Headquarters F. C. of V. C.,Sep. 15, 1885.To the Officers and Members of the V. C. and of the U. S.:Brothers:In accordance with the call of the Committee of Safety a general convention of the V. C. was held in New York City, Aug. 3 and 4, for the purpose of taking the necessary measures to save the organization from the ruin which threatens it. A full account of its proceedings will be found in the printed report, to which we invite your attention.Having been chosen by the convention to fill a position of great difficulty and responsibility in the organization during this, the supreme crisis of its existence, we feel it to be our duty to lay before you the plain facts of the present situation, and to ask the assistance of every honest man in bringing about a remedy. We make this appeal without regard to the side you may have taken in the recent and present troubles, knowing full well that nine-tenths of the organization are in a state of utter ignorance as to the actual facts, and that honest men have been led to sustain wrong. We make it more particularly to those who are supporting and yielding blind obedience to men who have turned their backs on the I. R. B., thereby ignoring the fundamental principal which is the cause and object of our organization. If that support is withdrawn an effective remedy can be at once applied. That there is trouble you will not now deny, and that it is serious enough to menace the existence of a once powerful organization, and to threaten the ruin of the hopes that have hitherto stimulated our efforts for Ireland, every day will make more clear to your understanding. The efforts at concealment made by the men who created this trouble, the withholding of information as to the wholesale suspension of D's, and the mendacious assertions made in recent circulars, have all failed of the desired effect; and in every D in the organization, to-day, there is gloom and discouragement and members are fast falling away. No official denials, a thousand times repeated, can any longer conceal this fact. Every member from Maine to California can see it for himself. The truth is beginning to filter through the barriers set up against its entrance to the D's, by desperate men, whose characters depend on its suppression. The frantic efforts and reckless statements of the army of paid organizers, sent around to counteract the progress of truth and avert the exposure of wrong doing, are useless and unavailing. Many of these are the men under accusation of complicity in the fraud, and they now use your money to deceive you and prolong the reign of dishonesty. Their prevarications, contradictions, and shuffling evasions are doing more to establish the truth of the charges, against which they are vainly struggling, than the strongest statement made in the interest of right and justice, and a spirit is gradually growing up in the organization which will produce one of two results—reform and punishment of the evildoers, or disruption of the organization and escape of the prisoners.One or other of these results is inevitable. And whichever it is, it will be the clear and logical result of your action. Your withdrawal from the organization, in despair or disgust, will no more enable you to shake off your responsibility than if you give an active support to the criminals. Which result shall it be? The decision rests with you. If the men responsible for this wretched state of things cannot succeed in stifling all investigation into their misdeeds, they would prefer to see the organization smashed. "Dead men tell no tales." They know that an honest investigation would overwhelm them, and they are fighting for existence. Therefore they are determined there shall be none, and every D that demands one is suspended or left without communication. This conduct is capable of but one explanation. They cannot stand investigation. The question with them is, shall their personal reputations be destroyed, or the organization be ruined? and they have chosen the latter. Men with true instincts, and whose records were clean, would scorn to force themselves on any organization, to handle its funds and direct its policy, while under such accusations as have been leveled against the Triangle. Men with the real good of Ireland and of the V. C. at heart, would refuse to hold office at the expense of the unity and the efficiency of the organization. Looked at from any stand-point their conduct is indefensible and unpatriotic. No man fit for the duties of the high office, these men hold, would acquire it by such means or hold on to it when acquired. No men who honestly intended to aid the men at home to free Ireland—which is the fundamental principle of the V. C.—would begin their official careers by deceiving their colleagues in Ireland and persisting in carrying on any policy against their protest.Since the disastrous gathering, miscalled a convention, which met in Boston twelve months ago, the organization has been going from bad to worse. The deceit and trickery by which three members of the F. C. were enabled to continue themselves in power, and so to change the whole form and object of the order, as to make it a convenient instrument for the furtherance of personal ambition, at the expense of the sacred cause of Ireland, have continued to play havoc in our ranks. The strength and vitality of the national movement have been shattered. The oldest and strongest D's are being driven out one by one, and a system of repression of free speech and sham trials, copied from the worst features of British tyranny in Ireland, is brought into requisition for the purpose of crushing all independence of thought, and stifling the voice of patriotism. No honest man in the V. C., who sees and hears what is going on around him, can fail to recognize that ruin and disintegration must speedily make shipwreck of our hopes, if a strong and vigorous remedy be not soon applied. No intelligent man can fail to see that every effort of the three men who have usurped the governing authority of the V. C., every dollar intrusted to them for the advancement of the cause is being devoted to the maintenance of their power, and to the work of driving from the organization every man who charges them withwrong-doing, or who advocates an investigation of the charges made.That the aims and objects of the organization, and also its money, are being sacrificed to the necessities of the war of self-defense, waged by three desperate men, must be plain to every intelligent man, and it must be equally plain that an honest, impartial investigation of the serious charges, made against these men, would put a speedy end to all this trouble, by either convicting them of wrong-doing or their accusers of falsehood. In either case the organization would be freed from evil-doers and restored to harmony. Why, then, is such an investigation refused? The men who make the charges are ready to substantiate them and take the consequences. The accused men shirk an investigation, drive their accusers out of the organization, so that their evidence may not be available, and hold on with the grip of desperation to the positions they are accused of disgracing.Can any organization of intelligent, self-respecting men tolerate such a state of affairs? You who submit to the scandalous methods by which it is kept up are making yourselves responsible for irreparable injury to the cause you are sworn to serve.Let us recapitulate the work of the Boston "Convention," the charges made against the Triangle, the disruptive policy they have since pursued, and the remedy we propose. We charge that the three members of the last F. C., who now constitute the Triangle, are solely responsible for the evils of the present situation, and that deceit and trickery have characterized their action at every step. There is no statement of theirs, now promulgated, that is not made for the purpose of misleading the organization in regard to vital facts. These facts cover the postponement and change of form of the convention, the proceedings of that body, the relations with the I. R. B., the disbursement of the largest sum of money ever handled by any F. C., the authority and responsibility of the R. D., and the policy pursued. In short, they embrace every question of vital importance to the organization and to their characters as officers and members of the V. C.First—The Postponement of the Convention—It is claimed that these men had nothing to do with it—that it was entirely the work of the organization. Here are the facts:Those who were delegates to the Philadelphia National Convention will remember, that the subject was first mooted thereat the request of the three members of the F. C. in question, in a caucus of members of the V. C. It was proposed by a member of D. II, and seconded by a member of D. I, and passed as a recommendation to the D's that they favor a change in the constitution, by which each district should elect delegates in proportion to membership to the National Convention. It was recommended in that form to the F. C. for promulgation to the D's. When promulgated it had undergone a remarkable change, by which each district was allowed two delegates, irrespective of membership. This would give a district, having then less than 100 members ingood standing, the same representation as others having 1,500 members.The proposition of the F. C. was passed in some D's, with an amendment providing for representation according to membership, and a request that the amendment be submitted to all D's. The reply of the F. C. was that there was no time to do so, and yet about a year elapsed before the convention was held. Thus they secured a postponement of the convention under pretense of submitting a constitutional question to the D's, but so altered the question itself as to deprive large districts of representation in proportion to their membership, reducing the number of delegates to the convention, thereby making the work of manipulation easier. Thus, you see, the proposition originated with the F. C. was supported by them in caucus, and they voted and worked for its passage, and yet they tell you they had nothing to do with it, "that it was the work of the organization."This was the first part of the program by which they sought to deceive and hoodwink the organization, escape a proper accounting of their trusts, and secure a continuance in office. Let us now examine the second part of the program, or farce, played at Boston.The Convention—Notwithstanding the long delay and the evidence of elaborate preparation for the convention on the part of the F. C., the notice to the delegates was only given at the last moment. Both the first circular after the convention, and the so-called "report" of its proceedings, issued by the Triangle in the name of the delegates from each district, contained deliberate misstatements of facts. There was no Committee on Credentials, and the word of the Secretary of the F. C. was the only voucher for the genuineness of the delegates. There were three persons present who were not delegates, and one of the three presided. The composition of the committees appointed by the chairman, after dining with the men who controlled the F. C., and disbursed its funds, left every consideration of decency and bona fide investigation out of account. To investigate the work of these men, a Committee on Foreign Relations, consisting of two of them, and a man who was entirely dependent on them for information, was appointed. The Financial Committee consisted of three district members, two of whom were the agents of the F. C., in the "active policy," and notoriously their partizans. These committees, sitting jointly, and having out of the six members only two who were not previously concerned in the work of governing and spending the funds, had the coolness to report that "The Finance Committee are fully satisfied with the economy and prudence with which the expenditures have been made, and the Foreign Relations Committee find complete exactitude in the financial acknowledgments of the R. D., etc." That is, two members of the American part of the R. D., who had been receiving and spending, in the name of that body, vast sums of money, of which the three home members knew nothing, aided by two accommodating district memberswho had been helping them to spend the money, find "complete exactitude" in their own accounts. And then, on the plea that "lives of faithful and devoted men are in the keeping of each of us who have served on either of these committees," they appeal to be allowed to keep the knowledge to themselves, and assure the organization that they "individually and collectively agree that it is a misfortune that so many of us should have this knowledge." They describe their anxiety to "see in the flesh the officer in charge of the new policy"—a staunch confederate of theirs whom they appointed and who merely carried out their orders—so that they might, forsooth, determine whether economy characterized his work and their own. But the crowning hypocrisy of all was their desire to ascertain if the receipts "acknowledged by the Home Branch of the R. D., corresponded with those reported by the F. C., as having been paid out." That is, they wanted to see if moneys received and spent by the American Branch of the R. D., without the knowledge or consent of the Home Branch, were properly accounted for by men who knew nothing about them, and whose representative was kept away from the convention lest the truth should become known. And the men guilty of this shameless deceit and hypocrisy are running the U. S. to-day.Third—The Relations with the I. R. B.—Without the presence of an envoy from the I. R. B. the convention was dependent on the word of men, who admitted the receipt and expenditure of $266,000, and who are positively known to have received a much larger sum, for the genuineness of the account. They place $128,000 to the credit of the R. D., and $75,000 to that of the S. C. of the I. R. B., and they make it impossible for an envoy from Ireland to confirm or contradict the statement, by withholding information from him as to the time and place of the convention.They aver that they sent the information both by cable and mail, and yet there are letters at our disposal, dating from June to October, from a member of the S. C., complaining that they could not get the information they sought, and the last one affirming that the old address was still good for either cable or mail. No letter passing between the two organizations ever miscarried before that time, and others have reached the same address since. The F. C. were made aware of the non-receipt of the information, and if it was intended to reach the S. C. it would have been received. The true explanation for all this is found in the admission in the "report" of the convention of a radical difference of opinion between the F. C. and S. C., and of a determination to dictate to the latter body. There is not a shadow of doubt that three members of the F. C. who represent the V. C. or the R. D. usurped the functions of the whole body, and spent the money voted to it by the F. C., without the knowledge of the home members. By keeping away the one envoy of the I. R. B., and auditing their own accounts, and speaking in general terms of the R. D. as if they spoke for the whole body, they hoped to conceal this fact and secure a continuance of the fraud. We now begin to see why it becamenecessary to impose silence, by oath on the delegates, for the first time in the history of the conventions of the V. C. The report of the convention issued by the Triangle, and the tone of circulars since issued, show a deliberate purpose to prepare the minds of the members of the V. C. for a break with our brothers at home. Are such men worthy of your confidence?Fourth—The R. D.—The R. D. is a fundamental law of the V. C., protected and ratified by international treaty with the I. R. B. It cannot be altered or abolished without the consent of the I. R. B., and the consent of the D's. It was adopted by the Philadelphia convention of the V. C., by a unanimous vote in 1876, with the proviso, that it should become a law only when approved by a two-thirds majority of the D's. It was submitted to the D's, and after being discussed at special meetings in every D, was approved by much more than the necessary majority. It was then submitted to the S. C., and having been agreed to by them the R. D. was elected, and by a solemn treaty invested with the supreme authority in all revolutionary matters.The R. D. could not be abolished without the consent of both the contracting parties, nor its functions assumed by a minority of that body, or their confederate "in flesh," without the consent of the S. C. or consulting the D's, who created it, and that most accommodating body called the Boston convention, has empowered the Triangle to elect an R. D. or not, as they see fit. That is, to elect the whole body and run a boat of their own, as did the Flannigans at the Flood, with the assistance of their confederate "in the flesh."The R. D. provided the means of adjusting all differences between the two organizations, of adopting a common policy, of auditing all expenditures, and made out of previously disjointed fragments, one united Irish revolutionary body throughout the world. Every intelligent man will now perceive that the assumption of power by the V. C. members of the R. D. and their "officer in the flesh," as well as the action taken at Boston, means broken faith with the I. R. B., means secession, disruption, divided counsels, is a direct blow at the integrity of the national movement. We cannot believe that you will continue to condone this offense on the part of the present Triangle, or indorse this breach of faith with the I. R. B.Fifth—The other work of the convention—The mode of electing the Triangle is inconsistent with honest intentions and gives the organization no protection against wrong doing. The oath of secrecy, as to the whole proceedings, is absolutely without justification or valid reason. Its evident intention was to cover up the farce enacted by the committees.No reasonable member of the V. C. wants information, involving danger to men, within the enemies reach. But every man should know, who audits accounts covering hundreds of thousands of dollars, and insist on having some guarantee that an honest inquiry is made into the most important work of the F. C., viz: theirrelations with the men at home. The change in the oath bodes evil to the cause. What intelligent man will bind himself to promote all measures adopted by the Triangle, "whether known or unknown?" Are we to follow these men blindly in every enterprise to which fancy or ambition leads them, including schemes of American politics?This, brothers, is the true situation of the Irish National movement in America to-day.The only possible remedy is in a general convention, which will pronounce final judgment, and calmly and impartially set aside all men who stand in the way of union. We have appealed to the triumvirate for such a convention, as have many of you, in vain.They will never call it, for the simple reason that they dare not. The only possible means of securing it, and thereby ending this trouble once for all, is by your shaking off the lethargy that has overtaken you and joining hands with us. Your appeals and protests to your leaders will be met by hollow pretenses and subterfuges, such as have met all such efforts for the last year.Waiting for the "regular" convention means submitting to another farce and allowing the work of disruption to go on with accelerated speed. Come, frankly and openly to our side, and the settlement of the trouble will be in your own hands. We are empowered to call a convention at any time, when we see the necessity for it, without waiting for the period fixed, and it shall be called as soon as you say the word. Then let the culprit suffer, whether it be accused or accuser, and the unfaithful, incompetent, and factious step to the rear. The cause of truth, justice and patriotism will triumph, the confidence now broken be restored, the gloom now hovering over the organization dispelled, and with brightening hopes we will march on to the accomplishment of our object—the restoration of national independence under a republican form of government to our native land.Fraternally yours,The F. C. of the V. C.X. F. G. (W. E. F.), Chairman.Y. F. C. (X. E. B.), Sec.All communications should be addressed to John C. Phillips care of P. O. Box 2049, New York City.
