Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-07-31
Mr.. Parsons Denial.

| 1t will be seen by the communication which we
hereby append from Col. Lewis E. Parsons. that he
denies the statement made against him by Mr.. c. W.
Charlton to the effect that he had confessed his bad
faith 70 the Democracy. By this denial Mr.. Parsons
has simply put himself upon the plea of not guilty.
| He is the accused, and however good may be his
character for veracity, his mere denial will not
lease him from the imputatiOn cast upon him by the
clear and impartial testimony of Mr.. Charlton Mr..
Parsons is the interested party in the issue between
himself and Mr.. Charlton and although the proof
might not be entirely adequate him before
criminal court it certainly is sufficient to convict
him in a of this kind, unless he shall dsprove
the charge by equally reliable witness his &C
cuser We have it from number of gentlemen of
| good standing in this city, well from in
Huntsville, all of whom know Mr. c. W. Charlton,
that he is a Methodist minister of irreprOachable
character and high distinction in Knoxville Tennes-
see. Certainly, then. the public will require some
| thing more than the bare denial of Mr.. Parsons to
set aside the statement OF such man against him.
| Mr.. CharltUns word is good as the word of Mr..
Parsons, or that of anybody else. He lives in Ten
nessee, and has selfish interest to subserve by
making this disclosure upon Mr.. Parsons. Mr.. Par
is, however the interested party in this cOntro
versy and submit in all fairness that he cannot
| be acquitted OF design to dlsorganiZe and des
troy the Democratic party. unless he shall counter
balance the testimony of Mr. Charlton, by an
equally unquestiOnable and disinterested witness
Indeed, the presumption of guilt in this case,
trary to the usages of the law, is all against Mr.
unrelenting opponent of the Democracy and never
even professed to be Democrat until last winter,
about the time the conspiracy was being organized
against the Democratic party of the State, by the
INSCRIPTIONS and treacherous efforts of Forsyth,
Seibels & Co., to hand the party over to Douglas,
and then he forthwith declared himself a Democrat,
and identified himself with the movement these con-
spiratOrs to overthrow and degrade the Democratic
party of Alabama. His course, since, in warning
upon the Democratic organization of the State, by
acting with the Commercial Hall faction in Opposi.
ton TO the regular convention of June 4th, at the
State House. and in pretending to thus represent the
Democracy of this State in casting its at Bat
more for Stephen A. Douglas all goes to confirm the
statement made against him by Mr.. Charlton Mr..
Parsons will, therefore, excuse us for saying that
his defence is not made out by his denial The test
timony of Mr. Charlton is unimpeached and unim-
peachable, and stands unrefuted But read what
Mr.. Parsons has TO say in his own behalf:
TALLADroA, July 20. 1860.
NRsRs SHORTER REID-GKNrIENEN In your paper of the
i and signed &c oSaron ID that tn letter b
writer makes the following statement
Mr. Parsons in reply said THAT his whole object in getting into
Convention that ne might the nomnac
Douglass this the only way in his judgment destroy
mot only So but further said intended movement as
u the Democracy conceal his real PURPOSES if he could
TiI statement s untrue, egery OOrd Of IL. Ny
joining the satOna Democratic party were stated in the speech
made time had any other, and
stated other to person This denial would be unneces
sion Of its truth
therefore request yop as an act justice give this letter
insertion your paper the prominent with
containing the charge and hope all others
papers it has appeared. viii 10 the justice.
Respectfully, Lrwls PARSONS.
To what the Advertiser has said we have only to
add that in Tennessee, where Mr.. CHARLTONs known
his character in all the relations of life is uniRl-
peached. His reputation for yeracty will not Suf-
fer by the denial of Mr.. PARSONS, who is unknown
to the people of this State.
The Journal don't like the doctrines held by Caleb
Cushing about quarter of century ago. in regard
to slavery Ii has nothing to say against his present
position on that question, as shown IN the resOlu
tons of the Convention by which Mr.. Breckenridge
was nominated, for which he voted. In bringing
I'D this old record against Gen. Cushing it admits
that public should be held responsible for the
opinions he has entertained and expressed We agree
with IL that until former errors are renowned,
hose bv whom they were held must be regarded as
,dherinp TO them Gen Cushing's present position
: known The resolutions we have referred to are
easily understood.
Now, will the Journal be good enough to tell US,
md inform the public, what position IN regard to
slavery in the District of Columbia IN the Ierrito-
,ies in the new States be admitted and the power
IF Congress over the whole matter. was maintained
by Hon Edward Everett the date CT his letter to
hon. Nathaniel Borden.
VIII it inform us whether Mr. Everett yet believes
Is he then did
lst That Congress can abolish the slave trade IN
he District of Columbia
3D. That Congress ought to abolish slavery in said
District
Sd mat the rights of humanity call for the abo-
ltlOn OF the slave trade in that District.
4th. That Congress by the Constitution can abol-
sh slavery in the Territories
9th. That no new States should hereafter be adj
nitted with domestic slavery s
9th. That Congress abolish the slave trade {
between the States +
9TH. That the exercise of this power is demanded
~ the principles of humanity and justice. d
And if Mr.. Everett has changed or modified his ! !
news since that letter written, will it say when
md where and how far, and let the pro-slavery v
men of its psrsy in the State know exactly where
le now stands?-Lo,dSUile Courier.