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

In action on the lsft where there
wA Immediate repulse, gave him
no Title 10 the disuinction Of the hero Of the
os,ns o. o. that var especially as u wss the
pant during his whole term OF service
made no charge that he claimed TO have cap
tured the cannon brought home with him,
being aware Of his disclaimer, but referred
70 the fact that his lieutenant, Roger Hanson,
bad few Year, after corrected the popular
Impression TO that effect b. humorously de
scribine. 10 letter, o. he frequently did In
spscches. IN the presence Of Gen. williams,
the circumstances connected with its scqui-
sition.
AZ regards Gen. Williams Confederate var
record and the specific allegation contained
10 Gen. Giltncr's letter 10 me, touching the
affair at kheatown, ~ IL not necessary 70 say
much. Having no personal knowledge OF the
fscts, and being without the record evidence
by which became officially cognirsut Of the
during the war, can only re-
fer IN the additional letter OF Gen. Giltner
r. Affirming the charge, and The accompany
ing statement OF Major Henry 7. Stanton.
In the Ru-sellvflle circular Of General
that the irsinustion that be wss
ever drunk during the var In front OF the
enemy 'is absolutely false and without any
foundation" Tn. issue would seem TO be
distinct and unequivocsi. From my kno~I-
edge OF the gentlemen VINO make these
charges, - well - from the corroboratipg
testimony OF others OF equal veracity, do
not hesitate 70 give them fnll credence. The
facss have been familiar To me for eleven
years, but they have been kept under that
broad mantle OF charity of which such com
mendable use has teen made by oshers, aud
should have 60 remained, had ! been permit.
ts' to continue silent
Gen. Williams 10 fortunate ip having such
~ "a aT .hsF- In. l.kt
them, however, - evidence introduced " i'm
peach the positive satements OF others OF
unimpeschrd and unimpeschabo verscity, 4
must HI borne In mind that they are gwen
for the purpose OF procuring Gen. Williams
release from the serious charges preferred
against him They partak-, therefore. Of the
nature Of petitions for executive clemency,
which almost any kind hearted man signs
daily without reading; human char
ity being so broad that II IL
easier TO md ten men Who will align an er-
statement than one who will ap-
pend his name to . charge or . protest. Asd
90, - hes already TRANSFERRED aimee the publ
cation OF Gen. Williams card and accom-
panyins certificates, more than one person
wno. thinking he wss only signing aprayer for
relief and condensation which was never To
get beyond the pigeon holes OF the War De
psrtmeut In Richmond. nnds bis statement
paradod oefor. the public TO refute . Specific
charge OF drunkenness which. personal
~, he viii not deny. Yet, though
thus eIhumed and made 10 serve
In this exigcney, It Ia remarkable. upon
To nnd how few, II any, will sp.
ply - testimony 10 refute the charge con-
tained In Gen. Giltner's, and supported BY
Maj. stAnton's, letter. Nearly ali evsds the
question, while generally they partake Of the
nature OF negative testimony In contrAdis-
tinction To positive test mony. Giltner aud
afa ton thsv saH WfIIiams drunk Al
particular time aud under peculiar circum-
stances. The production Of nve hundred wit
4 esses Who would swear they DID not zee hirn
drunk would not weaken the evidence OF the
former, unless It could he shows that the latter
were In equally favorable position for ooser-
walton.
In the course Of my speech ., Hopkins
vile. having observed Col. John ID. Morrie IN
the audience, when ! was about TO refer to
Gen. Giltner's charge. requested tn.t II
should make any statement or charge re-
latins to Gen. Williams, which he or any Que
else knew or believed untrue, | would be
glad W be corrected. Yet no one iuterpoeed
word, aud ! WAS surprised when
! ssw his card In Gen. Williams be-
half, 10 mud that not stthstznding from his
eminent legal scouiremeats he must be aware
ofthe value Of testimony, his card u utterly
WORTHLESS o. . r~futAtion Of General 6fltner's
charge. n after hearing the language a. de-
tailed by Captain Gsines, and alleged To have
been used by Gen. Williams OF me, he
could give . certificate that "there vas not .
word OF sentence of the whole speech that
wa@ sbusive OF Col. Johnston, and volunteer
= vote OF censur- upon me for responding In
What regard fitting terms, he certainly eY-
hibitA . singular oversight In omitting To af-
nrm that bis chief was intoxicated a. charged,
- be would have done had he not known that
charge 10 be true. He should try again, and
remember the legal maxim which reads, @p.
pvssro rer'. sc.
But there 10 one feature which strikes me In
the reading Of these three cards of General
Will ans and the accompanying voluminous
certificates OF character, and that Ia that they
do rot altogether tally or show that consis-
tency OF the several p.rts which IL essential
To toe unity OF the whole. One OF thess In
particularly attrscts my Admlrs-
tion by its assimilation TO the ''rhetorical
figures" OF General Williams speeches, and
II is difficult TO account for It, occurrence,
except On the hypothesis OF the existence OF
Q normal moral obliquity which, like the obli-
guilty OF vision. ine.pscitstes one for seeiug
straight.
In the Russ-llvtlle circular there 10 the fol.
lowing remarkable statement: