The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1883-11-14
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES.

A Republican Islander Put to Rest by Dem
ocratic Testimony.
For the purpose of creating mutual dis
trust between two distinguished Indianians,
the foolish story has from time to time found
its way into print charging Hon. Joseph f.
Mcdonald with a lack of fidelity to Hon.
Thomas A Hendricks during the session OF
the National Democratic Convention in 1880.
The charge from the first was wanting in all
the essentials of credibility, and has made
little, il any. impression at all upon the
minds of Indiana Democrats; so little, in
deed. that the Sentinel has not regard
ed it necessary to contradict 1t. We
have preferred to assume that as
the professed friend OF Mr. Hendricks
Mr.. Mcdonald was entirely incapable Of
duplicity or treachery, and instead of seek
ing for testimony, oral or documentary, to
protect Mr. McDonald's integrity, we have
deemed il wiser course 10 permit his well
established fame tor honorable dealing to
vindicate him from such attacks No.with.
standing this view of the subject we pub
lish, by request, the following private cor
respondence touching the subject between
well.known citizen OF Indianapolis and Hon.
Orestes Cleveland, OF Jersey City, H. j.; who
represented the Jersey City District in Con-
gress a number OF times, and who. in 1880,
was a member of the National Democratic
Central Committee:
INDIANAPOLIS. Ind, October -, 1885.
Hon. orestes Cleveland, Jersey City, y. j.;
DEAR SRI had the pleasure OF meeting you at
Swampscott in August. 1850, while stopping with
cottage.
Will never forget the history of an interview
YOU described. which took place between yourself
aud other delegates 10 the National Democratic
convention at Cincinnati on the one side and
Hon. Joseph T. Mcdonald on the other
How you insisted upon Mcdonald allowing his
nane 70 ~ PrysensG 20 .ne S 1ne next
one vote had been taken In Conventlonl as candi-
date for President and how he persistenty refused
ycntion as the friend OF Hon. Thomas A. Hen
bricks: and that no other man than Hendricks
could present his name 10 the Convention. etc.
that OCCASION we're as noble as those OF any man
could be. who was acting wholly for friend, and
not for self.
interview and his words and actions publicr
Begging your parden for trespassng In this man
upon the time OF one who has perhaps forgotten
49, Your obedent servant,
JAMES L. MITCHELL
JERSEY CRY. N J.. Oct. 81. 1885.
Mr. James l.. Mitchell. indianapolis, Ind:
DEAR SiR-Havlng Just returueu nome nllu your
kind letter of the 18th instant. and am glad 10
new acquain lance that was much too brief.
| hope Mrs. Michel recovered entirely from the
illness that took you 10 the sea shore In 1850, and
beg TO be remembered 30 her
You alluded to my having described TO you an
interview with Hon. Joseph T.. Mcdonald after my
return from the Cincinnati Convention. j remem-
Der Il WELL IL was the evening before the nomin
alton was made The delegation from many States
from New.Nork and New Jersey were widely divic-
ed, and doubts and fears were everywhere freely
expressed. The fact had developed that Mr.. Hen
dricks stood no possible chance OF a nomination.
that by a continued use of his name Indiana was
depriving herself OF any voice In the hnal result
Indiana was one of the most important States TO be
considered. and / found that many delegates who
TO vote for Mr.. Mcdonald, and in the
hope that we might he permitted
10 present his name 10 the Convention
we called upon him. lie promptly refused the use
OF his name under any circumstances whatever.
saying that he was there on behalf OF his friend.
Thomas A. Hendricks, and that he should con-
tnue his best efortt to secure his nomination
Hendricks made IL as painful 10 US 10 make the
suggestion as IL could be TO him 10 hear IL. but
that the fact was before that Hendricks could
not be nominated. and that we had reason to be-
leve that II he would allow the use OF hts own
name II would be received with great favor.
remained mistaken. With much anxiety on be-
half OF his friend he Acknowledged that his nom
ination did not then seem probable. but that ne
should do the best he could for him.
urged him TO communicate with Mr.. Hendricks
on the subject. but that he declined to do, or 70
consent TO it's being done BY others We urged
that be was taking upon himself great RESPONSE