The daily gazette., 1878-06-26
Mr. WattersOn Reiferates His
Charges and Makes n Pro-
DOS 4 on.

[lH OlDcH LtJt6T 70 IIOH' AOTuW .. IICUJt
Some casual observations OF mine To
reporter of the Sun seem to have given
you disquiet and, as would be gener-
GUS as well as just, | address you direct
ly, with the purpose of relieving your
mind.
You are mistaken when you say that
l have charged you with suppressing
any telegram or kilograms of Mr.. Til
den. You know, and know, that MIR.
Tilden disapproved the electoral bill.
Y ou know, and know, that you spent
Sunday, the 14th of January, in New
York, and that he made his objections
sufficiently known to you. You know,
and know, that on Monday
evening, the 10Th of January,
meeting Of the committee of
advisement considered the terms
of the bill, alphabetically submitted to
them that you were dumb as an oyster
as to Mr.. Tilden's opinions that final-
ly we all agreed to support The measure,
most of us believing it to be the emana-
tion of our chief. have. charged, and
do charge that your failure to deal
frankly with US on that occasion, your
failure to tell us what Mr.. Tilden had
said to you the day before, was the
practical suppression of his more saga
cious counsels, and to all intents the
betrayal of you friend.
As to kilograms l know nothing,
could know nothing, about them, and
have never said word about them.
| only know, and you know, and all OF
us know, that the electoral bill was not
Mr.. Tilden's offspring, and have only
said, what now repeat, that you al
lowed your bastard to be palmed of as
bis legitimate without saying word.
As to my charge that you wanted to
rest our case on the vote of Oregon, the
address which you publish itself fur
nishes the proof. That address rests the
case upon either horn of dilemma
Oregon ON the one hand, or Louisiana.
Florida, and South Carolina on the
other hand. 1t is obvious that l did
not mlsrepresent you. 1t is hard ly
worth stating the circumstances of its
suppression, which you say l had moth
ing TO do WITH. because l was "not a
member OF the national Democratic
executive committee" To make long
story short, after wrangle in New
York, which is known to quite a num-
ber of our friends, you turned up in
Washington with your document it
was submitted to the committee OF ad-
visement, of which was member !; on
my motion it was referred to sub-com-
mittee this returned it to the COM
mittee OF advise.nent rejected. Mean
while you REINFORCED yourself by your
national executive committee, which
met with us and, finally, our united
efforts subdued you and your address.
1t may not be known to you that per-
formed prodigies OF valor in this work of
subjugation.
You expose your. fwhen you refer TO
my incapacity to keep a secret. A man
who told, in sacred confidence, his extra
ordinary interview within an hour after it
was had Grant himself denying the truth
of your report-who kept his counsel SO
loosely that next days papers Contained
the whole of it, does not occupy aposition
of advantage to deliver lectures upon dis
cretion. You are right, however, in sur
missing that cannot keep secret. l
never had one in my life. A secret is
like wart on ones nose. Every body
has better view oft than the pcssessor
scorn secret, loathe secret, and,
doubtless, had you kindly admitted me
to your caucus the other evening, should
have gone away and told the reporters
what they knew much more accurately
and fully than l did myself.
But truce to badinase, to examinations
and recriminations, between you aud me.
l don't want to injure you. don't want
to quarrel withyou. Let us have done,
therefore, with innuendoes and epithets.
l have stated, publicly, that you were
guilty of a disgraceful falsehood; that this
talsehood was delivered with circum-
stances of solemnity to your colleagues;
that it was the occasion of transfer OF
the meetings of our advisory committee
from your house to another place, and
that l met you next day and refused to
recognize you. You ask why nobody
else did the like. Alas! 1 was ever a
fool in such matters, and always allowed
my disgnst to get the better of judgement.
| A wiser man would have gone along and