Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1870-07-22

Ae WIS elcCteu US CONSERVATIVE. w e mace
no such statement. We said positively that
he was elected by and as the nominee of the
conservatives IN the Legislature, which he
| corroborates. And we assume further that,
whether he made any pledges or not, in
tion, and, by virtue OF the election by con
erya!ivcs, taking his seat in the Senate was
a tacit pledge to represent them That he
has failed to do this, and has gone directly
against their wishes and sentiments, and the
wishes and sentiments of & large majority of
the people of Virginia, is we'll known and is
our cause Of complaint, and we again assert
that he does not represent has people. By
this VIC meant what VIC said Mr. Lewis
seemingly, desires to make the impression
that VIC meant by chs people" the Democ-
racy." No, by no manner of means We
insist that he mis-represents the largo ma
jority Of the people of the State
Though the "True Republicans" was the
name of the party on whose ticket he ran for
Lieut. Governor, the ticket was elected main
ly by the Conservatives, and we insist also
that he does not represent those who elected
Or advocated that ticket. They were conser-
vative in sentiment, while he has left them,
high and dry, for radicalism But the
''True Republicans did not elect him to
the Senate. 1t was Conservatives, elected
as Conservatives to the Legislature, y and
hence the side issue of Democracy" and
''True Republicans" is but begging of the
question.
His remarks about Gov. Walker, We leave
for him and the Governor to settle.
AS to the question Of opposition to MIR.
| Ackerman, we give Mr.. Lewis the full ben
eft Of his statement
That Lewis, Crawford & Co, of which
firm Jno. I. Lewis was partner, did have
3 contract with the Government, the papers
in the case Of Anderson Il Co., ps Mai.
Jones, of the Nitro & Mining Bureau, on
file in the Clerks Office of the Circuit Court
Of Augusta. prove; sworn statement
therein giving the amount Of hammered iron
G25 tons) contracted for. The suit of An
dcrson & Co., was dismissed, and the Gov
eminent kept the iron under its contract =
Whether it wss voluntarily sought, we
made no issue-Mr. Lewis raises that-we
simply asserted that he had a contract. That
several parties applied to Col St. John, Of
the Nitre s. Mining Department, in behalf
of i. G. & Co., before the contract was
made, we believe Col. st John will attest,
and that Mr.. Lewis loyalty was questioned
and vo4eied for, but we must do Mr.. Lew
is the justice TO say, dat as far as its being
done at ''his instance" from inquiry, we be-
; lieyo the report to have been incorrect. This,
however, We did POT assert, only stating it,
among other rumors, (tile truth Of which
VIC expressly stated we did not know, and
| hence would draw no conclusion therefrom J
merely 20 refuse the charge of the Journal
that we were 'spiteful." We could have
added other rumors in that connection, -'tof
raising OF proposing to raise a company for
the Confederate Service e-''af giving $50
towards bringing regiment Of Indians into
the service (Which we had heard but did
not know of their truth, J to show a want Of
"spitefulness' on our part, or We could
have turned to the Journal of the Convcn-
| ton of 1861, Of which oody Mr.. Lewis was
member, and citpd (page ls44, the upan-
inous election Of Gen. Il. =. Lee, as Com
mander in Chief of the forces Of Virginia,
on the 22nd of April (page 2o4) the vote
Of MIR. Lewis in the affirmative on the ques-
ton Of taxing slsyes to raise means to carry
on the war, on the part Of Virginia (page
2l7) his vote against yacatjpg the seats Of!
the members Of the Convention and electing
others on the 18th Thursday Of the following
May; and that, after hostilities had COM
menced, and the battle of Big Bethel had
been fought and won, we find Mr.. Lewis
(pages 2T0-74l voting for Messrs. Botclcr
q Neeson to represent the .sth and 10th dis
sricts Of Virginia in the Provisional Congress
Of the Confeceracy. Thcse facts even, Ia
ken from the Journal of the Conyentiop, we
could not have been considered as asserting,
only adducing to show that we were not
"spiteful,'' and much less rumors which
we positively declared we did not know 10
| be true
As to the charge of furnishing informs
ton aud guides which came near enabling
Gen. Early to capture Custer at the cave
We heard it from one who was there and
who was along with the guides, who gave
US the same reason for not capturing Custe,
as that given in the letter of Gen. Early
elsewhere. We did not not say the infor.
nation was given to Gcu EARLY. 1t wal
given to the gentleman who mentioned it tc
US, and the guides we're furnished him FL
asserts that he frequently sought information
from Mr.. Lewis and pever failcs, to get it,
Sheridan did not reach Mr.. Lewis premises
then, we are informed, as Gen Early hello
them. Mr.. Lewis is therefore at fault in
this Nav he net be as to the remainder
Surely he does not claim perfection for him
self.
4 General Early, (who saw our article anc
addressed Il letter to vs. declares he received
no information from Mr. Lewis. we puo
lish his letter elsewhere.
In conclusion we would again remind Mr.