d States Senate, }
"Washington, D. C., December 10, 1884.}
"Dear Brother:--. . . I can see how naturally you spoke of Jeff.
Davis as you did, and you did not say a word more than he deserved.
Still, he scarcely deserves to be brought into notice. He was not
only a conspirator, but a traitor. His reply was a specimen of
impotent rage. It is scarcely worth your notice, nor should you
dignify it by a direct rejoinder. A clear, strong statement of
the historical facts that justified the use of the word 'conspirator,'
which you know very well how to write, is all the notice required.
Do not attempt to fortify it by an affidavit, as some of the papers
say you intend to do, but your statement of the letters seen by
you, and the historical facts known by you, are enough. I have
had occasion, since your letter was received, to speak to several
Senators about the matter, and they all agree with me that you
ought to avoid placing the controversy on letters which cannot now
be produced. The records have been pretty well sifted by friendly
rebels, and under the new administration it is likely their further
publication will be edited by men who will gladly shield Davis at
the expense of a Union soldier. The letter of Stephens to Johnson
is an extraordinary one. Its publication will be a bombshell in
the Confederate camp. I will deliver the copy to Colonel Scott to-
morrow. One or two paragraphs from it go far to sustain your stated
opinion of Jeff. Davis. . . .

"Very affectionately yours,
"John Sherman."

This controversy came before the Senate by a resolution offered by
Senator Hawley, calling upon the President to communicate to the
Senate an historical statement concerning the public policy of the
executive department of the Confederate states during the late War
of the Rebellion, reported to have been lately filed in the war
department by General William T. Sherman. Upon this resolution a
somewhat acrimonious debate occurred, participated in by Senators
Harris, Hawley, Vest, George, Ingalls and others. During the debate
I felt constrained, on account of my relationship with General
Sherman, to give his version of the controversy between himself
and Jefferson Davis.

I disliked the introduction of such a controversy twenty years
after the war was over, but still, as the matter was before us, I
entered at considerable length into a history of the controversy,
and expressed my decided opinion