Pointe Coupee Democrat. [volume] (False River [i.e. New Roads], Parish of Pointe Coupee [La.]) 1858-1862, 1860-02-18
NO. 6.
[From the Baton Rouge Advocate.
Letter From E. w. Robertson.
BATON RoUGE. Feb. Sth, 1866


EDS. ADyoCATE:-lt is with reluctance
| feel constrained again TO ask lndul-
gence for trespassug upon your courte-
sy and the public, in matters personat;
but | cannot It rant the statement pub
Iiahcd by DR.. Deony in the Crescent OF
the 9th inst, in reference TO the clrcum-
stances connected with my signing the
recommendation to the people OF the
State, irrespective OF former political
differences, to meet in their respective
parishes and select delegates to attend
the Dtmocratice State Convention at
Baton Rouge, to remain without contra
dict!t H.
WbiIc1 admit the truth Of the state
mcnt 50 far as it relates to signing the
paper in question at the Harvey House,
the Doctor is mistaken when he states
he met me next morning; on the con-
trary, | had been in search of him that
morning, and seeing him pass down
Main street | pursued and hailed him,
and on ovcrtakipg him | asked him,
Doctor, what kind Of paper was 1t
signed last might an anxious to see
it z" rrmarking at the same time, that
did not fuIyremembcr it's contents, also,
at the same time, acknowledging the
corn. He replied that he did not have
it convenient, or words to that effect,
and went On to state its contents. L
permitted him to proceed until he de-
cIared that the object was to carry out
views similar to those expressed in the
resolutions on the same subject which
had been voted down in the Democratic
caucus of the House Of Representatives.
| then stated most distinctly, that [
should have opposed those resolutions
had | been a member of that caucus, and
would have Offered a resolution to admit
those only who had been elected as the
regular nominees Of the Democratic par
ty, and those elected from parishes in
which no nominations had beer, made,
whose known antccedents We're Demo-
cratic
| remarked further, that the PROPOSE
tion, as stated by him, was Il matter
which the Democracy Of each parish
should decide for themselves, and | did
not wish to interfere in the matter, al
though it might be Democratic, and
certainly had been tile usage of the par
ty, to receive all those who had hereto
fore desired IN good faith to act with us;
but | deny having endorsed the idea of
political combination or fusion of par
ties, as the paper i'll qnestionsevidently
contempIatcs. He replied "that it was
only Recommendation" and we sepa-
rated | did not then request the Doc
tor to have my name taken off, because
in the course of the conversation he led
me to believe that the paper was not in
lis possession lrad no idea that he
was then on his way to New Orleans to
have Unpublished, My determination
vas to await his return and request him
to let me see it, when l could have
judged whether to let my name remain
or have it erased.
Doctor Delony has since admitted to
me that at the time the conversation
took place between US, the document
was in his possession, and | know it
would have caused him very little in
convenience to have permitted me to see
it again. / did not see it afterwards
until it appeared in the Crescent, when
| Immediately published my card in the
Advocate requesting the withdrawal of
my signature.
Very respectfully, yours,
e. w ROBERTSON.