FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1056   1057   1058   1059   1060   1061   1062   1063   1064   1065   1066   1067   1068   1069   1070   1071   1072   1073   1074   1075   1076   1077   1078   1079   1080  
1081   1082   1083   1084   1085   1086   1087   1088   1089   1090   1091   1092   1093   1094   1095   1096   1097   1098   1099   1100   1101   1102   1103   1104   1105   >>   >|  
alstead on the 28th of September, and on the evening of that day the governor made a speech at the Music Hall, Cincinnati, in which he referred to Mr. Campbell having introduced the bill for the purchase of the ballot box. On the 4th of October, Halstead published in the "Commercial-Gazette" a fac-simile of the false paper, with the name of Campbell alone, the names of the other apparent signers not being given in the fac-simile and nothing being said about them. On the 8th of October I was informed that it was whispered about Cincinnati that my name, with many others, was attached to the paper. I at once telegraphed that if this were so the signature was a forgery. When I spoke at Orrville two days later I did not allude to the subject, regarding the whole thing as an election canard which would correct itself. In a brief time this became true. The whole paper was proven to be a forgery. The alleged signatures were made on tracing paper, from franks on documents distributed by Congressmen. All this was done by Wood, or by his procurement, in order to get an office through Governor Foraker. Halstead, on the 11th of October, published in his paper, over his own name, a statement that Mr. Campbell's signature was fraudulent, no mention being made of the other alleged signers of the paper. Subsequently, on the 10th of November, after the election, Foraker wrote a letter to Halstead giving a narrative of the mode by which he was misled into believing the paper to be genuine. It has always seemed strange to me that Foraker, having in his possession a paper which implicated Butterworth, McKinley and myself, in what all men would regard as a dishonorable transaction, did not inform us and give us an opportunity to deny, affirm or explain our alleged signatures. An inquiry from him to either of the persons named would have led to an explanation at once. No doubt Foraker believed the signatures genuine, but that should not have deterred him from making the inquiry. On the 12th of November, I wrote the following letter to Halstead: "Senate Chamber, } "Washington, November 12, 1889.} "My Dear Sir:--Now that the election is over, I wish to impress upon you the importance of making public the whole history of the 'forged paper' about ballot boxes. "While you believed in the genuineness of Campbell's signature you were entirely right in exposing him and the signers of the paper, for if it was
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1056   1057   1058   1059   1060   1061   1062   1063   1064   1065   1066   1067   1068   1069   1070   1071   1072   1073   1074   1075   1076   1077   1078   1079   1080  
1081   1082   1083   1084   1085   1086   1087   1088   1089   1090   1091   1092   1093   1094   1095   1096   1097   1098   1099   1100   1101   1102   1103   1104   1105   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Halstead

 

Campbell

 
Foraker
 

October

 

signers

 

signature

 

signatures

 

November

 

alleged

 
election

genuine
 

letter

 

making

 
forgery
 
inquiry
 

believed

 

simile

 
ballot
 

Cincinnati

 
published

Butterworth

 
implicated
 
possession
 

McKinley

 

importance

 

regard

 
history
 

public

 

misled

 
narrative

exposing
 

giving

 

believing

 

genuineness

 

strange

 

forged

 

explanation

 

Chamber

 

Senate

 
Washington

deterred
 
persons
 

opportunity

 

affirm

 

transaction

 
inform
 

impress

 

explain

 

dishonorable

 

tracing