Newspaper Page Text
_TIIK INDEPENDENT.
SATURDAY, AUGUSTS, I**B.
J. C. GALLAHKR, Editor (fid Proprietor.
Drawing the Lines.
Having accomplished just wlmt wo not
out u|4i| Pftsiwtiiig the facta, in
the (wo e-aac-s of tbc United Htates vs.
* frown I Win. It Loo, origi-
Mtaiugr in t his conn t v in January lAt, com-
Mtamt bo tare E. O. Wsdo, United States
tJoraftriwioiier, not only to the people but
the offloads entrusted with the enforoe
tMMMf tb*- testa of the United State* in
ttefflOtn of Georgia. Our little Ikdkpen
•Mßtr, the baby journal of the State, gone
fnatateritig idmnt everywhere, tolling the
priaftl* fa plain terms what is doing, how
IN*Mur dona, sd who is doing it, and
Sbtetl rirrsated the attention of the high
Ctamoraasont officials, as still be seen by
♦ba tetter of Col. Henry P. Farrow, the
Maftott Mates Attorney for the State of
tAantffia, addressed to ns on the Sfikl last.,
mid which wo phbliah in another column
ft Wo wish to impress ft upon the minds
Hff? ftW wtede™ that we have not directly
aasnmed any of the parties referred to in
•aft articles, tatlier in these eases or in the
Ponder, ms with offloial misconduct; but
♦ft have presented the aets and doings
of A W. Stone, Assistant Attorney for the
doßtMSta*e, E, C. Wade, United States
’MjfclttrtHSUiTier, and 0. H. Freeman, Depu
ty United States Mnrnhid. We have com
pared their acts with the requirements of
the tew, tad to our mind great niffl glaring
error-shave been Committed. We want it
di st Hieti. remembered that we in no in
stance arrogate to ourself infallibility of
‘ftpinibn in reference to the law-governing
-MWwtaf fees in proceedings under the
*dtn#t , ninent of the United States, We
Cilftled the fees ftotn the statute fwe think)
we then gsve the nmounta charged
ft? Ibd abore named officers in the said
according to onr computation,
IHia mm tilt charged and received by Stone, j
Wade and Freeman amounts to within a
fraction of ten times the amount allowed
tljnAw; if we have rend tho law and their
MP* correctly If wc are not in error j
they must be. Tllen the question is: Is
the error cWßirtifttod by mistake or with
crirmintl Intention ? If by mistake, we i
Jarre celled their attention to it, and ear-'
neatly appealed to them to correct it. i
Stone, the Assistant Attorney, is ns silent
im tjio grave; not. 'a nturmtir or whisper j
dSnihh from Freeman, tho Deputy United
HtatesMnrshal, who made the figures in j
HitSISW; hiit E. C. Wade, move senli
tive but Ihr less Sensible, published in j
the S.iv : ,i■! 1 fi>rriin : ) Veir* of the 93d, a
letter, in the first paragraph of which he
to invoke the sympathy of all 6ov-!
Brirtf>iT#t?flllciftl.H Sf saving he knew when
’fffleeoptcd the position of United States
f%woi-fnncr that the cry of the people
W to “pull that man down,” and
thit :■ pi 1 ' 1 I •. M.i■
f&Stpb? wltli tbit open aud snowed object, j
Of'futtuiidation. threats and vio-1
,M preventing the enforcement of the
%#S'df the tlttitcd States, NW, we defy :
Ihifn and his win do party, including the |
au)ff, well ns tho most!
i ■' i mmate liars in the
whqle parij', Jo pdim out n single act of 1
lifirdldittiofi or threat of violence, either
>y flic* people or Tub Independent, to,
thu or any other officer from a I
of tho laws of the Unit- i
fid Shttfis. Ijfow, wo call upon him to
Make e 4 flic names of those who j
nVofted an jntehtion to intimidate him or
thrf%fmed violence to him if ho executed
''fkt' Jnws. If he fails to designate tho pur
ftpf the instance in which The Indb- !
jlflltjfivjf has done it, his charge falls to I
and iio is branded with false-!
Tjoibu. If fid will designate tlio nnm who
’aftiPmpted to intimidate him or threatened
higi with. violence, If he discharged his
AWV, w#%ye ready to help to bring him
fS; jnSiiee. These are the sentiments of;
tite tatire community, and liis statement
(Jjiat there have been efforts to intimidate 1
him and threats of violence if lie enforced
the laws has no foundation in truth. Ho !
Syhjid ho grounds for such a statement, but
imidc it as a sensational report to get Unit
tei soldiers hero ostensibly to defend
nd to enable him to enforce tho
Pit really to embolden him in Iris
i gild oppression of the people. We
have no objection to his being furnished I
■m any number of troops, for when ho, j
by misrepresentation, bad them sent, hero
before, they were utterly disgusted with
Ui* proceedings, and denounced liis acts
ts and oppressive. Sow, wlwt :
nififo we lone that is intimidating os
Ujwktiuiisg ? Just told the people what i
Ji, Stone and IVitcmiar did iu the two!
