Springfield daily republic. [volume] (Springfield, O. [Ohio]) 1887-1888, 1888-05-09

feau telegram from Mayor Hewitt, deny
ing that be had ever apologized to the Brit
ish Minister for having offered resolution
of inquiry as to the case of 0'Donnell, un
der sentence of death in Great Britain
The telegram reads as follows: "New
York, May 6. Hon. d. S. Bryce, Washing
ton. Have just seen the reports in news
papers. Woodburn's statements as re
ported are simply untrue. Brumm's
statement is probably forgetfulness He is
entirely wrong. Ineyer made any statement
whatever in the House on the 0Donnell
business and never made any apology there
or elsewhere. There was nothing to ex.
plain or apologize for. The story that
apologized 10 the British Minister, was a
lie, which l contradicted at once in the
newspapers in which it appeared No
charge was ever made in the House and
hence l never had occasion there to deny
IT. The newspaper charge was utterly false
and was contrsdicted by Mr. West as well
pose fat contradiction and l thank YOU
for it VIII write more fully.
ADRIAN S. HEWITT"
Mr.. Hewitt's letter was also read. 1t
supplements the telegram and gives full
details OF his several actions in the matter
He explains how through his efforts the
resolution asking the British Government
for q suspension of the death sentence of
ODonnell, was placed before the British
Government twenty-fours after its intro
duction. He characterizes as IAN unmiti-
gated lie" the story that he had apologized
20 the British minister for the ac-
tion and states that he denied the
story at the time through the press.
mo reference" says Mr. Hewitt
was ever made to this matter on the floor
of the House" Continuing, he states that
the resolution introduced by Mr.. Brumm,
instructing the Foreign Affairs Committee
TO inquire whether he had apologized to
the British Minister, was reported back
with the statement that the committee had
been unable to obtain any such informa.
ton. Mr.. Hewitt encloses with his letter,
newspaper extracts and letter from the
British Minister. in which the Minister
says that he (Hewitt) not only made
no apology to him, but that he
urged favorable consideration of the
resolution. In concluding his letter, Mr.
Hewitt says: 81 suppose that this state
ment bisposes in full (although / know it
will continue to be repeatedly of the malici-
Gus slander of which have been the vic
tim. If this letter and those documents
can be inserted in the record. there will at
least be a complete and final, official denial
of the falsehood which has been many times
repeated in the newspapers, but 50 far as l
know has never before been uttered on the
floor of the House"
Mr.. Bryce thought these documents were
sufficient TO disprove the charge brought
against a relative of his by marriage and an
honorable gentleman.
Mr.. Woodburn, of Nevada said that he
did not regard the British Minister'S denial
as denial Of the charge; in fact it was an
admission 1t Was no better authority
that the gentleman's statement that he
was a relative by marriage TO A S.
Hewitt He had been informed by
q reputable gentleman who was one Of
the committee delegated by an Irish
organization of America to investigate the
truth of the charge made against Mr..
Hewitt; that as q result of the investiga-
tion, he This informantl believed A s.
Hewitt guilty of the charge. Upon this he
(Woodburn) had made the charge, and he
would not take il back. He needed better
authority TO do so than the letter over the
signature of A. 5. Hewitt, the defendant in
the case.
Mr.. Brumm, of Pennsylvania, said that
he had agreed with Mr.. Bryce to make GER
tain changes in the Record; that he had
agreed TO have inserted the word 'explana-
uon" for the word apology" He was sat-
isfied with the changes that had been made.
even if the Record had been fixed up in
way that it should not have been. But
when the charge was made that no expla-
nation had been made by Mr.. Hewitt he
(Brumm) maintained the charge was in
correct.
After further remarks by Mr.. Brumm,
the house went into committee of the
whole on the tariff bill.
Mr.. Stockdale of Mississippi, continuing
his speech from last Saturday in favor of
the bill, said that the cotton planter had
received little consideration in past legisla-
ton. The cotton industry was the favorite
of the colored man. He should no longer
be held in seryitude to the gigantic pro-
tective industries from which he derived
no benefit.
Mr.. Hopkins, of Illinois, spoke against
the bill. The fact could not be kept from
the people in the coming campaign, that
the Democratic party stood committed un-
equivocally 10 the doctrine of free trade
That party had come into power by prac-
ticing q system of false pretenses upon
American people unparalleled in the his
tory of political parties
Mr.. Mansur, OF Missouri, spoke in sup
port of the bill, contending that the Inter
nal Revenue should be maintained for the
payment of pensions and the remainder of
the war debt.
J. D. Taylor, of Ohio, opposed the bill.
and denounced free trade as fragment
Ol Tic IcUclllOut dS udllStTOuS 70 Tie
country in 1888 as secession had been in
1861.
Mr.. Richardson, of Tennessee, supported
the bill. He criticised the Republicans for
antagonizing every effort which the Demo-
cratic party had made to fulfill its pledges
of tariff reduction. The bill was wise,
conservative measure. which, while it
would not break down the protective sys-
tenn, would give some relief to the over
burdened people.
Mr.. McAdoo, of New Jersey, favored the
abolition Of the internal revenue system as
the best way to reduce the surplus. Free
trade was not one Of the principles of the
Democratic party. The incongruities of
the tariff laws should be removed, admin
istration reform should be inaugurated,
and duties which were high and above the
wage line should be reduced. In con-
cluding, he said he was willing to
make all reasonable concessions, but he
was bound to say that he would
scorn TO sacrifice the labor industries of the
Republic TO noisy defamation. To this
House had been committed fearful re-
sponsibility. 1t was not a mere game to be
played upon the checker board of infini-
tesimal politics. Let members individually
and collectively act wisely and well, in the
formulation and passage of a conservative
and efficient measure and the memory of
the Fiftieth Congress would long survive
in the annal OF q grateful people.
Mr.. Morrow of California, said the bill
instead OF building up the country would
retard its growth, and its exclusion of
Chinese from this country would be of lit
tie value il the products of China were to be
admitted face OF duty to compete with our
own products. The committee then rose
and the House at $50 p. m. took q recess
until oclck. the evening session TO be de-
voted to tariff debate.
At the evening session, Mr.. Stone OF Mis-
souri,. laid down the propositions that any
articles OH which a tariff duty was levied
was necessarily increased in cost to the eI-
tent of the duty and that high tariff &C
cumulating q surplus contracted circula-
ton.
Mr. Chinman of Michigan denied that