Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1881-05-21

own. The plot was born in his fertile, ,schemins
brain. He is as responsible for its paternity
as he is for the authorship of the letter tC
Oakes Ames, whom he begged to call the
Credit Mobilier dividend loan, or for the
$4,000 argument he made in the De Golyel
contract fraud before "Boss" Shepherd.
challenge the denial, and when it is made by
some responsible, recognized representative Of
the President, or representative even of the
unscrupulous, impudent politician who moulds
| MIN as ne would piece of putty, shall be
ready with the proof.
AS TO NIcHoL.
This is plain language, at least as plain and
unmstakable as can make it. AS for Nichol,
to whom I referred yesterday, consider him
OF no more consequence in the controversy
than, as the Herald editorially characterizes
him, the "flea in the shirt of Mohammed." Z"
However. considering the relation he bore to
the President as the secretary in charge of his
correspondence during the campaign and that
he now holds, as the manipulation of Indian
contracts, his letter, SO prominently printed in
one of the "organs," possesses a certain
significance. AS an attempted answer to the
arraignment IN the Herald of the President, it
shows in every line and sentence and para.
graph the weakness of the defense. The chief
point in it is this, that it is an error to say
that Gen. Garfield devised the New York con.
ference. Mr.. Nichol alleges that Gen. Gar
field went to New York because certain friends
of Senator Conkling asked him to do so. Now,
without going into the question of the accu-
racy or inaccuracy of that statement, let me
ask OF what consequence is it how that famous
conference came to be held? The great con-
trolling points connected with 1t are: First,
that it was held, and second, that at it Gar
field OF himself, by himself, and for himself,
auctioned off the great gifts in his prospect
I've administration, and made political pledges
which he has broken. Mr. Nichol has not de-
MED this and this is the gravamen of the
charge. AS said, when it is denied I have
the proof.
WHO Is IT?
During the last two or three days the
"Mulligans, from the captain in the State
department to the corporal in the White
House and the buglar (NichoD in the Indian
office, have been straining every nerve to dis
cover the identity of your Occasional Core.
spondent." The guesses on the subject are as
numerous as they are amusing. The style is
said to be that of Senator Conkling. This is
about the severest thing that has been said of
your distinguished Senator. If he shall ever
put in his own splendid rhetoric the facts
have strung together, the speech will, in all
probability, go down into history with the
memorable one of Burke in the trial of Warran
Hastings. AS to the other alleged authors of
your occasional correspondence, have moth
ing to say. All of them are men of first-class
ability, but after all what matters it who
writes or who does not write the opening
chapters of the inside history of the Mulligan
The country does not care
picayune. All it cares about is this: Is the
story true? When It's truth as presented by me
is denied the truth shall be forthcoming. I
have made the charge. await answer.