Newspaper Page Text
THE DAILY SUN
Office in the Sun Building, West
fide qf Broad fired. Second Door South ttf
Alabama,
New Advertisement* always found
on First Page; Local and Business Notices
on Fourth Page.
politioal prospects! Cannot hoaoot m< n,
throughout the land, be brought together
upon a common platform of honesty In
politics, as well iu» in dollars and cento?
There are important movements ju;
ahead! Cato.
Mr. Stephen* and “Law and
Order.”
We publish in full, the decisions of the
Supreme Court; also the daily “Pro-
©endings” of the Court, and keep the
“Order of Business” standing in our
eolunraa. _ *f I
Agesu f«rTli« >■■)
Thomas N Honan, Thomsavtllo. Ga.
jAUm ALUl Burra, Knoxville, Teuu.
DAT* Bill, Athena. (H.
Jon T. Bodkbts, Atlanta. Oa
J. L. Weight, Woodstock, Ga.
J. Q. Ca*i»weix, Thomson, Ga.
H. a Kamil tom, Dalton, Ga.
W. a Dana. Jr., Xatoaton, Ga
TArran, Karr k Co., WhIt* Plains. Green Co., Oa
J. L. hOTB, Chattanooga, Tenn.
J. C. Pahram, LaGrange, Ga,
U. A. Taehxdob. TbomMvlllo. Ga.
X, O. William*, Union Point
Change of Osar Subscription Price
We uk attention to onr new term* of
•ubscrfption in the flret column on our
it* ■—e.
•lmataC.pt.. of Ik. ■» K.r f.le ml tlu
Osaalcr.
DAILY... • Cent*
WEEKLY
Thursday Morktbo 8etthb«b 28.
CatoH Letter.
We cell the attention of our readers to
day specially to the letter of Cato, from
Washington. The disclosures he makes
are of a very important character. Wo
have personally no knowledge of the facts
■feted by him. but from our knowledge
of 4 the writer, we take it for granted that
he feels well assured of being able to sus
tain by proof all his allegations! It is
with onr oonftdenoe in hia judgment, in
tegrity and aenae of justice in this par
ticular, that we give his letter to the pub
lic. It is certuinly time for the honest
masses of the people, the toiling tax pay
ers everywhere, duly to oonsider whether
they are being diiftted by the corrupt
ring of political tricksters, into whose
hands they have fallen. A. H. 8.
Tc-day wo lay before our readers the
following correspondence, in which they
may take some interest. It is copied
from the Constitutionalist, of Augusta, Oa.
The letter of ‘ Law and Order,” ad
dressed to Mr. Stephens, apjieared in
that paper of the 21st inst. Hia response
appeared in the suwc paper of the 34th,
We shall continue the republication of
this correspondence in The Sun, as it
progresses. It is directly upon the vital
issues of the day:
From the Augusta (Ga.) Constitutionalist, September
Slat. 1872.
To lion. A. H. Stephens: Dear Hir—
You will doubtless pardon the liberty
the writer proposes to take, of address
ing you through the medium of the press,
when he aunts you that, though he has
not always concurred with you in politi-
cal sentiment or action, lie lias neverthe
less been a constant admirer of your gr*at
genius and power and patriotism for
many years—indeed, ever since he first
heard you on the hustings at Spring Hill
in Richmond county, when you were a
younger man by thirty years than you
now are. Be assured, my dear sir, thai
nothing short of a profound conviction
that the role you are now performing in
the drama of our national politics must
result in serious detriment to Southern
interests, by preventing Democratic su
with you, and you and they will have for
your compensation the reflection that
you defeated your party and gave a new
lease of power to Radicalism, liy per
sistence in an unwise policy, alreauy con
demned by the people, you will at least
establish, beyond question, your right to
be called Bourbons, since it was one of
their peculiarities “never to learn any
thing.” Your course, sir, in view of
your conservative antecedents, has much
astonished and pained the people. The
Democracy are surprised to And one of
your usual caution and forecast lea-ling
sion, when the voice of reason was
hushed in the impending fury of the
hour. You both did your whole duty
heroically to the Southern cause, while
it struggled in vain for independence,
aud wL< :» the struggle was ended, you
were both regarded by your people as
“Great men Htmggl.ug iu t'»c storm* <>f fate,
And greatly falling with a fulling State.”
That you both have acted conscien
tiously in the course you have respec
tively pursued since the war, is not ques
tioned. That you and all other Southern
men and politicians who acted with you
the van of a bitter assault upon your own just before the war, have acted outside of
premacy in the Union for years to come,
could induce the writer to suggest ob
jections to the political course ot a man
like yourself, who is more endeared to
the people by the goodness of his large
heart than by the admitted brilliancy and
grasp of his intellect.
