Democratic Sentinel, Volume 4, Number 26, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 6 August 1880 — DEN. GARFIELD'S DEFENSE. [ARTICLE]

DEN. GARFIELD'S DEFENSE.

***.A *■life *of ijfen. written Col.' Bussell B. Co'qjieir, of * gifes (Jen: Oartffeld’s 1 deYenfie- *bf Credit : MobiEeF SfiMness. -Col. Connell spent some days kt Gen. fikirfleld’S residence gathering 4lata for his edmpaign life rif the candidate for President, -and,” as the statrfmeht given. abont tlie Grevlit Mobil-ier-traiißaetien* is -in the first person, it may be accepted as Gen. .Garfield’s offi- , cijd answer to flie vgrave acchsations which have confronted him in his national contest. •• J.\( V- "V - - , We statenient made by Gen. Garfield, and there will be. very eommori regre£ among "faif-minded men of‘all parties that he has attempted 'any explanation if lie canid nob offer one more • satisfactorv tllati that gi.'ton through Col. Connell It is plfusijble as 'far ap.it goes, but its ’ratal defect is in the fact that it omits the two mopt .vital features of the , chargee he assumed to I explain; He is 'entqiply spent on the,.only documentary evidence that appears to sustain Mr. .-Mile*, ahd’condemft *Gen. Garfield, and that* is a -memorandum presented to the ponunittee by Mr. Ames, purport!* . .titeybe- G-'U. GarfiebTs Qy^-hftudw^ijti^gJ claim ing much morexhanlieliaa.received 011 his Credit ,M©bili£r -s*ri§k. If that- memorandum (.xvaa in Gen. Garfield’s- own handwriting, tlifr.e-.is escape , him frqm qlthea* t% charge' of purchasing tlie stock or .ttie ntOrb Serious lhurge of deliberately falsifying to exculpate himself -from his m testimony;of Mr. Ames on w -Prfint ; \yas tlie 29th of Q. Yqu may state.whether, in conversation ''Garfield claims, as ho claimed p- befqi'dins^^at-'the only trahftiction between you smrf borrowing $306. ' A. No, sir ; he did notclghn iW f wit§ “ Q.' State all that occurred in conversation bc--twtieifyoft. ‘A.*I Viavo. IjTid two or throe interi x ie*s witlriMr.' Giirflfeld.- He wants to put it on the paaisjof a,ioan. . .Q. Did he claim that it was; in fact, a loan V A. No,"lio did not. Q. State all you know fit reference to it. A. I told liua Jie kae.w veiy wall that that was a dividuiid- I made out' a statement and showed it'to hhn at the-time. In one conversation he admitted it, and said/ as near as I can remember, there was" $2,400 due in stocks and bonds. IIC-madda'little memoraiklum of SI,OOO and . $1,400, and. ns I recollect, tlierc was SI,OOO of Union Pacific* railroad "stock,’sl,ooo of Credit •MobDiee stock, amd-S4OO of stoek or bonds, I do not recollect what. Q. When was that memorandum made? A. dp .wnfl'inade inbny room. It was since this in- , vestigaiion a Q. Have you the mqmoranaum that Mr. Gar--'field tinUde? A. I have, tlie figuius that he made. [Paper shown Jto the committee containing figures, as follows,:] sl',oo'o *** 1.400 *#V. - »<* S '*'■» 4 v- 0 ‘1 - $2,400 1 , Q. Y'ou these, figures were made by Mr. 'Garueld? "A.* Yep, sir. ; G. k Hd‘,v did you happen to retain that little -stray -ftfcmOraiiilTTm-? A. I cfo not know. I . ;lsknokv>ay to ii at the time, un--j-il I Jpunji jtlierq was to be. a conflict of testivmgriypailaT thought if might be worth pre--1 serving!' ■ ;•’* **•' “ Gl?r£ Garfießi iiever appeared before ’file cbmmittee filter*me foregoing testiihony liad beeir gifen liy Mr! Ames, thus ' MaVfrfe the *swbnl . Statement that the ■' to emofffnetum was i fn v his 1 own handwritr He subseqiiently hn to his constituents, mTVUy of 'whom had revolted against his re-eledfibh, in which lie denied that he hadq>nroliased or agreed .to purchase the stock, but he did not allude to tlie damaging memorandum, and now his formal defense' presented for the Presidential campaign -is also silent on the point. Until Gen. Garfield can deny the genuineness pf the memorandum,.wliich as yet is undisputed, all attempts at expl an at ion of the Credit Mobilier transaction must be worse than failures. Another strange omission in lus defense is his failure to take any note of -tho ynanrfm'ous finding of the Republican committee'that .reported to the House I'eb> 18, 1873, through Judge Poland, as follows.: The facts in regard to Mr. Garfield, as found by-tlie edrimfiitoe, are that he agreed with Mr. Ames tQ take tea MJlvu'es of Credit Mobilier ■ rftitek, hut did not pay for the same. Mr. Ames received tlie 80 per cent.’’dividend in b-onds and sold them for 97 per cent., and also received the 60 per cent, cash dividend, which, together with the price of the stock and interest, left a balance of $329. Tbis-sum v. as paid aver to Mr. - QarfiukV by a check on the S' rgcant-at- Arms, and Mr. Gnrfield then, ■understood this sum was the balance of dividends after paying for . the stock. . Gem •Garfield' iJrts then, as now, a member of the House,-but he made no protest; on-the. fkyor agaiust the judg'nnsrit of. his politi’eal friends who thus ■condemned -him. This report find the tesfiipomy of Mr. Ames in regard'' 'to . Gen, ChufieVl’s- memorandum of Credit *Mo^iliei''profits diie to him are the two • appaj-entty-conchisive facts against him, aiid they are the two points which he “pusses ifi’Silence in offering his defense to his cotmtrymCn. ' ; Another, strange omission :in Gen. ’ G?arti(jl(Tf defense ljaust attract, very general Attention. .Ig his explanation oh the De»Golyer fee of $6,000, -paid him , &>r presumed professional services, he is atraugely f silent on the solemn judicial ' decision 'of a '. court distil ctly coMeninihg his fee as oorrupt -and Begid- suit brought in the Cook .‘County-Qijitfiui CouH of Illinois, to recover the hill amount, of the corruption -fond for tho Washington paving contracts, of which Gen. Garfield’s fee was a part, the defense demurred on the ground that the money claimed was promised to insure the official action of ’ GeA.® Garfield, Chairman of the Committee oh Appropriations, through whose official favor the fraudulent contracts had to be paid by Govemmeht appropriations* Judge Farwell sustained'the demurrer because such contract with Gen. Garfield was corrupt and could not be legally enforced. Gen. Garfield cannot be ignorant of the faot thpt the -judicial records of one of our highest courts have stamped. theDe Golyer fee with infamy ; and, if he had any explanation to offer on the subjoctj’di# Bhoftld have met this fearful -qudhdal deliverance against him. - Upqn the wfiole, it , would. have been " better for Gen. Garfield to bn silent on •kM’rfMttirfes thaft to have attempted to tliem-Jind yet be silent on the ’ points whjph jjipst conclusively condemn ' ... • " * - -*1 . r — .Dw r rr «rH— . . „ .. •