Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1884-06-08

eoHferriRg 5Ujh Others, keep my name quiet,
mentioning II 10 no one 9tHtcss 10 Mr. CaldlCell
/ write under the assumption that you
have returned, but have heard nothing
ToCrs truly, !. G. BLAINE.
A REPUBLICAN, EDITORIAL
0n the Binirc Letters. and Their Effect
iu Damaging the Party OF "Merai
Ide4ts.-s
Chicago Tribune (Republican) June,
1876: Now that the dazzling brilliancy of
Mr.. Blaine's Monday peIfor nance has
toned down somewhat, it Is as well that
the real significance of his letters be con-
si3ered. 1t is not easy at this time to
make an analytic examination, since all
the letters which Mr.. Blaine caused to lie
read in the House are not yet at hand,
owing to the singular omission of the press
agent to telegraph them the day they were
read. Mulligan, the Boston witness, las
also intimated that MIR. Blaine did not
produce all the letters which he took from
Mulligan, bat OF course the latter cannot
testify absolutely as to this until he shall
have seen the full collection of letters sub
mitted to the House and printed in the
Congressional Record. There is likewise
considerable confusion arising from the
arrangement OF the letters, which seem to
proper connection between them Mr..
Blaine has furnished no guide. AN
oIIuuIUfation nf tho points in this corre-
spondence is therefore, necessarily partial,
incomplete, and unsatisfactory; but such
as they are from the data at hand we sum-
msrize as follows:
]. In regard to the Spencer rifle contract,
it appears that Blaine, before he entered
Congress, entered into bargain for max
inc oil to 4la a,,k ,s,h
Simon Cameron, then Secretary of War,
and that he assisted in securing legislation
favorable to the gun company enabling
them to escape paying taxes on the arms
after he became member of Congress. II
also appears from his own letters that he
took $4,000 worth of Spencer rifle stock,
for which he gave Fisher his note; that
as late as 1872 this note had not been paid,
but, in a letter to Fisher in that year,
Blaine claimed that the dividend, running
all through these years and embracing his
entire Congressional career, had Cancelled
the note, yielded him some thousands of
dollars cash, and left Fisher indebted to
him some thousands more. 1t seems that
Mr.. Blaine admits, then, in his own letters,
that he received the stock without paying
cash for it, and that he drew dividends on
that stock all the time he was in Congress,
and while he was assisting the company
in securing legislation to avoid paying
their taxes.
.. In regard to the Northern Pacific
transaction, the letters admit that Mr..
Blaine was anxious to transfer to Fisher
and others lot of the fictitious stock of
that company for $25, 900 cash, and gave O
receipt therefor. In letter dated July 3,
1872, about eighteen months after he had
receipted for the S25, 900, Blaine writes to
EsShnr ahnyrt frnnaral aQtflnrnpnt and
among other things says: First l am
ready to fulfill the memorandum held by
you in regard to the Northern Pacific rail
road, as dltCdys hare been" Presumably
the memorandum referred to is the follow
ing:
lConfdential.l
BOsroN, December l, 1870.
Received of Warren Fisher, jr., S25, 900
in trust, in consideration of which l am to
deliver to said Fisher properly authenti-
Gated certificates of an interest in the
North Pacific Railway Company equiv
alent to one-eighth (g) part of one of the
twentY-four (24) principal shares in which
the franchise stock OF said company are
divided. Certificates to be in the name OF
Elisha Atkins. Witness my hand:
J. G. BLAINE.
This would look as though Mr.. Blaine
for eighteen months at least had this North
ern Pacific stock at his command. Whether
it was not finally delivered because more
favorable sale was negotiated in another
quarter, or because Mr.. Blaine at last de-
cided not to consummate the transaction
which he himself had proposed and urged,
is not explained.
8. In regard to the Little Rock and Fort
Smith railroad transaction, it seems that
Mr. Blaine undertook to job or dispose OF
Sl30,000 first mortgage bonds for Mr..
Fisher for cash, giving along with them
the same amount of Common stock" and
the same amount OF preferred stock.
But Mr.. Fisher delivered to Blaine for
$3.50 1000 cash Sl62, 800 in first mortgage
bands besides Sl30,000 in land grant
bonds, and the common and preferred
stock aforesaid. In this way Blaine re-
ceived as a commission for selling $32 SOC
in first mortgage bonds and $130,000 in
land grant bonds without paying any
money himself, The letters already pub
lished make two or three references to the
bonds due from Fisher to Blaine I'M
der this contract. The commission
or gratuity received by Mr.. Blaine
in this transaction would appear 10
have come from his saving while Speaker
of the Housel the bill which renewed the
land grant to the Little Rock Company
after 1t had lapsed. He did this by ruling
| out, in his capacity as Speaker, the e
Paso amendment tackled on by Julian, oi
| Indiana, which would have defeated the
original bill had it gone to the Senate in
that shape. Mr.. Blaine was careful tc
point out his advice in this matter in q
| letter to Fisher, dated October 4, 1869, and
| asking the latter to tell Caldwell (who
| controlled the enterprise) that he Blaine,
| had done him "a great favor" Some
| months before, in letter dated June 30
| 1869, Blaine asks Fisher to get Caldwell
| 80 make him definite proposition as tc
| letting him have some interest in this
| railroad enterprise, and added: az do moi
| feel that l shall prove deadhead in the
| enterprise; II ! once e;.bdrt in IL Sc,
rGriOus channels ul irhich / kIlojc ] can b,
| iseftil."
/. The Little Rock enterprise having
/ proved disastrous, Mr.. Blaine's friends tC
ghom he had sold the bonds came bach
on him for the money, and Blaine fell
himself under obligations to return it, or
| part of it; to what extent he refunded the
/ money does not appear. But he made the
point in a general settlement with Fisher
| that he had lost money in this transactier
because he had been obliged to take bacl
some o. the bonds. Mulligan, who repre-
| sented Fisher in this settlement, replied
that he understood from Mr.. Atkins tha
| Caldwell had renewed MN (BialneD o
$4,000 of these bonds by getting Ton
Scott TO put them off on the Union Pacifi,
company for S64, 600 in cash. Mr.. Atkin
was one of the directors OF the Union Pa
! siic Company. and he has not yet expliC
itiy denied Mu'fgan's statement. Thi
| source might Slso explain why Rollins, tn
treasurer of the company, told Harrison
another director, that Blaine was the ben
eticiary of the transaction-a statemen
which Rollins, under oath, admitted this
he made but for which he has never give
his authority. The fact that Tom SEQ!
got the bonds from Caldwell, and eve
Csldwell's recent telegram to Knott ths
Tom SCOTS version of the affair was col
rect, would not deny that Caldwell ha
taken them back from Blaine, or fror
Blaine's friends, to whom they had bee
sold, so that the S64, 900 went to reliey
Blaine. Mr.. Blaine had taken many occ!
sions to show Mr.. Caldwell how much b
owed to Blaine S Congressional interferene
in <eaaf of the scheme.
1t must be remembered that Mr.. Blain
did not permit MulligaR to present thes
letters with connected story of the var
Gus transactions of which they refer, br