The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1866-02-02
Those eonEressionaI Lstter..
The Memorialists strongly Con-
demned.
rhs rrn.h OF Hi.lor, Yiaaiealsa.
The Tennessee Delegation.

The Unions a morning CT too since, gave
IN extract, or, perhaps, the substance Of an
extract, from q private letter, STitsen oy
Hon. ". B. Stokes, 70 some correspondent
il this place, ia which that gentleman is
represented Is speaking IN The strongest
terms against the Memorials OF the Union
Central COMMITTEES, p~ronouncing their state
ments ~unfounded, or gross exnggeratlons.
The Uni n also understands that Hon.
Joseuh II Fowler has also written at least
one letter. in which be is very bitter against
the Memorials and their sathors. We are
satisfied, indeed, zee are perfectly confident,
that our cotemPorary has done, unInten-
tionaliy Of course, crest injustice to Col.
/ Stokes in representing him as c-ontrcverung
the statement Of the Memorials. We hare
he strongest assnrzz,es hat K does not con
trOUert heM, bHt on he contrary, s1bstaHti-
Gfes and confirms them, n ereJ essential
Point, and that, so far from regarding the
authors as faetionists, be looks upon them
as gentlemen "t0hose patriotism Is NOT 70 Be
DOUBTED, nor their AaottUeS sntpngHca." Pos
sibly Col. Stokes may nave deemed the pub
hcation Of the Memorials f'iae=padlcnt, " but
we are sure that be does not question the sc-
euracy Of their esdingstatements. Cur own
belief has been that a good, sound, intelli-
gent delegation Of true Union men from
ALAN LAAAE AlAA4 W 10 u a = AE4A0 VI k0lA IL
Congress, provided their admission did not
involve the withdrawal of Federal troops
from the state, nor lead to the adoption Of
any policy at Washington which would tend
% smooth the return Of the old rebel dynas-
ty to power. As to the pretended letter Of
Mr.. Fowler, in which be is every bitter
against the Memorials and their authors"
which the Union understands is in exist
ence, we believe IL is altogether a myth.
We are satisfied that Mr.. Fowler viii con
firm the Memorials substantially, if called
upon for his testimony.
We make these remarks in Justice to
Messrs. Stokes and Fowler, whose opinions
and feelings in this matter have, as we feel
fully assured, been grossly, although unin-
tentionally, misreprssented by The Onion.
We are certain that our representation is
perfectly accurate, and not to be questioned
successfully by sny authority whateyer.-
Press and Times.
The above appeared in the Press and
Times of yesterday. The reader viii
see that it is carefully worded, with the in
tention Of creating the impression that our
article was IN exaggeratiOn. In reply, we
would say, that we yesterday had shown US
three letters from Colonel Stokes, of which
we knew nothing, when the article was
penned and these were more bitter than
any one of those we had before perused.
In these he d-enounees the memorials as a
misrepresentation Of the position in Ten
nessee, and goes on further to say that Presi-
dent johnson, IN & Conversation goitA himself
did the same thine.
We expect to obtain the consent of Colonel
Stokes, in a week or 50, to publish these let
ters; and then the public can see If our srti-
Gle was q Misrepresentation. When the I'm
mortal dozen see the letter We refer to, they
will probably understand something of the
mischiefthey hsve done; not because they
were men Of political influence, but because
they we're unknown abroad, and are sup
posed by the radicals TO be men Of conse-
quence.
If any one-whether r it be the Editor Of the
Times, or one of the Memorialists, or any
one else-doubts the correctness Of the
above statement, we will introduce him or
them to the holders Of the letters referred
TO, and he or they can be satisfied in the
Coloners own hand writing. But until we
can obtain the necessary assent Of the
writer, we are not at liberty to publish them.
The Times says that the extract We gave
a few days since was probably a mere con-
deusation of the views Of Colonel Stokes,
but this is not the case. It is g verbatim
extract, even to the p~arentheeised word,
(memorislists
As t. the letter Of Mr.. Fowler, we stated
that we had heard be wrote such an me, but
had not seen it now that he did do 50, we
have the testimony Of Colonel Stokes, who
positively states SO in one of the letters
above quoted and We viii show hat letter
to any one who questions our assertion. To
whom Mr.. Fowlor's epistle was directed, we
canEot say.
Are we now sufficiently explicit? Dothe
memorialists and their seven followers con
tinue to dispute cur assertionsg