The Leavenworth weekly times. [volume] (Leavenworth, Kan.) 1870-1880, 1876-10-05
REPUBLICAN STATE TICKET.
Mr.. ANrHoNY's STATEMENT.

mdue Dy peolge L. hntio"y S ~
State Central committee at Topeka, las
Tuesday-or 90 much thereof as has bee
given to the public. A careful perusai o
the document cannot fail TO convince III
impartial reader that it would have beel
better for Major Anthony if he had no
made it. Those who had their mind
made I'D 10 vote for him, whether or no,
are not to be Influenced by statements, oil
either side, while those who honestly desir
ed TO see the charges against the MAO
cleared away, will look in vain to thi
statement for any convincing evidence. i
is simply his own denial, in general and IL
detail, of the charges against him, and thu
few attempts that he makes to INTRODUCES
proof amount to nothing, unless it be t.
injure hi. Gaze by exposing its weakness
In his explanation of the commission
business he admits the existence OF the firm
of Hill, Anthony 4 Co., admits that Il
was embarrassed in 1860, and SHOULD
have wound up in that year
but did not until the next admits that the
witness, Halliday, was sent to solicit con
signments for the house, but denies that hi
was instructed to make any representation
in regard to the condition OF the firm
Here, then, We have direct conflict be
tween Major Anthony's statement and Mr.
Halladay's deposition, and the reader mus
elect which of the two witnesses he will be.
Iieve. Halliday was disinterested party
Anthony is interested; Halladay's dsposi'
ton was taken at time when the ci-cum'
stances attending the transaction were ol
comparatively recent date; Anthony's
statement lie made after the lapse of fifteen
wears. At the tine Halliday was sent out
the firm was in "shaky" condition, ac-
cording to Mr.. Antkony's admission In ms
statement. Is it probable that the man
was instructed to state this fact to parties
from whom he solicited consignments
Isn't it more probable, even if no instruc-
tons were given on this point, that the
partners all supposed that he would repre-
sent the firm as being sound? Would he
have been sent out II 1t had heen thought
by Hill, Anthony & Co, that he would
state the true condition Of the firm TO those
from whom he solicited business? And ii
they sent this man out, knowing that, be
cause of his ignorance OF the true condition
of the firm he would represent 1t as sound
when il was not sound, are they not Just az
guilty, morally, as though they had given
him instructions to make such false repre-
sentations?
1t seems to us that the statement would
b.ye been stronger, if reference TO that mat
ter had been omitted.
He denies that he brought any United
State bonds to Kansas with him, but ad-
mits that his wife brought property OF that
character to the State, and that the same
was deposited in ID. K. Anthonys sale.
There are 90 many plain minded people in
this country who look with suspicion upon
broken merchants with rich wives, that We
are inclined to think the statement would
have been stronger, if reference TO that mat
ter had been omitted.
He says the commission to take the tes-
timony of Mr.. Halliday in New York was
arranged without his knowledge, and that
he never knew OF the existence Of such tes-
timony, or Of the fact that he was charged
with fraud in the transaction, till he saw
II published in The TINES, All that may |
be true, but it is certainly very inconsistent
with those active ard careful business quail |
tiles with which Major Anthony is COM
monty accredited. 1t is possible that a man
OF George T. Anthonyis shrewd business
habits might live for ten years within
stones throw of the court house and vet
remain ignorant of the record which had
stood there all that time against hint If
possible, we say, and yet SO extremely
improbable that We are convinced the state
ment would have been stronger if reference
to that matter had been omitted.
He submits two or three letters OF intro
duction, and general letter of commenda-
ton, signed by twenty citizens Of New York
State. These documents amount to simply
nothing at all. Anybody can secure letters
of introduction commencing "the bearer"
rs q man of Integrity and high standing,
and anybody could, in half a day, secure
three times twenty signatures to any kind OF
q paper-though il might be TO pardon the
worst rogue in the penitentiary, or TO hang
the best man in the communicated the
same men who sign the petition to-day, will {
lust a. freely sign the remembrance to-mor-
tow. Documents such as these have no
strength, and the statement would have I
'een stronger If they had been omitted.
He presents letter from Gov. Fenton, of
New York, transmitting Brevet-Msjor's !,
which proves that, year and +
! half after the close of the war, Captain Y
anthony was promoted to be Major Antho- al
That point seems to be established very q
learly, and We concede the title of Major, a,
nth all that the name implies, but We have =
ot been able to discover any intimate con- CT
ection between the receipt of a Brevet-
aloI . CORAhuiscAoH iLOm pONernOr entOn, L
nd the receipt Of produce on commission :,
-om Hughes 4 Lester. CO
Having made his statement, Major An tr
hony swears that "the facts therein stated q
re true" So could We swear to that, and =.
could anybody; facts are true in any, ,e
hing-but are the statements all factse 81
Considered altogether, we believe rs We u
ave already stated above, tina, the iuevit,. 2.
lie effect of the document will be to weaken AZ
lther than strengthen, Mr.. Anthony's posi- lie
on. There is such violent contrast be- hi
Eeen the display of egotism and self ~
'surance in the opening paragraph of the
atement, and the besgaIly array of i'm tn
otent testimony which makes I'D the al
,dy OF II, that the reader cannot resis. the -:
inclusion that Mr.. Anthony intended TO us
We his case BY bravado. M
Col. Ingersoll remarked, in one OF his ~,
ost eloquent efforts, that character i, o.,
tilt upon a record, no. upon . prospec- ten
a" We have heretofore publiahed the
cord in this case; to-day We give the H.
pspsctm. In