The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-02-09
EXPLANATION FROM HON. C. l.
HALL,

We received last evening letter from Hon
Gilbert L. Hall relative to the article in tn
BULLETIN of Monday, in which MI. Hail.
name is mentioned in connection with offer
made to him as inducements to enter upon ,
compromise with the Kellogg Legislature
Mr.. Halls letter is as follows:
New ORLEANS February s, 1875.
| To Page NJ. Baker, Editor Of New Orleans Bull
letin:
Dear Sir-In your extra of this evening.
which has just been handed me by friend,
notice in an article headed Bribery and
Corruption mention Of my name as that OF
one who has been offered large sums of money
to support the propositions of adjustment.
Such Is not the case. l stated to you on
Saturday evening that large offers had been
made to me to go into the Kellogg Legisla-
ture. 70 offer Of money ,oas ecer made.
These offers were made three weeks ago. be-
tore the Congressional Committee came This
is what was said: eff the Conservatives
would go back into the Kellogg Legislature.
big offers were made in regard to the organ
lzation. This is all l know of any offers
Kegrettng that you should have waited and
then deemed this as Of extra Importance
am, yours truly,
GILBERT L. HALL.
After or about mignight of Saturday Feb
ruary 9th, three members Of the caucus.
Representatives elect of the House, called to
see US respecting the vote Of the majority
OF the caucus on the Wheeler proposal.
These gentlemen, Messrs. Hall, Bower and
Blaffer, explained to US at some length the
nature of the proposal rs they understood it, |
and the reasons why they and the majority
had voted to accept it.
In reply, we stated that we did no: impugn
The motives of any Of the gentlemen who had
voted with the majority; that such of them as
We knew personally we were assured had
acted from conscientious convictions, but
nat, nevertheless, the act was indefensible.
md they would all find that their constituents
would repudiate the contemplated compro-
Mise. We cannot, Of course, remember the
xact language used either by ourself or by
lr. Hall, but in the course Of conversation.
nd touching the causes that had led member,
vote for SO unpopular, and, in our opinion,
o uDJustifable . measure, Mr.. Hall volun-
eered the observation: II do not pretend to
e. |
his left US to draw the almost inevitable
onclusion that money had oeen used, or if
OF money. its equivalent, in the attempt to
,fluence member of the caucus tc vote for I
,e terms Of adjustment. /
We have no recollection of Mr.. Halls saw )
lg that the offers were made to induce him
go into the Kellogg Legislature, and We are !
ute sure he said nothing about the time the \
Hers were made. The subject OF converse J
on was the action of the majority in voting
Y the terms Of adjustment proposed by Mr..
'heeler, and the remark of Mr.. Hall was ne S
'ssarily regarded as referring to that matter v
Id not to another. We were very careful to =
ate that the offer was spurned as it deserved,
Id we cannot see that Mr. Hall has any
'asonable ground for complaint that we :
,ouid have used remark which was not b
Ade IN confidence and which we deemed OF g
lcA vital importance in the crisis which
listed last evening, as showing that the
lem bad been resorting 70 corrupt means Il