Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-10-29
TERMS OF THE DISPATCH.
PITTsBURG. THURSDAY. OCT. %, 1871.
PAGES
SENATOR oUAY,s EXPLANATION.

The evident purpose of Chairman Kerr
and his colleagues in the Democratic party
leadership in relation to the fac-simile of
the Bardsley certificate of deposit, en-
dorSed to Senator Quay, is to create a be-
lief that the Senator personally shared in
BardSley's illegal perQuisites. This Is in
dicated by Chairman Kerr pointing out
that the transmission of the certificate to
Quay was about the date when Bardsley
had made a rake" of $4,000 from the
mercantile appraiSership patronage.
There is nothing conclusive on the face
Of the documents as published to fix this
assumption upon Quay. 1t is shown he
got nearly 1900 from Bardsley; but so far
as ANYTHING on the surface indi Gates this
$1,000 may. as Senator Quay says, have
been the proceeds of a note given by him
TO defray campaign expenses and dis
counted at the Keystone Bank through
Bardsley's influence.
But does this explanation help matters
very much for the Republican party
leaders? Is it encouraging to find the
partv's campaign managers making
nOte-broker out of public official, to
whom at the same time extraordinary and
illegal favors were being extended by the
party's representatives, Boyer, McCamant
and Livsey, custOdians of the public funds
at Harrisburg? These State functionaries;
at the date when Bardsley kindly turned
over the $4,000 certificate, were per-
hitting him to hold at interest for his own
benefit hundreds of thousands of dollars
Which should have been in the Sinking
4 int no Statn
Bardsley'S Stub-boOk certifies he remem-
bered Livscy with check for this Nc
Camant's correspondence of the same
period acknowledges 'favors received,
conveniently interpreted as ''neckties"
and "old magazines" Senator Quay now
admits that simultaneously Bardsley
obliged the party campaign committee
by securing timely discounv Of $4,000
note.
This explanation from Senator Quay, as
far as it goes, exonerates himself from the
implication intended by the Democrats
that he was personally a beneficiary at
BardSley'S hands. 1t will be complete
personal exoneration if he produces
the discounted note marked "paid"
or the check by which it was
lifted. But it goes as far as even Chair
man Kerr could wish in leaving the party
managers in the position of utilizing
BardSley in return for the Illegal favors
bestowed upon him from Harrisburg. The
explanation is jump from the frying pan
into the fire; and in this aspect Of the
matter it is hardly worth while discussing
the not wholly ineligible feature Of it
in
tended for campaign expenses in 80,
though the date of cashing was several
weeks after the election of '89 had closed.
The explanation of the explanation as to
this point will doubtless be that the bills
had previously been incurred Accepting
all that, and even the entire transaction as
Senator Quay tells it, the incident still re-
mains TO show that it is high time the idea
Of separating fiscal offices from personal
and party convenience and profit were
taken up by the public.
After this latest incident, all that re-
mains TO be done in the way of Identify
ing the party management with the wrong
side of the Bardsleyism issue seems to be
included in the disposition of the Senate
at Harrisburg to make defense of the
derelict State officials a party matter.
Messrs. Gregg aud Morrison have little
reason to feel thankful for what the cam
paign has brought forth. If they are
elected, it will certainly be from conf
dence in their own integrity and from in
disposition to let Pennsylvania go Demo-
cratic on the eve of Presidential election
not on account of any credit or prestige
derived from their immediate predeces-
sOrs in Office or from the leaders of the
party.