Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1859-01-13
Letter from Hon. Geo. F. Edmunds.


My attention has been directed to an editorial
recently published in the Freeman, and to an
article of the same tenor published as a cummll-
nic.tion in your paper touching the State House
appropriation question, and having some refer
ence to myself. do not propose to enter into
any discussion of any of the matters which ap-
prOpriately belong to this question, but merely
to repel the principal charges and insinuatons
which are in those articles made against me
I personality; for in s'mc quarters alsehood un-
cDntradict,d passes for truth
! will pass by the many errors in what is sand
OF the session of 1857 in which believe nm
acquitted of being guilty of any very grave Gin
with the remark that | cannot, and hope no
friend of mine will presume To dispute the pre-
eminent and exclusive fitness of Mr.. Merrill for
the office of Speaker; or to suggest that there
was anything else than II patriotic desire 10
promote the general welfare which induced him,
at the last nl0nlen,, to withdraw which he did
without any solicitation FROM me, or by my au-
thority.
am accused in the article referred to, of
appointing majority OF the Committee of
Ways and Means in the article called Commit
tee OF Financc] from "locaties opposed to
Mon lcr, tho ne ng of which take to be
that packed that committee in order 10 prevent
an alprnpl iation. II at committee was com
posed Of Mr.. liebard of Chelsea, Mr.. Hibbard
of Concord Mr.. Hall of Swanton, Mr. liam
inond of Middlobury, and Mr.. MISSIONER Of
Castleton. A maj orty Of it was not from $50
calities opposed to Montpelier unless it be es
tabishcd that Mr.. Stewart, who represented
Middlobury in 1856 and 1857, misrtpresented
and betrayed his constituents in exerting, as he
did, IA controlling influence in favor ot rebuild
ing the Capitol at Montpelier. can hardly
supp3s, that the people of Montpelier will assent
to such conclusion, even to put me in the
wrong.
But however this may be, 1t is sufficient to
say that ttc0 of the three membrrs Of the COM
mttec who were from the W est side of the State,
wer1 plac d On tn, committee at the special
solicitation and request of Goo. w. Colamer,
ESQ.,, the representative from Montpelier--a
fact which have reason to believe Mr.. Collamer
cannot have forgotten. They were gentlemen
with whom had ut that time no personal ac
quaintincn, but they represented wealthy and
intelligent constituencies, and their wishes or
opinions upon any subject Of legislation nei-
ther knew nor had any interest to know
i believe am charged with some sin in the
appointment of the Committee on Public Build
ings. q have not the article before me, and
may b. in error as t. this.) 1t need only he
said that Il majority Of that committee were the
steadfast friends Of Montpelier GAS their vote
proved) to the last, hut it is true that they had
sufficient honesty and courage to report whatever
they thought was wrJng in the progress Of the
work. confess to All admiration OF such men.
j am accused OF appointing the House Com
nittee Of Conference for III lurAese Of prcuM-
ing I'm agreement between tnu two HOUSES
4 ,Jt,., nInf
: of mind that finds it more agreeable, and
more in unison with its everyday life, to believe
. evil than good
The H,uss, with IN 'jority of nearly twenty
, members who were l0Ca,iy favorable TO Mont
( p 'lier, had by Minority of mors than thirty
fused t, IN ike any appropriation out OF State
inls. WIS in such Il case bound ny every
, rule of Parliamentary practice as well IL by every
principle Of honor and decency to III Ike II ma
ritv Of that committee fully represent the ma
, rity of the HOUSE. The minority of that com
, mittce was composed of II gentleman whose
f appontm mt was, think, quite satisfactory to
: Montpelier, and whose counscls, had they been
Q followed, would, | suspect, have produced a
r different and ,ss questionable pllii, and it may
he result. Tlc President of the Senate appoint
n cd committee which fully represented the views
n Of the majority of the Senate, which for aught
can discover was pretty much the same thing
e that did, unless it Can be maintain, ID that it
was right to express the voice of the majority OF
G the Senate for Montpelier, but radically wrong
to express the Voice of the majority of the
| House against Montpelier. | cannot help think
| ing that "the peculiar fitness OF Mr.. Merrill
s for the spetkership, would have led him under
= the same circumstances (although u citizen OF
: Montpelier) to do the same thing.
LASTLY am accused of having "refused to
y receive" the propositions OF the Senate, made
/. aft r conference had been held.
did nothing of the kind. | laid both COM
f muncrtions before the House, which with entrt
. unaimity. ordered them to be returned. have
!, yet to hear amy one question the strict proprey
e of that proceeding.
will occupy no more of your space or time
If wit the realization Of the general insinuations
contained in the article. Neither Burlington
= nor its repr & ntatyes are the foes Of Mont
: p,liyr nor do we mean to BE- SO if we can helE
n it; but We are liable to the common iniirmities
It Of human nature, and we may DO drum into a
It state of hostility by the temptations which sour
r rilty and abuse Offer us. | should not have
!. noticed this article ut all. had not letter APP
n leared, within Il day OF two, from respectabl,
a citizen Of Montpelier, stating that this article
e embodied the sentiments OF your people. In
f such Il case iusic. t, myself and resp ct for tn,
opinions Of tn, re plel Of the State demand ;
reply.
4 am sorry that want OF success in measure
: Of legislation should have led the people o
~ M,nip .lier, for whom have always had higl
:. respect, and with many of whom AIN On term
;. of friendship, to regard every misfortune in th
~ progress of that measure, as the fruit of un
!, fairness in the presiding officer Of the House
;. and corrupt combinations of its members. Sncl
imput,tions, like ''hread cast on the wat rs,
= as surely return at last in tine shape of p,Ntiv
, evils to those that ''cist' thcm-W sem .nten
,f feceris, tia ct metes.
=. Ono cannot b, expected to follow the news
). piprs to explode every bubble of Islander as
;, appears, and should not have troubled 70,
-, with this letter had it not seemed that the arti
=, Gle t., which have replied was the deliberat
; 3 manifesto of the people of Montpelier.
IN will dismiss the subject now, and Il trust
forever. Yours respectfully.
GEO. f. EDxuNps
Burlington, Jan. Sd.