The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-03-22
TO THE PUBLIC.

John c. Riyes the editor OF the Globe newspaper pub
ished In this city has hoaght nj to assa the members
me late firm Of Seden, Wthers, Co. through the col
umns Of his paper and to charge upon them corruption
and dishonesty In their failure and in the disposition OF Their
assets 5ts.H
The publishers Of The other city papers have not thought
Il incumbent upon them TO pursue such course. Mr.
Rives stands alone in this work.
AZ one Of the members of that frn propose TO show
briefly 10 the public that Mr. Rves has been actnaed 70
uusue ths course purely crafty feelings OF hostility on
lis mart and that under the prompting Of these unworthy
motives hs has not hestaed wntony and reeklessy 70
THAT the members Of said firm would be subject TO odiun
ana suspicion the part Of those 70 whom they were in
deb,ed and that mpuations would be cast upon them
xaa 10 be expected This is the common lot Of all who
have the misfortune to meet with pecuniary failure
matter what its They trusted TO the future to vim
dictate Them feeling assured that the winding up OF the ar
fairs Of their house would result In the payment IN full OF
an tbeir liabilities and In the full yindeaon of their in
tegrity OF purpose in their whole course.
IN he wear 1851 the house of Selden Wthers, Co puT-
chased two acceptances given by Blair Rves in favor OF
Barton seo Of New York, amounting together to over
as 600 Before these accepances matured Barton 20.
failed and Messrs. Blair Rives, (Mr r. having the
management and control of the business who were very
wealthy men, permitted their aeceptances TO be protested
When the first matured, and protested In December
1851 correspondence took place between the house OF
Seldom Whers, Go. conducted on their part by their
then president Mr. Selden) and Messrs. Blair ivesi
Conducted on their part by Mr. Rves which in It's pro-
gress engendered feelings of dissatisfaction on the part OF
the members Of the firm and subsequent events have
shown hostility on the part of Mr. r.
Mr. Ryes objected 10 the settlement of the drafts at that
time upon the grounds that Blair Riyes had received no
consideration for their acceptances and that Seden,
Whers Co had purchased the drafts at less than their
nomiual amount and intimated his purpose avail HIM
self of the plea usury Some six months after the pro-
test of these drafts they settled by the notes OF b.
at three and four months From the time 81 this trans
action all business relations between the house and Mr..
Ryes ceased and the agents of the instructed
not to the checks of Mr. r. drawn upon others
AT the time Of the failure of the house there was no in
debtedness whatsoever their part 10 Mr.. II.
Shortly after the deed of trust executed by the rn
and was admitted record, Mr.. Rives procured copy
and published it in his paper TO this there could be no
objection certainly, it conveyed information, doubt
interesting TO the public, although the deed public
record and open TO the Inspection OF all who chose to
to the City Hall and look at 1t.
Mr. Rives's commentaries with which he accompanied
the publication of the copy Astounding in vitupera
ton and inpuations Of dishonesty and fraud upon the
members firm and in Misrepresentation of facts be-
tray the source and motive Of the publication.
TO make derogatory charges and to mpute corrupt and
dishonest motives very easy to be done with those who
having self respect utterly careless whether their
statements be false, they inure those against
whom they uttered. This is mode OF warfare com
monty pursued by base and unprtopled men towards
those who have gained their enmity. Honorable men win
not employ Misrepresentation for any purpose and espec-
ally will they be careful of stating truth without coorng
even speaking of those whom they entertain
friendly feelings. Which Of these two characters MIR.
Ryes in his course towards the firm of SedeD Withers
Co. has exhibited let all just and honorable men decide
To general charges OF fraud and corruption, without
specification of fact 10 sustain them shall reply To
sustain some of his charges Of fraud and corruption Mr. r.
alleges the existence of certain facts, viz
That General Armstrong was shown, by the schedule at
ached TO the deed of trust to be debtor to the house
$4,000 when in fact he owed only about $1,000
That Petit shown TO be debtor S525, when In fact
he was debtor SIS 25 only.
That the Clerk Of the House of Representatives had
$4,000 on deposite with the house.
And that the of S55000 the yment of which was
preferred by the deed of for the redemption of
100000 of Virginia and Tennessee railroad bonds hypoth
coated with certain parties in New York in truth due
10 S, W., & Co. themselves.
These allegations are severay and collectively wholly
unfounded in truth.
The schedule of the assets of the firm made out by
the clerks of the house. Messrs Bestor Walker who
had had the sole and exclusive management Of the books
1t made out under the supervision and direction Of
Hon Samuel Chiffon, who the legal adviser Of the r
who prepared the deed and in the form directed by him.
Mr. O. desired list Of oil the credits shown by the books
(which were believed to show ally to be made out
clause was also inserted in the deed to all ohe,
credits if any there should be- not shown by the books
The schedule not particularly examined by the mem
bers of the rm having been made out with great by
Messrs Bestor Walker and supervised by Mr.. Chiffon
There did stand the books of the firm against Gen
Armstrong balance of S32 oO0 existing At the time OF
his DEATH His personal representative (Nr Harrs is
true had power to check for accrung after the
death Of Gen A., which, if applied TO the above balance
would leave due ST 800; but such application had not
been made and the house had power to make it,
Mr. Petit listed in the schedule owing SIS rs,
and not Sl,525, as Mr.. r. alleges Misrepresentation
wholly his own.
The Clerk of the House of Representatives had one
dollar of either public pirate money depose with
the house, but was in its debt about $4,000
The charge that the sum OF $55000 preferred by the
deed was in truth the property and in fact due to S. W.
Co themselves is upon its face utterly absurd that
in the absence of any allegation OF scna OF evil
dence to sustain it, does not call for denial but may
be referred evidence of the utter recessness Of the
statements the qualification of maleyolent passions will
sometimes actua,e malignant men to make.
Mr. Rves having gratifed his long-cherished enmity,
having yaiany and herocaly struck his enemy who he
supposed "doon' assuming all the responsibility of
an act which only generous and brave would dare
TO do challenges those he has thus injured suit for IL
BEL
For myself have neither time nor money requisite to
the yndcaon Of TRUTH is exceedingly uncertain and but
seldom affords redress for the injury which the reckless
sanderer has perperated was therefore inclined To
await the vindication which time and future developments
was sure would furnish was content to leave Mr..
70 the full and congenial enjoyment his course had
doubt afforded him-supposng however that his enmty
by his first publication had been satiated But in this
have been mistaken
,he house is subsidingwhen some of the members and
trustees putting forth every effort to wind up It's a
alrs and success is browning their exertionswhen conf
uece growing day by day in the public mind that every
creditor OF the firm will distant day be paid every
cent due him-again within short time past Mr. Rves
10 the columns of his paper assas the members of the
hrm with impuetions and vituperaon more degrading
and coarser than before made employed by him The
article published by him is as follows:
sELDEN, WRITER'S, 4 CO.
Oar attention has just been directed to the following ad
yertsemen published in the Union of this city on the d in
slant and marked to be published only III II had been
published oftener IL would probably attracted onr
Ienton Perhaps IL was published but once might
WAsnHoroN, February 49, 1855.
NJ