Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1861-03-30
Mr., Branch aad Mr.. Lewis--That Letter.

The last State Journal contains letter from Mr.. |
1.ris letter from Mr.. Branch, and portion Of
N. letter from Mr. Branch read by Mr.. Lewis to the
Dsople at Hayes and Green Level These documents |
will be founa appended to this article.
One of the important points in the letter from Mr.
Branch to Mr. Lewis, dated Washington City, is |
emitted in this publication. We canno: be mistaken
IN our recollection that the letter, as read by Mr..
Lewis, contained endorsement of the ticket
nosed of Messrs Rand, Wilder, and Lewis Where |
fore this omission? But Mr.. Branch says, i'll were
At home would advocate the election Of true men
,npledged fear that what is called the Union
marty is drifting into unconditional and uncomplan
inc submission. The columns of the Standard in
dicate such Drift Notwithstanding the omission
referred to- the foregoing extract locates Mr. Branch
Enthusiastically. If he had been at home he would
not have advocated or supported the USion ticket
because he says the Union party, and especially the
Standard are drifting into unconditional and un-
complaining submission" OF course, then, he would
have gone for the stree men" On the disunion ticket
Mr.. Branch also says ait is more than probable
we will be compelled to withdraw from the Union
that is it nearly certain that the State will haze
to 20 out Is that the feeling Of Union man? We
think not Mr.. Branch evidently belongs to the mo
hope" or disunion party.
Mr. Branch also thought that if the people of the
State should vote against Convention I've should
he ruined" This shows his respect for the people.
He was writing, not for the public, but for the eye
of his friend, and hence he said what he really
thought-and that was, if the people should think
It inexpedient to call Convention they would be
guilty of the folly of "ruining" themselves! Now,
we voted for Convention but it never occurred to
us that if our peculiar views should not prevail the
State would be "TxiRed."
So much fo- Mr. Branch's Washington City let
ter We think we have clearly shown, notwith-
standing the omission referred to, that Mr.. Branch
was dSuaioniSt on the goth of last month. We
have shown 1t by his own words, to say nothing of
his utilization with the State Journal and the dis
unonists generally ever since the issue of Union
Dsunion was made up. What Union man will say
that during the late contest in this State Mr. Branch
uttered to him. either in writing or verbally, words
of hope and encouragement? IL a Union man, was
the fact knowny Did he write or say any thing 10
that effect? If he did, let US have the proof Eel
low-ctizens that proof will not be offered 1t does
not exist 1t is all the other way. Therefore We
have said, and repeat it we will not support Mr..
Branch for Congress. We say this on principle and
we have right to say it. We will support no man
who will not pledge himself to labor, cheerfuy and
hopefully, to preserve the Union. We will support no
man who endorses or Sympathixes with disuniOEists
Mr. Branch seems to labor under the deluSion that
ire have assailed HIN. The gentleman is mistaken
he assailed us. We were before the people as a
candidate, saying nothing about against him,
when behold, letter is read from him on the stump
assailing US. That letter calculated, and no
doubt intended to injure US, to injure the Standard
and to injure the gentlemen with whom we were as
socIated. We had no agency whatever in making
it public That was done by Mr.. Branch'S partcu-
lar and very discreet friend, Mr.. Lewis. We de-
nounced the letter unmanly thrust in the dark
We declared the charge that the Union men were
disposed to submit to unjus. undelegated power,
a calumny and a SANDER. We now repeat the
declaration We now say it Uas unmanly thrust
in the dark. 1t proceeded from professed friend,
but real enemy. 1t was an indiscreet an indell-
cate, an indecent interference by Mr. Branch with
matters which did not specially concern him. 1t
attempt to dictate to portion of his consti-
tuents 1t was an arrogant assumption that he was
entirely right and the Union men, including hun
dreds of the Democratic party who had formerly
supported him, entirely wrong. 1t was declara-
ton that unless the people did as he wanted them
to do they would ruin themselves, and would
thereby show themselves unfit for selfgovernment
Verify, the servant is greater than the master.
But Mr.. Branch charges US with attempt to
''fish out" his "private correspondence" This is
", Oh - ha hon
he penned it. 1t is not true. The letter oas pri'
vate but Mr.. Lewis made it public. TWAS no fault
of ours that it made public; but, hacing been
made public, it was our right and our duty to call
for it If Mr. Branch had promptly said, "my friend
Mr.. Lewis has violated my private correspondence,
and do wish be held responsible for the con-
tents Of that letter" we would have made no call for
it. But he has done such thing On the con-
trary, he screens Mr.. Lewis andassais us, the in
nocent and injured party. He cannot do that with
impunity. He shall not charge with oficious or
improper conduct without being branded in return
as he deserves. We have not ished out" his prj'
vate letters Kr Le~is did that. He did it at
Hayes and at Green Legel. He did it to advance
the disunion cause and to influence few votes for
himself We know it is fashionable to assail and
malign us, and without intending to assail or ma
lign any one in return we proudly say there u
no blot on our escutcheon. Mr. Branch will have no
occasion to take any steps, far as ice are concern
ed, to prevent" his correspondence from being
violated for the purpose of making political capital
against" him. No one respects private corres9on'
dence more than we do The concluding paragraph
in Mr.. Branch's Raleigh letter meant for u.s. but
he may make himself easy on that score. We make
it point neither to talk about private corresPon'
dence on the Streets 1t for the purpose Of
making capital against opponents
But Mr. Lewis also pays his respects to us in that
CiceroniaD style for which he is distinguished
What have we done to Mr.. Lewis? He intimates