Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1876-11-03
Mr.. ri,deu,s Declaration that the Soldiers ofthe
Union were Trespassers.
LETTER FROM GOV. UNDERWOOD.

Inion we're Irespassers.
LETTER FROM GOV. UNDERWOOD.
The portion Of the speech of Hon. Lew
Underwood, of this city, delivered here early
in the canvass, in which he asserted that In
conversation with himself Mr.. Thden had
maintained that the war for the Union was
unconstitutional, ard that every soldier
that marched into a Southern State was
liable to suit for trespass, has been widely
copied by the Republican papers OF the
country. Mr.. Tilden has never dared DENY
that he advanced such sentiments; but as
some of his undeE-strappers have given sort
of equivocal denial that he ever said any
thing Of the kind, Hon. John NJ. Forbes, OF
Boston, addressed note to Gov. Underwood,
the other day, asking him to state what &C.
CURED Letween him and Mr.. Tilden. Gov.
Underwood reply is as fellows;
BURLINGTON, Oct. %, 1876.
Hon. J. w. ForbeS, Boston.
DEAR SIR Il am in receipt Of your favor
of the 22l inst. During the summer of
1864, at Saratoga Springs, had a social
discussion with Hon. 5. j. Tlldon, in which
he claimed that the Government Of the
United States was coniederacY Of States
and not national government. He took
the same ground as the Governors OF irginia
and kentu: ky did in 1861, that the United
States Government had no right TO march
an army across q State against its consent to
20 f-.-rs nd
act would be illegal, and no soldier could
justify such act if sued for trespass. l
contended that this was a national govern
ment and not a c0niederacy, and that the
States as such did not form the Government
of the United States, and hence there could
be no secession, and the attempt was rebel
lion. | understood Mr.. Tilden's views
in this respect to be the same
as those of Calhoun, \. Ii. Stephens, Wade
Hampton, Hill, and others of the Southern
Democracy otherwise, how can be expect
the solid support Of the South. Mr.. TIlden
reproached me for my ignorance Of the COM
mon law for claiming that soldiers, who
marched in obedience TO orders, we're not
liable in trespass for 50 doing. did not
say to him, as is published, Don't talk
such treason to me-" | did say, Don
talk such nonsense" Our discussion was
quite protracted, and | only state the sub
stance and drift Of it. am not aware that
his views expressed to me are logically dil-
ferent from those of his Kent letter The
Democratic party Of New York took the
ground in ISL that the United States had
no constitutional power to build gun-boat
canal around Niagara Falls in the State Of
New York without the consent Of that State,
even if it possessed the power II 30 it at all,
which. of course, makes the United States
subordinate 10 tie State. am truly yours.
LEVI UNDERWOOD.
Gov UndeTwocd's above statement Of Nj
Tllcn's views j. in exact accord with his
speech, and with the accounts q the inter
view which We have heard from others who
were present and listened TO the discussion
The question was directly put to M TIden
10y Mr.. Underwood, if he held that every
Union soldier in the South was liable in a
suit for troIa>s, and that the Government
could arm It's soldiers to prevent its destruc-
ton and then be required to furnish courts t. |
Try them as tre~Ias~ers; ard Mr.. Tilien re
piled that lie dad so Lold-that that was
"iust what" he held Tie discussion, we /
believe, ended ly tie Governors emphatic .
refusal to talk further with such a "lool"
We wish that those Northern editors who /
are so induisont to Southern criminals were
among them for while. so as TO realize tie .
and horrible fact that In many