356 C bet. 4½ & 6th
Washington Jan. 15.1
Dear Webb—
The books came—am much obliged.2
I tackled the Stag—nothing there. He was scared a good deal, but swore hard that all charges were false. If there was anything there, I was not able to start it. But it was fun, anyway. I wished all the time, that you were present.3
Yrs
Mark
Explanatory Notes
spies and informers who, under color of some kind of an authority
from the department at Washington, and under the name of Revenue
Agents, prowl around the country with the nominal object of
detecting frauds upon the revenue, but with the real design of
making all the money they can out of seizures and
confiscations.... These men walk into your office, demand your
books and papers and open private letters, look at your safe, and
then close your store.... They then go rum[m]aging around
for evidences of fraud. No charge is made—no specific
allegation; ... and wo[e] betide the man, however
innocent or honest, in whose books an error is found,... unless,
indeed, he “comes down” (as it is termed) and
pays this harpy what he thinks is a fair compensation for his
trouble. (Shufeldt, 2) Webb and Clemens had evidently heard rumors that Stagg was suspected of
extorting bribes from whiskey dealers under cover of enforcing the
two-dollar-per-gallon whiskey tax. In late November and early December,
after Stagg’s appointment had ended, at least one
(unidentified) Chicago journalist insinuated repeatedly in print that
Stagg was being investigated for such extortion. On 28 November he wrote
that the “United States grand jury ... is now on a grand
Stagg hunt. It is exhilarating sport; but the chances are that the Stagg
won’t be caught” (Chicago Times, 4). On 1 December he came close to direct accusation: The late Stagg hunt in Chicago was a very
exciting affair.... The chief huntsmen were Parker, Lawrence, Gen.
Norton [local revenue agents], the United States grand
jury, and any number of whippers-in, in the shape of detectives and
other similar rabble of lesser note[.]
This Stagg, thus hunted, is the one which we
alluded to some days since. It started from the revenue recesses of
New York, and ran through pretty nearly the entire country. Some
small dogs got after it in Peoria, and it was barked at by the
various curs of Pekin, Cincinnati, and St. Louis. A regular hunting
party was not organized till the animal reached Chicago.... but the
Stagg is not yet caught. It is a Stagg of more than average size,
strength, and speed. Its antlers are immense. It is a Stagg of
ten—that is, ten thousand dollars.... But it is to be
feared that the antlers of this Stagg will never be nailed as a
trophy to the walls of the revenue lodge of this city.
(“Stagg-Hunting,” Chicago Times, 1 Dec 67, 4) As late as 15 December, the unidentified journalist published similar,
though briefer, innuendos: “A meeting of whisky men at the
national capital may be accepted as evidence that somebody has just made
a raid—a la Stagg—among the
distilleries.” And, “Stagg was once a Christian.
There was a time when he listened to the whisper of a ‘still small voice’”
(“The Whisky Men in Washington,” Chicago Times, 4). Formal charges were evidently never
brought against Stagg. By late November he was back in Washington,
probably to seek reappointment, although apparently without success: he
is listed without occupation in the 1868 San Francisco directory (San
Francisco City and County 1867, s.v.
“Stagg, Cornelius”; Langley 1865, 592; “Cornelius Stagg
...,” Virginia City Territorial
Enterprise, 5 Dec 66, 2; McCulloch, 8; “Personal,”
Washington Evening Star, 27 Nov 67, 1; SLC 1868 [MT00607], 1868 [MT00619]; Langley 1868, 518).
Source text(s):Previous publication:
L2, 158–159.
Provenance:deposited at ViU on 17 December 1963.