No man cun escape the v-onsequenees
of his own prominence. One of these
oonsequene.es is his liability to public
criticism. You, sir, have won your way
to the front rank of statesmen in this
country. From this elevated stand point
you could calmly defy a party malignity
which sought by means of the Htn
amendment to consign you to powerless
Won]* of encouragement greet
us from every quarter—not only in ap
proving letters from nearly every State
in the Union, fyft ift long lists of sub-
uoribers daily received.
We have the strongest evidence that
the of the people eveiy where are
in earnest, and that there is "life iu the
old land yet."
party friends who differ in opinion from
you touching the true p >licy of the party
at this time concerning the amendments
--a time when they are engaged in a
deadly struggle to defeat the enemies of
the Constitution and the country, and
they are forced to exclaim, “J9Itu Bruit'!"
They cannot see, as you do, that Andrew
Johnson, as President, had the right to
call us in convention and require the abol
ishment of slavery, and because we con
sented to it, it was, therefore, constitu
tionally and rightfully abolished. They
can’t perceive that the reconstruction of
Andrew Johnson as President is one whit
less a usurpation than that of the Con
gress; indeed, it is most plain to them
that he had no power in the premises
whatever. They cannot see, as you do,
how they can upon principle accept the
situation as to the 13th amendment, and
refuse to do it os to the 14tb and 15th. —
Their idea is, that all were alike the off
spring of usurpatory and unjust interfer
ence with the righto of the sovereign
States. Yet they nave l>een adopted in
a method acceptable to the powers that
be, aud have been proclaimed anil ever
since acted upon and recognized as parts
of the Constitution. Instead of the peo
ple being counselled to nullify them by
the mere election of a President pledged
to ignore them, their opinion is that the
people should everywhere recognize and
obey them until they themselves see
proper, in a legitimate way, to repeal or
moaify them.
The people alone have jurisdiction of
this question. You are not understood
to hold that the Federal Government at
the close of the war had the cdKstitution-
al right to compel the abolishment of
slavery. If not, could your mere accp-
tauce of the wrong make it right, nor yet
would the acceptance by a “constitution
al constituency” give it the wanting elc-
aEffiry. v.',.”." — “»
tirement than all jour peraecutora, aud recognise and indorse this reasoning
would have wielded as a retired sage an "
WASHINGTON OORHESPON-
DENCE.
Letter fro Ml Cato.
Startling Disclosures.
WASBnroTow, September 22, 1871.
The publio press in this city sociuh to
be in a curious condition. I except the
Sunday papers, and a morning ami eve
ning prnnella, for the reason that I never
4oe any of them. The Chronicle was es
tablished during the war, by that incom
parable patriot, “Colonel” John W.
Forney. He made it pay'handsomely
dnring the Presidency of tbo “Martyr.”
Subsequently, howovor, somohow the
cash Account exhibited a prepondcronco
of big flgnres on tbo wrong side, and ho
magnauimoualy sold out to an at- oh J
of the Senate, (a Mr. Mouis), who
forth* ith showed his teeth in an anti
Orant direction. It was one of the won
ders of the world hereabouts at the time
where the purchase money Came from; if,
indeed, it were not merely nominal. No
one impeded Mr. Sumner, nor Mr. Carl
Sobara, nor Mr. Trumbull, nor any of
the other expectants of the next Demo
cratic uomiuatioii for tbo Presidency, of
contributing a red oent, Iu the t’-st
plant', they are sll too pure, holiest, and
abovc-aboord, to think of such a tl ug.
Iu the second piaoe, they are all parsi
monious to a proverb; mid thirdly, and
lastly, nod oonclusivelj. thoy are known
to lie as poor as snakes in March.
Under these circumstances, it was with
mors woadsr still, (if wonders may he
said to have degrees of comparison), that
the public read a recent announcement
that the Chronicle had passed into the
hands ot that other huge patriot, ex-
OorsODer Holden, of North Carolina I—
When this worthy son ot the South,
(who, if my reoolleotion serves, was one
of the “original" secessionists), came t >
this city, he was minus the dimes to pay
his way comfortably. He paid a viait to
New York, andy tuitn lime seeured a suf
ficiency of money to get Morris out of
hie pecuniar y scrape I I have it from a
good source that his feigned loyrity, how
ever dexterously put in market, has failed
utterly to affect him of the cigar!
