Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

_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