Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1857-12-31

Ice Waiers' He then presented and from Mr..
The scheme sh Duld be adopted.
Gen. Shields statement was, in substance, about
the same.
This testimony Of Generals Quitman and Shields,
it will be perceived fully sustaps many contTovert-
ed points in the extracts from my address. They
prove that Gen Scott said, that negotiations had
been going on with the Mexican authorties,-tha
they required d0Heesr" (5ri5e)-that he had al
ready expended ten twenty thousand dollars,
which he regarded as bread throWnupon he waters,
and that he would raise million, OF million and
a nalf more, and apply it in this purposes sum
sufficient Go insure the success Of the negotiation
Regarding this testimony as coHeiassUe on the only
statement Of that address which contradieted by
Geo. Scott, L submitted it TO the public without
word OF comment; feeling it painful duty thus
70 place Cen Scott in position 20 false 10 ruth ana
SO embarrassing TO the feelings aud honor OF man
occupying his position before the country. was
consent vindIcate the truth Of my statements
and did not point out the utterly false statement
10 which he had-upOn his honor-certIhed before
the world
Under these circumstances Of embarrassment
from which honorable exlication was lmpossIDie,-
ordiuary prudence woudhave suggested silence as the
only alternative left him. Had he taken that course,
no further duty would have been required OF me, and
grateful people migbt-in charity TO known u97r7'-
es OF character-hsye drawn the zeal Ger THIS last
solemn, false certificate onhonor-and under sense
of national shame. have sought 70 forget the past
But as often happens vita those seeking to exlrl-
cate themselves from false position, he has issued
a seeoRd card in which, while he coniesses-' oahoW
sAeme-that he had gwen bribe-(ln reg ard to the
very negotiation Charged in my address -be evi-
dsnilv xplts in the idea that neither Gen Quitman
nor Shields proves that he paid the money to 6anid
Anna He agrees that he paid the money, ana as a
brtBe to seine one but inasmucb as these witnesses
do not say, 10 so many words that il was paid to
Santa Anua, he feels entirely relieved Of the re
sponsibiiay Of his conduct. lie seems to have lost
81 ht OF the fact, that the charge was that be had
Dqid 6rg5e and thus dshoRoTed hiDaSe, and in his
solici.ude TO acquit Santa Anna Of corruption, he
cupiesses his own corruption aud dishonor.
II, IN connection with negotiations for peace, he
paid the BRIDE what IT, far his countr s
honor is concerned, TO whom the money was paid!
l. is The fact that ne the Commanding General at
The head OF a victorious army, undertook to pro
cure peace by corruptlng an inn ortani parsonage
exercising q controlling influence ovtr the enemys
army aud government that constitutes the CRIME
with which he is charged, and which dishouOrs his
country and government. But that l may not be
supposed to misrepresent Gen. Scott, will give in
his own language, the following extract from his
second card:
suce ii to say, in this connection, that neither of the
produced by Gen. Pillow, with urh gravity,
nlTsiets IL the leastt the oIy poin il question: viz;
he ten thousand dollar hrbe tor nether Of those nefas
rl7uas 70 nov 70 whom me zoe was pao' nor oll any
oher American sveT hear WhlspeT the lame "T ma es
lement al The War Juce, Of my secret disbursements
Was it to conquer peace" by such means, that
he was sent 10 Mexico? Was it Tor services such
these that he was honored with the breyet of Lieut.
GeleraR
But Gen. Scott is too ''hasty" in his conclusion,
that he is acquitted Of certifying upon honor to
falsehood, in not paying the bride 10 Santa Anna.
lie agrees that he pad brlbe-ten thousand dol
lars-tO some one. Let rs now examine the evidence
and weigh the facts of the case, and see if the
proof is not conclusive that this G7T6e not paid
TO Santa Anna. The amount actually paid as
5TiJe and the amount agreed to be paid, fully
proven by both Generals Quitman and Shields He
does not deny the conference which stated took
place MIR. Trists quarters, what is stated to
have occurred at that conference, IN either his first
or second card. Neither does he deny, in either
card, that by the terms agreed upon, stated at
that conference be was TO fight battle before the
city, end if he won, an armisIice to be granted
and if peace followed, that then, the additional
million, or mill hon and half be paid. Neither
does anywhere deny thatat this private conference
l opposed the whole proceeding as dishOnOrable to
our army, dsgraceful to government, and ICrOHg
ia morals. Neither has he anywhere denied that he
requested me at this conference to suspend my OPP
position for reflection, and that, in Difference to
his wishes l agreed to DO so. Nor does he deny
that day after the meeting Of General officers
| went TO his quarters and so earnestly opposed the
whole proceeding that he agreed lie would abandon
the negotiation. These facts all clearly set forth
in my original address, and as he has pointed out
statement Except that in regard TO the payment
Of the bribe 10 Santa Anna) as incorrect By every
rule Of pleading and common sense, he admits as
true all the other ayowments He dare not deny
that ms army did 6ght q battle (boody one) before
the eity-did wn-that the city was in his power
that he did land without it being asked for and with
any flag Of truce grant armisJice, which cost
the army the blood Of 1872 meu. 1t will thus be
seen that after the termination of the Puebla neg0
tIaon he did in fact carry into complete effect the
terms agreed upon as stated 10 at the private
conference at Mr. Trusts quarters.
