{"character_count": 1806, "word_count": 305, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9847999811172485], "ccnet_perplexity": [907.0999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
without dissenting voice. Under the conviction, that
it was the determination of the friends of Gen. Saunders
to carry the question before the Legislature and seeing
that all hopes at end for it to be settled IN eau
Gus, and considering Col Brown 10 be the candidate of
the Democratic party, according to the principles which
had ever governed that party, nominated him on my
own responsibility As am alluded to in the commun
cation referred to the individual to whoma proposition
was made by friend of Gen Saunders, not to nominate
him If Col Brown should be Withdrawn. emphatcally
state that no such proposition made to
thorized from Gen. Saunders, was requested to
submit any such proposition to Col Brown 1t is true
that friend of Gen. Saunders general conversation
the subject remarked that it would be best to throw
both candidates overheard and select third one; but
again repeat, that no such proposition submitted to
me as coming from General Saunders, and that
quently never communicated to Col Brown any such
proposition, as considered to have been made.


further state that is utterly false that Col Brown
that he took any part the proceedings of the Senate of
which he is member in relation TO the Senatorial cleo
ton but all occasions, as am informed from
questionable authority, retired from his seat, whenever
any question having the remotes bearing that cleo
ton, was about TO be considered.


also state, the evening preceding the first caucus,
and before vote was taken that Col Brown called
on and requested that after the vote taken, if he
should be in the minority, that should withdraw his
name, and state that it his wish that his friends
should unite with the majority In that contingency,
l certainly should have pursued such course.


Yours, respectfully,


RICHARD P. CARDWELL.