Ipk *Leo aud lirowu. If it was false it I
wgp no throat, and certainly fabehood!
shoidd iieyer irrtimidate a United Stales'
djjguJfatv. But are the statements false ?
npl.Tor if they were lie would
hut his letter is a plea |
and he
wMABP stuteprpnt, but attempta
to its force by saying that the, hilt
of costs was made out V>y C S. Freeman,
under the, direction of tlio United States
Atturney, A- W- Stone. Mr. Hezekinli
Brown iuforurs us Hurt so for as tire bills
of costs Whig made out under the diroc-i
tion of Col. .Slum, that Wade in his letter
misngjpetcnted Urn facts. He says Stone !
was not pruaeut Aud just hem we ask to
tocrecil a statement made in one of our
iunaof arkicloe on this subject. We slat- 1
ed that when Mr- iirowu paid Wude the '
♦we humbxsl and dollars that!
be CWadg) hauded Stene twenty dolhuw. ‘
TSliil* we misUtaterstPod Mr. Brow n, and
'to SL. Mime we make the cor- i
™ftrv‘"lSfcW Hays w han ho paid'
the money that Wade took out twenty dol-1
Jars from the' ot(8 TfUfiftrcd and thirty
■Utctahtad td: ‘•'Diis is Oni. tstono’sfee, ’
sad the one limwlrcfl and seventeen is
coming to me." Wude, in liis letter, suys
he got thirty dollars in one case and twenty
dollars in the other, and gave the balance. '
which was cighty-seten dollars, to the
District, Attorney uliil tlie Marshal. We
| don't know how it .was divided, guess it
was aeeeidiiig to rank, as neither wcre.en
; titled to a cent. Ifemembor, evader, we
j have never neensed these parties with
1 even a criminal intention, only stated facta.
Now, we propose to give a few more fact*
and circumstances that environs these pur
i ties, (if Wade's letft-r bo true), with diffi
-1 cutties from which it is impossible to ox
tricata themselves: Commissioner Wade
says when be took the bonds be sent them
to the clerk of the District Court at (Savan
nah. If that be true they became court
pafMUW, and by what authority dnl he
withdraw those bonds and compromise
these criminal cases that he says whs a
“bod scrape ?” And here wo introduce
Wade's deposition astound In his letter:
Ho says after the bonds were sunt to Ba
vannali that Mr. Brown commenced mak
ing propositions to him to settle the cases,
aud that Mr. lirowu offered to pay all the
costs that bod then accrued, and pay him
for all the trouble he aught be at iu effect
ing a settlement, and upon that promise
he went to work, (murk, reader, liis own
declaration;, he wont to work to compro
mise a criminal prosecution that he, him
self, declares to bo of great magnitude, for
pay. for a feo, for a reward from Mr.
Drown. Now, in this he has admitted
i that, us a judicial officer, he ogyeed to *f
| feet a compromise of these cases, with the
ussuruuce that he was to bo paid liy Mr.
Drown. Ho much for liis own testimony.
What else ? Ho says in pursuance of this
agreement, or rather, with this under
standing he weAt to work, wrote to Col.
A. W. Htone, and readily obtained bis
consent, then accompanied Mr. Brown to
Huvunnah, and with his own indefatigable
and untiring exertions Anally succeeded
in obtaining Col. Farrow’s consent. Now,
,if it is true that Wade, as a United Htutes
Commissioner, made this contract with
Mr. Brown 1m deserves credit for per
i forming it, but certainly he is not entitled
to much credit as a United Htates officer,
I into whoso hands the ruforceinent aets
were entrusted. Just hero we will intro
duce Mr. Brown’s testimony: He says ho
never proposed to pay anything but the
costs that had then accrued. Now, Col.
Wade, it may be thut yon misunderstood
Mr. Brown; wo presume you did think he
made tiio offer to pay you to effect a com
promise. Aud, for fear that you may
have some ajiprehensions that, we are seek
ing to intimidate you or threatening you
with violence, which did you do, extort
from that: quiet, up assuming, good citizen,
under pretended judicial authority, illegal
uud unjust fees and costs, or did you, as a
judicial officer of the United States, uc
ccpt liis money asr bribe ? But your tes
timony and Mr. Brown’s conflicts, which
arc to be believed. If tbe testimony closed
hero some, perhaps, would beliovo you,
and some him. But we propose to intro
duce another witness, whoso credibility
you don't dare to gainsay, who flatly con
tradicts you on (mother very material
point. That is Col. Henry V. Farrow.
You ay, “I accompanied Mr. Browu to
Savannah and succeeded iu obtaining Col.
Farrow’s consent." Listen to what Col.
Farrow says: “The cases alluded to were
never repotted to me, and Us I know noth
ing of them,” Ac, Again he says: “I ask
for information, as 1 know nothing in the
world of the matter more than I learn
from your article.” Now, Commissioner
VVodo, were you tryiug by misrepresenta
tion to get Col. Farrow into this difficulty
to take tho odium off of your shoulders, ar
has tho Colouel gone back on you ? We
have told you what he said, uud he flatly
ooutraitioto you. This is no Democratic
intimidation; this 1h no cry to pyli that
man down; this no threat of violence; this
is no prevention to tlio execution of the
laws of the United Htates; it is what Col.
Farrow, a Republican, says, not only a
Republican, but the United States Attor
ney, to whom the coses should have been
reported, and never compromised without
his consent and approval, and that should
never have been given by him until he was
thoroughly satisfied that the charges could
uot lio sustained.
| Now, we projKise to answer more spool
i finally the questions propounded to ns by
Col. Farrow, in his letter, to be found
below. And, wo propose to talk with Col.
Farrow face to face, fully confident that
there is no controversy between him and
us, and we also introduce him to you,
1 reader*, so that while wo arc conversing
you can listen.
