St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-09-01
CHAPTER VII.

Shows Something of What the MuIligan
Letters Contained and How They Gave
the Lie to Mr.. Blaine's Assertions Con-
corning His Purchase of Little Rock and
Fort smith Securities
Any careful review of the case gives strong
ground for the universal opinion that the
Mulligan letters demonstrated that Mr.. Blaine
lied in regard to his transactions in the stock
of corporations whose prospects were iuflu-
enced by the legislation of congress, and the
most polite political writers in the country
must agree that Mr.. Blaine used the utmost
economy and even absolute parsimony in his
use OF what is known as truth.
On the oath of April, 1876, Mr.. Blaine
arose in the house to Question of privi-
lege," saying that for some months past
charge against him had been circulated in
private, and was recently made public, de-
signing to show that he had in some in direct
manner received the large sum of S64, 900
from the Union Pacific Railroad Company in
lST1-for what services or for what purpose
has never been stated. He then read in his
defence, letters from f. II. Rollins, Morton,
Bliss ~ Co., Sidney Dillon and Thomas A.
Scott, TO show that he had had no transaction
with either of those gentlemen in the Little
Rock " Fort Smith securities. He then
stated TO the house the origin of the corpora
ton and some facts in its early history.
He says (see p. 2725 Congressional Record,
vol. 4, part 3,44th Congress):
Toward the close of 1858 COMPANY of
Boston gentlemen representing considerable
capital undertook its construction. In rails
ing the requisite means they placed the bonds
of the road on the New England market in
the summer OF 1869, offering them on terms
t,bi oh oil e.,
er, and offering them at Il time when invest
ments of this kind were fatally popular. In
common with hundreds OF other people in
New England and other parts of the country,
| bought some OF these bonds-not a very
large amount-paying for them at precisely
the same rate that others paid. never heard,
and do not believe that the Little Rock COM
pany-which | know is controlled by highly
honorable men-ever parted with a
bond to any person except at the regular
price fixed for their sales All the
bonds which | ever purchased l continue to
hold. Instead of receiving bonds
Of the Little Rock IL Fort Smith as Il gratui-
ity. | never had one except at the regular
price"
Mr.. Blaine closed his statement in the SOL
emn words following: II have never done
anything in my public career for which l
cannot answer to my constituents, my con-
science, and the
THE GREAT sEARCHER OF HEARTS,
Particular attention is called to the fact
that this statement was made April "a, 1876.
Mr.. Blaine evidently supposed that this
would put quietus upon the whole matter,
but It would not down ut his biddlng.n On
the 2d of May following Mr.. Tarbox OF Mass
achusetts introducduced resolution instruc-
ting the judiciary committee TO investigate
the reported sale 70 the Union Pacific Rail-
road Company of certain bonds of the Little
Rock " Fort Smith company. After the tes-
timony of Messrs Fisher and Mulligan had
been given, which showed that sales of Lit
Tie Rock and Fort Smith securities had been
made by Mr.. Blaine 10 parties in Maine, Mr.
Blaine endeavored TO make it appear that the
bonds which went to the parties in Maine
were first mortgage bonds and not land
grants. He says, p. 360S:
1t is incvidence that, with the exception of
a small fraction, the bonds which were sold to
parties in Maine were first mortgage bonds.
1t is in evidence. over and over again, that
the bonds which weht to the Union Pacific
road were land grant bonds. Therefore it is
moral impossibility that the bonds taken
up TO Maine should have gone To the Union
Pacific railroad. They were of different Sc
ries, different kinds, different color-every-
thing different as different as If not issued
within thous and miles of each other. So
on Its face is shown it could not be so -
Pages 102 1903 of the evidence printed in
House Mis-. Doc. 116, part l, shows that be-
fore the production of the memorandum
book by MIR. Mulligan Mr.. Blaine en-
dcavored to show that the bonds sold to Main
parties were first mortgage, and not land
grants. On P. 101 Mr.. Blaine, in question
ing Mr. Elisha Atkins, says:
MIR. Mulligan testiies that the great mass
Of TIE bonds that were
SOLD To THE MAINE PEOPLE
were first mortgage bonds, and entirely diff
ferent bonds from the land grant bonds.
What wanted to get from his testimony is
that it was impossible that the land grant
bonds that went into the Union Pacific rail
road could have been the same land grant
bonds that had been taken back from the
Maine people, On p. l21 same evidenced
Mr.. Blaine SAYS: Il desire 10 call attention
10 the fact that there are but SOS. 600 land
bonds sold to the state of Maine people, ac-
coriinS TO the evidence in the memorandum
book" The memorandum book produced
by Mr.. Mulligan.
TX NlltNt Va MI DANAnC al al luGSt sllkG-
ments and interrogatories to the witnesses
was to conceal his own transactions in the
land grant bonds.
Mr. William Walter Phelps, in his defense
OF Mr. Blaine In the New York Eyesiag PoSt.
also studiously avoids the land grant bonds,
saying second mortgage bonds. and three
for one, instead OF four for one.'' There
were no second mortgage bonds issued.
The real facts are, then, that Mr.. Blaine
had made sales to Colburn aud others in
Maine Of certain bonds and stock for which