Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1875-04-16
Gen. Logan and the New York
"NOrId." lr


On the 10Th ult. the New York World
revived the old SANDER against Gen.
Logan by the publication of the follow
=. q "a aS--:4. ---L~--iL-S - -.----- a.
one beatley:
JonTG. Wheatley deposes that he was one
| OF seventy men recruited for the Confederate
army by John A. Logan; that the said Logan
conducted the recruits from Williamson
County, ILL.,, under cover of night to a place
on the Ohio River, where they crossed into
Kentucky TO join the Confederate army; that
Logan chose this crossing-place in order to
avoid Union troops stationed at Cairo; that
Logan left the recruits n. the river for the
purpose of going back for more, promising
faithfully to join the first in a few days, and
then command the regiment in the Con-
| federate service.
This wretched batch of lies has done
service in every campaign since the close
of the war. In publishing the. sworn
falsehoods ofthe man Wheatley the editor
of the Wcrld no doubt knew them to be
lies, and published them with the de-
spicable purpose of keepiDg-a gross
slander alive for political effect. The
statement has been refuted over and over
again in Illinois, until of late years it has
been treated with something of the con-
tempt ii deserves both by Gen.. Logan
and his friends. But the audacity of the
World in again parading 1t before the
country induced Gen. Logan to bring
fresh refutation from rebel sources.
Thorndyke Brooks, late Lieutenant
Colonel @. s. A, of Baltimore,
Nd, in letter to Gen. Logan,
says of the affidavit Of Wheatley
and Of the alleged recruiting business:
| wish to say that said affidavit is a lie
throughout The only body Of men ever
taken from Williamson County, III to the
Confederate army, that l know of were those
that went with me. With the recruiting Of
| these, or sending off, you certainly had moth
ing to do. Said Wheatley" was never in
Illinois that l know of before the war. l
| joined the Southern cause believing it The
right one, and have never changed my opin-
ion on that point; however, not believing any
| good can be accomplished by prupagating
lies or Withholding the truth, IFhave written
you this letter as requested. --,s rssFx
Under date of the 31st ult, Gen, Logan
wrote to the World as follows:
| In your issue of the 10th inst. was published
| a statement based upon a pretended affidavit
| of one John s. Wheatley, stating in substance
that "had" recruited number of men in
Williamson County, ILL.,, at the beginning OF
the late war, for the Southern CoDtederacy,
that marched them to the Ohio River and
then deserted them, etc, .etc. i have no
| knowledge whatever of Mr.. Wheatley, eXceft
through his false affidavit, never having seen
him Il st he eysT resjded N ed in Williamson M Coqn-
| statement of his was published in Illinois sew
eral years ago, and at the time wholly refutcd
| by men of standing in the county, who de-
| clared every one of his statements TO be ut
terly false. understood at the time that this
affidavit was procured from a man in one of
the poor. houses in Illinois, by the Name of
Wheatley for a consideration, and afierward
denied by the same man. / had sup
posed that no one would ever again
think OF putting this base fabrica-
tion before the public, but inasmueh
as it has been done | presume you will not
refuse to publish a refutation Of it made by a
gentleman whose knowledge of the facts is
such that his statements cannot be ques-
toned / refer to Colonel Thorndyke Brooks,
OF Baltimore, who recruited the men referred
to by Wheatley, and commanded them dur
ing the war. He was raised in Maryland,
removed to Williamson County, H., a short
time before the war, and is now merchant
in Baltimore, wen known in that city. l
therefore ask as an act OF Justice to me that
you publish this note, with the letter of Col.
| Brooks appended, in as conspicuous apart of
your paper as you did the false statements
against me. Very respectfully.
The World of the 3lst inst. contains
the above letter, and the letter of Col.
Brooks, but not a word of retraction ed
itorially. To give wide publicity to a
gross SANDER is despicable act; not to
seek by every means at hand to correct
the false impref SION is a still more despi-
cable act. This latter is the Worlds po-
sition. If it did not, in the first instance,
know the affidavit of Wheatley to be
false, it must have been convinced of its
falsity by the letter of Col. Brooks.
To have said as much editorially would
have been a manly act. Too cowardly
10 refuse publication of the refutation Of
its SANDER, the World is still.too mean to
offer an apology for having given cur
rency to falsehood. No greater injus-
tice can possibly be committed against a
man than falsely to denounce him as a
traitor; the injustice of the false charge
is doubled when it comes from the lips
of rebel sympathizer with the rebellion,
and is hurled against soldier fresh from
his country's service in the most trying
period of its history. This is the act of
which the WO1ld has been guilty, and for
which it has made no decent reparation.
Inter. Ocean, april 6.
| -