001. F. says: “I have also rend your ar
ticle of the tilth inst., under the caption
! “And They Won’t Explain,” in which you
1 charge certain officer* with extortion, or
; with receiving illegal fees. If yur eharge
•jm BtUf-u-ril-ii the law provnUw nr heavy
•tarositch conduct, and as above
’ stated you owe a duty to the people and
i Government ”
Colonel, we stated how far these two
cases had proceeded, not accusing any one
iof criminal intention. We stated what the
i fees in such cases are as laid dowu ia the!
1 hooks, and we stated what they had
Uluvrged and reoeived, and that between
the two ii nn Hints there is a very great dis
parity. Colonel, we stated that the law
allowed a Commissioner for issuing a war
rant two dollars, two dollars to the Mar
shal for each arrest; for taking a bond,
i fifty eenta; to the Commissioner for ittvea
; tignting bases, five dollars per day. This
!is what the book says. Colonel, is the
| book right ? Listen, reader, while we tell
1 the Colonel whot these fellows have done: I
! Commissioner Wade issued two warrants,
' two dollars each, making four dollars;
i Joseph H. Cummings, Deputy United
1 Btab* Marshal arrested the two men, two
dollars each, making four dollars; Cam-
I missioner Wade took aud upproved the
I two bonds, fifty cents each, making one
i dollar. This was all, no investigation, but
wo allow the Commissioner five dollars.
1 just as though there had lieen an investi
gation, making in ail fourteen dollars.
' Colonel, is this correct us to tho fees ? If
! so is it legal or illegal to charge sixty-two
1 dollars and ten rente in one ease ? And
oven if that be legal, Colonel, it bt
legal in a pr< sisoly similar case to charge
sewnty-four dollars and ninetyf (Ml '<
Cohjuel, are flni Tees fix*d by tbe HtTOltc
legal If not, Arc cither one of tho charjjfe*
inailc by these men legal ? If so, whten
one ? They are at variance with tho books
and at variance with each other, and they
can't both be right, even if tlio book is
wrong. Nowj Colonel, you decide this
question. Th it ah error, ft so is it aeci
| dental or intentional ? If accidental or an
innocent mistake, ought it not to be cor
rected and the injured portion reim
bursed V If sn intentional wrongougbt not
tho wrong-doors to be held amenable to
tbe law and punished for the offence ? You
have pledged yourself to us, Colonel, in
your letter to enforce the United Htutes
laws impartially. Will you do it? We
have no reason to doubt your word, and
will wait patiently for your action. Now,
Colonel, as these entire proceedings to us
and to our renders, to say the best for
them, are mysterious, and the parties con
cerned cannot or will not explain. Will
you be so kind as to inform us if the bill
of costs modi' out and collected by thdke
men in the cases above stated are the legal
and legitimate fees, so that we rosy enjoy
the great pleasure that it would afford us
to useorc our readers that the said officers
hud committed no mistake, had done no
wrong, that it is all attributable to our stu
pidity and inability to solve these legal
mysteries. Dissipate, Colonel, from our
mind the mystery if you can, that we may
have the gratification of assuring tho peo
ple that, although we had stated the facts
correctly, we were mistaken in their appli
cation. Colonel, yon say if our charge is
well founded the law provides a heavy
penalty for such conduct. We are not
their accuser, we have only given a his
tory of their conduct, and you say U onr
statements are well founded the law pro
vides a heavy penalty, Ac. Wo have stated
the truth and nothing but the truth, und
every word of it can be sustained by the
highest evidence, primary, not secondary,
no hearsay or presumptive testimony, but
by proof positive. You say the law pro
vides a heavy penalty for suoh conduct,
und you arc entrusted with the enforce
ment of the laws, and you say you are de
termined to enforce them with fairness and
impartiality against the offenders. We
have given you the facts; do they consti
tute an offonoe, if so, what arc you
going to do, Colonel ? It is our duty to
chronicle events, to expose official mis
conduct. It is your business to vindicate
the law and bring offenders to justice.
Colonel, ns yon were kind enough to make
some suggestions to us which we appre
ciate, will you permit ns to make one to
you ? Do as yon promise in yonr letter,
enforce the laws alike against nil offenders,
nnd the good people will all sustain yon,
and the odium you refer to in your letter
will not weigh heavily npon yon when your
work is done. If the facts stated by ijs
in these cases constitutes On offence against
the law wo can furnish you with as posi
tive proof of other nnd greater wrongs
done to our people. Our whole commu
nity is ready to co-operate with yon in thu
enforcement of the laws. And the charge
that they are disposed to intimidate United
Htates officials and prevent the execution
of the laws is a vile slander tad calumny.
LKTTF.It OF COL. lUSNIiV P. FAttltOW.
Offkik of Umtkd States ArroitNßv, j
DtSTHK-rS of Gkouuja, -
Atlanta, July 23d, 1873. )
J. ft. Oalta her, Esq., Editor and Proprie
tor Independent:
Hut — My only apology for addressing
yon in the absence of an acquaintance is
the public pood.
I have read your article* concerning an
j affidavit made by A. N. Wilson, before
Commissioner Wayne, and the warrant is
sued thereon for the arrest of Ponder, and
permit me to say in nil candor that those
two gentlemen are too well known in
Georgia, and possess too much character,
for yon to find it protitable to assail them
ns you have been doing. I think, from
their general character, without knowing
! anything more of the nffair than I have
| seen in your paper, that you have done
' them injustice.
