Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-06-09
HILLS STORY.


HILLS STORY.
Mr.. Hill, the first witness, related incidents
in his interview with Anterior; that he
called upon him at his (Atherton's) residence
late in the evening, and stated that charges
having been made of his connection with
the bonded spirits bill he (HilD had called on
him to learn what Kentucky whisky man
had to say on the subject Witness then
stated the substance of the conversation
which ensued, and declared that the inter-
view published in the Commercial of April
2S;h was substantially a correct recital OF
that conversation; that the only errors were
verbiage, not facts; that the statements were
correct though the language was not Uerb2tim
Anterior, who was present. asked permits
sion TO question the witness, and was allowed
to do s., but failed to secure any admissions
other than those contained in the direct
statement
BUELL's JOKE.
BUELL. was examined at some length as to
what information he had upon which to base
the charges which had from time to time
appeared in his paper. Witness stated his
information was entirely general and cuma-
lative, derived from a great number of con-
versations with different people, from current
gossip, frcm newspaper articles, and the
manner in which specific Legislation had
been accom- plIshed. He had been inclined
to regard the bonded spirits bill from the
start as job, and therefore was not inclined
to give it The benefit of any doubt. He had
no specific information apart from that in
possession of other people; the general run
and tenor of public discussion of matters
were the only means of information he pos
sessed.
He was asked why he had in various articles
in the Critic mentioned the names of General
Boynton, Mr.. Nordhoh, Major Carson and
others as influential journalists who were
under suspicion of being corruptly inau-
enced.
Witness did not remember of even having
mentioned the name of General Boynton.
He had alluded to others only in a spirit of
chuff. He had treated the charge that an
influential journalist had been bribed as a
farce. He had spoken of 1t in his paper as
a joke; at least that was his intention. He
might be a poor joker, but that was the best
he could do.
Witness was asked. "Can you give any in
formation going 10 show that any member of
Congress or senator, or any journalist ever
received 'or was offered any consideration
whatever in connection with this lil?"
Auswer-No, sir; | have no information
whatever; | only suspici0ned much of it,
based on the fact that / never before knew
that bill involving S6,O0OOOO between in.
dividuals and the government had passed
through the House under suspension of the
rules. / thought that was pretty plain in
dication that the benz ficiaries of the bill did
not court inquiry or disc ussion. Witness
did not desire to have 1t supposed for mo-
ment that he had alluded 10 any newspaper
man N a spirit OF malice, but only in a
spirit of joking.
Mr.. Hawley asked If the witness knew any
senator or member OF Congress who had re-
ceived, or had been promised, any considera-
ton. The witness did not know of any Of
his own knowledge. He had conyersed with
a good many members OF Congress, but, with
out conferring with them, would not care to
give their names or the substance of the con-
versations held with them. Covering a
period of several months the impression pro-
duced upon his mind was that. with the ex-
ception Of one or two representatives and
possibly one senator, the members of each
house took more interest in the measure than
they naturally would in any pending legisla-
ton.
Mr.. Hawley then read an article clipped
from the Critic, in which were mentioned the
names of Nordhoff, Carson ard Boynton, and
inquired: "Whence came the rumor that
Influenced YOU in associating the names of
influential journalists with the subject of
bribery and corrupt Influences"
Witness aid not know. He heard it pass
ing around a joke-as mere chaff-and
laughed at it.
Mr.. Hawley-What would you say if they
joked you about taking brides Would you
knock them down? Answer Qaus. hing)-
Oh, no, General Hawley.
Mr.. Hawley-Well, you should do so if
you are an honest man.
Mr.. Hawley continued-Is there any fact
whatever upon which you can base your in
situation against the three gentlemen named
In that article? Answer-No, l cannot say
information. / have reason to believe that
one gentleman named sometimes gets valu
able consideration. l cannot say have any
information or reason to suppose that either
of the three gentlemen were in any way cor
ruptly influenced in this connection.
NoRDHoFF ON THE STAND.
Mr.. Nordhoff took the stand and said:
For the honor of the profession he had been
trying to discover the names of the journal
ISIS if there were any, who attempted TO
profit corruptly by this Legislation. Mr.. Car
Isle agreed with him (Nordhof) that the
parties should be exposed aud asked Colonel
Wharton if he could give any information.
At his (Nordhoff's) request Colonel Whar-
ton called upon him but declined to give the
names, and he (Nordhoff) with good deal
of warmth said 10 him: 81 have never known
in past years piece of rascality in danger
of being exposed that it did not have a law
yer standing in for it to protect it." Laugh
Ter, in which Colonel Wharton Joined heart
lily. Mr.. Atherton m de the statement tba the
first time he heard the name of Senator Voor-
hees mentioned in connection with the bill
was when it appeared in the dispatches; that
he never spoke with Messrs Carlisle or Will
lis or Thompson about the ns mes OF parties
h.