Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1880-08-21
WHOSE Bull Is GoRED.

The historyof Hancock 5 Sherman
letter is a strange one indeed. First
it was announced in the radical
papers that a letter was in existence
written by Hancock to Sherman
which was running over with trca-
son and IT'S production fiercely de-
manded. To all this Gen. Hancock
quietly replies that the letter once
written and mailed becomes Gen.
Sherman's property, and cannot be
produced without his consent. lie
(Hancock), however, avOwed his
Willingness that it should be pub
lished, if Sherman should consent.
Then arose ii hueand cry after Sher-
man, who had gone west, and it
took a week to find him, but at last
came his tardy consent; then came
the publication of the letter, which
became ct once campaign docu-
ment for the democratic party. Sew
eral democratic dailies indeed kept
paragraphs from it standing in their
columns for weeks, while the repub-
lican Journals preserved a dead
silence ON the subject.
But now comes another strange
phase of the matter. Hancock's
letter on the face of it is evidently
an answer to one or more from Gen.
Sherman, and an enquiring public
grows curious to know what were
the questions put by Sherman to
Hancock. Calls become urgent for
the She. man note of interrogation,
and at last the unexpected answer
comes: ''Gen. Sherman would rather
it was not published"
This seems surprising, but we are
not surprised; we are inclined to
think that the questions which it is
not convenient to produce are those
to which the following paragraphs
of Hancock's letter were answers :
/ The army should have nothing to do-with
!
| dent. The people elect the president; the
! congress declares In a joint session who he
| is; we OF the army have only to-obey his
mandates, and are protected in so doing
| only so far as they may be lawful ; our COM
| missions express that.
AS have been writing thus freely to you,
| may still further unbOSOm myself by STAT
| ing that have not thought it lawful or wise
! to use federal troops in such matters as have
/ transpired east of the Mississippi within the
last few months, save so far as they may be
4 brought into action under the article of the
| constitution which contemplates the meet
/ ing of armed resistance or an invasion of n
state more powerful than the state authori-
! ties can subdue by the ordinary processes,
/ and then only when requested by the legis-
lGture, or, if it could not be convened in ses-
! sion, by the governor, and when the presi-
| dent of the United States interfereS in that
manner it is state of war, not peace.
The army is laboring under Disadvantages,
and has been used unlawfully at times in
the judgment OF the people. In mine, GER
tainly, and we have lost a great deal of the
| kindly feeling which the community mt
i large once felt for Us. IL is time to stop and
Our regular army has little hold upon the
| affections of the people of to-day, and its SUI
! perior officers should certainly, as far as ii
| is in their power, legally and with righteous
! intent, aim to defend the right which 20 us
| is the law and the institution which they
/ represent. 1t is Il well-meaning institution,
and il would be well If it should have an
| opportunity to be recognized as a bulwarlE
the law.
The questions which elected these
answers would not probably, if pub
lished, exercise a favorable influence
on the republican cause in the pres
ent canvass, and we are disposed to
commend the discretion of General
Sherman when he withhOlds them
from the public eye.
A man who was well acquainted
with the republican plans in 1876
has said plainly that Grant was in
great perplexity ut that time from
finding that the army could not be
used in seating Mr.. Hayes; and
hence the electoral commission.
Query-WOuld not the complete
Sherman Hancock correspondence
throw some light upon this perplex-
ity?