If the papers were tampered with after
they loft the Commissioner's hands, then
| those who did it should be held responsi
:Me for it—mot in a newspaper, bnt in
j oonrt. I know but little concerning those
' upon whom you east this imputation; bnt
from what I know of them cannot for a
moment, suppose they did any such thing.
If you have (no reason for believing they
did, then yon should not have assailed
them ns yon have; and if you have reas
ons for believing they did, then it is your
I duty, as an hottest citizen, to go before
j the proper officer and take snoh steps as
j will bring them to punishment. Ido not
i propose to espouse their cause. but simply
; wish to suggest to yon that if you believe
1 such conduct has been perpetrated by
I these men. it is due the people and the
| Government that yon take Bteps for their
[ punishment
j I have also read your article of the 11th
i inst, under the caption, ,- And they won’t
| explain,” in which you charge certain offi
[ oers with extortion, or with receiving ille
gal foes. If your charge is well founded
i the law provides a heavy penalty fqr such
conduct, and, as above stated, you owe a
duty to the people and the Government,
i The article rejects it}>on my office, in that
iit alludes to Mr. Stone, who was at that
i tune my assistant, and 1 demand of you
! that you perform your duty, and bring
these parties to punishment; and on fail
ure to do so you will stand beloro ytmr
readers in the light of having made
charges you are unable to sustain. There
i arc several questions 1 propose to ask yon
j for information, as the cases alluded to
i were never reported to me, and as I know
i nothing of them: At whose instance were
those parties arrested? By whom, and
i when were they arrested? Before whom,
! where and when did they give bond? By
! whom, when and where was the eompro
! wise made? How much money was paid,
and to whom paid, and where paid? What,
is your mithprity for |aying| that District
got (feto? ami did Htone
appear Belpp tho Ctaimil|lk>ne’g Court
in the costa Tljpsc questKs I Ui)( for
information,' as 1 know nothing in, the
world of the matter more than I learn
from your article.
Now, in conclqsion, I have a few words
to say of a general character. A# you arc
aware, I am tho United Htates Attorney in
Georgia, and I frankly say to you I intend
to enforce the lawn of the United Htates to
the utmost of my ability against all who
violate them. I will make no discrimina
tion as to the laws or the violators of
them; but shall, if able, enforee all the
laws against all the violators. lam aware
of the difficulties surrounding me, and
fully appreciate the necessity of impar
tiality, fairness and justice. If there is
one thing more important than everything
else in the performance of my difficult and
delicate duties, it is to see that all persons
entrusted with the lows in Georgia them
selves riwpect the laws. lam determined
to respect, fts well as enforee, the lawn, and
will sec to it that all others respect ns well
as enforce them. There will be enough odi
um resting upon those of us entrusted
with tho execution and enforcement of the
lews, even tf we duly respect them; but if,
in our enforcement of the lnws, we diere
gard and violate them, we bring dishonor
on the Government, and redder proper en
forcement of tile Jaws imposmlrio. While
I shell sustain and defend all Federal offi-.
cers in Georgia in everything in whic h
they are right to the last extremity, yet I
will sustain them m nothing in which they
have wilfully disregarded und violated law a
entrusted to their execution, but will, iu
ail eases where they have wilfully violated
11.i laws, pipHwgute them witb more vigor
than any other class of criminals, knowing
that I w ill be sustained iu tins course both
by the court und the Administration.
lam ready at ull times to co-operate
with those who sock tho enforcement of
thu laws.
Yury respectfully,
Htesnv P- F.uikow,
United States Attorney.
REI’LY TO OOL. PARROW S LETTER.
Gutman, Ga., July IWth, 1878.
I Col. Henry J’. farrow:
Hrn—Yuurs of tho 23d instant just re
ceived, aud I mu frank to confine that I
j sin pleased with your expressed intention
i to vindicate Hie laws of the United Htates,
:in the HUto of Georgia, and see that all
, others to whom tho execution of the laws
i are entrusted discharge their duties, or be
| held amenablo for derelictions or obuaes.
i I am glad, sir, that yon write in tho spirit
you do, and manifest a disposition to pro
| tect our citizens froai needless mreata and
oppressions, in the way of extorting from
them money to obtain their liberty. All
of which I will tiring to your mind as clear
j os a sunbeam Uifole 1 close this epistle.
Ist. In reference to my article on the
I Ponder arrest, you will .sue that my re
mark* in coninfcfiioq with Comnussiouer
(Wayne uud A. &’ Wihsui wont written by
i pothioaUy, and not directly dunging thorn,
for 1 never believed, ss I stated, that either
of them ever sow the warrant after it was
filled up that Htephous had when ho ar
rested l’ondor. for although signed by
i Commissioner Wayne in his own proper
! signaalaro, the balance of the writing, in
j the body of the warrant and tho affidavit,
| w as in another handwriting find not bis.
| Tho Mane of Wilson was not within
! three inches.of the affidavit, but iiumodi
( ately above the Couimitwioucr’s, anil bore
I no resemblance to Mr. Wilson’s lisndv. rit
' ing. We compared it with his handwrit
ing as it appear* in oilier place*. His
; wnting, or his signature, is well known
: here, and.there isn’t a man that saw it but
! said, and will swear to the best of their
I knowledge, that it was not his.
