The Pulaski citizen. [volume] (Pulaski, Tenn.) 1866-current, 1871-09-21
That C0nyief's Letter.

published n letter from a convict IN
the State Penitentiary at Nashville,
containing some grave charges
against the officers of that institu-
ton. In giving the letter publici-
ty NE disavowcd any Endorsement
of its contents, believing at the
time that they might be exaggerat-
ed, and feeling disinclined to give
full credence to a document ema-
mating from such a discreditable
source. At the same time, howev-
or, we feltit to be an act of justice
to give even a convicted criminal if
he was prosecuted, an opportunity
for defense, and as the murder of
Hylinger was fresh in the minds Of
the people, and suggestive Of posi-
bic cruelty to prisoners on the part
Of the prison officials, we conceived
it to be our duty to grant even a
felon the privilege of a hearing if
his punishment exceeded the pen
alties that the law imposed upon
him. We have lived long enough
to know that authority is sometimes
vested in men who abuse it, and
that the history Of every public in
stitution where the offenders Of the
law have been confined, has had its
chapters of horrors and contained
instances too often of
"Man's inhumanity to man.''
It was but natural therefore with
all the revolving details Of Hyling-
er's death before us) that the pri-
son officials should be objects of
suspicion, and that one could sup
pose even a convict capable oil dis
closing other crueltics on the part
of his custodians.
During the absence of the pro
prietor and senior editor of this
paper, the letter of the convict was
received at this Office. It came
through the post office. bore the
Nashville post-mark and had evil
dences of authenticity. The wri-
ter Of this article (who at that time
had control of the editorial de
partment) published it without hes
itation, and in doing 50 considered
that he was simply discharging his
! duty as a Journalist, and furthering
the ends of public justice. A short
| time afterwards we received q let
ter from Mr.. Chumbley, the War
den OF the Penitentiary, couched
in what we considered too impera-
tive terms, demanding the name OF
the convict who wrote the letter.
Under the circumstances we per
emptorily declined to acc EIDE to his
request, inasmuch as such disclo-
sure might place the convict in a
position where he would incur Mr..
Chumbley's resentment. We ac-
cOmpanied this refusal by an as
sumption of any responsibility
that it might lay us liable to, and
informed Mr.. ChumbIey that in his
capacity of a public officer he was
/ amenabIe to censure or praise as
tie case might be, and that the
pubic press possessed the inherent
right to bestow either the one or
the other when an exigency de-
manded it. At the same time we
informed him that it would afford
US pleasure to give him the full ben
eft, through these columns, of any
defense backed by proof that he
had to make. In reply we received
the subjoined letter and certificates,
which we now publish as an act of
justice to him. The letter is man
" in its construction and has the
! tone of innocence. The certificates
establi III beyond all question the
absurdity of the charge that Mr..
Chumbley and his subordinates
made way with two convicts and
then reported them escaped"
We 1.-THE writer) have had a per-
sonal acquaintance with Mr..
Chumhley of several years dura-
ton, and in justice to him we can
say that nothing n his past repu-
tation harmonizes with the lament
able part he played in the Hyling-
er affair
Jxo. B. SMITH, Eso.-DEAR SIR;
Your letter Of the Sth inst receiv-
ed, and while I admire the chivalric
assumption by yourself of the re-
sponsibility for the publication of
the "Conviet's'' communication,
prefer to have no personal contro-
versy with you if it can be avoided.
The impulse which actuates you to
shield ''the dcfenceless," does cred
it to your heart; and therefore, I
do not propose to find fault with
your refusal to give the name Of the
convict, though you do me great
injustice in supposing that a knOwl-
edge Of his name would prejudice
me against him.
But as the convict did not him
self hand you tue communication,
YOU must have received it from 9th
er hands. That party, I presume,
Is no. defenceIsss, and it is las Ranas