Daily national Republican. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1862-1866, 1866-03-26
THE PRESIDENT In coNNEoTI-
GuT.


CUT.
We call especial attention to the CORE
spondence below, which we find In the New
York Tmss. The main letter was sent to Q
vile sheet printed in this city, the editor Of
which has Of late SO basely misrepresented
the true state Of the canvass in Connecticut
but, dog like, he refused to admit the light
Of truth to his columns, fearing that his OWE
lies might thereby be revealed to his readers,
whom he has managed, for long while, to
keep In blissful ignorance.
The letters referred to below state the true
position Of the existing canvass In Connecti
cut and the Presidents relations thereto, and
Is In street accordance with the views We ex
pressed In an editorial on the subject on
Saturday. Here is the correspondence
TIE PRESIDENT IN CONNECTICUT.
To the Editor Of the Eeic York Timesy
The following article will explain itself II
was prepared for the Washington ChronIeie,
to one Of whose editors we presented II, and
by whom II was declined. We desire to
bring It to the attention of our friends and
others in Connecticut previous to the cleo.
tion in that State. J. +. D.
y. W. B., Jr.
NEw YoRK, Friday, March q, 1865
To the Editor Of the Washington Chronfcis:
In an editorial article Of the Chronicle Of
this morning, we understand you to favor
the idea that the result Of the New Hamp.
shire slsotion is in some respects 4 verdict
against the Union policy of President John
son. and an approval Of the action Of Con.
grass, 90 far as that action is at variance
with tho desires Of the President; and you
also intimate, as We understand you, that
| the election Of Gen. Hawley in Connecticut
may be justly interpreted in the same way.
II this be your meaning, We beg leave to
say, in advance. that such an inference and
such use Of the election Of General Haw'
ley would be q gross perYersion Of tbe truth
and wholly contrary to the assurances pub
licly and privately given by Gen. Hswley
who, II Is admitted, could not DO elected bul
by the aid Of the friends of tho President and
his policy.
Yet we do not claim that this policy Ia In
yolysd 10 the issue Of this election, and va
| therefore protest in advance against any such
| inference; and II such . nse is made Of that
| election, we assure you that the eject will be
| injurious 10 the Union organization.
The question may be asked why the Con
! servattyss Of Connecticut do not act with th,
other organization which has unressrysdly
avowed its support to the Presidents policy
Our answer is, that we have more eonfdsnes
in the men who have proved ths!r loyalty
on the fields Of battle, and by their efforts Il
sustain the Government In the darkest period
Of the war, than in those Who sought to dis
courage enlistments, destroy the credit o.
the Government, and give aid and comfort L
the rebels; and whom We cannot trust with
their cheap profsssions, even though they
head their ticket with gentleman whose wa
record is not so Objectionable, but whose &c
commodating temper is such that he allow
himselfto be used TO advance the interest o
a party whose loyalty was tried and founC
wanting.
We are also firm in our belief that tn,
President prefers to settle this contest insid,
ofthe Union party, giving those Of the op'
posits side who are sincere in their profes
sions the opportunity Of throwing theil
strength where 1t most propsry belongs
namely, into that portion Of the Union party
which is confeSsedly in harmony with theil
| views.
JAMES =. DAseoek, ! Of Connecticut.
F. W. Smith, Jr., ~ ''N''
wAsHIsoroS CITY. March q, 1885.