New-York tribune., 1874-04-06

coaanrt blatant eYpedton as admiral of the feet.
at his return beheaded Judgment OF ntteen years
spondence with undertook TO explain me re rem9ya'
insisting for long time that he was tne Ienu Vi
Motley but he always made the matter worse, WINE
he heats of santo Domingo entered into the discussion
AT last January 1871, formal paper tne
removal and signed by the Secretary was ad before the
senate Glancng at this document found TO my sur
prise that its most salient characteristic was CONSTANT
yndicyeness toward Mr. Motley, with effort 10 w9uha
his feelings, and this was signed by one VINO IA nu & SAT
with him at my house in friendly communion ana com
aspiration on the evening Oh tnc ,t h a :, The
Gen Grant and bad so often insisted that ne wa te
friend OF Mr. Motley; while, IA II IL was not enough 10
insult one Massach citizen IN the public service
the document ater succession oi la niI5 - 'u ~
speers makes u kindred assault on me- anu thls ~
signed by one who so constantly calleu me Hienu,
and asked for help The senator from mlssouri
MIR SChurZl has already directed attention TO TINS as
saut and has expressed his Judgment upon IT, CONFESS
ing that he should not have failed 10 Ieel the Insult
and then eXciaimng with just Indignation Wleh suo
things arc anched against any member OF thls OO1y ~
becomes the American Senate TO stand by MN anu Do
TO attempt to disgrace and degrade him because ne
shows the gensyeDess OF gent enan tOOhgTesStOIsh
Giobe De5ate Of March TO- 1871 1t to see how ths
senator regarded the conduct of the Secretary Nor Is
its true character open to doubt, especially when we
consider the context ana now nov 1hs e ocment
Mr Motley, in his valedictory to tne otdte depart
ment, had alluded to the rumor that ne was "
Tne document signed by the Secretary, "hle mlnging
most offensive terms with regard TO- Dis irenu IN
onV 10 notice Mr Motleys adoption Of which
gin this city in source bitterly personally anu ''P
Mr. aosy saws ha been rumOei that he removed from the
most Of Minister to In Hand Of The opposition made 6 an
eminent senator honOr hn with bis neni'ap We s4ho
Mo ac to attribute the causes Of their failures er
n m res thsn themselves and to clam 9sscaon or
r Onos o! neir mlkes There be question as to she
eminent Senator at whose coo hI Soy SE 70
the removal Bnt he il entirely mistaken IN seSng
csiou csnsc confidence favor and IS nn"oft
vi, ,e' 10 hc,s ,nasns Gnd g originally
Sd r rs nominao attribute 10 him share the cause
s soey mus. know or no, know he stands alone IN
hi. ignorance Of tue fact ta ma.y 5sna'"aS % IA 1S ,
,gasi SsRdor whom h rer' dHd hGr, heper Continued
d than "aom 20 % single or sincere IN his de re for the pub
differences OF oplnoo 1 S .s Of what bise
frank and eonsdng m his own deahns @gIs s,lss 70 a
upon he words and gsses q ytna,hP e eG9e
.,Ts sn, SS Soa II pp So g. &I Congress. Third session.
The euogy Of the President here Is at cSst SIN guar
tary OF state is by order of the President but evil
dent that the writer OF this dispatch had made up ms
mind TO set an rule at defiance III beyond paying court
m the President even at the expense or making hlm
pra SO himself the concluding sentence ohls elaborate
passage SO full OF gall from beginning to end had any
object, II 1t were anything Dt mountain o "on1s
was an open attempt TO make an official document me
was signed Hamilton FISH" As became aware oi 10
and found also that 1t was regarded Oy others IN tne
same light, was distressed and perpeXed couln noI
comprehend 10. knew not why the secretary shouiu
step 80 out OF his way III manner absolutely Win
out precedent to treat me WIN os,entatPS&s & Sne M
especially when thought that Tor years hiu Deeh ms
friend that had spoken OF him except with KIND
ness and that constantly since assuming MS present u
ties had turned to me FOR help ms was more nc0m
prehensibe when | considered how utterly groundless
were all ms impuatons | have lived 10 VAN II sucn
an attempt Oh me fail TO rebound on lts authOr.
