Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1882-07-25
THE FAIRMoNT ARRANGEMENT.


uOSc anu q. DartVu L aynes we propose to
lay before our readers the conclusions which
We have drawn from those Communications,
and for greater clearness aud precision, We
will divide our remarks into numbered par.
agraphs.
1. 1t is conceded fact that when the
Fairmont Convention took short recess for
supper, the next ballot, if no new aspect was
given to the contest, would result in the nom-
ination of Hon. B. z. Martin. 1t thereupon
became .expedient for Hoge and Lucas, if
they desired to prevent. that result, to have
such an understanding among their respect
i've supporters as would defeat Martin and SCI
cure the nomination of either Hoge or Lucas
Their combined vote was sufficient for that
purpose, and it only remained to determine
to which of.the two contestants the benefit of
that joint vote should be given, and upon
what terms that alliance was to be arranged.
q John Barton Payne, an original friend
of Lucas, and with friendly feelings towards
his rival, called Judge Hoge from his room
and submitted to him the plain and distinct
proposition, "That if he would not be can
didate for denomination for Congress from
this district, two years from that time Tin the
event that Mr.. Lucas should be oaudidate)
that the frie1ds of Lucas would vote for him
aud give him the nomination.
3. Hoge's dignity was in no wise shaken
few moments. he returned to his room aud
communicated Payuo's proposition to such of
his friends as were there assembled, and asked
their opinion as 10 the expedieccy of its ao-
| ceptance. Upon his return from his room,
the interview was brief, and Payne says, that
he promptly and uuqualifedly accepted his
| proposition. Now what does Judge Hoge
say? Does he deny this ? Does he say that
he rejected PaJne'4 proposition !? He does
not. be says, II returned to MIR. Payne
and stated that such proposition involved
question of principle; that no Que had right
to determine a question of nomination which
belonged only to convention" with yari-
ETY. Of tFumped-up pl4titudcs that no one
would have ever dreamt or thought of in such
hurried political crisis. His reply could
| easily have been aye nay, but he pictures
himself in his letter in the attitude of the
modest maiden, "Who, swearing she would
never consent, consen ted )" for he admits, in
his Monroe letter, that be returned from that
interview, and announced to his friends that
Lucas would retire; that the friends OF Lucas
would now support him, and that the retire.
ment of Lucas had been arranged"
4. Judge Hoge in sophistical effort to
make some excuse for his present conduct,
says his friends vera "almost unanimously"
opposed to Peyne's proposition. This we
~. T.
SpEigg did object to tho arrangement AS
to tho other persons in the room, our informa-
ton Is reliable, that some were SILENT others
said 1t was personal matter for him to de-
| ternlne upon his own responsibility, and
others again advised an acceptance These
facts, We are .crcdibly informed, will be sus>
tanned by every gentleman in the room. with
the exception Of Mr., Sprigg Let them be
INTERCEPTED. Except as it bears upon the
vcracity of Judge Hoge, it is worry unim>
portant inquiry in this controversy, what his
friends advised him to do on that occasion
The question is, not what his friends advised,
but what lose did. Payno's interview was
with Judge Hoge, privately and in person,
not With bis friends. If Judge Hoge. after
consulting his friends acted as if he had their
approval, when in fact be had not, all that
need be said on that subject ia, that he Do
ceived the friends Of Lucas, and insul,ed his
| own supporters.
3. Judge Hoge, in his recent letter to Col
| Monroe, admits that no announced to his
friends, THAT tho retirement of Mr. Lucas
had been arranged" between Payne and him
self. But he does not inform US what were
the terms of that arrangement. Upon this,
the most vita! question in this controversy, he
IS SILENT he beats about the bush with somo
Ingenuity, but shrinks back from the main
|
ting that the statement of Payne is correct p?
| No other inference can bo drawn FROM his si>
lence on that point, for his letter to Col
Monroe was intended for publication, aud
was designed to embrace oil that be could
say IN defence of his present position. The
acceptance OF Mr.. PAyne's proposition, as
| presented by him, stands virtually conceded
by Hogo. But Hogo cunniugl7 connects
another proposition with that of Payne, to-
wit: obligation to transfer his friends;
| proposition never submitted to him, and sub
mts his denisl to the proposition go altered
by himself, Judge Hoge says in his Mon
roe letter, 81 have some recollection Of adj
ding, that [ did not know that l would care
to serve second term in Congress" A. most
remarkable stretch of recollection indeed
and singularly in contrast with his present
avidity to return to the flesh pots of Egypt:
6. Judge Hoge says-"Expressing my
confidence in Mr. Payne, I asked him to
make contemporaueous memorandum of our
| conversation" Why make any memorandum,
if tho proposition had been rejected? Such
a course would DO idle and seueelcss in the
extreme Ii was only because the propos>
ton was accepted, that there could be any
sense in reducing tho compact or treaty to
writing. 1t was reduced to writing by Payne
at Hcge's request. Why at Hogo's SUCCESS
ton The reason is obvious. Such contracts
have been often made before, and Just as Of
ten broken. Hogo was conscious OF the taiut
OF bad faith attached to all such arrangements.
Elated with the idea of a scat in Congress,
not then looking beyond his one term, and
anxious to secure that, he was prompt, by
way of showing his good faith, to suggest that
the arrangement should be reduced to writ
ing, that no suspicion might rest upon him,
that he would do what many others had