The National tribune., 1882-04-29

OF great names mentioned by the latter as
holding an interest in the claim, and thai
the interview lasted only about fifteen
minutes. In response to q summons 10
Washington Mr.. Shipherd appeared before
the Senate committee and substantially ad-
r1itted an attempt on his part 10 bribc Gen
fiurlbut and Walker Blaine Third Assistant
Secretary OF State, i'll the interests of the
Peruvian company, the purchasers of the
Cochet claim. He was unable, however, to
produce the slightest evidence that either
OF these gentlemen had ever even received
the letters said TO contain his infamous pro-
posais. In his examination before the co2l-
mlttee on Monday last Mr. Blaine produced
the following correspondence between the
State Department and Minister Hurlbut
referring to the claim Of the Peruvian COM
pany, which etfectually disposes of Mr.. Ship
nerds accusations of completely in his
schemes on the part of any officer of the
! Government:
Mir. Blaine related the points of his con-
yersation with Shipherd. in which he (Ship-
! herd read what he claimed to be the opinion
of eN-Secretary Evarts, to the effect that
! Cochet could claim one-thrd of the guano
Mr.. Blaine here said, with much emphasis
/ Il would be willing to take the most solemn
! oath that President Garfield died without
ever having heard of this vile scheme, or ever
having heard the name of Cochet mentioned"
Witness the next day called Mr.. Trescott's
attention to the matter, and the latter, at his
(Nr. Blaine's) dict1tion. wrote dispatch
MIR. Blaine then proceeded TO read the entire
correspondence between the Department of
State and Minister Hurlbut. touching the
Cochet claim. In the latter part of July.
the dispatch just mentioned, was written to
Mr.. Hurlbut as follows:
Through tho American holders or their at
torncys you will no doubt be placed in posses
sion OF the facts regarding this claim, but you
VIII take no step towards committing the Gov
ernmcnt thereto till you have received further
definite instruction.
On the 22d OF September Mr.. Hurlbut
replied:
acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch
rs TO the Cochet claim. This legation has
nothing but vague statements toward the Gre
atln& OF q commercial enterprise, and can take
j
two letters, to which reply by this mail, ask
ing information as to the origin and extent of
this claim.
On the 18th of November Mr. Blaine
replied:
Your number twelve in reference to the |
Landreau claim, received. In regard TO this !
subject | became convinced that there was not |
even a preliminary inquiry necessary. There |
1S Mo IT1Sr ~.
can intervene. If American citizens purchased |
an interest in this claim, they purchased moth |
ing more than the original purchaser possessed. |
They did not purchase the aood Offices of this |
government, and you are instructed not to ex-
tend to them those offices.
On November I'd another dispatch was
received from Mr.. Hurlbut which crossed
Mr.. Blaines answer to Mr.. Hurlbuts previ-
Gus dispatch, in which he says:
I wrote to the Department in nv No. 10 nv
opinions on the COctct claim on which Mr..
Shipherd and his associates relied | have also
written to Mr., Shiphcrd and have pointed ont
to him the utterly defective proof as to the
possessions. The whole matter rests upon as
first it is not true in fact that
Cochet discovered cifher of these claims. They
have been used for 100 years; second, it is not
true that Peru ever recognized him in such
capacity; third, it is not true in fact that they
descended to his son. / am inclined to doubt
his sanity as to truthfulncss
Mr.. Blaine said in answer to this dis
patch that on December he wrote Mr.
Hurlbut as follows:
Your No. % in relation to the Cochet claim
is duly received. ! have pleasure in expressing
my apprecition Of your course as detailed
therein, and especially your action in sending
hitherto the correspondence in the case. Per-
haps should mitigate somewhat the severity
IF my language in view of the possibility of
he fact that Mr.. Shipherd is not wholly in his
right mind.
This ended the correspondence between
he State Department and Minister Hurlbut
IN the Cochet claim, and Mr.. Blaine pro-
'eeded further to address the committee as
% his relations with Mr. Shipherd
In regard to Mr.. Shepherds story about
he S250,000 bribe offered Mr.. Hurlbut and
lis (Shipherds) statement that he told him
witness) about it and took the opinion of
III his counsel about it, Mr.. Blaine stated
hat he had written to the several gentlemen
by Shipherd and he would read
o the committee the correspondence. Wit
less wrote to Senator Blair, asking if he re-
nembered to have heard Mr. Shipherd in
lis (Blaine's) presence mention any offer of
o250,000 Of stock to Minister Hurlbut, and
'eceived the following reply, which he read
Hon. JAMES G. BLAINE.
DEAR SIR: / never heard Mr. Shipherd state ,
o you that he had offered Mr. Hurlbut $25OOOO ,
If stock. / never heard that he made such an
,ffer until read it in the published reports OF
lis evidence before the Foreign Affairs Com
rittee (Signed) HENRY ". BLAIR. I
Mr.. Blaine then read his letter to ex- Sec
'etary Boutwell,, making the same inquiry
md the latter's reply that he had never
leard Shipherd say that he had offered
iurlbut S250,000. He also read similar let
ers of deDiel from Mr.. Scott Lord, ex-Sena-
or Eaton, ex-senator Cragin and Mr.. William !
j. Robertson, and raised general laugh by J
idding: " There is n very large lie out some a
There, and l don't think it will require a 4
cry searching investigation to locate it," !
Mr. Blaine then read his correspondence t
With ex-Secretary Evarts, in which the lat t
er denied that Mr.. Shipherd had any au- t
hority for quoting him in any way: that
le had never given any opinion or been
sked TO give any whatever in regard to the
;ochct claim; that he was absent in Europe. =
nd did not know until his return and then