The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-01-13

controversy the fact that before the war, there
had been an elaborate conspiracy in Washington,
BIZ which certain senator's had decided upon the
confederate government. had appointed com-
mittees of senator's to- 90 South to attend to the
preliminary steps for its formation, and agreed
that others should remain here to prevent such
legislation might interfere with the success OF
the conspiracy. The matter under consideration
was. no more a personal quarrel than the four
years war for the Union had been PERSONAL
quarrel.
Mr. Vest said GENERAL Sherman had stated
that he would make his reply to Mr.. Davis
through the War Department. OF course there
fore. the paper Was part OF personal contro-
versy.
SENATOR sHERMAS's PROTEST.
Mr. Sherman after reciting the circumstances
of the controversy, said he did not desire to
wound the feelings of an old man, "but, great
God" said he, "mill if ever be disputed in this
country of ours. easany time within q thousand
years, that in the war and before the war,
Jefferson Davis was conspirator and traitor to
his conntryf Never trust" Mr. Sherman felt
compelled to enter his most solemn protest
against Davis being treated as a patriot. From
feeling of personal delicacy growing out of
his relationship to one of tho parties to the con-
troversy, he would have preferred not speaking
on 1T, but some senators seemed to treat 1T as a
controversy between two civilians. 1t would
ne u matter of surprise to Gen. Sherman that it
was OF that charastor. Gen. Sherman hau stated
that he did not know Davis personally Gen.
S1lerman had, by invitation, attended the re-
CHlon OF Grand Army post. and IN the course
Of inpromptn remarks, as: reported by the
newspapers perhaps correctly enough, said he
regarded Davis not only as rebel, but as aeon
sPlrator, and that he had seen certain letters
and papers while on his march through Georgia,
tending to show that Davis, while the war was
progressing, bad abandoned his States rights
convictions, and had become practically a. die
tatOr in the South. But there was no personal
matter in controversy between Mr. Davis and
Gen. Sherman. Gen. Sherman simply insisted
on his right to class Davisias a conspirator and
traitor. Didthat make personal quarrel be.
tween the two menl Far from it, He 1.-THE
speaker1 rnghtas well be said in the same way to
make a personal quarrel with the descendants
of Benedict Arnold by repeating historical
fact Davis had written aibitter article, not adj
dressed to General Sherman, but substantially
giving him the lie. General Sherman had not
responded to that article by any letter to DAVIS
Cur to any of the newspapers. He did the very
opposite. He was still, in every sense, an officer
of the army. even though on the retired list.
He was subject to the Presidents orders. AS
an army officer, therefore, he properly gave to-
his military superiors his reasons for every
assertion he had made. This he was bound to
do When an officer Of the army, whether
tired or not had any insult put upon him,
or anything which, among gentlemen, would
reflect upon, his character, his honor,
integrity, he was bound by his calling to
make explanation to the. proper authority to
show that the Inputarion. his honor was not
just. There WAS therefore. no personal contro-
versy between Jefferson Davis and General
Sherman, but there were some statements of a:
striking character involved which ought to be
put on the official records of the government.
why" Senator Sherman asked, should not
these papers be priEted2 Did they not show the
motives that led to the warl Did they not tend
to show. the probable termination of therrehellion.
even il the United States. armies had not sup
pressed ito he theeventual establishment of a
despotsTn, in tho Southern Statesa" Later,
Senator Sherman added: whenever the mo-
tiEes and causes of the war are called ia ques-
ton, must assert that If was a, causeless re-
bnilion, entered uponwith bad motives, and all
the men who ledin that movement were traitors
to this country of OURS"
MR.. LAMAR's DEFENSE OF DAVIS
Mr. Lamar characterized Mr.. Sherman,s state
ment OF the controversy as being marked by FIRE.
quent inaccuracies. As to the issue between.
JEFF Davis and Mr. Sherman. he mr.. Lamar
did not impugn General Sherman's veracity, but
insisted that he had been misinformed about Das
Wis, The South, Mr. Lamar said, had surren-
dered upon all questions dividing the
sections had given up the right of people
to secede from the Union and had given
up the right of each State to Judge for itself of
infractions of the Constitution and the mode of
redress 1t had fought for it's own view and had
lost, but no man should. in his presence, call.
jeff Davis % traitor without his I4amar's) re-
spending with a stern, emphatic deniali
lie had no objection to any publication that
would throw light upon the true character of the
movement for separation of the Southern
States from those of the North According to,
publications liz the press, the question was not
merely that the secession of the Southern States
was the result Of conspiracy. That question.
the Senator from Ohio MFR Sherman] had
properly remarked, n question of historical
truth,' and was to; be. ascertained and decided
by the facts of history as read by future genera
tons. Whether 1t was a conspiracy of a fewam-
bilious Individuals or an uprising of awhole peO
pie to preserves, as they thought, their autonomy
and their institutions-it was a question which
Mr. Lamar was willing should be remitted to
the verdict of postarity. No senator had kinder
feelings for General Sherman, or more respect
for his military sagacity or genius than had MIR.
Lamar, but General Sherman had been betrayed
by his feelings, and by transformation, into an
allegation and a charge against Jefferson Davis
which he could not sustain. which no man could
ever sustain, and which was not true. That
aiiegationwas that he saw letter from jefferson
Davis asserting that If Southern State should
secede from the Confederaey, he would
put it down by military coerconsz There was
no question to the historical effect in relation
TO the character of that movement as betweenM Mr.
Davis and General Sherman. 1t was outsde the
record; and when the Senator from Ohio said
there was no personal controversy betweeen
those two distinguished gentlemen, his state
ment came in direct conflict with the assertions
of General Sherman himself, who when inter-
viewed by representative of the press in ST.
Louis with regard to Mr.. Dayis's denial re-
fused to make statement, saying it was
matter between himself and Mr.. Davis. aud
not a matter for the press. Its person
atty was established by General Sherman
himself; and the discussion that had been
brought up in the Senate could throw no light
whatever on the Naked bold issue of the fact
whether General Sherman saw letter written
by Jefferson Davis to senator now in the
United States Senate saying he would coeree a
Southern State. if it should attempt to secede
from the Confederacy. II assert SIR said MIR
Lamar, that no such letter is in existence, and
in my opinion no such letter was ever written.
When the truth comes before General Sherman
that he has made. an assertion, even against. a