Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1871-11-18
TENNESSEE RADICkts.


WASHINGTON, Nov. 10.-Goy. Brown
ow has written letter, denying that Col.
Camp, United States District attorney in
Tennessee, was removed because he took
part in the prosecution Of Roderic r. Butler
for pension frauds. The letter upon which.
the President made the removal was signed
by Roderic Butler, Maynard, and Brown
low No one has believed, or said. that
either of the two last named gentlemen
were influenced by the official conduct of
Mr.. Camp toward Butler, but it is firmly
believed that the movement against him had
It's origin in bitter personal feeling on But
ler's part, and determination, which he
did not hesitate to ayow pending and subse-
quent to his trial, to pursue every official
who had been concerned in preparing the
case against him..
The complaint made in the Joint letter
which these gentlemen sent the President
was to the effect that Col Camp was unfit
for his place, and was constantly harrassing
good people with suits for trivial matters.
The President, believing the statement of
the only two men of standing in the Ten
nessee delegation, removed Col. Camp
without hearing. When Col. Camp ar
rived, after his removal, and explained the
situation to the President, he was at once
reinstated This is conclusive as to the
Presidents final judgment upon the charges
which the three Tennessee gentlemen had
made in their letter.
Fortunately for COL Camp, he was an
Ohio soldier, and, better still, was from Mt
Vernon in that State, and he was thus able,
through Mr.. DelanO, to secure a full hear
ing. This resulted in his prompt restora-
ton.
1t seems that Col. Camp had been prompt
in collecting evidence against Butler in the
pension fraud case. He is now prosecuting
near relation of Butler for forgery, and is
also prosecuting Butler himself as bonds
man for government stamp agent. And
Butler, either for selfprotection or revenge,
or both, has been very busy against him.
This is not the first time that Senator
Brownlow and Mr.. Maynard have been I'm
Willingly used by their associates in Con-
gre IS to bolster of cases and causes essen
italy bad. These two gentlemen enjoy the
distinction ofhaying been, for a number of
years, the only Tennesseeans of prominence
in Congrets who are not regarded here as
pa1ticipators in corrupt schemes. The re-
suit has invariably been that whenever the
iobbers got into trouble they Immediately
sought protection and shelter from
Senator Brownlow and Mr.. May
nard. The disgraceful spectacle pre-
sented when the entire Tennessee
delegation in the House united first in lob
bying, and finally in voting against the ex-
pulsion of Butler for his cadetship transac-
tons, will not soon be forgotten by the
country. To this matter Mr.. Maynard gave
Lis countenance, TO the surprise and grief
of his friends. His reason for the course
was understood to be that if Butler was ex-
PEELED Democrat would succeed him. The
same argument was used, and with effect,
by Butler to help maintain himself when the
government arrested him for defrauding
widows Oftheir pensions. And now that Mr..
Stokes has been arrested on grave charges no
sooner does the news reach Tennessee than
Mr.. Maynard gives the weight of his name
there TO declaring them, in his opinion, wholly
untounded. The course pursued by Sena-
tor Brownlow and Mr.. Maynard is a good
example of the greatest difficulty in the
way Of Kidding Congress of the disreputa-
bic element among the Southern Republi-
can members-an element largely response
bic for the bitter opposition to Republican
ism which prevails in the South to-day.
The best men often uphold the worst.
They do it from the goodness of their
hearts, and no one questions but they
themselves are honest in all transactions.
The very fact that they are recognized In
Congress, at the departments, and by the
public as men of great integrity, places a
heavier burden Of responsibility upOnthem.
They are associated in the minds of the
public more particularly with the delegation
which their State sent to the Fortieth and
Forty-first Congress.
The men whose names were very fire.
quently before the public have been those
Of BrOwnlOw and Fowler in the Senate.
Maynard, Butler, Stokes, Prosser, Arnell
and Hawkins, of the House. Of these
Fowler has never recovered, even among
his associates here, from the burden of the
charges brought after the failure of i'm
parchment. Mr.. Hawkins was regarded as
having deliberately espoused the cause of
Andrew johnson.
For the rest, since it seems as if the Re
publican party is to be continually called
upon to apologize for and protect shem, it
may not be out of place to present a few
points in the public records of some of
these gentlemen to show how far the party
is bound to extend aid to them.
Roderic Butler first appears as a member
Of the Confederate State Legislature at
Nashville, in 1861, and as one of the most
active and bitter men in it. His intense
Rebel hate carried him so far as to propose
that body Of men should be organized to
hunt Union bridge burners in East Tennes-
see with bloOdhOunds. The next year he
appeared in East Tennessee and attempted
TO raise Rebel regiment. He did not sue
coed, and some time later he figured
slightly in the Union service. Up
on entering Congress he took the
test oath in the face of all these facts.
AS member Of the House Committee on
Pensions he was detected in passing a case
without evidence, where be was the attor-
ney, in direct violation of law of Congress,
but it was stopped in the Senate Commit
tee and reported against. This, of itself,
would have been sufficient to expel him, if
the Senate Committee had decided to bring
the transaction to the notice of the House.
As for Mr.. Stokes, his early Unionism is
very much like that displayed by Butler.
The ell-knOwn Duncan letter affords suffi-
Gent evidence on that point. He was,
however, converted at an earlier day.
When the Union men in Tennessee were
trying TO secure cOlOred suffrage in that
State, they were violently opposed by Stokes
and in a speech at Chattanooga, in 1867, he
indicated his position in the following choice
language:
"FELLow-CITIZENS What do you think?
These Yankees want to force colored suf-
frage on us. Just think Of big buck Mig
ger with his two big toes spraddled out
like gig forks, and cracks in his heel big
enough to put bolt of calico in, coming up
to the polls and voting with a white man!
It's mOnStrOus.'
In 1868, finding he could not carry his dis
trict without it, he declared in favor of
cOlored suffrage. When on his way from
Washington to Tennessee to make the
campaign for Governor against Senter, he
stated to a Southern Republican that he
''was going down to make that campaign,
to drive out the last Yankee, and carpet
bagger, and Federal soldier from Tennes-
see, and that it would have to be done in
other parts of the South
Mr.. Arnell, according to the direct state
ments of his former associates, also started
as a Confederate, and failing to secure mill
itary position, at a later date became an
original Union man. The charges of gross
fraud in his election to the Fortv-first Con-
greSs were never answered here to the salts
faction of many who voted for him. His
competitor was a Union Soldier. The
CHARGE made by the RpD1Iblicans Uos that