Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1880-12-23

Ahe tnhrss which Conkling and
His frienAs Ought TO Answer
Antdst tho eo1rosefsy shoas the Ian
gus2e il which Srator Bsyard couched
his siinssnn 10 Combine. Arthur and
othe rs At Dover hs. fall. the real question
sesaas 10 havo han almost lost sight OF,
yet IL IL one Tixch deseS sss Acd demands
attention. ilr. Bsyard dil csiticise the
conduct OF SENATOR Coakiina aud the
others oouoorDei 10 the Phelps, Dodge &
60. case sDd he has no disposition 10 with-
draw Anything he 4aid. There lies before
us private letter from Senator Bsysrd to
a wtu Known gsntle man OF this city in the
course OF whnn. in siludiug 10 this con-
uoversy, MIR. Bayard says;
did say:
ftrst-That s27l.OO0 WAS taken wronglu!ly
from the pockets OF Phelps, Dodge a Co.
Seeond-Ihst Arthur Cornell, Latin ana
Jayne were concerned in it,
Ihrrd-That Conkling WAS understood, as
the counsel OF the three first named men, TO
have received compensation for his advice
aud assistance in the transaction
Fourth-ThAt this was no fancy skeach but
that the reports and publications OF Congress
would show them to be true.
Fifth-That Boutwell, was then Secretary
OF the treasury, and Noah LAWS United
states District Attorney.
The Dover reporter makes me say that
Boutwell,. Noah Davis, Conkling and the
custom house officials were al personally
present when s267, 900 was taken out OF Mr..
Dodge,s pocket and that hey dioided II among
Themselves. This Is absolutely false. never
spoke of the division nor who were present
at 1t.
Mr. Baysrd then goes on To calculate
the probable division OF this S27i 600,
which, AFTER dcdurnng probably $40, 600
for court costs, would leave s2Gl 900 to
divide. Half tAi4, or $3.50, 500 wonld go
to tue Treasury, aud OF tine remainder one
half, r65, go would go to the iufcrGier,
Jayne, and a like amount would he divided
| equally between Arthur, Coraei and
Lefiin. Sucu at least, is substantially
the division contemplated By the moety
system. air. Bayard then resumes
Ny letter to Conkling is precisely accurate.
did denounce Infamous the whole moiety
I system, and Arthur, the then Collector. for
the support Of it, and cited the Pheps-pudge
/ case a. conspicuous illustration Of its i'll
. lhluN' plt tlu Hut hlE tIht boutwell,, COuk-
! ing, DAVIS ". al. were present when the money
1 was obtained from Dodge or that they
divided il among themselves. II was, | sup
! pose, divided under the moiety laws and the
! three revenue officers got their share and
| CoDkling, as their COUNSEL was understood to
have received compensation from them. The
| testimony before the House Committee shows
this No addition was needed to
the naked facts to make ii shocking abuse
OF the law, and such Il law Is surely infamous
In April, 1873, Noah Davis wrote d long
letter to Phelps, Dodge " Co., in which he de.
elared his conviction that there nevel had
been the slightest intention to defraud the
revenue on their part, and vet for an alleged
Withholding OF some Sl,G0O OF royenne
-ZIl,OU had been extorted from them
The letter from which we have quoted
was hasty one 10 an intimate personal
friend who had asked Air. BAyaEd what il
was he did say, and h" gives the facts,
with which lie WAS perfectly familiar, 10
which be alluded. Senator S.uiabury, ex-
Governor Sauisoury, Representative
Williams aud others familiar with the facts
were pres9nt, and their recollection agrees
entirely with Senator Bay art-, whiis had
he made II statement such as qss attrib
uted TO hin, they could not have failed Il
notice il and remember II. 'rAair knowl
| edge Of the facts makes their rect frc.ior
OF vastly more valns than that o; Ia, o.
, hostile village politicians who prnbably
3 never heard Of Phelps, Dodge y Go
before
? But We hA,a quoted euDesn OF VIVA
D Mr.. ia! ard did say, ami which ns.n 0
Z character and National reputation re.u.ru.
3 Der bearing EiEl say, 10 show tAat h
3 charged the slgGers Of Tie feea.t ear
o With varying degrees q comp. city 10
, very diseteditable transaction. ami ,ha
4 charge Mr. baYard has not iakru 'heB
S II the parties think th-y t,,... met j, the
4 had batter ST ahort doing it w!agp
O delay for nothing tN-y have y,
# said or cws-i ntue,s ia -
- for them goes any distance whutegt
10 toward relieving them from H. impoti
ii"r ot sorftd participation III a gro.
wrong, Hiuc- acknowledged las Gu
their nal3h--r 20 have barn Wroig. n
Q people viii nsiitye that Mr. B.yald di
e not nlake statements IN conflict with h
L own knowledge Of thr facts hut thr
n would like 10 lear what Mr. C0nkliug d
J. 10 say IN reply to VIVA; Liz. hayard anj
/, he a'd say. Does MIR Coukiing eau,u!,
o that so trlii'ug matter as 70 requr i
( attention, nov that he hhy. hiulS, T. aft
q years VI silence. thrus. i. before IL