91st PA-Texas Freedman's Bureau, articles in Galveston Daily News, 1866

Mr. Cushing and His Ten Thousand Dollars.

[list of articles in the Galveston Daily News]
[I have proofread this page]
[source: Galveston Daily News, 27 April 1866, page 2, column 3.]

Mr. Cushing and His Ten Thousand Dollars.

Having published the statement of the Bulletin to the effect that one of its employees heard a Federal officer say that Judge Caldwell, in a conversation with Judge Baldwin, stated that Mr. Cushing, being in favor of negro suffrage, would advocate the same in the Telegraph if indemnified for losses to the extent of ten thousand dollars--we now give the reply as it appears in the Telegraph of Wednesday:

In this manner Mr. Flake attempts to shuffle out of an imfamous [sic] falsehood. After having charged Mr. Cushing with offering to sell the columns of his paper for the purpose of advocating negro suffrage in this State, for money, which charge Mr. Cushing promptly pronounced malignantly false, he now brings forward a person in his employ, namely, a Mr. Matthew Whilldin, an associate editor of the Bulletin--of whose credibility nothing need be said--who states that he was informed by Capt. Wright, of General Gregory's staff, that Messrs. Baldwin and Caldwell had conversed about the matter in his presence!!-- Granting the truth of all this, what does it prove? Simply that the United States District Attorney of this District, and a District Judge of Texas, whom Mr. Flake is supporting for a seat on the Supreme Bench of the State, have been plotting together in the presence of the Chief of the Freedmen's Bureau in this State to bribe an editor of a newspaper to the support of negro suffrage!-- Verily it is a dirty bird that befouls its own nest! The nest is most thoroughly befouled, and nothing whatever said that involves Mr. Cushing. His interests are in no manner at stake. He has stamped the charge made against him, and continues to stamp it as a malignant falsehood. Until Mr. Flake proves it to the letter, the infamy of publishing such a falsehood rests upon him.-- Until Judge Caldwell and Col. Baldwin endorse Mr. Flake's statement he has nothing whatever to do with them in the matter.

Mr. Flake has said that it was considered disgraceful in many parts of the State to confess to loyalty. That was another falsehood. But can any candid man wonder that it is disgraceful among all honorable men to be associated in any manner, politically or otherwise, with such characters as himself, and as he now endeavors to prove the leaders of his party to be? If such are the loyalists of Texas, then loyalty must stink in the nostrils of honest men. But his claim to loyalty is as false as all things else about him. He is now plotting to overthrow the government, to destroy the President, and to renew the war. People of Texas, let your condemnation be most emphatically stamped upon such men in the approaching elections.

From our knowledge of Col. Baldwin and Judge Caldwell, we feel assured that they would never mix themselves up in any such questionable proceedings as those mentioned by the Bulletin. As for Gen. Gregory, we have no interest in what he thinks, says, or does. Our opinions are just the same when he speaks as when he does not speak; when he says no and when he says yes.

The following, in reply to the above, appears in the Bulletin of yesterday:

Mr. Cushing, being completely cornered, and having no alternative left save that of putting the two Judges or General Gregory on the witness stand, skulks behind his successor, and thus runs from the fight he can no longer maintain. We do not propose to be diverted from our main issue by the side attacks upon us in yesterday's Telegraph, or by joining issue with Mr. Gillespie. As for this latter gentleman we shall pay our respects to him after we are through with Mr. Cushing. When it may be found that "Wicked Jim" did not die and go to Heaven in early youth. Mr. Cushing is the gentleman to whom our present attention is directed. Until yesterday we had neither spoken to nor seen Judge Baldwin or Judge Caldwell since this controversy began. The former gentleman called on us yesterday and remarked: "I do not hink Mr. Cushing will call on me in regard to the matter." We will tell Mr. Cushing why we do not put these gentlemen on the stand, and why he dares not do it. If we put them there and they testify, as we believe they will, he will get his factotum, Mr. Gillespie, to keep repeating his denial. But if he calls them on the stand himself, the question is settled at once and forever. Now, Mr. E. H. Cushing, we have nothing to do at present with Mr. Gillespie: we defy you to call on Judges Caldwell and Baldwin for their testimony in regard to the matter in controversy. You dare not do it.

top of document | home
revised 1 Sep 03
contact Harry Ide at hide1@unl.edu with comments or questions