approachable they were placed above all responsibility and all law! The selection of one of them was a guarantee to any act which they might indorse! They were appointed by the President and the Secretary of the Navy, and their conduct is not to be questioned!
What does the honorable Senator himself say, who is the chairman of the committee? He says he has no doubt that it was perfectly just and right that they should do—what? That they should retire, furlough, and drop, just as they did. From what do you suppose he deduces that fact? Why, he says that the year before he made a calculation himself—not being an officer of the navy, not being personally acquainted with the navy, living at Pensacola, where a few ships touched annually—and that out of one hundred whom he marked, ninety-nine were dropped or retired. Do you think there had never been any conclave sitting here, ordaining who should be dropped or retained, long before the bill was passed—dropping men, not because they were inefficient, but because their places were supposed to be necessary either to members of the board, or to friends and relatives who were to be promoted by the removal, retiring, or dropping of these gentlemen? Is it fair that men should thus be stricken down with every evidence of interest on the part of those who did the act? Should the country be thus essentially injured without redress? Is there to be no justice, no sympathy, nothing but taunts and insolence to the unfortunate, and those who are stricken down without demerit?
Sir, the honorable Senator, the chairman of the committee, spoke of officers who were dropped, and officers who were disrated, occupying a place in the gallery—audiences by prearrangement—when I spoke. I believe it was repeated by the Senator from Delaware [Mr. Clayton], though it is not to be found in his speech, that the ladies of those officers were here. What a high crime on the part of men who have been stricken down and dishonored!
Mr. Mallory. The Senator does not mean to misrepresent me, I know, but I desire to call his attention to the fact that I made no such remark. Although I have never seen the notes of what I did say on the occasion to which he alludes, and never read the report, I am confident that he will not find that I alluded to any officers furloughed, retired, or dropped, being in the galleries. I did say that when I saw the galleries, on the occasion referred to, I knew what was to come. That was my remark. I did not refer to any officers being there.
Mr. Houston. I suppose the honorable chairman of the Naval Committee means that the whistle was to come. I did not intend that at the time myself, so that he knew more than I did. I perceive that was a misfortune for me. I wish I had never learned to whistle [laughter], but I might have learned to blow a trumpet. Trumpeting and whistling were coupled together in the letter to Thorburn, and I might have illustrated it very well without whistling, by blowing a trumpet. [Laughter.]
If the distinguished Senator did not refer to that, the Senator from Delaware did. Have men no right to entertain anxiety for their sullied honor, for their blighted prospects, for their dishonored name? May not the partners of their woes and joys—the mothers of their children—the companions of their cares—who feel interested in their honor, be permitted to sympathize with their sorrows? To forbid this would be worse than the worst despotism. It is a tyranny that chains the mind, and renders the freedom of limbs a reproach to the possessor. What woman would not feel for a husband—she whose anxious
