Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1884-01-30
The Charges Against BoyntOn, Of the Gin
einnati Commercial Gazette"
Declared by That
Gentleman TO be Wholly Untrue and
Without Foundation in Faet-The
Correspondence.
Three Letters Of More Than Passing In
terest-The Ex-Speaker, for Want
Of Argument,
Resorts to Abuse and YituperatiOn-
Gen. BoyntOn Interviewed
Shaw's Say.
keller AND ROYNTON.
The Ex-Speaker's Last Letter TO the
NeWspaper Man.

The Ex-SpeaIker's Last Letter 10 the
Newspaper Man.
WASHINGTON, January 29.-The follow
ing is the letter which Mr.. Keller had |
read from the clerks desk during his per-
sonal explanation in regard to the Boyn- |
ton matter in the House:
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, OF THE ! |
UNITED STATES,
WASHINGTON, January 2s, 1884 |
To II. V. Boynton:
About II o'clock last night some person
handed me at my rooms an envelope,
which seems to be addressed in your hand
writing, and which contained printed
card of yours on the subject of your guilt
in the matter of a scheme to pass bill
through the last Congress. This morning
l found letter of yours on my table
(which had been left there in my absence)
marked Personal and dated the 26th in
slant, asking an investigation OF your
practices by the House, and threatening to
publish letter unless by to-day's session
| caused an investigation. Your conduct
has placed you so far outside the pale of a
gentleman as to make, it degradation
to notice you. You have been so
often shown to be liar and a
defamer of character that it has be-
come unnecessary to deny anything you
say, and you conceive it to be the business
OF Congress to occupy its time investigat-
ing your bad deeds to dignity you. Your
colleague CIV. b. Shaw in defaming me,
and who presided last spring over a meet
ing of a few members of the press to con-
denim me, was at one time shown land as
he was compelled to admit the fact by the
public recOrds) to have taken $4,000 as
lobbyist while a correspondent, and, so
far as | know, he has had the privileges OF
the press gallery ever since that, and re-
fused to investigate the truth of the charge
against me at your instance when they
must have been known by both to have
been false. Do you think the present
House should investigate such a case as
your violations of all decency by daily
lying about me in the press and otherwise,
and appealing to others to do the same,
as / am informed? Does not such
conduct on your part forfeit all right you
NAV have to sit with gentlemen of the
press? | shall not move the investigation
you ask, because l do not believe it to be
the business of the House of Representa-
tives To investigate your corrupt conduct.
There is no Iule of the House against your
being a lobbyist. The members of the
last House land the record shows the fact
know you lied in your publication that |
opened the press gallery for the admission
of members wives the last night of the
session. All the members of the present
House know you lied when you published
that when seats were about to be drawn, |
went TO Cannon of Illinois, and asked him
TO request the privilege of being allowed
to select one, etc, to which objection was
made. These and other like matters need
no investigation by the House to learn
their falsity. | know you forged letter
last summer and published it to the
country, purpsrting to have been written
by me to the Secretary of the Treasury,
giving the date, and about a mat
ter of no grave importance, but,
as | was informed at the time,
merely to injure me. Your printed carl
has been rightfully interpreted by the
public as an advance confession of your
guilt as LOBBYIST. If, wher YOU told me
near the close of the last Coz gress, l was
a fool for not making mC ney while
Speaker, rs Blaine and Colfax had done,
and that there was still plenty TO be made
if the McCiarrahan bill should he gotten
through, had thrown you, ,as you deserved,
from my room, ] suppose it would have
been wiser for me, but up to that time You
and had been on good terms, although
had been warned by friends that your
public reputation was such as to make me
beware OF you. / treated you leniently,
although | have never spoken to or recog-
nized you since, and you have from that
time to this devoted yourself by all man.
neT of falsehoods in assailing my character.
You did not say with whom you were in
terested in the AIcGarrahan bill, but
intimated that You had colleagues.
NY knowledge of lobby cliques
was obtained from you. l have no desire
TO condemn correspondents, for | think
most of them are gentlemen. Some of
them have been influenced by you to do
what they say they are heartily ashamed
of. 4 correspondent OF q newspaper
should regard his position rs one of high
responsibility, and, of all things, should
be at least truthful l do not pretend to
say that McGarrahan had no merit in
his original claim, but when you eX-
planned TO me that the bill you wished to
get through Congress provided for the
issue of many million acres of land scrip,
which would be about the value of Val
entine scrip, worth then about $50 per
acre, and since more, and that there
would be abundance to divide, /, for the
first time, learned the scope of the bill,
and at once told you it would not pass
the Forty-seventh Congress. | have letter
from you, dated February %, 1888, asking
me to recognize member named TO sus-
pend the rules and pass the bill, which is
of date earlier than our talk. No person
had even spoken to me in opposition TO
the McCiarrahan bill, and my position
against il was taken, rs you know, at the
time YOU explained its nature and pur-
poses. | leave it for the public to decide
whether the lobby who work for big Jobs
at each session of Congress, do it for
pay or sentiment. The committee of in
vestigation you speak of has given you
more concern than me, but it has afforded
you another excuse or opportunity to write
and have published more untruths, pre-
tending that they are the result of testi-
mony disclosed before the committee.
dislike to receive your letter at all, but as
you propose TO publish it, it may be due TO
the public that some facts should go out
along with it. OF course you would not
publish yours without publishing this
with it. J. WARREN gEIFER.
Boynton's Letters TO Keifer.