Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-03-01
In conclusion Mr.. Blaine saws:

/ III SOuCiusiou M oldIue bRys:
Far be 1t from me to hold my son blame
less; though when his youth, his urcompicted
education. his separation from the influenced
OF home, tho exchange Of life full Of hope
| and auticipations for premature cares and IN.
eongenial companionship are considered,
ho!d him moro sinned against than SHINING.
But his mother, at no time, in thought or
word or deed, attempted to separate this man
and DIS wife. On the contrary she did not fail
by iioeratty, by consideration and by extern
uation. to foster in every practicable way their
sible."
COUNTER sTATIMESrs-
Father Ducey when asked by reporter in
New York regarding Mr.. Biaine's statement
said he considered himself blame.ess; that the
young man claimed to be Of legal age; that he
WAS married in conformity with the laws Of the
state OF New York under n special dispensation
from Archbishop Corrigan. He furthermore
claimed that Mr.. Blaine to be fair should pub
lish the reply which he, Father Ducey. had
sent to his letter and which Father Ducey de-
ciined to make public himself
As stated in The STAR yesterday Mr.. Blaine
upon being asked said tins letter Of Father
Ducey's amounted to nothing and Father
Ducey could give il out if he wished.
Mr.. and Mrs Neyins, the parents Of Mrs
James G. Blaine, jr., were seen yesterday Mrs
Nevins. 1T Is stated, said: secretary blaine .
story about what happened in the interview at
Augusta between Mrs. Blaine, sr.. my daughter
ana myself Is radically wrong. There WAS no
scene whatever. My daughter asked to see her
husband and Mrs. Elaine refused to allow this
to be done. We told our side of the story, and
Mrs Blaine became furious ami called serv
ant to show us to the door. Mrs. Blaine refuse
10 speak on the subject when the servant was
in the room."
through his private secretary. Mgr. McDon-
neil, Archbishop Corrigan yesterday expressed
mis- views In the Blaine affair as follows: The
nrchblshops position in the matter is simply
THIS: Father Ducey brought the young people
Will hin to the formers house the evening
that they came to New York. He said that he
desired special dspensation to marry them.
which the archbishop had it in his discre!iOn:to
refuse, whether there was any apparent objec-
ton or not. When the archbishop arned who
the parties were he had long talk with tbem,
and endeavored 20 dissuade tnem from taking
the step without the knowledge of young
Biaines parents. The young man, however.
seemed to be determined to be married
equally stubborn. They would listen to no
advice, and said that il they could not get u
dispensation so that Father Ducey could
marry them they would go TO some Protest
ant clergyman who would perform the cere-
mony. Young Blaine said that lie was within
three weeks OF being twenty-one years old, and
No looked Us II he was old that. This Is
what he told both Father Ducey and the arch
bishop. The dispensation only gave Father
Ducey the right to marry the couple If he saw
mt 70 do SO, and IL to the relations between HIM
and Mr.. Blaine III the matter the archbishop
has nothing to say any more than that the re-
sponsiIliity for uniting the pair lay entirely
with the priest.
Mrs. james G. Blaine, jr., who is at Sioux
rails, refused to say any thing, but her counsel
SAID that complete anu careful answer would
De made to Secretary Blaine b statement