Headquarters F. C. of V. C.,Sep. 15, 1885.
To the Officers and Members of the V. C. and of the U. S.:
Brothers:In accordance with the call of the Committee of Safety a general convention of the V. C. was held in New York City, Aug. 3 and 4, for the purpose of taking the necessary measures to save the organization from the ruin which threatens it. A full account of its proceedings will be found in the printed report, to which we invite your attention.
Having been chosen by the convention to fill a position of great difficulty and responsibility in the organization during this, the supreme crisis of its existence, we feel it to be our duty to lay before you the plain facts of the present situation, and to ask the assistance of every honest man in bringing about a remedy. We make this appeal without regard to the side you may have taken in the recent and present troubles, knowing full well that nine-tenths of the organization are in a state of utter ignorance as to the actual facts, and that honest men have been led to sustain wrong. We make it more particularly to those who are supporting and yielding blind obedience to men who have turned their backs on the I. R. B., thereby ignoring the fundamental principal which is the cause and object of our organization. If that support is withdrawn an effective remedy can be at once applied. That there is trouble you will not now deny, and that it is serious enough to menace the existence of a once powerful organization, and to threaten the ruin of the hopes that have hitherto stimulated our efforts for Ireland, every day will make more clear to your understanding. The efforts at concealment made by the men who created this trouble, the withholding of information as to the wholesale suspension of D's, and the mendacious assertions made in recent circulars, have all failed of the desired effect; and in every D in the organization, to-day, there is gloom and discouragement and members are fast falling away. No official denials, a thousand times repeated, can any longer conceal this fact. Every member from Maine to California can see it for himself. The truth is beginning to filter through the barriers set up against its entrance to the D's, by desperate men, whose characters depend on its suppression. The frantic efforts and reckless statements of the army of paid organizers, sent around to counteract the progress of truth and avert the exposure of wrong doing, are useless and unavailing. Many of these are the men under accusation of complicity in the fraud, and they now use your money to deceive you and prolong the reign of dishonesty. Their prevarications, contradictions, and shuffling evasions are doing more to establish the truth of the charges, against which they are vainly struggling, than the strongest statement made in the interest of right and justice, and a spirit is gradually growing up in the organization which will produce one of two results—reform and punishment of the evildoers, or disruption of the organization and escape of the prisoners.
One or other of these results is inevitable. And whichever it is, it will be the clear and logical result of your action. Your withdrawal from the organization, in despair or disgust, will no more enable you to shake off your responsibility than if you give an active support to the criminals. Which result shall it be? The decision rests with you. If the men responsible for this wretched state of things cannot succeed in stifling all investigation into their misdeeds, they would prefer to see the organization smashed. "Dead men tell no tales." They know that an honest investigation would overwhelm them, and they are fighting for existence. Therefore they are determined there shall be none, and every D that demands one is suspended or left without communication. This conduct is capable of but one explanation. They cannot stand investigation. The question with them is, shall their personal reputations be destroyed, or the organization be ruined? and they have chosen the latter. Men with true instincts, and whose records were clean, would scorn to force themselves on any organization, to handle its funds and direct its policy, while under such accusations as have been leveled against the Triangle. Men with the real good of Ireland and of the V. C. at heart, would refuse to hold office at the expense of the unity and the efficiency of the organization. Looked at from any stand-point their conduct is indefensible and unpatriotic. No man fit for the duties of the high office, these men hold, would acquire it by such means or hold on to it when acquired. No men who honestly intended to aid the men at home to free Ireland—which is the fundamental principle of the V. C.—would begin their official careers by deceiving their colleagues in Ireland and persisting in carrying on any policy against their protest.
Since the disastrous gathering, miscalled a convention, which met in Boston twelve months ago, the organization has been going from bad to worse. The deceit and trickery by which three members of the F. C. were enabled to continue themselves in power, and so to change the whole form and object of the order, as to make it a convenient instrument for the furtherance of personal ambition, at the expense of the sacred cause of Ireland, have continued to play havoc in our ranks. The strength and vitality of the national movement have been shattered. The oldest and strongest D's are being driven out one by one, and a system of repression of free speech and sham trials, copied from the worst features of British tyranny in Ireland, is brought into requisition for the purpose of crushing all independence of thought, and stifling the voice of patriotism. No honest man in the V. C., who sees and hears what is going on around him, can fail to recognize that ruin and disintegration must speedily make shipwreck of our hopes, if a strong and vigorous remedy be not soon applied. No intelligent man can fail to see that every effort of the three men who have usurped the governing authority of the V. C., every dollar intrusted to them for the advancement of the cause is being devoted to the maintenance of their power, and to the work of driving from the organization every man who charges them withwrong-doing, or who advocates an investigation of the charges made.
That the aims and objects of the organization, and also its money, are being sacrificed to the necessities of the war of self-defense, waged by three desperate men, must be plain to every intelligent man, and it must be equally plain that an honest, impartial investigation of the serious charges, made against these men, would put a speedy end to all this trouble, by either convicting them of wrong-doing or their accusers of falsehood. In either case the organization would be freed from evil-doers and restored to harmony. Why, then, is such an investigation refused? The men who make the charges are ready to substantiate them and take the consequences. The accused men shirk an investigation, drive their accusers out of the organization, so that their evidence may not be available, and hold on with the grip of desperation to the positions they are accused of disgracing.
Can any organization of intelligent, self-respecting men tolerate such a state of affairs? You who submit to the scandalous methods by which it is kept up are making yourselves responsible for irreparable injury to the cause you are sworn to serve.
Let us recapitulate the work of the Boston "Convention," the charges made against the Triangle, the disruptive policy they have since pursued, and the remedy we propose. We charge that the three members of the last F. C., who now constitute the Triangle, are solely responsible for the evils of the present situation, and that deceit and trickery have characterized their action at every step. There is no statement of theirs, now promulgated, that is not made for the purpose of misleading the organization in regard to vital facts. These facts cover the postponement and change of form of the convention, the proceedings of that body, the relations with the I. R. B., the disbursement of the largest sum of money ever handled by any F. C., the authority and responsibility of the R. D., and the policy pursued. In short, they embrace every question of vital importance to the organization and to their characters as officers and members of the V. C.
First—The Postponement of the Convention—It is claimed that these men had nothing to do with it—that it was entirely the work of the organization. Here are the facts:
Those who were delegates to the Philadelphia National Convention will remember, that the subject was first mooted thereat the request of the three members of the F. C. in question, in a caucus of members of the V. C. It was proposed by a member of D. II, and seconded by a member of D. I, and passed as a recommendation to the D's that they favor a change in the constitution, by which each district should elect delegates in proportion to membership to the National Convention. It was recommended in that form to the F. C. for promulgation to the D's. When promulgated it had undergone a remarkable change, by which each district was allowed two delegates, irrespective of membership. This would give a district, having then less than 100 members ingood standing, the same representation as others having 1,500 members.
The proposition of the F. C. was passed in some D's, with an amendment providing for representation according to membership, and a request that the amendment be submitted to all D's. The reply of the F. C. was that there was no time to do so, and yet about a year elapsed before the convention was held. Thus they secured a postponement of the convention under pretense of submitting a constitutional question to the D's, but so altered the question itself as to deprive large districts of representation in proportion to their membership, reducing the number of delegates to the convention, thereby making the work of manipulation easier. Thus, you see, the proposition originated with the F. C. was supported by them in caucus, and they voted and worked for its passage, and yet they tell you they had nothing to do with it, "that it was the work of the organization."
This was the first part of the program by which they sought to deceive and hoodwink the organization, escape a proper accounting of their trusts, and secure a continuance in office. Let us now examine the second part of the program, or farce, played at Boston.
The Convention—Notwithstanding the long delay and the evidence of elaborate preparation for the convention on the part of the F. C., the notice to the delegates was only given at the last moment. Both the first circular after the convention, and the so-called "report" of its proceedings, issued by the Triangle in the name of the delegates from each district, contained deliberate misstatements of facts. There was no Committee on Credentials, and the word of the Secretary of the F. C. was the only voucher for the genuineness of the delegates. There were three persons present who were not delegates, and one of the three presided. The composition of the committees appointed by the chairman, after dining with the men who controlled the F. C., and disbursed its funds, left every consideration of decency and bona fide investigation out of account. To investigate the work of these men, a Committee on Foreign Relations, consisting of two of them, and a man who was entirely dependent on them for information, was appointed. The Financial Committee consisted of three district members, two of whom were the agents of the F. C., in the "active policy," and notoriously their partizans. These committees, sitting jointly, and having out of the six members only two who were not previously concerned in the work of governing and spending the funds, had the coolness to report that "The Finance Committee are fully satisfied with the economy and prudence with which the expenditures have been made, and the Foreign Relations Committee find complete exactitude in the financial acknowledgments of the R. D., etc." That is, two members of the American part of the R. D., who had been receiving and spending, in the name of that body, vast sums of money, of which the three home members knew nothing, aided by two accommodating district memberswho had been helping them to spend the money, find "complete exactitude" in their own accounts. And then, on the plea that "lives of faithful and devoted men are in the keeping of each of us who have served on either of these committees," they appeal to be allowed to keep the knowledge to themselves, and assure the organization that they "individually and collectively agree that it is a misfortune that so many of us should have this knowledge." They describe their anxiety to "see in the flesh the officer in charge of the new policy"—a staunch confederate of theirs whom they appointed and who merely carried out their orders—so that they might, forsooth, determine whether economy characterized his work and their own. But the crowning hypocrisy of all was their desire to ascertain if the receipts "acknowledged by the Home Branch of the R. D., corresponded with those reported by the F. C., as having been paid out." That is, they wanted to see if moneys received and spent by the American Branch of the R. D., without the knowledge or consent of the Home Branch, were properly accounted for by men who knew nothing about them, and whose representative was kept away from the convention lest the truth should become known. And the men guilty of this shameless deceit and hypocrisy are running the U. S. to-day.
Third—The Relations with the I. R. B.—Without the presence of an envoy from the I. R. B. the convention was dependent on the word of men, who admitted the receipt and expenditure of $266,000, and who are positively known to have received a much larger sum, for the genuineness of the account. They place $128,000 to the credit of the R. D., and $75,000 to that of the S. C. of the I. R. B., and they make it impossible for an envoy from Ireland to confirm or contradict the statement, by withholding information from him as to the time and place of the convention.
They aver that they sent the information both by cable and mail, and yet there are letters at our disposal, dating from June to October, from a member of the S. C., complaining that they could not get the information they sought, and the last one affirming that the old address was still good for either cable or mail. No letter passing between the two organizations ever miscarried before that time, and others have reached the same address since. The F. C. were made aware of the non-receipt of the information, and if it was intended to reach the S. C. it would have been received. The true explanation for all this is found in the admission in the "report" of the convention of a radical difference of opinion between the F. C. and S. C., and of a determination to dictate to the latter body. There is not a shadow of doubt that three members of the F. C. who represent the V. C. or the R. D. usurped the functions of the whole body, and spent the money voted to it by the F. C., without the knowledge of the home members. By keeping away the one envoy of the I. R. B., and auditing their own accounts, and speaking in general terms of the R. D. as if they spoke for the whole body, they hoped to conceal this fact and secure a continuance of the fraud. We now begin to see why it becamenecessary to impose silence, by oath on the delegates, for the first time in the history of the conventions of the V. C. The report of the convention issued by the Triangle, and the tone of circulars since issued, show a deliberate purpose to prepare the minds of the members of the V. C. for a break with our brothers at home. Are such men worthy of your confidence?
Fourth—The R. D.—The R. D. is a fundamental law of the V. C., protected and ratified by international treaty with the I. R. B. It cannot be altered or abolished without the consent of the I. R. B., and the consent of the D's. It was adopted by the Philadelphia convention of the V. C., by a unanimous vote in 1876, with the proviso, that it should become a law only when approved by a two-thirds majority of the D's. It was submitted to the D's, and after being discussed at special meetings in every D, was approved by much more than the necessary majority. It was then submitted to the S. C., and having been agreed to by them the R. D. was elected, and by a solemn treaty invested with the supreme authority in all revolutionary matters.
The R. D. could not be abolished without the consent of both the contracting parties, nor its functions assumed by a minority of that body, or their confederate "in flesh," without the consent of the S. C. or consulting the D's, who created it, and that most accommodating body called the Boston convention, has empowered the Triangle to elect an R. D. or not, as they see fit. That is, to elect the whole body and run a boat of their own, as did the Flannigans at the Flood, with the assistance of their confederate "in the flesh."
