The New York herald., 1877-07-07

S him fhes. witt Win tSs isiorms.on ' which So S could
and the that he certainly could be IN the actions
against ely witness ior Tho city, setting aside
duced by a publication OF his confession, 10
person Of ordinary intelligence makes him
person VINO haa tue slightest amou6t Of shoman
sympathy the fact oil his having suffered already over
ton You calmly thrust him aside, however, because
you noticed, as you state, variance between his
verbal and his written statemenl sincerely believe
your advisers can think OF any better aud you
ielt the necessity of saying something rl
TOWNSEND IN skLF-vISDlcArIoS.
In replying to your criticisms against my conduct.
will follow them they IN your report For tho
what You say is oSrrss. satsmsn, of what iss,aed
to before the Senate Committee the Woodin inves
garon, and you would nave the public draw the con-
my letter OF the Goth stated that you assured
that the "statemenr' showed TO you on the 18th
OF April should be sacred from all eyes but thoss OF
Mr. Tltcn and your father. stilI adhere TO that
assertion, and NO oorrec. report Of my testimony will
show that testified differently. j imposed secrecy
because did not consider " Just either to Mr. Tweed
or to the persons whose names were mentioned n
that these charges against them were in exist
ence that more publicity tnan was absolutely essen
MAJ should be s cn nine ns oan was scSsy. s
source, and With no personal desire to Djuro ohcra
had no intention or dss'ro that you should not
suit With any you thought proper, either to the
propriety Of releasing NJ Tweed at all or upon
any oi ths subjects embracsd in tho stasmeat upon
which such persons could have knowledge did
not even complain my letter OF It's exhibition
Ar. Peckharn. although ! airly might have done
you had intimated TO me your anwilnyness thai
should furnish him any infornation, una since my let
whose word cannot be questioned anu whose name, II
you desire It, lsci couhdcut he viii permit me 10
make public, that yon stated 70 him about tho snnc
time ''that you had confidence whatever in Mr..
Peckham would not rcpeat this reinhk " thought II
possible that could bs o. any injury 10 NJ reekham
cause for objection. Had you informed Mr. PsckhAm
or Mr. whitney what MI. Tw cod could testify in The
nass sa"s
put, according TO your own report you sent
mS ana sS Mno To- Mr. PeoKSan, leaving IL 10 his ssoSso
say, "Mr PecKham Informed me that Mr. Nasn read
small part ott while is Was in his tAr. psskhams)
Your own understanding OF the na..cr Is given by
you in your testimony before tho Senate Com.
inittce on the 1st Of May
O. In did ron hold that paper, whether
% s ss e s s S%
ssSs 70 . s% ad a s s"u & III
whether any evidsncs farns,sa wss of value
In giving my testimony before the senate Commit
tee Was not called upon to state the names OF the
gentlemen TO whom you had Indicated you would sho~
the statement and consequently they were not men,
toned
f31 So TIN TEN PER CENT soKs cee
In your report you give very grave coloring to
versaton in regard to compelling restitution by those
persons who had received money for improper pur-
came from mo as you impute 10 mo- Tho utmost
foundation for ascribng 1t 70 me was re-
lucrative business than to collect ior ten per cent of
tho collootions the amount covered BY such checks.
The statement was made after you had remarked that
ufder no circumstances woulu you make Mr. Tweed's
proposition public and that It's only usefulness would
be IN obtaining back some Of the money That saule
statement believe have made TO msnv persons and
|
me. think you have ovcrshot the mark in
telling that lasehood II Is q question OF
all the probabilities are against my making
such propostion There 10 no present nece sity for
engage in Illegal business and belIevs my bit.
tsrest 0lponen. woud give credit for better iudg-
ment even II had been ever 70 much inclined 70 dis.
honesty, than TO have approached comparative
stranger, and one too, who not treating me with
ordinary professional courtesy, with such barolaccd
composition you would not admit that any one
would had the hardhood 10 approach you such
away without yoIi resem.'ns ~ put wnat excuse lor
ton Iroin me aiford9 Do You wisn the Governor to
that you doubted your ability the
temptation OF the suggestion If you accepted Mr.
VINO Is THE ONE CHICK sESArons
Wherein your grievance consists with reference to
withholding the name OF senator in case of pubi-
cation OF the statement Of Mr. Tweed is not very clear
report shows that did not permit interfere with
full disclosure TO you, and while made such sug-
gestion IT. was lett with you to pass upon.
Mr.. Tweed had but check, which Ee stated
be had given to the gentleman spoke oil, and that
check had been carried away with others from Mr..
except the uncorroboraied evidence OF Mr. Tweed.
Other reasons also had which thought sufficient to
Justify me in asking that this single name should be
rowSsESD's swEEyY RETAINER
But Of oil your apologies for your actions my re.
ceving retainer from Mr. Sweeny appears NE the
weakest and at the same time the most outrageous.
The character Of that retainer was fully stntod you
by me- and 1t not at all such you would have 1t
appear l was retained not to render Mr.. swecny
any service counsel but .aersiy 10 prevent my be-
e ns people ~s'
full knowledge and CONSENT and With The distinct
understanding, in Mr. Tweeds presence, that |
should have duties 10 perform tor Mr. Sweehy as
his counsel ana that the retainer should IN way in
teriere with my efforts In behalf OF Mr. Tweed The
preparation OF Mr.. Twoed's statement, and informed
you OF IT in your Office on the day prosecuted tho
did not permit il IN shield Mr. Sweeny. spoke Of IL
to Mr.. O'CoDor Mr. Peckham, Mr. Whitney and many
Others as wen as youfss ana J, was no secret to any
never had conversation with any oil his counsel
anout his case.
tH nf PERSONAL, VERY. Us.
II was handed 10 me by your friend, Mt. Bryant,
when you and he appeared the most intiinaio and
abou. week after you and he visted Nv. Tweea in
Jail But n mems actions ~ be judged By thoir
results 1t would be fair inquiry whoncr you had hot
received arctancr from Mr. sweeny Could you have
Sa i ~ yoa n
checks which MIR. Tweed exhibited you were not set
forth In the statement oil April " is untrue, and
evinces the strong Imaginative acuity OF the per-
son WHO drafted your report l mover knew What
special checks Mr. Tweed exhibited to you, Was
hot present, and was never told by either you him
In furnishing tho checks Tor mo 10 draw the statement
! believe that Mr. Tweed spared neither friend nor
ioe. I never told you Mr. Tweed had iaIsined told
you-as stated IN my letter to you OF June 20, my
interview OF April 4that In consequence OF your IN
timacy with Mr.. Bryant and his assurances. Mr.
Tweed In such condition Of mind that he did not
appear to be aware what course would meet your ap
proyal. The same gentleman above reierrcd TO- who
upon that basis
Mr. pAIkURILD ARaAIukxD. NrnttH
But lot Us inquire Tor moment what OF per-
you are who Undertakes TO charge others with i'm
proper Conduct and who appears 50 familiar with tho
law against crime won't 40 further hack than your
connection with what you call the Sweeny setteeDt
and about which you say I'll consider the getting the
400 0O0 In this action under the crontnst auces
fortunate, and the acceptance OF II has my ap-
prevail" According TO the iotter written to you
by Nessfs. pcckham Nash, dated June 7. and set
forth your report all tho evidence the people
against Peter H.. Sweeny when they Instituted their