me from my friends!" I am willing to bear, and have borne, a great deal from some of mine, but I am not willing to be sacrificed or slaughtered by them, or that they should make capital for themselves by endeavoring to bring odium upon me. This is asking too much, and a little more than I am willing to yield.

When you have given votes, or made speeches or reports that were offensive to Union men, which you have frequently done during the session, did I make haste to repudiate you or your action? No! I did not approve of what you had said or done, but I offered a defense for you; I did not justify, but palliated, to reconcile those who distrusted you (as seven tenths of my friends did): and this you know, for you have been present when I did it, and you will recollect the acknowledgment you made, which I will not repeat, but which might apply as well to this case as to the one then under consideration.

And now, Mr. Garnett, I have given you a Roland for your Oliver, and let me assure you I have said nothing here except to defend myself from your most extraordinary, unprovoked, and uncalled-for assault upon me. If I thought it proceeded from treachery or baseness of heart, as others do, I would drop you altogether; but I do not think this. I think you were put up to it, and in a moment of weakness you gave way to the bad counsels of interested men, who would rejoice at my discomfiture. It is for you now to say what shall be our relation in the future. I am willing to break even, let by-gones be by-gones, and let matters stand as before; but of this you must determine for yourself. But I am admonished by the little Dispatch that my letters are always long, and that the printers dread me, which I do not think concerns them much, as I am never permitted to trouble them in this way except in the form of a paid advertisement; and, to be frank, I could not be content with short paragraphs like one who has a paper always at his command, and writes for it every day. But for any thing I can now sec, I shall be under no necessity of troubling any of them again very soon.

I am respectfully yours,

JOHN M. Borts.

THE THIRD LETTER.

In continuation, the two letters below are furnished, as serving to show the real condition of things as they now-spring of 1866-exist in Virginia, under Mr. Johnson's reconstruction policy.

To the Editor of the Republic:

Auburn, Culpepper County, February 26, 1866.

No doubt many of my friends will think it strange, and will probably condemn me for the position I have assumed in the "axioms" I have presented, and the letter following upon its heels, addressed to my friend, Muscoe Garnett, Esq.; and sometimes I think it a little strange myself, that in violation of what I thought was an absolute determination on my part, for the last five years of my life, never again to permit myself to take an active part in politics, that I should now havo departed from it, and placed myself once more in the foreground, to receive all the abuse that misapprehension, ignorance, stupidity, and malevolence might direct against me; but when I saw the incontestible evidence of disloyalty displayed by the press and Legislature of this state daily exhibited and hourly increasing; when I saw Union men every where, and under all circumstances, overslaughed and turned out of office for those who had served in the rebellion; when I saw the people being rapidly educated to look upon treason as a virtuc, and a passport to office, and loyalty a crime to be punished; when I saw, out of all the papers published in the state, only two or three, and those of a limited circulation, remonstrating or protesting against this injustice to those who alone could fill any office in this state according to the provisions of the Constitution, which I at first pronounced a second edition of the "Lecompton Swindle," but which has since been recognized by all, and under which the present Legislature professes to have met, and is now acting; when I saw that the late rebel Legislature was virtually and substantially declared a lawful government, when, on motion of a very active participant in the rebellion, in a bill that referred to the late state government, the words "de facto" were struck out, on the ground that many thought it a government “de jure," thereby virtually legalizing the rebellion; when I heard in Washington of the overwhelming testimony that had been given by the most respectable gentlemen from this state, and from almost every other Southern state, of the rapid incréase of disaffection and disloyalty among the people; and when officers in command of Southern departments, of the highest respectability, and of the highest grade and distinction, testifying to this disloyalty, and on oath declaring their knowledge of a wide-spread conspiracy on foot among the leaders-not to embark in rebellion again, for of that they have had quite enough-but to involve the country in a foreign war, in order that the discontented and aspiring politicians might have a chance to cut their way to fortune, and wipe out the bitter mortification with which

they are devoured, but which for a time was smothered, all of which you will learn when this testimony is laid before the public. It is not in my nature to be quiet until the net was woven and the knot tied by which we were again to be plunged into a sea of calamities as we were in 1861, when it might be too late to resist it. Seeing all this, I hesitated long, I reflected maturely on what my duty required me to do, and I felt I should bo no better than a traitor to my country and to my party-I mean to the Union sentiment of the South and of the country, for I belong to no party-if I did not endeavor to nip it in the bud.