Here Is a coincidence Of circumstances too re
markable to have been accidental. The payment
OF the ten thousand dollars BRIDE and the agree
ment 20 pay the additional million, have been
clearly proven, and all the other terms Of the re-
marbable negotiation as stated II my address, and
reiterated in my subsequent letters; and he having
failed to deny any of them Except that the bride
was paid 10 santa Anna) and the subsequent history
campaign having JH.ftisd all Those terms, the
question recurs, to whom the ten thousand dol
lar bride paid
it wall not be doubted by any that the ten
thousand dollar bride was paid TO the person to
whom the additional million was to be paid; neither
will 1t be doubted that that person the man
who was engaged in the negotiation with Mr.. Irlst
Nor can it be doubted that this negOtia0r occupied
position Of authority that satisfied both Mr.. Irlst
and General Scott that he had power TO tredt-tO
suspend the operations of the Mexican army-to
fix upon the terms of an armistice, and finally TO
make peace Both Mr.. Trist and General Scott
would stultify themselves by maintaining any other
position.
Why should they hold negotiations with any per
not possessing these powers? General Scott
says the tribe was paid TO procure peace. Why
bride a not having the power to grant peace
Why agree TO pay additional million contingent
upon peace unless the recipient in condition to
ald in bringing about peaceT Why use the WORD
"d2ucsur" as proven by General Qultman, and why
the money TO be secretly applied, unless as
tribe, and unless this important parsonage, to whom
much money TO be paid, was possessed OF
authority. and was known by Mr. Trist and General
Scott TO be possessed OF authority TO grant what
tuey bargaIned for! The question again presents
ITSELF who the negotiatOr, the recipient OF the
hrioe, possessing all these extraordinary powers?
Santa Anna Is known to have been at that tine
the President OF Mexico armed with and exercising
all the powers OF government, and TO have been IN
actual command OF her armies. lie was IN fact the
governments Of Mexico for he was vested, by the
Congress, with dICtatorial lowers. lie could nego-
tate, grant armlstice, and agree upon terms OF
peace and no other iiUiRg could. Ii is not ma
,eraI through whose hands the money passed IN its
transit from Scouts possession TO Santa Anna's.
That ID passed from the American Treasury, by
General SCOTS ORDERS TO the hands Of Santa Anna,
Is thus demonstrated; and 1t is an insult to the
public intelligence Tor General Scott 70 ctTtUy upon
ldt TINS NllOt Was not paul. uaAtSNly VI
directly TO Santa Anna, and 10 expect the American
people 90 believe him.
Ia is thus made manifest that the statements in
General SCOTS card, that he had paid certain small
sums to - Or-for information received,
&c, had no sort OF connection with this bride OF
len thousand dollars; and the attempt on his part
TO impress that belief the public, Is shameless
effort deception tOreheve himself from the false
hood 10 which he certified upon honor fixed upon
him 10y the crushing weight of Qmtmans and
Shields testimony
1t will be remembered that in 1852 the Senate OF
the United States passed resolution requesting the
President to furnish that body with a statement OF
General SCOTS accounts, &C In the report Of the
Secretary Of the Treasury, under Mr.. Fillmore,
made in compliance with this resolution Of the
Senate there was a dsfc in General Scouts account
of about twelve thousand FIVE hundred dollars. II
the expenditure making this deficit had been legal
ana proper one. ne would have had proper voucher
Tor the amount, and his account would have been
credited. But If ten thousand dollars Of that
amount were used as br5e, being in itself illegal
aud an evidence OF corruption, he could have no
voucher; and no administration would disgrace 1t
self by allowing such an item in settlement OF
General SCOTS account.
Ii this ten thousand dollar bride admitted TO
have been paid be not part Of the dehclt OF twelve
thousand five hundred dollars in his account, 1t
might be well for General Scott TO explain that de-
fclt IN his aocount-else it would seem that in his