did not. I merely desired to know whether there was anything in the story going through the papers. I am glad to learn that Southern men who have sought conversation or correspondence with you show so good a disposition.
In your reply you did not allude to what I had said about the desirability of an agreement in the Conference Committee of the two houses of Congress on a mode of counting the electoral vote. There had been a rumor in the papers that some friends of yours, assuming more or less to represent your views, had expressed a hope that no such agreement would be arrived at, but that the counting of the votes and the decision of all disputed points by the President of the Senate would be insisted upon. This matter appears to me of such importance in this crisis that I cannot refrain from expressing to you my anxiety about it, in connection with all the circumstances of the case. You will pardon me for being very frank. I do not want to force myself into your confidence or to obtrude my counsel. But at the beginning of the campaign I wrote you in one of my first letters that for whatever work I might perform in the canvass I should neither claim nor desire nor expect anything in return except the privilege of speaking to you on matters of public concern without reserve. I did so, and in some cases the advice I volunteered seemed to coincide with your views, in others it did not. In all cases it was offered in a sincere and unselfish spirit. In the same manner I address you now, believing that there are some things about which many people may hesitate to speak to a man in your position because they may not be considered pleasant. If I act otherwise I do so as a true friend.
I send you an article taken from the last number of Harper's Weekly, undoubtedly written by Mr. Curtis. I risk nothing in saying that it represents the sentiments
