The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-10-03
Mr. RufRn's Letter.

Mr.. Rufin's Letter.
W. puh,ssh this morpsng from r. @. Rrr-l
vss. rsu., an interesting contribution to the
history Of the "new movement" Of 1888.
We bsve no wish to question any Of Mr.
ppvs.xv statcmcntx, but we will indicate
snme that will bear further explanation.
Hero r one:
ssTAe alIisurs and the whole s9sr was
arranged vita Messrs. Stcarns and Cren-
shaw on one side, and General hanone on
the otbef.0
This stsement assumes thst General ma
uoxE was In 1850 so influential in the Dem
ocratic ser Conservative party that be not
only fen authorized % make, but diduake,
an ev,,iancc " vita the True Republican
marty for and on behalf Oh the Conservative
parfy. II happens that we were member
OF the Convention that met to with
dxw wrrHgRs, wkLxgR, ana MARYE.
and were, We take !, for granted,
made acquainted with the reasons why II
was deemed expedient TO retire those gen.
tlemep, vet we 40 not think that General
MAuoxE's name was ever mentioned In that
Convention. We have in our dies pretty
full report Of what was said aud done In
that Convention.
On the irsi day Judge OLD made the re-
port from the Committee on Business, which
was signed by himself. JOHN b. BALDWIN
j. r. EDxUxDs, FAyETTg McMuLLIN, l.. Il.
ANDERSON. J. G. CAxPBEi.L, A. MosELEr,
(of wythe, we tbink) w. ID. HAsKINs, and
w. T. sUrHEaLY. Judge OULD "in sub
hitting the mai ,rity report made an effect
i've speech In favor thereof" Mr.. GooDE
submitted minority report
Mr.. SHAcKELF0RD offered resolution
postponing all action until ten days after
the Presidents proclamation ordering the
election, but afterwards withdrew 1t, and
moved to lay both reports on the table.
The vote was ayes %, noes 30. A change
Of one vote would have laid both reports
upon the table. Where was the evidence
In this action OF any "alliance"? How
could there possibly have been any? And
II there was any such thing In the air, how
did 1t happen chat the Convention sat two
days celebrating as TO what II should do
On the second day, Judge HUNTER MAR
SHALL moved, and It was ordered, that the
vote should be taken at O'Clock z. 81. and
that the two sides should have the time for
debate equally divided between them. Does
that look as II an "allence " was on the
carpet between General MALONE and Messrs.
SrEARNs and CRgNsHAw In which all good
Conservatives had acqui6sced on tie
strength OF their confidence in General Ma
HOSEi Mr.. GooDE withdrew his minority
report to allow vote 10 be taken
it IL described above. Mr.. SHAcKELFORD
again urged his resolution. john b.
BALDWIN made powerful argument
in favor OF Judge OULD's majority report.
Governor SMITH made most eloquent and
beart-stirring appeal on the other side. to
which, however, Colonel BALDWIN effective.
ly replied. JOHN X. EDMUYDs made strong
argument in favor OF Withdrawing the
ticket, and Of voting for GILBERT c. Walk
Era speech which it required good deal
OF courage to enable man to make at that
time. The vote on Mr.. SHACKELFoRD's pro-
position was the test vote. 1t was "a for it
and 81 against it. Judge GUILDS report was
then adopted without division. Rich
mond city voted with the 81.
We reolte these historical facts to show
that on the both Of April, 1869. no d" ALI
ance" such as Mr.. RUFFIN speaks OF was
recognized by any leading Democrat as
having been made by General MALONE or
anybody else. Not hint was dropped on
the subject in the April Convention. We
shall, therefore, probably learn that the
"alliance7' 'sarranged" by General MA
HONE was in itself nothing, and depended
for its success 1pon the action OF the Con-
sentative Convention, whose members did
not acknowledge that he had any authority
TO make such " alliance" and have never
since conceded the truth OF the claim that
be was the founder or originator OF the
Conservative party OF Virginia.
Here is another statement which needs
further explanation:
"Generai Malone took command OF the
combined forces and organized the victory
over WeIls and the party OF hate which en-
franchised the people OF Virginia. Here
again speak as a witness; for in that cam
vass was volunteer aid upon the staff OF the
Richmond Enquirer, and witnessed the ma
Deuvres which flsnked the enemy and gave
us the day.1
We should like TO hear what those ma
neuvres were. "Tbe present writer was
actively engaged in that campaign as men,
Der OF the City Central Committee and SUI
perintendout of Monroe Ward. Yet he
never once heani OF anything that General
MALONE bad done TO .'.flsnk the enemy"
except what he did In the Petersburg Re-
publican Conxention, (weithink 1t was.)
As to General MAHoSsss coming out in
1867 for some such movement as the one
under discussion, we trustith that state
ment is not tr0e. Until after the defeat of
Mr.. SEYMOUR In 1861, who made fight
against negro sS4frage, there was no excuse
for any soutbeBer coming out for "uni-
yers&l amnesty and universal suffrage"
Any man who wenld have done so would
have utterly ruined himself in the esti-
matioa OF the people OF Virginia. We
are szre. too, that we never heard the
name Of q. G. WALLER before 1859, and
we suspect that Mr.. RufFLrs /" gentleman
OF great intelligence" Is M staken as 10 his
dates. Why Colonel WsTn,Ws was nomi.
mated, after the UNDERWOOD Convention adj |
iourned, To defeat the UNDERWOOD Consti- |
tuiion aud aegro suffrage; and It's incredi- |
BILE that Geaeral MALONE had thea secretly |