The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-05-03
THE EMMA VINE SWINDLE.
0EN. SCHENCK'S J. LETTER or RESTG-
Ni7ION rs 4 DIRECFOR.
L

Foreign Affairs as to his knowledae OF the !
Emma mine swndle and tho connection there.
with OF Minister Schenck he testified in the
most positive manner That Trenor w. Pafk
showed him the Original draft of schencks lot
ter reslGning his position as director Of the
Emma Mining Company Of London; that Park
said it was good letter, but that he meant to
have better one; that subsequently Park did
show to him another letter of resign ltion from
Schenck, and there were evident material alter
aliens In II. This was vociferously and prompt
" denied by Plrk's attorney In New York, and
for giving tits testimony Lyon was vigorously
denounced from London by Schenrk, from New
York by Parks friends, and from san Francisco
by Bi stewart. when Svhenck and Park came
here to testify In resari to their connection
with the swlndie. they both denied in the most
emphatic manner that Schenck had In reality
written two letters Of resignation Schcnck him
self entered into an elaborate explanation aud
produced the original rough craft of the letter he
had written. lie denied that he had sent either
the rough draft or the perfected copy to Park
for his consideration or revision, but said that
he, perhaps, had talked with him on the subject.
He secuted the idea that there had been any
concert between thcm In regard 10 the letter.
the alterations which LIE made In copying from
the rough draft were such rs any person was
likely TO make when they had hastily written a
letter OF this kind
Some time after this, the substance OF
Schenck's testimony having reached London,
MIR. McDoural. the Chairman OF the Emma Min
ing Companv's stockholders telegraphen to the
Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
that he had the original Of Screnck's letter of
rcsignation, and " was IN Park handwriting.
At tho time tins cable despatch was received,
SchenCk being on the stand, was again examined
on this disputed point, and he still adhered to
Ms original explanation. He was then showed
tho cauie despatch from McDougal, but not
wltnstanding tins he nrmly denied that Park
huu written the second lettCr llp In
tho habit. he said, OF having persons write let
ters for hin. lie did not beiieyc McDougal or
any Of his party knew PARKS handwriting. and
he. WAS quite certain thero " IS some mistake
about e.. Park WAS also examined at this time
uncquivncal terms that he had ever written or
suggested anything IN scnenck's letter oi resis-
ndtioI.
SETTLING TnE DISPUTED POINT.
The commiitec. IN order to settle this dis
puted u,a'i'n, telegrlrheu McDongl to send
on the ori-inll letter Ia his posse ion. In due
time tne mail brought package ftom NcDou-
NOT only the uriginri m park handwIitInr but
acopy Of q in Scocncks handwriting. 1he one
| the one dated Dcc O, isii when was published
some tlmc aftcrward 1uero two ersslres
| aud interlincations In 4. lhe FIRST Is where
schcnck Is suppos d to be spca1i : Of his ,ap;
probation OF his fellow directors. P.rk had
| written continued appreciation OF them as
| men," The word men" il stricken out, ana
| erasure Is where no speaks of his Intinned con-
ndsnce IN the mine rs valuable properly. PARK
| word gro test" Is stricken out, and tho word
fullest" intoriincd. rho intcrineations ana
undoubtedly hy Schenck's own hand. " hen the
| original letter was shown 10 Park to-day. he at
once admitted that II VS. written ny MIN.
| P.rks, anu tnat the interlineaiions were made
| hy himself farA, however. said that the inter-
| tion was called to the use Of 9 different ink, and
| TINS lie said he could not explain.
EVIDENCE FROM LONDON
| The original in Parks handwriting came into
| the pusscs-ion Of McDouEll by accident C. y.
| Fisner, Who. IL VIII o. remembered. wrs G n
| cerned with ,hencK In the Colorado laud spec
ulatiCn, snd went to London 10 sell the tonds
| q that bogus concern. WAS lost AT SEA with
down on :he coast oil Newfoundland In the win
ter Of lo,J. some vi his hassace was let behind
by his landlord. McDousai bought IT, ana thus
came In possession OF great man, impor-
tant and some very curious dorGn nts.
| letter of re-ieuttiln In P.rk's hsudwr.ting.
