Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1882-04-24
lHE PERUVIAN COMPANY INVESTIGATION.
aR BLAINE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE
HIS TESTIMONY coNrRAD1cr1Ke sH1PHERD

pear UeIoFe the lOTelgn SHAFTS cOMmlttee tnis
morning in connection with the pending inves
ugation not only insured prompt attendance o.
the members OF the committee, IN. st tracted a
crowd which soon filled the committee rons and
blocked up the corridor Immediately adjoining
Admission to the rooms was mostly restricted to
memterS Of Congress and the press. Mr. Blaine
arrived at 10:40. and after brief conference with
chairman Williams, took his seat at the loot of the
committee table and proc ed large portfolio OF
papers and documents, al r Will ch he was sworn,
and chairman Williams put the inquiries 'Do you
know Jacob r.. Shipherd? Have you read his tes-
timony7" 10 which witness answered, II 90;
nave read his testimony and have endeavored to
understand it." Mr. Blaine then asked that the
resolution authorizing the investigation be read
Mr. Blaine then stated in substance that he
never saw or knew OF the letters in the State de-
partmsnt until Mr. Shipherd was introduced to
never seen the man or heard OF him until the 25th
OF July. MIR: Blaine then explained the method OF
Opposing Of papers In the State department,
which would account for his previous statement,
and added: "Such trashy matters as the ShfDherd
letters would never be called TO the attention OF
scarcely 1T for the waste basket"
THE MISSING PAPERS.
Representative Kasson asked: "Do you know
how they came to be missing from the files?"
Answer.-"I don't know thing about it. know
rs little Of it child unborn; they were not ad.
dressed to me, but were simply routine matters
1erred in the ordinary course OF business One
would suppose had passed the summer with him
IN REGARD TO THE INTERVIEW
which 1t was alleged that had with Mr.. Shipherd
on being introduced to him by Senator Blair on
the 25th OF july SO far from that interview lasting
until late at night, it lasted only about fifteen
minutes. Then excused myself on the ground OF
important business and the interview was post
po ned until the next morning, and did not see
Sh 1pher after that or hear OF him until the 18th
Ar
Shpherd has had his full say as to what the policy
OF the government toward him is it occurred to
sue would be to inquire from the department what
that policy was"
THE OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE.
Mr.. Blaine then produced what he stated was
the entire correspondence between himself and
Mr.. Hurlbut during his administration at Lima.
WHY Mr.. BLAINE DID NOT KICK sHIPHERD OUT.
"Mr. Shtpherd came to me and stated that he
was the representative OF very important claim
called the COchet claim. 1 had never before
heard OF it and asked him how he spelled the
name He tcld me Senator Blair was one of his
counsel, and also added the names of ex-senator
COnkling. Hon. Scott Lord, ex-senator Cragin and
others thought 1t very strange array OF
counsel. He named about a dozen prominent
Morton. Bliss Co., end others. mention these
facts en- passant. because l have been criticized
for not kicking Shipherd cut OF the department
the first morning he called, but when a man
comes introduced by a United States Senator.
with three eX-SeEatOrS and an eX-Secretary OF
the Treasury as counsel, and an array OF hackers
such as he mentioned, it would hardly be the
Gu tom OF the department to kick him out on
sight This explains why did not do what l
virtually did do later, and for not doing which
have be en- severely criticized"
MR. BLAIEEs WARM DEFENSE OF THE DEAD PREsI-
DENT
Mr.. Blaine then related the points of his CONVEX
sation with Sh1pherd, in which he (Shipherd) read
what he claimed to be the opinion OF ex-Secretary
EvaTts to the effect that Cochet could claim one
third OF the guanO. Mr.. Blaine said with much
emphasis: " 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 Iext day called Mr.. Trescott's atten-
ton to the matter, and the latter at his (Nr
Bla1ne'S) dictatfOn wrote dispatch. Mr.. Blaine
then pro 'eeded to read the entire correspondence
between the Department OF State and Minister
Hurlbut, touching the COchet claim.
THE CORRESPONDENCE.
In the latter part OF July the dispatch lust men
toned was written to Mr. Hurlbut as follows:
''ThrOugh the American holders or their attorneys
you will, no doubt, be placed In possession OF the
facts regarding this claim, but you will take no
step towards committing the government thereto
On the 22d OF September Mr.. HurIbut replied: 81
ack nowledge the receipt OF your dspatch AS the
statements toward the creation of commercial en-
terprise and can take no judicial action. I have
been favored with two letters, to which reply by
eX tent OF this claim"
On the 18th of November Mr.. Blaine replied !:
'YOur No. IL, in reference to the Landreau claim,
received. In regard to this subject became con-
Vlnced that there was not even preliminary in
quiry necessary. There is no just ground upon
which this government can intervene. If Amer
lean citizens purchased an interest in this claim
they. purchased nothing more than the original
purchaser possessed. They did not purchase the
good offices OF this government, and you are In
structed not to extend to them those Offices"
On Nove.nber I'd another dispatch was received
r. innC
swer to Mr.. Hurlbut's previous dispatch, in which
he says: 81 wrote to the department., in my No. IL
my opinions on the COchet claim, on which Mr.
Shipherd and his associates relied. 1 have also
written to Mr. Shtpherd, and have pointed out to
him the utterly defective proof as to the posses
SOnS. The whole matter rests upon assumptions:
First it is not true In fact that Cochet discovered
either OF these claims-they have been used for an
hundred years; second. it Is not true that Peru
ever recognized him In such capacity: third It ia
not true in fact that they descended to his son
am inclined to doubt his sanity as to truthfulness
December 5th he wrote Mr.. Hurlbut as follows:
"YOurs No. Is, in relation to the Cochet claim is
of s d
and especially your action in sending hitherto the
correspondence In the case Perhaps should nit
1gate somewhat the severity OF my language in
view Of the possibility Of the fact that Shpherd is
not wholly In his right mind"
State department and Minister Hurlbut on the
Cochet claim, and Mr.. Blaine proceeded further to
address the committee as to his relations with Mr..
the matter to see II there was any claim to prop
erty, as was claimed by Mr.. Shipherd upon Mr.
Evarts opinion, and found there was nothing in It.
subsequently / had a conversation with Mr. FL
more, which fully satisfied me on the subject"
AS TO SUBSEQUENT DISPATCH
Mr.. Belmont inquired: Was there not subse-
quent dispatch7
Mr.. Blaine explained that the Peruvian compa-
ny survived the COchet claim. and Mr. Shipherd In
formed him that eX-Senators COnkling and Eaton
would soon start for Peru in its interests, and
after that he wrote the dispatch such as would al
ways be given where Americans of high rank were
interested In the case OF the COchet claim it was
found to be Peruvian claim, in behalf OF which
the department could not, under any circumstance,
use Its offices, but the Peruvian company. being an
American company, was entitled to the kind Ofices
OF our minister IN any investigation that might be
made In Peru in their behalf.
LETTER OF SENATOR BLAIR CONTRADICTING SHIP
In regard to Shipherd'S story about the $500
bribe offered to Mr. Hurlbut and his (Shipherd's)
statement that he told him {witness) about It and
took the opinion OF all his counsel about 1t, Mr.
Blaine stated that he had written to the several
gentlemen mentioned by Shipherd and he would
read to the committee the correspondence. Wit
ness wrote to Senator Blair, asking II he remem-
bered to have heard Mr. Shfpherd In his Blaines)
presence mention any offer OF s250000 OF stock to
Minister Hurlbut, and received the following re-
Dly. which he read: