Democratic Sentinel, Volume 6, Number 12, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 21 April 1882 — THE PERUVIAN INVESTIGATION. [ARTICLE]

THE PERUVIAN INVESTIGATION.

Rhipherd, in his examination by the House. Investigating committee on the Bth inst., detailed an interview he had with Secretary Blaine in Washington on the evening of Oct. 13, 1881 The witness adverted to Hurlbut’s singular conduct in withholding documents he had been requested to deliver. Blaine retorted sharply: “ What business had you to make an srbandboy of an American Minister ? He would have done right if he had thrown all your papers into the fire.” The witness then told Blaine what was reported of Hurlbut’s intimacy with Suarez ; that they had gone out together on the steamer; that, on arriving at Lima, Suarez had placed at Hurlbut’s disposal one of the finest residences in Lima, with a wine-cellar exceptionally well stocked, and that Hurlbut was occupying it free of expense to himself, and all had been furnished by the Credit Industrie!. Blaine laughed incredulously, and said : “ Oh, they don’t catch Steve in that way. If he lives in a fine bouse he pays rent for it.” The, witness then said further: “ Well, Mr. Secretary, their intimacy is a matter of public comment in Lima. They are always together. Suarez is virtually an inmate of the American Legation.” At this Biaine exclaimed, with great emphasis : “If all • his be true he must have sold out to the Credit IndustrieL I will go to the bottom of this.” Then, after a moment, turning to witness, he said : “ What do you want me to do, Shipherd?” The witness handed him a draft of a dispatch and said: “ Send that to Hurlbut’’ * Blaine read It, and replied: “No, not that, it would raise a howl in Congress.” He (Blaine) then wrote, resting on the arms of his chair, a dispatcu in substance as follows : “ The report reaches the State Department that your conduct is such as to lead to suspicion of improper relations with the Credit IndustrieL You must stop it.” The witness continued: “I heard afterward, through Senator Blair, that the dispatch was sent; but the dispatch, which it appears from the correspondence furnished by tne State Department was sent, was very different from the dispatch which the Secretary wrote in my presence and read to me." In his testimony before the committee, on the 10th inst., Shipherd said he had a talk with Gen. Grant concerning the affairs of the Peruvian Company, and that he (Grant) declined to consider any proposition to become pecuniarily interested in the company, although he looked upon it in a favorable light. Witness said that ex-Senator Conkling agreed to accept a retainer for professional services if the occasion should arise. Shipherd declined to tell with whom he had been “holding confidential correspondence ” upon pension affaire, intimating that the committee was exceeding the range of their investigation and obtruding upon purely private matters. The witness was then asked if he had anything further to offer in justification of his charge that Minister Hurlbut had been influenced against the Peruvian Company by the Credit Industrie!. „ Shipherd replied at some length to the effect that he had already been charged with pursuing an attack upon the reputation of a dead man, and he did not care to go further or say anything that was not directly in the line of his own justification. He had read from newspapers and had heard reports connecting Hurlbut with the Credit Industrie!, and these reports he (Shipherd) had repeated to Secretary Blaine at their interview Oct. 14. Shipherd, at his examination on the 11th inst., positively refused to tell who was the author of the sealed letter sent by him to Arizola, under cover of Minister Hurlbut, and to be delivered by the latter. Mr. Blount continued to quote from the printed correspondence and endeavored to extract from the wit ness a categorical answer to each question, reading from the letter sent to Arizola through Minister Huilbut, but obtained nothing but evasive replies. He ask'd : “ Was not that letter written by the Venezuelan Minister?" Witness declined to reply. Witness wan asked if Senator Blair, as counsel was conferred with in relation to the letter to Hurlbut in which he (Shipherd) tendered him *250,090 in stock, and replied: “ Senator Blair did not see the letter to Hurlbut.” Witness, however, told him about it some time after it was sent. It was discussed by all the counsel; none of them even found fault with it on its face, but the remark was frequently made: “ Shipherd, that letter will bear a double construction, and may get you into trouble.” The Shipherd examination was resumed on the 13th. Witness refused to produce a list of the stockholders of the Peruvian Company. He testified that Wm. H. Hurlbert saw a. dispatch to Minister Hurlbut on which Secretary Blaine had penciled the words: “Go in, Steve! ” Shipherd’s examination on the 14th inst was dry and uninteresting. He stated that he presented a letter of introduction from Gen. Grant to President Arthur, but declined to repea*' what occurred at that interview with the President. He assured the committee, however, that nothing occurred that could have any reference to the allegations of the House resolution which led to the investigation, although the conversation had some relation to the Peruvian Company. Witness voluntarily denied the published statements that he had certain correspondence with Secretary Blaine, and that there were certain letters which Blaine would not like to have published. He said he never received an autograph letter from Secretary Blame.