Not lightly would jJdge an ancient freud FOR
time said nothing to anybody OF the outrage hoplnR
tna perhaps the Secretary would open ms eyes 20 lne
trre OF the document he had signed and vol
Hnteer some friendly explanation. Meanwhile propo-
sition 10 resume negotiations received from En
Gland and the Secretary seems. desired to confer
with me the subject: but there was evident conscious
nes on his part that he had done wrong for instead OF
m ms AZ
Senate aud telling him that he wished 10 confer Win
added that he did not know precisely what were his
Relations with me and how should receive him. Within
brief fortnight had been in conference win MIN at
the State Department and had dhed at MS house pc
side about the same time making call there Yet he
was in doubt about his relations with me- Plainly pc
cause since the conference the dinner ara the call the
document signed by him had been communicated 10 the
SENATE and the Couscencestruck Seer 3tary dld not
know how should take it. Mr.. Patterson asked me
What he should replied, that should the sec
reary come to my he would be received as an old
friend and that at any time should be at ms service
for consultation public business but thdt coud not
conceal my deep OF personal wrong received from
him absolutely without reason or excuse. That TINS
message was communicated by Mr. Patterson cannot
doubf FOR the Secretary came 10 my house and there
was a free conference How frankly spoke on public
ouestous without word on other things, the Secre
frv knows He will remember If any inquiry, remark
or ausiOn escaped from me eXcCp In reference 10 pup
lie business The interview was of business anu no'h
On careful reflection, 1t seemed to me plain. that
while meeting Secretary officially 1t would not be
consistent with selfIespect Ior me 10
relations with who had put his name 10 uOcunent
which, after proracted fury toward ahoner
studied insult to me, where the furyis intensified
rather than tempered by too obvious premeditatlon
Public business must not suffer; but IN sucn case per
sonal relations naturally cease and this rule nave FOL
lowed since. Is there any Senator who would nave
done lessl Are there not many who would nave done
more am at a loss to understand how the Secretary
coud expect anything beyond those Official relations
which declared my readiness at all times to maintain
and which, after his assault on me, he was Wiling
to seek at my house. To expect more
shows his part grievous insensDlity 70 tne
thing he had done. Whatever one signs he makes
hia
document, adopted libel upon his Trend ana wnen ne
communicated 1t to the Senate he published the libel
Nothing ike It can be in the history OF our Gov
ernment. it stands alone The Secretary - alone Like
lean Paul in German literature his Just title will be
Ine onv For wears have known Secretaries Of
state and often differed from them but never before
Ssfore did secpetapy Of State Sign document beng
an associate public service, ana puDlsh III 10 lno
world Never before did Secretary OF STATE 20 entre
set at defiance every sentiment OF friendship. IL ~
impossible to explain this strange alteration except
from the disturbing influences Of Santo Domingo But
whatever ITS lOrgn, its true charaoterls beyond ques
As nothing like this State paper be shown in the
history Government also nothing ike lt can be
shown in the history OF other governments. Not an
instance can be named in any country where person
thing The American Secretary is alone, not only in
his own country but in all countries none Out him
self be his parallel" Seneca In the hercules rens
n"' f'''1''N "Qusris Acds p,r.ni
He is originator and first inventor withia prerogsves
and responsibilities thereto belonging.
have mentioned only one sally IN this painful docu-
ment but the whole, besides its prevailing offensive
ness shows inconsistency with actual facts OF my own
knowledge which ,is in entire harmony with the reck
toward and the spirit through
out. Thus have the positive allegation that the
death OF Lord Clarendon, June 81 1870 determined me
time for inviting Mr. Motley TO make place for
sor when in point OF fact time before his lord
ships Illness the Secretary had Invited me TO go 10
Iondon as Mr.. Motey's successor-thus showing that
the explanation OF Lord Carendons death was an after
thought when 1t became important TO divert attention
from the obvious dependence OF the removal upon the
defeat Of the Sant0 Domingo treaty.
A kindred Inconsistency arrested the attention OF
The London Times in its article OF January a. 1871
the document signed by the Secretary. Here, accord
ing to this Journal the document supplied the means OF
correction set forth that the 25h June two
DAYS before Lord Clarendons DEATH Mr. Motleys COM
ing removal was announced in London Journal After
stating the alleged dependence OF the removal upon the
Ior Clarendon journal holding the scales.