New-York tribune., 1878-03-23
GERRIT SMITH NOT A LIAR.
JOHN BROWNS SON SPEAKS OUT.

JOHN BROWNS SON SPEAKS OUT
HE BREAKS THE SILENCE OF TWENTY YEARS AND
vINDICATEs THE MEMORY OF Ills FATHERS
FIIEND-GERRIr SMITH DID NOTs KNOW OF THE
PROPOSED WAR UPON THE UNITED STATES GOV
ERNMENT AT HARPER's FERRY.
TO the EditOr OF The Tribune
SIR place in your hands, for publication, letter
received within the last month from John Brown'
jr. Its occasion sufficiently appears on its face.
copy was, by the same post, received by Mr Froth-
ingham but publication has been postponed by m'l-
tua understanding to the present. Comment Is not
intended but it may not inappropriatey be SAID
that the letter has the approval OF Nir
+. B. Sanborn. whose testimony IN the
controeersv respecting Gerrit Smith. so far from
being limited to his personal word as inuriously
supposed, extends through a mass of documentary
evidence of decisive bearing the subject. Though
my differences may not be found, at every point, in
entire unison with his, believe that his facts are
reliable.
Gerrit Smith, who admitted that he knew John
Browns general plans and purposes, said neverthe-
less that he had no knowledge of Harpers Ferry.
Knowing and approving those general plans, partly
executed at Harper's Ferry. how could he say that
he knew nothing of iti For. If the plans which he
knew were executed there instead of at some other
place. il would be subterfuge to say that he did not
know of Harper's Ferry, because he did not KNOW
that to be the place where was designed to execute
the plans. This is the answer:-
John Browns general plans, known and ap-
proved by Gerrit Smith, were executed only
in part at HarpcI's Ferry. The principal and
most conspicuous occurrence there, was the dead
" conflict between John Browns forces and
the United States troops prccptated by an attack,
directly upon the territory. and by an invasion OF
the jurisdiction of tho United States. Not
only Mr.. Smith did not approve OF; those
acts, but they were expressly denounced by
Article XLVI Of the Constitution of the provis-
ional government embraced i'll, and forming part
of, Captain Browns general plans. When tldings
of the attack reached Mr.. Smith ut Petcrboro. i'm
pending insanity had morbidly inflamed his consti-
tutional adherence of boodshed and the attack at
Harper's Ferry stood in his excited mind for all OF
its excesses. And so being ignorant, as IT is con-
ccded he was, that Iiarper's Ferry was to be the
place where the general plans of John Brown, which
he knew and approved, were to be executed, he
consistently said that he knew nothing of
HarpeIs Ferry, thereby signifying what III
fact is its equivalent that he knew nothing of the
war made against the United States Government
mt Harper's Ferry Such an attack being forbidden
by John Browns general plans, known to Gerrit
Smith, had that been all that occurred there.
without question. Mr.. Smith could have truly said
that he was ignorant of the attack on iiarpeI's
Ferry So also, If the plans known and approved
by Mr. Smith, were only in part executed at llar-
pers Ferry. and were them either by accident or
design abandoned and supplancd by war against
the United States Government, bis declaration that
he knew nothing of the attack on llarper's Ferry
is in fact Just as true, though not perhaps literally
as true IA if no part of the plans known To him
had been executed there. His alarmed fears did not
dwell on the earlier and less prominent features of
tho attack, but seizing upon the treason of open
war against the Government of the United States
he identified the attack on Iarpcrs Ferry with IT,
He manfestly would have deemed himself guilty Of
treason. had he known that such an attack
was intended and so understanding by the
Iarper's Ferry invasion. treason against the Govern
ment Of the United States. he denied il by saying
that he knew nothing Of llarper's Ferry. This Sig
mfcaton to him of Harpcr's Ferry peryaded the cur
rent of his after thought and 10 his latest life II IL
evident that lac considered that in denying any
knowledge of Ilarper's Ferry he denied any
knowledge Of the war made there against the
Government of the United States-a war which.
there can be no. doubt, not comprchcndcd
within John Browns general plans and purposes,
but which equally without doubt, was involved IN
the invasion of llarpcrs Ferry.
Mr.. rockingham authorizes mo to say that he
concurs in this view. JOHN CoCHRANE.
Nar- York, March 90 1873.