Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1865-03-09
Hon. y. y. Cox and the COnstitution'
nl Amendment.

Hon. 8. =. Cox and the Constitution-
al Amendments.
On the 10th of February, we printed a
paragraph frcrn1ne Neso York Netcs, which
ran thus; M
"There Is story ahoat about sharp
game played by Mr.. Cox, whereby one DEM
ocrat was induced to 90 over TO the ADOLF
ton side. A short time before the vote was
taken ON the amendment, Mr.. Cox took Mr..
English, of Connecticut, into the cloak
room of the House, and told him that II he
fEnglish) would vote for the amendment,
he (Cox) would do likewise. she then read
to Mr.. English short speech that he sald
he intended making, explanatory oil MS
reasons for voting in the affirmative, and as
sured that gentleman that he would vote
with the Republicans if he English would
do the same."
This sstory" was adopted, revamped, and
enlarged, by AGATE, of The Cincinnati Ga
zette; and was repeated by MACK, of The
Commercial and by the young man who
edits The Crisis. We at once pronounced it
LIE, upon the authority of Mr.. Cox him
SELF and afterwards, in an article of some
length, we undertook to show its utter i'm
probability and absurdity, and to place it
in its true light before the readers of The
STATESMAN. When Mr.. Cox read our arti-
Gle, he telegraphed us Mr.. ENGLIsH's denial
of the 'story," and we printed the dispatch.
Thereupon, BEN. WOOD gave to the readers
of The New York News the following arti-
Gle, editorially: fE .
sour Washington correspondent, a few
days ago, alleged that the Hon. S. s. Cox
after inducing Mr.. English to vote in favor
of the abolition amendment to the Consti-
tuition, by representing that he (Cox) in
tended to vote in its favor, when his name
was called answered in the negative. Mr..
Cox, in reference to this accusation, tele-
graphed to THE COLUMBUS (Ohio) STATES
MAN as follows:
English says the statement is lie; and
gives your own reason, that my name came
first in the list. S. s. Cox"
"As the statement thus pronounced a
falsehood was first published in our col
umns, we have to say that we, editorially,
can vouch for the truth of our correspon-
dents assertion. The statement OF Mr..
English to us, in the presence OF other
members of Congress, was, that Mr.. Cox
had stated his intention to vote in the
affirmative, and read to him speech that
he said he would deliver in explanation of
his vote. 1t is true that the name of Mr..
Cox came first in the list, but Mr.. English
having decided to vote as he did, did not
consider himself at liberty to change his
mind.
"We have none but the most friendly feel
ings toward Mr.. Cox, and we have certain
ly no desire to make any assertion to his
prejudice. But we cannot submit to be
placed in the attitude of falsifier. There
must be some mistake in the telegram as
published by THE STATESMAN, for MIR. Eng
lish is not in the habit of using the strong
language imputed to him, nor do we think
that Mr.. Cox would bear false witness to
screen himself from the consequences OF an
indiscretion. However, Mr.English is an
honorable man, and we are perfectly will
ing to abide by his statement over his own
signature. We would not have alluded to
this matter had not The Columbus Crisis,
while discussing the subject, asserted that
this denial of The STATESMAN made it mere
ly matter of veracity between Mr.. Cox
and Mr.. Wood and Others We are, there
fore, in self-detense, obi ged to give the facts
as they came to our knowledge"
LETTER FROM MR.. ENGLISH.
The time has now come when it is proper
for us to print the following letter from Mr..
ENGLISH to Mr.. Cox, which has been in our
possession for several days. THIS DIsposEs
OF THE "sToRY" FOR ALL TINE; and Mr..
Cox's traducers mast "abide by ENG
LIsH's statement over his own signature"
whether they "are perfectly willing to" or
not; l 3, ,.l.I