The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1880-08-19
senator ButloE,s nspIy. to aen. Cash.


| a reporter for the Mews and Courier
called Upon Senator Butler with copy
OF Col. gashs letter us IL appeared in
the MationM Republican, aud inquired if
he had anything further TO say about It,.
The Senator 6ad,not seen the note TO
the Postmaster at Washington, and when
he had read it, smiled and remarked that
he had never objected to the publication
of the letter; on the contrary, was quite
willing that il should be published. Col.
Cash was entitled to have his say, and
now that he had delivered himself. ho
hoped he would be in happier frame Of
mind. "But," said the Senator, "iust
how 1t could injure the Democratic party,
l can not see, and therefore cannot un-
derstand why any paper should have re.
fused TO publish the letter on that account.
If Col. Cash finds tho Radical party
more eongenial-appearing from his nose
to have fallen out with the Democratic
party-it is entirely proper for him to
seek comfort in its ranks. Such con-
summation appears 70 be in accordance
with che eternal fitness Of things"
Reporter.-Haye you anything to say,
General, in reply to the charges which
Col. Cash brings against you?
Gen. Butler.--No, except TO say that
they are purely imaginary. Not word
of truth in any Of lhem. OF course,
do not say whether his chafge, that 1 am
coward, is true or not. II Is nnyer safe
to pass judgment on any mans courage.
L have seen some people terribly disap-
pointed in that regard, and Col. Cash
may find it Sc in this case, but we cannot
always tell.
Reporter.-Haye you ever had any
moneyed transactions with him7 What
does he mean by "the privilege Of insert.
ing your hands in his pockets" &C., &c.
Gen. B.-Why, it means that the man
is crazy or something worse. never
had money transaction, or endeavored
to have one with him in my life, nor az,
other business transaction. So he has
drawn entirely on his imagination for
this statement. Nor did l ever "piteous-
lly apply" to him about the "lottery," as
he calls it. Ny own and Gen. Gary's
connection with that business has been
explained again and again, and wns
gard and Early with the Louisiana lot
terry. The difference is, that theirs has
been success, ours was a stupendous
failure. Our attempting such an enter
prise, under the circumstances, was q
piece of ineffable stupidity, but had no
occasion to apply piteously to Col. Cash
or anybody else about it, and, therefore,
his statement.in regard to it ia without
foundation in fact. Like every man who
makes such mistake, / felt disguised
with myself about it, but am not in the
habit of complaining of sympathy being
withheld as Col. Cash does in my case.
Reptile says that you had "recently
been branded in public as liar, and
only sought redress by returning the
offensive epithet." Did such an occur
renee ever take placer
Gen. B.-Never. There is not q word
of truth in it. And I have only this to
say rs to that. Ii Col. Cash will produce
one respectable or reputable man who
will say that such thing happened, il I
do not prore that he lies will make to
him the most abject apology for any
grievance, zeal or imaginary, that was
ever made to man. And il he does not
do SO, where will he be? Oh, no, I have
no objection TO the publication of the
letter. Very hard things have been said
2L.ut me before, and [ have survived
them and trust will survive this. There
are some things that i might say about
the publication of my letter, but ! shall
not do so now; nor shall indulge in
recriminations with Col. Cash, or throw
mud ut him, but leave him to his own
conscience, which hope will cause hin
to feel ashamed Of his letter. He v y
not in the "fetters of the law when ~.
letter was written, to my knowledge, and
they do not appear to ohqfe much now.
have nothing to retract of my letter.
but cannot see why Col. Cash should feel
epecidHy aggrieved, rs no moro mention
Ia made of him than others connected
with the duel, unless the ''cap fits him"
better than Others, for which am not to
blame. only expressed my opinion
about public transaction in Which a
number of persons were engaged. Why,
have not the right to do that?