.MTEwMg.MTY4MA

[Copy of envelope]

House of Representatives, U. S.

[Postmark]

Wash D.C Mar 17 Congress

Col. Thos J. Gantt St. Louis

[Marginalia]

Recd March 19 / 80 Gen J. E. Johnston

[Pg 1]

House of Representatives, Washington, D.C, March 16th, 1880

Col. Thos. J. Gantt

  My dear Sir,              

               Your letter of the 13th came 

in due time and was read with great satisfaction, the more from the fact that I had just been inform- ed that in an accidental gathering of 12 or 15 demo- cratic senators a vote was taken on the F. J. Porter case, the result of which was 3 to 1 against taking it up again during this session at any rate, the excuse being, the danger of injuring our chances in the coming presidential election. How the exhibition to the country of an outrageous villainy is to bring [o-?]

[ ? ] upon the innocent and benefit the perpetra- tors, was not explained.

       The democrats in both houses of congress have 

been exhibiting in this matter unaccountable timid-

                                                ity

[Pg 2] ity from the beginning. What they are afraid of is be- yond my perception. All that I can discover is an in- definite apprehension that we may strengthen the radi- cal by righting a great wrong.

     I heard most of Randolph’s speech and read it all. 

But have no recollection of any interruption by Conkling or Logan. But your words express the other case exact- ly. I was present, and ashamed for McD. It would have been the easiest matter in the world to defeat Conk- ling – by reading a page or two of McDowell’s examina- tion immediately preceding that passage read by Conkling.

     The [Millenialism?] is not expected in our time.  So the 

best substitute for it, had better be adopted. Such a one for instance, as would prevent, rude and insulting lan- guage like that you refer to. The law of personal accountability is the only one that occurs to me. It is absolutely disgusting to be compelled to hear the ugly an

               by our adversaries 

insolence uttered ^ in every discussion that occurs.

    I can’t think that a knowledge of Pope’s incapacity 

[Pg 3]

            House of Representatives, 
                  Washington, D. C.,       , 18   .

influenced Lee and Jackson in their operations. We must sup- pose that Lee’s object was to enclose Pope between his two corps. But Jackson placed himself in Pope’s rear when Longstreet was about three day’s marches from him. Then, he formed his troops with their right flank position ex- actly towards the U.S. Army so that if attacked on that flank, their destruction would have been inevitable. And after all, the battle occurred as if the two corps had marched together directly towards the federal Army. Barring the losses that occurred before the 30th. So I see no object in the exposure which only showed their contempt for Pope. In the case you cite, Napoleon accomplished an important object without great exposure.

    In reference to [ ? ] [ ? ] [ ? ], I am not sure that 

his nomination would not be better for us than Blaine’s or Sherman’s. I find a good many western

                                               men

[Pg 4] men who think that he would not bring out the strength of the republican party if nominated. They think that the feeling against a third term is strong in the north.

    The democratic nominating convention will, I hope, 

try earnestly to find for our candidate, the democrat who will unite our party. Although he may not be the man we would make president if we had that power in our hands. I believe fully that the continuance of republi- can government depends on our electing the next president.

                     As ever,    Yours 

                          J.E. Johnston