Democratic Sentinel, Volume 8, Number 38, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 17 October 1884 — BEECHER VS. BLAINE. [ARTICLE]

BEECHER VS. BLAINE.

A Caustic Letter from Henry Ward Beecher to Candidate Alger, of Michigan. James F. Joy’s Opinion in 1877 of the Plumed Pirate of the Kennebec. A Partially Obliterated Tattoo Renewed with Artistic Skill and Vigor. [New York telegram.] On Sept. 27 the New York Herald, in its correspondence from Detroit, attributed to Henry Ward Beecher a statement to the effect that James F. Joy, who placed Mr. Blaine in nomination in 1880, had said to Mr. Beecher that Mr. Blaine, while Speaker of the House of .Representatives. had offered to appoint a House Bailroad Committee which should comprise certain members suitable to Mr. Joy—such, in fact, as he should request or dictate—providing that Mr. Joy should take off Mr. Blaines hands 126,000 worth of Little Rock Railroad bonds. This story remained uncontradicted until Sept. 30, when Mr. R. A. Alger, of Detroit, cabled to Mr. Joy, in London, the story as coming from Mr. Beecher, with the request to answer whether or not it was true. To this Mr. Joy replied,.on the s.me date, as follows: 'Blalno never made me any offer to appoint a committee to suit me. In any manner or form, or for any consideration of any kind whatever." Mr. Beecher will give the Associated Press to-morrow a letter which in very plain terms will contradict Mr. Joy’s denial of the story of Mr. Blaine’s corrupt offer. The letter will contain specifically and in detail Mr. Beecher’s account of what Mr. Joy did tell him about Mr. Blaine’s proposal to him, the same confirming the corrupt animus of the proposal and this Mr. Beecher will defy Mr. Joy or any one else to contradict. Mr. Beeoher’s letter will go even further. In it he will say in so many words that his knowledge of the utter unsuitableness of Mr. Blaine to occupy a high position of trust is not of reoent date, but that he has known it for more than twelve years. The appearance of the letter is awaited with the greatest interest in this city by all who are aware of its existence. The following is the text of the statement by Mr. Beecher as given by the Herald's Detroit correspondent. It was, he said, while he was a guest in Mr. Joy’s house here that Mr. Blaine’s name came up in conversation. There were several gentlemen present Mr. Joy thereupon said that he knew Mr. Blaine to be a oorrnpt man, and went on to give his reasons. As well as Mr. Beecher remembered them, they were as follows: He, Mr. Joy, was in Washington in behalf of a Southern railroad in which he •was larg ly interested, and which was threatened with hostile legislation by Congress, Mr. Blaine being Speaker of the House. A committee was to be appointed having special reference to this road. Mr. Joy asked Mr. Blaine, in the appointment of the committee, to put on it a certain member. Mr. Blaine gave no answer at the time, but the next day an intimate associate of the Speaker came to Mr. Joy and said that Mr. Blaine had $25,000 in railroad bonds (Mr. Beecher does not remember which or of what road], and said that if Mr. Joy would take them off his hands he would make up the committee as Mr. Joy wished it made up, at least to the extent of not arousing too direct suspicion. Mr. Joy said he declined the bargain. This was Mr. Beecher’s recollection of Mr. Joy’s statement. It will be observed that in its general details it Is practically the statement made in the Detroit Rews. Mr. Beecher added that he used the facts in a public address, and that some days after he received a message from Mr. Blaine begging him to call on him (Mr. Blaine) at the fifth Avenue Hotel. He did so, and Mr. Blaine asked him his authority for the statement. He gave the details of his talk with Mr. Joy, and Mr. Blaine said: “Mr. Beecher, see how impossible that is. Why. Mr. Joy nominated me at Chicago.” Mr. Beecher replied with some heat, asking Mr. Blaine if he meant to intimate that he (Beecher) nttered a falsehood in quoting Mr. Joy’s statement. “Oh, no,” said Mr. Blaine, “but Mr. Joy must have been mistaken." Mr. Blaine did not make any further effort to deny the general statement, and Mr. Beecher said to your correspondent that the reply forcibly reminded him of Mr. Blaine’s similar- testimony in regard to Mulligan.. THE LETTER. Following is the text of Mr. Beecher’s letter: Bbopklyn, N. Y., Oct. 6.