I Commissioner Wayne savs that the affi
| davit was made by Mr. Wilson to the beet
j of bis knowledge and belief; a number of
gentlemen hero will swear that the afflda-
I vit Unit Stephens hod was written in the
, jHisitivu. 1 lmve no doubt that Commis
i sinner Wayne issued a warrant, and npon
i the affidavit of A. N. Wilson; and I have
! no doubt in proper form, but it was not
the one that Stephens hail hero. I hail
i already in print a short articlo on that
i subject when I reoeived your letter, which
II think will bo perfectly satisfactory, and
I which you will see in The Indwen joint, a
j copy of whioh 1 send yon.
Aud now we come to the Leo and Brown
cases, Mid the cost question. You sny the
i cases were never reported to you, nnd that
i you knew nothing in the world about the
matter until you saw an account of it in
The InDki exwwt. In this yonr statement
i conflict very materially with E. C. Write's
j nude ia his letter published in the .Worn
! ini/ Aretes of thfflffßd. die aaya that Ire ob
: turned yonr consent to mako the aettle
l ment. I refer you to his letter, which I
j enclose with this.
j Imu not their accuser. I have simply
j presented the facts as they exist, and as
i they can be proven, uud called upon them
I to show by what authority they collected
such enormous fees. You enquire at whose
’instance were these parties arrested? We
! have never 'hoard of any prosecutor, but
■ have heard that Wm. Wade, a brother of
jii C. Wade, the Commissioner, made the
‘affidavit. Th ey were arreeted in January
iby Joseph S. Cummings. They appeared
■ before E. C Wad* sometime in January,
and waived an examination and gave bond
ito him for their appearance ia Savannah
on the 14th of April lost. The compro
mise was made on the 15th of April. The
' money w as paid t>y Hezeliinh Brown tp E.
|C. Wade iu Major Smyth’s office. The
amount of money paid was one hundred
I and thirty-seven dollars. Mr. Brown says
■ Wade handed Stone twenty dollars in his
■ presence. Stone did not appear before
the Gominiseiouer’s Court. These are the
: facts that I have presented to my readers,
1 and I can establish every one of them,
Again 1 repeat, 1 have not accused these
l men of any crime; but urgod them to ex
| plain how they compute the costs so. as to
1 amount to such unreasonable sums.
; Wade's letter will show yaiu that he re-
Bved fifjy dollars, and that he gave the
mice t< Store, Freeman and the wit-
Mbcm, bilt itiicrc wat no wiljffdnics. I agree
With youpColoncl, that vottr position is a
delicate one, your duties are Imrthensome
and your responsibilities weighty, and you
need not doiibt but that your official acts
will be rlds<iy watiiiedandcritlciscd if stall
! vulnerable. Against every manifest wrong
Jof yours (t mean official acts', The
! cekdekt will wage a fierce warfare. But
in the discharge of yonr official duly, in
i which yon boldly, manfully and •impar
! tially vindicate the law and discharge your
! duties witflodt respect to peiwons, slficld
! ing neither friends nor foes, Democrats
; nor Republicans from the just penalties of
the law, we will take pleasure in holding
i you up before onr readers os a model offi
j cer. There is nothing emlwlied in. the
principles of the two great political par
ties that should make us personal enemies,
I but it is the practice of some of the eon
1 temptiblc KcahiWags that constantly fer
; ment strife and disconl, and their con
temptible reports and vindictive oppres
sions of the people embitters them against
1 the whole party.
It is immaterial who administers this
Government. The laws ought to be vindi
| ented and enforced. The innocent ought
jto be protected, and the old man and tiie
poor man's money ought not to be ex
torted from them under a pretended legal
authority.
Another instance to which I refer in my
article published in the issue of my paper
which I send you. It is charged, and I
am credibly informed that it can be
proven, that E. C. "Wade, ns Commissioner,
charged a man in Oohprit county fifty dol
! lars for taking a bond for his appearance
at the District Court in Savannah in April
last.
I do not make this report in a spirit of
vindictiveness. I have no malice. I givo
you correct reports. Are they violations
'of the taws. If so I will, us a taw abiding
citizen, co-operate with you iu bringing
: them to justice. I will furnish tho proof
to sustain my reports to you, and will
furnish you with still more startling ones,
but h little older,
I am, sir, very respectfully.
Your obedient Servant,
J. C, Galuaheb.
™
An Interesting Correspondence.
We give lodow nn interesting corres
pondence lie tween Governor Smith and
1 eX-Govemor Johnson, growing out of
i Governor H. V. Johnson's speech made at
t the Macon liar-dinner:
<IOV. SMITH'S riBST IiETTER.
//oh. //. V. Jn/msmt:
Hik—The Macon Ti'kfjrrrph ami
yrr, vi the Ifith insL. eoutains an account
of a dinner, given by the Mata n Bar, in
complimvnt to yourstdf at the Brown
House, on thfl-ini iost. Tii thut account
: the use of the following language, in a
speech, is imputed to you; “in reference
to my adißiuistraUfin as the Executive of
: the State, this much I will dedans —J ntttr
; deemrni any one with f<mepramim."
Wlieii I state that gentlemen who heard
j tbe spoeeli delivered have expressed too
opinion that in using this language yon in
tended to tjiikc an usjiuiou.s imputation
' against myself, you canmit fail to. see the
1 proprietymy mpiirftting yon to say cx
| Illicitly whether upon the occasion referred
! to, you Used, literally nr substqhentiy, tho
language above quoted, uud wliut idcr
! cnce, if any, you inlcuded the same to
' have to myself.
