New-York tribune., 1878-06-08

life, a letter such as Mr.. Sherman Is said to
have written was perfectly blameless. That
this was the story told him is made certain
by the facts, % that Anderson was ravenous
for Office, and by telling Republican leaders
that he had committed crime he would nave
made it impossible for any man OF influence
to help him safely; (2) that Anderson never
tried to use the letter as if it were pledge
to reward fraud; and (3) that he was treated
by Mr.. Sherman with entire indifference.
That no such letter was ever writ
ten by Mr.. Sherman appears probable,
because it is not produced, because he swears
that he fully believes that he wrote no such
letter, and because Anderson, in his letter to
Matthews, April z, 1877, inclOsing another
paper, says, "tIiis Is the last piece OF docu-
"mentary evidence in existence"
H. As to Mr.. Matthews, the documents as they
stand, if all of them are genuine and without
any explanation which he has sought oppor-
tunity to make under oath and TO support by
proof, indicate precisely this and no more that
he tried to get an Office for Anderson after
the latter had surrendered to him certain
papers alleging that there had been fraud
perpetrated in Louisiana. What personal
blame belongs to Mr.. Matthews in the matter
the public cannot Judge until it knows how
many of the documents were forged and which
of them how many and which of them came
to the knowledge of Mr. Matthews, and what
the belief was upon which his action was
based. The essential thing now is to observe
that there is conclusive proof that Mr.
Matthews did not know of the existence Of
any of these documents until after the
Inauguration of President Hayes. His first
interview with Anderson was after the
Inauguration all letters between them
were after the Inauguration; the pre-
tended Acknowledgements that fraud had
been committed are not even said TO
have been made known to him until after the
Presidential contest had been settled, when
one was given to him in March, and the other
sent to him April 7. 1t is, therefore, proved
conclusively by the documents, as far as they
prove anything. that Mr. Matthews was in no
way cOgnizant Of any fraud until after the in
auguration. What he knew or believed after
that event we have yet to learn. But no Re-
publican leader appears to have had any
ground for suspecting fraud, as far as " the
documents" prove anything, until after the
contest was over, if even then.
III. What Governor Kellogg did, will per-
haps be learned from other evidence, his own
included. But "the documents" indicate
plainly that there was an ugly personal quar-
rel between Anderson and Kellogg and his
immediate supporters, long before the election ;
that Anderson's clerk, Butler who was par
ticuar supporter of Kellogg, made an assault
upon Anderson on the 7th Of October. as
Anderson alleges, with the aid of Democrats,
and with intent to kill him; that in letters to
Weber, before and after that time, Anderson
expressed the intention that the State ticket
should be beaten, though he believed the
State would go for Hayes; that out of
this quarrel and Andersons offer to
Democrats to prove-for pay-the existence
of conspiracy by Kellogg and Others to
preyent an election in East Fellciana, grew
the pretended Acknowledgements OF fraud
subsequently given TO Mr.. Matthews. 1t is
probable that the one bearing Weber's name
was forged by Anderson, because not one
of the letters by Weber to Anderson, or by
Anderson to Weber, refer to such docu-
ment az contemplated or executed; be-
cause Weber swOre TO a contrary state
of facts Immediately after because the
signature of Weber is declared by those
who know it to be a forgery and because
Anderson, when confronted with the very
paper which he had sent to Mr.. Matthews,
denied It's genuineness in order to escape
prosecution for forgery. His pretence that
the original bore erased ink-blots which were
not copied in the pretended forgery, though
anybody attempting forgery at all could have
copied them with ease, is ridiculous.
". Finally. as to the general question
whether any fraud whatever was perpetrated
except by Anderson himself, 1.-the documents
give curious evidence, which has escaped
Democratic notice. Two days after the pre-
tended signature of an acknowledgment Of
fraud by Anderson and Weber, after Ander-
sons offer to Burke TO prove the fraud and
Keloggs alleged conspiracy, if paid s.,
600, and after he possessed the evil
dence which in the Nash agreement he
undertook TO suppress, showing that the
"parish was carried by the Democrats" !"
this same Anderson wrote TO Butler
November 16, III letter produced and iden-
tilted by himself, cautoning Butler not to sell
out to the Democrats unless he had " the
" documentary evidence to prove his asser-
tions," and adding "1hat is pkere the shOe
"p pinches me. Could prOUe all l know, some
" of these scoundrels would be in the Peni-
"tcntiary.n Thus, after Anderson had all
the documentary evidence" which he now
produces, he himself wrote in regard to the
contemplated bargain with the Democrats.
that his lack of such evidence was where
"the shoe pinchcd him." and that he could
not prove his assertions. Whether he can
prove them now is yet to be seen. But Demo-
cratic managers would better search " the dOcu-
"mentsp little more closely, before they
shout that anything has been proved, except
the phenomenal rascality of their chief wit