Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-01-13

Hot Shot for Foraker and Halstead.
The supplementary report, signed by all the
| members of The committee except Chairman
Mason, reports the following additional find.
ings:
We think that the conduct of Wood during
the negotiations with Governor Foraker, and
also pending the execution of their agreement,
disclosed his depravity.
We also believe that careful scrutiny of
the face of the forged paper must have shown
its false character. The high stations attained
in public affairs and in public confidence by
have suggested verification of the corrupt
paper before it was uttered or published. In
formation as to Its real character was near and
easy of access as disclosed by the report of the
committee.
The publication of the false paper in the
Commercial Gazette showing Mr.. Campbelps
name and suppressing all other signatures.
was almost as bad as the original fabrication
of the paper. 1t was spoilation OF evidence.
The entire incident the committee have
been instructed to investigate, is an example
of political methods deserving the condemna-
tion of all parties and all good citizens.
Mason Explains His Position.
Mr.. Mason, in minority report, says that he
cannot agree with the additional findings of
his colleagues first, because they are not
within the inquiry propounded by the resolu-
tion under which the committee was ap-
pointed.
Mr.. Mason expresses his inability to agree
with his associates in the statement that
careful scrutiny of the forged paper must have
shown its false character. 1t is easy now to
know in January, 1891, what we ought to have
known in September, 1882 Whether or not
Messrs. Foraker and Halstead treated well the
Gentlemen who were outraged by the forgery
b not seeing them personally is q question of
ethics not involved in this investigation nor
does it throw any light upon our subject as to
who forged and who uttered the forgery. The
same can be said Of the charge with reference
to the publication of Campbelrs name alone
and the suppression of the others.
Il cannot agree" continues MIR. Mason,
"that the publication of paper, or part of
it, which the publisher believes to be genuine.
and the suppression of part of it, ranks with
the crime OF forgery. and especially whore the
suppression is not part of the subject matter
of the paper.
They Were Simply Deceived.
"The publication of the forged paper by Mr..
Halstead, long before election, is conclusive to
my mind that he was thoroughly deceived and
believed it to be genuine, and when he found
that he was mistaken he at once published over
his own signature the most complete retraction.
Both Messrs. Halstead and Foraker have fur
nished all the evidence within their power to
this committee, even submitting their private
and personal correspondence, that every thing
could be shown to the committee.
"Being deceived is the only oHense of Messrs.
Halstead and Foraker. They each have made
reputation and Character equal, perhaps, to
the forgery. Since they found they were de-
ceived they have done all In their power as
honorable men TO make amends. To ask more
seems to me to be most unjust, and believing,
as do, that the evidence does not warrant the
censure INDUCED in by my associates on the
against such additional findings l most re-
spectfully but most earnestly protest."