Rensselaer Republican, Volume 17, Number 3, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 25 September 1884 — THE MULLIGAN LETTERS. [ARTICLE]

THE MULLIGAN LETTERS.

Mr. Blaine Wishes Every Republican Paper to Publish Them in Pull. The “Explosion” a Fizzle of the Worst Kind, Hurting Only the Democrats. Elaine’s Innocence of All Wrong-Doing Fully Established by the Correspondence. MK. BLAINE. He Hopes Every Republican Paper in the Country AVill Publish the Letters. An Augusta (Me.) correspondent of the Chicago Tribv ne telegraphs that journal as follows: “The publication in the Boston newspapers, with sensational headlines, ot the so-called additional Mulligan letters has caused some comment here. It is well known that the letters have been hawked about for some time with a view of getting Mr. Blaine’s t'rieuds to stop their publication, but they have refused to take any notice of these offers, and are congratulating themselves now that the Democrais have published the letters. Everybody here agrees that the letters are the best kind of tribute to Mr. Blaine's honesty and fidelity to his friends. His distress because he was unable to raise $‘25,000 to pay a loan he had secured for the railroad company, proves conclusively the falsehood about his being a millionaire, while his strenuous efforts to keep the railroad company out of financial difficulty is regarded as proof that he was right in saying that he would be no deadliead’in the enterprise. The publication of the letters is not a surprise here, as it was known that the' Democrats were trying to get up something t 6 break the force of the splendid victory won by Mr. Blaine in his own State. “Mr. Blaine, accompanied by his wife, arrived from Bar Harbor this afternoon. In answer to the reporter who called at his residence to ascertain if he wished to say anything in regard to the letters, Mr. Blaine replied that his only desire was that every voter in the United States might read the letters for himself and nnEform his judgment from editorial misrepresentation in partisan journals. There was not a word in the letters, Mr. Blaine added, which was not entirely consistent with the most scrupulous integrity and honor. He hoped every Republican paper in the United States would publish the letters in full.” A REVIEW Of THE LETTERS. The Correspondence Demonstrates Blaine’s Innocence of Any Wrong-Doing. The New York Tribune, commenting on the new batch es Mulligan letters, says: “Malice has overreached itself at last. The new letters published tor the purpose of injuring Mr, ; Blaine go far to vindicate him. When Mulligan and Fisher ransacked their correspondence eight years ago for material to blacken Mr. Blaine’s reputation, their cold and deliberate malice rejected the letters now publlshed. If there were then In their hands any which could have done him harm, we may be sure those would have been produced. But the letters now printed, thougn they contain no new charge, nor a scrap of evidence that tends to sustain any old charge, do contain much that is of the greatest value to Mr. Blaine. For that reason his accusers when cool were shrewd enough to suppress them. But now they see public opinion moving forward with resistless sweep toward Mr. Blaine’s election; they are maddened and desperate, they hunt their pigeon-holes again for the dregs of aucient scandal, and in their fury, they brand themselves wit i falsehood, and for the first time disclose the true character of the transactions between Mr. Blaine and Mr. Fisher. “The new publication embraces that very letter of Oct. 21, 1871, which Mr. Blaine has for eight j'cars been accused of suppressing. As the iS’un showed with great clearness, the oftreiterated charge was reduced at last to this one letter which was named in Mulligan's memorandum, but whien Mr. Blaine declared was not in the package received and publicly read by him. Continually the Times, the /Vs/, and other papers have repeated that Mr. Blaine lied aud liad deliberately suppressed this letter. Yet now the blundering rage of his baffled accusers produces it from their own stock and makes one thing clear. For-eight years Mulligan has seen Mr. Blaine falsely accused of suppressing this letter and lias, known all the time that the charge was false, because lie held in his possession thfe proof. Yet he lias kept back that proof 'fend silently allowed the lie to go on doing its dishonest work, and thus has made that lie his - own to blacken the character of Mr. Blaine. In the light of this fact who should now be believed, Mr. Blaine, who told the truth, or his accusers, selt-convicted of falsehood'/ And why was this letter then suppressed'/ Because, as it now proves, Fisher and Caldwell had failed to make good the pledges upon which Mr. Blaine had borrowed $25,000 for their benefit. “The great tact which the new letters establish is that Mr. Blaine was the victim of Warren Fisher, deceived by him from the start, induced to involve himself and his friends in an undertaking in which they all suffered, crippled by the refusal of Fisher to keep his word, persuaded when disaster came to borrow money for the enterprise upon his personal credit, and finally left’in the lurch by his professed friend, who reasoned that Mr. Blaine, being a public man, could never, ass ord to demand what was justly due him, for fear of scandal. The letters of June, 1869, previously published, prove that Fisher then made a proposition to Mr. Blaine which hejicsitated to accept, uncertain whether It might involve lalger resources than he could .command. The new letters of Oct. 4 and 5 show 'what has been evident all along, that he had closed the arrangement with Fisher to take from him certain bonds in order to raise money for the enterprise., and that he did not prove a ‘deadhead.’ but performed his part to the letter. He not only took bonds and placed them to lift the enterprise over obstacles, but had disposed of sl2s,otxj before the letter was written making mention of his ruling in Congress. Thus he has been infamously slandered all this time by the charge that lie referred to his ruling in order to get into the concert. He was In it already, as the new letters prove, amt had placed all the bonds he was expected to jilace. But these new letters also prove that privacy about that negotiation was urged, not jby him, but by Fisher, who was at that time negotiating with Caldwell. It may be inferred that Fisher did not then want Caldwell to know that the enterprise had been in such straits. He it was who wrote about,‘the Importance of keeping all quiet,’ and to him Mr. Blaine wrote, ‘No one will ever know from mo that I have disposed of a single dollar in Maine, so there need be no embarrassment in talking with Mr. Caldwell.’ There was not a thing in the transaction of which Mr. Blaine had reason to Ire ashamed. He had taken at his own rißk a block of securities, and by his personal credit and reputation with friends had placed them, receiving, as both Fisher and Mulligan admitted. the average rate of percentage that others received. Thus, May 31, 1876, Warren Fisher, Jr., testified (Misc. doc. 176, pages 88 and 8ti): “Question—Was any other bonus besides stock ever given in the purchase of these bonds'/ Answer —No, sir. “Q.—Were not land-grant bonds sometimes given? A.—O, yes; if I sold SIO,OOO of these firstmortgage bonds I would also give as a bonus SIO,(XX/ of land-grant bonds, SIO,OOO common stock, and SIO,OOO of the preferred stock. “Q. —So that In a sale of SIO,OOO of these bonds there was really a transfer of SIO,OOO mortgage bonds, slo,ooo land-grant bonds, SIO,OOO preferred stock, and SIO,OOO common stock? A,— Yes.