Condor cutnpels me to say that T have
| from time to time henrd vague 'rnmors of
Uttkiod DUUMUrks made by you iu reftT
| cnee to myself; but their uncotiunty has
I hitherto prevented me from culling your
! attention to them The bin gunge imputed
!to yon in the TeUyraph and Meesenptn-.
; however, ami tin 1 opnsti uction phtcetl upon
iit by iuUlligcnt gi aUvnu n present, leave
me no olteinahve liut to make tho above
: inquiry.
I aru, sir, your obedient servant,
Jau ks M. .Smith.
ex-goVEltNoii Johnson's fiust letter.
i Sandy Grotb, lUprow Cos., Ga. 1
June 21st, 1873. I
|
Hi* KrceHenci/, .Tatties .V. Smith. Atlanta,
I Cos:;
Hia—l thank you for yours of the 17th
instant, as it affords me an opportunity of
| correcting the remark attributed to inv at
1 the 'Macon Bar dinner.
! Without attempting to count all I said,
11 did sny, on the point concerning which
I you inquire, in substance, “As to my ad-
I ministration, wliilo Governor, I ahalf say
; but little. It is for others to pass upon
i its merits.” And I concluded with the re
i mark, “that I never deceived anybody.”
Tho words with false promises were ad
ded by the reporter, without intending, I
presume, to do me or anybody else injus
tice. It was nn occasion of good humor,
and the remark was made in that spirit.
At tho moment the charge against you,
which I have so often heard, of having re
ceived applicants for office, came into uiv
I mind and suggested the remark. Thus
I far. I may be said to have alluded to you:
But I intended no such charge myself, nor
to express any opinion in reference to it.
Many of your frienils were present, and
T was their guest. It would have been dta
conrteous to them to lmve selected sbeh an
occamon to be offensive. ’ I am sorry they
undcrstooil me os you say they did.
1 uu, sir, yonr obedient servant,
' Herschel X. Johnson*.
ciov. smith’s bbcond letter.
Atlanta", Ga, June 20, 1873.
i Hon. Herschet V. Johnson, Bartom.Ga.:
i Sir—Yonf letter of the 21st instant has
j I>een received, and I regret to say that its
I contents are not altogether such as I had
: hoped for.
I I understand yon its saying, in effect,
that- yon were lild by the charge, so often
heard by you, that I had received appli
cants feu- office to state in reference to yonr
own administration, as Governor, that yon
had never deceived anybody. You dis
idttim that it was yonr intention to charge
me with having deceived applicants for
office, or that you meant to express any
opinion in reference to such charge, You
nowhere say what moaning you did intend
to convey by the use of the words men
tioned.
In my communication of the 17th inst..
I requested, in substance, to be informed
I what reference, if any. the language used
|by you was intended to have to myself.
1 Your answer to that request admits, in ef-
I feet, that the obnoxious remark was made
by you with allusion to myself; but you
fail to state what application you intended
; the same to have. In brief, ybu state
! what your intefition was not, but do not
sav what your intention was.
Since tii* porreajtondenee pommericeil,
accounts of thi .hma-r have H]i]n-itrud in
many papi-ry titid hjjre been published in
a way toffcave uo doubt wbtaever of the
general taidHrstanflkg, that It was yotir
making the remark referred
I to, to remfyt tnjurtotlNly npon me. Tn
; view of this, I cannot consent, that the
: matter shall rest where your letter places
i it. I must, respectfully, bat earnestly, re
j quest you to give a full and definite nn
(swer to my enquiry of the 17th inst.
I on, sir. your obedient servant,
Jambs M. Sjtrrfl.
EX-GOVtHNOB JOHNSON’* SECOND IXTTEB.
Sandy Grovt:, Bajitow P. O. Ga., i
July 4th, 1873. (
liis Kxcellencu James M. Smith, Athmta,
Ga.:
Hiw—l.iving six miles from Bartow, I
did not, receive yours of the 27th ultimo
until two days ago. lam sorry that mine
of 'tii*? 21st ultimo fell short of your
hopes.
The second paragrapli of your last lotter
does m injustice. Mv reply to vours of
the 17th does not admit, in substance, as
strongly as you seem to think, that the
obnoxious remark was made by me iu allu
sion to yourself. I will restate, in rather
different language, what I intend to be un
derstood to say, in order that you may
catch the precise shade of thought which
I wish to convey. Tho reply to the latter
clause of your question of the 17th ull
necessarily involved the analysis of a men
i tel operation.
! lain not , even now, after full reflection,
conscious that, at the moment of the re
mark. you personally were iu my mind.
