In a despatch announcing the capture of Williamsburg, May 6th,
General McClellan inquired whether he was “authorized to follow
the example of other generals and direct the names of battles
to be placed on the colors of regiments.” This gave occasion to
the following resolution, moved by Mr. Sumner.
RESOLVED, That, in the efforts now making for the restoration of
the Union and the establishment of peace throughout the country,
it is inexpedient that the names of victories obtained over our
fellow-citizens should be placed on the regimental colors of the United
States.
Mr. Hale objected to its consideration; so it was postponed.
May 13th, Mr. Wilson introduced a joint resolution to authorize
the President to permit regiments of the volunteer forces to
inscribe on their flags the names of battles in which such
regiments have been engaged; but no further action was had upon
it.
* * * * *
Mr. Sumner’s resolution excited comment at the time. The
_National Intelligencer_ remarked:--
“Now that public attention has for the first time been
called to the subject, we presume there will be on the
part of many an instinctive approval of the grounds on
which Senator Sumner condemns the custom thus originated
and practised by ‘other generals.’ … When the Union is
restored and peace has been reëstablished, we take it that
the regimental colors of the United States will preserve
no trace either of Union _victories_ or Union _defeats_.
The name of ‘Springfield,’ in Missouri, would otherwise
perpetually remind us of the unhappy fall of Lexington in
that State.”
An excellent citizen of New York, Alfred Pell, wrote that
“exactly what Congress should do with base Secession standards
and flags was pointed out by Mrs. Brownrigg, who
“‘whipped two female ’prentices to death,
_And hid them in the coal-hole_.’”
Other testimony was from an undoubted authority, being
none other than Lieutenant-General Winfield Scott, in his
autobiography. After quoting the famous resolution which Rufus
King laid upon the table of the Senate, February 18, 1825,
fifteen days before he finally left that body, which he calls
“a benign resolution,” to the effect, that, as soon as the
remnant of the national debt should be discharged, the net
proceeds of the whole of the public lands should constitute a
fund for Emancipation, the Lieutenant-General proceeds:--
“The resolution stands a national record. Here is
statesmanship, farsightedness.… Here is magnanimity,
considering the hostility of the South on account of Mr.
King’s powerful resistance to the admission of Missouri
into the Union with Slavery. Here is a Christian’s revenge,
returning good for evil. All honor to a great deed and a
great name!.…
“I place in juxtaposition with the foregoing a kindred
sentiment that gleamed in the same body on a more recent
occasion.
“It had been proposed, without due reflection, by one
of our gallant commanders engaged in the suppression
of the existing Rebellion, to place on the banners of
his victorious troops the names of their battles. The
proposition was rebuked by the subjoined resolution,
submitted by the Hon. Mr. Sumner, May 8, 1862.”