Page images
PDF
EPUB

In an examination of the files of the telegraph company, I came across the following:

Washington, Dec. 13th, 1874
Gen. John McDonald, Supervisor, St. Louis:
I succeeded. They will not go. Will write

you.

(Signed) Sylph.

I had no idea who "Sylph" was. I at once enclosed the copy to the Secretary of the Treasury. He proceeded to get hold of the original at Washington and at once, without disclosing what he had found, wired me to come to Washington. When I got there he showed me the original which was in Babcock's handwriting. This was the first knowledge I had of the possible connection of Babcock with the Whiskey Ring.

Bristow was exceedingly cautious and impressed me with the importance of being so myself, lest injury be done to Babcock and incidentally to the administration without further evidence. It was during this trip that I first saw Babcock. I called at the White House to pay my respects to the President, and was at that time introduced to Babcock. In the course of further inquiry it appeared that on one occasion McDonald enclosed in a letter directed to Babcock at Washington, a five hundred dollar bill and gave it to A. M. Everest (a collector for the "Ring") to mail. This Everest testified that he did, in a mail box on the corner of Fifth and Pine Streets. If such testimony was not contradicted, it went far to prove that Babcock was sharing in the frauds.

Babcock was defended by Chester H. Krum, Emory Storrs of Chicago, Judge Porter of New York, and

Ex-Attorney General Williams. Under the guidance of Storrs, a letter carrier by the name of Magill was found who testified that he unlocked (at the request of McDonald) the letter box and returned to him the letter that Everest had mailed. On cross examination it was shown that the box was not on Magill's route and that it was positively against the rules of the department for him to open it. The introduction of such a witness was a great surprise to the prosecution. No time was had to inquire as to the character of the witness before the close of the case. After the trial, however, it was ascertained that Magill had been a soldier in a Rhode Island Regiment during the Civil War, had been court martialed and dismissed from service, etc.

After the evidence was all in, Colonel Broadhead opened for the Government in a most excellent address. He was followed by Judge Porter and Mr. Storrs for the defense and I closed for the Government. All of the arguments were fairly reported in the newspapers, but as I recollect there was no official stenographic report made.

The burden of Judge Porter's address was what he called a defense of General Grant against the unjust attack on his Secretary, etc. Of course, there was no just ground for such a defense. No one had breathed a word against Grant. Porter had, for effect upon the Court and jury, built up a man of straw and proceeded in a most adroit manner to make it appear that Grant was the real defendant in the case. In answering Judge Porter, I attacked his man of straw and in doing so unwisely allowed myself

to tell a story. The story at the time seemed to fairly illustrate the situation. It was about as follows: “A young physician was called to see a woman in her confinement. After the young fellow left the house, he was asked by a neighbor how his patient was doing. He answered by saying: "The child is dead, the mother will die, but by the grace of God I hope to save the old man.'"'

This story reached the President and I am quite sure that it did not strengthen me in his estimation. I was appointed United States Attorney by President Grant in the vacation of the Senate. When the Senate met in regular session in December, the feeling against Bristow and the prosecution was so bitter that the President never sent my name to the Senate for confirmation. He could not remove me while the Senate was in session, but without delay he proceeded to do so when the Senate adjourned in August, 1876. He appointed William H. Bliss to succeed me. Bliss was an assistant in my office, but he was lucky enough to give no offense to those in power.

General Bristow left the Cabinet of President Grant in (I think) April or May, 1876. He went to New York and engaged in the practice of law. The name of his firm was Bristow, Peet, Opdike and Burnett. The hostility of President Grant to Bristow continued and was caused solely by the relentless prosecution of Babcock, whom the President believed innocent of any wrong.

In New York, after both Bristow and Grant were out of office, they chanced to meet in a public place, where General Grant openly insulted Bristow by

abruptly turning from and refusing to speak to him. This hostility continued for a long time after that occurred.

What I am now about to relate was told me by General Bristow in his office in New York after the death of General Grant. He said that shortly before General Grant was removed to Mt. McGregor where he died, he received a note from him asking that he call at his residence in New York. This request, against the protest of Mrs. Bristow, he complied with. He found General Grant sitting in an invalid chair, all muffled up about the throat and head and suffering from cancer of which he finally died. As General Bristow entered the room, General Grant extended his hand and said: "General Bristow, I have done you a great wrong and I cannot afford to die without acknowledging it to your face. In the prosecution at St. Louis you were right and I was wrong." Thus it was that the friendship between the two men was restored. As Bristow told me the story, his eyes were filled with tears.

None but a brave and honest man would have done what Grant did. He was an honest man. He was a great soldier and a true patriot. Bristow was not only a great soldier but a statesman of marked ability. Both rendered much service to the country, for which a grateful people are thankful.

XI

LATER YEARS

Back to Kentucky- Early and Present Day Travel - Election Frauds in Saint Louis-Appointment to Prosecute-President Cleveland Convinced-The 1887 G. A. R. Encampment-President and Mrs. Cleveland attend the Veiled Prophet Ball-Fishing Anecdote-Gen. Joe Shelby.

When my father moved from Virginia to Missouri in 1841, with his family, he came through Tennessee and Kentucky, crossing the Tennessee and Cumberland rivers not far from Cadiz, the county seat of Trigg County, Kentucky. Here in this county his brother, Joel Dyer, had come a year or so before and settled about ten miles from Cadiz on as poor land as there was in the county. The two brothers, David and Joel, had married sisters, Nancy and Mary (Polly) Salmon. After stopping for a day or two in Trigg County, my father proceeded on his way to Missouri. From that time to July 1857, my mother and her sister had not seen each other. In the meantime, both brothers, David and Joel, had died.

In the summer of 1857, my mother determined to go to Kentucky and visit her sister. At that time I was nineteen years of age and accompanied my mother on this trip. We first went to St. Louis, where

« PreviousContinue »