Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1880-12-14

their truth. These charges were OF unlawful
and criminal conduct, imputed together to saw
eral rersops, of whom l am one. asked you
vLetber YOU mads the statements. This would
Scam 60 call for frank disclaimer or sdmls-
sion You answer nothing as to anyone con-
csrnad exoept me. As to me ycur denial ID
ioferential, by impescbing the honesty OF the
renorter, aud then you proceed With 1ew'
ouIte different and erroneous s!atement "nioe
YOU say you uttered, as to me, 10 inc lofm ol
alleging what was understood.
Thus your response to plain ana Wa,faI.. Wv
eh1e inouiry is one which does not meet tne
@ ir nuirv but consists chiefly of allegations far
diterent. and, though less injurious, o1ensl7e
md untrue. bssing them you say, on puollca'
iione and statements OF which have no know.
iadye. Do you wish to leave the mat!er mere
If YOU think it deserves further at!enu9n, W.
vou answer my question, namely, Wnetner t9e
nm hlshed statement sent you in print was maoe
by you. vo.cor Co,rrrsa.
The Honorable T. r. Bayard. senhtUr, Wiz
mington, Del.
SENATOR BAYARD MORE EXPLICIT.
WILMINGTON, DEL November Il, lSoo-
Sir: Yout letter dated the 18th inst. ana posi-
marked the 18th, was received tnls moinlns.
You s.nt me on the 18th an snony NOUS commu-
tic.tion, cut from Republican newspaper IN
Philadelphia, purporting to be an extract IRON
, nublic speech made by me at Dover near Inc
end of the recent canvass. should not nave
considered statement 30 irreguls!ly mAue
worthy of nc,ice, but IS you did replied TO you
instantly in spirit of courtesy that had never
before seen or heard of the article; that II Was
20 grossly inaccurate as to cause the oelel IL
could not have been written by an honest per-
son. But as had spoken of the case OF rneips,
Dodge s. Co.. and mentioned you IN connecsion
with it. went on candidly to give you, as IS;y
"a memory enabled me. what did say. which
necesssriy excluded what I did not say and
in clu led Tsl of my speech which had any REFER
er CO to you or the moiety question"
The extract you sent me 10 uptrue. anu
ljeye msiciously so, and can but be SURPRISED,
as your letter had assured me you did not mean
ito imply th1t you supposed l dld or Wonlo
max, such an utterance that any tdrtner STATE
ment than that contained in my letter couio oe
desired. In that letter also expressed my
regret if the slightest injustice nao oesn Goto 40
apply sny proper remedy when any error hao
bsen pointed out to me. Your letter in reply 70
this chsrsct.r;zss IS my statement, new, qul.e
different and erroneous" ana s.;ans iuuseluenty t:r
different and, though less injuriops, onensiSe
and untrue basng them upon publications OF
which I (you) have no knowledge"
The pu ocaLions to which made reference.
of which you say you have no knowledge Hnlcn
relate to your alleged connection WIZ sns cas-
testimony of Mr.. VIM. 4. Dodge, at page 22e
and of the Hon. Noah Davis at pages Zf7 ana
24S of House Miscell sneous Documents, no,
264 of frat session. Forsy.third Oongre's, me
statement OF VIM. z. Wood, have already
sisted, was published in the New York Sun OF
TIM 18th ult
IT, your inquiry whether wish to leave the
m stter here" can ony reply that have no
wish on the subject but to be simply JUST 70
myself and others, and wherever that leads me
I shsiI try to follow. Your obedient servant.
T. F. BAYARD.
The Hon. Roscoe Conkling, Utica N. 7.