Yon certainly were neither subject nor the
j Object of deliberate thought, but a certain
matter, to wit: the charge that yon had
: deceived applicants for office, as a sngges
\ five subject of tiiought conic into my
: mind. It was thus only that I had any
i reference at all to you; and that, not as
the subject of the thought, nor the object
iof the remark. Hence, according to the
• taw of association, it was the result of a
1 rapid intellectual operation, of which the
charge just stated was the suggestive eir-
I cumstance or fact—-the mere punctual *a
] lien*. I have thns given you the interior
working of my mind, from which you cun
sen for yourself, “what reference, if any,”
: was made to you. The remark jierse does
not, nceeasarty, point to yon, and cannot
Vie offensive to you, except from its con
nection with the suggestive fact just
stated, and upon the construction placed
. upon it by "intelligent gentlemen'’ who
! heard it.
i I have discovered that construetion. I
; Itave no idea thut any such construction
would have been given to the remark, or
I that you would have been so sciiHitive, but
for the existence of that charge. lam
! frank to say, however, that if it had oc
curred to me at the time that my motive
Would have been so misapprehended us it
! Dim been, I w ould not have made the re
mark; or else have used some other form
of expression For, surely, I would not
■ have taken such an occasion to be offen-
The only print io your last comrauoiea- j
tiou is, that my reply of the '2lst to yonr i
note of tiie 17th ultimo is not full in this: ,
that I stated “what my intention wan not,” j
but did not say “what my intention was.” !
Having disavowed the obnoxious interpre
tation given to the remark, which you are i
pleased to cofisider the negative aspect, I
should not suppose that you would feel any |
particular interest in the affirmative as
pecU It seems to me, also, that both as-’
prists arc covered by what I said in my |
first letter. lam quite sure it is, if read j
In rrmmution with the foregoing parn
srraph Still, however, I have uot tho
taunt objection to. meet this point more*
fully, if possible.
lim know, as well as I do, that hi these
degenerate time*, the absence of ingenu
ousness, candor and fidelity in high politi
cal quarters, though not universal, is yet
so prevalent und apparent us to lx- obvious'
, ovb (a MUfcWte guswvu*. My ndmiuta-,
trutiou was in a different day. It bus been ;
but too kindly alluded to by the first regu-,
lar toast offered tit the dinner. I was res
ponding to it, It is now one of my most j
pleasant rrifleetions with it, that whatever
errors 1 may have committed, I tried to ;
practice the simple virtue of sincerity; aud
by the remarks under consideration, am
plified into ite affirmative signification, I
intended to imply that in my intercourse
with men, touching matters of constitu
tional and official duty, to the best of my j
poor ability, I exercised entire candor and
good faith. Referring to nothing partieu-!
larlv, but tire degeneracy of tho times on
which we have falk-u. i supposed that I
might imply that, without arrogance, I;
could not sav much more without egotism.
Is it possible that it ia offensive to any I
living man?
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
Herschel V. Johnson.
gov. smith’s third letter.
Atlanta, Ga., July 10, 1878.
Hon. H. V. Johnson. Brrrtoir, Ga.:
Bnt—l acknowledge the receipt of yonr
letter of the 4th instnt. and regret to sav
that, in my judgment, like the one which
preceded it, it fails to meet the require
ments of the situation. Upon the meta
physical points raised and discussed therein
I have nothing to say; nor can I appreciate
the fonce of your insinuation, that I am un
duly sensitive when hold up, in the public
estimation at by a gentleman so
prominent and distinguished ns yourself
sm unworthvof respect and confidence.
The wbsle matter, in my opinion, re
serves itself into this; In a public speeoh
in the city of Macon, you took occasion to
use language which haft universally, so far
as I enti learn been interpreted injuriously
to me ns chief Magistrate of the State, and
derogatory to #iy character as a gentleman.
You admit, substantially, thut such lan
guage Inul reference to myself, or whs sug
gested by a Certain charge of deception
which you had often heard; at trie same
time you disclaim that any offence was in
tended by you.
Now, as under the circumstances, I stand
as if charged before the public by yourself
with faithless aud dishonorable conduct, I
conceive it to be due to me that in your
reply to this eommunipation, you state ex
plicitly, with tho liberty, on my part, of
making such use of it ns I may deem neces
sary for my own vindication—that nothing
yon said in your Macon speech was intend
ed as a reflection on myself, or an indorse
ment or countenance of any injurious
charge against me.
Having never done me the justice pub
licly to correct the report of your remarks
in the Telegraph ami Messenger, which you
admit whs incorrect, nor denied the just
ness of the public inference therefrom, I
trust that you will see that the request I
now make of you is both reasonable and
right,
I assent to the correctness of what you
say iu reference to the degeneracy of the
times; and I think you will agree with me
that one of the strongest evidences of the
existence of this lamentable condition is the
readiness of disappointed place-hunters to
malign the motives of those upon whom
rests the disagreeable duty of making ap
pointments to office.
I am. sir, vour obedient servant.
James M. Smith.
Ex-aovEßxoß Johnson's third lettbr.
Sandy Gbove, Bartow P. 0. Ga,, 1
July 17th, 1873. f
His fSeeellency t James M. Smith, Atlanta,
OofM-
Hid—Yours of the 10th instant is re
cetvea, arid I confess I am surprised and
disappointed that mine of the 4th ia not
satisfactory.
Your first letter oomplainqd that gentle
men who lwArdstbc speech <1 divert J had
expressed the opinion, that in using “tbe
language” (the remark complained
intended to make an injurious imputation
against vmt rue tf." I replied tlmt they mis
appohended my motivo. You further asked
me to state '*woat reference, if nv, I in
tended the same to have to yonrselff”
T disavowed iu substance, having any of
fensive reference to yon, and stated how
the remark was suggested; but that I did
not intend to make any charge against yon
of having deceived applicants for office,
nor to express any opinion in reference to
it, and that I was sorry that I was misun
derstood.