The R. D. provided the means of adjusting all differences between the two organizations, of adopting a common policy, of auditing all expenditures, and made out of previously disjointed fragments, one united Irish revolutionary body throughout the world. Every intelligent man will now perceive that the assumption of power by the V. C. members of the R. D. and their "officer in the flesh," as well as the action taken at Boston, means broken faith with the I. R. B., means secession, disruption, divided counsels, is a direct blow at the integrity of the national movement. We cannot believe that you will continue to condone this offense on the part of the present Triangle, or indorse this breach of faith with the I. R. B.
Fifth—The other work of the convention—The mode of electing the Triangle is inconsistent with honest intentions and gives the organization no protection against wrong doing. The oath of secrecy, as to the whole proceedings, is absolutely without justification or valid reason. Its evident intention was to cover up the farce enacted by the committees.
No reasonable member of the V. C. wants information, involving danger to men, within the enemies reach. But every man should know, who audits accounts covering hundreds of thousands of dollars, and insist on having some guarantee that an honest inquiry is made into the most important work of the F. C., viz: theirrelations with the men at home. The change in the oath bodes evil to the cause. What intelligent man will bind himself to promote all measures adopted by the Triangle, "whether known or unknown?" Are we to follow these men blindly in every enterprise to which fancy or ambition leads them, including schemes of American politics?
This, brothers, is the true situation of the Irish National movement in America to-day.
The only possible remedy is in a general convention, which will pronounce final judgment, and calmly and impartially set aside all men who stand in the way of union. We have appealed to the triumvirate for such a convention, as have many of you, in vain.
They will never call it, for the simple reason that they dare not. The only possible means of securing it, and thereby ending this trouble once for all, is by your shaking off the lethargy that has overtaken you and joining hands with us. Your appeals and protests to your leaders will be met by hollow pretenses and subterfuges, such as have met all such efforts for the last year.
Waiting for the "regular" convention means submitting to another farce and allowing the work of disruption to go on with accelerated speed. Come, frankly and openly to our side, and the settlement of the trouble will be in your own hands. We are empowered to call a convention at any time, when we see the necessity for it, without waiting for the period fixed, and it shall be called as soon as you say the word. Then let the culprit suffer, whether it be accused or accuser, and the unfaithful, incompetent, and factious step to the rear. The cause of truth, justice and patriotism will triumph, the confidence now broken be restored, the gloom now hovering over the organization dispelled, and with brightening hopes we will march on to the accomplishment of our object—the restoration of national independence under a republican form of government to our native land.
Fraternally yours,The F. C. of the V. C.X. F. G. (W. E. F.), Chairman.Y. F. C. (X. E. B.), Sec.
All communications should be addressed to John C. Phillips care of P. O. Box 2049, New York City.
But these vigorous measures, instead of crushing the opposition, served only to give it new life and energy. An organization, antagonistic to the Triangle, composed of men bitterly hostile to Sullivan, Boland, Feeley and others high in power,was brought into existence, and rapidly grew until it was equal in strength to the original Clan-na-Gael. It had trusty spies and avowed adherents in the older organization, and the bitter quarrel was also brought into other Irish movements. Sullivan and his aids gradually dropped out of control, first seeing to it, however, that they were to be replaced by men to whom their word would be as law. Still Cronin and those with him kept up their warfare. Numerous efforts were made to silence him, and twice in 1887 he was called as an expert witness in trumped up cases before two Chicago police justices, in the hope that his persecutors, by putting him on the rack of cross examination, might find some flaw in his life that could be made use of in lessening his influence, or some disgraceful scrape which might be held over his head, to make him heed the behests of the man into whose possession the secrets had come. This effort failed of its object, and the physician returned to the charge with two new allegations. One was that the Triangle had allowed the family of Lomasney to suffer for the necessaries of life, while funds that had been appropriated by a local committee of the Clan-na-Gael, which labored under the belief that the missing brother was in an English dungeon, had been withheld, and another, that Sullivan had gone to Paris, while Patrick Egan was an exile in the French capital, anddemanded the sum of $100,000 of Land League funds to carry out the aims of the physical force men in America. According to this charge, the money was demanded to meet certain expenditures that had been planned in a convention of representative members of the Clan. Mr. Egan, so it was claimed, after a good deal of consideration, refused to turn over the money, and then Sullivan threatened to disrupt every Irish society in America unless his demand was speedily complied with. He pointed to the fact that there was a large and growing element among Irish-Americans that was dissatisfied with the management of national affairs, and was ready to revolt as soon as a leader turned up to direct them. A whole week was consumed in discussing the demand of the American emissary, and in the end Mr. Egan was convinced that it would be wiser to take counsel with some of his confreres before rendering a final decision. He told Mr. Sullivan plainly that he was opposed to granting so large a sum of money for any purpose whatever, but he was willing to abide by the decision of other men who had as close a knowledge as himself of the needs of the order at home and abroad. He offered to submit Sullivan's proposition to Sheridan, the famous No. 1 of the Phœnix Park Invincibles, and the leader of the physical force men in Ireland. Mr. Sullivan agreed to this offer,and Sheridan was called to Paris from Ireland by telegraph. Within a week after all the facts had been laid before him, he decided that the money demanded by Sullivan had better be paid than withheld to conciliate all factions of the Clan-na-Gael in America. In result it was claimed that Egan paid Sullivan $100,000 in cash, from the funds of the Irish National League, of which he was treasurer, and that the then chief of the Triangle brought the full amount with him when he returned home. Instead, however, of turning it into the treasury of the Clan-na-Gael, it was contended that only $18,000 was accounted for, and the balance of $82,000 was deposited in the Traders' Bank, to the credit of "Alexander Sullivan, agent," the full amount being subsequently withdrawn on account of certain speculations by Sullivan on the Chicago Board of Trade. That such a deposit had been made was confirmed some time later, when the bank in question failed and its records, as the outcome of legal proceedings, became public property.
But the troubles of the warring factions could not last for ever. There were influential men on both sides who wanted harmony, and were determined to secure it. Finally, the two sides came together at a convention held in Chicagoin 1888. Peace was restored, and the Camps and individuals that had been expelled by the Triangle were declared to be again in good standing. It was decided that the accounts and acts of the Clan-na-Gael society from 1881 should be investigated, and three men were chosen from each faction as a trial committee. They were as follows:
Dr. P. H. Cronin, of Chicago.Dr. P. McCahey, of Philadelphia.John D. McMahon, of Rome, N. Y.P. A. O'Boyle, of Pittston, Pa.Christopher F. Byrne, of Saxonville, Mass.James J. Rogers, of Brooklyn, N. Y.
Dr. P. H. Cronin, of Chicago.Dr. P. McCahey, of Philadelphia.John D. McMahon, of Rome, N. Y.P. A. O'Boyle, of Pittston, Pa.Christopher F. Byrne, of Saxonville, Mass.James J. Rogers, of Brooklyn, N. Y.
The sessions of the committee commenced at Buffalo, in 1888, but the fact that there were a large number of witnesses from points adjacent to New York City, induced the body to make a change of base to that city, and the inquiry was resumed at the Westminster Hotel during the heat of the Harrison-Cleveland presidential campaign. It was soon found that the hotel was altogether too public a place for the inquiry and a hall was hired in another locality. Alexander Sullivan, who, with Boland and Feeley, was present in person, entered a formal protest against the participation of Dr. Cronin, couched in the most vituperative language. It read as follows:
New York, Sept. 15, 1888.P. O. Boyle,Secretary.Dear Sir:—At the opening of this investigation in Buffalo I protested against the presence of P. H. Cronin as a member of the committee to investigate any charges against me. The committee decided that it had no power to act in the matter, but, through its chairman, said that I could file my protest in writing. Therefore I formally and in writing renew said protest. My grounds areFirst, he is a personal enemy; second, he has expressed opinions in this case; third, he is a perjurer and scoundrel, unfit to be placed on any jury.To the first objection I cite the men of the United Brotherhood organization in Chicago, from which he was expelled in a case where I conducted the prosecution. There is no question in Chicago of his personal hostility. Before the National League convention in 1886, his was one of the signatures to a circular assailing me, and he was a regular attendant at meetings hostile to me. This is so notorious to me from all parts of the country that it is not necessary to enlarge upon it, but if substantiation is required it can be furnished to an overwhelming degree.In the support of the second objection it is only necessary to recite the now notorious fact that Cronin was a member of the executive body of the United Brotherhood, and as such he was one of those who circulated charges against my former associates and myself. He therefore not only expressed opinions, but in his official capacity caused those opinions to be published and circulated.Your committee is chosen from two bodies, whose members differ on many points, but who all agree, or profess to agree, in denouncing unfair trials, biased juries and prejudiced jurors in Ireland, and yet I am asked, after a period of four years has elapsed since I was a member or the organization, to come for trial before a committee chosen in my absence at a place where I was given no opportunity to be heard, although I was within a few hundred feet of the place.While you ask the world to believe that you want a fair trial on one side of the Atlantic, you ask me to accept as a juror one who would be excluded in any civil court from a jury in a trial of a case in which I had an interest however trivial.I am told that it has been declared that if I do not appear before this committee I shall be denounced as one unable to defend himself against the accusations filed. So I was left with the alternative of being tried before a jury, with at least one perjured member, or being abused and villified for my non-appearance. And this is what the men who selected Cronin were led to believe was fairness. They should never again be so indecently inconsistent as to criticise the position of juries or courts chosen to try men in England and Ireland. Had he as much decency as an ordinary dog he would not sit in a case in which I was interested.As to the third objection to Cronin, I charge that the brand of perjury is so burned into the scoundrel's brow that all the waters of the earth would not remove the brand. He was a delegate at the district convention held in Chicago, March 23, 1884, that being the first one held in this district. After the constitution was so amended as to provide for the elevation of two delegates from each district, two delegates were elected at the very same session, one being chosen immediately after the other. Yet Cronin, after first officially reporting to his club that two delegates were elected, circulated a report that only one was elected, and stated that he would not be permitted to speak or to present any suggestions from his camp. Every such delegate at the convention has been sworn, and every one, including those who were with Cronin in the U. B. organization, testified that two delegates were chosen, that Cronin was present when they were chosen, that every delegate not only could speak, but was actually called upon to speak, and that every delegate, including Cronin, did speak.Cronin was expelled, a convicted liar, who added perjury to his slander. I have further investigated his record, and I find that in several matters outside of this organization he is also a perjurer. A record obtained from Ireland by William J. Fitzgerald says that Cronin was born at Buttevante, April 13, 1844. Cronin swears that he lived at St. Catherines, Canada, until after the assassination of President Lincoln, April 14, 1865. Captain McDonald, of No. 2 Company, Nineteenth Battalion of the Canadian militia, of which P. H. Cronin was a member, says that at its formation in 1862 or 1863 he had P. H. Cronin in his company, or shortly after its formation. He was known as the "Singer Cronin," and at the time of joining he took the oath of allegiance as follows: "I swear that I will bear true and faithful allegiance to her majesty, the queen, her heirs and successors."About 1863 positive orders were sent by the government that every man had to take the oath of allegiance, and that there were none under his command who did not take it. The record shows that Dr. Cronin's father, J. G. Cronin, was a British subject and continued in Canada up to the time of his death, so that P. H. Cronin until 1865 or 1866, when he left Canada, was a British subject, and if, as he claims, his father was naturalized in the United States before going to Canada, he voluntarily abandoned his American citizenship and resumed the position of a British subject.This P. H. Cronin voluntarily swore allegiance to her British majesty. Yet this creature swore in his name as a voter in St. Louis and voted in that city. He thought best not to come to Chicago and reside one year, but sneaked down to a county in Illinois, doubtless being afraid of attracting attention in Chicago, and swore that he arrived in the United States a minor, under the age of twenty-one years; that he resided in the United States three years preceding his arrival at the age of twenty-one years. He claimed to have been home in 1856, and not in 1844, and even if that were true, he was only nineteen years old when he left Canada, becausehe swore he was in Canada when President Lincoln was assassinated; that he came to the United States in 1865 or 1866, and yet he swore he resided in the United States three years previous to arriving at the age of nineteen, and thus secured his papers on this minor petition falsely sworn to.This side of Cronin's character, I submit, should be considered in connection with any report his malice and prejudice may dictate. I have not made any formal protest against the presence of Dr. McCahey on the trial committee, but it is well known that he has been active in publishing documents and interviews hostile to me, and it is at least strange that one who has been so engaged should be willing to serve on such a committee.Very respectfully,Alexander Sullivan.
New York, Sept. 15, 1888.
P. O. Boyle,Secretary.
Dear Sir:—At the opening of this investigation in Buffalo I protested against the presence of P. H. Cronin as a member of the committee to investigate any charges against me. The committee decided that it had no power to act in the matter, but, through its chairman, said that I could file my protest in writing. Therefore I formally and in writing renew said protest. My grounds are
First, he is a personal enemy; second, he has expressed opinions in this case; third, he is a perjurer and scoundrel, unfit to be placed on any jury.
To the first objection I cite the men of the United Brotherhood organization in Chicago, from which he was expelled in a case where I conducted the prosecution. There is no question in Chicago of his personal hostility. Before the National League convention in 1886, his was one of the signatures to a circular assailing me, and he was a regular attendant at meetings hostile to me. This is so notorious to me from all parts of the country that it is not necessary to enlarge upon it, but if substantiation is required it can be furnished to an overwhelming degree.
In the support of the second objection it is only necessary to recite the now notorious fact that Cronin was a member of the executive body of the United Brotherhood, and as such he was one of those who circulated charges against my former associates and myself. He therefore not only expressed opinions, but in his official capacity caused those opinions to be published and circulated.
Your committee is chosen from two bodies, whose members differ on many points, but who all agree, or profess to agree, in denouncing unfair trials, biased juries and prejudiced jurors in Ireland, and yet I am asked, after a period of four years has elapsed since I was a member or the organization, to come for trial before a committee chosen in my absence at a place where I was given no opportunity to be heard, although I was within a few hundred feet of the place.
