"ALBANY, _January 27, 1846_.
"MY DEAR SIR,--The inquiry which your favor of yesterday contains is so
made up of statements and inferences--so very general in some respects,
and so imperfect in others--that an answer to it which expresses
neither more nor less than the truth must be more specific than you
seem to ask.
"I understood from gentlemen whose veracity I could not question
that on the Wednesday before the recent caucus you made to them a
communication to this effect:
"You said that it would not do for you to make any further proposition
relative to the union of the _Argus_ and _Atlas_, but you invited
a proposition to be made to you, the terms of which you specified
as follows: That the _Argus_ and _Atlas_ should be united, at an
appraised valuation; that the joint establishment should be owned by
Messrs. French, Cassidy, and Sherman Croswell in three equal parts;
that you should withdraw from the concern; that Messrs. Cassidy and
Sherman Croswell should be candidates for State printers; and that
the emoluments of that office, if it were conferred upon them, should
belong to the joint establishment.
"This proposition, you said, would be entirely acceptable to yourself,
and you expressed great confidence that you could induce your friends
in the Senate to confirm it. In that event, the bill purporting to
abolish the office of State Printer, of which you expressed decided
disapprobation, would, you hoped, be postponed or greatly modified
or defeated, and harmony, as you thought, restored to the Republican
party. The result of your efforts was to be communicated to those from
whom the proposition was in form to emanate before the assembling of
the caucus. Your suggestion was in all respects adopted and followed by
them.
"Deriving from these facts, as well as from the interviews which you
had sought with me on the subject, strong hopes that an arrangement
satisfactory to all parties, consistent with public duty, and conducive
to the interests and the honor of the Democratic cause, would be
effected; and having reason to believe that more of the radical
Democrats of the Assembly and all those of the Senate would assent to
the union of the two papers (being first convinced that the advocacy
of sound Democratic doctrines would be essentially secured)--of which
fact you were, after consultation with them, advised--you may imagine
my surprise when, half an hour before the caucus met, I learned that,
although twenty-four hours had elapsed, you had not even communicated
with several of your prominent friends in the Senate; had not seen
your partner and relative, who is a member of your own family; had
failed to keep your appointments; and, when sent for, at my instance,
who was still unwilling to impute a design to evade, were unprepared
to close the negotiation, to make any definite arrangement, or even a
proposition. Attended as this failure was by the forcing through the
Senate, at an extra session, held in the mean time, by your friends,
of the bill you disapproved, and followed, as it has since been by
your advocacy in the _Argus_ of that bill, I am forced, in the absence
of all explanation, to entertain more distrust than I remember having
expressed, or wish to express, of a negotiation in which I engaged at
your solicitation.
"In regard to the particular language which your letter ascribes to
me, I have no recollection of having used it, nor does it, in the way
you have stated it, remind me of any conversation out of which the
information you repeat to me may have originated. Nor does it seem to
me in substance correct, so far as it may be construed to imply much
of a direct personal communication between you and me after the first
stage of the negotiation; or any effort to 'compromise the questions
of difference between the _Argus_ and _Atlas_,' further than to unite
these two papers, which I was sincerely anxious to bring about, and
after the intimations from you did actively recommend to my associate
Democrats of the Assembly, while I left them and myself at perfect
liberty to act according to our individual judgments and consciences
on any questions of reform in regard to the office or the functions of
the State Printer. But that I may not have adverted to the distinction,
if there be any in substance, between your making a proposition and
suggesting one to be made to you which you declared beforehand would be
entirely acceptable to you, and may have spoken in general terms of the
proposition as yours as well as that of those you represent, is very
possible; and that I may have casually expressed the sentiments which
the facts above stated necessarily excited, in regard to the part you
bore in the transaction is possible, though I do not remember having
done so, and I am sure if I have not the forbearance is to be imputed
solely to reluctance with which I have put an unfavorable construction
upon your conduct.
"If there is any explanation to be offered I should be glad to hear it,
and to learn if I have even in thought done you the least injustice.
"With great respect, your obdt. servt.,
"S. J. TILDEN."