Office of the Historian

No. 211.
Mr. Washburne to Mr. Fish.

Legation of the United States,
Paris, December 21, 1874. (Received Jan. 8, 1875.)
No. 1072.]

Sir: I beg leave to acknowledge the receipt of the President’s message, which you have done me the honor to forward in pamphlet form through the dispatch-bag.

We had received, two days before, the full text of this document in the New York papers. The message has been remarkably well received in Paris. For myself, I am greatly pleased with the whole of it, but more particularly gratified with that portion of it which treats of the financial situation. That, indeed, has pleased the people of Europe more than anything else, as showing the firm resolution of the President to stand upon and defend sound financial principles, regardless of any clamor that may be raised on the subject.

As the true text of the message is read, the portion of it in regard to Cuba is highly commended as statesmanlike, moderate, and just. You will have heard before receiving this of the scandalous misrepresentation of this part of the message, which was telegraphed to Europe by Renter’s Telegram Company. That false version of the message created a bad impression here, and was a means of very materially depressing the bourse. It was not until the full text of the message was received here that the fraud was discovered. General Schenck has probably sent you the article in the London Times referring to it. I send herewith a slip which I cut from the Times, containing a communication from the secretary of the company on the subject, in which he endeavors to explain away the affair; but the Times, in three lines, completely destroys all that he has to say. I do not take any stock in the statement he gives of the alteration of the message at the last moment, or that the President had given out a telegraphic synopsis of the message before it was delivered and while it might still be subject to a change. Many people here think that the statement telegraphed in regard to Cuba was a stock-jobbing operation. It is certainly a thing very much to be regretted, and was calculated to do us much injury in Europe.

My own idea is that what was telegraphed over was the guess-work of a newspaper correspondent instead of any authorized views of the President.

* * * * * * *

I have, &c.,

E. B. WASHBURNE.
[Inclosure in No. 1072.]

spain and cuba.

[From the London Times.]

To the Editor of the Times:

Sir: Having telegraphed to our New York correspondent concerning the discrepancy between his summary and the text of President Grant’s message, he states in reply [Page 453] that he received a synopsis of the document by telegraph from Washington on the evening previous to its presentation to Congress.

The paragraph relating to Cuba and Spain was, however, changed by the President at the last moment, and our correspondent immediately telegraphed the altered version.

Unfortunately, it only arrived after publication of the first message in the second morning editions of the London newspapers. In other respects our correspondent’s summary appears to have been substantially correct; and while it is to be regretted that he did not clearly explain the discrepancy at the outset, it cannot be charged against him that he left the public under a wrong impression as to what the President had actually said.

You may rest assured that regard for our reputation and our responsibility toward the press and public will insure the immediate adoption of further precautions against the consequences which might result in the future from undue haste in telegraphing important documentary intelligence.

I am, sir, yours obediently,

FREDERICK J. GRIFFITHS,
Secretary.

Renter’s Telegram Company, (limited,)
Old Jewry, London, E. C., December 22.

Note by the Times.—Mr. Griffiths does not explain why the corrected version received, he informs us, by his company, was never communicated to us and our contemporaries.