Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1884-01-19


MATES THAT THE WHOLE TRUTH Has NOT CONF OUT.
Ex-senator !. P. ChriStiancy has published at
MS nome In Lansing, Mich, statement In reply to
what he considers attacks made upon him in the
press IN connection with the publications concern
Ing his divorced wife. my forbearance towards
that divorced wife, who ruined me, but whom l
could never hate he says, "my reticence and ne
greet 10 have the evidence against her or full eX
piaration Of the case published showing my own
entire innocence, and that 1 have been from the
nrSt the victim, and not the perpetrator OF
wrong, may have had the effect to lead many into
the honest belief that had been guilty of the
charges brought against me. 1 never had the
slightest fear that any person who knew me well
personally would or could believe one Of them"
WHO ARE THE THREE?
Referring to the fact that he was absent in Peru
when the charges were first made against him, he
says: 81 knew then there were at least three men,
In widely-separated portions OF the Union who for
tne sake OF themselves and their families more
THAN for her sake, were deeply interested in sus-
ta1n1ng her, and to this end, to crush me; and
o oWn , 1ney We're financially able and their
secure the reporters in Washington, not only
for the Washington press, but that of the
ful took it for granted there was also a fourth
richmond In the field GIRO, of whose interview
with her at the st. James hotel, December o. 1879.
tne press and my letters from the United States
had informed me; but whom l have never seen,
and with whom never had any correspondence,
directly or indirectly. And 1 took it for granted
that he would be equally interested to set the press
against me; and the first 1ntimation to the con-
tIaIy was that which received about January IS,
1881 by the newspapers which contained copies of
his testimony taken I'm December. 1885, including
her letters to him, which have been fully proved by
ttees1mony as Wen as her own confessions made at
the time OF taking GiroS testimony and soon after
There Is a Refinement OF cruelty In the attacks
made upon me by the press since the death of my
divorced wife, seeking to compel me to appear to
admit the justice of those attacks or to place me I'm
the position OF seeming to
ATTACK THE DEAD,
While In truth have made greater sacrifices to en-
able that woman to reform and to regain credit
able standing In life than all my detractorS would
ever have made, and greater than one man In a
thousand would have made For this purpose l
have allowed myself to stand only half INDICATED
before the world, so far as the press is concerned
relying upon the result OF the suit for my yndica-
ton, and declining to give to the press the most
damaging testimony against her. while that on her
side was given to the press fast and often faster
and worse than 1t was given before the MASTER
1T had not yet been given and worse than it was
when given. bore all this patiently, well know
Ing that when the testimony on my side should be
taken she would be driven to the alternative of
withdrawing it by the dismissal OF her cross petit
ton or OF having found by the court to be false
and peTJured when the testimony on my side should
be taken And for months my great fear was lest
she should dismiss her cross petition (under cover
OF which she had thus aSsalled me) before the evil
was known to my counsel and one intimate friend
only. But as went on with the testimony on my
part, showing what had actually been my conduct
towards her and hers towards me- and
WHAT MANNER OF WOMAN
She had been, (some OF which got into the papers
WITHOUT any agency OF mine, and very little with
my consent) began to feel entirely easy as to the
result, and she most decidedly uneasy. and the in
direct appeals on her side either to take her back
or 10 place the case upon some other ground than
the question OF adultery on side and cruelty on
the other, became more frequent and earnest. And
1lnaly. In June 1881, when had become perfectly
satisfied that the result would be against her on
both issues and that had completely indicated
myself, and she apparently satisfied of this also,
standing with me, Internationally dismissed her
cross-pet1ton, with all its charges then consent
charges OF adultery, butt to add another charge,
that Of desertion. allowing the court to decide the
ehe s s w Sp0a both sboE1 nd or
In an interview with the reporter OF the Detroit
Ecening Netrs published In that paper October
nth, 1882, which enclose and ask you to publish.
This seems to be rendered necessary from the fact
that some OF the Washington papers while aiming
to appear very fair and impartial, and evidently
well informed as to the suit have since her death,
with an assumed appearance OF fairness, COM
m1tted the grOssest Injustice, by contr1vtng to
make IT appear without directly asserting IT. that
abandoned the charge OF adultery against her. In
consideration OF her withdrawing her cross petition
against me; whereas the truth IS directly the re-
verse.
have as high respect as any one can have
for that sentiment which naturally 1nclines us to
sympathy with the weaker sex in any contro-
versy, and for that other sentiment which for
bids us to aSsail the dead or the absent who can
not rep'y. ihave made as great sacrifices for these
sentiments as any other man.
But thee sentiments should never be INDUCED so
far as to justify crimes against the living of either
sex. mad hoped, for the sake OF her memory and
Of her friends, that she, with whatever faults and
frailties she may have had, might be allowed to
rest In peace II she is not, 1t will be the fault of
nGfSlSfpnf falSphO0I nd
was made was published In october. 1882. In it
Mr.. Chr1St1ancy denied first, paragraph then pub
liShed In a Detroit paper 1ntimatlng that he had
obtained his divorce by paying $4,000 to his WIFE
He said that approaches had been made to him to
induce him to withdraw his charges OF adultery.
but he had given his counsel written instructions
not TO negotiate any arrangement whatever until
Mrs ChrlStlancy's cross-bll was dismissed uncon-
oltlonay, In which case he might, for the sake OF
his WIFE, grant such favors as would not Interfere
with his right to a divorce