New-York tribune., 1886-01-06
COL GREENE'S REPLY TO MR.. PATTERSON

JAMES G. PATTERSON. Esq.
DEAR SIR: ] see In this evenings papers an
open letter you referring TO my otter TO Messrs
McCurdy II, de-. and Beers. in which you charge me
first with breach OF confidence second. with incorrect
statement.
As to breach OF confidence, permit me to that had
no confidential relations with you In the matter did
not send you 10 NewYork to these gentlemen. did not
know you going. You went at their request not
mine. You were their messenger to me, not mine 10
then was not priyy to your relations with them
they were formed at my request for my benefit
had no responsibility 10 or for any OF you was eb-
tltey ignorant Of the whole thing until you delivered
their message IN their behalf You confidential
relations with them but not with You did not ask
me 10 treat their message confidential to the
cunstances would have made such request absurd no
man would have received such message.
As TO incorrect statement permit me TO say you have
overlooked the very first part OF your etory To me.
After telling how you were called to New-forb by these
gentlemen gou said that M WhleIe Reid had informed
ih,a Of mn article being in ype IN THE TRIBUNE office
a,ra,iiag publication and that hey could hare space 10
replu That they did not wish TO have the
article appear that any further controversy wou d
be urous To business that tnsy had had enough and
desired peace and that II would stop they would stop
and that you authorized to guarantee their good
faith ability, and strict performance. toll yod that
article was about senErontno aud would appear this
xesk That article was the reason OF your be-
ing sent for, as you put II, and that and the
other Tontne articles were all the attacks" on
NV part that spoken Of You mentioned no other,
either OF your knowledge or "a complained OF by
Messrs McCurdy Hyde and Beers. AS a matter Of fact,
thcrs was nothing else talk about. Bui dat article
disclosed TO them by Mr. Reid tho starting point and
key OF your story to me.
You say did not your question rs to whether
my proposed future discussions referred to Tontinc.
Pardon ne you did not understand me said they
would refer TO Tontne and to things growing out of
Tonune.
You say that your proposition was that "The New
Work pouics and Connecticut Mutual should
thoir attacks upon each other" You put in quotation
marks do NOT know why. you did not put 1t to me
I'm those words, but just az have stated It.
learn from your letter for the first time that you
undertook your mission account OF your interest IN
the Connecticut Mutual. You told you didu't know
why they had pitched you pesce messenger. for
Won were accustomed to campaigns yourself; but that
Won had concluded to 10 their errand Your manner OF
treating it did not convey the Impression that
vou thought the Couuee lieut. Mutual the Travellers
had suffered or would suffer from what had done or
proposed to 10. Indeed. thought you were quite as
much amazed and entertained by thoir proposition as
vns Yours Ac JACOB L. GREENE
HARTFORD, Jan. 4. 1885.
THE statement above about MIR. Whiteaw Reid,
attributed by Colonel Greene 90 Mr. James q.
Patterson, ia entirely untrue. Mr. Reid said Moth
ing 20 Mr. Batersons friends. directly or indirect-
ly. or 10 any body. about Colonel 0reenss letter.