The Foreign Service Journal, November 2011

50 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / N O V E M B E R 2 0 1 1 sular upon an entirely new platform.” Colonel Mosby, said the Mail , was “a man amongst men,” and a “con- sul among consuls.” The Press Turns Up the Pressure Back home, the press had begun to run with the story of consular corruption and Mosby’s efforts to stop it. The National Republican noted in September 1879: “The latest revelations in the matter of Bailey…only em- phasize the unfortunate po- sition in which the State Department is placed by its efforts to shield Seward and Bailey.” The Republican added pointedly: “It is very strongly charged that the department shields Bailey because Minister Seward must stand or fall by the former.” The Hartford Evening Post of Sept. 29, 1879, suggested that the State De- partment would have to ease up on Mosby. It had come to light that the ex-guerrilla was being censured less for the substance of his charges than for his refusal to observe channels of authority, and especially for his new in- sistence upon writing directly to Pres. Hayes. Mosby, argued the Post , could not be dismissed for such infractions. “If Mosby should be turned out be- cause of his activity in the matter,” said the paper, “it would incline people to think that he was sacrificed because of his zeal in pursuit of a corrupt official. … People would honor Mosby for the course he has taken, and, coming home with a fistful of facts, he would become an exceedingly troublesome customer for the Seward family.” Not all of Mosby’s growing press coverage was supportive. He was ridiculed in a letter published in the National Republican for having “orga- nized himself into a widespread smelling committee,” to sniff through all the consular corners of the East. He was accused of trying to make a reputation out of a “cloud of fragrant scandal.” It was alleged, according to the Cincinnati Commercial of Oct. 2, 1879, that he had annoyed the presi- dent to the point that Hayes had told him he was “no longer engaged in the partisan ranger business.” He was also accused of violating “official etiquette” and of behaving “just as he would in a Virginia bar- room,” just as he had earlier been ac- cused of bringing the “manners of the saddle into the salons of the diplomats” (in The Press of April 8, 1879). But George Seward remained under a cloud, and editorial sentiment came down largely on Mosby’s side. “It is probable,” declared the Philadel- phia Times on Sept. 26, 1879, “that the case against [Seward] would have been dropped sure enough but for the acci- dent of our getting one honest man into a Chinese consulate. Col. Mosby is that man.” At this time Fred Seward decided to press Mosby on the Bangkok issue, asking him to make the charges against the men at Bangkok more specific. Mosby answered serenely that he per- sonally had preferred no charges against Sickels or Torrey. The charges, he explained in a dispatch to Seward on Oct. 18, 1879, were being brought by the master of the Alice C. Dicker- man , an American merchant vessel. He had, however, expressed an opinion of these men, Mosby told Seward, and would gladly repeat it. “I believe,” he told Seward, “that I said Sickles [sic] was an idiot and…Torrey …was about as fit to be in the consular service as … Capt. Kidd. I have no apologies to make for having expressed this opinion.” At the end of October 1879, plead- ing overwork and poor health, Fred Seward turned in his resignation. “The friends of Mr. Seward,” wrote the Cincinnati Gazette , “indignantly repel the insinuation thrown out … that the charges pending against his cousin, the minister to China, influenced his res- ignation.” Mosby had a different take on it, writing to his Virginia friend E.M. Spilman in January 1880 that he had finally had to “turn” on Fred Seward, and “expose him along with the others whom he was trying to protect.” Ex- plained Mosby: “If he had remained in office until Congress met, I would have had him impeached. He saw what was coming, and got out of the way.” Years later Mosby related that after he had discovered Fred Seward trying to “shield the rascals,” he had written privately to Hayes. “Hayes,” he as- serted in a May 1902 letter to John W. Daniel, “discharged him [Seward] from the State Department.” Outreforming the Reformers Mosby continued his agitation for reform, now through one of his most powerful patrons, Ohio Rep. James A. Garfield. He pressed Garfield to have John Singleton Mosby during his service in Hong Kong. Reproduced by permission of The Huntington Library, San Marino, Calif.