Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-12-22
A REJ0INDER.
Major Icoscan's Reply to the st. Louis
Republics Recent Article
Wherein He Was Made TO Figure in an Alleged
Crooked Lane Deal In Texas-He Gives
a Thorough Exposition.

The following communication is in
ciated Press from st. Louis under date
of November 80, but which was published
by and originated with the st. Louis
Republic of that date, and which reply
has been forwarded to the Republic for
publication:
HOUSTON, Tex, Dec. 4. 1890.
To the st. Louis Republic:
The sensational article in your issue Of
the Goth uItimo, wherein you say upon
the authority of DR.. l.. p. Ehrmsnn' 3
startling confession of voluntary perjury
and perhaps that Of other debauched
creatures, unmasking an alleged steal of
from 100 900 to 200 900 acres of public
school lands in Texas, wherein you make
me the chief c~onspirator, came to my at
tention on the 2d inst.
l believe, and so will just men ayr zee
with me, that you have not been as hon.
orable rs you hould have been, in view
of the fact that you statements were
based upon the authority, as you say of
an alleged perjurer's confession. Must
the people of the United States believe
that the great % :St. Louis Republic''
assassinates men g honor, especially that
of the houored dead whose lips are
sealed and dumb il the grave, upon any
such testimony?
And again, in view of the fact that
your correspondent at this place, Mr..
Hamp Cook, called Upon me for an in
terview upon the matter you published,
at about half past 8 O'Clock D. m. on the
22d ultimo, when l told him that il was
then too late, but 10 call at my office
next morning at which time | would give
him all l knew; and in view of the fur
ther fact that just one week ago your
other correspondent at this place, Mr..
A. II. Gentry, called at my Office OF the
same mission, who after l explained
matters to him dismissed the entire maj
ter, but in no instance did / refuse to tell
them all l knew upon the subject.
This alleged ''steal' of DR.. Ehrman's
and the Republic is not as vast as stated.
ThereSwere only seventy-eight sections
of say $40 acres each, although some
contain less, -aggregatius 40, 920 acres.
Deduct from this the seven sections first
owned by Col. TalmaEe, the seven see
tons owned by Mr.. O'Donnell and the
seven sections owned by Mrs. O'Donnell,
bought in their respective names,
amounting to -, 40 acres, and that
would reduce the alleged ~''steal''to &c.
$50 acres instead OF 200, 600 as alleged by
the Republic.
1t is true that Mr.. O'Donnell first
bought from the state of Texas for him
self and others ninety-seven sections, but
shortly after aid purchase he sold for
others, as their attOrney-in-fact, niue
teen of the n!nety-seven sections to F.P.
Kiileen of Galveston, who afterward sold
the same to Allen & Moore of Galveston
and Flatonio, Tex, who are now the
owners, and III this transaction Mr..
O'Donneli was represented by Nessrs.
Waul Il Walker, of Galveston. All this
could have been ascertained 10y the Re-
public from the records of the general
lane office Mt Austin, Tex, or from the
papers in the suit BY the state of Texas
against Talmage & O'Donnen in the dis
trict court of Travis county, Tex, No.
filed April l, 1854.
In regard to the purchase of these
lands from the state of Texas BY Mr..
O'Donnell for himself and others under
powers of attorney on file in the general
land office ut Austin. which purchases
Mr.. O'Donnell made in 1881 and 1882, the
Republic says of me that al was the per-
son that engineered the scheme through,
GNAh| AAlA"AS- WIN AN in"s VI
Now, as TO this vile charge, [ say, tbs
it was absolutely impossible for me to
conduct or transact any business what
ever for Mr. O;DonnelI, in Texas or
elsewhere, as l did not know him at the
time such lands were bought by him.
Upon examination of my books to-day I
find that The first entry on my books
against him Is of date February 10, 1888.
l am absolutely and positively sure and
certain that | never knew or spoke to
MIR. O'Donneii before this date, so the
Republic can see that | could not have
engineered anything for him before
that date. Neither did | know any man
or woman in whose name and for whose
use m land was bought from the state
by Mr.. O'Donnell at the time, nor did l
Know Col. A. a. Talmage for over q
year and a hall after February, 1888.
Regarding the purchase of the above
mentioned school lands by MIR. O'Donuell
from the state, l find that said purchases
were made under the act of legislature
of the state, approved July s, 1879 &c.
l.. special session IL Leg. p. 23lE, and
the act a~mendGtory thereof, approved
April i6, 1881 g. L.. Il Leg. p. 1877.
These were lands set apart TO the state
for the benefit of the common school
fund, 10 be sold, and the proceeds aris-
ing from such sales invested for the ben
EFT of said school fund.
Under these laws all applications to
purchase school and had TO pass through
the hands of the officers of the county
and state charged with the sales, from
the county surveyor up TO the commits
sioner OF the general and office, and it
appears from the records of the general
land office that all this was done, and
after examination certificates issued to
purchaser upon payment of the purchase
money
From an examination of the records, 1
find that Mr.. O'Donnell purchased all
school lands from the state between De-
cember 10, 1881, and August 81, 1882,
except a few sections purchased Septem-
Der 10, 1882; all of which the Republic
can ascertain by reference to the records
of our general land Office.
Now, as l have said before, how could
l have :engineered' these purchases,
as l did not then know Mr.. O'Donnell?
All this the Republic can verify By re-
ference 10 the official record of the
county of Brazoria Gin which county ali
the school" lands purchased by Mr..
O'Donnell are situate, except a half