While you ask the world to believe that you want a fair trial on one side of the Atlantic, you ask me to accept as a juror one who would be excluded in any civil court from a jury in a trial of a case in which I had an interest however trivial.
I am told that it has been declared that if I do not appear before this committee I shall be denounced as one unable to defend himself against the accusations filed. So I was left with the alternative of being tried before a jury, with at least one perjured member, or being abused and villified for my non-appearance. And this is what the men who selected Cronin were led to believe was fairness. They should never again be so indecently inconsistent as to criticise the position of juries or courts chosen to try men in England and Ireland. Had he as much decency as an ordinary dog he would not sit in a case in which I was interested.
As to the third objection to Cronin, I charge that the brand of perjury is so burned into the scoundrel's brow that all the waters of the earth would not remove the brand. He was a delegate at the district convention held in Chicago, March 23, 1884, that being the first one held in this district. After the constitution was so amended as to provide for the elevation of two delegates from each district, two delegates were elected at the very same session, one being chosen immediately after the other. Yet Cronin, after first officially reporting to his club that two delegates were elected, circulated a report that only one was elected, and stated that he would not be permitted to speak or to present any suggestions from his camp. Every such delegate at the convention has been sworn, and every one, including those who were with Cronin in the U. B. organization, testified that two delegates were chosen, that Cronin was present when they were chosen, that every delegate not only could speak, but was actually called upon to speak, and that every delegate, including Cronin, did speak.
Cronin was expelled, a convicted liar, who added perjury to his slander. I have further investigated his record, and I find that in several matters outside of this organization he is also a perjurer. A record obtained from Ireland by William J. Fitzgerald says that Cronin was born at Buttevante, April 13, 1844. Cronin swears that he lived at St. Catherines, Canada, until after the assassination of President Lincoln, April 14, 1865. Captain McDonald, of No. 2 Company, Nineteenth Battalion of the Canadian militia, of which P. H. Cronin was a member, says that at its formation in 1862 or 1863 he had P. H. Cronin in his company, or shortly after its formation. He was known as the "Singer Cronin," and at the time of joining he took the oath of allegiance as follows: "I swear that I will bear true and faithful allegiance to her majesty, the queen, her heirs and successors."
About 1863 positive orders were sent by the government that every man had to take the oath of allegiance, and that there were none under his command who did not take it. The record shows that Dr. Cronin's father, J. G. Cronin, was a British subject and continued in Canada up to the time of his death, so that P. H. Cronin until 1865 or 1866, when he left Canada, was a British subject, and if, as he claims, his father was naturalized in the United States before going to Canada, he voluntarily abandoned his American citizenship and resumed the position of a British subject.
This P. H. Cronin voluntarily swore allegiance to her British majesty. Yet this creature swore in his name as a voter in St. Louis and voted in that city. He thought best not to come to Chicago and reside one year, but sneaked down to a county in Illinois, doubtless being afraid of attracting attention in Chicago, and swore that he arrived in the United States a minor, under the age of twenty-one years; that he resided in the United States three years preceding his arrival at the age of twenty-one years. He claimed to have been home in 1856, and not in 1844, and even if that were true, he was only nineteen years old when he left Canada, becausehe swore he was in Canada when President Lincoln was assassinated; that he came to the United States in 1865 or 1866, and yet he swore he resided in the United States three years previous to arriving at the age of nineteen, and thus secured his papers on this minor petition falsely sworn to.
This side of Cronin's character, I submit, should be considered in connection with any report his malice and prejudice may dictate. I have not made any formal protest against the presence of Dr. McCahey on the trial committee, but it is well known that he has been active in publishing documents and interviews hostile to me, and it is at least strange that one who has been so engaged should be willing to serve on such a committee.
Very respectfully,Alexander Sullivan.
The protest was overruled. The charges, five in number, filed by John Devoy, of New York, and Luke Dillon, of Philadelphia, set forth that no active work had been performed by the "Triangle" or its agents; that there was nothing to substantiate its claim that it had expended over $87,000 in active work; that it had basely neglected the families of men sent on errands of the Brotherhood; that bogus transfers had been issued to members of the organization as coming from Ireland, and that a district convention had illegally instituted. The trial was a heated one. Each side went to the hall every night backed by desperate followers. Letters threatening them death if a verdict of guilty was rendered were received by Cronin and McCahey. Suspecting treachery; the former took the precaution of making full notes of the testimony for his private information. When the evidence was all in a vote was taken on a motion to acquit. It stoodthree to three. Next a vote was taken to find Sullivan, Boland and Feeley guilty. This time it stood four to two, one of Cronin's colleagues deserting to the other side, and leaving the Chicago and Philadelphia physicians alone in their opposition to the Triangle. The question then arose as to the disposition of the evidence and a resolution was adopted that every record of the trial should be destroyed. Dr. Cronin demanded that the evidence should be published with the report, and sent to every Camp, but again the majority was against him. Thereupon he refused to surrender his private notes, and after returning to Chicago and consulting his friends, he determined that every man in the Clan-na-Gael should hear the story, and that a statement on the subject should be made at the meeting of the Irish National League of America, which had been called to assemble in Philadelphia in 1889. From this time on to his death, the matter was uppermost in his mind. A minority report, signed by the physician and Dr. McCahey, was filed with the executive, and a demand was made that it should be made public in the order. This was not done, however, simply because the majority of the Executive was attached to the "Triangle element," and, this avenue closed against him, Dr. Cronin contented himself with reading the report in his own Camp. It was this act, according tothe subsequent theory of the prosecution, that, more than any thing else, cost him his life. Meanwhile he was industriously engaged upon the preparation of his papers for the prospective conventions of the Clan-na-Gael and Irish National League, his report of the New York trial proving invaluable to him in this connection; while he continued at the same time to periodically insist upon the publication of the minority report of the trial. On the very day upon which he was decoyed from home, the Executive Board was called together; and on the following day, (Sunday) an order was issued that Alexander Sullivan's protest, which branded the physician as a perjurer and a traitor, should be sent to every Camp.
It was hardly to be expected that the adherents and allies of the ex-head-centre of the Triangle would contemplate the vigorous assaults of Dr. Cronin upon the reputation and official conduct of their erstwhile leader with equanimity. The temporary calm that had settled over the organization with the close of the Chicago convention and its treaty of peace, vanished like a fog before the noon-day sun; and strife and bitterness once more reigned supreme. Every camp had its faction that championed the one side or the other. Under the banner of the physician, as well as underthe colors of his adversary, were ranged scores and hundreds of men who had left their imprint upon the Irish-American history of the decade. The physician had his Rends, Dillons, Devoys, Hynes, Scanlans, McCaheys; the lawyer his Egans and Fitzgeralds, O'Briens and Bolands. Effort after effort was made to induce Dr. Cronin to abandon his policy. Arguments, pleading, cajolery, threats—all were employed in vain. To one and all he had but one reply: "That he had put his hand to the plow, and that, God helping him, he would never turn back." For months before his disappearance, he believed that he was a marked man, and that, at the first opportunity, he would pay forfeit with his life for what he regarded as his unselfish devotion to the cause of his native land.
Little wonder then, that those of his intimate friends who were familiar with these facts declared, as with one voice, that he had met his death at the hands of his enemies.
Dr. Cronin's report of the trial, and which for weeks prior to the night of his disappearance, he had carried with him for safe keeping, were found in one of his garments in his residence after his failure to return home. The record in full is as follows:
TELEGRAM.March 13, 1889.—Dr. P. H. Cronin, No. 468 N. Clark Street: Meet me at Westminster Hotel, New York, Tuesday evening,15th, 8 o'clock. Peremptorily required on account report of committee to read.J. D. McMahon.Telegram dated Jan. 19 or 18, 1889, New York:Dr. P. H. Cronin, Opera House, Chicago, Ill.: Ordered by the proper board that you send to me without delay your report on the trial.Ronaine.Dr. Cronin's reply as follows:Chicago, Jan. 17, 1889.T. H. Ronaine, Esq., New York.—Dear Sir and Brother: I am in receipt of telegram, and in reply would say that I vote as I did at last meeting of committee in New York; with the recommendation that vote be published and read to the clubs. McCahey has correct record of my vote. Or, if not, please inform me.Fraternally,P. H. Cronin.Philadelphia, Pa., Jan. 15, 1889.To the F. C. of the U. S.—Dear Sirs and Brothers: The Trial Committee appointed at Chicago was unable to elicit all the facts connected with the charges placed before it, because of the refusal of several of the witnesses to answer many of the questions asked, and because of the inability of others to remember events and figures that might be supposed to be indelibly impressed on their memories. From the evidence presented I am obliged to report:1. That the family of one who lost his life in the service of the order was scandalously and shamefully neglected, and continued to be neglected for two years after their destitute condition was known, and that Alexander Sullivan, Michael Boland, and D. C. Feeley are responsible and censurable for that neglect.2. That Gen. C. H. McCarthy, of St. Paul, Minn., was unjustly and deliberately excluded from the Boston convention, and subsequently shamefully persecuted and driven from the order, and that Alexander Sullivan, Michael Boland, and D. C. Feeley are responsible and censurable for that series of reprehensible acts.3. That delegate from home organization was excluded from the Boston convention, and that the same three defendants are responsible and censurable for that exclusion.4. That the same defendants issued a deceptive report to the Boston convention, leading the order to believe that its affairs had been examined by independent committees, and that the order was $13,000 in debt; that, in fact, Alexander Sullivan and Michael Boland were on the committee of foreign affairs, and the Treasurer states that there was a balance in the treasury and not a debt.5. That prior to the Boston convention one hundred and eleven thousand ($111,000) dollars was expended without any direct or indirect benefit to the order, and most of it in a manner that could not in any way have benefited the order, and that the same three defendants are censurable and responsible for this enormous and wasteful expenditure.6. That this enormous sum was spent without the sanction or knowledge of the home portion of the R. D.7. That various persons sent abroad were not supplied with sufficient funds, and that the agent of the Triangle is responsible and censurable for that criminal neglect, and not the three defendants.8. That Michael Boland and the late Secretary of the I. N. B. issued fraudulent transfers, for the purpose of deceiving the order in Philadelphia into believing that the union with the home order had not been broken.9. That Michael Boland and D. C. Feeley, the former by acts and the latter by assent, are guilty of attempting to pack the Pittsburg convention by, first, excluding the delegate from the Pacific Slope; second, excluding Mr. McLaughlin, delegate from Dakota; third, excluding O'Sullivan and Delaney, rightful delegates from New York; fourth, admitting the Rev. Dr. Betts and John J. Maroney, on bogus credentials from the bogus districts; fifth, admitting Boland and Malone, illegal delegates from New York; sixth, admitting proxies from Iowa, Brooklyn, and Illinois; seventh, sitting as delegates themselves in direct violation of the constitution.10. That the $80,491, reported to the district convention as having been spent in active work was not spent for any such work, no such work having been done or contemplated during the eleven months within which this large amount was drawn from the treasury. The active work done between the Boston and other district conventions, was paid for out of the surplus held by the agent of the Triangle at the time of the Boston convention, and not out of the $87,491 drawn from the treasury months after such active work had ceased.11. That Michael Boland and D. C. Feeley, the former by acts and the latter by silence, are responsible for the expenditure of this large amount of money, and censurable for deceiving the district convention as to the purpose for which it was spent.12. That Michael Boland, Alexander Sullivan, and D. C. Feeley, the former by acts and the two latter by assent, illegally suspended D's in January, 1885, and that Michael Boland and D. C. Feeley, the former by acts and the latter by assent, illegally suspended U. D.'s in New York, in January, 1886.Yours, respectfully,P. McCahey.I concur in the within and foregoing report, and would recommend, in strict fairness to all concerned, and in justice to the entire organization, that the evidence, from which were deducted the foregoing, be printed by F. C. and sent to each D. O. and by him read at the general meeting or district over which he presides.P. H. Cronin.Signed Jan. 19, 1889.NOTES OF TESTIMONY.First meeting, Westminster Hotel, New York, July 30.J. D. McMahon, of Rome, N. Y., in the chair.Committee met, and after some discussion as to choice of chairman and secretary the matter was arranged by electing anew J. D. McMahon as chairman, and P. A. O'Boyle as secretary. Members present: McMahon, O'Boyle, McCahey, Rogers, Burns and Cronin.Letters and telegrams were read showing that none of the defendants were ready, owing to brief notice. Accusers on hand.On motion, committee adjourned to meet at Buffalo, N. Y., Aug. 20, 1888.Genesee House, Buffalo, N. Y., Aug. 20, 1888. Committee called to order. J. D. McMahon, President; P. A. O'Boyle, Secretary.Present: J. D. McMahon, P. A. O'Boyle, P. McCahey, J. J. Rogers, P. H. Cronin, C. F. Burns, Sullivan, Feeley, Boland, Ryan, Devoy, Trude, O'Neill, McCahey.On announcement by the Chair that the committee was ready for business, Mr. Sullivan stated that he had an objection to offer to the constitution of the committee. The chairman asked if it was to the committee as a whole, or to any particular person.Sullivan answered that it was to the personnel of the committee; that one of the committee was a malignant enemy of his (Sullivan's); that the same party was forever pursuing him with a design to injure him; that as an expelled member of the order, that party referred to ought not to sit in any committee. Continuing, Mr. Sullivan said that the party referred to was Dr. Cronin, who recently had made statements through a newspaper in regard to him that he knew to be false; that the newspaper editor (giving name of paper and editor) had sent him (Sullivan) a letter of explanation, and that for this and many other reasons he objected to being tried by the committee as constituted.Messrs. Feeley and Boland followed, both strongly objecting to