Hut, where did the money come from f
This has become a National question of
the gravest importance. It ia known
that Tweed, Connelly A Co., established
the Patriot newspaper in this city, under
reetridioiu as iu id jnUitical course. It is
an acknowledged stipendiary of those
sharpers, and at any moment may lie
stopped at their behest. How mildly the
Patriot deals, therefore, with these ras
cals f For every dollar they stole, bodi
ly, it shows a counter dollar stolen by the
other wing of the same financial oonfed-
«raoj—but not a woid of condemns lion
This washing of one hand with the
other, ia not an invention of the Tamma
ny Bing. Hut the eabsidising of public
presses upon both sides it.' And now,
probably comes in the information that
1 am enabled to give in this very import
ant letter. It ia that IlMen got
Ms money fo nek*. Me CAroni-
eI* from the Radical ailjuncd qf
the Democratic Tammany King. So we
see that the Metropolitan press employed
|) abase and recriminate each other, and
thereby throw dost in the eves of the
publio, are owned by one and the same
Indy of man, who, for conveaieooe rake,
divide themselves into Demoetaii^ad
Badioal coteries, the better tp fleooe the
country of millions upon millions. The
eamraon ground spun which those vil
lains meet ia the "New Departure,” a
molt superlative humbug, designed from
the beguining to cover up frauds, politi
cally fundamental aud fundamentally
fraudulent and felonious. I hope these
truthful and alarming disclosure*—none
ot the implicated parties will dare deny
them—may have sone weight with the
thinking men all over the country. No
man can be called honest in s pecuniary
sense, v;ho proposes to avail himself of
.’•■and and knavery in furthe-ing iu
influence more poUint than all their un
patriotic and anti-Bepublican machina
tions combined. This would have been
a triumph worthy of yonr post record.—
Those who love Republican principles
aud institutions (and four-fifths of tbo
American people are still devoutly at
tached to them) would ever have listened
with deep respect to the utterances from
“Liberty Hull,” and if the effect should
uut have been as immediate as on ardent
patriotism could desire; yet like bread
cost on the waters the return would hove
been certain after many days. Sir, have
you not lowered your crest iu quitting
the exalted position of a retired political
sago and statesman which was so univer
sally accorded to you tnat even the North
ern press, without distinction of party,
copied idl your outgivings on important
public questions, to mingle in the petty
strife of tbo daily press 1
That your motives oro pure and your
purposes patriotic, no one will a moment
doubt, and still, as Homer main some
times, the course you aeem to have
marked out for yourself in the present
juncture of affairs may not bo the wit ei *
and best for all that! Tbo pnrpc
then, of this Jotter, or perhaps letters
(for I find I shall not say all 1 wish lo
iu ouo letter,) is to show, first, that your
policy is wrong under all our summin'-
iuga, aud not in accord w’tli your action
and policy on other important questions
ill which you ti ok conspicuous part. Aud
secondly, - to appcol to you, by your past
record and yom patriotism to desist from
your war on political friends, who,
while they cannot agree with your pres
ent policy aud views, nevertheless desire
to tw earnest oo-lal>ororu with you in all
well-timed and judicious efforts iu he
hall of constitutional liberty.
Hinoo you have become editor, yoi
have impressed the public mind with the
cuuviction that yon hove assumed as your
special mission the defeat of what you
are pleased to atyle “New Departure.”
When it is remembered that the New
Departure, properly oud truthfully por
trayed, simply represents a prudent pol
icy" deemed essential to the future tri
umph of the great Democratic party of
the nation,and is sanctioned by the ablest,
purest aud wisest of its leaders, and
heartily susbiiued, os it ia believed, by
the almost unanimous voice of the
Nntioual Democracy of the North, it Cl
but bo confessed von have taken upon
yourself a Horculiun task. \\ bile this
may indicate both yonr sincerity of
viction, and your coufideuco in yonr
own power to crush wlint you couocivo
to be an orrer, it must nevertheless pro
voke surprise and chagrin that so illustri
ous a foonian should be willing to thrust
his glittering steel at the heart* of his
own frieuds, and seek to spill their blood.
Wuat, then, is this polioy of the New
Departure, of which you are so unsparingly
denunciatory, and that causes you to per
secute it* friends even unto strange citios?
Let the question be unswerod first by
showing what it is not. Aud first, it is
not what it is so often stated to lie in Tire
Atlanta Bun—“a new name for Radical
ism”—nor ia it a pretext for sliding into
the Republican party, as you often insin
uate, it you do not distinctly charge it.
Nor yet is it on endorsement or approval
of the principles and policy of the Radi
cal party, which resulted in tho adoption
of the [fourteenth and fifteenth amend-
incuts and the unconstitutional laws.