In yonr second letter you seemed to b*
satisfied with my disavowal of offensive in
tention; but said I failed to state what
application I intended the same to have,
••in brief, that I stated wliat my intention
was not, but did not say what my intention
wa-. ”
In nly reply to that letter repeating tlio
same disavowal, iu stronger terms, I stated
what was affirmatively my intention.
And in my earnest desire to show you all.
I brought yoO into the inner chamber of
mv thoughts, that yon might see for your
self, that if the remark bad any reference
to you at all it was so nnapprecinble that I
could not define it, except by describing
the operation of my mind at the moment
af uttering it. In your third and last let
ter, you call this “metaphysical,” and dis
miss it us unworthy your consideration.
I now disavow, {or the third time, any
intention whatever, by the language used,
“to moke an injurious imputation against
yourself. ” I did not intend, by the remark,
and on the occasion of its utterance, to
charge yon with deceiving applicants for
office, tior to express any opinion in refer
ence to such charge. And, that there
may be no misunderstanding us to what I
mean, I add that I did net intend to do
either of these things,directly or indirectly,
overtly or covertly. As ‘ ‘to endorsement or
countenance’ 1 af any such charge, I can
only say that the state of my mind won
just what it was relative to tlie expression
of any opnion in reference to it That ia
to sav—-after the most careful self-examina
tion 1 am not conscious that I bad any in
tention, either pro or con, as to endorsing
or countenancing. Certain it is, that I
never thought of such a thing, until tbe
receipt of yonr last lette! f , The idea wtn
for a moment entered into my mind.
Yon think I insinuated that you are too
sensitive. You are ntiSteken. I depre
cate insinuations in such a eorresponaenew
as this, looking to the healing rather than
the infliction of wounds. All I meant to
say was that hut for the existence of tho
charge alindcil to you would not even have
suspicioneil that you were referred to. No
man can be too jealous of his honor. If I
offended any person, justly or unjustly, I
um bound to justify the offense or to moke
suitable amends. Y lmvo redeemed that
obligation iu this ease:
Yon complain that 1 “hsvenot corrected
the reiHUi of my remarks, nor denied the
justness of thu public inference from them.
If, in the first instance, you had simply
called my attention to the matter, and sug
gested that course. I would lmve promptly
published an explanatory card. But I
had uointimationofilie misapprehension of
my motives until I received your letter of
17t)i of June, written only two days after
the remark w-es made, f bad a right to
suppose, and I did suppose, from that that
you preferred a different mode; and I
therefore doubted the propiety of publish
ing sny card pending the correspondence
thus inaugurated. I have always expected
its publication as terminated. It is quite
as desirable to me as to yourself. For I
am far from 1 ping satisfied to have it be
lieved, that I would violate the propriety of
a festive invasion, in order to assail you
when (his correspondence shall bepub
lishe.d, 1 dun lit not , the public will have
the sagacity to see that I intended no such
thing.
I am, sir, your obhdiant servant,
Herscheo Y. Johnson.
GOVERNOR smith’s I'OrRTH LETTER.
Atlanta, Ga., July 22, 1873.
Hon. U. V. Jl/osson, Bartow, Ga.:
His—Yonr letter of the 17th instant baa
been received, and I take pleasure in say
ing that the disavowal of any intention to
reflect injuriously npon me, by any
thing said in your Macon Bar dinner
speech, is full and satisfactory.
It is proper for me to say, before clos
ing this correspondence, however, what I
had often heard before yonr sp<tech was de
delivered, viz: that a report had been cir
culated in the eastern part of the State to
the effect that I had violated a promise to
yon by not offering yon a place upon the
Supeme Court Bench. 1 hulk given no at -
tention to the report, supposing that it had
originated iu the petty malice of some evil
disposed person. When I learned, how
ever, that a gentleman of your consequence
—the person w hom the report charged mo
with having deceived had used in a public
speech language understood by persons
present as intended tq imply that the
charge was true, it became proper for mo
at once, not only to seek an explanation,
but also to require a distinct avowal or dis
avowal of such intention on your pert It
was due to me that tbe explanation should
be very full, -and that the disavowal, if
made, should be broad enough to meet the
charge, in all its aspects, with a negative.
I am pleased to repeat that in these re
quirements your lost has met my reckon
able expectation.
I am, sir, yoUr obedient servant,
J ames M. Smith.
Three members elect to the Forty-third
Congress are dead—Jas. Brooks, William
Whiting and J. G. Wilson, of Oregon.
It is authoritatively stated that Vice
President Wilson is a confirmed paralytic
invalid, who can only live with careful
nursing and cessation of exciting toil.
“Mamma,” said a delicate little boy,
“I’m afraid a fever would go hard witb
me.” “Why, my son?” “’Cause I’m o
small it wouldn’t have room to turn.”
Murder in New Jersey.— The body of
a young woman named Delia Corcoran
was found in the Hudson river, near Yonk
ers. on Wednesday. The body had every
appearance of having been outraged and
the victim then strangled to death and
thrown into the river. It was at first has
tily buried, but when Mr. Dnvis, by whom
Delia Corcoran was employed as a cook at
Exeelsior Grove, Hudson county, New
Jersey,ascertained the factshe suspeeetedit
was Delia, os she had been unaccountably
missing since the Sunday previous. Tho
body was disinterred and identified as that
of Delia Corcoran. She was last seen with
a numlier of colored men who, it is charged,
outraged and then murdered her. W*r*
rants ha-.e been is.-ued for their arrest-, W