The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1902-05-21

this class, men whom I knew to be hon.
orahie and upright, upon whom could
1 rely or should I rely? When 1 receiv.
ed this letter from Messrs. Barbee and
Smith. 1 determined to lay aside, as ]
did, my personal feeling toward Major
Stahlman, entertaining as I did no
friendly feeling for him. He is dlstin-
guished Republican, living in my district
who had bitterly opposed my election to
Congress, as did the newspaper which
he owns, on administration sheet, I may
add.
But 1 laid all this aside and did all 1
could honorably for the passage of this
bill. I saw Major Stahlman almost daily,
and we boarded at the same hotel But at
no time did he tell me that he was to be
paid any fee. knew he was In Washing
ton often and 1 thought was then on
some railroad business pending in Wash
ington, and naturally believed that his
offices in the matter were purely as a
friend of tho church. I knew his family
were members of the Methodist church at
Nashville and that he affiliated with that
church. and hence, as he said, he was
working for the payment Of this claim.
These facts alone. laying aside the letter
Of Messrs Barbee & Smith, naturally
led mo to believe that his action in the
matter was as a friend of the church.
IT have given twice a statement of my
entire history with the passage of this
bill. did so under oath, once before the
senate committee and recently in depo-
sltion. My record in the matter l gladly
gave the public when called on to do so.
1t is open for every one to read and 1 re-
affirm here that all that have stated in
these two statements.
Had l known that this enormous fee
was to be paid Major stahlman or any
one else for lobbying for this claim be-
fore Congress would not have voted for
the passage of the bill and I certainly
would not have misled my friends, the
members of Congress, in the manner that
did when they asked me If the charge
that this fee was to be paid was true and
/ said to them that there was no truth
in the charge. was misled, as you must
see, and 1 am grieved that 1 misled my
friends, members of Congress.
Now a moment as to the merits of the
claim. The United States army while in
Nashville used and consumed an immense
amount, about $780, 900 worth of property
of the Methodist Episcopal church south.
The amount paid by Congress was $685.
000. Gen. Clinton D. Fisks said this was
a just claim, Major A. w. Wills, a Re-
publican, who was in Nashville at the
time this property was taken, and who
is now, and has been several times, the
postmaster at Nashville, espoused this
measure; indeed he was very active In it's
support. The Hon. John C. Houk, a Re-
publican once a m ember of this house,
Endorsed 1t. So did Captain ]. w. Baker,
leading Republican of Nashville, and
30 have many other leading Republicans,
as well as Democrats. The bishops of
both branches of the Methodist church in
dorsed it, including the colored bishops.
1 could give you a list as long as my arm
of leading men whose names appear here
in The Record containing the debate of
this bill when pending in the house. The
claim was absolutely meritorious. The
history of the claim is odious now be-
cause Of the deception practiced in pro-
curing its passage, as I have stated, and
as the Senate hearings on this matter
clearly disclose. 1 thank the house foe
the opportunity granted me for making
this statement"