Tho Departurists, so-called, neither ap
prove nor endorse as constitutionally
adopted, even though a compliance with
form aud manuers may have been hud,
auy of the recent amendments, including
the tbbteentli. Still they accept them
all as accomplished fact*, as proclaimed
aud recognised part* of the organio law,
and sav they are to continue to lie recog-
uized and obeyed until tho people,
who alone hava the power, see proper, in
a legitimate way, to repeal them. The
thirteenth will uever he disturbed, since
it was most solemnly acquiesced in and
agreed to by the whites, the masters and
owner* at the time of its presentation to
the Southern States for their acceptance
and for the additional reason that the in
stitution of slavery could nevor again be
desirable in the South. The fourteenth
and fifteenth amendment* have also been
added, ns jtho Now,Departuri»ta conceive,
in violution of the spirit of tho Coustitu-
tion.
Still they have been Uiu* addl'd, anil
there is now no escape from obedience to
them. Bat you say, this ia a departure
from tho platform of tbe pai ty in 1868.
Grant it Bat that platform \>iw ao ex
treme in it* deinamU that tbo author of
tho Broad head letter, which letter caused
the insertion of tho weakest plank in it,
has since, with hia own hands, ripped it
up and thrown it aside. General Bhur
and the party tried that plonk thorough
ly, and found it would not do. and henoe
discarded it as an element of mischief,
and tending ooly to unite the enemies of
the true Democratic theory of govern
ment. If you [lerhist in Htauding on it
still, its capucit- may prove ample to
hold the minority who will stand there
when applied to the fourteenth and fif
teenth amendments, as is evident from
the frequency with which you quete the
Swayze speech” of your brother, Judge
Step iens. With his characteristic terse-
neaaand nervo is force lie asks, “Does the
acceptance of a lie make it the truth?” I
answer, No, never 1 But to deny the ex
istence of the lie ns an accomplished fact
is, if not in itself an untruth, at least a
most untenable absurdity. But again, if
a fraund upon your rights of property
was enacted, and without the shadow of
constitutional right, when you were com
pelled to accept the emancipation of
your slaves, tell us of your acceptance of
it by u “constitutional constituency,” or
otherwise, was equivalent to an endorse
ment of the policy and tho modus ope
rand! ? If yes, thou indeed are you con
sistent in saying that those who now ac
cept tho fourteenth and fifteenth amend
ments as parts of the organio law to be
obeyed until repealed necessarily endorse
their policy ana the modus ot their adop
tion. But if no, then indeed is your
logic lame, though you bo ft sound
logician.
That you should be bo confident of the
orreotneHs of your own positions, and ho
distrustful, if not iutollerant, of the
views of others, can but excite comment,
in view of some few prominent mistakes
of judgment occurring in your political
history, which have not eutiivly faded
from tlio memory of your constituents.
You sustained the policy of the Missouri
restriction iu your bold advocacy of the
compromise measures of 1850, and you
even found iu your support of it consti
tutional authority for Congress to ex
elude slavery from o ic half of-the Ter
ritories of the nation—upon the princi
ple of fair divisiou, as you said. You
thought, and so declared that these
measures would give peace and
.iniet to the country. But they
did not; and afterward you found it neces
sary to incorporate iu the Kansas-Nebras-
ka bill the popular sovereignty features.
And this you ardently proclaimed os tbe
balm for all our woes flowing from the
slavery agitation upon every new acqui
sition of territory. This was to be the
mugio wand which should ever after give
repose to tho public mind on this trou
blesome question. But did it do it ? I
leave the dismantled, impoverished, aud
oppressed South to answer. Later when
wo had seceded, and the Government of
the Confederate States had been set up
at Montgomery, you uttered, iu your fa
mous “Corner stone” speech, the decided
opiniou that the “corner stone” of the
new Government was in tho recognition
of the idea of the slavery, the subordina
tion, of tho negro, the inferior race;” and
you said that the United States Govern
ment, having failed to discover this great
“physical, philosophical aud moral truth,
fell when tho storm came and tho wind
blew.” And you confidently predicted a
glorious future and inevitable perpetuity
for the young government os a logical se
quence of this well selected principle as
its corner stone 1 While all Southern
heirts sympathize with you in the sad
reooUeotiou of tho perished hopes and
prospects of that memorable era, it would
perhaps be noedleas, if not unkind, to
ask you whore is the corner stone now ?
Other errors of judgment you have
committed, and on important questions
and occasions; but none of these are re
ferred to iu a censorious spirit. Far, far
from it; but with the sole object to in
voke at your hands a more charitable es
timate of the opinious of others, who, if
they should prove to bo wrojg in their
judgments, would nevertheless claim (as
you doubtless do and can in reference to
your mistakes) that they were honestly
mistaken. Tnere are some few men, sir,
in the world who, by the very glare aud
brilliancy of their superior minds, dazzle
us to admiration, while their bold and
“uureigned ambition” tills us with fear.
