Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1869-06-17

Can the editor of the -imericdn inform
! US what subsequent events have fully
| proven that about all Of the statements
and charges against the Republican
| leaders and Governor Chamberlain made
in his (Mr. Nyc'sl circular ,rerc not
| trseT'
Riverside Echo.
II wa. not true that our Congressman
telegraphed urging the defeat Of the
State Police Bill and on the ground!c-s
charge that they did so telegraph. Mr..
I'VE proceeds 10 call the men whom he
say. controls the Republican party OF
Maine political gamblers" We think
n man using such language, to say the
least. To men just - honest A. he il.
and just ~ patriotic should not he very
thin skinned. He bases his grounds
for q third party mainly on the state
rncni that members OF Congress did
send such message, and Mr. Blaine
interposes this rcjoinder:-
House Of Rep. Washington. ID. &. I
March %. 1853
JOSHUA ME-, ERo., DEAR Sui
find the following somewhat extraordi-
nary statement in communication
published over your signature In the
Riverside Echo Of March -.
II was told by . Senator nj Augusta
on Thursday hast, that he had just had
kilograms from several Congressman,
urging n defeat of the State Police Bill
Why? Becauae II would injurc the
Republican party"
II have personally conferred With the
entire delegation from Msine In both
Senate and House, and am authorized
by them individually Ia say. as saw.
for myseli-ihat no telegram. or letter.
| or message of any kind was sent by any
one of US. AT any time. 10 any person in
| Augusta or elsewhere. in regard To the
| State Police Bill.
The Senator therefore who made the
statement quoted by Won was guilty Of
deliberate ialsehood. In order to
protect your own good name. am sure
Won VIII perceive the NECESSITY OF max
ing public the name Of this senator. Cor
| cannot believe that Won will consent
10 stand as the cndorser OF his gratuitou.
and groundless accusation. You will
please publish this letter. ADD oblige
y ours. very truly, j. g. BLAINE
Ii Is true that A-. Nye gives the
name OF Mr.. Lang rs hi. authority. but
Mr. Lang was talking or thinking about
another matter when he said a telegra m
had been received &c. 80, putting the bes;
construction possible on Mr.. Nve's state
nlent, il was founded in error. The
foundation stone was toppled over with
the statement that the entire delegation
denied sending any such telegram.
After giving detailed statement OF
the progress of the bill. as he viewed il.
Mr.. Nye SAYS:
III square vote could have been
taken on Thursday the bill would have
been carried by three, and on FRIDAY
by five majority, unless some of the
members were deceiving US. I then
charge j. l.. Stevens with the defeat Of
the bill in the Senate On account of the
meanness displayed by him in his par
lianentary tactics But If the House
and Senate had both passed the bill il
would not have become law. Ii il
well known that Governor Chamberlain
would have vetoed il. and that he had
his veto message prepared ON FRIDAY"
man who will make such broad
statements as are contained IN the above
paragraph, and use such epithets, is not
FIT for reforiner. We will let Mr..
Stevens answer for himself. Will the
reader please note the good temper of
Mr.. Stevens reply; and how neatly he
turns on this champion of political fair
ness, and tells him that there was no
chance to get said bill passed only bv a
Legislative trick. There was no time
when the Legislature was full, that there
was majority in favor of the bill" :
This statement is corroborated bv other
members. Then how much honesty 10
there in Mr.. Nye and his friends in try
ing to force the passage Of bill against
the views of the members of the Legisla
ture, in resorting to trick to obtain
his and their ends! How much mora.
force would such law carry with il
But we will let Mr.. Stevens speak 70.
himself
MR.. STEVENS LETTER.
A communication appears in the news
papers and has been sent broadcast il
the State as a circular, signed by Joshu.
Nye, Jr., in relation to the rejection O.
the Police Bill by the Legislature. in
which personal attack is made ON nv
self. In reply have only to say that
the author gives me far more credit 70,
the defeat of the bill than fairly belong,
70 me. At no time during the session
Of the Legislature was there q majority
n either branch in favor Of the bill when
he members were all in their seats. In
he vote in the Senate on the question OF
Is engrossment fscenty-seren Senators
,0ted and its engrOssment was refused
The bill went to the House and when
arge number Of members were abs