New-York tribune., 1878-02-02
THE LOUISIANA CONTROVERSY.
THE NON. CHARLES FOSTERS ACCOUNT OF THE
CONFERENCE AT wORMLEY's AT NEw'oRLEASs
-wM. Z. CHANDLER's COMMENTS.

| lBY TELEGRAPH TO TIE TRIBUNE.l
WAsHINGToN, Feb 1.-The Washington Post OF
this morning publishes an "intervicw" with Repre-
sentative Charles Foster in regard to the sO-caled
Burke-Matthews agreement" He is represented
as saying that lie not invited to the conference
at Wormlcy's. i got there by accident" he con-
| tinued "It was intended to invite me- but didn't
get that invitation somehow, and only dropped INTO
the conference when its object was explained to
| me-"
| "What was chat object 7"
"Oh, to talk over matters. II was not with view
to any contract or bargain, and neither was con-
| tract or bargain made"
"Who were the confereesi'
"Wcll, Henry Watters0n was there, and l.. John
Ellis, Of Louisiana. and John Sherman. Stanley
Matthews, Governor Dennison, General Garfield,
Major Burke and one or two others don't renem-
Der Just now who they We're"
"Whom did you personally representa-" 7"
"Ididnt represent any one | got there by acci-
dent, as tell you, and took little part i'll the busi-
nessn
"How long prior to that conference had you
received letter from Mr Hayes ?"
mot long. don't remember tho dates, but it
was not long between the receipt of the letter and
the conference"
what were the contents of that letterW
"Oh it was merely letter congrauatng .ne on
my speech, and stating that my views on the with
drawa of the troops from the Southern States were
in accordance with his own"
"Did he make any contingent promises in that
lctterp
"None at all. He said ii in the end the result
Is favorable your understanding of my position will
bo found to be correct That is all | can remember
of It now"
"Did you show that letter to any Southern peo-
pleT
81 think did,
ITO whom =
81 sh wed it TO Gambler of Georgia; Ben Hill.
Levy, of louisiana J. Young Brown, Faulkner, Of
West Virginia Abram s. Hewitt. Henry Wattcrson,
Major Burke and think to Alexander II. Stephens,
| also
did you show these gentlemen the letter before
| the conference 7"
" Yes it was prior TO that meeting"
"Dil not Major Burke read paper at that con-
fcrcnce"
81 think he did"
| "What was its naturci'
| my impression is that h read document
pledging the Nichols Government. II it were sus-
taincd to protect the Republicans of Louisiana and
to insure them peace and happiness IN that state
"Do you remember any further terms set forth in
! that agrecmcntT
gain. The paper simply set forth hat Nichols was
willing TO do"
"Wcrc You satisfied with the propostionr
| "Wcll, | thought il was no more than he ough to
| do"
"Did any one express any dissatisfaction with the
papcrr
81 don't remember that any one did"
Didn't General Garfield say that he was not ex-
acty pleased with il, or some portions of It,"
Not to my recollection"
"What was said 10y the Republicans prcscntp
81 don't think they said much Of anything. Burke
read his paper and did ali the talking"
"And the Republicans sat around and listened,
taking no part in it"
Pretty much so; yes"
"And this conference followed closely upon your
exhibiting Hayes's letter to the Southern Demo
cratsP
II don't remember the dates, but | think it was
| soon AFTER
"Aud you merely met to hear what proposition
| Major Burke had to malep
" 1t was not proposition; it was merely sug-
gcstion."
| "And you merely met TO hear what suggestion
| Major Burke had to makcP
| 1--WE went to hear what he had to say"
"Mr. Foster, was not the conference based entirely
"No, can scarcely say it was that letter merely
expressed Mr.. layes's views and authorized no bar
gain. nor was any bargain made"
"Did the paper read by Burke come up to the
point in IIayess ettcriD
"The paper simply suggested what Nichols would
do if he sustained"
"And the letter simply suggested that il the re-
suit were favorable to Hayes your understanding of
his position would be found to be correct and that
understanding was that tho troops would be with
| drawn from the South !"
| "Somethlng like that yes"
| "And yet there no bargain''
| "No, there was bargain at all Burke's paper
was not signed by anybody, and no agreement was
| entered into"
"It was laying down of platforms on both
sidesl"
/" AS much that as anything"
| "To the complete satisfaction of all concerned"
| IL don't think any satisfaction wSs expressed;
| don't think anything said one way or the
other.n
wM T.. cnANDIERs STATEMENTS.
The reporter says that he showed the above report
to Mr. Wm L. Chandler, who, after reading it, said:
| "We this is remarkable statement. lie admits
| having a letter from Hayes; that he showed 1t
around, aud that the conference followed close
! after. Now there was more than one conference,
and at one of them Burke read memorandum
which clearly set forth the understanding on both
sides.7
"Was that memorandum signedP
| "Not by the parties to it; John Sherman and
Stanley Matthews refused to sign it, but it was
understood to be the outline of the agreement
| entered into and Burke held it rs such"
| "Were there no signatures appended I"
"Just as soon as the agreement was entered up
and written ont, sanctioned by all the parties con-
! cerned somo of tho Southern Democrats-tndlng