The interior journal. [volume] (Stanford, Ky.) 1872-1881, 1875-04-30

met sAto captain biectburn OF Carers reafment
10 vain appealed N HE honor and duty ~ q
sentl~man ana soldier, and finally waa forced 10
and dId STRIFE him with my sword. and thus
preferrsd charges against ne whicn never saw
aud never heard from. ~ In existence. and tnev
never vere tried the Indignation and scorn
Afterwards informed, drove him IN dsersce and
lsnominy from the command. I was relieved
from command In the Department Of Western
ovw vequea.
This would be . raan statement for man
without papers" but with one supplied 80
abundanuy ~ IL author with contrary evi
desce, though stronger and better for local
consumption IN Logan, In view that the circu-
lar les put out -four days before the county
convention, II is hard TO reconcile 9TH the
facts. Though ssseveratipg solrmnly that
there had never been any charges, or, II any,
that he had never seeu them, I'm his letter 10
Hon. n. c. Burnett he says:
aEs. WILLIAMS TO ZION. n. O suasrrr
wyrBKviILn. Jan. 2, 1854
DIAR Similarly In November last . Captain
Blackburn. VI tb~ First Tennessss cavalry (my
orlssas). preierred charges against me for ours
ing and abusing omcofu and men. ana for DRUM
snnssa" An tnis b alleged 70 have occurred on
the 18th and is.h OF Octoosr, 1855.
Tbess oharss. came TO my headquarters, and
we're scot 10 major General sam Jones, with the
indor.ement upon then that they were false ana
demanded an Immediate investigation. cot no
notice wss taten Of the request. Some DAYS after
tbis requested again In writing that the charges
b. Investigated OF dismissed as 9roundiess, feel
ins the, could not conunue In command ~hilr
tbs - charges were hausfnG over me. Neither
vas done. ! then astrd 70 b. relieved from com.
mand until an Investigation could be had, whicn
wss done. have continued 10 press fpr On invcs-
ttssttop up 20 this time. but Without succer.
Sufm | quit the Command he ON
cerv have wrfttsn me voluntary letters.
s-'tinG 10 most positive terms that the charge.
SAN. Jones, who promised 70 dismiss the charges
ton; but has done neither. ! am. therefore, COZ
nay %oocs nS srss %. Pr Pr..sso. a sou
70 them, and ssh that Justice may he done me.
The question naturally arises. what induced
.,i, e. ,sa az, W. "a mes near
this Captain Bsekburn. with his men, ned from
the neld. and was halted BY me ana ny staff ana
forced osct. With msnv not very complimentary
erprvsstons on my part In regard 10 his ds-t.rdly
conduct.
The Captain feeling the sting Of thi. rebute,
s vas Easily P-rsasdss % de.isnins psr.onsto
toe service for cowardice 81 Rosersville . few
weeks sso, ~ have learned frnm 6enrfsl Jones
and other. Your. truly JOHN =. WILLIAMS.
Hon. hhskf Q. BuasArT
In his card, only issued on the 18th AZ OF
April. 1875, alone aud without the Burnett
letter. he denies any knowledge OF charxes OF
drunkenness having been preferred against
him. while among the documents accom pany-
ing HE Louisville card, In which there is no
such denial found, 10 the Burnett letter ststiug
that charges specifically named within quo
tstion marks had three months previous
thereto BEEN prepared against him, one Of
which vas. Is alleged by Gntner, for drunk
ennese; and that the sAme had come 20 hie
beadquarters, been Endorsed by him, and for
warded to department headquarters. The
tso statements are 30 directly contradictory
o. 10 challenge ones snszement 10 q degree
unequalled by any incongruity of statement 1
hsve ever known except from the same
source.
Equally amusing is the audscity which would
ahrm, - be does 10 nis RussellvilIe letter,
that he (Gen. Williams) va relieved from
command In the Department Of Western Vn-
ginis and transferred 10 the command OF Ken
lucky troops In zen. Joe Johnston's army
at nv own request" The inference to any
ore In reading this with the antecrdent sen
tslces would be that pending certain reputed
charges, Of which ne had cognixance only by
h.arsay, he had asked To be relieved in West
EN- Virginia, and was transferred py his own
r,auest to Joe Johuston's army, the relief
ard transference being simultaneous,
or least In close sequence, and
both the result OF concurrent application.
The fact 10 disclosed In the Burnett letter, not
otly that this is untrue. but, - alleged by me
10 my Hopkfnsvtlle SPEECH, that he vas with
out command, and on duty for more than
siK months from November l, or thsre.bouts;
ard that General JONES, the department com
msndcr. bad, after examining his certificates
OF character, decllned to return him TO his
command or disnliss the charges He had
al the date of this letter been under arrest
three months, and remained TIL May fellow
Ing, or four months longer, before he was
ordered to Georgia And here let me call at
t<ntion TO the svowment Of General Williams
that he never was under arrest but once, and
that after ssltville. He seeks TO avail MIN
self OF tcchnicAity In saying he WAS
net placed under arrest but merely relieved
OF command Every soldier knows that the
aucst OF an sfiicer merely consists In being
relieved OF command, with more or less lsti-
tude OF locomotion, and that he IL not con-
nned TO the gusrd-h house ~ . private, except
for high crime. When, therefore, an officer
IL relieved OF command under charges he IL
literally under arrest 90 that there is .
mere quibbie In words In the discrepancy on
watch General Williams ass~rts that he was
never under arrest after the Rheatown AHA
under charges OF drunkenuess
-.