Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1884-10-10

In Il legal trial of IA person charged with
crime, the forms of law, established for
the protection Of the innocent and for the
promotion of Justice, do not permit the
prosecuting officer to change his specified
tiun,. He can not charge n man with
burglary ut Il certain time and place, and
bc permitted to sustain it by offering 10
show that hc committed larceny at anoth-
or time and place. Nor, when his specific
charges fail can hc expect to ret a verdict
by falling back ON the general proposition
that the accused is Il Scoundrrl aud lar.
But this is precisely the course which Mr..
Blainc's aCcu,crs have taken. They have
been compelled, 10y stress Of Circum-
stances. to materially modify their speci-
lcatiOns. and failing to prove the most
serious of these, they indulge in much
general dcnunciaton of Mr.. Blaine as Il
trickstcr and scoundrcl, anyhow. Prom
nent among the circumstances alluded
to, has been the appearance of a very clear
analysis of the evidence produced against
and for Mr. Blaine, during the Congress
siOnal investigation Of 1876, made by Mr.
George Bliss of New York. Mr.. Bliss, aS
few need he told, is an able and prominent
member of the New York bar, the lawyer
who was selected by Gen. Garfield as the
leading counsel for the Government in
the prosecution of the Star-route
cOnspiratOrs. 1t may he added, by the
way. that Mr.. Bliss has never
been IA follower of Mr.. Blaine. He active
ly opposed him in the Republican conven-
ton of 1876. He was not for him in 1850 ;
and he was, he says, "heartsick," when
Mr.. Blaine was finally nominated by the
last convention, both because he wanted
another man, and because he supposed,
without having examined the subject,
that there was something in the Mulligun
episode which seriously reflected on Mr..
Blaine. Having II months leisure, last
summer, he for his own satisfaction de
tcrmined to look into the matter. He
procured the necessary documents, some
of them with so much difficulty, that it
does not surprise him that very few people
seem to know what the testimony is and
having gone through them he decided
without the knowledge of Mr.. Blaine or of
any friend of hiS-to prepare and print ii
statement of the charges and the evidence,
50 brought together as to enable any one
to judge for himself concerning them.
This statement and analysis, has been
printed in pamphlet form, ami is the
pamphlet alluded to by President Wool
sey. in his letter declaring his intention to
support Mr. Blaine. Mr. Bliss printed his
pamphlet before the appearance Of the
late batch Of Mulligan letters but so far
as we can see, nothing in them conflicts
with his conclusions while on some points
they furnish strong evidence confirmatory
of those conclusions.
The charges which have so damaged
Mr.. Blaine in the estimation of many hon
est persons, were, as our readers remem-
Der. carefully formulated by the New
York ErCHinq Post, i'll April last, and its
statement of them was generally adopted
by Mr.. Blaine's opponents and has formed
their chief stock in trade. Taking them ny
in order, let us see how the case now
stands.
The first and chief of those charges was
that Mr.. Blaine made Il ruling rs speaker
in favor of the Little Rock and Fort Smith
railroad, in which some OF his friends
were Interested that he wrote at once tl
the promoters calling attention to the scr
vice he had rendered them, and shat final
lE, after some negotiations. ne secured a.
a reward for the ruling his appointment
as sclliug agent ul the bonds or
commission and received a uUMbcl
oI such bonds. H. his percentage.
The Justice and proprirty Of the ruling re-
fcrrcd to has not been questioned. TN,
comparison of dates and abstract of sWurI
testimony. made by Mr.. Bliss, showed ;
very wide vari;.nce of the charge from tn,
facts, and this has been made SO incontest-
able 10y the second batch OF Mullgan let
tiers. that the Eronhtg Post has beer
forced to admit it, and, has virtually Tt
tracted the charge II admitted, last
week, that neither Mr.. Blaine nor hi
friends We're interested in the bill, wher
| the ruling was made ; that he did moi
write at once to them calling attention t,
the service that neither the ruling nor tn,
reference toit (made several months later
had anything to do with the bond transac
tionS, and that Mr. Blaine got no rewarC
for the ruling Our readers can iudg,
how much is left of this charge.
The second charge was as follows:
That Mr.. Blaine asserted ON the floor o
the House that the bonds he received were
bought by him at precisely the same rat,
as others paid-Whercas the evidence
showed that the bonds came To him a
commissions ON sales which he secure,
the opportunity of making through his ale
given To the work in Congress; and tina
he solicited this agency, baSing his rcqucs
on the aid so given and that he paid moth
ing whatever for the bonds, the consider
atlOns being his ruling as Speaker and hi
subsequent efforts To sell them. What h