“Dear Sir: In answer to your letter to my son, of May 21, 1883, there are three points suggested. First, in regard to her produce (Maria Russell’s). I have no recollection any further. I have no data from which I could find out concerning them. Second, I have no remembrance of her death nor the manner of it. Now, in regard to the statement I made to Mr. John K. Stringfield. I think he has made it too strong, for I told him my statement was from memory only, and that I could not nor would not swear to it. Since that time I have had sufficient proof to overbalance my memory, and circumstances called to mind that have convinced me I was in error. I simply stated what I believed to be true at that time. I have no interest in the matter whatever—only want to be understood. I trust that you will oblige me by publishing the above letter.
Yours truly,
“L. Holton.”
It must have been a most pitiful sight to see six or eight able-bodied men, headed by the stalwart Brodhead, acting as chief inquisitor, circling round the reclining form of a poor old invalid, trying to convince him that he had no memory and that he was a liar, prodding him with questions about horses that he never had heard of, and when he failed to tell them, torturing him with remarks that if he couldn’t answer that question how could he know so well about Maria Russell? But with all their tortures they couldn’t force him to say his father did not own Maria Russell all her life and that she did not die with two good eyes. It was simply a little Spanish Inquisition on the waters of the Elkhorn from which came the cry, “Recant, Recant,” dinged into the ears of the helpless paralytic. Still, helpless as he was against so many, he obeyed his conscience and maintained his integrity, notwithstanding all the satanic arts of Torquemada. When all else had failed the war-cry was shouted in his ear: “New York is trying to destroy the breeding interests of Kentucky, and all true Kentuckians must stand by each other or we all go under.” The old man brightened up and said: “I’m a Kentuckian, but you mustn’t try to make me a self-convicted liar.” The piece of patchwork given above, in the shape of a letter, was then shaped up by his tormentors, for the old man was not able to write a line, and dispatched to the office of Wallace’s Monthly, where it was printed just as it was received. Each one of the tormentors made a copy of it, and no one of them was satisfied with it; even the inquisitor-general said it fell far short of what they wanted, but that by industriously speaking of it as a recantation, the public would soon come to treat it as a recantation.
When, after years of fruitless effort, Mr. Brodhead, manager at Woodburn Farm, got control of registration, he made an early move to have the cloud removed from the pedigree of the stallion Lord Russell, and brought the matter before the neocracy of his own creation, of which he was himself the head and brains, and the action thereon was published in Wallace’s Monthly for February, 1893. The presentation is imposing in length and abounds in many things that have no possible bearing on the question at issue. Unfortunately I have no means of determining the extent to which the crime of the interpolation or excision has been made manifest except in two of the exhibits which I will give. In Exhibit 1 (Holton’s letter above) the following words are interpolated: “and in justice to all I correct my statement.” These words are not very important to the meaning, but they are very important as indicating the accuracy, and hence reliability, of a witness. In the same exhibit Mr. Brodhead says: “I insist that you will oblige me,” etc., while the original uses the word “trust” instead of “insist.” Again, Mr. Brodhead has his letter dated June 11, 1893, instead of June 12, 1883, as it is in the original. The variation of the dates here seems to have had a purpose, whatever it may have been. This letter must have been a great trouble, for I have seen three or four copies of it, so called, and no two of them alike.
I was duly notified that the question of Sally Russell’s pedigree would be brought up at that meeting, and requested to be there to sustain my view of that question. The court and the jury were made up of Brodhead’s creatures, and organized simply to register his edicts. The wise man said, “Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird.” The bird looked on, from a safe distance, and saw the fowler impaled in his own snare, by his own act, and his true character revealed to the world. It is very difficult to understand just why it should have been deemed necessary to cut out the very pith and heart of Mr. Holton’s letter, when he knew that it would make no difference with his court whether there was any evidence at all. Under the law of retribution, a man’s character may be determined by his own acts.
HOLTON’S TRUE STATEMENT.
“Forks of Elkhorn, May 24, 1883.
“This is to certify that my father, Captain John A. Holton, was for a number of years interested with Captain John Russell in a number of thoroughbreds, and they raced them in partnership. When they dissolved and divided the stock, I am positively certain that my father retained all the descendants of the Stockholder mare—among them Maria Russell and all of her produce AND I KNOW TO MY CERTAIN KNOWLEDGE THAT CAPTAIN RUSSELL NEVER OWNED OR HAD IN HIS POSSESSION THE MARE MARIA RUSSELL, OR ANY OF HER PRODUCE. And I further know to my certain knowledge that said mare, Maria Russell, had two good eyes from the time of her foaling until the day of her death. If my father bred a mare to Boston in 1848, I incline to the opinion that it was a bay mare we owned called Limber, for the reason that she, Limber, was very uncertain, having missed several seasons. There is one point, however, that I feel very certain upon, and that is, that neither my father nor Captain Russell, during their racing or breeding career, ever owned a Boston filly. As Boston was the most famous horse of his time, it is not at all possible that there could have been a Boston colt or filly on my father’s farm and I not knowing of the fact. I was born in the old homestead the 15th of November, 1820, and have resided either there or adjoining all my life; therefore I had constant opportunity to know all about my father’s stock of horses.