The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-06-14
a FAR LOOK FOR A LOST LETTER.
Mr.. Cox Dissatisfied with the Course
of the Examination.
SHARP RETORT FROM THE ESSEX STATESMAN.
Effort 10 Fix the Stain Of Recommendation
on Senator Matthews,
COMING APPEARANCE OF MRS. jerks.
IFRoM Dun SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT


IRON DUN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
WASHINGTON June 49, 1873
Tho Potter Committee did nothing or conseQ uence
to-day. 1t is reported that Mrs jerks viii be exam
ined tomorrow and there 10 some excitement In dem
pcratc circles tonight tho fact that since
rived here sho has been IN frequent consultation
with Mr. shellabarger, Secretary Sherman's counsel
She will be closely questioned about this. The matter
or the alleged Sherman letter continues to excite
lively curiosity II there is such lot.or it is kept
very secret, and there would seem to be no
object In this any reason why /. should not
be produced 1t once, and Secretary Sherman
has denied, In conversation and in writing, that he
wrote letter. and has SAID that he letters from
Anderson and Mrs. jerks asserting that they have
any such letter and know nothing about IT,
t would to beyond doubt that the whole story
10 myth, and Anderson. who relates It, per-
DuFer. So far, It must be ADDED, tho CON-
mittee have not produced any witness to
strengthen Anderson's unsupported assertion that
there is such letter, for DarraI. who undoubtedly
believed in its existence, owned on nina
tion that no knew nothing OF it. except as no had
been told oft by Anderson and MIRA JenKs.
IS THERE PHOTOGRAPHIC copY9
On the other hand there is good deal OF private
testimony the existence OF Photographic copies OF
pretended letter. Mr.. ShermanAnd his friends say
that these arc fraudulent. The committee have not
produced any copy the original. They refused
say TO allow Anderson TO whether there
were any other copies Mr.. MacMahon said in reply
10 questions from Mr.. Reed. that far as the demo
cratic members know the original Is In existence
that there other contemporaneous copies than
that produced By Anderson; that he knew nothing Of
any Photographic copy Of the original and had never
seen one, but had often heard OF one.
Thero In tharefoPo absoluteiy q ransom IN hoevo
that there ever was such q letter except Secretary
Bherman's own. doubt, expressed to the committee.
This doubt surprised and vexcd many Of his friends,
but, on the othcr hand, considering that tho resou
ton introduced by Mr. Potter and passed by the House
makes worry charge against Of the foremost
officers OF the government, charge inducing and
encouraging conspiracy to fasfy election returns
and wrongully change the vote Of Louisiana for
President, the committee ought have fclt them
selves bound either TO establish this charge Or
confess that their course In tho matter looks
ike Hiding with accusations too serious to
be tolcrablo unless they least shown rest on
probable cause. and surely tho unsupported evidence
ofa notorious and scf-confessed peIurer cannot be
held probable cause OF suspicion against anybody.
Tho committee has been In session nearly two weeks
and It has certainly tred with this question in an
unjustihabie manner
PROCEEDINGS OF THE POTTER COMMITTEE.
WASHINGTON, June ID, 1873.
The Potter Investigating Committee resumed It's
session this morning at nai-past eleven O'Clock by
calling General G. II. Smith, late appointment clerk
OF tho Treasury Department, who was the stand
when the committee adjourned last evening. In re-
ply to questions Of General Butler he stated that no
had found copy OF the telegram that was inquired
about the previous evening, but not the letter. He
had looked at all the copies that no had m ado
u letters sont, and found no copy Of letter
Of Mr. Matthews. He said ho would like to
make this statement, that he this morning
vent the Secretary's oice and looked the record
or references OF letters scnt from the President The
Treasury Department, and found that tho Steubenvic
letter che Conn letter. recommending Anderson, was
referred to the Treasury Department March TO- 1871
That was the Conn There question raised
yesterday whether It had been at the State Depart
That was, the General said before he made
appointment clerk. He mentioned also that all OF the
Official letters the Treasury Department, in
the Office Of the appointment clerk sent by him
into the mail room, where they receive . stamp, so
that ofRcial letter, when entered tho
nles cannot be Withdrawn without, at any rate, tho
that such letter received being lett there.
This lettcr OF Mr.. Matthews to him was OF course,
Official official II Official there would bc two
dispositions OF IT, one would be that he would put IL
In for filing q letter recommending an applicant,
and IL would be into the mail and stamped
properly and then nIed, or the applicant withdrew
his application he would hand tho letter to him II he
wished IL. l do not think In any case he would
destroy such o letter. II It personal, thon
Of course IL would depend the disposition
person would ordinarily make Of IL He himself
would b, likely to keep any such letters He might
have ned that letter from Mr.. Matthews Official
letter. II would have becnjn his discretion TO
regarded 1t either official letter personal let
ter II evident that In this case he regarded
. personal letter. This morning no requested Mr..
johnson to look over The letters and II he should find
any such letter from Mr.. Matthews recommending
Anderson no tho wisnoss) would inform tho CON-
mlttce.
When the witness finished General Butler asked
him II he had any further explanations to make. TO
which he replied mo"
OFFICIAL AND PERSONAL LETTERS.
Q. A letter brought IRON Senator by party who
recommended . man for appointment would be
usually treated as Official letter, would u not
A. +. would depend entirely upon Its terms; II 10
wsro addressed to me as appointment clerk adj
dressed to Mr. Sherman or tho Assistant Secretary,
and sent 10 me, would have no right, in my
opinion, TO consider IL ns any other than an
Official letter; my recollection OF tho letter
before 4 read Anderson's evidence was this
that IL was q letter written from Cincinnati
10 mo, and that Mr. Anderson called in reference toit
know did not Senator Matthews at that time
personally and that, probably, gave tho impression
that tho letter mad come from distance; II was In
my mind that this letter camo from CINCINNATI
O. What was the date the letter according TO your
recollectionf A. AS told you yesterday, have no
recollection, but must n \ II by other dates.
q The nrst letter was whsnf A. About the middle
Of June
q Tho Hrst letter might have been week before
Tho cttcr which you have OF tho 22d2 A. Ycs, sir.
A. Then you say giving the longest time, about Tho
l3tn OF JuncY A. Yes, and probably may have been
tho 18th or 10Th.
Did you 60 10 the President before or after you
receiyed The letter OF the 22d? A. Before.
q. And alter you received The nrss letter. A. Yos,
q Did you 60 st Mr. Andsrson's suggestion9 A.
Yes. SIR.