The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1878-06-13

was living down there he Was very dissipated
and think his reputation was not what YOU
Call good at least in northern community.
1t might be what you cali fair in the city Of
New Orleans, tlaughter) and think he drank
good deal. He told me that himself.
talked with his friends there and think if
called upon to testify they would say his repu-
tation there was not considered good at all.
Q-Takng what you knew Of him there aud
what he did, state the view you actually took of
his services to the Republican party and the
character Of his supposed claim upon it?
AIT the date Of his showing this Nash
document of later developments and there be-
ing no reason that he should state anything bat
facts to me, his statement to me that those con.
les that the New York Sun obtained were not
signed BY him and he did not know where they
came from, and his statement about the Sher-
man docament say taking all this into con-
sideration, think up to the date of the Nash
agreement he served his party, and have still
no reason to doubt it. but since the date of the
Nash agreement. L think his missta tements to
me when he had no reason to make them and
the contradictions here with what he told me,
have led me to doubt him.
Mr.. McMahon-Was it the Nash agreement
that first opened your eyes to Mr.. Anderson's
urworthiness of character?
A-Up to that time heard things of Auder-
son detrimental to him. but knew so little of
him that was not prepared to believe him,
and the presentation to him of such kind of
document as the Nash agreement was some
thing extraordinary in itself.
Q-That was delivered to you shortly after
you went to the President urging Auderson's
appointment to consulship?
A-That is my recollection. Ia order to be
as accurate as possible have cons ulted Ander-
son and that is his recollection.
Q.-You have been in consultation with An
derson since you have been here?
Al know him personally, of course, and
asked him the question when he frst showed
10 nit
lie ton. That was probably the latter part of
March. "
Odd you then go to the President and
revoke your recommendation?
A.-No, sir; think very shortly after that,
probably few days, left the CITY. I did moi
see the President again.
Q.-You did not write any letter to the Presi-
A..No, sir: my opinion was at the time
That the appointment should ba made.
Odd any of the delegation revoke the
recommendation they had made of Anderson?
Al suppose it would be on file if Won
wanted to see it. We were all leaving the city
about that time.
QGWhen did what was called the Harlan
and McVeagh commission come to Louisiana?
A-They came in April, III.
Q-Do you know of any interview between
Anderson and Harlan while he was there?
A-No, sir. While the commission was
there l was only in the city one or two days,
Q.-Did Anderson report to you that he was
having any interviews with Harlan?
while there
QIYou came back to Congress on the 18th of
October and you were here all the time during
December, 1877, and January, 1878, and Won
LETT about the last of April, did you not?
Ayes, sir.
Q-Have you any way of fixing about the
time you left to go home?
y fxryoo hafnn &I,o 4
think. went home before the appointment
was made.
Q-Were you at home on thu 1st of May?
Ayes sir.
Q-About how long does it take you to get
A-About three days.
.,Q|When Mrs. Anderson exhibited to you
this Nash agreement how soon did YOU see
Nash and ask him about it?
A-rhe same day. Nash called at my room
s0Ou after Anderson, 4ftf
Q-Nash admitted signing the aoreement
and he told a bad story about Anderson?
Al don't think he said much about Ander-
SOD. He said he was foolish to sign the naner
or said it was foolish and he said "yes.'' one
OF the two. L would not like to Jay here be-
tween two particular politicians down there
who was right and who was wrong Ander
sons statement to me was that he had made
MS protest and return in good faith, but after
" was zone ne was afraid Nash would not take
care OF him as he thought he ought to, and
therefor he exacted this document from Nash
vi understood you to say that what made
you go back substantially on Anderson was the
Nash agreement which you said was rather an
extraordinary thing even for Louisiana poli-
tlcian. How did the Nash agreement have
you had formed of James E. Aud erson?
Alt lessened my opinion of him. He did
much about him. IVY gay
NOV what want to know and what the
com mlttee want to know is WIN this mao
james E Anderson was then REQ ard ed'I b. m nan
u al your dealings as so important nerson IN
nave Io your dealings with the admip;strot;o w
why was 1t that you were corresponding MiTs.
nun and wanting to bring influence to bear on
wards for yourself?
a. sald yesterday that my recolec ton
it to-day? ffNs' 'ouA o'a'o
Al will state it today that Anderson took
great interest in the matter of the collectorsh;n
OF New Orleans and offered his services in
behalf OF the Packard or myself and said to
me at that time that he had such claim nm
Matthews that he was satisfied that Matthews
could support Packard and myself for the
Q.-Why did you say little while apo in
answer to Mr.: Cox that last winter he abused
matthew's and said he would publish this letter
If he did not give him placer
Al dldn, mean to sag that at all. Now
what meant Dy doing something for him was
appointment OF myself or Packard.
Q-Were you tor two months pressing ella inns
on the OASIS OF certain papers of which Won
knew nothing aud had not seen?
Al stated yesterday that didn't depend on
these papers entirely to influence Matthew'S
They were to help.
Q-Iou still had something further to do
WIN Anderson after you knew his threats to
Matthews? :"
Al correspondent with him.
Q-You still did not abandon all vour claims
upon the collectorship?
A-Before saw the documents 1 was salts
fled couldn't get it.
Q-So it was not the showing of the dozen.
ment TO you that satisfied you you couIdn't get
1t but other influences? so'
Ayes SIR -
Q-Ehere is another despatch would like to
nave you look at and see if you have apv recoI-
lection of sending it? WV
,AEHes sir, this was sent on the 21st of
March and Is an earlier despatch than the 9th
Q-Reading (''If you come over to night
Drlng all the papers. Better come.") That
was March 20, 1878?
Ayes sir,
Q-I want to get the connection between that
which was last? "'' DA's "nu
Al could not be exact about dates. INIT the
POI point want to state is that he never brought
Inc documents over and 1 never saw than
Q-Now, if Anderson was the Kind of r,on
you heve represented him to be this morning.
ana you had discovered that about him in
Apeii, 1871, or March, what want to under
stand from you now ia this connection is that
you nave ave stated couple Of weeks or ten days
after the ID Of March Anderson was over hare
threatening Stanley Matthews with the eV.
posare of this document? 'A0 Ga
A., AEihat was his statement to me and
Matthews corroborated it. "A1
us that letter in yonr handwrtino?-
(handing letter to witness.) ,'iDs
Ayes, sir.
Mcmahon here offered the letter In ev;danca
and read it himself, as follows: e''Nonoo
HOUSE OF Representatives..
washington, April 2, 1S78. I
. MY Dear Sill, 1T seems to look quite snre bora
bas hayes VIII not appoint Packard and G
get It himself. Tonight he and Marks oa II S sas
ua VI aud Packard will say he desires me to
nave IL IN case he can't get it himself think if
and o ooHId press the matter now it would be sure
fhin Sal % aone next week. Write to him if Won
Guluk DeSC and II you are not COMING ouor J9.A