New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-07-22
ARCHBISHOP EUGHES'S REPUTATION
MALICIOUS ARTICLE AGAINST HIN,
Published IN the n. Y. Daily Times Of last Saturday.

To he Es'toy u Tie N. Y. TSisrss.
SIR: On the 9th Of January, 1857, II. J. RAY
MoSp ESQ.,, Editor Of The N. Y. Daly Tisses.
published in his psper meudacious and scurrilous
article sssinst Archbishop HUGHEs. Isprofessed
to be q communication. and was signed "Equisas."
In the course Of a week or ten days, Mr.. RAYMOND
ras called on by gentleman TO meet the legal con-
sequences Of that hbelous article, or ~ make
known the writer's name. Mr.. RAYMOND pre-
fessed his regret that on the same afternoon no
was obliged to 20 to Washington az q wiioess in
some matter of Congressional dispute shout tho
honesty of certain members in c'rtain noorIiry
transactions. He promised, tovrver, thai ho
,hould be absent only one day sua lhas "a soon -
be returned he would rbsAe kpowu tlc auth"r of
"Equifas." VI. RAYMOND won't to ~ ashn gtoa,
and was there catschissi bys omnl.t,e, Of the
House, bat nothing very clear was ehcit,d from rs
answers. He returned about the time hc hGset
had specified, but unable still as he rretendoa
to gsse the of his correspondent. Nei'hr
should he b. promised to give il in 40 bret Pc
ri,d, since. &c 1rdug TO his subsequent stsGemenI
tie author resided in Boston. Still, from tune 10
time Mr. RAYMOND was dupned for the name OF
the author of the libel which be had Published lie
became somewhat alarmed and somewhat nervous
in regard TO the subject but he kept on shutting
and procrsstinstipg as long he could. Finally,
on the 18th of February Of this year. he addressed
note 10 the ARCHBISHOP, couched in the follow
ing terms:
"DALY TINES OFricE, n. Y, Feb. IL, 1857.
"DEAR SIR: was greatly surprised to learn lase
evening that you had never received from me any
note in explanation of the publication of article
signed 'Equas in The Tfwss Of Jan. O. l regret
this especially it has let under the suspicion Of
treating you with a disrespect which most assuredy
do not feel
The article reached me accompanied by private
note in the handwriting, signed by Dr. McElroy
Of st. Mays Church, Boston, who avowed himself
the author Relying entirely upon the rcspectability
and responsibility Of the name-the genuineness OF
which did not for inaant suspect gave the srti-
Gle into the printers hands without even perua On
being applied to for the of the author wrote to
DR.. McElroy for permission 10 give tor rather to
afford bin opportunity Of asserting to its surrender
and was sstonshed to hear in reply that the whols
thing was FoRGERY and that he knew nothing
whatever of the article in question. wrote to him at
once expressing my deep modification at so shamctS
an imposition l also Immediately wrote you note.
embracing these explanations and enclosing the orgi-
nal of the private note accompanying the article, to-
gether with Dr. McElroys reply to my letters. l
sent them by lad-the same who brings this-to No.
263 Mulberry street. and he told afterward that hs
put it under the door. The next day, was Informed
that had not then reached you and supposed that
this was in consequence of your absence or of some
accident. As l heard more Of II, took 1t fog
granted had subsequently been received and had No
suspicion to the contrary until last night
H. Sanftb a artic vi
possibly afford some clue for the detection Of thu
author.
Your Obedisnt servant .,o.,
'iArchbshop HucHEs."
A note of this Kind would DO calculated TO win
| the confidence of the ARCHBISHOP, and 1t really
had that effect for the time being. But there are
circumstances connected with other proceedings Of
Mr. RAYMOND which IRE inexplicable. For in
stance, he speaks of note accompanying the
manuscript of Equi.ss, and alleges that he had
sent that note, together with private one of his
own, to No. 263 Mulberry street. Now, any note
eft at No. 1853 Mulberry street would reach the
ARCHBISHOP. When Mr.. RAYMOND was ques-
toned on this discrepancy, be pleaded that the boy
by whom be had sent it would be still forthcoming;
but that, az a great snOw-storm prevailed at the
time, the boy nay not have found the house, but,
to use the words of bis own explanation of this
affair, the boy must have slipped it under the door
Of another. The ARCHBISHOP accepted for tho
time being this explanation, although other crcum-
stances would throw doubt upon it. For instance.
the first page Of the communication Of "Equitas"
had been trimmed off at the top by the scissors Of
Mr. RAYMOND, any can see by the script
which the editor Of The Times subsequently fur
Dished to the ARCHBISHOP. The boy, even in
snow storm, could have slipped under the ARCH
BISHOPS door, or that Of any Of bis neighbors, the
whole communication just as easily as the trimmed
portion which Mr.. RAYMOND pretended to have
sent by the dilgent lad who, because there
snswstorm, could not distinguish No. 263 Mulberry
street from any other house in the neishborho?d,
and who therefore discharged his message By
slipping the communication under the most con-
venient door.
The eI. Honorable HENRY J. RAYMOND, once
vceroy Of the State Of New York, had shown him
self toward the ARCHBISHOP in former times as q
courteous gentleman. Courtesy at the hands Of
others, the ARCHBISHOP hardly ever forgets. And
it so happened that, before these events, 10
bad been in conversation with third party who
knew him and knew Mr.. RAYMOND perfectly we'll.
He alluded TO Mr.. RAYMOND's kindness in terms
which we're as sincere as complimentary. But tho
mutual friend interrupted him By stating:
"Sir you DO not know Mr. RAraosD. He il plas"
sible in friendship be il plausible in treacheryi he has