Dr. Cronin. Boland said that though personally he had some objections to Dr. McCahey he would waive those objections and join with Messrs. Sullivan and Feeley in asking that Dr. Cronin retire from the committee, they being willing to accept any one in the room in preference.Dr. Cronin replied to this; said he thought it strange that Mr. Sullivan should speak of him as a malignant enemy. He (Cronin) had never characterized Sullivan personally as an enemy; anything said by him (Cronin) was directed toward the men whom he was given to understand had wrecked the organization. Sullivan was one of them, he understood, and only in connection with certain developments pertaining to the order did he say anything of Sullivan. If Mr. Sullivan believed everything told him by gossips he (the doctor) could not help it. "Indeed," the doctor continued, "why should I be the enemy of Mr. Sullivan? What has he done to me that I should, as he says, single him out for personal enmity?" As to the newspaper editor matter, the doctor said, that while not believing in introducing what savored of American politics, he could explain the newspaper affair by referring to thepaper itself. Mr. Sullivan would certainly not make an affidavit to the statement that the paper had done what he said, for he (Dr. Cronin) had evidence that would readily disprove it.To this Mr. Sullivan replied that he did not want to make affidavits, but would say that the creature (referring to the doctor) should not sit as one of his judges; that he (Sullivan) could prove by a dozen men, who would not believe the doctor under oath, that he (the doctor) was an expelled member of the organization. [Then the paper mentions the names of three men.]Mr. Cronin said, interrupting Mr. Sullivan, that the gentleman evidently meant to irritate him or intimidate the committee.Mr. Sullivan said that he did not wish to intimidate the committee.Dr. Cronin then said: "Then you probably mean to intimidate me. That you cannot do, sir, and you ought to know it by this time. All the objections you urge were made at the convention, and by an almost unanimous vote, as the selection of that convention, I am the peer of any one here and doing my duty by the body that created me. I would not, if I could."Mr. Sullivan took his seat, overruled by that body.The Chairman asked all but the committee to retire, and, upon a vote being taken, the objections of the defendants to Dr. Cronin were overruled by the votes of the Chairman, Messrs. Burns, Rogers, McCahey, and Cronin, the Secretary not voting. This was announced to those making the objections, and the trial proceeded.Before the trial proceeded, Col. Boland said he had a witness whose expenses he wished to have guaranteed; that the witness resided at Leadville. On motion it was ordered that the expenses of witness be guaranteed.Col. Boland called attention to the fact that many persons present who were witnesses, etc., should not know what was going on. The Colonel said that matters of grave importance might come before the committee, and as it was common report that one witness had given information to the British Government, that John Devoy had given information to the British Government, he requested that none but the attorneys for prosecution and the defendants remain before the committee, each witness to be examined separately.Dr. Cronin objected to this, saying, that as Devoy had been singled out for animadversion by Col. Boland, it was not fair for the committee to extend support to Boland's unjust attack.On motion all but the committee retired. The committee then decided that each prosecutor should remain with the attorney and that witnesses be introduced separately; the defendants remaining also; the committee admitting all those entitled to be present, the charges were presented and specifications as follows:1. That no active work had been performed by F. C. that had been claimed by that body and its agents.2. The men on errands of the brotherhood had been basely neglected and their families left without support.3. That bogus transfers to members of the organization had been issued as coming from Ireland.4. That the district convention was falsely instituted, etc.5. That F. C. members sat as delegates in that convention in direct violation of the constitution.The proof of charges had shown:1. That they had claimed that $87,467 had been expended in active work. No vouchers were presented, no contracts, and no money, no account explained about.2. Proof that such explanation was never made.3. But little money given Mrs. McCahey; small sums given to men abroad; bogus transfers fabricated by X Y and others.4. Convention illegally constituted at Pittsburg; proxies present, Boland and Feeley sitting there. Boland offered position as R. D. and money sent him that he might make statement that active work was engaged in.A witness testifies: Witness called to stand, after being duly obligated, testified as follows:Some time previous to the Boston convention I was called on by certain members of the order in reference to an offer of services made by me some time previously. After conference in relation to details I agreed to go to the other side. I went by steerage on ticket procured for me and received£20. After an absence of seven weeks I returned by steerage passage out of the amount received. Upon my arrival in America I met Donovan, who acted as agent for the body, and who paid me $50. Donovan was then in the employ of Gen. Kerwin. I complained of the small amount given me, but did not ask for more. Not enough was given me for the work expected to be done. Later in the same year I was again called on by Donovan, who asked me if in addition to myself I could furnish enough men to accomplish a certain amount of active work. He asked me would I go again I said yes. Looked up the men. It was almost impossible to find any. Got two men on steamer and one to accompany me to do work abroad. Everything being ready, I met Donovan at Green's Hotel, Philadelphia, in company with John J. Maroney. Donovan told me that Maroney would buy tickets for me by steerage. They cost $18 apiece and $100 was given me to carry on work. I told Donovan that on former occasions I had to go on vessel three days after work was done; that the sum now offered me was too little for the work looked for. I insisted on getting money enough for the purpose of safety, else I would not go. Donovan told me that sufficient funds would be furnished on the other side. He stated his reason for not giving me more before leaving was that men engaged in similar work had been arrested on landing on the other side; that my carrying a large sum might excite suspicion. That was satisfactory to me, especially as I was given the name of the agent on the other side who was to furnish funds as needed. I left the room and sent in —— (another man), the one that was to accompany me. Maroney left the room with me. This otherman told me he received the same amount that I did. Maroney then told me he was glad I refused to accept the sum offered me as total compensation for the work. He also said he did not believe it was the wish of the F. C. to do as the S. had said. He promised to see the F. C. and demand money from them, and should they not give it he would send me help on the next steamer by a trusty man. On the way over I had to pay over£2 for certain accommodations on steamer. After being on the other side nine days, taking care not to excite suspicion, I had but£10 left. I then went to Capital City, and met the man who I was told was the agent and would give me money, and I told him I wanted some help, as I was short of funds. I asked him for£10. He denied having any money for any such purpose; he had no more than he required for actual expenses, and hardly that. He said all he had received upon leaving was $200.Objected to by Boland, who asked to know how witness knew the man was agent.Witness—I was told by Donovan in the presence of Maroney that upon my arrival on the other side I would get funds from the man mentioned. The man then went on to say, that owing to the circumstances he might be obliged to stay for a year. He had worked at his business for some time, but was doing nothing now. I then said I would return at once to America. He said he would at once ask something for me from Ex. I replied that if he did not get funds I would go back. Before leaving I asked him where would it be necessary to do the work. He said he did not know; things were looking queer; that he was sure he had been betrayed by some one.Question by Mr. Ryan—What became of this man?Witness—He is now in prison. His reason for thinking he was betrayed was that two men had called at his lodging asking for him under his assumed name. I told him to change his lodging. But soon after I was told he had been followed up by the same individuals, whom he had suspected were detectives. This alarmed him much. At his request work was delayed six weeks. I at last told him I would do the work. There were four of us. At various times I asked him if he had received any money from Ex. He said no. He seemed so careful that my men deemed it cowardice. I called his attention to this before the men, saying we looked for courage at this time. He repeated before us that he believed he had been betrayed, for, though he had changed his lodgings several times, the party he suspected as being a detective had called upon him at each place.Exception by defendant. To which was said:I finally induced him to give orders to do the work. This was Thursday. Saturday we did it. After the work was done I met him that same evening. He remained in Capital City seven days afterward. I was so reduced for funds that I prevailed upon him to give me£4 of the£16 he had left. On landing in this country had£3½. Had no bed nor bedding on the ship; slept on the top side of a plank.This in answer to a question by Dr Cronin:I at once complained to Donovan and Maroney, and through them to the executive, or Gen. Kerwin, of the treatment I had received and the culpable neglect of the F C. About the last of February, 1885, Donovan furnished me $10 with which to reach home. The man in charge for the order made me take an oath before leaving to bring the matter before the order.I always supposed Kerwin was a member of the executive. Before leaving America I told Maroney I would take an alias known to me; my alias was the proper name of a man. The imprisoned one bore the alias given to me. This was the agent. He was four miles from the place we worked at. Only three of us did the work.Question by Mr. Ryan—How much money in all did you receive?A.—Four persons in all. $500; of this the agent got $200. We were two months in the country.Then the witness makes a statement that the other man who went with him, whose name I did not read the last time—this man came back six months after. At an expense for material, I should think, of $7,400 in all to cover the enterprise.Q.—How many operations did you perform? A.—Three. We always bade each other good by after each meeting, thinking it might be our last meeting on earth. I have learned that in order to get back, the other man who went over with me had to sell his clothes to get passage money. He came with a sprained ankle. In July or August, 1885, he received $7 from Maroney. I took up Rossa's paper one day and in it I saw an announcement of a subscription to keep the mother of Cunningham. I went to Maroney, and after telling him it was shameful that she should be allowed to suffer so he said he would see to the matter. Spoke of Gen. Kerwin as being asked to send some help; said he would not. I said if they didn't I would. Kerwin then came to my home and said I ought to be expelled; I told him he ought to send help to the woman; he said he ought not as the man himself had abundant means; I finally induced Mr. Ryan to get F. C. to send something. One hundred dollars was sent through D. 18, who sent it through F. C., and I was informed of S. G. of 18. A few months after I met a lady of Detroit who told me that Capt. Mackey's wife was in want; he was killed in London and was assured, I am told, that his family would never want. Lomasney, and his brother, accompanied by Fleming, went over in 1884. I wrote to Cochrane, and both assured me that Mrs. Mackey was in want. At once $1,025 was raised and sent to Detroit, where matters were found to be even worse than they had been represented.In the case of Dr. Gallagher, his people were in want. Mr. Delaney had recovered the money on the doctor's person, but that was only a small sum, and most of it was being used in his defense.On consultation, met D. in New York. One hundred dollars was raised and sent to Mrs. Gallagher. I requested that the menon trial on the other side should be defended. Gen. Kerwin said that friendless men were better off in such cases. I raised£50 to send to Jack Delaney's sister.Witness produced five forms of transfer, purporting to be in accordance with the rules of the combined order, but which were shown to be bogus. Witness said: I wrote in the early part of June, 1886, for transfers for certain persons in Philadelphia, who had been clamoring for admission into D. I said it would do a great deal of good to be able to show that we were in opinion with the folks at home. Within four days I received six, of which those five are a part. McMahon, Burns, Henry, Gallagher, Henry, the witness testifying. Leonard stated to me—Objected to by the defendants.Some time before the Pittsburg convention, witness was called upon by P. O. Sullivan and J. J. Delaney, who had learned that he was a delegate to the convention. They said they represented eleven D's, and that in order to seat Boland and Miller, Sullivan and Delaney had been thrown out by the suspension of D.Mr. Boland objects to this.Mr. Ryan and I protested at the convention and asked that Delaney and Sullivan be seated. We stated that a good member of the executive should sit as a delegate in the convention; for the same objection, we objected to Mr. Feeley and Mr. Gleason. Each of these men voted to seat the other. We objected to the proxies from Chicago, Messrs. Tim Crane and Florence Sullivan, the latter proxy for Father Dorney. The other said he represented Alexander Sullivan.It having been stated that district S. represented or had been represented by virtue of a cablegram sent to Gleason and Sullivan, Boland requests them to act for Australia, and that John J. Maroney and Dr. Betts were admitted as proxies. We asked the secretary if any money had been sent by this district in any communication had before the receipt of this cablegram. Secretary said he hadn't had any communication with S. at all. The communication was with Alexander Sullivan and Michael Boland.We then asked how the Australian cablegram came here, by which route. The secretary didn't seem to know. Mr. Ryan then informed the convention that all cablegrams reaching here from Australia were recorded in the London post office. For this reason he thought it highly improbable that any such message came to the gentleman mentioned.Here Mr. Sullivan denied having been appointed delegate to the convention, or that his brother Florence represented him there.The Witness—I was R. D. at that time in place of Gen. Kerwin. Before my election as delegate I never acted as R. D. There was no connection with the home body. I received $500 from Mr. Ryan, which it was said I was to use as my judgment dictated. I asked Boland if I should do any active work outsideand kept a lookout for it. I spent money afterwards in trying to right the order.CROSS-EXAMINED BY ALEXANDER SULLIVAN.Q—When and to whom did you complain on your return to this country? A—To Donovan.Q—You made no complaint to the executive directly. A—No.By Mr. Boland—How did you get the money, the $500. A—In cash. This was three months before the convention.Q—Did I ask you to get the amount right as representing R. D.? A.—I told you I had them on the ship.Q.—Has any difficulty since that made you say why you were on R. D.? A.—No.Q.—Were you a delegate at the time you got the money? A.—No.Q.—Were you appointed on foreign relations or finance committee? A.—No.Q.—Pending the discussion of the report you left the convention? A.—I left, claiming it was not a convention of the order.Q.—You don't know who I appointed? A.—No; I was not in on permanent organization.Q.—You don't know of operations outside of your own? A.—No.To Mr. Rogers—I voted at the convention under a vote taken on various motions.By Mr. Ryan—Do you know of any work having been done between Jan. 20, 1885, and the district convention. A.—No.Q.—How much did it cost for Mackey's work? Objected to by Feeley.Q.—When did you get that $500. A.