—To Gen. R. A. Alger, Candidate for the Gubematoral Office ip Mich-igan-Dear Sir: ■ The publication of your tele gram to Mr. James F. Joy, of Detroit, but now in London, and his reply, compels me to pub- ' llsh the facts of an interview with him at his ’. hbuse bn or about Sept. 29,1877, in order to clear myself of the charge of bearing false witness againgt him. I have steadily refused to’ give to thwpubllc press the story of that interview st the hospitable board of a private house; but as ' the utterance of a public man about a public man I had a right to mention it privately among iniy intimate friends. In Why the ’ partial and-imperfect: story of that fnAenriew got .into . that newspaper I dp not know; certalifly not •with 4 -my knowledge or privity. Misled by. these reports, you telegraphed to Mr. Joy, in London: ’ • Detroit 4 , Sept. .80.— Joy, Care Brown, . Shipley & Co., Ldnaon: Did Mr. Blaine offer to appoint committee to suit you if you took LittleRock bonds off his hands? Henry Ward Beecher says you told him Blaine did. : ‘ ' Alger. Henry Ward Beecher said nothing of the kind, as you shall soon see. It was easy for Mr. Joy to reply: London, Sept, so.—To RA. Alger,. Detroit, Mich.: Blaine never made me any offer to appoint a committee to suit me, in any manner or form or*for any consideration of any kind whatever. J. F. Joy. Please send to him the following narrative, and you may depend upon it Mr. Joy will not contradict its substantial accuracy; neither will any one of the several gentlemen who were at the table with me, nor will other witnesses, not a few, deny that the same substantial statements have been made by Mr. Joy to others not infrequently. Toward the close of the dinner, Sept. 29,1877, political matters were introduced, and among other things Blaine's failure to receive the nomination that went to Hayes. Mr. Joy spoke with contemptuous severity of Mr. Blaine, and gave this statement: “When a difficulty occurred in regard to certain lands in the Southwest in which I was interested, a committee was about to be appointed by Sess to examine the matter, Blaine being er of the House. Through a friend I asked aine to have one sound lawyer appointed on that committee; I did not care of which party; I simply wanted a sound lawyer. In a day or two Mr. Blaine sent me word through a friend that he had certain depreciated bonds, and that if 1 would enable him to place them at rar I could have my committee as I wanted it.” cannot forget with what cutting severity Mr. Joy leaned back in his chiir and said: “That is the man Mr. Blaine is;” and he added: “I refused the offer, and, as the courts soon settled the matter, no committee was appointed.” At that time I knew nothing of the land in question, nor of the bonds alluded to, but I did understand fully Mr. Joy’s opinion of James G. Blaine. What changed Mr. Joy’s notion and led him to nominate Mr. Blaine at the Chicago convention of 18811 do not know. It can probably be found Out by inquiring of the editors of certain great daily newspapers who hardly found language bitter enough for years to inveigh against Mr. Blaine, and who now cannot find language bitter enough to pour contempt on th ■ men who do not approve of placing Mr. Blaine in the Presidential chair. I shall not prolong this letter by narrating Mr. Blaine’s views of the matter in an interview with me which took place after my speech at Cooper Union during the Garfield canvass, at his own request, in the Fifth Avenue Hotel. I can hardly believe that he has forgotten that. I cannot but admit the indomitable pluck with which Mr. Blaine is detending himself against such a cloud of charges as was never made against any other Presidential candidate since the Government began; yet I can not allow myself to be misled by sympathy with his undoubted kind-heartedness, oourage, and audacity. Unsound in statesmanlike judgment, unscrupulous in political methods, dim-eyed in perceiving the distinction between truth and untruth, absorbingly ambitious, but shortsighted as to methods of gratifying his ambition, and, with a genial, social disposition and a brilliant rhetorical capacity, Mr. Blaine makes an alluring candidate, but would make a dangerous President. I pray you to excuse my adding to the cares of your canvass bv a consideration of these matters. It was, however, but just to you to point out hew misleading was vour telegram to Mr. Joy, and how Irrelevant to the subject-matter

was his reply.

HENRY WARD BEECHER.