So I "pitched in," enlisted once again against the most mischievous, the most reckless, the most untiring and persevering, and the most wicked party, as I religiously believe, that the Almighty, in his infinite wisdom, ever permitted to exist on carth. I speak now of the leaders of that party as a political organization, many of whom seem to think the sun would cease to rise and shine if their infallible counsels were withheld from the nation. Of what materials are our people made, that they do not look more clearly to their own interests? Have they not suffered enough through the agency of this same Democratic party, that they must cling to it and worship it as if it had delivered them from misery and ruin, instead of having brought it upon them? Are my present propositions more obnoxious than were my admonitions against the twenty-first rulo (by which the Abolition party was built up) in 1841? or my opposition to the annexation of Texas (the remote causo of the late rebellion) in 1844? or my opposition to the Mexican War in 1845, '6, and '7? or my warnings against the repcal of the Missouri Compromise (the immediate cause of the rebellion) in 1854 ? or my urgent entreaties against secessionin 1861? Why, then, not listen to me now? I am only a little in the advance now, as I was on the above-named occasions when they respectively occurred. Then all condemned, but afterward, when too late, all approved. I am not silly enough to apprehend another rebellion; but I do fear the ascendency of this party to power, and I do fear that power, if the country should, by any misfortune, become involved in a foreign war, which I have every reason to believe is anxiously prayed for by many who have recently taken the oath of strict fidelity to the United States, as contained in the amnesty oath.

Now suppose, by any misfortune or any indiscrimination on the part of the civil or military authorities either in Washington or on the Rio Grande, we should be involved in difficulty with the French Empire, and these extremely loyal gentlemen were to invite the French authorities to land a

considerable force at some southern point-say Charleston, Savannah, Pensacola, or Mobile-and General Grant were to attempt to resist them with the army of the United States, who believes they could reach the point of landing, in the present temper and spirit displayed? They might reach the point, perhaps, but would their supplies and the materials of war be allowed to reach them? Would not the bridges be destroyed, and the rails torn up, etc.? I believe if the men did not do it the women would, for they are being educated to this feeling every day.

Now if this feeling does not exist, why is it that every Union man is sacrificed, and every one who was in the rebel service taken care of? Why is it that if young ladies, who modestly and instinctively shrink from the appearance of their names in the public prints, and who attend a social party given by United States officers, find their attendance on the occasion referred to in the next day's paper in such terms as to bring odium upon them among their former friends? I know of a young lady who was brought up in a strong secession family, and whose partialities were all in that direction, that, for the sake of an evening's amusement with some warm friends, attended one of these officers' "hops," and the result was, her old friends and companions refused to recognize her when next sho met them.

All profess to be loyal, and to belong to the Union Church. Is it usual, when one joins a Christian church, and kneels at the communion-table to take the Lord's Sacrament, for them to treat with contumely and contempt those who knelt at the same table before them, and, if not, why do those who kneel at the altar of the Union with us give themselves airs, and spurn the association and fellowship of those whom they found at the altar when they came in? Does he who joins a Masonic lodge despise his brother-Masons because they were Master-Masons before he joined the lodge?

I know a lady of Virginia birth, but who married in the North, that came to this state, and went to visit her friends and relatives in Richmond (and whose father was an original and life-long secessionist), having no sentiment of resentment toward those who had differed from her in opinion; not one of her friends called to see her, and one of her near relatives actually gave her to understand that he would not speak to her if she were to visit his house; and this individual was one of the class who claim to be "loyal men" in the present acceptation of the word, and who had taken the amnesty oath, and who has hitherto passed for a kindhearted gentleman.

Under all these circumstances, together with those enumerated in my last letter, I determined to remain inactive no longer, and I have enlisted for the war, and "upon this line I propose to fight it out;” not because, as the Charlottesville Chronicle clegantly expresses it, "He had rather drive a stage, hectoring and swearing from one tavern-stand to another, than to command a man-of-war and keep his mouth shut," or, as the same paper, with still more refinement, says, "Because he would prefer being the bully among half a dozen followers, to being the leader of a free and independent party." I beg to assure the editor of the paper in question that he does me great injustice when he thinks I could have a taste for stage-driving, hectoring, swearing, or bullying, but I would rather be dead and in my grave, honored for my manhood, than patiently to submit to the wrongs and oppressions which are sought to be put upon all of my class, or keep my mouth shut from compulsion or fear; that I did not do under the Confederate despotism, and I am still less likely to do it now; and for the "free and independent party” in this state, where is it to be found, for any man of brains to lead, to which I could attach myself as an humble follower? If any one will point it out to me, I will promise to fall in the rear rank of that party. My highest aspiration is to see one such arise, Phoenix-like, to claim what they are entitled to demand. "I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak both the words of truth and soberness.'

When I enlisted in this war I knew what odds I should have to encounter; I know the prejudico I should awaken; I knew the injustice that would be done my motives; I knew the timidity of those I was endeavoring to serve, because I have had to deal with them before. I was also aware of the ignorance and stupidity I should meet with in such papers as the Petersburg Index, the leading articles of which have been beneath contempt, not for the abuse of me which has characterized them, but for the absence of all understanding and knowledge of the great questions they undertake to discuss. I knew that the small provincial papers, upon the plea of "want of room,” would garble and mutilate my “axioms," and give what they call "a synopsis," but only such a synopsis as suited their purposes, and then reason from them; all this I knew, but I determined not to "keep my mouth shut" or my pen idle.

Wait until this "Radical" Legislature shall call a convention to make a new Constitution, which will be composed of the same set or sort of men that now control the Legislature, and then we shall all see where the Union men will be found; and, therefore, I choose now, and just here, to