Such au oue is your distinguished corn-
peer aud neighbor, who is a Hercules in
intellect and a very Boanerges of indis
crctiou. You, with all the powers of a
full grown mental manhood have not been
wanting heretofore in that essential ele
ment of a truly great man, and you are
therefore installed in the popular heart
Pardon mo, if I again suggest that when
such a man seems to have lost sight of
prudential ballast, and lends his power
ful influence (unwittingly, of course) to
the widening of the breach between the
Northern aud Southern States by inten
sifying the feelings of estrangement pro
duced by the late conflict of the arms, it
will produce regrets which, if rcspectfu 1 -
ly silent, will be in fact none tho less
keenly felt Let me warn you, air, not
to mistake respectful forbearance for
acquiescence or endorsement. The
Democracy neither acquiesces in nor ap
prove* of your extreme policy.
When the war cloL Xi and tho flag of
the Confederacy was furled, the people
of tho State looked more particularly to
you and to Herschel V. Johnson to guide
them out of the surrounding ruin to a
poaition of safety and repose. You both
had led the opixwition to secession, and
had only surrendered to tho voice of pao-
your legitimate role, is quite as manifest.
Where secession failed, without gratifi
cation, which, as true sods of the South
pou could not feel, yet with a just regard
'or your antecedent position of devotion
to the Union and redress of wrongs in
side of it as Douglass Democrats, you
could and should liave led in favor of ac
quiescence, in obedience to the laws and
government of the ruling authorities of
the nation. This course, adopted by the
Union men and Douglass Democracy of
the South would have restored quiet at
home, disarmed Northern enmity and sus
picion and resulted in a speedy recon
struction, which would have been unmar
red by any of the offensive and uncon
stitutional legislation and policy which
now embarrass and insult the Southern
people. Neither extreme and ultra posi
tions on the one hand, and sullen silence
on the other, become men occupying
your's and Governor Johnson’s positions
in a trying emergency like the present.
Law and Order.
From tbe August* (G*.) Con*tltution»li*t. September
•nth, 1871.
Liberty Hall,
CllAWFORDVILLE, Ga.
22d September, 1871.
To the Editor of the Constitutionalists.
Dear Sir: In the issue of your paper
of yesterday appeared a letter addressed
to me, over the signature of “ Law and
Order," which unquestionably deserves,
though it may not i>ositively require, a
response from me. You will, therefore,
I trust, extend the courtesy of allow
ing me to make such reply as I deem pro
per, through the medium of your col
umns.
The writ r of the communication re
ferred to is certainly laboring under quite
as great a mistake in relation to the sub
ject of the “New Departure,” and the
objects aimed at by it, as he is in relation
to those “few prominent mistakes of
judgment occurring” in my public life
to which he specially alludes, though in
“no censorious spirit.”
It may be proper first to set him right
in matters of fact toi ;hiDg those “mis
takes of judgment” on my part, mention
ed by him, and then set him right in like
matters of fact in regard to the “New De
parture."
1. This writer says to me, that I “sus
tained the policy of the Missouri restric
tion in (my) bold advocacy of the com
promise measures of 1850;" and that I
found in my “support of it constitutional
authority for Congress to exclude slavery
from one-half of the Territories of the
nation—upon the principle of a fair divis
ion, os (I) said.”
Now “Law and Order” will pardon mo
for saying to him, that he himself is
greatly mistaken in this matter. The
compromise measures of 1850, which I
so boldly advocated, “had no restriction
whatever upon slavery, or evolution of it,
from any portion of the Territories of
the United States, (ns I should say, and
not the Notion—as this writer designates
tho Union of tl cse States), and could not,
therefore, have been advocated by me,
on any such grounds or principle as he
secniH to suppose.
2. This writer says that I afterwards
“found it nocersary to incorporate in the
Kansas-Nebraska Bill the ‘popular sove
reignty’ features." To this charge of
“mistake in judgment” I need only
mind “Law aud Oruer” that no new popu
lar sovereignty features were incorporated
in the Kausas-Nebraska Bill—that meas
ure did nothing but carry out in good
faith—iu letter and spirV—the principle
ot Federal legislation over the Territo
ries of the Union, which was established
in 1850.
3. This writer is equally mistaken him
self in what he says about tho “Corner
Stone” speech. That speech clearly set
forth that there was no difference be
tween the Constitutions of the United
States and Confederate States, so far as
the ^subordination" of tho African race
was concerned, the same “cornor stone"
was in each. Whatever “strong hopes”
for “peaoe and quiet,” resulting from
the principle established in 1850, and
carried out in the Kansas-Nebraska Bill
in 1854, were ever expressed by me,
“Lnc and Older" should recollect that
they were announced with the distinct
and emphatic declaration that they were
founded entirely upon the express con
dition that the territorial principle ostab
fished in 1850 should be adhered to, and
not “departed” from. This tho record
abundantly shows. If this principle was
afterwards* “departed" from, either by the
North or South, I was certainly in no
way responsible for either tho ^depar
ture" or its consequences.
