Year: 1872

The publication of the following letter,
in reply to that of the Hon. Geo. w. EN-
cry, Chairman Republican State Commit
tee, published on Tuesday morning has
been delayed because of the pressure upon
our columns. 1t is given now to answer
repeated inquiries as to whether the APP
pointment rendered in that letter has
been accepted:


KNOXVILLE Tenn, Oct. Is, 1872.


SIR: Your esteemed favor of the 18th
inst. notifying me of my appointment as
one of the Electors for the State at Large
upon the Republican ticket, to fill the va
cancy caused by the resignation of Judge
Houk, has been received. L thank you and
your associates for the honor thus conferr-
ed and accept the nomination.


| do not know that l can address the
people of Tennessee at many points in the
few weeks left of the canvass, hence take
this opportunity of presenting to them
some considerations which think should
influence them in voting for Grant and
Wilson.


The present canvass is unlike any we
have had in this country, for in so far as
the policy and acts of the Republican par
ty for the past twelve eventful years are
concerned, we have the confession of our
opponents plainly made in their Cincin
natl Baltimore conventions, that we were
right and they were wrong. We may
question the sincerity of this confession,
we may doubt that if successful their
promises would be fulfilled, but for all the
purposes of a canvass we have them upon
record as endorsing the wisdom and policy
of our party through the trying period to
which have referred. We are not there
fore challenged to defend the past. We
can look to it for the record of the Democ-
Tot t,,l. hNyi hat nI,on h,
their future, but they can not look to it for
such purpose for in confessing that our
acts have been wise and just, they offer an
assurance that it is good guarantee for the
future. AS to the past then, we need have
no concern.


What is to divide us now? Purely
choice of persons for President, and of the
policy they may be expected to pursue
for the future AS between Gen. Grant
and Mr. Greeley, no sensible southern man
should hesitate to choose in favor of the
former. He has been more honorable
fairer, and more conciliatory in his policy
towards the South than Greeley. There
is not a statute upon our books to-day, of
which the South complains, that has not
been fully Endorsed or advocated
by Horace Greeley, | challenge
any man to point to single unkind, un-
charitable word Gen. Grant has ever ut
tered of the Southern people, or single
act either private or official, dishonorable to
them or inimical to Southern interests.
AS President, it was his duty to suppress
the violence that bands of lawless men in
tiicted upon sections of the South, but if
in doing this, arbitrary measures were ne
cessary and some innocent men suffered,
as is always probable under such crcum-
stances, who should be held responsible for
1.-THE turbulent spirits of the South who
melted the violence, or the President who
simply did his duty in protecting innocent
citizens in their persons and property? If
the general policy OF Gen. Grant has been
of the character claimed, is it not far better
policy for the South to show by its votes
that it appreciates such acts and thereby
establish some claim upon the President
personally for the coming four years, than
to vote for Horace Greeley, who was ear
liest and most mportunate after the war in
his demands for "A proscriptive, sweeping
reconstruction policy? Ifthe South pas
sionately turns its back upon President
Grant and his fair, honorable policy
and takes in preference Horace Greeley,