The Sedalia weekly bazoo. [volume] (Sedalia, Mo.) 187?-1904, 1884-08-26
THAT PRINTING BILL.
What Mr.. Heard has to Say
Concerning His Action
in Regard to It.
The Charges Of Bad Faith and De
ceptive Fully Refuted.
SEDALIA, Mo-, August 80, 1884.

| SEDALIA, MO-, august AZ, 1904.
EpIroR BAzoo.
DEAR SIR request the use of your col
umns 10 present TO the public a statement
of facts relating to certain charges contsin-
cd in the "Sedslia Democrat" In its issue
of the 18th OF July, and in subsequent Is
sues, referring TO my conduct In relation to
measure which was before the legislature
of this State in 1881, and while was a
member of the senate. Said original arti-
Gle appeared as an editorial but since It's
truth was subsequently sworn to, by John
ID. Russell, / shall locate the authorship
with him, and treat the subject accordingly.
In the first place, wish 10 say, thai this
matter between Mr.. Russell and myself is
purely personal, and has no political feature
at all, except that it was published and
persistently urged by the Democrat"
while / was a candidate for the congression-
al nomination in this district, as a reason
why should not be supported for that po-
sition 1t is with great reluctance that DOW
refer publicly to said charges; as / desire
10 avoid all appearance, even, oil trying 10
provoke any controversy with any man, or
any newspaper in my party, or Of trying TO
keep slive any feeling OF bitterness which
grew out of said canvass; but the charsc-
ter of said charges makes il absolutelJ nec-
essary that they should be disproved. Aside
from all feeling of dnty to myself, as man
claiming to be honest, ! am compelled, by
he commonest duty TO the public. whose
support / ashland TO my party, on whose
endorsement | ask ito not only make an
emphatic denial of said charges. but to sup
port the same by such evidences as will
leave no room for any honest doubt, or
candid criticism. In noticing In their proper
order, the material statements OF Mr.. Rus
sell, | come, first, 10 that relating TO
the printing then being done by republic
can newspaper" While that would not
affect the Case at all-since the printing
was being done on oeatrdet, by the
Iopest bidder, as IL Is to-day,
still, this statement is incorrect. A small
part only was being done BY a republican
newspaper, the State Journal, and Mr.. \.
{. Burcb, one Of its proprietors at the
time said printing was being done, told me
last week that the part his paper then had
was about one-thrtieth part Of the whole.
care nothing about this point, but men,
ton il simply 10 show Mr.. RusselTs inac-
curacy in making up his statement
He next SAYS, when quite late ia
Senator Heard was paying no attention 10
the bill, duplicate was made and intro
duced into the house by practical printer,
where il passed almost unanimously, aud
was sent TO the Senate Tor lis action" Ihis
statement is entirely at variance with the
facts, as sbOUn By The record. Instead OF the
bill being neglected in the Senate until
quite Jafe IN the session." and then dupli-
cate being introduced into the house, etc.,
the bill was introduced into the House In
the very beginning of the session, on the
fourteenth day thereof lSee House jour-
nal, psge 1917, and v as looked after in that
body by Mr.. McHenry and Others OF It's
friends; and nothing was attempted to be
Geue with the subject in the Senate until
said bill had passed the House. He next
says: There il was referred TO the COM
mittee on printing, composed OF Messrs.
Heard. Cottey and HedSon."
This statement is also In direct conflict
with the record. By reference to the Sen
ate journal. psge 40, it will be seen that
the committee on printing consisted OF
Messrs. Hesston, Lloyd, Byrnes, Cottey and
Headlee end that 1 W1s not a member Of a,
al all. In thee other places in his article,
Mr.. Russell refers TO me as a member OF said
ali Of which is In positive con-
tradiction of the official record, by
which he must stand corrected. He next
saws: "The Democrat, In common with
other friend. of the measure, was confident
of favorable report from the committee,
out no report zoos made. Tired OF waiting,
as the session WIS drawing to close. the
10 manager of the Democrat ven, to Jetfer-
son City," etc. This puts him IN the atti-
tube OF having gone To Jefferson City before
a report ,ras made, and TO hurry IL up, etc. =
when the fact il, the committee had al
ready reported on the bill, and IL was In
possession al the Ssnai,, Gsd Ia al beea the
subject of caucus, called al the instance OF
its friends. before he came to Jefferson City
and I had requested Maior Edwards, the
day before Mr.. RUSSELL came, 10 telegraph
for him, TO see If he could not explain away
the objections made against the bill In ssid
caucus. I had requested the caucus TO 10y
II oper for the purpose Of sending for Nc.
Russell, and so stated TO the caucasus sew
ersl of the senators who were present, testi-
fy in their letters published herewith. MIR.
Russell next says: The manager OF
the Democrat, in his interview
with Senator Heard, explained the obpox-
ious sections, and suggested that, II neces-
sary, il could be stricken out entirely, as IL
amounted, practically, to nothing" / regret
being obliged to contradict Mr.. Russell,
bat the fact is. don't think he msde any
such explanation or suggestion to
me; and really, the sections he speaks
Of "s7Ring ota involved nothing
less than the whole subject OF compen
satie q for the work to be done under the
bill. Mr.. Russel;'s statement re-
garding our conversation on the subject of
my calling up the bill, ETC., is .dismetri-
cslly opposed to my recollection on the
same subject.
; The next statement Of Mr.. RUSSELL relates
TO Senator McMahsn's promise 10 call up
the bill and sfterEard declining 20
do SO, because he had inform
alton that 'Messrs. Heard, Heastop and
Co,tey would kill his tornado bin, &c,
AS to the truth Of said statement, / will
leave Messfs. Co,tey AID MeMshan to
speak IN their letters published herewith.