The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1874-03-31
POLITICAL MISCELLANY,
g0 A BUTLER eROADSIDE.
AN OPEN LETTER TO VICE PTSESI
ft DENT WILSON.

AN EXCcEIAIIoN FROM PARTY RIEND-
ANALOGOUS CRITICISM OF THE sE'SAroR.
The following letter, altogether the most
novel since Greeley's to Seward, has just
been made public:
LOWELL, Mass, Oct. 18th, 1871.
To Mr.. Senator Wilson, Natick;
DEAR SIR: A press of engagements, which
leaves me but little leisure to attend to the
epistolatory courtesies of friends, has delayed
my acknowledgements of your letter ofthe 9TH
of October, in which you say snow general,
I propose to write a few plain words to you. y
/ like plain directDess of speech. 1t is a
virtue. and one which practice to some ex-
tent, and in which am glad to be preceded
by YOU on this occasion. accept the apology
in your note for your action towards me and
find in it satisfactory explanation of your
course, which was before inexplicable. /
had learned, and have the evidence, that in
Paris YOU said, in substance, that you deemed
that in my candidature for governor was
doing a very wise thing, because 1 should
bring back the labor and temperance men to
the republican party. Your note shows why
YOU then supported me-that when you lett
for home you thought should be nominated.
"Russell had so said to me in London, and l
so said to Others" Success has ever
advocates and supporters, and you
thought ] was to succeed. But as
you say, '.when / found there was a
contest coming, L first intended to go to CAL
ifornia, and did not intend to mingle in the
coming contest, but was kept at home and
crowded into affairs" There never was a
statement more exactly and unwittingly ex-
planatorv of the facts than this. Mr.. Sena-
tor, YOU were literally crowded" into your
opposition to me. My enemies, Knowing
your weakness to do what the last man asks
You to do with which your friends are also
well acquainted), by the imperious dicta-
ton of the senior Senator Ito which you
have always finally yielded), drove you to
saving and doing on Tuesday exactly differ
emily from what you had declared in Paris.
and what you had said on the previous Fri
day, / am informed, from sucn sources that
believe the testimony, that on Friday, as
in Paris, you said substantially that
was doing a very wise thing in
the manner in which l was carry
ing on my canvass; yet to the exact con-
trary of that declaration, on Tuesday you
were Crowded" by Senator Sumner and
others into concurring in the written state
ment of Senator Sumner-which neither
of you dared to publish over either of your
naInes-"that you deeply regretted the ex.
traordinary canvass which General Butler
has precipitated upon the commonwealth"
So I could not reply to you. do not quite
understand the next sentence of your note:
"Your speeches were such as to force a rup-
ture upon republicans" Pardon me, Mr..
Senator, what can you mean by
RUPTURE UPON REPUBLICANs?"
Is it any kind of disease to which you re-
for? 1 am still mystified when,yOu further
say: "And to make your nomination self
DEGRADATION How that can be, don't I'M
derstand. Indeed, you seem to think you
will puzzle me; because you next say "This
NAV not seem so to you, but II you will
think how it will look in another man you
will realize it." Under favor Mr.. Senator
cannot ''realize'' it. How my nomination
was to be ''self.degradation," either in you
or myself whichever "self'' is mant) is en-
tirelv incomprehensible to me, after doing
nv best ''to look at it in another man."
Again you say: "Believing that your sue
cess would be injurious to our cause, said
what thought, that it ought not to be
made" What ought not to be made, Mr..
Senator? My success? Again you say: az
had a right to say it. and did SAP it as my
sense of duty" / agree to this; but please,
Mr.. Senator, why could you not have writ
ten it in little more ineligible form?
Davus sum, non Edipus. That IS Latin and
you may not understand it. Let me trans
late it freely. 1t was the old Roman method
of saying: II am Butler and not Wilson,"
and therefore / cannot understand "plain
words" explanations put in the form
of muddled conundrums. / am still
more puzzled when / come to the
next sentences: I" Il said to all that should
vote for you if nominated, and do all i could
for your election" How would il have been
possible for you to do that when my nominal
ton would " force a rupture on republi-
cans" and would be self-degrad ation."
and las Mr.. Sumner crowded. you into con-
curring) I" a nomination which would be
hostile to the best interests of the common
wealth and the republican party?" never
would have voted for such nominee, for
any body, or anything, Mr.. Senator. could
not even have voted for you, much as deem
it necessary for you to live by political office.
L never would have voted for you with
such awful consequences, although regularly
nominated. If you are sincere in what you
say in your note (or understand what Mr..
Summer made you say, it would seem that
you
MISTAKE A REGULAR NoNuNATIoN'
for a conscience. Again you say: 81 have
had no Sympathy with those who have in
dulged in personal assaults on you or your
friends" But any worse personal assault
made upon me, than that which Senator
Sumner "crowdedn Senator Wilson into
concurring in--that my nomination would
be "hostile to the commonwealth and the
republican party'-I have failed todiscover.
However, for all that, let me repeat, heart
lily accept your apology, and excuse you.
You were crowded. into it, and 1 fully be-
lieve you had no idea of the force of
the language which Senator Sumner
made you use, and therefore l entirely
credit you when you say that you
have never sympathized with any per,
sonal assault upon me. How could
you? Didn't you say, on the Friday pre-
vious, in substance, in the presence of more
than one person, that 1 was doing a wise
thing in making my canvass for governor,
and that 1 should unite the party by bring
ing back those who had gone out? I am sorry
to learn, as you tell me, that your friends at
Natick not only failed to support you, but
failed to do as you desired. You say: 81 was
not candidate for the convention, was asked
to be one, .but positively declined, and re-
fused before leaving home, and wrote from
Washington that must not be voted for"
Still it apears, in spite of your so
cogently-expressed wish, all who agreed
with you in Natick in regard to the merits
and dement's of your present correspondent
did vote for you as a delegate to the conven
ton on an anti-Butler ticket. True, there
were not many of them; but the fewer, the
81