Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1884-04-30
EDMUNDS AND PHELPS.
The Correspondence Which Has Re.
Gently Passed Between Them.
THE SENATOR TO THE REPRESENTATIVE.

WASHINGTON, D. c., 2Sth April, 1884.
Dear Sir:-1 have read your letter in defense Of
Nr. Blaine In the Sunday Tribune and also the
editorial OF the Tribune thereon, in which you say
"Senator Edmunds was understood to have
ns oIoek OF burlington and Missouri securities
the Burlington and Missouri road when they were
In the Senate. They both supported the bill to
restore the land grant to their road"
These statements taken In connection with the
rest OF your letter evidently mean that at the
e M ene Sat to In
the editorial in the Tribune states expressly as
being your statement, that thing; Both yourself
hunted up what suppose to be the joint resolu-
ton to which your refer being Senate joint resolu
=. ton No s, sa 1ss session FoItye1rst Congress,
eoagsess,sas. ss @ e,o5e q y that Time, = chat
the House amendment, which remark commend
to your careful consideration. had at that time,
ana never had before any ownership or interest In
the state of Vermont and never expected to have
and had no more connection with the passage of
more than you (Which assume wss nothing at allS,
excepting what may be inferred from my remark
on the House amendment. More than three months
looking at my old books, subscribed for 95 shares
OF the stock and 600 OF the bonds OF the Burng-
ton and Missouri river railroad company in Ne
braska, which l assume was road In
some way affected by the legislation referred
to. I paid in cash the same price that all
eral years, when sold it in the Boston market at
the market price and no more, and then or after
wards bought more OF the bonds of the same COM
pany, which still hold. This is the whole story,
and give you authority to verify it by an exami-
nation OF the books OF the company in Boston,
my who Sr ,n1and to 10 el
full, as do not doubt you do, to be somewhat accu-
rate In making statements about the acts
body else wish to know anything concerning
my business or other transactions at any
to you IN % ss es S
that what you say is true. 1 am neither willing
nor desirous to be either candidate or President.
to Inc upon the subject knows but as naturally j
like to stand well in the estimation OF my fellow
citizens dislike to be accused OF either corruption
bias, selhshness or acting on publec questions in
which have private interest, when such accusa-
tions are untrue. Respectfully yours.
Hon. WILLIAM WALTER PHELPS, House Of Repre-
SentattveS.
Mr. PH ELPs IN HIS REPLY,
dated April %, says: 81 have this moment your
letter OF this morning and hasten to correct some i'm
pressons you have gotten, either from my letter to
the Post or more probably from some of the numer-
GUS newspaper comments regret If you think that
in using your name an Illustration of principle
have In any way hurt your reputation. 1t is 9
reputation Of which you and the country may well
facts do not and ought not, hurt any
Illustrate was that legislator has no % right to to
refuse justice to corporate interest because
he happens to have some share in the
It was not necessarily a wrong thing for a
legislator to acquire an interest In corporate
property after legislative action In which he had
assisted and cited as an illustration your conduct
and that Of many other legislators which neither
nor any one else censurcd Then asked why such
any one else Mr. Blaine did not vote but did rule
SO that the Little Rock and Fort Smith road got its
land grant connrmsd, ;,knowing no more Of the road
months Afterwards Nh. Blaine bought his interest
in that road. You voted-because the assent was
land grant OF the Burlington and Missouri road.
knowing at the time little more OF it than did, for
you debated IT. you say you forgot the fact; three
that road. The cases were 50 analogous In ali es-
sential particulars that it seemed proper to group
discseditable should not have defended him nor
mentened you Where is there any lack of accu-
racy In my statements about other peoplee" 1
block OF Burlington and Missouri securities" and
again, '.senator Edmunds acquired his interest in
the Senate You saw ION the 18th Of IL JulX was is "a
you subscribed for one hundred and ninety
i've shares OF the stock and six thousand
and Missouri River Railroad Company" am In
accurate In these statements, then, only In case
you were not member Of the senate on the 18TH
OF July, 1859, ana IN case stocks and bonds do not
constitute block. said, 'they both (you and
another1 supported the bill to restore the land
grant to their road" You say this point nothing
accurately you had only to say you svoted against
the bill" Had you done this would cheerfully
admit my inacc9racy; but the official record shows
you present and speaking upon the resolution at
the moment Of It's passage, and the record shows
ou,ae misapprehended me as saying you were In any
way Interested In the road, at the time OF the pas
sage OF the resolution 1t IS responsible, and not
suspect It can take care Of itself and prefers to-
made no such representation, directly or by impl-
cation. Such fact would destroy the parallelfsm
between your case and Mr.. Blainesl" Mr. Phelps,
In conclusion, claims that his statement was accur-
ate. ana that he thought them 'sa CHARGE he
could have used the technical language OF legal
pleading.
SENATOR RDMuNps CLOSES TIE CORRESPONDENCE
with note dated this morning, In which he says
II have yours, dated 28th inst, which was left at
my house late last evening. According to your
permission, any OF the gentlemen Of the press who
desire It viii be permitted to take copies OF my
note and yours The statement In your public let
ter together with the facts referred to In my note
win show what the point was With your arHu-
ments and conclusions have no concern"