New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-05-26

Mr.. Hewitt gives the ceareSJ Stabemeht VIC
have seen anywhere of the complicated trans
actions connected with the sale of the mine III
London and the organization of the English
company, and although he refrains from char
acterizing the enterprise by the harsh terms
which have been so freely applied to II al
home and abroad, it Is not difficult to see wnat
he and the rest of the Committee think about IT,.
The manner of Gen. Schenck's becoming
q shareholder and director is also described
with unmerciful cleamess, and it is shown
that after having "placed himself in a false
"postion with his own Government by lden-
" tifying himself with n private enterprise III
"regard to which he himself had grave scrll-
"ples, without consultation with tho Secretary
"ot State, and having accepted pecuniary
"fayors from the vendors of the property
(Which disqualified him on moral grounds
1" from assuming the duties or trustee, he
nevertheless did in advance OF the sale OF
"the stock become a director Of the proposed
" company, and therefore, as the agent OF
Z" the vendors, joined in the invitation
"to the public to subscribe for its
shares without informing tho subscribers
"that his dividends had been guaranteed to
him, and that his shares had been procured
"by previous arrangement without any FISK
"of loss to himself, from the fact that one OF
4" the vendors had offered to take the shares
/" off his hands at any time ut their original
"cost." Mr.. Hewitt also makes it plain that
the official position of Gen. Schenck was used
by Park, Stewart g. Co. both to further their
negotiations with Albert Grant and to induce
the public to subscribe to the stock. Ho makes
it plain that Schcnek, instead of paying for the
shares dollar for dollar" rs he assured Sec
rotary Fish, put no money at risk, but was
paid for his influence by a bonus of Is
per cent per annum on 100000. AS for
the pecuniary result of the speculation, Mr..
Hewitt remarks that il Gen. Schenck did lose
money in the long run it was because IN the
hope of making a greater profit he refused to
take advantage of Parks agreement with HIM.
He operated several times in Emma stock, and
in one case three hundred shares in his name
were subscribed for, carried, and sold" at a
profit of $4,000, without any intervention
whatever on the part Of Gen. Schenck beyond
signing the application and the usual transfer
form in blank" Park Is shown to have fur
nished the money for this transaction, although
in his sworn examination before the Commits
sioner in London Gen. Schenck declared that
Park HAD nothing to do with it. SO too with
the story that on receipt of a Geographic warn
ing from Park. Gen. Schenck sent his Secre-
tary of Legation from Paris to London to sell
1000 shares of stock Gen. Schenck gave 1T II
guarded denial, but the evidence of Col. Cheese
brough shows that it was true.
Unfortunately for Gen. Schenck the Com
mttee have tested a great many of his state
ments, and seem to have discovered abundant
reason for receiving them with caution. HIS
first dispatch to Mr.. Fish was "A misrepresonta-
ton of the nature Of his connection with the
company His letter of resignation was mis-
of the reasons for his reSlgnnS.
His statement to the Committee was a
Of his financial transac-
tons. And with regard to the letter OF
resignation, concerning which the testimony
ia conflicting the Ommttee-apparently
leaving a great deal unsad-" are of opinion
81 that two letters Of resignation were prepared,
"the one rough draft written by Gen.
"Schenck, and the other an amended copy
"made by him after his conversation with
Park, the second having been modified from
"the first in accordance with the suggestions of
"Mr. Park" The delay in the publication OF
the letter of resignation until after the stock
then on the market had been disposed of is
alluded to as certainly unfortunate" But
the Committee have no hesitation in declaring,
and all decent Americans will rejoice that
they are able to do so, that they cannot
believe Gen. Schenck was knowingly party
to any fraud. All the evidence goes TO show
that he had absolute faith in the value of the
mine, and the House is only advised to con-
denim his action as L" i'll advised, unfortunate,
land Incompatible with the duties of his official
"positon." Ii is resolution which carries dis
grace, but does not imply criminality, and we
are satisfied that the world will admit it to be
just.
Mr.. Hewitt supported his able and con-
elusive report in a strong speech, throwing
food of light upon parts of the story OF the
Emma Mine which the Committee judged not
to be submitted to them for decision. 1t
describes the sort of morality which Mr..
Schenck seems to think BELTS an American
gentleman, and the conduct which he thinks
becoming in an American diplOmatist; it
touches sharply upon the character of ex-Sen-
ator Stewart, and it presents a picture of Mr..
Trenor w. Park which that eminent financier
would probably make the basis of an action
for libel, damages about seventy-iiye mil
lion dollars, if it were not unfOrtu-
nately privileged. The conclusion which
Mr. Hewitt draws from tho whole is a severe
censurc of the United States Government for
failing to deal promptly and firmly with Gen.
Schenck "when by his becoming director,
"and BY his letter of resignation he made the
"grave and irrcparable mistake of indorsing
"and reindorsing the enterprise and the men
"who have caused this great disaster and this
greater reproach.n Partisan sentiment would