The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1877-02-23
CAMPBELL AND WALLACE.


Mr. II. G. Campbell Gives Evidence
ON the Charge that He was to be
Bribed.
The following is copy of card sent
yesterday by Mr.. T. q. Campbell to the
editor of the Commercial:
CINCINNATI, Feb. %, 1877.
To the Editor OF the Commercial:
In your issue of the 11th Of January,
| 1877, there appeared a statement OF Will
liam P. Wallace to the effect that he had
been bargaining with Mr.. j. Il. Mclean
concerning the SherifPs advertising, and
| Mr.. McLean'S statement that money had
| been paid TO me to betray my clients
| interest, was the basis Of the negOtia-
tions with Mr.. Mclean. Mr.. Wallace
| first gave currency to somewhat simI-
lar statement in the latter part OF De-
cember, 1876, alleging at that time that
Mr.. Chas. Overaker, his now Chief Dep
uty, had actually seen the stub OF
check that had been given me for my
services in the matter Of the SheritPs
advertising.
l at once wrote to Mr.. Mclean asking
il anything of that nature had been SAID
by him, or If it was reported by his au-
lhority.
He replied as follows: ..--
CINCINNATI, Jan. /, 1877.
L, c. Campbell, Esq:
In case you may ever need a denial of
the charges made by Wallace in relation
10 my connection with the contest case,
| take this opportunity of pronouncing
the entire statement lie, made by WAL
lace for public effect.
Very respectfully,
TSigned1 j. r. MCLEAN.
i. S.-1 hope you received MIR. Over
aker's denial which sent you.
Mr.. OYeraker's denial to which Mr..
Mclean refers has already been pub
lished in your paper.
| 1t then remained the unsupported
story of MIR. Wallace, and SO stood until
Mr.. Wallace called MS attorney, Thos.
A. Logan, Esq to the stand in the TO-
flowing statement made by Mr.. Wallace
to your reporter Jan. IL, 1871:
Mr.. Logan was my attorney. He
brought me one day document to sign.
l did not read it through, but saw it
was in the nature OF an obligation to
give the advertisements to the Enquirer.
1t had John McLean's signature wit.
messed before IA notary public. BY it
was to make the contract in cOnsidera-
tion of the action taken by Mclean in
preventing the production of testimony
of illegal votes having been cast to Sc.
cure my election. l was expected tt
sign it. l refused to sign that, however
presume Mr.. Logan still has that in
his possession. My signature is at.
tached to u document that the Enquirer
refers to, and there is a blank in thai
also for a consideration" or course
John McLeahs statement, that he
had bought off Mr.. Campbell in
my behalf mad some influence
with me. After many solicitations to
call and see Mr.. Mclean, l at last did
so. When got to his office | found MI
Logan there, drawing up another docu
ment. They were not satisfied with the
one tney had, it seems. glanced over
this casually, and saw that it was con
tract to give them the advertising il
consideration Of 81 900 used to relieve
me in the contest case" Mr.. McLear
said :"Why make it 81, 600? Why no
make it more? MIR. Wallace knows it il
worth more than that" Mr.. L0gal
said: II understood you to say that yol
wanted to name the amount that yOl
Maid MIR. Campbell on behalf of MI
Wallace"
l Immediately wrote to Mr.. Logan, bu
that gentleman had professional engage
ments elsewhere, and hau left the Guy
| wrote to him az Boston, and some day
after received from him the following b.
telegraph:
NEW YORK, Jan. II, 1877.
T. c. Campbell, Esq, Cincinnati:
Your Boston letter just received. Yo1
!, misunderstood me entirely, and do Ill
great Injustice. Your conclusions ar
, erroneous Will return next week an
= convince you.
. TSigned1 THOS. A, LOGAN.
| waited until his return, when he sen
me the following:
CINCINNATI, Feb. IT, 1877.
T. c. Campbell, Esq:
Il DEAR SIR have been absent fro
the city, and have delayed until now re
plyiug 10 your inquiry as to the pu
l. lished report of the Wallace clean il
D. tervlew. l have TO state that l did nt
II mention your name or allude 10 you
any manner in the remark which
: therein erroneousiy quoted. Neitht
d did your name appear nor was allusio
I: made to you in the proposed contrac
| did not hear any improper use Of yOl
,- name by either parties. Very respec
!ully yours, a- 3.
~ GSfgnedl THos A. LOGAN
W This dIsposes of the matter, thin
"a | have no desire to use any harsh term
In have tried to gain my case; nave dol
The best knew how Tor my client, at
/. will continue to do so until Mr.. Walla
A. is removed from a position which
a. holds by reason of the grossest fraud
o. 1t is quite likely that before my ellie
obtains what is fairly his, other sla
ders, with as little foundation as |
above, may be set afloat, but the publ
believe, will estimate them AZ the
true value.
Yours, respectfully,
IT. g. { AMPBELL