The Evening critic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1881-1885, 1884-09-15
CLEVERLY FLAYED.
M,KEcHHIE SKINNED BY BROCK.

The Question of BOY cotttng Blaino
ana the Republican Party because
of the New York TrlbunC's"
Course Agnin Discussed FIR. n. %.
BtOck 6ucct ssfuiiy Defends HIS
action and That OF shO ReDublt-
cnn Printers Here - Serious Ac-
cusations Against MIR. McKechnte,
which Mr.. Brock seems 30 Have
the Proof 80 Sustain with Men
who Think. McKechuic's hnnu-
SBCe Amounts 30 Nothing.
The CRITIC publishes below very in
tciesting correspondence. 1t will be OBJ
served that MIR. Brock attacks tho enemy
at what he regards as tho enemy's strong
est points. And he succeeds in carrying
the works, too, every time.
The position of Mr.. Brock and of those
who follow him is clear and unmistakable.
He is opposed to rafting" any office, but
he sensibly concludes that the fact that u
Republican paper is Grated" is no reason
why the Republican party should be de-
nouDced.
On the other hand he places Mr. Nc
Kechnie in position which he will find II
hard to explain to sensible and honest
men.
MIR. McKcchnie 10 MIR. Brock.
70 lir. AirGn D. brock, Columbia 7yDogrdph.
teal LniCa No. 1O1:
SIR when the National Republican Com
mittee determined 10 establish an afternoon
paper in the Interest OF Mr.. Dlaine's candidacy
In this city, they brought Murat Halstead hero
TO conduct It, and iesuod IT from the STRAIT
tribune ONCE, thus, In view OF the facts pre-.
ceding its advent, adding insult TO the injury
already done tho printers OF New York, and
thereby showing their entire sympathy with
Reid In his antagoniem to New York Union.
When Mr.. Halstead, in this STRAIT ETtrd, is
sued from the "rat" Tribune ONCE, innocently
asks, "what has Mr.. Blaine got to do with TT
| II ie admitted that Mr.. Blaine Is not n stock.
holder In the Tribune, and has nothing to do
| with the long strike. Why, then, boycott
| Blainer thought 1t nothing but right aud
proper that the public should know las Mr..
Halstead knew, as the Republican Committee
knew, and as MIR. Blaine himself know our
| reasons for boycotting James G. Blaine and
| 1t is somewhat remarkable, Mr.. Brock, that
| In your letter TO me you do not advance one
solitary reason why, under all the clrcum-
James g. Blaine and the Republican party,
| unless 1t may be inferred from your conclud-
| ing paragraph that you are OF the opinion that
moro harm than Mr.. Blaine and the Republi.
| can party. AS you devote the greater part of
| your letter TO labored effort to impesch my
| veracity In regard to the interview held by
| MIR. Smith and myself with MIR. Blaine, may
be pardoned II say word here personal OF
myself
The first vote cast was for Abraham Lin.
coin, and have voted the National Republican
ticket on all occasions since that time. Mr..
Blaine was my choice for the nomination be-
fore the Chicago Republican Convention mot
and, all things being equal, is my choice fol
President to- day. II In my letter have con
veyed the idea, to you or any one else, tina,
Mr. Blaine promised to communicate again
personally with US after our interview with
him, nothing was further from my Intention
The only thing Mr.. Blaine did promise was
that he would endeavor TO have the matter IL
question settled within one week from tina
time. But that Mr.. Blaine used the language
that you put into his mouth, Mr.. Brock, is alb
solutely untrue, as you can see by my col
| leagues note herewith appended. Had II moi
been for Mr.. Halstead's Innocence my letter
IN all probability, would never have seen tho
II may not have occurred to you, Mr.. Brock
but It certainly has to me and may to others
connection with Organized Labor, and the ser
| vices you boast you have rendered It, your de-
| sire for the success OF Mr. Blaine and the Re
t Se Welfare q the printing frasernity that nal
| there must DO some potent reason for It, 1t
has also struck me as remarkable that you
were not go fastidious, Mr.. Brock, In regard e
typographical Unions using their political
| power as a factor in aiding Columbia Union Il
| maintain It's scale OF prices In the month o
February, 1888, when the attempt was mad,
| in the United States Senate to "rat" the Gov
| eminent Printing ONCE. There is nothing II
| your whole letter, Mr.. Brock, that shows you
/ uhihuo ihotoS ioaiay hh.n yOah pooo "no - =
| tuitous insult to our Union when you insinu
| ate that Grover Cleveland and his friends foo
| the bills of The B0yc0tter.
| Whether the determination OF the members
OF No. @ TO bring their ballots into play ir
"downing" that political party whose ofiicia
organs refuse to pay the Union scale OF prices
is wise or not time Will tell. But or one thing
| l feel assured; Let Typographical Union No
| and its allies In the cause OF organized labor
but succeed in defeating the Republican party
In the State OF New York on this Issue at the
next election and the printers OF Washington
| will have nothing to fear OF any moro attempts
| on the part OF any member OF Congress TO "rat'
| the Government Printing once.
With reciprocal respect, remain, &c,
| II. MCKECHNIE,
1 n