—The check sent by Boland and Ryan will show I got the money from Ryan, but he received it by check.Constitution of the order offered in evidence.Examination of another witness. Obligated, name, etc.My knowledge when I was elected D. M. to fill vacancy, caused by resignation of John J. Marony. In July, 1885, his resignation was demanded by the district. In October I went out as an organizer for the National League through the west. Nov. 23, I spoke at Philadelphia. Several seniors mentioned that Dillon was in straightened circumstances. I promised to see the executive. I saw Gen. Kerwin, D. M., of New York. He said when I mentioned the matter to him, that he had no power; that this was not an order to grant pensions. He would see Boland. I met Boland by arrangement. He listened to what I had to say, and at first refused to assist Dillon. Finally he said he would consider the matter. Then he authorized me to pay $200 of obligations maturing. I advanced this myself, and got it back in December, 1885, and I saw Gen. Kerwin, and told him he should send money to Mrs. Cunningham; that the lady was hurt on the subject of her being neglected by us. He said he would send it. In December, 1885,it was rumored that our convention would be held in January, 1886. I was told by Kerwin and Boland that Egan wanted to retire from the Presidency of the league. I was asked by them to accept the Secretaryship of the league. This I refused. It was said considerable trouble might be looked for in any case; about the last of December I was sent for to go to New York. I saw Boland and Kerwin together at this time, as well as in January and February. Had interviews with Kerwin and Boland on the subject of the convention and like matters. Mr. Boland asked me why I would not take the Secretaryship. He said the plan for holding a convention of the order had been abandoned, as the L. R. then did not take place. Men would get out and I would not be selected as President of the league.Some time after this I received the following letter from Kerwin:"My Dear Sir:(Giving the name.) The Chicago people have asked for you for the 4th of March. If you will take my advice you will take no office in the league."I was led to believe about this time that the organization intended opposing Parnell, owing to his recognition of others. Boland and Kerwin both said this.(Interrupted by Boland.) Is that your recollection of what took place? A.—Yes.Various letters were shown. (Exhibit B.)These exhibits were not found among the physician's papers.Q.—By Mr. Rogers—What did you give the money to Dillon for? A.—The money had been given me as a general resource. I did not want to go into active work, and suggested Dillon. I gave him the money. Boland authorized this by a letter to me. [Letter read.] Dillon had convinced me that the F. C. hadn't done fair; in fact, I felt that Boland was trying to play me, and I wished to return the compliment.Q.—Did you want to accept the Presidency of the league? A.—The slate was Baldwin, Minton and Carroll for F. C., and myself as President of the league. I knew that my age was a bar to my acceptance. Then I was going to attack the ones in authority. I attended the convention. Carroll was temporary Chairman; Reynolds was elected permanent Chairman.Convention went into Committee of the Whole. It was reported that Father Dorney could not come because he had trouble with the Bishop, and that Alexander Sullivan was absent because British detectives were shadowing him. I held that no member of the executive could sit as a delegate; quoted the constitution; no exception to my doing so; the fact was as stated by me. The last district called was Q. For R. we were directed to apply to the Secretary. District S. was named. I objected to this as no mention had been made of it in our report. I asked "Where is it?" I was answered, "Australia." Its representatives here areMaroney and Betts. They said they represented Boland and Sullivan. I asked if there was any organization in Australia? I was answered there is one in contemplation. The Secretary said Betts and Maroney were there by order of the executive and by order of a cablegram sent to Sullivan and Boland.Sullivan is said to be not a member of the order and Boland represents New York. They had earlier said that Sullivan was shadowed by detectives.I then showed how the cablegram had come from England. Letters had been left with the President by Boland. Districts H. and B. declared they would leave the convention. We refused to take any part. Did not return. Motion to expel seceding members carried by a vote of 20 to 5.Q.—By Mr. Boland—The conversations were in the presence of Kerwin, were they not? A.—Yes, many of them.Q.—Did the matter come up in relation to your treatment at Chicago? Some of it took place before you were elected? A.—Yes. At district meeting of S. J. Kerwin was present as the representative of F. C. The district requested me to accept. Had no conversation with you until months after.Q.—By Mr. Feeley—Did you present any objection at district convention as to your statement as to district? A.—No. Because I knew nothing of any other district.Q.—Did you present any evidence, other than your statement, in relation to any of the acts mentioned? A.—No. Because I was not aware of any man elected.Q.—Do you recollect that a vote was taken in regard to District A.? A.—Yes; if you have any doubt I can refer you to mem.Q.—Do you recollect my opposing the representation of Australia by any person in that body? A.—No; you spoke to me, however, and said to me that I should not oppose it; that you were as anxious as I, for you had been ignored or not consulted for eighteen months. You voted to seat Australia.Q.—You charged that the executive used the funds of the organization to pay Maroney's debts, did you? A.—No. In August, 1884, Maroney was a porter in a store on Market street. Soon after he was D. M. of three counties surrounding Philadelphia. He went into the gents' furnishing goods at No. 2400 Kensington avenue. He got $400 from the executive; check on the Continental Bank, exchanged to his credit. Afterwards he went into debt $600 to McDermott (Black Jim). This amount the executive paid to McDermott. I saw the $600 paid him. I made the fact known to the convention. [Mr. O'Boyle interrupts.]Q.—What was the relation between Maroney and the executive? A.—I don't know.Mr. Rogers—What did Maroney say when you gave him the money? [There is no answer to that question.]Mr. O'Boyle—Upon whom was the check drawn? A.—All checks were signed by Kerwin for the executive.Mr. Rogers—Had this not been a prior date? A. No.Mr. Feeley—Was your charge denied by Maroney? A.—No, he said the money was furnished by the executive for work until he should earn enough to pay it back.Mr. Feeley—When was Maroney's debt paid? A.—Some time in December.Q.—Did Maroney do any work after that? A.—He acted as detective in Iowa. He went with Sullivan and Boland to St. Paul.Dr. Cronin—Did the term report show any loss to Maroney? A.—I could not say; the time was from August, 1885, to August, 1886.Examination of another witness, a member since the beginning of the old organization.Q.—Did you know Capt. Lomasney? A.—Yes.Q.—Do you know of his having left on a certain motive? A.—Yes, three or four times since his imprisonment as Mr. O'Sullivan in 1867.Q.—Do you remember the last time he went? A.—Yes; in August, 1884.Q.—What did he say to you on the subject of his work? A.—I was closer than a brother to him. Our families had constant intercourse. I offered him my hand the day he told me of his project; had little help. Wife saved a bed.Q.—What family had he? A.—A wife and four children and an aged father.Q.—Who were with him? A.—His brother Jim and Mr. So-and-so.Q.—Have they been seen since? [No answer to this.]Q.—What was Mrs. Lomasney's condition before his going? A.—A most outrageous case of neglect. Flemming's mother died in the poorhouse.Q.—Did you ask for help? A.—Yes; in 1885 I went to New Haven. We had no directors. I called upon Dr. Wallace. He was D. Saw Mulvaney and Condon. The latter went with me to Carroll. He professed utter ignorance of the whole affair. I said: "By God, you must see her;" her, Mrs. L. He decided to. Mulvaney said: "Why don't you see Boland?" Found him on Fifth avenue. He denied all responsibility. He would have nothing to do with it. Finally he claimed she had received much money. I said she did not. He was non-committal. His acknowledgment made him responsible.Q.—Did you see Carroll at New York? A.—Yes. We met him at Vesey street. He left me to go into theHeraldbuilding and brought me $100. I refused this. I told him I didn't come for money. I said: "You know how to send this, as you have the others; if you respect the memory of the dead and the widow and the orphan, made so by your act, do your duty by all."Q.—Until August, 1886, what was her condition? A.—Poverty-stricken; no coal, no clothing; nothing left her but misery and her pride. Our S. G. would not give the channel of communication.He read our resolutions; whether he ever forwarded them or not I did never know. He is dead. He told the committee of D. that the organization was not responsible.Mr. Rogers—You swear you called the attention of Boland and Carroll to her condition? A.—Yes; and not until somebody came to us with $1,025 did the poor woman have any adequate support.By Dr. Cronin—Did Lomasney attend the district convention held in Chicago in 1884? A.—No; he was not elected.Q.—Was any one elected from your D.? A.—No; we noticed it much. We could not account for our D. having no representation.Q.—Would Lomasney tell you if he had been selected a delegate by any one outside of D.? A.—Yes, and we would have been aware of his absence.Q.—Would he have gone there, if not elected a delegate?A.—No; he was the soul of honor, and despised trickery; he did not care for office; never held any in his life except in danger.Mr. Boland—Did you see him at Boston? A.—Walsh told me he had no control. S. G. contended that the organization had no responsibility. In 1885 John Maroney called; said he had been especially sent. They had come for a little money; gave $10; Lomasney had nothing. N. Y. D. S. raised and sent $150. More was raised and suppressed. In 1887 the sheriff put Mrs. L. out on the street. No home was ever bought for her.Question by Mr. Dillon—Do you know that Mrs. L. is an economical woman? A.—Yes. People began to talk of her and sent an organization to me to say that she was extravagant; talked of her husband's taking off, which prejudiced many, and her rent was raised. She had been paying $30 a month; no general increase; the landlord wanted her put out.Mrs. Lomasney examined. [Upon Alexander Sullivan's request not sworn.] Husband went away in August, 1884.Q.—How much money have you received from the organization since? A.—A thousand dollars altogether.Q.—How much since? A.—In the summer of 1885 I visited Alexander Sullivan. I went to inquire after my husband, as I was led to believe he was in possession of certain funds; he did not know my condition, nor did he relieve me. He did send for a ticket to Detroit with which I returned home.Q.—When again did you call upon Mr. Sullivan? A.—In August, 1886, I made known my condition, and after advising me to sell my little store, he asked me a schedule of my liabilities: $200; he would attend to the matter. He gave me no money, nor offered me any. He seemed anxious that I should not communicate with any one in the city. He asked me if I was acquainted with any one. I told him of James Q. Mr. S. said I should not mention his (Sullivan's) name to any one, etc. Called on Q. He talked to me about Father Dorney. No help.Met Col. Richard Burke, and he, with some friends, assisted me, I know that Mr. Sullivan was the one that had a right toattend to this. Was afterward amazed that he did not. The dress I wore was a borrowed one. John Hickey was S. G. Several weeks after I went to Mr. Sullivan and asked him a loan of $100; this he sent me; nothing since. I could not give up the store, as that would confirm the belief that husband was dead or in the business. Thomas Tuttle was the first to relieve my necessities.CROSS-EXAMINED BY ALEXANDER SULLIVAN.Q.—You saw me in 1886, was it not? A.—Yes, certain. Another $500 came from Brooklyn. I had a letter sent by my husband when he was in Europe, inclosing one from Mr. Alexander Sullivan, in which he said, in my letter, he asked for money. I afterwards received a note from my husband saying he had received money from Mr. Sullivan; I don't know the amount.Here Mr. S. admitted that Lomasney was sent by the organization.The last letter from husband was in 1884; anxious to go home. His age 44.Examination of another witness. Evidence corroborates that of the first witness taken. Received£20 and one steerage passage six weeks after the first witness. No shoes. Sold clothes and trunk to get home. No bed.
TELEGRAM.
March 13, 1889.—Dr. P. H. Cronin, No. 468 N. Clark Street: Meet me at Westminster Hotel, New York, Tuesday evening,15th, 8 o'clock. Peremptorily required on account report of committee to read.J. D. McMahon.
Telegram dated Jan. 19 or 18, 1889, New York:
Dr. P. H. Cronin, Opera House, Chicago, Ill.: Ordered by the proper board that you send to me without delay your report on the trial.Ronaine.
Dr. Cronin's reply as follows:
Chicago, Jan. 17, 1889.
T. H. Ronaine, Esq., New York.—
Dear Sir and Brother: I am in receipt of telegram, and in reply would say that I vote as I did at last meeting of committee in New York; with the recommendation that vote be published and read to the clubs. McCahey has correct record of my vote. Or, if not, please inform me.Fraternally,
P. H. Cronin.
Philadelphia, Pa., Jan. 15, 1889.
To the F. C. of the U. S.—
Dear Sirs and Brothers: The Trial Committee appointed at Chicago was unable to elicit all the facts connected with the charges placed before it, because of the refusal of several of the witnesses to answer many of the questions asked, and because of the inability of others to remember events and figures that might be supposed to be indelibly impressed on their memories. From the evidence presented I am obliged to report:
1. That the family of one who lost his life in the service of the order was scandalously and shamefully neglected, and continued to be neglected for two years after their destitute condition was known, and that Alexander Sullivan, Michael Boland, and D. C. Feeley are responsible and censurable for that neglect.
2. That Gen. C. H. McCarthy, of St. Paul, Minn., was unjustly and deliberately excluded from the Boston convention, and subsequently shamefully persecuted and driven from the order, and that Alexander Sullivan, Michael Boland, and D. C. Feeley are responsible and censurable for that series of reprehensible acts.
3. That delegate from home organization was excluded from the Boston convention, and that the same three defendants are responsible and censurable for that exclusion.
4. That the same defendants issued a deceptive report to the Boston convention, leading the order to believe that its affairs had been examined by independent committees, and that the order was $13,000 in debt; that, in fact, Alexander Sullivan and Michael Boland were on the committee of foreign affairs, and the Treasurer states that there was a balance in the treasury and not a debt.
5. That prior to the Boston convention one hundred and eleven thousand ($111,000) dollars was expended without any direct or indirect benefit to the order, and most of it in a manner that could not in any way have benefited the order, and that the same three defendants are censurable and responsible for this enormous and wasteful expenditure.
6. That this enormous sum was spent without the sanction or knowledge of the home portion of the R. D.
7. That various persons sent abroad were not supplied with sufficient funds, and that the agent of the Triangle is responsible and censurable for that criminal neglect, and not the three defendants.
8. That Michael Boland and the late Secretary of the I. N. B. issued fraudulent transfers, for the purpose of deceiving the order in Philadelphia into believing that the union with the home order had not been broken.
9. That Michael Boland and D. C. Feeley, the former by acts and the latter by assent, are guilty of attempting to pack the Pittsburg convention by, first, excluding the delegate from the Pacific Slope; second, excluding Mr. McLaughlin, delegate from Dakota; third, excluding O'Sullivan and Delaney, rightful delegates from New York; fourth, admitting the Rev. Dr. Betts and John J. Maroney, on bogus credentials from the bogus districts; fifth, admitting Boland and Malone, illegal delegates from New York; sixth, admitting proxies from Iowa, Brooklyn, and Illinois; seventh, sitting as delegates themselves in direct violation of the constitution.
