The Ottawa free trader., 1882-05-06
BLAINEs DODGING.

| oAhAN6o DVOSA"S'
There is an almost unanimous agreement
of the prcss-stawart and halfbrced as well
as democratlc-th that IN the late encounter be-
tween Belmont and Blaine before the con.
pressional committee charged with the inves-
tigation OF Baine's Peru and Chill diplomacy,
the latter was badly worsted. Not that Bel
mont was in any way a match for Blaine in
verbal fencing or rhetorical pyrotechnlcs Bel
mont is young man--just beyond 30-laying
no claim to Oratory or any special brightness,
but hard.working, plodding fellow, who had
thoroughly studied his case, and knew exactly
what questions to put that wentto the marrow.
These questions were few, but they were SIN.
gularly direct and pointed. AS they were put
no one saw more clearly than Blaine their ex
act drift and significance. Instead OF giving
them direct answer, however, he undertook
to pervert their meaning by enveloping them
in fog of words, endeavoring to lead Bel
mont aside from the main ISSUE The latter
however, was immovable, returning at the end
Of each Of Blaincs little stamp speeches with
memorable pertnaclty to the one and only
issue, which was this: Did Mr. Blaine use
the authority OF his office and the name and
influence of the United States to compel a
foreign state to pay, for reasons satisfactory to
himself personally, CLAIM of disputed validi-
ty? And did he, in 80 dong, give Chill and
Peru to understand through the accredited
Representatives of this government, that no
treaty OF peace could be made between them
with the consent of the United States unless it
provided for the payment of the Landreau
claim
AS foundation tor his questions involving
this Issue. Mr.. Belmont had before him and
quoted from two letters OF instruction from
Mr. Blaine to our minister in Peru, one writ.
ten August 4th, 1881, to Mr.. Hurlbut, and the
other written December 10th to Mr. Trescott.
The two letters referred to the same subject
the Landrcau claim. The former instructed
Mr.. Hurlbut in plain and pointed terms to say
to Peru and Chill that IN the case OF treaty
of peace between them, and transfer of Peru
Wan territory TO Chilli is involved IN the treaty,
"this claim of an American citizen QIandreau)
SHALL be treated as a proper lien on the prop.
erty TO which it attaches and that Chilli ac-
cepts the ccssion with that condition annexed"
But by December the American press had got
wind of the character of Mr.. Blaine's demands
upon Chill, involving, as they did, direct
threats of war to enforce n rotton clam, and
such storm was rising that Mr.. Blaine be-
came alarmed ana hastened to back water by
writing his famous dispatch to Mr.. Hurlbut,
scOldlng him for his zeal in obeyIng his Au.
gust instructions, and superseding him by
Mr.. Trescott who came with new instructions
in the December letter, softened to this Ian.
guage: "While disabusing Chill of any I'm.
preston that the United States mediate inter
vention in behalf of private CLAIMS beyond its
good offices, you will say that justice seems
to demand that Landreau should have an OPP
portunity to be heard in support Of his claim
before any treaty of peace is made in disre-
gard of any rights which Mr.. Landreau may
be found after an impartial investigation to
possess"
Blaine throughout the whole stgation
persistenty ignored his August instructions
to Mr.. Hurlbut and quoted the December let
ter to Trescolt only; and because Mr.. Belmont
as persistently insisted on an answer involving
his August Instructions Mr.. Blaine lost his
temper and went to abusing MIR. Belmont.
Over and over he eYclaims: "Mr. Belmont
solemnly asserts and has through two days
conducted by tortuous questions an lnvestlga.
ton to establish his original misstatement that
| had stated IN my December dispatch to Mr..
Trescott that no treaty Of peace should be
made in which the Landreau claim was not
recognized; while | insist tho word shall
does not occur IN the dispatch" Now this
was false Mr.. Belmont had quoted from the
August, not the December letter, and over and
over so informed MIR. Blaine; but the latter
doggedly ignored the fact and went on abus-
ing Belmont for misquoting him.
Blaine's persistence IN thus brazenly as well
as stupidity endeavoring to avoid his own
words and assall Mr.. Belmont on false pre-.
tense, Is exactly IN keeping with his famous
suppression of the "Mulligan" letters and will
rebound to his credit in Just the same way,
-