Moreover, howover atro jgly I may have
expressed my hopes for the success of the
cause of secession, after it was resorted
to as a mode of redress against the breach
of faith on the part of certain Northern
States of the Federal Uniou, yet iu that
same “Corner Stone” speech the grounds
upon which those hones rested are express
ly and cloarly stated, and if there was a
“departure" from those grounds, I am
certainly in no way responsible for it, nor
justly chargeable, as far as I can perceive,
with a “mistake in judgment” in the en-
tertainme it of the hopes expressed, and
as expressed. So much for my past
“mistakes in judgment” referred to.
Now, as to the “New Departure,"
called. Either I am, or “Lawaiui Older”
is greatly nvstaken “in judgment,” not
only as to its character, but as to its aims
and objects.
My opposition to it arises from a very
different understanding of its nature and
meaning from that entertained by “Law
aud Order.**
He seems to think that it does not mean
to approve or indorse in any way the
“fraudulent amendments." Now, I say
to him briefly, and in all frankness, that
whenever the authors and concocters, as
well as all supporters, of this movement
shall sav in plain terms that they do not
moan by it to affirm that the 14th and
15th amendments have been constitution
ally adopted, and are therefore not “framl-
ulent" but rightful parts of the organio
law of the Union—not hereafter to be
assailed or qvestioned—then my opposi
tion to it will cea: 3.
No one is less disposed to make war
upon friends of any sort than I am; but,
in this instanoe, I think, if “Law and
Orthr" will take pains to inform himself
a little better, be will find that I am not
firing upou political friends when I fire
upon tho authors of this movement, or
its objects; unless he considers those as
political friends whose policy is to get
the general approval and sanction of the
Democracy of the Union of the riglfui-
hcss of tho most flagitious usurpations of
power in tho history of representative
Government ! Usurpations openly
avowed by the perpetrators of them,
whenfthey boldly proclaimed that their
revolutionary acts were “outside of the
Constitution,"
notice in detail; as, for instance, what he
says about General Blair’s abandoning
the principle of bis Broadhead letter ;
what he says about the “NewDeparture”
having received tho approval of the pur
est and ablest Democrats in the country,
Ac., and divers others which time will not
allow me now even to allude to.
But there is one other point in his let
ter which I cannot omit a reply to, heavy
as tho pressure upon my time is. He
aays the Democracy neither acquiesces in
nor approves of (my) extreme policy.
Now my reply to “Law and Order* on
this is, let us underfitand each other. As
he intimates that this is but one of
series of letters he intends to
address to me upon tho general
subjects embraced in the one before me,
I would most respectfully ask of him to
state in the next of his epistles what is
the “extreme policy” I advocate to
which he refers ? Is it extreme to say
that these amendments were not constitu
tionally carriedt la it extreme to say that
they w ere neither proposed nor ratified
as provided for in the Constitution ? Is
not this au admitted truth by every just
man in the country, North aud South ?
Is it extreme to maintain that what was
done “outside of the Constitution was
revolutionary null ami void? Has not
every Democrat in the country—the
wises, pu eat, and ablest—so declared at
the polls ? Is it extreme to urge upon
the people everywhere to yield obed en-
ce to these usurpations as defacto acts of
tyranny, so long as they are enforced by
those clothed with power to execute
them; but never to sanction them as de
jure or rightful parts of the fundamental
laws of the Union ? Is it extreme to hold
that the power of rectifying these abuses
of the high trust of office remains in the
People of the Stales, aud that this rectifica
tion can be effected by them peacefully,
and in a constitutional mode and manner
at the polls'l Is there 'any thing violent
or against “law and order” in the doc
trine so held ?
I aim to be a thorough “law and order
man in every step of policy I recommend
for the rescue of the liberties of this
country ;and if in any thing I propose I am
extreme I wish to know in what. I do
hold that whatever is unconslutioually
done by Congress is “nult and
void,** and should be so pronounced
by the courts. Is there a man in the
United States—even Senator Morton
himself—who will dare dispute this be
fore an intelligent audience in any State
in the Unipn ? Am I extreme in holding
this position ?
I go further, and maintain that, in the
trial of persons prosecuted for a viola
tion of acts of Congress, founded upon
these amendments, which were carried
by admitted usurpations, that the juries
are judges of tho validity of the law, as
well as the judges. Is this an extreme
position ? Can any man deny or dis
pute its correctness? Have I recom
mended any course or policy for a recti
fication of the usurpations of Congress
which is not founded upon a strict ob
servance of “law aiut order" throughout?
