Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1840-10-26
For he Wdlcdmun.
TO THE HON. G. z. VAN NESS, EX-GOV
ERNOR OF VERMONT.

L.
ERNOR OF VERMONT.
SlR,-lt is very dsagreeabe to be under the NO
cessiy of exposing to the public the faults of 9TH
ers and more especially so, when they have here
toore held responsible and lucrative Offices, and
administered the government under which we
live with honor to themselves and to the general
satisfaction of the community. But when find
that any person is in the habit of addressing the
public, and making false statements, and from
those statements draw false differences, which are
calculated to lead the rising generation into error
cannot, consistently with my sense Of duty with
hold my dsapprobation fiom such and snail use
whit feeble abilities God has seen fit to bestow
upon me, in exposing such proceedings to the
public.
In my last address TO you, dated at Middlebury,
August 10Th, 1910, made statement respecting |
your management in your public addresses gen
orally, by which your chief aim was 10 convince
the Freemen of Vermont that the present Wing
party was composed, principally of the old feder-
al party, and that the old democratic, ar par
ty, are now supporters of Mr. Van Buren,, and as
a confirmation OF your statement you referred to |
the members of the Legislature of Vermont OF
1873, and in your address at " oodstock, in May
last, you used the following language LET us
come to some proceedings which have taken place
in our own state. In the year 1913, the federal
isis obtained a majority in the House of Assem-
bly,, but we still retained the greater number of
the Council. A resolution WINS passed by the lat
which proposed that the members of both houses
should convene on n day mentioned, to offer un
thanks to Almighty God, for the victory obtained
by the American army under Gen, Harrison near
the river Thames over the combined forces of
the British aud Indians. On concurring with the
Council IN passing the resolution, ninety FIVE (a
the repuhlicnns) voted in favor of il, and every
federalist, there being l08, voted against it. Now
these los were federaists, ihnt is for war with
their own government) affirm that but one ever
has come over TO our party. i find also that 80
of them are now dead, but of the rs living ones,
every man, except the one already alluded TO, is
thorough going modern Whig" | was present and
heard your address at Brandon, Aug. 9TH, and you
there admitted that two OF those los had come
on to your side. You stated likewise that out of
those 95 which voted in favor of concurring in
passing the resolution, 25 dead and 20 living
and of those, 40 were now Van Buren,, and 80
were Wings. In my letter TO you, | stated how a
part OF those 95 now stood in relation to their pol
ticks and stated that did not believe that 25
Van Buren, men could be found out OF the 20 lv
ing.
have now ascertained from good authority,
which believe cannot be disproved, the facts
contained in the following table, by which you
will find that your statements are lot corrobora-
by the facts.
Whole number of Democrats, l03
Now Van Buren, men, "a
Wings, 81
Dead, 80
| Unknown, d
Did not vote on the resolution, 81
Whole number of Federasls, 100
Now Van Buren, men, 81
Wings, So
Dead, AZ
Unknown, s.
Did not vote, II
! BY this table you will see that 6 of those who
voted against that resolution are, or were Van Blu
rem men at the time you made your address at
W oodsock. Zadock Wright of Vernon, having
died in June last, who one of the 10S and Il
Van Buren, man. The four democrats not heard
from have removed from the stale, and from the
hest information have been able to obtain think
they are now wings, if living They were from
Hancock, Lincoln, Westheld and Worcester, all
wing towns. The member from Berkshire, |
have put 10 Van Buren, on the ground that he was
Jackson man or 10 years ago, when he re-
moved to the west. His brother, who now repre-
sents that town, is wing. j stated that Mount
Tabor was loco now, il was a mistake, the mem
Der from that lows has been dead many years.
As you may have a curiosity TO know where those
6 Van Buren, Federalist are from, they are liun
Monkton, Salisbury, Chttenden, Vernon, Il 'a,ls-
, borough, and Reading. AS to the member from
, marlborough will remark that on looking
the Journal Of that year l fluid that he did vote
both ways, at varods times. 1t appeared that when
Mr.. Deforest federal member not able to be
I III the Ilousei tnht MT. Dupy WOulu vote on tne
federal side, which was the case when the ques-
ton was taken on the resolution mentioned; and
when Mr.. Deforest voted Mr. Dupy would vote
on the democratic side generally.
The Council that year composed of Dem
ocrals and Federasls and only 3 of the demo-
Gratis and one of1he federalist now living, and
all wings. They .Messrs. Mark Richards,
Elias Reyes, Horatio Seymour and Solomon Nil
Ter, making out of the democratic part of that leg
isa,ure now living 40 wings and "a ocofocos
think that you can but discover by this that your
statement at Brandon was not true. Now sir, as
to the leaders of the old federal party, was as
much opposed to them during the last war as you
or any other person; but still did believe that 9
out of 10 OF that party were as true Americans as
any people whatever that we had amongst u.s. but
that they were deceived by the leaders of he par
} ty. well remember that when went to Plaus-
burgh, Sept. 10Th, the day before the battle had
J many old federallsts by my side, but have
collection of seeing Martin Chittenden or Stephen
flaight and many other federal leaders, which now
belong to the ocofoco ranks, in that action. 1t
matters very little to me whether man was fed
eral or democrat 25 years ago. provided he is right
true blue American now. The old federal party
was disbanded under Mr.. Monroe's Adminstra.
, ton and united with the democratic party, and
what God has joined together LET not vile man
put asunder.'
Most respectfully, remain usual, yours,
i LEONARD DEFINING.
, -, Montpelier, Oct. 10, 1910.
=