TINS l. a very portnnt iact 10 bear ~ mind be-
| g use n shows that there W"s The most Intimate
re atiuus cxt-tiu- between >c4euck and Fisher.
| lie would np' hove infrustDd TINS % per % MIN
| unless tucy wer, tne rio-pet Of friend. and II
the othrrvlc.,u uf the cas-. be- taei, unl IL - H.
| si-ttd th-t !isher Gbair1ciei THIS letter fiOm
Sch.uck's private p.pe.,, ~ must bo admitted
| that ms Intercourse win ScAeuck was coistsnl,
| or else he would not have m opportunity to
steal so Important document.
DAMAGING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.
In addition - the Pirk draft aad S,nenrlt's
copy of toe letterof resign ltion sent to tnt For
! eisn AG.ms Committee by McDoueal, there
we're "A lut Of letters lld kilograms from Fisher
| to his brother in London, and letter from
| Scnenck to Fisher, as well IA telegrams from
sche9ck 70 Anderson, tue Chairman ol the
| psny In ls72. The nrst ana most important doc
ument Is statement Of An account current
| Hankcy, the stock brokers who fist undertOOk
to sell the Emma mine for PARK ana stewart,
| and who subsequently introduced them to
Albert Grant Tnis Is as follows:
| 2iGREsnAN srREgr, cor COLEMAN sraHRr,l
C.M. FISHER, Esq.-Dep' ~; Neenclos. ,ou memo,
OF sees. ior IN. sei i.!e'ea'; Cr your'e ts ~.
yourself s:si los. 81 tnces herewith 4i;sa .. ID
We are, dear sir, you're truly, CoAtss a HANKsY.
On this IA the following endorsement;
Coates hsnkey, pt. 80, 1872, enclosing acct Gen.
scaencs aud NJ. fisfei
WHAT THE DOCUMENT SHOWS.
This document shows conclusivelv that
Srhenck and Fisher were jointly interested IN
4 llankev. Now Go ties Il llankey as above
81 .ted, were the brokers' through whom iarl,
and stewart originally attempted To dispose OF
the Emha uln-, and IL Is admitted tnat they
received &lnoO0 sterling 'f,er Albert Grant
made tire com oinouon 70 put the property On
tine narkct through tue Emma Mining 1npany
of Lonson Qiml cn). OF this &lO,OD u s al
admitted that Fisher. ihrodeh Schenck lnnu-
ence, got tj.aO. II is also admitted tnat Fisher
WAS indebted puor 10 all TINS TO Sohcnck IN the
sum Of $500, md tn II WIS through his inhu-
| ence thai fisIer was taken into the Iob lay Park
and Grant. Inc following ietter, IN view OF
these admittod facts, becomes very Important;
4s ALnxA.slr srErrr, LosDoS, Dec. 10, 1871.
| My DEAR MH FISHER: In acolyersHtlon win Grant
ts.ay tat NJ hau gwen Coates check Tor ten thou
missions subscriptions Itaough. best TO give you
inns information, that yOu ght gtt your portion De
fore lie hn . gets "a" ou viii mention my
| name. Very truly yours T. w. PARk.
| sCHENCK TO Ms DEAR MR.. FISHER.
| The following letter from Schenck shows a.so
the intimate relations that he had win Fisher
"WEDNESDAY, Oct ., 1879
MY DEAR MIR FISHER; | am Just on TO the country
On SUNDAY Nll expect TO see you Oy II O'Clock o
sooner with tue ccrhc e oi the 900 anu all closed.
am under promise tOsette vita ia er, ltYou we're a
| hone this werK you might cu,e out with good ptont
Shares p yesterday. Perhaps you ar mere II Il
Paris you ought to get back at once IN ti1e o. STRIKE
| Yours. IN haste, koBr' q SchkNch'
The following kilograms and letters from
| Fisher at Paris TO one Cf his brokers III LondOt
explain themselves
LoNpRFs DE PARIS Dec, 10, 1879.
| Duncan, ~ ThreddHteis sHcet LOndoH:
| Close Vut Emma n tcsi TINS Is rRht FISHER
STRICTLY PRIVATE.
GRASD IorEI, PARIS, Dec 10, 1872
| DEAR DUNCAN; telesrdphcd you last night 70 c'os
out Enma, sc. Tut, ia stuctly private, w; Inc rea
was thtt met Gen scncnck AOout - O'Clock u
tie eyenlng, aud ne old me he rot caOie from l. u
that ulornu telling him TO sell ont Al once at the be
Ptlcc he could got, ana he Ohe GrncraO cent Cheese
DOrOuYh TO London the same evening wan lnsrurtlon
to consult eager (ShO you and KNOW Ii IN New lOik)
H | Asa lI Iafaan e