Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1889-07-10
A MODERN IuNIUS.
Again Discussing the Identity Of
Arthur Richmond
4 PROFOUND POLITICAL SENSATION

- = @%tf@ - = 49, $3.50 NtNA~t A~@f@N 49, 49,
The Emphatic Assertion That Julian
Hawthorne and Gail Hamilton wrote
the Arthur Richmond" Letters Re-
wives General Interest IN the Author
ship Of Those Celebrated EpistIes.
NEW YoRK, July 10.-The disclosure
of tie authors Of the arthur Rich
mond. letters made in The Commercial
Advertiser, has caused a decided sensa-
ton in literary and political circles as
well.
Gail Hamilton had once been sus-
pcrted of the authorship OF the letters,
but the suspicion had died out owing to
the later alleged discoveries. AS to Jul
liam Hawthorne, his name had never
been mentioned in connection with the
letters, and all those who know the
young author are wondering how he
came to take part in their composition.
When the letters appeared everybody
saw in them the handiwork OF per-
sonal enemy or personal enemies Of
President Cleveland, Secretary Bayard,
Samuel j. Randall and James Russell
Lowell.
When, then, it was announced that
Julian Hawthorne was one OF the two
writers, under the pseudonym Of AR
thur Richmoud,V readers of the letters
asked themselves and each other won
deringly what was Hawthorne's motive.
IL was known well that Hawthorne had
not been an Office seeker, took no inter-
est ia politics and had no personal
gradge against President Cleveland and
his cabinet. What, then, induced him
10 join in the Arthur Richmond attacksg
One suggestion on this point appears
on the surface to offer some explanation
OF the motive. It IS to the effect that
Hawthorne wrote only the Lowell let
ters II this is a fact, a possible motive
appears.
Hawthorne Dispute with Lowell
It Is a somewhat interesting fact that
In October, 1896, Mr.. Julian Hawthorne
published ia The New York World an
interview with James Russell Lowell
which the latter subsequently repudi-
ated In it Mr.. Lowell is made to speak
disparagingly concerning the queen of
England. Mr. Lowell denied this abso-
lutely and declared that whatever else
he might have said was spoken by him
to the SON of his old friend Nathaniel
Hawth0rne) and not to the public. Mr..
Lowell was one against whom Arthur
Richmond's ugly shafts were especially
directed
Mr.. Briee. the present editor of The
North American Review, continues Mr..
Rice's policy Of silence.
Facts That Pointed 10 Rice.
Thefe were, too. several condolences
which went to strengthen the belief
that Mr. Rice was the author, though he
denied the parentage. Among the let
ters were two TO the secretary of state,
Thomas Il. Bayard. In one of them APP
pears this paragraph:
How bitterly you spoke at that time Of the
new president and of his .crass indifference
ON o matter 80 vital TO you'll No man knows
better than you do just TO what turn cam
vaeback should be cooked. but when you then
expatlaled to your friends on the traits of
Athnt delicate duck, Cleveland Il certainly
was IN the vein rather Of Brutus preparing
Caesar for burial than Of Antony come TO
bury himl That You have since then done
your best To accommodate yourself to the Icy
facts Of the case Is undoubtedly true. / am
sure You would not now speak of the presi
dent as sdelicate duck"
This occurrence was at dinner given
by friend Of Mr.. Rice and at which Mr..
Rice was q guest This paragraph broke
the friendship between host and guest,
because the former believed it to be 0
breach Of hospitality.
Bayard RetaIiates on Rice.
1t will be remembered that when Mr..
Rice went to England there occurred one
of the most unpleasant incidents in the
later years of the editors life.
The letters to Mr.. Bayard had UNI
doubleday annoyed the secretary, and
some illusions IN them to Mr.. Phelps,
then United States minister to England,
greatly angered that gentleman.
Mr. Rice desired to be presented at
court. Mr.. Phelps, when the editor
called upon him, refused to recognize
him, and fatty refused to present his
countryman. There was vast deal of
newspaper comment upon the episode at
the time. and then it was gradually for
gotten.
But though it was generally under
stood that that the Arthur Richmond
letters were the cause of the disagree
ment between Mr.: Rice and the minister
20 England, Dir. Rice gave no one to I'M
derstand he did not write them.
Julian Hawthorne's Denial.
Julian Hawthorne is summering az
sag Harbor When asked whether il
was true that he had borne a hand in
the composition of these letters Mr..
Hawthorne made the following state
ment:
have never read any of the Rich.
naond letters to which you refer, and
certainly had nothing TO do with writ
inn them or any of them. Your in.
Quiry is the first notification Of the
charge that has reached me-
No Trusts for Washington.