The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1882-04-13
Anef hlrhef debst. lIobswa modldel

'fhis WIS accepted by llaokbnrp hs %
amendment 10 his resolution, which WI
adopted.
Prlyaie business having been disponso'
with the house NJ 1855 went Into COnmitto
Of tic whole on the tariff bill, Haskell q
Kansas, being the principal , speaker
The committee NJ 1880 rose, and the hous'
took recess until 1880, the evening session
being for the consideration Of pension bills
--.---.. Shepherds Examination
WAsnlNGroN, April THE examination
OF Jacob Il. Shipherd is conducted by mem
bers of the committee on foreign affairs, &C
cording to their position, beginning with
the chairman, Williams. Under this ar
ranGement democratic member OF the com
mittee will not have an opportunity to cross
examine the witness until the Republican
members have concluded, and Represents
tiyes Perry Belmont, of New York,
upon whose resolution the investigation
was ordered, is the last member on the
committee list. Chairman Williams was
absent to-day, and Orth, OF Indiana, pre-
sided over the investigation. AS soon as a
quorum was in attendance Rice Inquiries:
"lf the letter published in the
New York Herald May 10Th
from General Grant to Sena-
postscript ofMay Dist"
After reading the letter, Mr.. Shipherd
replied: II think il Is"
Rice-"Up to thdt time it had been the
intention Of your client, had it not, to offer
the presidency of the Peruvian company to
General Grant,"
Mr. shpherd replied that it had, but
ter there might not be perfect
harmony between General Grant and Presi-
dent Garfield, it was not deemed advisable
to adhere to their original intention.
Shipherd was asked to give the names
of any members of congress or
other parties to whom his pro-
pectus had been sent. He replied
that he could if it were deemed proper
question. The committee decided the
question to be proper Shipherd replied
that he had no correspondence with any
member OF congress. as member, or with
respect to any action as member, that
all his dealings or correspondence
with such persons was with them as citi-
zens and in their private capacity.
Rice-"The committee is unable to divide
person into two parts-one as member OF
congress and the other as u private citizen.
The committee fails to admit of such dis
tlnction, and expect you to answer"
Shipherd then declined to answer.
After some discussion as to
the propriety of his replying, which was
demurred to, he was asked if he had any
correspondence with any member OF the
house and replied that his only correspond
ence with any member was with Mr.. Hew-
lit. He wrote him as q capitalist, not
knowing that he was member, and that
Hewitt sent him very courteous reply
by the same messenger who bore his
(Shepherd's) letter to him.
Rice then read from the printed evidence,
taken at q former hearing, Shepherds state
ment in regard to his belief that Hurlbut
was not only purchaseable, but that he
would insist on being purchased, and
asked what he (Shipherd had to sustain
the allegation.
Shipherd replied: Nothing but the
letter and collateral correspondence with
General Hurlbut, which would be submit
ted at a proper time"
Rice-"I deem the present a proper
time"
Witness replied that he could not get
collateral correspondence now, without go
ing to New York, but that he had with
him several original letters from
Hurlbut which he would submit
to the committee. The letters were then
read by the clerk The first letter bore the
date Of Belvedere, Illinois, June 6, 1881,
acknowledged the receipt of letter from
Shipherd, and stated that he (Hurlbut)
could take no action in the matter of the
Peruvian company, except under lnstrnc
second also bore the date of Belvedere,
Illinois, June 16, 1884, and was of a similar
tenor, stating that any action in the matter
must be dictated and decided in Washing
ton. The other five letters bore the date of
Lima, Peru. The third letter bore the date
of September u, 1881, acknowledged the
receipt of documents from Shipherd,
and stated that nc, such Instructions
had been received by him (Hurl-
butt as he had stated had been
forwarded to him at Lima by the state de.
partment; also intimating that such
great interests as he Shepherd claimed to
have in charge should be represented at
Lima by competent person; that Peru
was in urgent need of assistance. The
fourth letter bore the date of Octo-
Der IL, 1881; acknowledged the
receipt of duplicate documents and
intimated the writer didn't consider the
claim of the Peruvian company as solid as
had been represented. by Shipherd. The let
ter also discussed at some length the Cochete
claim, and pointed out its weakness. The
fifth letter bore the date OF October Is, 1881;
was very brief, and simply stated that the
writer was unaware OF the status OF the
French company, which was reputed to
have offered pecuniary aid to Peru. The
sixth letter bore date of October 20, 1881.
1t acknowledged the receipt OF let
ter from Shipherd, intimated that
the Calderon government was rapidly
being accepted, and if the Peruvian
company expected anything to be done for
them instructions should be telegraphed
from the state department. at once. The
seventh and last letter bore the date
of November %, 1881, and notified
Shipherd that he (Hurlbut) had
sent their correspondence to the
state department and returned his Ship
herd's) last and most singular letter, and
positively declined any other correspond
ence. The writer adds: THE tone of
your letter is displeasing, and ! wish no
more of them"
The Floods.
New ORLEANS, April GA Morgan City
special says: There was rise of two inches
o,,d N half In tho last twantv-four hOurs