Nay, more: have I recommended any
policy which, if pursued, will not most
certainly bring about a complete rectifica
tion of all these usurpations, after a
while at least, unless the Peoples of the
United States are themselves ripe for
Despotism?
These are plain questions and I wish
them answered. I do not myself believe
that the Peoples of this country are at
all ready for Imperialism,or Monarchy m
any shape, and that all they want for the
maintenance of the Right, is to see how
they can save and preserve their liber
ties in a constitutional mode and manner,
and without any violation of “Law and
UJatrljee, lerorlrp, <?tc.
FALL TRADE—1871.
SHARP & FLOYD,
Jewelers aud Silver.Smiths,
FINE WATCHES
(If Sterling Time-Keeping Qualified, Elegantly dated.
AN
STOCK,
New 8tyle« Pearl, Coral, Roman Gold 8eta, Bracelets,
, Shirt and Sleeve Buttons.
Beautiful Opera, Vest and Guard Chain*.
UNEQUALLED DIAMOND
Embracing »« VERY FINE JITgUEgL
Sterling Nilverwure lor* Wedding Present*, En
graved without Charge in Superior Style.
Fine Plated Ware, French, Marble and Bronze Clock*, Wedding Fans, Artistic Bronzes, etc. We aro
Agenta for the
DIAMOND SPECTACLES,
The Beat Aid to Impaired Sight Known. We give personal attention to
Repairing of Jewelry and Watches,
Aud have the Finest Workmen in the City.
We take Pleasure in Showing our Storo aud Stock to all. *
IfV Offer Greatir Inducements than Heretofore to Purchasers
Septl8-dtf SHARP & FLOYD.
There are many point* in the letter ot
‘Law and Order” which I should likoto
insurance Company.
Seven Per Cent. Interest Paying Plan
The Missouri Mutual Life Insurance Company
OF NT. LOUIS. MO.
JTothing- Concealed-
-Jrothlng Exaggerated,
lions Raised.
-JTo raise Expeeta-
EVER, does not depart from the old, well-tried and safe principlea, which underlie all sound Life In
surance.
It guarantees an annual dividend to Policy holders
OF SEVEN PER OENT.
On aU cash Premiums paid to the Company. This Dividend can be used
To Reduce the jtmount of the JText Premium— To Increase th
Policy ; or, Can be tPtthd awn in Cash at the End of
any Pol - Pear.
This is Realty a Se-cn per cent of JBoney at Com
pound Interest, Coupled uith the Advantages of Life Insurance.
There is no uncertainty about tbe AMOUNT of the Annual Dividends to Policy holders. It la a definite
sum, fixed in the face of the Policy, being Seven Per. Cent. Compound Interest, on tbe amount of mo
ney paid by tho Policy holder to the Company, and left in its bauda.
All Policies Non-Forfeitable After Two Full
ANNUAL PAYMENTS ARE MADE.
'rfoitiug law in adopted by tho Compan
_ . . i Premium, the cash aurrendor value o;
Policy and keeps it in forco till the Kurrendcr value ia exhausted.
If tho full annual Premium ia paid every year in cash, and al! Dividends or Interest Accumulations 1 ft
in the hands of the Company FOR NINE YEARS, the Policy will become
SELF-SUSTAININQ
, .od lump it Keif Id force for It. full .monut WITHOUT ANY F URTHER
Order.'
Aluxasdeh H. Stephens.
Xlliecellnncoits
TO THE LADIES!
Grand Display of Millinery!
J. M. HOLBROOK
LADIES’ BONNETS,
HATS, RIBBONS, AND
MILLINERY GOODS
GENERALLY,
Wliloli Is Now Hencly tor In
spection.
The moat Fashionable aud Latest Styles of Every
thing in this line can be secured at his Storo.
Competent LADY MILLINERS aro in attendance,
who will tako pleasure in showing GOODS.
FXJRSI
Hi. Slock of LADIES' FCItS 1. complete. S
hu them .t ALL PRICES, aud to iuit to .go..
LADIES' DEPARTMENT up SUM. over tt
HAT STORE, proper. wp«A*t
MERCHANTS 1
BUY
CROCKERY and GLASS
No. 47 Peachtree Street,
-FROM—
T. RIPLEY,
JMPORTEB AND JOBBER.
SO- ESTABLISHED It YEAR*, -fc*
Keeps a large stock.
Occupies THREE FLOORS—30xl» feet.
Inducements offered to cash buyers
Equal to any Market.
Atlanta. Ga.. August 2.1871. aug 5 2
To Parties Desiring to Build
eitliena of Atlanta that he Is i
He has at his command a picked set of hands, and
JO HAT c. JTH1HOLSL
OFFICE IN A1R-UNK HOUR*. PRYOR STRUCT
•ptl-fivs
LANDSBERQ’S
LUMBER YARD,
OPPOSITE GEORGIA RAILROAD DEPOT.