10. That the $80,491, reported to the district convention as having been spent in active work was not spent for any such work, no such work having been done or contemplated during the eleven months within which this large amount was drawn from the treasury. The active work done between the Boston and other district conventions, was paid for out of the surplus held by the agent of the Triangle at the time of the Boston convention, and not out of the $87,491 drawn from the treasury months after such active work had ceased.
11. That Michael Boland and D. C. Feeley, the former by acts and the latter by silence, are responsible for the expenditure of this large amount of money, and censurable for deceiving the district convention as to the purpose for which it was spent.
12. That Michael Boland, Alexander Sullivan, and D. C. Feeley, the former by acts and the two latter by assent, illegally suspended D's in January, 1885, and that Michael Boland and D. C. Feeley, the former by acts and the latter by assent, illegally suspended U. D.'s in New York, in January, 1886.
Yours, respectfully,P. McCahey.
I concur in the within and foregoing report, and would recommend, in strict fairness to all concerned, and in justice to the entire organization, that the evidence, from which were deducted the foregoing, be printed by F. C. and sent to each D. O. and by him read at the general meeting or district over which he presides.
P. H. Cronin.
Signed Jan. 19, 1889.
NOTES OF TESTIMONY.
First meeting, Westminster Hotel, New York, July 30.
J. D. McMahon, of Rome, N. Y., in the chair.
Committee met, and after some discussion as to choice of chairman and secretary the matter was arranged by electing anew J. D. McMahon as chairman, and P. A. O'Boyle as secretary. Members present: McMahon, O'Boyle, McCahey, Rogers, Burns and Cronin.
Letters and telegrams were read showing that none of the defendants were ready, owing to brief notice. Accusers on hand.
On motion, committee adjourned to meet at Buffalo, N. Y., Aug. 20, 1888.
Genesee House, Buffalo, N. Y., Aug. 20, 1888. Committee called to order. J. D. McMahon, President; P. A. O'Boyle, Secretary.
Present: J. D. McMahon, P. A. O'Boyle, P. McCahey, J. J. Rogers, P. H. Cronin, C. F. Burns, Sullivan, Feeley, Boland, Ryan, Devoy, Trude, O'Neill, McCahey.
On announcement by the Chair that the committee was ready for business, Mr. Sullivan stated that he had an objection to offer to the constitution of the committee. The chairman asked if it was to the committee as a whole, or to any particular person.
Sullivan answered that it was to the personnel of the committee; that one of the committee was a malignant enemy of his (Sullivan's); that the same party was forever pursuing him with a design to injure him; that as an expelled member of the order, that party referred to ought not to sit in any committee. Continuing, Mr. Sullivan said that the party referred to was Dr. Cronin, who recently had made statements through a newspaper in regard to him that he knew to be false; that the newspaper editor (giving name of paper and editor) had sent him (Sullivan) a letter of explanation, and that for this and many other reasons he objected to being tried by the committee as constituted.
Messrs. Feeley and Boland followed, both strongly objecting to Dr. Cronin. Boland said that though personally he had some objections to Dr. McCahey he would waive those objections and join with Messrs. Sullivan and Feeley in asking that Dr. Cronin retire from the committee, they being willing to accept any one in the room in preference.
Dr. Cronin replied to this; said he thought it strange that Mr. Sullivan should speak of him as a malignant enemy. He (Cronin) had never characterized Sullivan personally as an enemy; anything said by him (Cronin) was directed toward the men whom he was given to understand had wrecked the organization. Sullivan was one of them, he understood, and only in connection with certain developments pertaining to the order did he say anything of Sullivan. If Mr. Sullivan believed everything told him by gossips he (the doctor) could not help it. "Indeed," the doctor continued, "why should I be the enemy of Mr. Sullivan? What has he done to me that I should, as he says, single him out for personal enmity?" As to the newspaper editor matter, the doctor said, that while not believing in introducing what savored of American politics, he could explain the newspaper affair by referring to thepaper itself. Mr. Sullivan would certainly not make an affidavit to the statement that the paper had done what he said, for he (Dr. Cronin) had evidence that would readily disprove it.
To this Mr. Sullivan replied that he did not want to make affidavits, but would say that the creature (referring to the doctor) should not sit as one of his judges; that he (Sullivan) could prove by a dozen men, who would not believe the doctor under oath, that he (the doctor) was an expelled member of the organization. [Then the paper mentions the names of three men.]
Mr. Cronin said, interrupting Mr. Sullivan, that the gentleman evidently meant to irritate him or intimidate the committee.
Mr. Sullivan said that he did not wish to intimidate the committee.
Dr. Cronin then said: "Then you probably mean to intimidate me. That you cannot do, sir, and you ought to know it by this time. All the objections you urge were made at the convention, and by an almost unanimous vote, as the selection of that convention, I am the peer of any one here and doing my duty by the body that created me. I would not, if I could."
Mr. Sullivan took his seat, overruled by that body.
The Chairman asked all but the committee to retire, and, upon a vote being taken, the objections of the defendants to Dr. Cronin were overruled by the votes of the Chairman, Messrs. Burns, Rogers, McCahey, and Cronin, the Secretary not voting. This was announced to those making the objections, and the trial proceeded.
Before the trial proceeded, Col. Boland said he had a witness whose expenses he wished to have guaranteed; that the witness resided at Leadville. On motion it was ordered that the expenses of witness be guaranteed.
Col. Boland called attention to the fact that many persons present who were witnesses, etc., should not know what was going on. The Colonel said that matters of grave importance might come before the committee, and as it was common report that one witness had given information to the British Government, that John Devoy had given information to the British Government, he requested that none but the attorneys for prosecution and the defendants remain before the committee, each witness to be examined separately.
Dr. Cronin objected to this, saying, that as Devoy had been singled out for animadversion by Col. Boland, it was not fair for the committee to extend support to Boland's unjust attack.
On motion all but the committee retired. The committee then decided that each prosecutor should remain with the attorney and that witnesses be introduced separately; the defendants remaining also; the committee admitting all those entitled to be present, the charges were presented and specifications as follows:
1. That no active work had been performed by F. C. that had been claimed by that body and its agents.
2. The men on errands of the brotherhood had been basely neglected and their families left without support.
3. That bogus transfers to members of the organization had been issued as coming from Ireland.
4. That the district convention was falsely instituted, etc.
5. That F. C. members sat as delegates in that convention in direct violation of the constitution.
The proof of charges had shown:
1. That they had claimed that $87,467 had been expended in active work. No vouchers were presented, no contracts, and no money, no account explained about.
2. Proof that such explanation was never made.
3. But little money given Mrs. McCahey; small sums given to men abroad; bogus transfers fabricated by X Y and others.
4. Convention illegally constituted at Pittsburg; proxies present, Boland and Feeley sitting there. Boland offered position as R. D. and money sent him that he might make statement that active work was engaged in.
A witness testifies: Witness called to stand, after being duly obligated, testified as follows:
Some time previous to the Boston convention I was called on by certain members of the order in reference to an offer of services made by me some time previously. After conference in relation to details I agreed to go to the other side. I went by steerage on ticket procured for me and received£20. After an absence of seven weeks I returned by steerage passage out of the amount received. Upon my arrival in America I met Donovan, who acted as agent for the body, and who paid me $50. Donovan was then in the employ of Gen. Kerwin. I complained of the small amount given me, but did not ask for more. Not enough was given me for the work expected to be done. Later in the same year I was again called on by Donovan, who asked me if in addition to myself I could furnish enough men to accomplish a certain amount of active work. He asked me would I go again I said yes. Looked up the men. It was almost impossible to find any. Got two men on steamer and one to accompany me to do work abroad. Everything being ready, I met Donovan at Green's Hotel, Philadelphia, in company with John J. Maroney. Donovan told me that Maroney would buy tickets for me by steerage. They cost $18 apiece and $100 was given me to carry on work. I told Donovan that on former occasions I had to go on vessel three days after work was done; that the sum now offered me was too little for the work looked for. I insisted on getting money enough for the purpose of safety, else I would not go. Donovan told me that sufficient funds would be furnished on the other side. He stated his reason for not giving me more before leaving was that men engaged in similar work had been arrested on landing on the other side; that my carrying a large sum might excite suspicion. That was satisfactory to me, especially as I was given the name of the agent on the other side who was to furnish funds as needed. I left the room and sent in —— (another man), the one that was to accompany me. Maroney left the room with me. This otherman told me he received the same amount that I did. Maroney then told me he was glad I refused to accept the sum offered me as total compensation for the work. He also said he did not believe it was the wish of the F. C. to do as the S. had said. He promised to see the F. C. and demand money from them, and should they not give it he would send me help on the next steamer by a trusty man. On the way over I had to pay over£2 for certain accommodations on steamer. After being on the other side nine days, taking care not to excite suspicion, I had but£10 left. I then went to Capital City, and met the man who I was told was the agent and would give me money, and I told him I wanted some help, as I was short of funds. I asked him for£10. He denied having any money for any such purpose; he had no more than he required for actual expenses, and hardly that. He said all he had received upon leaving was $200.
Objected to by Boland, who asked to know how witness knew the man was agent.
Witness—I was told by Donovan in the presence of Maroney that upon my arrival on the other side I would get funds from the man mentioned. The man then went on to say, that owing to the circumstances he might be obliged to stay for a year. He had worked at his business for some time, but was doing nothing now. I then said I would return at once to America. He said he would at once ask something for me from Ex. I replied that if he did not get funds I would go back. Before leaving I asked him where would it be necessary to do the work. He said he did not know; things were looking queer; that he was sure he had been betrayed by some one.
Question by Mr. Ryan—What became of this man?
Witness—He is now in prison. His reason for thinking he was betrayed was that two men had called at his lodging asking for him under his assumed name. I told him to change his lodging. But soon after I was told he had been followed up by the same individuals, whom he had suspected were detectives. This alarmed him much. At his request work was delayed six weeks. I at last told him I would do the work. There were four of us. At various times I asked him if he had received any money from Ex. He said no. He seemed so careful that my men deemed it cowardice. I called his attention to this before the men, saying we looked for courage at this time. He repeated before us that he believed he had been betrayed, for, though he had changed his lodgings several times, the party he suspected as being a detective had called upon him at each place.
Exception by defendant. To which was said:
I finally induced him to give orders to do the work. This was Thursday. Saturday we did it. After the work was done I met him that same evening. He remained in Capital City seven days afterward. I was so reduced for funds that I prevailed upon him to give me£4 of the£16 he had left. On landing in this country had£3½. Had no bed nor bedding on the ship; slept on the top side of a plank.
This in answer to a question by Dr Cronin:
I at once complained to Donovan and Maroney, and through them to the executive, or Gen. Kerwin, of the treatment I had received and the culpable neglect of the F C. About the last of February, 1885, Donovan furnished me $10 with which to reach home. The man in charge for the order made me take an oath before leaving to bring the matter before the order.
I always supposed Kerwin was a member of the executive. Before leaving America I told Maroney I would take an alias known to me; my alias was the proper name of a man. The imprisoned one bore the alias given to me. This was the agent. He was four miles from the place we worked at. Only three of us did the work.
Question by Mr. Ryan—How much money in all did you receive?
A.—Four persons in all. $500; of this the agent got $200. We were two months in the country.
Then the witness makes a statement that the other man who went with him, whose name I did not read the last time—this man came back six months after. At an expense for material, I should think, of $7,400 in all to cover the enterprise.
Q.—How many operations did you perform? A.—Three. We always bade each other good by after each meeting, thinking it might be our last meeting on earth. I have learned that in order to get back, the other man who went over with me had to sell his clothes to get passage money. He came with a sprained ankle. In July or August, 1885, he received $7 from Maroney. I took up Rossa's paper one day and in it I saw an announcement of a subscription to keep the mother of Cunningham. I went to Maroney, and after telling him it was shameful that she should be allowed to suffer so he said he would see to the matter. Spoke of Gen. Kerwin as being asked to send some help; said he would not. I said if they didn't I would. Kerwin then came to my home and said I ought to be expelled; I told him he ought to send help to the woman; he said he ought not as the man himself had abundant means; I finally induced Mr. Ryan to get F. C. to send something. One hundred dollars was sent through D. 18, who sent it through F. C., and I was informed of S. G. of 18. A few months after I met a lady of Detroit who told me that Capt. Mackey's wife was in want; he was killed in London and was assured, I am told, that his family would never want. Lomasney, and his brother, accompanied by Fleming, went over in 1884. I wrote to Cochrane, and both assured me that Mrs. Mackey was in want. At once $1,025 was raised and sent to Detroit, where matters were found to be even worse than they had been represented.
In the case of Dr. Gallagher, his people were in want. Mr. Delaney had recovered the money on the doctor's person, but that was only a small sum, and most of it was being used in his defense.
On consultation, met D. in New York. One hundred dollars was raised and sent to Mrs. Gallagher. I requested that the menon trial on the other side should be defended. Gen. Kerwin said that friendless men were better off in such cases. I raised£50 to send to Jack Delaney's sister.
Witness produced five forms of transfer, purporting to be in accordance with the rules of the combined order, but which were shown to be bogus. Witness said: I wrote in the early part of June, 1886, for transfers for certain persons in Philadelphia, who had been clamoring for admission into D. I said it would do a great deal of good to be able to show that we were in opinion with the folks at home. Within four days I received six, of which those five are a part. McMahon, Burns, Henry, Gallagher, Henry, the witness testifying. Leonard stated to me—
Objected to by the defendants.
Some time before the Pittsburg convention, witness was called upon by P. O. Sullivan and J. J. Delaney, who had learned that he was a delegate to the convention. They said they represented eleven D's, and that in order to seat Boland and Miller, Sullivan and Delaney had been thrown out by the suspension of D.
Mr. Boland objects to this.
