Rensselaer Union, Volume 11, Number 8, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 November 1878 — Jim Anderson’s Bargainings. [ARTICLE]

Jim Anderson’s Bargainings.

After Anderson had given his evidence before the Potter Committee he was not discharged as a witness until the final adjournment of the committee in August, and during these two months be drew witness fees at a rate of $8 a day. In the meantime. having lost his position as night editor of a Philadelphia newspaper, he was provided with a place as a proof-reader on the Washington Post at a salary of sls per week. He was not contented with this position, considering it to be too humble, and the salary too small for a man of his dignity and resources. The editor of the paper would not tolerate him in either a reporter’s of editor’s position, however, and his connection with the paper was severed. Since then Anderson has been accommodated with small loans from persons who admired his candor and who were associated with the Potter investigation. But, having exhausted his thb h~*9»xbSP p eaWflfte’contract with him should be carried out and he be “ taken care of.” He complains that he has been repulsed and insulted, and that his treatment has not been such as a gentleman would endure.

Finally Anderson warned his sponsors before the committee that their agreement must be complied with, or he would make other arrangements. Anderson then commissioned a friend lately to make a proposition to Judge Shellabarger, which, in effect, was that he should either prepare and make oath to a full and complete denial of all his testimony heretofore given, so far as it related to Sec’y Sherman, and append a statement of the manner and means by which he was induced to testify; or, when the Matthews Committee should reassemble, he would withdraw his refusal to testify before that committee and answer truthfully all questions that should be put to him relating to the Sherman letter—how the story was invented and put in circulation, how he was bribed to testify falsely, and reveal fully the full story of the manner in which he was led to make his statements before the Potter Committee. As a condition to all this, Mr. Anderson was to be granted absolution for all the sins committed in the past and immunity for the future. As a guarantee of good faith, Anderson offered to put in writing a statement to be read by Judge Shellabarger which he would make oath to, if an understanding should be arrived at. This is in brief the statement that is made by Anderson and his friends. It is of course partially denied by those whom he has been serving. They say that the trouble with him is his failure to obtain money as a reward for his testimony.. They deny that there was such an arrangement as he asserts. His evidence, they say, was voluntary and given for motives of revenge, ana that since he told his story all demands for a reward have been denied. They claim that payments of money were never made to him, and that he merely drew his witness fees, as did all others who testified. Money has been loaned to him when he claimed to be in want, but with the understanding that it was a loan, and not a gratuity. The “ coparceners” assert that they always regarded Anderson as a dangerous man and unfit to be trusted, and that they have allowed no dealings him that could be construed as meaning bribery. They admit having been warned by Anderson that he would reverse himself” unless he. was taken care of, and they acknowledged an understanding that he has offered himself to Judge Shellabarger as a witness for the defense. Judge Shellabarger, they say, is welcome to him, and that Sec’y Sherman may have 'all the benefit that can be derived from his statements; but how, they ask, are the Republicans to get around Senator Matthews’ letter? They charge specifically that Anderson demanded $2,600 as the price of his silence, that amount being necessary to set him upon a chicken farm in Louisiana, which is his present ambition. The gentleman with whom Anderson has been conducting his negotiations only a day or two ago received the following '’letter from Anderson, who is now in Indianapolis, visiting his wife’s family:

My Dear Sib: 1 wrote you last week upon my arrival here, but as yet have had no reply. I wish you would attend to that matter at’Once and let me hear from you by a night dispatch. I have an oppo> tnnity of making an excellent investment in fancy chickens here, bu t don’t ( wish to do ao until I know definitely what will be done. Should you see Sypher. write me the result of your conference. Ask * * * if he could work me into the SehtlMrl office here should I desire to stay, or, what would be better, on the New Orleans Democrat. Let me hear from you as soon as possible. Truly yours, - . Jamis E. Anderson. Judge Shellabarger was asked, this morning, about this matter. He said that it is a fact that he has received propositions from Anderson of this sort. He has received several of them, not from Anderson personally, but through his friends and gentlemen whom he has convinced that hqjs sincere in his intention to undo, as far as possible, the harm that he has jdone, and in the future to have square dealing and honesty f but the Judge said he has told'all of th ese gentlemen that if Anderson wants to do right and inend the damage he has done, there is no necessity for either himself or Sec’y' Sherman having any knowledge of or ]part in his repentance; that the plainest and most common-sense course for Andcr son to pursue is to repent and offer such recompense as he is able, without hav ing any dealings with Bets y Sfiennan or ins counsel. Judge SheUabarger said that neither or the Secretary cares one whit for what Anderson proposes to do, nor do they care whether he makes a retraction or not; he may do so it he chooses, but it will destroy the effect of. any retraction he may make, if they enoour-

age it or offer inducements in that direction. ’’Has Anderson asked any inducements from yon in the matter?’’ was asked. ” None whatever,” said the Judge. “Those who have called upon me in his interest have merely represented that he was sorry he had lied about Sec’y Sherman, and that he was now anxious to do the right thing. They never Intimated that he expected any reward, but said that he was remorseful and wanted to unburden himself. But I told them all that I would have no dealings with Anderson personally or indirectly, that I would not allow him to come to my office nor speak to mq. I understand that he has attempted to approach Sec’y Sherman in the same way, but the Secretary will have nothing whatever to do with him.” “Do you know that he has made a statement contradictory to his evidence before the Potter Committee?” “I hate hoard so, but I do not know it. It was intimated that such a document was ready in case Sec’y Sherman or mvself wanted to see it. But I refused absolutely to compromise myself with him io any way. I told his friends I did not want to see the paper, and that Sec’y Sherman did not. We have had all along an abiding faith that such a rascally fabric of lies as were woven into Anderson’s story would not hold together long, and we felt that we had only to wait to see the story contradict itself. For several montns we have been continually m receipt of letters offering to furnish evidence, and making propositions in regard to this matter, but we have taken no more notice of them than to file them away for preservation. Hernia a lot I have Just this moment received from the Secretary, and here is a note of transmittal.”

The Judge here exhibited a bundle of papers and a note from Sec’y Sherman, in which the latter asked Judge Shellabarger to place these papers with the others of the same sort, and said’ that he was of the same opinion fore, that jpyas bggt.tg hiyWria~ ileal-" jhT. ~<ui any person in this matter, but to let it adjust itself, as it. certainly would in due time~r I < Anderson failing to open negotiations with Judge Shellabarger has attempted to reach Sec’y Sherman's ear through other channels, and has made at least two propositions to official subordinates of the Secretary, but they have declined to do anything in the matter. Anderson’s “ true story” is now for sale to the highest biddeir, and will doubtless soon appear in print. asserted from a thoroughly trustworthy source that Anderson has made an affidavit before Dr. Houston, of the Pennsylvania Republican State Committee, wherein he (Anderson) sets forth that the testimony be gave before the Potter Committee was false in every particular, especially that portion which related to the writing by SeJy Sherman of the Weber-Anderson letter; that he was paid for this perjury; and that the person who induced him to perjure himself, and paid him therefor, was a man by the name of Gibson, who has been closely connected with the Potter Committee through the Whole of its labors.— Washington Cor. N. Y. Tribune.