The New York herald., 1878-02-22
The EX-President Replies to George
William Curtis and John Jay.
lie Never Asked Sumner TO Support the
st. Domingo Treaty.
WHY GRANT REMOVED MOTLEY.

Curtis the Sumner controversy showed It to
General Grant. As have had occasion to remark.
nothing has impressed moro In tho conversations
OF General Grant than his want OF resentment or
animosity In speaking of the with whom he has
been associated In this Summon matter ho has de-
clined several occasions 10 make any statement.
what Is the use" he said to the in Paris, of
pursuing u controversy with gentlemen who have
newspapers at their control and dead men for their
sabjectsg"
HOW HERALD INTERVIEW CAME PASS
But this special article In Harpers Weekly does tho
General gross injustice that shall venture to
give you tho Impressions 1t produced upon tho Gen-
eral's mind.
'.This article, he said, .is most unjust and docs
reflect credit upon tho reputation ofMr Curtis for
honesty and fairness. 1t Is assumed by Mr. Curtis
and other defenders Of Mr. Sumner that l. In some
way, wantonly attacked the reputation OF Mr. Sumner
and ME Motley Now here are the facts. When
Mr. Motley died l was IN England. Two articles
came to my attention: one from tho pen OF
John Jay and The other from that OF Mr. Smalloy Of
the Tribune. Both Of theso articles did myself and
especially Governor Fish, great injustice. saying,
among other things, that VIC had killed Kr. Motley.
although he lett his mission In 1870 and died 1877
Some time utter l was travelling from London 10
Edinburgh and met Mr. Copeland the train, who
was representing the NEW YORK HERALD. took occa.
sion to speak TO M. Copeland OF the articles OF
Mr. Jay and Mr. smallcy aud OF their In.
justice, and TO state the real iacts az
remembered them. The train was travelling
about torty.Gve miles IN hour at the time
and no notes were taken. NY statement was written
out aiterward by Mr. Copeland from memory, and
sent TO the HERALD without my seeing It. When the
paper containing tho article reached plainly
that tho author had endsavorcd to state the con-
versaton with accuracy; but there were somo
errors both of omission and Of commission, AZ was
most natural under tho circumstances It has been
SO long since read The articles that cannot specify
what these errors wero.
WHAT GRANT SAID TO CURTIS.
:sBut never said that Mr.. Sumner, In stating
shat when he removed from the charmanship
OF the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations he
know to be ialsehood' The fact is. 'clsan docket
is term that has been introduced by Mr. Summers
overzeaous admirers to give this uncallsd for
troversy o turn that would enable them to con-
tradct my statement successfully. What said was
entirely in relation to what had passed between Mr..
Curtis and myself in a conversation ut Long Branch
when hc asked mo 70 use my influence to have Mt.
Sumner restored 10 his former position on tho
Foreign Relations Committee. MI Curtis should re-
member that told him that had nothing to do with
the formation Of the Senate committees, and that II
had would not regard Mr.. sumner as q proper men
for that committee the administration. because
he had put himself out OF relations the secro-
tary OF State and yself and without any roason SO
lar as either Mr.. Fish or myself werc con.
cerned. l told Mr.. Curtis that the chairman
tha. committee above all others should be good
terms at least with the Secretary OF State. said
also TO Mr. Curtis that Mr.. Sumner had most untor-
tunato temper for any business transactions. Hc
was doRmatc, opinonatod, iniaIble In his own es,i.
mation--the be all and do all In any matter in
which he took part; of a temper that made business
with him almost impossible In proof OF this stated
that when Mr.. Sumner was relieved from the chair
manship Of his committee tnero we're several treaties
before hlm-sevon, nino or olcven-not acted upon.
told Mr. Curtis that OF these treaties had been
before the committee for about sixteen months and
that although did not know tho fact
members of the committee did not even know Of their
existonce Mr. Curtis replied that this could not be
true, as Mr. Sumner had told him tha', wnch ho was
displaced the work before bis committee finished
Mr. Curtis that was very glad that IN any question
OF vcracity between Mr. Sumner and myself II should
be upon a point so easily determined, and that no
should DO convinced was right at once wrote to
ventions before the Committee ON Foreign Relations
at tho time OF Mr.. Summers removal their
nature, tho time thoy had been under
consideration by the committee and their
final disposition. The reply from the State Depart
ment showed that there were. far AZ can recocct
nov. twelve treaties and conventions. and that Of
these twelve two had boon beore the committee for
about sixteen months soc that Governor Fish says
there nine; bu, my recollection Is that tho
number was twelve sent the list that csme from
the state Department TO Mr.. Curtis He can answer
whether was right not and II he cannot thon tho
Hon. J. c. Bancroft Davis can. Mr. Davis was acting
Secretary Of State a. tho time and answered my let.
ter"
SUMNER UNDER MORBID INFLUENCE
After this narration, which, you will observe, 10
an especial .osho article Of Mr. Curtis, tho
General returned 70 Mr. sumner. "I said," no con-
tinucd ",o Mr. Curtis at the ume-I said specifically
that did no, accuse Mr. Sumner Of knowingly and
Intentionally ialsifying the factA I say 90 now.