The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1884-08-14
The Exploded SANDERS.


Blaine for the Presidency by the Chicag
Convention was announced, the free trad
and Democratic press commenced tn
work of personal defamation. Among tn
false charges explained, refuted and eH
1'ploded eight years ago, were those re
lating to several railroad transactions
In view of the aggressive and confden
manner in which the New York Euen
ing Post and the Times revived thes
charges, the Young Republican Clu1
Of Brooklyn determined to Investigate
them. Below is the result, as givel
to the New York Tribune, by one o
the members, each charge having beer
presented and discussed separately. l
will Re seen from the conclusions reached
that there is nothing in them, which was no
khessn long ago, and nothing but partizai
desperation and personal malice woull
ever again have made reference to them
SIR: I received to-day from the head
quarters of the Brooklyn Young Republi
can Club summary of the official evidence
concerning Mr.. Blaine's railroad transac
tions. As | had previously made careful
study Of the evidence taken before the
Judiciary Committee this summary pre-
sents no facts with which | am not already
familiar. My deliberate judgment cal
therefore be expressed at once, and / ask
as a member of the Club, for space in YOU
columns in which to state the case very
briefly. m
l. Mr.. Blaine has been charged with
| 0e
railroad in which either he or his friends
were financially interested. Mr.. Blaine &
own letters of October 4, 1869, prove con-
clusiyely that this charge is false. In
those letters he says that neither Mr.. Cald-
well nor Mr.. Fisher had engaged in the
enterprise at the time the ruling was made.
If he had been acting in collision with
them, he would not have written them so
silly and unnecessary a lie.
2. Mr.. Blaine has been charged with
making an improper ruling in this case.
The only effect of the ruling was to sepa-
rate monstrous job, known as the Ell
Paso scheme, from an entirely legitimate
and innocent measure which had passed
the Senate by unanimous vote.
3. MI. Blaine has been charged with
calling attention to this ruling as a service
actually rendered to the promoters of the
enterprise and with making it the basis of
a personal demand for financial favors.
But the two letters of October 4, 1869, con-
tain internal evidence of the falSity of this
charge. In those letters he relates the
circumstances under which the ruling was
made, and is very careful to state that the
service rendered was accidental and unin-
territorial. He admits that it was his
''plain duty to make the ruling when the
point was raised. " that neither Mr.. Cald-
well nor Mr.. Fisher was then interested in
the enterprise, and that he did them the
favor without knowing it," Now, sir,
it seems to me self-evident that if Mr..
Blaine was seeking to make his ruling the
basis for financial favors, he adopted a very
ruinous and inexplicable course in belit-
Ting his service and in hurting out the
fact that he had only done his duty, that
there was nothing else to do, and that he
did not have the remotest idea Of doing
anything for them. A knave would either
have enlarged his service, or kept silent.
Whoever heard of corrupt legislator or
lobbyist asking for reward and at the
same time proving that he had done moth
ing to deserve it /? Mr.. Blaine's own ex-
PLANTATION is much more reasonable. He
had happened to refer to The Congressional
Record and had discovered that he had
once made ruling respecting the road.
The fact had escaped his memory. He
wrote the details to Mr.. Fisher as mat
ter that would interest him, since they
had happened to become connected with
the enterprise.
4. Mr.. Blaine is charged with entering
into negotiations with the promoters of
the Arkansas road and with promising to
use his official influence in their behalf.
AS a matter of fact, after the original
ruling was made the Arkansas road never
came up in Congress except on one occa-
sion-on technical question too trivial to
notice. Congress had done all it could for
the road, and there was no possibility of
Mr.. Blaine's ever having an opportunity
of promoting it's interests in an official Ca
pacity. When, therefore, he wrote on
June 20, 1869, that he would not ''prove a
dead-head in the enterprise, and that he
saw stvarious channels" in which to be
useful, he could not have referred to any
corrupt use of his position as Speaker or a
Member of Congress. lie could only have
referred to the sale of the company 5
securities and the development of the con-
struction scheme. These were legitimate
Investments And he did not prove "a
dead-head. F." He placed line of stock
in Maine among his personal friends, and
subsequently advanced a considerable sum
to the company when it was embarrassed.
5. What remains of this case when these
points are settled Absolutely nothing.
The public is not concerned with Mr..
Blaine's private business transactions. He
seems to have purchased line of securi-
ties at the same rates as others were pur-
chasing (hoth Mr.. Fisher and Mulligan
admit this) and to have sold them to his
friends and when the securities declined,
he took them back, in many instances at
great personal loss. These matters do not
concern the Public. So long as it is not
proved that he made an improper use OF
his official position, these private transac-
lions can be dismissed as affording nc
ground for criticism.
1 see no reason, therefore, why the
Brooklyn Young Republican Club, on the
evidence presented, should not heartily
| and unequivocally indorse the nomination
of MI. Blaine. His public transactions
are without dishonor. His private bust
ness only reflects credit upon his generos-
| ity in dealing with those to whom he had
sold securities which subsequently depre,
ciated. am, respectfully yours.
SSH, a MEMBER OF THE CLUB.
Brooklyn. July 81, 1884.