Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1889-11-03
" Malone vs.. Lee and Daniel" Tho OF
For the Dispetch.l

Under the title Malone rs. Lee and
Daniel in his organ, The school and Tariff
Adc0oqte. General Malone founders
through three and a quarter columns IN q
vain attempt TO vindicate himself against
the charge brought against HIM ~ pam
phet printed and circulated by the state
Central Committee OF tho Democratic
party.
The charge thereinmade is distinct, and
VITA two specifications, as follows:
lst. IL the wear 1885 Governor Lee, the
then candidate for Governor, and Nr.
Daniel, prospective candidate Tor the
United States Senate, were met at Abiue-
don. where they had an engagement to adj
dress the people, by doigcr circulated
and signed by General ManOne. IN which,
after setting forth at some length what no
conceived TO be the enOrmities Of the fund
ing bill of 1871, he concluded by charging
It's passage into "a law upon those tTo gem
tlemen, when the fact was that Governor
Lee had nothing TO do with the passage of
the funding bill, and that Mr.. Daniel was
known t. General Malone to have been
opposed to il.
General Malone has never denied that
such paper was signed and circulated at
the time allegedl
"a. 1t was Tetortcd and proved upon
him that pending the discussion of the
The proof was the affirmation of two
witnesses TO that effect-yiZ., Hon. John
". Daniel and the late John Bacon Cren-
shaw.
In rebuttal General Malone published
extracts from the letters of twenty-seven
men, all members Of the Legislature at the
time Of tho passage of the funding bill. Here
are their names. Hon. l.. c. Bristow Colonel
II. b. HansheTger, Hon. John y. Crenshaw,
Il oil. III 'tf4s rrfa1T
Hon. Ross Hamilton, Hon. Peter q. Nor
can, General J. {. Hill, Hon. George Fayer-
man. Hon. George W. Young, Hon. John
A. McCaull. Hon. Caesar Perkins, Hon. f.
Lewis Marshall. Hon. Robert Norton, Hon.
". j. Wall. Hon. W. =. Austin, Hon. }. II.
Noble, Hon. W. A. Bryant, Colonel W. w.
Wood, Hon. Addison Davis, Hon. William
Y. Stevens, Hon. Job. HawXhurst, General
Stith Boiling, Hon. Henry Bowen. Colonel
W. ii. Taylor, Hon. II. NJ. keyser, and
Major James ". Walker. OF these twenty
seven twenty-one assert that they never
heard General Malone utter any opinion
on the subject and know not what his
sentiments were. OF the other six,
two, TO wit-Mr. McCaull and Mr..
Bowen-say General Malone thought
the bill inopportune, premature, and
unwise; one, Mr. Hansberger, had
impressions made upon him by General
MdNOuo LuhI las was oHpoSSu ~ ~ CAG
MIR. Wood, an intimate friend. understood
he was opposed to it, One Mr.. keyser un-
derstoOd from Mr.. Cockrane that he was
in favor Of it, and tho remaining one. the
lete MIR. John Bacon Crenshaw, had no
hesitation in saying that my distinct re:
collection Is that General Malone approved
the funding bill of 1871"
General Malone has misstated the issue.
General Lee never asserted that General
Malone was active in securing the passage
OF the funding bill. But he did say, and
on the unimpeachable testimony OF
John Bacon Crenshaw and John W.
Daniel, that he told them he WAS in
favor Of the passage of that bill: Gen.
eral Malone has not disproved that,
but he has proved, on the testimony of
certainly, three of his witnesses, Mr.. Wal
ker, Mr.. McCaull, and MIR. Wood, that he
was opposed TO the passage of the bill.
IfGenoral Malone was man OF different
reputation ii might be conceded, distinct
% il the testimony OF Mr.. Crenshaw and
Mr.. Daniel. that they had made n mistake.
But there is at least one other question to-
wards which he occupies adoubie position,
the details of which extend through several
years and show deliberateness and perse-
varence and continuance in deceit which