Norwich bulletin., 1911-07-27

6uI lnlS 0lun seem 10 Gat1sly him So sent for Charlie Taft and asked him to tell his brother. the president. who 1t was really represented The president made no further objection to my claim. Yours.
 DICK.
 The postscript is not now on the files of the department If it were. 1t would be my duty to transmit 1t under this resolution. Who is really responsible for it's wicked fabrication, if 1t ever ex- isted, or for the viciously false state ment made as to It's authenticity is immaterial for the purposes of this communication. The purport of the al- legged postscript Is and the intention of tfSe fabricat0r was to make MT. Rich- ard s. Ryan testify through it's words to the public that although l was at first opposed in the public interest to granting the elimination which he re- quested. nevertheless through the un- due influence of my brother, MT. :. Charles P. Taft, and the disclosure of the real persons in interest was in- duced improperly and for the promo ton of their private gain to make the order.
 The statement in so far as my brother is concerned-and that is the chief feature of the postscript-is utterly un- founded. He never wrote to me or spoke to me in reference to Richard s. Ryan or on the subject of Controller bay or-the granting of any privileges or the making of any orders in respect to Alaska. He has no interest in Alaska, never had and knows nothing of the circumstances connected with this transaction. He does not remem- Der that he ever met Richard s. Ryan. He never heard of the Controller Bay railroad until my cablegram of inquiry reached him.
 MT. Bailinger says in telegram in answer to my inquiry that he never received such a postscript and that he was in Seattle on the date of July 13. when 1t was said to have been writ ten.
 MT. Richard S. Ryan, in a letter which he has sent me without solicita- ton, says that he never met my broth CT, MT. Charles r. Taft, and that so far as he knows MT. Charles F. Taft never had the slightest interest in Con- troller bay, in. the Controller Railway and Navigation company or in any Alaskan company, and he utterly de- nies writing or signing the alleged postscript The utter improbability of his writing such a postscript to MT. Ballinger at Washington when the latter was away for his vacation for two months must impress every one.
 The fact is that MT. Ballinger never saw the letter of July 13, 1910, to which this postscript is said to have been attached. It was sent to me by MT. Carr, Secretary Ballingers pri- vate secretary, at Beverly, on July 1.-the next day. l read the letter at Beverly in August with other papers and sent them to the White House. It was placed upon the White House files and remained there until April 22. 1911. when it was, by request of Secretary Fisher, for use in connection with his answer to a senate inquiry, returned to the interior department. and it was after this that the core spondent is said to have seen the let ter with the postscript attached. MT. Carr saw no such postscript when he EtuL LkG lCtIcI u 1ACs ulu uOL SGG IL when l read it. No one saw it in the executive office, but it remained to ap- pear as a postscript when it is said that the correspondent saw the letter in April or May on the files of the in- terior department. All others were de- nied the sight
 The person on whose statement the nf vnh npn characterized as an amazing post script is based is a writer for news papers and magazines, who was given permission by Secretary Fisher. after consultation with me, to examine all the files in respect to the Controller bay matter, and this under the super vision of MT. Brown, then private sec retary to the secretary of the interior. After the examination, at which it is alleged this postscript was received from the hand of Mir. Brown, the cor respondent prepared an elaborate arti- cle on the subject of this order and Controller bay, which was submitted to MT. Fisher and which was discuss ed with MT. Fisher at length, but nev- CT in the conversation between them or in the article submitted did the cor respondent mention the existence of the postscript. MT. Brown states that there was no such postscript in the papers when he showed them to the correspondent and that he never saw such a postscript. Similar evidence is given by MT. Carr and other custo- dians of the records in the interior de- pertinent.
 Stronger evidence of the falsity and maliciously slanderous character of the alleged postscript could not be had. Its only significance is the light it throws on the bitterness and venom of some of these who take active part in every discussion of Alaskan issues. The intensity of their desire to be- smirch all who invest in that district and all who are officially connected with its administration operates upon the minds of weak human instru- ments and prompts the fabrication Of such false testimony as this post script I dislike to dwell upon this feature of the case. but it is so full of a lesson that ought to be taken to the heart of every patriotic citizen that cannot pass it over in silence.
 When made this order was aware