St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-10-26


The last figure in the record Of the chld's
orth has been chiselled away, and the date
Born June IS, 1851 has been made to
read, ''Born June Is, 1S5-. D" Such
is the mutilation. OF all the letters and fig
ures in The inscriptions that little figure ~
in the record Of the child's birth was the only
one mutilated or touched. In no other re-
spect were the inscriptions or stone mutt
lated, defaced or marred. The final
figure ''1' in the record of the year Of
the chid's birth, and that figure only, was as
Mr.. Blaine said, ''carefully chisclled away"
What is the necessary inference from this
Fact! 1t is this That ''the infamous per-
petrator Of the deed'' repairs TO the cemetery
lot with a formed design, fixed purpose,
a definite object, and that was To discover a
rccord-the record of the child's birth, the
wear in which it was born. As it stood prior
TO the mutilation that monument bore upon
its face public evidence of that birth date,
legal record evidence admissible in all courts
of Justice, and as it has TRANSFERRED, the only
public record evidence of that fact in exis-
tence.
WHO HAD A MOTIVE TO DO THE DEED?
Now, who was the infamous perpetrator of
the deed! First, who had p motive to de-
birth? Motives grow out of relations The
motive to destroy the record Of the child's
birth grew out of the relation which the per-
petrator sustained to the child and the date
of its birth, a relation which made it for his
interest, or supposed interest, to destroy the
record. This question of motive leads to
the very door of truth, for it
points TO him as the author, and to
him only, who had an interest in having the
record destroyed. In whose interest," there
fore, was the mutiation performed. In the
interest of James G.. Blaine or of one Of the
publishers Of the Ne,0 Agcf What cOuceiv-
able motive could the publishers Of a Demo
cratic paper have, under the circumstances
TO destroy the only record evidence in ex-
'stence of the child's birth! What possible
interest could such publishers have in that
record. cXceptsto preserve it? With as much
veason Mr. Blaine might have charged that
he publishers of the indianapolis Scatige,
Ras interested in having that record de-
stroved. just how much interest the pub
fishers Of Il Democratic newspaper had in
destroying the record appears from the fol-
lowing extract from letter received
September by gentleman in this city
from Mr.. Shumacker, publisher of the
Sentinel:
''We have reason to believe that Mr..
Blaine will undertake TO fix June, 1852, us
the date of the birth of Stanwood, their first
child. All we can possibly desire now is to
establish the fact OF the birth having occurred
in June, lS5l.n
And vet Mr.. Blaine would have the coun-
try believe that one Of the publishers of this
paper destroyed the only public evidence OF
the child's birth in order to furnish the pub
fishers Of the Sentinel and of other Demo
cratic papers with Photographic copies of the
mutilated record. So true is It that the in
decent and infamous peryetrator of the deed
was working in the interest of Mr. Blaine. .
TuE SKELETON IN HLAINE's CLOSET.
Ever since Mr. Blaine entered public life
his policy inspecting this unfortunate child
seems to have been one Of eoncealmeut- Il
rclo-is be true, he reluctantly admitted hi:
paternity at the outset, and has studiously ig
nored the child's existence ever since. The
child's name is suppressed in the Blaine fam
ily record, published in North's history OF
= Augusta. that record being otherwise com
Dlete. 1t is also suppressed in the campaign
lives n Mr.. Blaine, including Couwells :,
published in this city under the supervision
of Mr.. Blaine The court record Of Mr..
Blaine's libel suit against the Argus, con-
tanning obnoxious dates, is said "a
have disappeared from the files
of the court, and also the copy of the Aygsg
containing the same from the files of the
paper in the Portland public library. Why
This studied concealmcpt of the date Of the
birth and of the very existence of this child
StauwOod Blalnet
Nr. Blaine was married March 90. 1851
md his child, Stauwood, was born June Is
1881. These two dates indicate Mr. Blaine:
relation 10 the child and the motive for cou
,ealment When Mr.. Blaine was nominated
for the presidency these two dates, of hi:
marriage and of his child's birth, confronted
aim at the most important juucture of hi.
life.
PREPARING To FLING MUD.
Re had resolved in the event Of Cleve
lands nomination to raise the scandal issu,
n distract attention from his own publi
record and stav the revolt of the Indepen
dents. He had this scandal Issue unde
consideration before Gov. Cleveland wa
nominated, as appears by his letter TO Dr.
Warner. informing him that he had referre
the matter .'confdentially" to the Repubh
can National committee. Well he kne'
Al -, a,tsrE t,non the uriyste life OF Coy