The Ouachita telegraph., 1877-09-21

peace, and harmony; saw the violence
and bloodshed at their elections how
white Republicans, as we'll as black,
were shot down during their political
contests; and I asked myself, Why is
it? How long must this continue? :?
Those men down South, the white edu-
Gated citizens, are as good men as you
or i. They are Christians; not thieves,
nor cut throats, nor bandits yet they
see these things, and tacitly approve,if
they do not take part in them. Why
is it, and how long will they continue?
While thinking these questions over
my mind reverted to the scenes of the
war, and an incident ut the battle of
Cedar Mountain came to mind. 1t
was hard fought engagement, and for
Il time we could not tell how it would
end. We who were in command had
determined that il a certain movement
resulted in one way we would give
certain orders, but if it resulted other
wise different orders would be given.
With our field glasses we were watch
ing the course of things. All at once
saw colnlnotion in the thickest of the
fray. The artillery had got to work,
and were throwing shells fast and with
unerring aim into solid masses of the
enemy. Heads were being blown
from tneAr DOule5, dTulS atlu legs "cE0
torn from their sockets, and souls were
pared and yet rejoiced and congrat-
ulated my fellow officers that we were
victorious. How could this be? Why
was it.? 1t was because we were at
war. That one word solved in my
mind the problem of the South. The
people there were at war. There was
a conflict going on. The social and
political relations Of the people were
not natural, not harmonious. There
were disturbing elements among them,
and while they existed or were unduiy
active, there would be conflict: Let
tho causes OF the conflict be removed,
and there will be peace and ultimately
harmony and prosperity"
"But," said the reporter, eve do not
see much disposition in the South to
manifest a loving temper toward us in
the North"
The President mildly retortetl: "How
ito you know? You form your opin-
ions, no doubt, from reading the papers;
but editors of newspapers do not al
ways represent the popular general feel
ing of the people, either North or
south. L think most of the people in
the South, AS l know they are in the
North, are more disposed to encourage
fraternal, harmonious, social and busi-
ness relations than the extremists, who
unfortunately, too often get control OF
the newspapers. But even these, or
most of them, will come around all
right in tine.''
One Of the questions recently agitat-
ing the scientific mind is. "Can Rattle
snakes Rattle in Wet Weather ?' In
49, ro1
of us scientists have taken part, but it
is yet unsettled. Prof. Hunter Nichol-
son, of the Rattlesnake Depart-that is
to say, of the Agriculture Department
of the University of East Tennessee
maintains that rattlesnakes can rattle
in wet weather; Mr.. Frank Buckland
maintains that they can't; while we,
on our part, have penetrated into the
bowels of the controversy no farther
than to signify our perfect willingness
to leave it discretionary with the
snakes themselves whether they can
or can not, for since it is impossible
that we can determine the question by
personal observation or experiment
without SO far placing ourselves en- rap
port with the reptile as to get into the
same Congressional district with him
and we may here pause to remark that
u more lntlI1l0tC uSSOClotIOn WIN GH0C
to particular subject of scientific research
has long been singularly repugnant our
untutored sensibilities, not to mention
its utter incompatibility with our prin-
.iples of early piety-since we can not,
us we Were about to observe, owing to
II press of job work and other profess
sional engagements, bring personal de-
monstration, to bear upon the question,
we must reluctantly leave tho subject
to be handled by the other scientists
engaged in the interesting controversy,
who talk as if they would daily with
the innocence of IA rattlesnake as one
would play with a hoop-pole or ten
foot section of II well-rope.
AS the reader may possibly have in
ferred, our share in the experimental
part of the controversy up to the pres
ent time has been small, and it is hard
ly necessary to say that it is n part
whose bulk is not likely to be very
greatly augmented at an early day. 1t
is a little difficult to determine AS yet
who has the best Of the argument, Prot.
Nicholson or Mr.. Buckland, as neither
OF them has yet been bitten, which
would certainly be the worst of it. The
first-named would seem, however, to
have somewhat the advantage, as he
declares that he has taken rattlesnakes