“Q.— Making a transfer of $40,000 instead of $10,000? A.—Yes, sir. “.May 31, 1376, James Mulligan testified. (Miscellaneous document no, page 01.) "Question—Do you know of any other sale (than the one to Mr. Blaine) of tire bonds of that company? Answer—Yes. “Question —Were the other sales made on the same terms as this sale? Answer—No, sir. Quite different. “Question—Was the percentage Which was realized by Mr. Fisher on those other sales different from that realized on this sale? Answer —lt aveiaged about the same. “Afterward what-? A long gap in the correspondence. Even now it is evident. Fisher ana Mulligan still hold other letters which they dare not publish, but deliberately suppress, because at this and other points iu the history the whole truth would vindicate Mr. Blaine'completely. But in December, 1870, it appears that Mr. Blaine was trying to borrow money for Fisher and Caldwell to help them through, and at the same time appealing in vain for the bonds promised by Fisher to him and by him to his friends who had purchased. As he states, Dec. 29, Mr. Blaine did borrow on his individual promises, but in the letter of Jan. 26 he had to beg in vain lor ‘ good notes for the $25,004’ and for 'the $86,000 bonds which were made “by yourself and Mr. Caldwell the express basis of the $25,000 loan.' Thus entrapped by a deliberate bn ach of faith, he says: ‘ Its personal hardships to me are bitter and burning, and humiliating in the last degree.’ Yet Fisher and Caldwell left him to bear the loss. A note fell due March l,and he was compelled to meet it. An .tuer came in April, and he wrote: ‘lt Is no more ;mv debt fhan the debt of President Grant or Queen Victoria, and I cannot believe that you

and Mr. Fisher, Both or either, intend to Have this burden upon me. If you do it will crash me.’ Caldwell, April 25, acknowledged the justice of the claim and appealed to Mr. Fisher, being unable to act himself. Nevertheless, Mr. Blaine was obliged to write June H about the $25.000 ‘which 1 borrowed here on my own faith and, credit'on tie distinct understanding with you (F’isher) that it was to be repaid,' and urges some transfer of securities. Fisher still refuses, and, Nov. 8, Mr. Blaine is still praying for an honest fulfillment of the contract. ‘How can I do fids with parties who have paid their money earnestly demanding' the consideration proml- - bs me, but which i am not able to give liter catise-T do not receive the bonds to which I am entitled by contract? It Is not a question of money-making with me. »It is simply a question of saving my word with others,’ Is not this the language of a thoroughly honest and upright man? Is it not clear throughout that Mr. Blaine was conscious ot no wrong, but suffering keenly from injustice? Yet, after all this, when a settlement was made and it was agreed by Warren F’isher, as he admitted' tn his testimony, that the letters on both sides should be given up, it was this same Warren Fisher who broke his agreement and kept letters or allowed Mulligan to keep them for the purpose of defaming Mr. Blaine, and now, in baffled anger, he prints enough of them to show what sort of a man he is. Fly bis own betrayal of faith the letters now Come to light which show how he took all the money he could from Mr. Blaine and his friends, bfoke his own word, and trusted for immunity tea public man's clread of scandalous misrepresentation. _To such a man Mr, Blaine appealed jn vain for the truth. His letter of April 16 th is an honest man’s urgent plea for simple justice, ‘t he letter is strictly true,’ he writes, and every man knows that he would never have penned these words with such a request if his conscience had told him that the statement he wished Fisher to make was false. The testimony of F’isher and Mulligan already quoted proves that in the vital point Mr. Blaine stated the truth. He bought bonds on the same terns ottered to others, and by doing so involved himself in heavy loss while making good the losses of friends. On that very statement which Mr. Blaine asked Fisher to sign, in the belief that a man he had helped at such cost to himself would not refuse an act of simple, justice, his friends may well rest. Not one of his letters, not one of the letters to him, be it observed, contains any hint or trace of abuse of his position as Speaker or as member of Congress. Neither Mulligan nor Fisher ever charged him with any dishonest or improper act, in all the transactions he was an honorable gentleman, and he was in the hands of sharpers. "What has the public to do with the business relations of Mr. Blaine aud Mr. Fisher? Nothing, since they do not concern his official conduct in any particular, nor his personal integ-rity.-The public has judged them rightly. Eight years ago the worst that could be said about these transactions was said, and the ]>eople, hearing both sides, sustained Mr. Blaine as they do now. From that day to this public confidence in him has been growing stronger, public regard for him greater, and the latest efforts of his detainers only serve to bring upon themselves the infamy they deserve.”