the view taken of this question by the military authorities. I will read very briefly from the letter of the Secretary of War of the 18th of April, 1866:

"The arrest of this chief traiter was effected on May 10 last, near Irwinsville, Georgia, by the fourth Michigan cavalry regiment, under the command of Lieutenant Colonel B. D. Pritchard, who started upon the pursuit with his command from Macon, Georgia, on May 7. The reward in this case, however, is also claimed by Lieutenant Colonel Henry Harnden, who, with his regiment, the first Wisconsin cavalry, also engaged in the pursuit, arrived upon the ground but a few minutes after the command of Colonel Priteaard had taken possession of the camp of Davis. Without discussing at length the charges which have been made by Colonel Harnden in regard to the course adopted by Colonel Pritchard upon this pursuit, it will be sufficient to observe that, upon a careful consideration of all the evidence, these charges are not deemed to be sustained in any particul ir; and it is concluded by the undersigned that the latter officer, both in the pursuit and the capture, acted in entire good faith toward the former, and cannot be held responsible for the momentary unfortunate collision which took place between the two commands."

A collision which sent two men of the fourth Michigan cavalry to the grave, but none of the Wisconsin men. If anybody has a right to complain of that collision I claim that it is ourselves, and if I felt disposed to enter into a statement of facts in that regard I am sure I could easily show that that statement of the Secretary of War is true. It is said further by the Secretary of War:

At the same time it is proper to bear testimony to the valuable services upon this occasion of the first Wisconsin cavalry and its commander, and to note that while the Michigan regiment is deemed. under the terms of the offer, to be entitled to the reward, the activity and zeal displayed in the pursuit by the other must commend it to a hardly less honorable mention than its more fortunate ally."

I have not a word to say in opposition to that.

And now one word more upon this subject. The committee have put in the name of General Wilson for an award of $3,000. I am not about to quarrel with that now as it stands, but I ask what is the reason why, when the committee put in the name of General Wilson, they did not put in the name of Colonel Minty, who commanded the Michigan cavalry, or rather the division. It was under his order that Colonel Pritchard was acting. Now, if there is anything to be given to those who were concerned in the matter, why not include Colonel Minty, who gave the order?

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. Inow call the previous question.

The previous question was seconded and the main question ordered.

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Massachusetts propose to have a vote now?