The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-05-04
PLAYING A WEAK HAND.
NOW POKER SCHENCK ExPDiINs
THE FISHER DUNCAN LETTERS.
Admissions thnt Destroy the Force OF his De-
pinIs-,Iore Proof that Y. w. Park Wrote
Gen. Scbcnck's Letter OF Resignation.


minis ore Proof that y. w. Park Wrote
Gen. scbcnck's Letter Of Resignation.
WARRINGTON, May 3.-In the Committee
on Foreign Affairs to-day, MIR. Chlttenden for
Cen. schenck, said n the committee should be
OF opinion that certain correspondence OF Park.
Scbenck, and Fisher was proper to be considered
he would waivo all objection and leave the
committee perfectly free to act. 1t was de-
cided by the committee that the papers should
not be received as evidence, but II Gen. Schenck
desired to make a statement he was at liberty
to do 80.
Gen. Schenck then reviewed the letters, saying
that as to the letter from Fisher to Duncan,
dated Dec. 49, 1872, he did not know who Duncan
was, but II seemed that he was q stock broker
with whom Fisher was dealing. While IL was
true that he gave Fisher such Information as he
possessed, It was utterly untrue that he had any
stock operations with him. Fisher had mapv
good points, but was not always careful. and
acted from Inference, and made AN improper
use OF Gen. Schencks name. Referring TO an
other letter OF Fisher to Duncan, in which II
was said that Gen. Schenck telegraphed Chese-
brough to sell 1000 shares, Gen. Schenck said he
was perfectly satisfied that he never telegraphed
ChesebrouRh TO sell 1000 shares, and such shares
were never sold. These were communications
passing through Fisher and hls broker, and In
no way possibly affected him (Gen. SchenolO,
and the use OF his name by Fisher was without
authority. The differences were solely those Of
not Ia the ,emotest degree responsible.
Tho question rs to the interlineation OF two
words In Gen. SchenCks letter OF resignation
having been nRain introduced, Mr. Hewitt said
no had becn represented In the Associated Press
report "a saylng yesterday that the interlinea-
tions we're In MIR. Parks handwriting, whereas
he said they were In Gen. Sohenck's hand
writing.
Mr. LYON made a statement In support Of parts
of his former testimony. lie said that ut all OF
bis interviews with MIR. Park, the latter never
used nm unkind word, but on the contrary,
exhibited tho most friendly feeling toward
him. He sal he saw the original letter OF resig-
nation OF Gen. Schenck as director oi the En- Ia
Mine Comp ny at least II 50 purported to be.
Inere was no reference In IL TO the mine or the
shares. but IL 8. Id that Schenck resigned only
enemies an opportunity to ciitlcise his conduct
Mr. Park said to tho witness: don't like the
letter and am going to have n better one from
Schenck." The impression OF the witness was
that Park wrote the nna letter OF resigna lon,
aud that Schenck copied II from Parks manu-
script. He had told II. A. johnson Of these
facts within twenty four hours after he learned
them. There WAS nothing about which he was
more positive than these two letters of resignh-
ton.
Mr.. II. A. johnson also 0ave some testimo ony
and corroborated what LyOn's said concerning
the two letters OF resignation. The witness
said n letter Of the Secretary OF the Emma Min
ing Company written aubs rquent to Gen.
Schenck's resignation, In which II was said th at
Park had remarked to Lyon that tho letter OF
resignation expressing the fullest confidence In
tho mine and In his associate directors, was a
better endorsement OF the mine than II Schenck
had remained director OF the mine.
The committee adjourned till tomorrow
morning.