Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Rousseau And Grinnell. [N.Y. Times, July 22, 1866]

Rousseau And Grinnell.

Mr. Raymond's Remarks in the House of Representatives, July 17, 1866, on the Assault of Hon. L.H. Rousseauupon Hon. J.B Grinnell.

From the Congressional Globe.
"...Now Pennybaker was informed by Rosseau of the probable assault, but there is nothing whatsoever to show that hewas invited there for the purpose of taking any part in the affair or in any other capacity than as a witness of the assault. Col. Pennbaker has been in the army and was in the habit of carrying arms, and he testifies that on hearing of this contemplated assault he went to his room and took a pistol and came with it to the House. With the exception of that single incident, there is not a shadow of suspicion that anybody was informed by Gen. Rousseau of his intended assault upon the member from Iowa.

Col. Grigsby, who was the second party present who is named here, testifies in answer to Gen. Roussuau's questions as follows:

Q.--I ask you if anything had ever occured between you and myself which led you to believe that the thing was to take place?

A.--Nothing whatsoever, I only arrived in the city a day or two before. I had not seen Gen. Rousseau until I saw him at the Capitol since 1862, when we were in the army together, and I only was with him three minutes before we went outat the door.

Q.--Did I even know you were present on the portico until you came up to me?

A.--I had no reason to suppose you did at all. I was following Col. Pennybaker. I supposed you were running to get into a car. I never dreamed of anything of the sort occuring.

I read further from his testimony: By Mr. Banks:

Q.--Do you ever carry arms upon your person?

A.--Yes, Sir.

Q.--Were you armed on this occasion?

A.--I had a small Deringer pistol in my pocket.

Q.--How long had you had that?

A.--I had carried it ever since I left the army. I do not suppose it has been out of my pocket in twelve months.

By Mr. Rossuea:

Q.--You did not have it with you for this particular occasion?

A.--No, Sir; for I did not know any such occasion. The condition of society has been such in our town that it would not be safe to be unarmed. It is rather the exception than the rule for gentlemen not to carry arms, especially one who has been in the Federal Army.

Q.--I understand you to say distinctly that you had no knowledge or intimation that anything of this sort was to occur?

A.--Not the slightest. I was very much surprised when I saw you raise your hand, and I had no idea who you were striking.

But it is said that Col. Pennybaker told Col. Grigsby of this affair, and that in consequence the latter was there. That, Sir, is negatived distinctly by the declaration of Col. Grigsby himself, in reply to a question by Mr. Wilson.

Q.--You stated that Col. Pennybaker came up with you?

A.--Yes, Col. Pennybaker went over to my room to take a drink with me. He was talking about matters, and said he must go to the House. I told him I would go with him if he had no objections.

And in a subsequent part of the testimony he states that what he came for was to see Mr. Harding, of Illinois, a member of the House, and that he simply went out with Pennybaker because he supposed he was going.

Q.--Did any one else ever intimate to you after that time that probably he would assault Mr. Grinnell?

A.--No, Sir; I never heard anything of the case until the day it occured.

Q.--When you followed Mr. Rousseau from the rotunda that day was it with the expectation of any such occurence?

A.--He seemed to pass me without answering, and I followed him out more to know what was the matter.

Q.--Then when you followed Mr. Rouseau out you had no thought of a collision?

A.--No, Sir; none at all.

By the Chairman: Q.--Did you have an interview with Col. Pennybaker that evening or that day with reference to this transaction?

A.--Not until afterward.

Q.--Did it strike you at the moment there might be some personal difficulty, and was that the reason for your following?

A.--No; it was not for that reason at all that I followed him. I followed him for the express purpose of knowing whetherhe was going to New-York.

That is all there is about those three men. Col. Pennybaker was told that there might be a collision, and came up. As to the other two parties, the testimony of every witness--uncontradicted, undoubted, not a shadow of suspicion thrown upon it--tends to show that they were there accidentally. Why, then, it may be asked, were they armed? Simply, as they have already have explained, because it was their custom to be armed. But why, it may be asked, was nobody else armed? If any one will tell me what reason he has for supposing that nobody else was armed, then I may think it worth while to answer that question. It must be recollected that out of the fifteen or twenty persons who, according to the testimony, were present, these three and no others were singled out aand examined on that point. But I think gentlemen understand pretty well that it has become quite fashionable--quite too fashionable--a fashion much "more honored in the breach than in observance," to carry arms on the person. These three men did it and were detected. How many more did it and were not detected it is not for me to say. But I submit that, whatever may be the disposition by the House of these gentlemen themselves, whatever view the House may take of their conduct, there is nothing whatever in this evidence to show that they were there by procurement of Gen. Rousseau--nothing whatever to show that they knew aught of his purposes; that he had lifted a finger or done a thing to have them there at that particular time; and the coincidence which the gentlemen from Iowa referred to yesterday is simply acoincidence, and nothing more....
Note: The whole article is well worth reading as it provides detailed summaries of various assaults and acts of violence committed by our [supposed] 'representatives' throughout the years....



Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home