Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-02-25

Il is said that many Of those who are most
conspicuous in this State in the advocacy Of
the proscriptiye policy Of the radiczls-who
cling closest TO the system Of test oaths-and
who would disfranchise more than three
fourths Of the people Of the State-have not
been altogether free from the faint Of infidel-
ity 10 the cause Of the Union. We do not
profess to know whether these imputations
are strictly correct to the extent stated bat
they have gained such currency that their
introduction into the press could scarcely
give them greater publicity, and might be a
service to the parties by giving them know
ledge Of what is being said Of them. With
this view We give briefly the substance Of
current allegations against several of
them:
Col. WM. b. SToKEs.--Itis said that this
gentleman, in The month Of May, 1861, de-
clared that the time had come to resist the
expressions of the Federal Government !;
that he commended Cor Harris for his course !;
that he was for arming the State and re-
sisting Lincoln to the point Of the bayonet p
that he enrolled his name as volunteer TO
resist what he then called "Lincoln's usur-
patton" thai he opposed, in and ont of Con-
gress, the doctrine of coercion, desired TO see
the Southern Confederacy recognized with
out bioodshed, and was in favor of military
League with the Southern Confederacy. 1t
furthermore alleged that after that, he at
tended one sr more meetings where volun-
teer companies we're forming and organizing
delivered addresses encouraging erlistmeuts,
and contributed money TO AID in their equip
mcat. We desire to know whether these can
be denied with truth.
MR.SEcRETARyFLkrc 1T is asserted
that the Secretary of State, in whose hand
writing it is said the pending franchise bill
was presented to the House, was an appli-D
cant to the Confederate authorities at Rich
mond, the first year of the war, for military
commission in the Confederate service, or
for authority from the Confederate war Office
70 raise a regiment for the rebeP' SERVICE and
showed every disposition Of friendly interest
in The cause. II is also asserted that he
shamelessly dealt in human flesh" as late
as the year 1868. Can this be truthfnlly
denied
Mr.. ARNI:LL.-This worthy gentleman
is understood to have given the light of his
countenance to the cause of the rebellion"
by subscribing to the equipment of military
company for service in the Confederate
army. Qtis not, however, alleged that he
paid the suhscription.) He then sought and
obtained letters Of recommendation TO The
appropriate Confederate authority, upon
which he was enabled to get contract to
furnish leather to and for the use of the Con-
federate Government, an article which was
always in great demand, and absolutely in
dispensable to their success. He did furnish
the leather.
Mr.. SEN4ER--a Senator's known as a
member of the "Rebel Legislature" of
1862; il is asserted that he took the oath,
which was then required, 10 support The Con-
stitutiop Of the Confederate States; that upon
the fall Of Fort Donelson, he obeyed the
proclamation of Gov. Harris converting the
Legislature at Memphis, and remained with
il until its final adjournment.
Similar reports are current respecting the
record Of many others who are signalling
their devotion to the Union by ostracisiDg
their fellow-citizens, and by a course of
policy which effsctually destroys the essen
tial elementary principles of republican
systems of government. five have a proper
understanding of the proposed franchise
law, these gentlemen would be excluded
from the privileges of the ballot under its
operation. There are, we imagine, within
the limits of the State very few who were
citizens in 1861, who could comply with all
its provisions honestly and be allowed TO
vote.