The Pickens sentinel. [volume] (Pickens, S.C.) 1871-1903, 1886-10-21
cal statement already branded with


statement had been seen by Republical
Senator'S, and that they were not igno
rant of its real character when the Haw
ley resolution was under discussion il
the Senate. Those Senators then knew
that General Sherman had, in his letter
of January 6, 1885, to the Secretary ot
War, changed the issue between us from
one of veracity to rambling, shufiinp
discussion of conspiracy and of con.
splrators' in the winter of 1S6O-61. and
that which at Frank Blair Post may have
been "a white lie, not intended for pub
ncatlon-camc before the Senate as 81
historical statement, bolstered with 9TH
er falsehoods equally without foundation
or support in anything written or uttered
by me. 1t now survives as an executive
document of picturesque prevarication.
L know nothing of any conspiracy OF
'conspirators.' There was no secrecy
about any of the political affairs which
led to the secession of the States in
l86O-61. 1t was the opinion of the con-
| ference of Southern Senators in January.
which is introduced in this historical
statement as evidence of conspiracy,
that secession was the only remedy left
to the States; that every effort to pre-
serve tho peace had failed mainly
through the action of that portion of the
Republican party which refused all
propositions for adjustment made by
those who sought in January, 1861, TO
justify confidence, insure peace and pre-
serve the Union. In the same month in
which that conference was held served
on con mittee raised by the Senate to
seek some possible mode of quelling the
excitement that then existed. That com
mittee was composed of the three politi-
Cal divisions of the Senate, and it was
considered useless to report any measure
which did not receive the concurrence of
at least majority of each division. The
Republican Senators rejected every
proposition that promised pacifcation,
and the committee reported to the Sen
ate that their consultation was failure.
Was there less conspiracy in the Repub-
lican Senators combining to prevent
paclflcatlon than there was in the South
ern Senators writing in conference to
ADVISE conventions of their States thft
their cause was hopeless in Washington?
Gas to the epithets which Senator
Sherman, in debate, applied to myself,
as his mode of retaliation for nv DENIM
clatlon Of his brother, have been. COM
PEELED to prove General Sherman to be o
1alsllier and slandcrcr in order 70 protect
my character and reputation from his
wllitUl and unscrupulous mendacity. If
MS brother, the Senator, felt the sting
ol that exposure, and his epithcts are
any relief, am content that he shall 90
on the record as deuouncing mo as q
TRAITOR because L have proved his
brother to be liar. =
"Ihls historical statement mipht have
been enlarged and extended by the Sen
ate and made to embrace the deliberate
Misrepresentation by General Sherman
of communication to him by Col. J.
d. Stevenson in regard to Albert Sidney
JohnstOn's command in San Francisco,
In 1t tier to Col. VIM. II. Knight, of
Cincinnati, Ohio, dated October %,
1881, General Sherman asserted that
Col. j. ID. Stevenson, now living in San
Francisco, has often told me that he had
cautioned the government as to a plot or
conspiracy through department com
mandcr Abort Sidney Johnston to de-
liver possession of the forts, ETC., to men
III California sympathizing with the
rebels in the South, and he thinks it was
by this advice that President Lincoln
| sent General Sulter to relieve Johnston
Of his command before the conspiracy
was consummated. That statement Of
Sherman, the veteran, Col. j. d. Ste-
Vcnson promptly and emphatically de-
MED. General Grant himself has not
been exempt from Sherman's malice
70 Colonel Scott Sherman wrote: IF G.
j. Smith had lived Grant would have
disappeared to history The remarka-
bic statement was published by General
Fry and pointedly and emphatically
denied by General Sherman. Prompt to
SANDER, he is equally quick to deny his
language. The letter of Sherman dated
September 6, 1883, was written to Colo
mel Scott; now Of the war record office.
| The denial of Sherman hos caused the
publication Of the letter and the exposure
OF his hypocrisy in his recent laudation
of the dead chieftaip.
''The deliberate falsehood which Shor-
man inserted IN his official report that
| Columbia, ;. O., had been burr ed by
General Wade Hampton was afterwards
confessed in his Memoirs to have been
distinctly charged to General Wade
hampton to shake the faith Of his people
IN him. Even when oonfessin9 one
falsehood he deliberately coined another,
and on the same page Of his Memoirs
said that the fire was accidental. when
he knew from the letter of General
Stone, who commanded the provost
guard in Columbia, that the fire was not
accidental. How much more he know
he may in future Memoirs or state
mcnt' reveal. Can any tnah imagine q
less moral character, less conception of
TRUTH less regard for what an official re-
port should contain than is shown by
Sherman deliberately concocting false
hood for the dishonorabIe purpose of
shaking the faith of the peoplh Of South
Carolina in their fullow!citisen General
Wade Hampton? / have in this vindi-
cation, not of myself only, but also of
, the people who honored me with the
| highest official position in their gift,
5 been compelled to group together in
} stances of repeated falschoods deliberate
e ly spoken and written by General Sher-
, mNn-thc Blair Post SANDER of myself,
{ the dcfomation Of character Of General
5 Albert Sidney ohnston, the disparage-
| mont Of the military fame of General
l Grant and the shameful and corrupt
charge against General Hampton. I have
l prepared this examination and exposure
only because the senate Of the United
0 States hts piSen To. Shcrmon's slnndn-