National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1875-02-04
PERSONAL.
An Open Letter to Senator Gordon.

No. la sTREET,l
To the Editor Of the National Republican:
SIR In looking over the defamation q
can't call tie thing speech, for 1t is filled with
ridiculous assertions, perversions and distor-
lions of facts, and evidently the offspring of
falsehood) of Senator Gordon, (who misrep-
resents Georgia at the Capitol,) contained in
the Congressional Record of this morning,
CLEAN the following: Among the witnesses
introduce there will be no Jack Browns, who
run for Office first upon one side and then upon
the other--Democrat in 1872 and Republican
in 1S74-and always beaten on both. shall
not introduce any witness who assigns as his
reason for becoming candidate tor Congress
that he had failed at everything else, and was
obliged to have an Office. / prefer a different
class of witnesses and different kind of testi-
mony."
Two or three days before the Senator gave
utterance to the above garbled, false and dis
respectful statement, met him in the Capitol
grounds, when he defantly and cowardly re-
marked to me that in day or two he intended
to make a speech in which he would "attsck
my political record, and give no quarter, for in
formation furnished by me to Senator Pease"
l simply replied that my political record was
public property, and hoped that he would use
it as he saw proper; but if he dared to say one
word in derogation of the dignity of my char
acter as a man of truth and honor, would
hold him personally responsible. l took occa-
sion to be present when the Senator detained,
and heard the aforesaid Objectionable state
ment, as we'll as his refusal to permit Senator
Pease to refute the base ISLANDERS which he
(by taking advantage of his position)
was surreptitiously perpetrating upon me.
After the Senator's sophomore effusion was
ended he was alone saved from the faithful
execution of my threat by the interposition of
older and wiser heads, who tried to convince
me nothing was said derogstory to my charac-
ter, and who finally prevailed upon me 20
await the publication of the gentleman's re-
marks in the Congressional Record; then, i'll
still maintained that the language was i'm
proper, could resort to my only alternative
a reply through the press. Believing now
that the Senator intended to be disrespectful
and insulting, will ask ''Why has Brutus be-
come mad" The only solution can give to
his temper is that some two weeks ago l in
cidentally remarked to Senator Pease that
Gordon spoke one way in Georgia and another
in Washington, and illustrated my meaning
by alluding to a speech made during the last
canvass, in which l was told he said ''that
he supposed there was not white Radical in
the county of Macon; If there was, It was the
duty of Democrats to drive him from the
county," or words to that effect. Gordon de-
MES using these words or sentiments in
Georgia. AS told Senator Pease, did not
hear the speech, but received my information
from reliable sources. But let US look to the
proof. 1 will quote from a letter written on
the 22d ultimo by minister of the Gospel,
and which l proposed to show to Gordon in
our interview in the Capitol grounds.
This good man says: al was present when
General Gordon made the speech alluded to,
and if my memory serves me right he said 'he
hoped there was not a white Radical in the
county; if there was the good people ought not
to let him live here" This evidence comes
from witness whose truthfulness and charac-
ter can't be questioned, and moreover it is
positive evidenee. En- pdsSGnt, there is princi-
pie in evidence that a witness swearing to a
positive fact, or positively, must be believed in
preference to a thousand negative witnesses.
My preacher says that Gordon did say it, and
Gordon says he did not say it-one is positive
and the other negative; therefore upon princi-
Piles of evidence jury would convict Gordon
of lying. But my preacher can be corrobo-
rated, and Gordon convicted, by other testi-
mony in my possession. The secret of Cor
don's refusal to let Senator Pease interrupt
him during his defamation can be well under
stood when it is known that Gordon knew
Pease held in his hand the above evidence of
his guilt.
Hoping you will pardon this intrusion in
adopting the only method, suggested by
friends, by which can defend myself, dis
miss the subject by saying that Gordon is a
"fraud, and he must steer clear" of misrepre-
sensations in the future, so far as 1 am con-
cerned. "FeTbUnl sat Sdpisni."
Respectfully, JACK Brown.