Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1884-06-27
MIR. BIninc's Vindication.
from the Chicago Tribune.l

The connection of Mr.. Blaine with the
bill renewing the land grant Of the Little
| Rock and Fort Smith Railroad of Arkansas
has been 90 generally misunderstood that
the honest, roCk.b bottom facts about it ought
to be settled in few words for the informa-
ton of the public Mr.. William Walter
Phelps covered the ground fully in his letter
of April gath, addressed to the editor of the
| New York Evening Post, and printed in the
| Chicago Tribune of Saturday, April 2Gth.
Mr. Phelpss letter, however, is so long and
goes 50 much into detail, that busy men
who are less interested in getting at the truth
of this matter than In forming hastY opinions
| about it, will not read the evidence in full.
| We desire, therefore, to put the truth in n
few words, and refer anybody who may not
be satisfied with brief analysis of the facts
either to Mr. Phclpss letter or to the Con
gressional Record of 1876, where Mr.
Banes own statements may be found in
full
The charge is
That in the spring of 1869 MIR. Blaine
being at that time Speaker of the House
of Representatives bill renewing the
the land grant of the Little Rock and Fort
Smith railroad in the State of Arkansas was
before the house. and that in his capacity of
Speaker, he pro noted its passage because he
had pecunary Interest in the road.
The truth is:
/. That Mr.. Blaine at the time Of the
passage of the bill had no pCcuniary
interest whatsoever in the railroad or
its land grant, and expected 10 have
none.
.. That he had no acquaintance with any
persons who did have any pcCuniary interest
| in tho rnlrD11 or its land uraut.
3. That he did not promote the passage
of the bill, and that it did not need his in
fluenCc, iuasmuCh as 1t had already passed
the senate by a unanimous vote, and was not
objected to by anybody in the house. In
fact, it passed the house by unanimous
vote, as soon as it was before that body, on
its merits.
4 That Mr.. Blainc'3 sole connection with
the bill was o rule out an amendment tack
ing to It the very OdiOus and Objectionable
. land grant of the Texas and Pacific railroad,
measure which ought not to pass, and
which, if it had been fastened on the Little
Rock and Fort Smith railroad measure
would probably have dragged it down to an
unmcrited defeat. When this highly offens-
, i've amendment was proposed, Mr.. Root
one of the Arkansas members, called the
= speakers attention thereto, and at MIR.
Blainc's suggestion, Mr.. John A. Logan,
G then q member of the house. raised the point
, Of order that the amendment was not ger
mauc, and ii was ruled out of order forth
: with. The bill then passed by a unanimous
vote.
Nearly three months after these events Nil.
Blaine for the first time obtained an interest
in the railroad purchasing the stock ana
, bonds as any other buyer might do, aud then
!, for the first time formed the acquaintance OF
J. those who had been instrumental in pushing
the enterprise in the state Of Arkansas lie
l. bought block of securities belonging to The
; Little Rock and Fort Smith railroad, lnclud
: ing stock and first and second mortgage
/ bonds, in June, 1869, after the adjournment
V of congress, and placed the first mortgage
bonds during the three months following
with number of his friends in MassaChu
sets and Maine The entire series of bonds
at his disposal was closed out during tho
II months If July, August, and september
!, 1869, 50 the transaction was ended when, II
.. his letter of October 4, 1860, Mr.. Blaint
J. wrote to Fisher and merely in the way of {
ID curious reminlscenCc called attention to The
as fact of his unsolicited and accidental service
k to the road the April previous, when he VA
l. in no way interested in lis affairs, and ha'
&c no reason to suppose that lie ever would be
N The truth is that his attention was hrs
directed to the railroad by its application t.
Z cDUIItSS lDI IL ItucN III VI lto ldhu SIAM; "h
s. it first seemed to him a favorable investmcn
l. after its land grant had been rencwe
J. by unanimous vote of both houses of con
t grcss.
t. VI. Blaine sold his securities of the road
his friends with a personal promise That
any loss should ensue he would take Dac
the stock and bonds at the price for whic
{ hesso,d them Ghrinkrgc did ensue, and tn
ID stock and bonds were thrown back upon hi
n hands, and, though he had given no write
~ guarantee of redemption, he paid Tor thel
=, 20 at great personal sacrifice out OF his ow
~ pocket The New York Evening P0>t ha
since alleged that he unlOaded his dlsastrol
investm, mt upon the Union Pacific RAILROAD
but it has produced no proof Of any sue
X TRANSACTION, whereas Mr.. Blaine has e2
30 hlbited the sEOrn statement Of the officers {
&c, the railroad that TO such transfer was eve
-, made and his statement has been acceplt
tie as conclusive by those who arc familiar Wit
O. the circumstances of the case. Indeed,
nd was this part Of the controversy that Geors
90 William Curtis considered in Uupp
"" lIechlH when he wrote in May, 1876, th
ne Mr.. Blaiuc'a stn'Cmeut was las thorough
he ruiutatipu ae was ever made"
jes We are convinced that no candid pers'
he can investigate wit iOut pre- ud'ce all /!
he facts connected with MI Blalnc's reco.d
N, this case without coming to the firm co
NJ clusion tina it was IN all respects honoral
sand proper, and creaitsble to him, both us
res private citizen aud public man.