The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-08-01
THE THIEVES RING.
nj. vi. yygsRFR EXPOSES SOME OF THE
+ mAsCALrTuEs OF THE LATE RAwAoAh
wARTrY-TME "RRG RING"
DoNA1psoNv11nE, La, July %, 1878.


ipstant annear several statements which the
facts will not substantiate nor warrant. |
will only notice the material allegations In
said editorial, as follows:
s.Wbile Weber was on the stand Mr. Cox
surprised him by the production of letter
written by witness to Robert Morris, Of New
Orleans, marked private and dated at Don
jacksonville, February 6, 1878 Of which the fol"
lowing synopsis Is given by the Pcayt"'e:
i asMorris Marks came to see my sister.ln-
law ia reference to a statement publlslled LII
tie Northern papers that there was woman
ir Washington representing herself as Mrs.
I'D, A. Weber, who said she had q document
sent by Sherman and others, making promises
Ii protests would be made; Ihs woman
threatens Sherman u 20. with exposures. L
do not believe that this woman was doing any
such thing. No one is authorized TO repre-
sent Mrs. d. A. Weber. ] want you to watch
this matter very closely. 1t may rebound TO
your interest as well as ours. Marks IS go,
out If Mrs. b. A. Weber had the letter. Per-
flaps he wants to make capital out OF It. |
want YOU to go to the residence OF Mrs. 4. Il.
jerks and see II she is there hnoW that thts
document acas, and Is get IN eristence. You
might find out something from the Democrats
relative TO this matter"
s sLrhis letter, which was evidently not writ
ten for publication or political effect, tailles
with the circumstance OF MARKS VISIT, ana
slso with the tenor of repeated statements
made by Weber himself to friends in Donald
sorlyiIle. It fatty contradicts the assertion
of the Witness that he destroyed the original
Sherman letter in July, 1877
On July 3, while on the stand at Washing
ion, I testified the following, which you will
find on page Cid Of the printed testimony OF
the committee:
Q-By Mr. Springer Your sister in-law
stated that she had the Sherman letter?
Al l,,rs{ 1ipI fl,ri ery f,Jy t,pf tr t1oxr
her brother come there to Interfere with the
matter. She felt that she could attend to her
own business. He felt very, angry, at Mrs.
jerks being there again. | do not know my
sister-in-l laws reason for stating It, except: OF
course that she was under the impression
that she had the letter among her papers. [
bud not told her that had destroyed 1t. /
had told no one about that [ made remark
In New Orleans to one or two gentlemen lone
pf them Mr.. Norris when Mrs. jerks was en-
here Ia Washington, trying to trade on the
letter.
Q.--Last winter?
A.-No, sir; but the last time. think, that
she was here. She wrote q letter at that time
had an interview with Mr. Sherman, and 1t
was generally supposed that she had traded
with Mr. Sherman. She disclaimed knowing
about the existence Of that letter. ! did it for
statement made by Mrs, jerks, that she had
Of preventing any one believing that she
would or could trade upon It; and to show
that she was simply. trying to hlaclsmail some
object, and that of all our family, has been to
shut the matter up. and not to have it known
at all that such @ letter had been given That
was my reason for destroying ito shut tho
matter up.
II will be readily perceived that the state
rnenb Of the Chief that "Mr Cox surprised me
by the production Of the Morris letter. Is un-
founded. Again the Chief says: ut tallies
" fe1 Himself 81 reR % e m
Vile. IT fatty contradcts the assertion of
the witness chat he destroyed the original
Sherman letter in July, 1877"
j may have spoken to one Or two persons OF
The fact that / knew the Sherman letter had
been given to p. A. Weber and JAS i. Ander
SON. and If did SO 1t was during the time
about February, 187S-when Mrs. jerks was
Agitating this matter at Washington; but
since July 1877, that had the Sherman let
ter or believed it was yet In existence, is un-
fftie Therefore, the statement Of the Chief |
that the Morris letter fatty contradicts the
assertion of the witness that he destroyed the |
original Sherman letter In July 1877, Is also |
untrue. A careful perusal and comparison OF
my testimony given at Washington with the
Morris letter will disclose no inconsistency |
whatever in the assertion that destroyed |
the Sherman letter in July, 1877.
sufficient Importance to give 1t publicity. I
could at this time review the testimony of
Bornio, Of the Granite Building, given before,
the committee relative to the alleged reward
testified BY him was to receive for my testi--
mony before the committee but as have not
been the owner or possessor OF a $1,000 claim
against the parish of West Feicana since at
least three or four years, the falsehood OF the
assertion is too palpable for notice. The as
sertion by the same witness that / stated to
him was cooped up at Tunica by band Of
would-be- hulldozers, when | was nearly two
hundred miles from there is also unworthy
OF consideration.
There Is, too the testimony OF Marks, now
of the Internal Revenue Department, which
is subject to very serious corrections, but
particularly relative to the statements said
to have been made to him by. Mrs, D. A.
Weber, that she Mrs. D. A. W) had told him
AS papers with her This is not all there is !
enough to be told, besides that, to shake the
occupant clean out of his section Of the Gram
lite Building.
willingness (l to bring about an interview be-
tween John Sherman aud James =. Ander-
son at Washington was almost at the same
time followed by an effort on the part of Gen.
Sheldon Counsel for John Shermanl, through |
Mrs. A. D. jerks, to force Mrs. ID. A. Weber
to New Orleans SO as to have her intricately |
disclaim any knowledge Of the existence Of |
Che Sherman letter?
Ill Mr.. Sherman never wrote @ letter of
assurance and protection to D. A. Weber and |
JAS. e. Anderson, why should he Or any of |
his friends endeavor, by tricks, to obtain
to the contrary, when the matter |
was about to be thoroughly investigated by
congressional committed The answer sug-
gests itself.
I inclose you herewith list given me by
prominent member OF the ring" referred to
In my testimony some time SINCE which was
said to contain q portion OF the bills pending
In the Senate during the session Of 1876, in
which it had been determined there were
brass tacks." AS I was not member OF the
little ring which existed inside of the big ring,
and which gathered for themselves much Of
the 'tacks, and though cognzant Of the fact,
I was in most instances cleft OUT
Now, for instance, there was the Senate bill
relative to smallpox. Hayes, doctor, be-
lieye, was in charge of the hospital. This bill
was introduced and referred to the Judiciary
Committee, of which Special Deputy Collector
Thomas G. Anderson was chairman. If my
memory serves me right the records will show
1t was never acted upon nor reported and
died there a smallpox death.
There was too, a good and nice old gentle