The Portland daily press., 1876-06-05
Mr.. Blaine and his Accusers.

Mr.. Blaine and his Accusers.
1t is no matter of surprise that many intelli-
gent people are entirely mistaken respecting
the real nature of the charge against Mr.. Blaine
which the Judiciary Committee of the House
is examining. For weeks. journals like the
New York Sun, whose editor is social out
cast. and the Boston Herald, which shows
disposition which entities one to believe that
it would deliberately blacken any mans char
acter. if, by SO doing, it could increase its cir
culation and enhance its reputation for jour
nalistic enterprise, have been filling their col
umns with all sorts of sensational stories,
vague insinuations and extended surmises,glar-
ingly set off by positive headlines which find
no confederation in the columns of mischiev-
GUS and malicious drivel which follow such
astounding announcements. For no other
reason than because Mr.. Blaine is pursued by
such band Of political assassns, every friend
of fair play should insist that he should have
full and impartial hearing before the coun-
try. 1t should also be borne in mind that
those who promptly rise up now to say 81
told you so," are recruits to the guerilla band
which is led by Dana of the Sun and the con-
scienceless Bohemian who would write the
most infamous scandal, and the publisher
who would print the same for the same rea-
son which the highwayman would give fer
taking the life of traveller. Those, too,
who stand complacently looking on while
Mr.. Blaine is assaulted as few public men
have been, should remember that success in
one case will embolden these political assas-
sins to attempt to ruin other parties, just as
one success in highway robbery or bank
breaking will tend to embolden the class of
professional scoundrels who are in those en-
terprises.
But what is the charge against Mr.. Blaine?
It is that he sold to Col. Thomas A. Scott
quantity of Little Rock & Arkansas Railroad
bonds which that gentleman subsequently
sold to the Union Pacific Railroad Company
at price above their real value, and that
Scott purchased these bonds of Mr.. Blaine in
payment for his influence to secure legislation
favorable to some Of his railroad schmes.
That is the entire charge. The Arkansas
bonds were not subsidy bonds. The road
was not built by aid of any grant of land or
money made by Congress. The lands the
bonds affected were ceded to the state of Az.
kansas by Congress during the administra-
ton of President Pierce. No act of Con-
gress could in any manner affect the railroad.
A congressman who owned bank stock, or
manufactured wooden, cotton or any other
goods affected by the tariffor was interested in
ships, might be criticised for voting on bills
affecting such interests, but no measure of
national legislation, either general or
special, could affect grant made more than
twenty years ago. If, therefore, it s proper
for any man to sell railroad bonds, it was
proper for Mr. Blaine to do so, unless we are
going to set up the doctrine that no man in
public life shall engage in any business enter
prise, thereby leaving all public positions to
that class of persons who are unable to OBJ.
tain wealth and incompetent to engage in
any business. In the event of such re-
quirement of public officers, no man who had
a thousand dollars invested in any property
which could be affected by legislation on the
currency or tariff could be trusted to sit in
Congress. Every public position would be left
to such saints as would beggar themselves for
the sake of serving the country, and to a
class of incompetents and unfortunates who
are unable to acquire such quantity of the
worlds goods as would attach their personal
interest to any possible act of Congress.
Has this charge been proved against Mr.
Blaine? Mr.. Harrison, who gave the story
its rise, said he mad it from Mr. Rollins. Mr..
Rollins says he afterwards found that he was
mistaken about it. Mr.. Wilson, govern
ment director of the Union Pacific, says that
he had heard the story but on investigation
was satisfied that it was false. Mr.. Tom
Scott testifies squarely that he had his Ar
kansas bonds of one Mr.. Caldwell and, never
directly or indirectly, purchased bond of
any kind of Mr.. Blaine. ''Poker Jack" had
been told by one Mr.. Robinson that he had
carried Mr.. Blaine bonds, but Robinson tes-
titled that he he'd never so stated that the
package was railroad map. Mr.. Mulligan
testifes that he heard Messrs. Atkins and
Fisher say that Mr.. Blaine disposed of Ar
kansas bonds to Tom Scott, but both these
statement.
Is this the sort of testimony that prominent
men of national reputation are to be con
demned on? What would a court of law do
were Mr. Blaine or Mr.. Kerr, or any other
man accused on such testimony? Simply in
struct the jury to bring in a verdict of "not
guilty." and,under the present laws of Maine,
order the arrest of the persons instituting
such suit to answer to the charge of malic-
ious prosecution.
Is il quite fair that Mr.. Blaine shall be dis
posed of on this sort OF testimony-a man
who, as the Boston Adgertiser justly observes,
"a little more than a year ago received
the unanimous concentrations of his party
and the cheerful testimony of his political op.
ponents, for the ability, briiancy and fairness
which had characterized his term of six years
as Speaker of the House of Representatives,
and has rescued his party and the country
from two or three grave mistakes?" Are fair
minded men in this country about to con-
demn, on this sort of testimony-the two-fod
denied heresay of man who acknowledges
that he has personal enmity against the ac-
cused-the man, who, fourteen years in
affecting public and private interests where he
did not vote with the majority of the best men
in both parties-who has repeatedly called the
attention of the House while Speaker to mis-
obiauous hills wbo dopoupnnd tho saIar0 prob