New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-03-23
SHEPHERDS STORY ABOUT ALL TOLD.
IBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUNE.I

lBY TELEGRAPH TO TRIBUNE.l
WASHINGTON, March 22.-Mr Shepherds testi-
mony to-day undoubtedly ended such disclosures as
it is IN his power to make regarding the connection
of any United States Minister officer OF the state
Department with the Peruvian Company and, APP
parently of any officer of the Government. The
sum of these is seen to be very small Mr.. Shipherd
stated positively that offer of stock was made to
any officer Diplomatic or otherwise" except that
to General HurlDut, and that no ntimauon was
made to HIM by any officer of desire for any inter
est in the company. He wrote to General kllpat
mex on the subject, simply letter OF information,
making no proposition, and received no response.
He had an interview with General Adams, the Min
lister to Bolivia but that simply in regard to the
possibility of an agreement between the Government
of Bolivia and the Peruvian Company for lease OF
the nitrate beds in the former country, and had no
connection with the attempts to enforce the COM
pany's claim against Peru. No proposition was
made on either side for an interest In the company.
The witness said that no officers of the United
States broadening that term so as to include men,
bers of Congress, had any interest in the company,
except one, who could not possibly come INTO Of
fetal contact with the company-Collector Robert
SON of New-York-and he received retainer for
purely legal services
The impression left by Mr.. Shepherds testimony
was that the only persons holding positions in which
tney might possibly nave pcCi CHiiOu "PVh w "NN
upon the pretensions of the Peruvian Company,
and who either had, or were promised
stock. OF became connected with the company,
were Minister Hurlbut and Senator Blair
If this should prove be true the stories that have
been current in Washington to the effect that a
number of Congressman received stock and re-
turned 1t only when investigation was seen TO be
impending will fall to the ground, where the charges
against Mr. Blaine long and it will appear
that this whole Peruvian Company scandal is the
most farccal affair of its kind that has been seen
In Washington in recent years.
The real animus of 1t was a desire to injure Mr.
Blaine 1t has long been evident that it would not
do that. If it should appear that the whole
scandal is to dwndle down INTO the failure OF the
Minister to Peru to resent attempt to br1be him
with block of moonshine stock, the discontinue
of Mr. Baines enemies will be complete. IL
is evident, however. that those newspapers which
have been pursuing Mr.. Blaine propose to get what
aid they can. even from Mr. Shepherds testimony of
Yesterday. The tenor of this that he told Nr.
Blaine that he could not ask from the United States
Government at that time anything more than no.
ti6cation to the South American Governments that
In the war settlements the fact that there were five
claims of American citizens pending against eeru,
which might be affected by those settlements ought
not to be overlooked. This is a fair statement OF
the request Mr.. Shipherd made. though not his OK
act words which, like all his language, must not.
probably. be taken too literally. Shipherd had
right as a citizen to make the request, and the Sec
retary of State would not have had the right refuse
to comply with it. 1t is charged that Mr. Blaine did
what Shipherd wanted him to do. Probably If MIR.
Blaine thinks it worth while to go before the COM
m;ttee when he returns to Washington, he will adj
init that he did do what Mr.. Shipherd wanted HIM
to do so far 1t proper. He will probably also
admit that if he were Government employe sell
ing hostage stamps and Mr.. Shjpherd offered him
three cents for one it would be his duty to sell 1t to
him. If an American citizen chooses TO buy claim
for 5000 OOO 600 against country where, as one OF
the minor officials of the State Department said at
the time Shipherd began to assume National pro-
portions, the people haven't any breeches," and
calls upon the State Department forjts good offices
with the Government of that country, the State
Department cannot refuse them unless for
some good reason Ii will not, under ordinary cir
cumstances do more than ask hearing for him,
and that was all that was done in this instance
This is the extent to which Mr.. Blaine did what Mr.
Shipherd wanted him TO do, in his letter of August
4, 1881
II should be promised that Cochet's claim is the
one which the Peruvian Company owns. Mr.. Ship
herd confirmed to-day the statement often made
that the Peruvian Company does not assert any IN
terest in the Landreau claim, but claims to have
prior lien which will wipe out the Landreau claim.
OF the Cochet clam Mr.. Blaine wrote to Minister
Hurlbut follows:
The two claims for which special consideration and
tive intervention have been askedare those known as
the Cochet and Landreau claim In reference TO the
Cochet claim there has been no information LAID before
the Department of sufficiently definite character 70
warrant specific instruction, and in the absence Of the
requisite data here you will be left 20 take such steps as
may seem expedieIt on investigating tne origin ahu
character Of the claim The primal point at Issue IS
any ann ntres IN the claim in en-
ttng him them TO tho good oioes OF THIS Govern
american holders OF the claim their attorneys will be
on the ground you will doubt be placed In possession
your Government the of Its good offices without
irs reporting in full TO the Department for well con-
sldered and definite instruction
With regard TO the Landreau claim the Secretary
then proceeded TO reassert the conclusions reached
by his predecessor on three occasions Perhaps be-
fore this phase Of the subject dismissed Mr. Ship
herds effort TO cast a slur on Mr.. Blaine by decar
ing that he treated lightly attempt to bribe
United States Minister, should be contTasted with
these facts When Mr. Blaine heard rumors that
the Credit Industrie was trying to use the Ameri-
can Legation at Lima In its negotiations, he tele-
graphed TO Minister Hurlbut: Influence Of your
position must not be used In aid of Credit Induste
any other financial speculating association"
and III the letter of November 10. 1881. in which
this telegram explained he said:
presume you viii be asked by the agents or officers of
snoe as United states Minister 10 promote It's interests
II would OF course, preaent 10 you the claim Of an
American organization composed OF reputable citizens
snd emitted To your good Offices where they may with
proprety DC extended. But you VIII specially avoid any
Bdvocscy Of the claims OF that any other company
Individual IN the pursuit Of personal ends business
terprlses To Minister of your experience need not
point you 10 the proper distinction between diplomatic
good Offices and personal advocacy.
Likewise that when Minister Hurlbut wrote Mr.
Blaine that he had carried negotiation to be-
come q trustee of valuable railroad, In order to
turn 1t over to an American company. Mr.. Blaine
at once wrote TO him, saying; 81 have heard of
Shls negotiation with astOnlshment and regret de-