The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1884-06-19

MR. BLAINES VINDIOATION.
The Chicago Tribune, under the
above head reviews the connection OF
Mr.. Blaine with the bill renewing the
land grant OF the Little Rock and Fort
Smith railroad, Of Arkansas, and thus
summarizes the case:
"The charge is:
THAT In the spring of 1S69-Mr
Blaine being at that time speaker of the
house Of representatives, bill renew
ing the land grant of the Little Rock
and Fort Smith railroad 10 the state of
Arkansas was before the house, and that
in his capacity of speaker he promoted
its passage because he had pecuniarY
interest in the road.
"rhe truth Is:
II. That Mr. Blaine at the time OF the
passage of the bill had no pecuniary in
ierest whatsoever in the railroad or its
land grant and expected to have none.
"2. That he had no acquaintance
with auy person who did have any pc
cuniAry interest in the ra,lroGd Ut its
land grant.
"3. That he did not promote the
passage of the bill, and that 1t did not
need his influence, inasmuch as it had
already passed the senate by unani-
nous vote, and was not objected to by
anybody IN the house. In fact, it passed
the house by a unanimous vote, as soon
as it was before that body, on Its
merits.
80. That Mr.. Blsine's sole connection
with the bill was to rule out an amend
ment lacking to it the very odious and
Objectionable land grant OF the Texas &
Pacific railroad, measure which ought
not to pass, and which, if 1t had been
fastened on the Little Rock and Fort
Smith railroad measure, would probab-
" have dragged it down to an uumerit-
ed defeat. When this highly offensive
amendment was proposed, Mr.. Root, one
of the Arkansas members, called the
speakers attention thereto, and at Mr..
Blaine's suggestion Mr.. John A. Logan,
then q member of the house, raised the
point of order that the amendment was
not germane, and 1t was ruled out of or
der forthwith. The bill then passed by
a unanimous vote.
"Nearly three months after these
events Mr.. Blaine tor the first time OBJ
tanned an interest in the railroad, pur-
chasing the stock and bonds es any 9th
er buyer might do, and then for the first
time formed the acquaintance of those
who had been instrumental In pushing
the enterprise In the state OF Arkansas.
He bought block of securities belong
ing to the Little Rock & Fort Smith
railroad, including stock ana first and
second mortgage bonds, in June, 1869,
after the adjournment of congress, and
placed the first mortgae bonds during
the three months following with q num-
Der of his friends in Massachusetts and
Maine. The entire series Of bonds at his
disposal was closed out during the
months of July, August and September
of 1860, so the Transaction was ended
when, in his letter of October 4, 1869, Mr.
Blaine wrote TO Fisher and merely IN
the way of a curious reminIscence called
attention TO the fact of his unsolicited
and accidental services to the road the
Apnl previous, when he was in no way
interested in its affairs and had no rea-
son 10 suppose thai he ever would be.
The truth is, that his attention was first
attracted to the railroad by Its spplca-
ton 10 Congress for q renewal of its land
grant, and il frat seemed to him . favor
able investment after Its land grant had
been renewed by q unanimous vote of
both houses of Congress.
"Mr. Blame sold his securities of the
road TO his friends with 8 personal
promise that If any loss should ensue he
would take back the stock and bonds at
the price for which he sold them.
Shrinkage did ensue, and the stock and
bonds were thrown back upon his hands,
and though he had given no
written guarantee of redemption,
he paid for them at q
great personal sacrifice out of his own
pocket. The New York Post has since
alleged that he unloaded his disastrous
investment upon the Union Pacific rail-
road, but it has produced no proof of any
such transaction, whereas Mr.. Blaine has
exhibited the sworn statements of the
officers OF the railroad that no such
transfer Was ever made; and his state
ment has been accepted as conclusive by
those who are familiar with the circum-
stances of the csse. Indeed, it was this
part OF the controversy that George VIII
liam Curtis considered an Harper's
Weekly when ne wrote in May, 1876.
that Mr.. Blaine's statement was 'as thor
ough refutaiIon as was ever made"