Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-04-26
TIE IIrsroRrc nrE prrrcr.

Conspicuous on the public stage now
stands two of Georgia's most distin-
guished sons, Mr.. Hill and Mr.. Ste
phens, engaged in violent and ma
hgnant dispute, growing out of Mr..
Hills recent historical address. So
far, the controversy turns mainly on
that part of the address which relates
to the Hampton Roads Conference.
Here the two statesmen stand face to
face, pronouncing each others asse--
tons false, and insisting, to use the
language of Mr.. Hill, that the tissue
made shall tolerate no solution but
proof, retraction or in5amy." Mr.. Hill
in his address declared:
The full history Of the Hampton
Roads Commission and Conference has
never been written l viii not give
that history now. Much has been said
and published on the subject which is
not true. / know why each member of
that commission, ON our part, was Sc
ANOlCO. .1CCClNC0 1IOm MI. LAWS
own lips full account of the CONVEX
sation, between him and the commits
sioners, before their departure from
Richmond.
Commenting on this, Mr.. Stephens
afirms:
There is not one word of truth in it, ex-
cept that ''much has been said and publish
ed on the subject which is not true" and
nothing has ever been published about it
more untrue than what Mr.. Hill has thus
written and published himself. It is utter
ly impossible that Mr.. Hill could have
known what he says he knew, or received
from Mr.. Davis what he saws he received
from him. Mr.. Hill was not in Richmond
during the time the subject of the commits
sion, or the appointment of commissioners,
was under consideration by Mr.. Davis. He
had left that city before the conference or
commissioners had been determined upon
by Mr.. Davis. 1t was on Friday morning,
Jan. %, 1866, that Mr.. Hunter, of Virginia,
called at my room and stated that Mr..
Davis wished to see Ile at IL o'clock NJ, on
that day. On meeting Mr.. Davis at the
hour appointed, he stated to me the subject
of this mission, or conference, Just as given
by me in the I'd vol. of the ''War between
the States,' pages 590-61S inclusive. He
said he had not mentioned the subject, up
to that time, to any person whatever, ex-
cept Mr.. Hunter, not even to a single MEM
Der of his cabinet-that he was TO have a
cabinet meeting at O'Clock that evening
to consider the matter, but wished to confer
with me first as to the policy Of the confer
ence. The conference and the Commits
siOners were agreed upon that evening at
the cabinet meeting. The Commissioners
were sent for, and conferred with, by the
President and Mr.. Benjamin, on Saturday,
the next day, and were dispatched on their
mission early Sunday morning. Mr.. Hill,
at this time, was in Georgia, and did not
return to Richmond before the general sur
render. With what amazing effrOntery,
then, does he now affirm as an historical
TRUTH etc.
To this Mr.. Hill makes the following
reply:
Well, if Mr.. Stephens has told the truth
plead guilty of the most amazing effron-
terry. will ask no mercy, and accept no
pardon. But if Mr.. Stephens has not told
the truth, lrhdt then? Who, then, shall
wear the epithets ''shamelessness," ''impu-
dence," " effrontery,r "shameleSS-faced-
ness," etc, etc; who, then, has exceeded
Barere and Munchausen combined? If he
has told the truth, accept infamy. If he
has told falsehoOd be must take the same
penalty. Now, stand before the public
responsible, on pain Of infamy, to make
good the following statement OF facts:
vas not only in Richmond during all
the time ''the subject of the commission
and the appointment of the commissioners
was under consideration by Mr.. Davis"
but Mr.. Stephens knee / was there, saw me
almost daily, talked with me, knew the in
tereSt | took in the commission. and could
not have forgotten these facts unless he has
become imbecile indeed. l was at the mans
room and told him that / should insist on
his appointment on the Peace Commission.
1t was at my earnest instance that Mr..
Davis consented TO his appointment, and
this was all done before Mr.. Hunter nOti-
fed him of Mr.. Davis desire to see him at
II o'clock NJ, on the 9th of January. Still |
further, had promised TO 20 10 Georgia, on |
a special mission and at Mr.. Davis special |
request. For this very mission Mr.. Davis |
deemed it important that l should know all |
about the progress, prospects, and results OF |
the commission.
The Commissioners left Richmond on |
Sunday, the 2eth of January. l remained |
in Richmond, before leaving for Georgia, to |
ascertain if our Commissioners would be |
received by the other side, and at what |
place, and to confer with whom. On Fri |
day morning, the Sd of February, Mr.. Da-
Wis received dispatches making known that
our Commissioners were going to Hampton
Roads, and not Washington, and that
Messrs. Lincoln and Seward would meet
them. l spent much of the morning of Fri
day the Sd with Mr.. Davis. and received
from his own lips all that have stated in
the address, and much more preparatory to
leaving for Georgia.
Thus Mr.. Hill fatty contradicts the
alleged abb, and each of the eminent
parties seems to say to the other, in the
language of OtheIlo:
''You told lie; an odious, damned lie;
Upon my soul alive, wicked lie"
1t is simply a question of fact-the |
of Mr.. Hill at a given
time. This certainly has no great his
toric Importance, and none at all ex-
cept as affecting the credit to
be given to the gentlemen's
historic productions. But who is to be
the arbiter, the third witness? Ex-
President Davis seems to be the person
to fill the position most naturally. His
name is used in such a manner by Mr..
as to create the impression
that Stephens relied somewhat upon
his statements for the truth of what he
has charged. On the other hand, Mr..
Hill evidently intends to subpoena Mr..
Davis to prove his declarations. Mr..
Hill and Mr.. Davis are fast friends, and |
if we are to take their word for it,
believe implicitly in each others great
ness. But there need be no lack of |
witnesses to the whereabouts of MIR. |
Hill at the time in question and the
truth may be established to a moral
certainty. 1t will be damaging to one
Of the distinguished disputants, but we
incline to think that should it 60 |
against him, it would be vastly more
derogatory to Mr.. Hills character; for