The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1880-10-21
GEN. GRANT DENIES.

~ hpeCIdl teicSTdH u the new
York Star, from Cleveland, Ohio,
dated October 8, says:
The extraordinary statements pub
lished in the Republican press in q
recent interview with Rev. DIR.
Fowler, Methodist clergyman, who
asserted that Gen. Grant in conver-
sation with him had spoken of Gen.
Hancock rs q weak, vain man and
had charged him with being impli-
Gated in a corrupt Transaction in
Louisiana state bonds, has come to
grief at the hands of Gen. Grant
himself, who, in an interview had at
Chicago with correspondent Of the
Plain Dealer Of this city, emphati-
cally denied ever having made any
such statements. When the story
first came out il was received with
incredulity by the public generally,
il being so entirely inconsistent with
Gen. Grants character to speak in
that manner Of q brother officer.
Gen. Grant was in the city to-day,
and, being asked in regard TO the
matter, said that he did have q pri-
vate conversation with Fowler, the
preacher in question, but Fowler not
only violated his confidence in max
ing IL public, but misrepresented
what he had said. 1--WE had some
conversation about Hancock" re-
marked Gen. Grant, "but | never
said any such things as DR.. Fowler
says | did,. and never thought of
saying them. l cannot conceive why
Dr. Fowler should have thus misrep-
resented me-"
You did not say, then, that Gen.
Hancock is vain, ambitious and
weak, and that he was crazy to be
President p"
"No, SIR" replied Gen. Grant, en-
phatically, "I never said any such
thing. What did say was that
Hancock never thought much about
the Presidency until he received
some votes in the convention of 1864;
not one vote, as DIR. Fowler put it,
and that afterward Hancock had the
presidential bee in his bonnet"
"How about the statement that
Hancock was weak and vain and
complained that you did not praise
him enough p
"I did not say that. I only said
that Hancock liAed to be praised.
My relations with Hencock were
cordial, and after he was promoted
to be major-genersl he wrote me
manly letter saving that no thought
| would do him Justice
How about the Louisiana bonds!'
''Dr. Fowler has that all wrong.
said nothing at all about Gen. Han
cock having anything TO do with
those bonds. never knew that he
had and have never had any reason
to think he had. There were onlv
$4,000,000, while DR.. Fowler says
100000
You are made to say that the
Louisiana commissioners agreed to
pay Reverdy johnson $3.50, 900 if the
officers removed by Gen. Sheridan
were reinststed, and that President
johnson had Hancock called to
Washington TO be instructed with
reference to this bond project"
Il never said that. l did not say
the commissioners agreed TO paw
Reverdy johnson that sum. did
not say that President johnson
called Hancock TO Washington 10
instruct him in this matter. did
not say that Hancock knew any,
thing about those bonds, and don't
know that he did. never said q
word TO Hancock about the bonds.
He removed Sheridan's officers when
he went South and telegraphed his
reasons, which did not think salts
factory on political grounds. He
asked 10 be relieved and I relieved
him. That Is all said about It"
Then the part of DIR. Fowler's
story that makes you reflect upon
Gen. Hancock's personal integrity
misrepresents your
at certainly does.- said Gen.
Grant with emphasis. Il never said
anything in any way rejecting or
intended To reflect on the character
of Gen. Hancock. The published
interview with DIR. Fowler misrep-
resents me entirely"
That Gen. Grant should make this |
explicit disavowal of the sentiments
attributed TO him by DIR. Fowler no
more than meets the expectation Of
his friends, who were surprised |
when the statement drst appeared |
that Gen. Grant should make such |
baseless charges affecting the char
acfer OF Gen. Hancock. Much sur
prise Is expressed that DIR. Fowler |
should lend himself TO 50 vile
piece of partisan work as sending |
forth the Interview containing such |
fragrant misrepresentation. The |
only explanation is that DIR. Fowler,
who Is = bigoted partisan with .
strong tinge Of faBaticism In his
nature, has allowed his zeal to 80 far
outrun his veracity that the two
have lost sight OF each other. The
refBtation Of this exceed
ingiy dirty campaign lie makes the
Republicans sorry that If ever was
started '