Mr. Ryan and I protested at the convention and asked that Delaney and Sullivan be seated. We stated that a good member of the executive should sit as a delegate in the convention; for the same objection, we objected to Mr. Feeley and Mr. Gleason. Each of these men voted to seat the other. We objected to the proxies from Chicago, Messrs. Tim Crane and Florence Sullivan, the latter proxy for Father Dorney. The other said he represented Alexander Sullivan.
It having been stated that district S. represented or had been represented by virtue of a cablegram sent to Gleason and Sullivan, Boland requests them to act for Australia, and that John J. Maroney and Dr. Betts were admitted as proxies. We asked the secretary if any money had been sent by this district in any communication had before the receipt of this cablegram. Secretary said he hadn't had any communication with S. at all. The communication was with Alexander Sullivan and Michael Boland.
We then asked how the Australian cablegram came here, by which route. The secretary didn't seem to know. Mr. Ryan then informed the convention that all cablegrams reaching here from Australia were recorded in the London post office. For this reason he thought it highly improbable that any such message came to the gentleman mentioned.
Here Mr. Sullivan denied having been appointed delegate to the convention, or that his brother Florence represented him there.
The Witness—I was R. D. at that time in place of Gen. Kerwin. Before my election as delegate I never acted as R. D. There was no connection with the home body. I received $500 from Mr. Ryan, which it was said I was to use as my judgment dictated. I asked Boland if I should do any active work outsideand kept a lookout for it. I spent money afterwards in trying to right the order.
CROSS-EXAMINED BY ALEXANDER SULLIVAN.
Q—When and to whom did you complain on your return to this country? A—To Donovan.
Q—You made no complaint to the executive directly. A—No.
By Mr. Boland—How did you get the money, the $500. A—In cash. This was three months before the convention.
Q—Did I ask you to get the amount right as representing R. D.? A.—I told you I had them on the ship.
Q.—Has any difficulty since that made you say why you were on R. D.? A.—No.
Q.—Were you a delegate at the time you got the money? A.—No.
Q.—Were you appointed on foreign relations or finance committee? A.—No.
Q.—Pending the discussion of the report you left the convention? A.—I left, claiming it was not a convention of the order.
Q.—You don't know who I appointed? A.—No; I was not in on permanent organization.
Q.—You don't know of operations outside of your own? A.—No.
To Mr. Rogers—I voted at the convention under a vote taken on various motions.
By Mr. Ryan—Do you know of any work having been done between Jan. 20, 1885, and the district convention. A.—No.
Q.—How much did it cost for Mackey's work? Objected to by Feeley.
Q.—When did you get that $500. A.—The check sent by Boland and Ryan will show I got the money from Ryan, but he received it by check.
Constitution of the order offered in evidence.
Examination of another witness. Obligated, name, etc.
My knowledge when I was elected D. M. to fill vacancy, caused by resignation of John J. Marony. In July, 1885, his resignation was demanded by the district. In October I went out as an organizer for the National League through the west. Nov. 23, I spoke at Philadelphia. Several seniors mentioned that Dillon was in straightened circumstances. I promised to see the executive. I saw Gen. Kerwin, D. M., of New York. He said when I mentioned the matter to him, that he had no power; that this was not an order to grant pensions. He would see Boland. I met Boland by arrangement. He listened to what I had to say, and at first refused to assist Dillon. Finally he said he would consider the matter. Then he authorized me to pay $200 of obligations maturing. I advanced this myself, and got it back in December, 1885, and I saw Gen. Kerwin, and told him he should send money to Mrs. Cunningham; that the lady was hurt on the subject of her being neglected by us. He said he would send it. In December, 1885,it was rumored that our convention would be held in January, 1886. I was told by Kerwin and Boland that Egan wanted to retire from the Presidency of the league. I was asked by them to accept the Secretaryship of the league. This I refused. It was said considerable trouble might be looked for in any case; about the last of December I was sent for to go to New York. I saw Boland and Kerwin together at this time, as well as in January and February. Had interviews with Kerwin and Boland on the subject of the convention and like matters. Mr. Boland asked me why I would not take the Secretaryship. He said the plan for holding a convention of the order had been abandoned, as the L. R. then did not take place. Men would get out and I would not be selected as President of the league.
Some time after this I received the following letter from Kerwin:
"My Dear Sir:(Giving the name.) The Chicago people have asked for you for the 4th of March. If you will take my advice you will take no office in the league."
I was led to believe about this time that the organization intended opposing Parnell, owing to his recognition of others. Boland and Kerwin both said this.
(Interrupted by Boland.) Is that your recollection of what took place? A.—Yes.
Various letters were shown. (Exhibit B.)
These exhibits were not found among the physician's papers.
Q.—By Mr. Rogers—What did you give the money to Dillon for? A.—The money had been given me as a general resource. I did not want to go into active work, and suggested Dillon. I gave him the money. Boland authorized this by a letter to me. [Letter read.] Dillon had convinced me that the F. C. hadn't done fair; in fact, I felt that Boland was trying to play me, and I wished to return the compliment.
Q.—Did you want to accept the Presidency of the league? A.—The slate was Baldwin, Minton and Carroll for F. C., and myself as President of the league. I knew that my age was a bar to my acceptance. Then I was going to attack the ones in authority. I attended the convention. Carroll was temporary Chairman; Reynolds was elected permanent Chairman.
Convention went into Committee of the Whole. It was reported that Father Dorney could not come because he had trouble with the Bishop, and that Alexander Sullivan was absent because British detectives were shadowing him. I held that no member of the executive could sit as a delegate; quoted the constitution; no exception to my doing so; the fact was as stated by me. The last district called was Q. For R. we were directed to apply to the Secretary. District S. was named. I objected to this as no mention had been made of it in our report. I asked "Where is it?" I was answered, "Australia." Its representatives here areMaroney and Betts. They said they represented Boland and Sullivan. I asked if there was any organization in Australia? I was answered there is one in contemplation. The Secretary said Betts and Maroney were there by order of the executive and by order of a cablegram sent to Sullivan and Boland.
Sullivan is said to be not a member of the order and Boland represents New York. They had earlier said that Sullivan was shadowed by detectives.
I then showed how the cablegram had come from England. Letters had been left with the President by Boland. Districts H. and B. declared they would leave the convention. We refused to take any part. Did not return. Motion to expel seceding members carried by a vote of 20 to 5.
Q.—By Mr. Boland—The conversations were in the presence of Kerwin, were they not? A.—Yes, many of them.
Q.—Did the matter come up in relation to your treatment at Chicago? Some of it took place before you were elected? A.—Yes. At district meeting of S. J. Kerwin was present as the representative of F. C. The district requested me to accept. Had no conversation with you until months after.
Q.—By Mr. Feeley—Did you present any objection at district convention as to your statement as to district? A.—No. Because I knew nothing of any other district.
Q.—Did you present any evidence, other than your statement, in relation to any of the acts mentioned? A.—No. Because I was not aware of any man elected.
Q.—Do you recollect that a vote was taken in regard to District A.? A.—Yes; if you have any doubt I can refer you to mem.
Q.—Do you recollect my opposing the representation of Australia by any person in that body? A.—No; you spoke to me, however, and said to me that I should not oppose it; that you were as anxious as I, for you had been ignored or not consulted for eighteen months. You voted to seat Australia.
Q.—You charged that the executive used the funds of the organization to pay Maroney's debts, did you? A.—No. In August, 1884, Maroney was a porter in a store on Market street. Soon after he was D. M. of three counties surrounding Philadelphia. He went into the gents' furnishing goods at No. 2400 Kensington avenue. He got $400 from the executive; check on the Continental Bank, exchanged to his credit. Afterwards he went into debt $600 to McDermott (Black Jim). This amount the executive paid to McDermott. I saw the $600 paid him. I made the fact known to the convention. [Mr. O'Boyle interrupts.]
Q.—What was the relation between Maroney and the executive? A.—I don't know.
Mr. Rogers—What did Maroney say when you gave him the money? [There is no answer to that question.]
Mr. O'Boyle—Upon whom was the check drawn? A.—All checks were signed by Kerwin for the executive.
Mr. Rogers—Had this not been a prior date? A. No.
Mr. Feeley—Was your charge denied by Maroney? A.—No, he said the money was furnished by the executive for work until he should earn enough to pay it back.
Mr. Feeley—When was Maroney's debt paid? A.—Some time in December.
Q.—Did Maroney do any work after that? A.—He acted as detective in Iowa. He went with Sullivan and Boland to St. Paul.
Dr. Cronin—Did the term report show any loss to Maroney? A.—I could not say; the time was from August, 1885, to August, 1886.
Examination of another witness, a member since the beginning of the old organization.
Q.—Did you know Capt. Lomasney? A.—Yes.
Q.—Do you know of his having left on a certain motive? A.—Yes, three or four times since his imprisonment as Mr. O'Sullivan in 1867.
Q.—Do you remember the last time he went? A.—Yes; in August, 1884.
Q.—What did he say to you on the subject of his work? A.—I was closer than a brother to him. Our families had constant intercourse. I offered him my hand the day he told me of his project; had little help. Wife saved a bed.
Q.—What family had he? A.—A wife and four children and an aged father.
Q.—Who were with him? A.—His brother Jim and Mr. So-and-so.
Q.—Have they been seen since? [No answer to this.]
Q.—What was Mrs. Lomasney's condition before his going? A.—A most outrageous case of neglect. Flemming's mother died in the poorhouse.
Q.—Did you ask for help? A.—Yes; in 1885 I went to New Haven. We had no directors. I called upon Dr. Wallace. He was D. Saw Mulvaney and Condon. The latter went with me to Carroll. He professed utter ignorance of the whole affair. I said: "By God, you must see her;" her, Mrs. L. He decided to. Mulvaney said: "Why don't you see Boland?" Found him on Fifth avenue. He denied all responsibility. He would have nothing to do with it. Finally he claimed she had received much money. I said she did not. He was non-committal. His acknowledgment made him responsible.
Q.—Did you see Carroll at New York? A.—Yes. We met him at Vesey street. He left me to go into theHeraldbuilding and brought me $100. I refused this. I told him I didn't come for money. I said: "You know how to send this, as you have the others; if you respect the memory of the dead and the widow and the orphan, made so by your act, do your duty by all."
Q.—Until August, 1886, what was her condition? A.—Poverty-stricken; no coal, no clothing; nothing left her but misery and her pride. Our S. G. would not give the channel of communication.He read our resolutions; whether he ever forwarded them or not I did never know. He is dead. He told the committee of D. that the organization was not responsible.
Mr. Rogers—You swear you called the attention of Boland and Carroll to her condition? A.—Yes; and not until somebody came to us with $1,025 did the poor woman have any adequate support.
By Dr. Cronin—Did Lomasney attend the district convention held in Chicago in 1884? A.—No; he was not elected.
Q.—Was any one elected from your D.? A.—No; we noticed it much. We could not account for our D. having no representation.
Q.—Would Lomasney tell you if he had been selected a delegate by any one outside of D.? A.—Yes, and we would have been aware of his absence.
Q.—Would he have gone there, if not elected a delegate?
A.—No; he was the soul of honor, and despised trickery; he did not care for office; never held any in his life except in danger.
Mr. Boland—Did you see him at Boston? A.—Walsh told me he had no control. S. G. contended that the organization had no responsibility. In 1885 John Maroney called; said he had been especially sent. They had come for a little money; gave $10; Lomasney had nothing. N. Y. D. S. raised and sent $150. More was raised and suppressed. In 1887 the sheriff put Mrs. L. out on the street. No home was ever bought for her.
Question by Mr. Dillon—Do you know that Mrs. L. is an economical woman? A.—Yes. People began to talk of her and sent an organization to me to say that she was extravagant; talked of her husband's taking off, which prejudiced many, and her rent was raised. She had been paying $30 a month; no general increase; the landlord wanted her put out.
Mrs. Lomasney examined. [Upon Alexander Sullivan's request not sworn.] Husband went away in August, 1884.
Q.—How much money have you received from the organization since? A.—A thousand dollars altogether.
Q.—How much since? A.—In the summer of 1885 I visited Alexander Sullivan. I went to inquire after my husband, as I was led to believe he was in possession of certain funds; he did not know my condition, nor did he relieve me. He did send for a ticket to Detroit with which I returned home.
Q.—When again did you call upon Mr. Sullivan? A.—In August, 1886, I made known my condition, and after advising me to sell my little store, he asked me a schedule of my liabilities: $200; he would attend to the matter. He gave me no money, nor offered me any. He seemed anxious that I should not communicate with any one in the city. He asked me if I was acquainted with any one. I told him of James Q. Mr. S. said I should not mention his (Sullivan's) name to any one, etc. Called on Q. He talked to me about Father Dorney. No help.
Met Col. Richard Burke, and he, with some friends, assisted me, I know that Mr. Sullivan was the one that had a right toattend to this. Was afterward amazed that he did not. The dress I wore was a borrowed one. John Hickey was S. G. Several weeks after I went to Mr. Sullivan and asked him a loan of $100; this he sent me; nothing since. I could not give up the store, as that would confirm the belief that husband was dead or in the business. Thomas Tuttle was the first to relieve my necessities.
CROSS-EXAMINED BY ALEXANDER SULLIVAN.
Q.—You saw me in 1886, was it not? A.—Yes, certain. Another $500 came from Brooklyn. I had a letter sent by my husband when he was in Europe, inclosing one from Mr. Alexander Sullivan, in which he said, in my letter, he asked for money. I afterwards received a note from my husband saying he had received money from Mr. Sullivan; I don't know the amount.
Here Mr. S. admitted that Lomasney was sent by the organization.
The last letter from husband was in 1884; anxious to go home. His age 44.
Examination of another witness. Evidence corroborates that of the first witness taken. Received£20 and one steerage passage six weeks after the first witness. No shoes. Sold clothes and trunk to get home. No bed.