Record Data
Source citation
Wood, D.H, to R. M. T. Hunter, Washington D.C., 11 November 1857. As printed in Correspondence of Robert M. T. Hunter, 1826-1876, Vol. 2, ed. Charles Henry Ambler. Washington D.C.: American Historical Association Annual Report, 1916, p. ##.
Recipient (to)
Hunter, R.M.T.
Type
Letter
Date Certainty
Exact
Transcriber
Wes McCoy
Transcription date
Transcription
The following text is presented here in complete form, as true to the original written document as possible.
Washington, D.C., November 11, 1857
My Dear Sir:
I have thought it would be agreeable to hear the opinions of your friends respecting your letters, and your prospects of re-election to the Senate.
On the first head, many of your most discreet friends think as you had preserved so long a dignified silence under the lashings of the “Enquirer,” that it would have been best to have persevered in this respect; and have said to your true friends in reply to their queries the substance of your last paragraphs to the Rockingham constituents.
But, the matter is done, and I may say without dissimulation, “Well done,” to quote King George’s reply to Dr. Johnson, especially the last letter. The first letter did not measure up to your accustomed felicity of style; but the last, has even evoked the praise of the National “Intelligencer.” Your positions are impregnable, and will be sustained by the mass of the democracy of our State. You will pardon my suggestion, I hope, when I venture to say, that your omission in both letters to refer to the very manly and patriotic reply of President Buchanan to the Connecticut Clergymen, has been construed into a cold admiration on your part of its contents, or of your want of personal or political allegiance to his administration. I sat the mere absence of approval has implied dissent.
Gov. Toucey says that he has no doubt of your faithfulness to principles, party, or the Administration; and that he supposed you would not be induced by mere newspaper squibs to define your position, but wait until a proper opportunity offered on the floor of the Senate. As one of the humblest of your friends I had hoped this would have been your course. But of course you knew best.
There is a rumor that because of the “Enquirer’s” faux paux in respect to the Senatorship, thaqt Gov. Wise has avowed his intention, recently, not under any circumstances to allow his name to come into competitions with yours; also, that the friends of that newspaper, seeing there is no probability of defeating you, and that a further opposition may jeopardy the interests of the paper, will soon cease its childish hectorings, and be reconciled to your success under the plea of endangering democratic supremacy in the State if further was shall be waged! What a pity!!
Dr. Kidwell, and others assure me that there is now not a shadow of doubt as to you re-election. All of my correspondence looks to this result.
So mote it be!
Rumor assigns Mr. Orr is most prominent for the Speakership. Forney’s paper thinks he will have no serious oppositions. But I learn that his own colleagues will not support him. He is looked upon as the Administration candidate, which may defeat him. If the Southern Rights men will go into Caucus they can control its nominee, and give it to Bocock, or any other as popular member. But the fear is that the State Rights members will not be here promptly, not go in a body to Caucus.
If the Virginia delegation presents one of her members for Speakership, the strong presumption is in favor of success. Bocock, Letcher, and Hopkins are spoken of in this connection. The first can command the united States Rights strength and is besides very popular personally. Have you heard any expression of opinion from Mr. Garnett, or any of the Members?
My Dear Sir:
I have thought it would be agreeable to hear the opinions of your friends respecting your letters, and your prospects of re-election to the Senate.
On the first head, many of your most discreet friends think as you had preserved so long a dignified silence under the lashings of the “Enquirer,” that it would have been best to have persevered in this respect; and have said to your true friends in reply to their queries the substance of your last paragraphs to the Rockingham constituents.
But, the matter is done, and I may say without dissimulation, “Well done,” to quote King George’s reply to Dr. Johnson, especially the last letter. The first letter did not measure up to your accustomed felicity of style; but the last, has even evoked the praise of the National “Intelligencer.” Your positions are impregnable, and will be sustained by the mass of the democracy of our State. You will pardon my suggestion, I hope, when I venture to say, that your omission in both letters to refer to the very manly and patriotic reply of President Buchanan to the Connecticut Clergymen, has been construed into a cold admiration on your part of its contents, or of your want of personal or political allegiance to his administration. I sat the mere absence of approval has implied dissent.
Gov. Toucey says that he has no doubt of your faithfulness to principles, party, or the Administration; and that he supposed you would not be induced by mere newspaper squibs to define your position, but wait until a proper opportunity offered on the floor of the Senate. As one of the humblest of your friends I had hoped this would have been your course. But of course you knew best.
There is a rumor that because of the “Enquirer’s” faux paux in respect to the Senatorship, thaqt Gov. Wise has avowed his intention, recently, not under any circumstances to allow his name to come into competitions with yours; also, that the friends of that newspaper, seeing there is no probability of defeating you, and that a further opposition may jeopardy the interests of the paper, will soon cease its childish hectorings, and be reconciled to your success under the plea of endangering democratic supremacy in the State if further was shall be waged! What a pity!!
Dr. Kidwell, and others assure me that there is now not a shadow of doubt as to you re-election. All of my correspondence looks to this result.
So mote it be!
Rumor assigns Mr. Orr is most prominent for the Speakership. Forney’s paper thinks he will have no serious oppositions. But I learn that his own colleagues will not support him. He is looked upon as the Administration candidate, which may defeat him. If the Southern Rights men will go into Caucus they can control its nominee, and give it to Bocock, or any other as popular member. But the fear is that the State Rights members will not be here promptly, not go in a body to Caucus.
If the Virginia delegation presents one of her members for Speakership, the strong presumption is in favor of success. Bocock, Letcher, and Hopkins are spoken of in this connection. The first can command the united States Rights strength and is besides very popular personally. Have you heard any expression of opinion from Mr. Garnett, or any of the Members?