Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1884-07-03
a SLANDER RECALLED.


A Little Baltimore Organ Retracfs q
Stupid Canard.
baltimore Morning Herald, July list.
Some time ago we printed an editorial
In which We attributed to Senator Bayard
the authorship Of the following letter
alleged to have been addressed to Samuel
NJ. FELTON,, president Of the Philadelphia,
Wilmington & Baltimore railroad
Never would by any act of mine suffer
| anybody over which i have control to guard
any corporation in transporting Lincoln's cut
throat hirelings. GSignedl
THOMAS F. BAYARD.
A gentleman representing Mr.. Bayard
called OF this office yesterday to deny the
authenticity of the letter. He produced
q note from Mr.. Samuel NJ. FELTON, in
which 1t was stated that he (Mr. Felton,
did not recollect ever havin. received
such letter from Mr.. Bayard. Mr..
Bsysrd's friend asked that we do tina
gentleman the justice to make public this
fact.
1t gives us great pleasure to do go. 1t
is no part of our desire or creed to do an
injustice to any man, and where we are
unwittingly led into error we feel it in.
cumbent upon us to make ample rspara.
tion.
FALsBHooD EVEN IN THE DENIAL.
Referring TO the above retractiOn on
the part OF the Herald the Baltimore Day
Of last evening says:
Now the gentleman referred to did not
represent" Mr.. Bsysrd, II by this 1t is
meant that Mr.. Baysrd ia concerning
himself about this ridiculous faleehood
backed by forgery. The letter he showed
Mr.. Hooper LOT the Herold] was one
hastily written by Mr.. FELTON, in Boston,
in which he states he does remember the
story circulated in 1851 by which "Mr.
Bsyard was said to be- in command OF a
company at Wilmington, and that it was
suspected that some Of its membera were
southern sympathizers, and saying:
But have no recollection of writing him
any letter at that time nor of having received
from him any such response as quoted in the
article you inelose me from a Baltimore
paper. The language used in the alleged
answer is certainly not in accordance with my
impressions of Mr.. Bayard at that time or
since. Yours truly, s. NJ. FELTON,.
Now this is surely as positive state
ment IS could be expected from man
concerning an event alleged to have hap
pened % years ago. Mr.. FELTON, was then,
rs now, an ardent Republican, and it was
quite natural that he should have heard
the foolish story circulated at the time,
and it Ia not likely that II, with this
vague recollection still lingering, be had
ever made any such application he would
have forgotten so disoourtsons response
He is now absent from his papers, and
hearing OF the thing for the first time,
says that he has NO recollection Of ever
having written such letter or received
such a reply, and he adds that the
language attributed to Mr.. Bayard is not
In accordance with his Impressions Of him.
The letter was q private one to personal
friend, called ont by one hastily written
to friend. The gentleman who called
on Mr.. Hooper has shown us the letter
quoted above, and 1t seems to us that II
Mr.. Hooper had been anxious to do com.
plete justice he would have given more
prominence to denial which considering
the lapse Of time, ia rs complete as any
careful man who had conducted vast
correspondence could possibly msks of a
fAlsehood.