ATIjA nta,ga.
Sawed Sbinglee mxxe%
T .wflira. Wlxlto
Swell. Windows «*»
Ttllnrie
All Rinds ot Pressed mm
Framing lumber.
(.bil l, A. l.dinNIBlBO * 00., PropcUtorA
For all time to cc
PAYMENT.
Tlioao Advantages aro not Offorod toy any
otlier Company.
Another equitable feature in tho Company is that all its premiums taken in Georgia will be invested In
the State, to assist iu building up its own resources.
This Company is not confined in its operations to tbe Seven
su ranee upon any the well established plans that may bo desired.
For Further Information Apply to
r Cent Interest Plan, but gives in-
Cranston & Strobhart,
General Agents for Georgia,
Decatur Street. Opposite Kimball House, Atlslta, Os.
fiar&uwr*, (Etillerji, 0nns,
OHAS. WYNN
W. L. WADSWORTH, Atlanta, Oa., |
W. L. WADSWORTH & CO.,
Importers and Dealers in Hardware,
Opposite JaniOM* Bank,
September 10-ly
Whitehall Street.
ATLANTA, OA
IFJfM. JtlJtCMLME,
O. B. HOOKS*
office .bf^^rrrr’ i css
continuance oft be wme.apM-lv | ^rlffln.Qs.. May 12.1871. yL
Uniucroitn^jpnblistiing QTompann.
UNSECTIONAL, UNPARTISAN, UNPOLITICAL SCHOOL-BOOKS.
The freshest series of Text-Books published—containing the latest
results of discovery and scientific research.
Officially adopted by ilie Virginia and Georgia State Boards of education,
AND NOW LA1IQBI.Y IN USB IN
T SOUTHERN 0TA.TXI,
And in many Northern 8tat#s.
Ike Itwvemtg fufcttshmg (fa
An Association composed of many
the several Southern States, feel-
School-Books which should be en-
unpolitical, which should present
science—are now issuing a com-
Tcxt-books by the eminent schol-
whic.b are the
Cheapest, Best, and Most
of the most eminent citixens of
ing the necessity for a scries of
tirely unsectional, unpartisan, and
only the facts of history and
plete scries of School and College
0*8 and educators namyi below
Beautiful School-Books
Now published. The ** University Series” embraces
Maury’s Geographical Skimvs,
By Commodore M. F. MxuBT.of the Virginia Military Institute. A series of books which
made an era in the study of this science, and which, in 'the words of a well known and ac
complished Southern teacher, “ arc characterized by a felicity of arrangement and simple
freshness of style which must ever render them attractive to the young, and which will be
used by all who wish to teach Geography as a seknv*', as something to malps pupils think,
and not merely us an enumeration of dry facts.” ♦
Holmes’ Readers and 8pellers,
By Gkomqr F. Holmes, LL D , Professor of History and General Literature in the Uni
versity of Virginia. A series of Readers unequalled in cheapness, excellence, and typo
graphical lieauty. They arc steadily progressive in character, bright and fresh in their
selections of prose and verae, and illustrative of Southern scenes, incidents, and history.
Venable’s Arithmetical Series,
By Charles S. Venable, LL.D., Professor of Mathematics in the University of
Virginia. These books are received everywhere by intelligent tcachep with the highest
satisfaction, as being most admirably adapted for mental drill, as well as for business educa
tion. Their methods, rules, and reasoning* arc clear, distinct logical, tad comprehensive,
and the series is carefully graded throughout.
Holmes' History ot tho United States,
Bv Gkorob F. Holmes, LL.D., of the University of Virginia. It is enwftfe to say of
this admirable work, interesting, impartial, and tfurhfol, as well as pure ana graceful m
style, th:\t it is the only History of the United States which is strictly unpswtisan. It
comes down to the present date.’ Alto,
De Vere’s French Crammer, Readers, eto.,
Clldersleeve’s Latin Series,
Carter's Elements of General History,
Holmes’ English Grammars.
Leconte's Scientific Series,
Johnston’s English Classics,
Duntonlan Writing-Books, eto., etc,
Bred for o.r raw llJ.L'STRATED nUSCHIPTIVK OATAI/HICK, wMtk will to
mailed free to may teacher or school officer. It tells what teachers thiok of tfcs books, and
contains specimen pages of each.
Address UNIVERSITY PUBLISHING COMPANY,
155 SBd 167 Croshr Street, Hew York.
w
A . SL A YM AKER
GENERAL AGENT,
ATLANTA, OEOUOXA,
Drawer 19, Office: Corner Marietta and Peachtree
-V dlaasac