The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1874-10-16

convention, which is
rood reason why the charges did
lot sooner receive proper attention.
It is now too late to make any
change IN the ticket, and after the
evidence is all given, the public
must render the verdict.
1t is true, as Mr.. Lappin's friends
have all along maintained, that a
mere affidavit in a law suit proves
nothing, and that his answer denies,
just.as positively, the charges, as Mr..
Walker AYERS them. 1t may be that
too much Importance was given
the publications of the opposition.
Since they were made Hon. T. II.
Walker has published letter stat
ing that the matters of difference
between him and Mr.. Lappin had
been settled. He closes his letter
with these words:
TOPEKA, KAN, Sept. 10, 1874.
Hon. Samuel Ldppin, Seneca, Kan:
DEAR SIR:-I write to inform
you that the article in the Kansas
City Times was published without
my knowledge and against my
wishes.
The reporter for that paper called
to interview me the day after you
left, and / positively declined to
talk about the matter, giving as q
reason that our differences had been
satisfactorily settled and did not
want to revive them.
The high regard 1 have for you,
running oyer a period of more than
twelve years, coupled with the hon
orable settlement, made me not on
ly willing but anxious that they
should be buried and forgotten.
With best wishes for your future,
/ remain, Very truly,
II. ii. WALKER.
This letter really proves that even
in Mr.. Walkers opinion Mr.. Lap
pin is q gentleman of character and
integrity.
Again, We have heen more fully
informed by parties conversant
with all the facts of the Walker and
Lappin suit, lately pending in our
court, that Lappin's actions were
grassly exaggerated. In view OF
these facts, and with a desire to cor
rect any misconstruction of our
former remarks, we give place to
the following extracts from a letter
received, this week, from a gentle
man in Northern Kansas, where
Lappin is best known, and who is
well acquainted with the troubles
which at one time existed between
Mr.. Walker and the firm of Lappin
81 Scrafford, and whose veracity we
can endorse:
"To my surprise / have noticed
that your paper, and one or two
others in the State, which support
the Republican ticket, have CRITICS.
ed unfavorebly the nomination of
Hon. SamI Lappin, of Nemaha
and the principal objections
made TO him are the statements
in a petition filed in Ly-
on county by Hon. L. III. Walker
against Messrs. Lappin & Scrafford,
to settle some land matters in dis
pute between them. The case is
now settled, and the following let
ter was written to Mr.. Lappin by
Mr.. Walker"
Here follows the letter quoted
above.
"This letter of itself ought to be
sufficient TO contradict and set at
rest all charges based upon any pc
tition or statement made by Mr..
prejudicial to Mr.. Lappin.
But so much has already been writ
ten upon the subject, l wish to add
3 few additional statements in ex-
of our candidate. Soon
after the adjournment of the Re-
publican convention, Mr.. Lappin
was attacked with the infiamatory
and has been confined
to his bed ever since. He is now
unable to write, and has not been in
to make public
of the unjust SANDERS
inculated against him since their
publication. His political enemies,
taking advantage of his sickness
and his silence, have so strongly
misrepresented the facts about his
private affairs, that some of the
good friends of our own party have
been thereby deceived.
~ the
IF Mr.. Lsppin WAS honest and man.
y. Mr.. Walker negotiated the
Dan of largo sums of money
through Messrs. Lappin & Scraf-
ord, to save his lands from forced
sale. Most of this money was OBJ
aimed 10y Messrs. Lappin s. Scraf-
ord at high rates Of interest tchich
hey paid, solely to accommodate
Mr.. Walker, and TO aid him as a
friend. After the loans, extending
through years, had reached u large
'um of money, Walker himself hay-
ng executed deeds of conveyance
o secure them for the moneys
which they had obtained for him.
accepted and received from them
conditional contracts for the re-pur-
hase of all the lands, and upon his
compliance with his agreement, on
he 18th of June, 1870, q ] the lands
we're 10 be decided back to Mr..
Walker. Walker did not make the
payments, as his contracts promis-
d, on June 18th, 1870, and for his
dvantage Lappin & Scrafford ex-
ended the time of payment twice,
nd although informed bv their
ounsel that, under the written con-
ontracts existing between Walker
nd themselves, they could hold all
he lands conveyed to them abso-
ltely, in fee simple, still they had
o wish to push Mr.. Walker, and
me and again offered to re-convey
him, upon being paid the sums
lat he had stipulated he was will
ng ITO pay. Lsppin & Scrafford
ever insisted upon the ownership
the lands conveyed to them, and
he strict enforcement of Mr.. Walk
g contract, until Mr.. Walker in
ituted his suit, whereby Messrs.
sppln II Scrafford were to be de- ,
rived OF ALL INTEREST on the mon.
7 which they had obtained from
her parties and loaned in their l
Vn names to Walker. AS soon. .
'wever, as the parties met, after 4
c institution of tho suit, thew
me TO terms with each other, and =
their matters were honestly, Q
morally and satisfactorily settled. p
The charge that Lappin secretly h
ok any contracts from Walker In
ew York, or elseW here, or had anv .
terest in destroying or concealin1 q
Q same, is contradicted by the rec. Il
4 in the suit of Walker VS.. Ian. hi