Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1840-04-13
fN i.nEli5A
GEN. lIARRISON'S MILITARY CHAR.
ACTER-SLANDERS REFUTED.
FROM THE ONO STATE JOURNAL,

FROM THE ONO STATE JOURNAL.
The following correspondence was Gale,
out IN consequence of remarks relative TO tn,
character and conduct of General H,nn,soN
made by members of the House of Represen
tatlves OF the State of Ohio in their places OF
the floor ofthat House. A letter was addres
sed to each of the gentlemen whose replies ar,
gwen below, by member of the House. who
hearing the remarks, stated their substance
and requested from each sta tement of th,
facts which fell within his personal know
ledge, respectively. The high character o
| the gentlemen whose statements have thus
been obtained tone of whom has been uni
form and prominent supporter of the last and
present Administrations of the General Go
vernmen0 is such as to put the facts to which
they bear testimony entirely beyond doubt:
WAsnINGToN, (Ky) Feb. 2i, 1910.
DEAR SIR Your letter of the 9Th instant
reached me to-day by the Southern mail
marked " mis-sent, forwarded" This will ac-
count for your not having my answer "a an
earlier day You have been correctly inform.
ed that | was in the battle of the Thames,
and near the person of General Harrison from
the commencement to the termination of the
engagement, and that | personally know
what part General Harrison took in it," had
the. honor TO act volunteer aid de camp
|
tons of that campaign and was at no time
more than five minutes out OF sight of him
on the day of battle, until after the surreil-
der OF the British army and retreat of the In
dams. You say it has been avowed on the
floor of the house Representatives (of Ohio)
now in session, by members in their places,
that General Harrison was at no time on the
battle ground that the entire plan of opera
tons was projectcdby Colonel II. Nj. Johnson
that he led the troops on To conquest, and that
General Harrison had neither part nor lot III
the matter" From the reckless character of
The attacks made upon General Harrison,
through the prostituted and pensioned press
devoted TO the support of the Administration,
1t is not surprising that that portion OF its sup
porters who read nothing else but the papers
devoted to the reelection Of Mr.. Van Buren,,
and abuse of General Harrison, should make
such statements but that a member ola le-
gislativc body who from his station ought to
be a man oiinformation, and gentleman,
should be so ignorant the history of one OF the
most important battles of the late war, or so ut
terly regardless oftruth as to make such a state
mcnt, Is tru " astonishing. Every member of
your Legislature has,I presume, read General
llarrson's official account of the battle of
the Thames and wanton and unprncipled
as have been the misl representations of Gene
raj lIarrison's military character and con
duct, have now (after lapse of upwards of
twenty six years. for the first, time, heard the
intimation that his account of it was in
any particular untrue. In that paper, Gen
eral Harrison states correctly the position
he occupied at the commcnc cment of the dc-
ton and he might have stated, with equal
truth, that he in person gave the ,yord of com
mand to the mounted regiment to Z" charge :"
and that he advanced with it, until it received
the enemy's fire, and then passed rapidly TO
the left, whe e the Indians still obstinatelv
maintained the fight. Such, sir, aver TO
be the facts, and feel perfectly confident that
General Cass (who was in the battle) and
General lIarrison's other aids -de-camp will
unhesitatingly sustain me in the statement !;
and it happens that they are all yet alive.
One of them, Col John O'Fallon resides at ST.
Louis, Missouri and the others, Colonies
S. Todd and John Speed Smith, at Shelby
vile and Richmond, in this State. As to the
statement that !" the entire plan Corporations
was projected by Col. Johnson" it is, like the
charge that General Harrison was at no time
in the battle, nor within two miles of the bat
tie ground, .taise, utterly false. The idea of
charging the emmy with the mounted men
was exclusively General IIarrisons. | was pre-
sent when he first announced it, and know
that Col. Johnson was then at the head of his
command, and was not consulted on the sub
jet, Until after General Harrison had express
sed his determination TO make the charge: and
lift is intended to state that the plan of opera
tons of the campaign, or the order of battle,
was projected by Col. Johnson, it is equally
untrue and am very confident that he has
not, and never will give the slightest sanction
to such statments us you say have been made
by members of your House of Representa-
tives.
You have my permission, sir to make such
use of this letter as you may think proper
Respectfully, your obedient servant,
JOHN CHAMBERS.
Moses b. CoRwIN Esq.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 2S, 1910.
DEAR SIR: Since writing to you, in answer
to your letter of the 18th instant, it has occur
red to me that principal object of the false
hoods relative TO General Harrison, which
have found propagation on the floor of the o.
ho House of Representatives, must be to
make the impression that he is acoward; and,
though you do not state in your letter the cause
assigned by his slanderers for his alleged abb
sence' from the command of his army at the
battle ofthe Thames, presume no motive for
it less charitable than sheer cowardice would
have been imputed by one capable OF such
Misrepresentation of his conduct. Butwhateyer
may be the alleged induce ment iorthe conduct
attributed to him, the relation i'll which then
stood TO him, and my knowledge ofwhat his
actual conduct was, imposes on me The duty
have performed, of pronounclng the charge
false and | trust You will pardon me tor
suggesting the proprety Gf an appropriate
| ir- l. 10,