The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1869-02-04

and defy contradiction.
You cay in the Dispatch Of January 9th
One Of these unprincipled adventures on
Monday swore, before the Reconstruction
Committee, to- number nf downright falPe-
hoods, AZ cverv man in Virginia, ConserVa-
tive and Radical, must know" suppose
that this refers to me. IF so, / pronounce
your statement false. I did not smear 10
anything. and until you prove my state
mcnt false. or retract vour CHARGE, you
must stand branded q slanderer. You say
Z" The church in Staunton, for instance. If
composed of say 12l members, Of whom l2o
are southern Methodists, and one north
ern Methodist (the son of one Of those
troublesome partisans called northern Me-
thodist preachers, and doubtless inveiglcd
into the church for sinister purpose).
Technically the voungar Mr.. Phelps NAV
hold the title to the building, but in morals
the 100 own it." -...r
And your corresrondent, in the same pa
per, says I" Mr.. Baldwin eavs only one
heaides his son.-who- ia irregular in his
attendance" Colonel Baldwin ought to
know that 7 have no son hare 'nho IS u
member of The church. 1t was distinctly
stated in Colonel Baldwin's presence last
August that my son had left Staunton. He
Joined the church. of his own choice, in
Washington in 1863 or 1864, brought his
certificate here, and took one away with
him in June last, and is a member in good
standing in Baltimore city. lie makes no
claim to the propertv. The " Hing ut his
attendance is worthy Of the " malice that
insured it." Colonel Baldwin ought also to
know that the onlv tDo members OF the
Methodist Episcopal Church that were sworn
here last AUGUST, both claimed to he m en-
berg Of the Methodist Episcopal Church;
that there is another, whose membership no
one has contested, to speak of no other:
True, one of those sworn stated that he d1d
not co0perate with me, yet upon oath he SAID
that he considered himself member OF the
old or Methodist Episcopal, Church vet:
In your paper of the 28th ultimo the i'm
preston is sought to be made that my state
ment in WASHINGTON conhicted with my
statement before the military commissioner
here last August, and that did not stare
the facts concerning the colored members
Of our church here. I am willing tha1 my
accuaers publish both Of my statements.
Then the people can judge. Aaron shoveler
will confirm all that / Haid in Washington
about the co1ored members here. L do not
fear the record in General Stoneman's office
or in Washington of testimony given by
myself. if pronerly made. | never SAID
L" that found it necessary TO preach with
two revolvers in my pocket"
do not deem it necessary to notice any,
thing further, and likely shall not trouble
the public again, whatever may he sald or
written. Yon and your correspondents can
continue such assaults as your blindness
and hate may inspire. I was born IN VIZ
ginia, though you publish me in to-day's
paper as carnct-hagger. My home is
in the State, and expect to spend what of
life remains to me in it: and feel that in
claiming, both upon legal and moral
grounds. the church property that our mem
hers and ministers are entitled to use am
doing right. I expect " TO fight it out upon
this line if it takes all summer 30
"Come on, come on, this rock shall fly
From its firm base rs soon rs l..
am, &C., f. P. PHELPS.
Stanton, "a, February |, 1869.
As fallen woman is the worst of human
beings because she feels herself to he I'M
worthy of the association of her own sex,
so hypocritical preacher is the most I'M
principled, reckless, and unblushingly i'm
pudent, of all public characters. 1t is abb
solutely impossible to credit anything he
SAYS; for he would rs lief tell lie as the
truth. He knows that he is untrustworthy,
treacherous, and false, and is conscious that
he is so regarded by all good men.
When Mr.. PHELPS tells US that he went
to Washington "to seek the removal of dig
abilities from several citizens Of Augusta"
we understand that he went as partisan
to aid members of the Radical party. tie
evidently intended, however, that the pub
lie should infer that he went on that mis-
sion for the benefit of true Virginians.
Mr.. PHELPS tells us that he did not Stceor
to any lies. We supposed the testimony
given before the Reconstruction Committee
WAS taken under oath, but we were mis-
taken, AS to whether he told lies without
swearing to them, we can only say that we
based the charge upon the report of his tes-
timony sent out to the whole country, North
and South, by telegraph from Washing
ton city. We reproduce the telegram,
promising that Presiding Elder PHELPS is
therein called I" A Rev. Mr.. Elder -"
"The Reconstruction Committee again
to-day had under consideration the propo-
sition of the Virginia Conservatives. A
Rev. Mr.. Elder, Methodist preacher Of
that State, testified to the committee that
society in Virginia was in fearfully bad
condition, that neither person nor property
was safe, and that he could not preach a
sermon there without having two rovolVers
in his pocket that he would be egged if he
were unarmed, etc.
"To this, Mr.. Brooks. member of the
committee, remarked that the reverend
gentleman would require whole battery Of
guns to protect him in New York if he
should speak as violently of the people in
the latter State as he represented himself
as speaking relative to the interests of the
citizens of Virginia. Mr.. Elder, however,
made a very plausible statement from his
standpoint" =.
Mr.. BRooKs's remarks were entirely I'M
called for if Mr.. PHELPS did not tell the
falsehoods here charged upon him. The
reader can judge for himself as to Mr..
PHELPs's regard for the truth.
1t is matter Of no importance, as every
man with an ounce Of brains ought to know,
whether there be two or ten members of the
staunton church who eympathize with Mr..
PHELPS. He himself admits that nearly
all of them despise him, yet he would if
he could take their building away from
them and give il to the contemptible mi