Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1885-01-13


tier from Jefferson Davis asserting that II
Southern State should secede from the
opfederacy he would put it down by the
Military coercion ofthe Confederate govern,
cent. There was no question OF historical
act in relation 10 the character OF tna1
oovement between Mr.. Davis and Gen;
sherman. 1t was outside the record, ana
rban the Senator from Ohio said there was
40 nersopal controversy between these TWO
DISTINGUISHED gentlemen his statement came
n direct conflict with the assertions OF zen;
sherman himself who, when interviewed
hv a representative of the press in ST. LOUIS
with regard to Mr.. Davis's denial, refused
to make statement, saying 1t was na',
tor between himself and Mr.. Davis, ana
not a matter for the press. us person.
alitv was established by General Sherman
himself, and the discussion that nau
heen brought up in the Senate could throw
no light whatever on the naked, oalo lssue
of fact. whether General Sherman saw
letter written by Jefferson Davis to Seua-
TOR now in the United States Senate, saying
that he would coerce Southern State II IT
shouId attempt to secede from the Confed'
eracv ~ tssert, sir" said Mr.. La
mar "that no such letter is in existence,
and, in my opinion, no such letter was ever
written" AS reason for his belief, MT.
Lamar said that he had been throughout
friend of Mr.. Davis, and had been often ID
consultation with him, and if Mr.. Davis va
ried his opinion, from the beginning OF the
secession controversy to the ED, IS to the
inheritance of maintaining the movement
upon the consent of the people engaged In
il. and not upon any force, his most inu-
mate friend was ignorant of any such revo-
luton of opinion. No man had stood more
firmly than Mr. Davis by the doctrine mat
it should be government based upon con,
sent and not force. through all the eVentiui
scenes of the struggle. Gen. sherman tneh
WAS simply misinformed.
'One other thing, sir" said Mr.. Lamar III
conclusion; I'VE, Of the South, have sur
rendered upon all the questions when al
yided the Two sections i'll that controversy
We have given up the right OF the people 10
secede from this Union. We have gwen up
the right of each State to judge for itself OF
the infraction of the constitution and the
mode Of redress. We have given up, SIR
the risht TO control our own domestic IN
s,i,u,iuns. We fought for them, and we
! lost in that controversy. But no man shall,
in my presence, call Jefferson Davis
traitor without my responding with stern
aud emphatic denial."
MIR. Vest said that the Senator from Kan
sas (Mr Ingalls) could indulge in no debate
without h"coming personal That Senator
| was u verbal horror and an oral terror.
| One Of the ctfenses known to the OLD
common law was that of being common
scold, the punishment for which was a
ducking. He (Mr. Vest) would not, how.
ever prescribe such punishment for the
senator from Kansas The Senator had
said that he Mr.. Vest) bad been in the
habit of abiding in a spirit of boastiulness
to the fact that he had been member OF
the Con federate Senate. II was not true.
The records would show that be had made
such illusions upon only two occasions,
once is his eulogy upon Mr.. Hlll,with whom
he had served i'll tho Confederate Senate,
and again to-day in order to assume The
full share of responsibility which was sought
in Certain quarters 10 be put upon Mr..
| Davis.
Th- Senator from Kansas had said that
Mr. vss' Was nev e "ffsdi{fd to a 1he
received his credentials from Governor OF
io,ity Of 35 900 ia a time of profound peace,
and MS election was by Legislature elect.
ed in q lirue Of peace. He would say now
to the Senator from Kansas that this (Mr.
| Vest'~) credentials to the Confederate Sen
ate, as also to The United States Senate had
never been disputed by his own constitu,
enls, and the Senator from Kansas would
| know what he meant