Rensselaer Union, Volume 5, Number 18, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 23 January 1873 — The Credit Mobilier Investigation. [ARTICLE]

The Credit Mobilier Investigation.

Mr. McComb made a statement, on the 9th before the Committee, re-ailirming his testimony abont the conversation he overheardbetween Messrs. Brooks and Alley, and giving the dates and amounts of the check and draft Brooks drew in payment of the 100 shares he purchased. McComb says that on the day Brooks gave the check, he received or had given to his son in-law 53Q0 shares of the Union Pacific Railroad stock, and $5,000 worth of its first mortgage bonds; later he got $6,000 more of each, making, in addition to the Credit-Mobilier stock, $25,000 in Union Pacific Railroad securities, for SIO,OOO paid. These transactions, McComb says, place about three months after Mr. Brooks was made a Government Director of the Union Pacific Railway. The Committee adjourned to the 13th. A letter is published from T. B. Kingsland, Mr. Brooks’ business manager in New York, saying that Mr. Brooks’ check-book shows no check for SIO,OOO to Durant, or $5,233.33 —alleged by H. C. Crane, in a letter to McComb, to have been received by him (Crane)—and that he (Kingsland) never, acting for Brooks with Crane, paid for any one hundred or fifty shares of Credit-Mo-blller for Charles H. Neilson, and he is certain that Brooks could not have made any such large operations in money without his check book or bank account showing It. Mr. Dawes was sworn before the Committee on the 13th, and submitted a written statement. He says he never was the owner of any Credit-Mobllier stock; he agreed to take ten shares of stock, but the agreement was rescinded before the stock was transferred.

W. Hastings sent a letter to the Committee, proposing to show that a large shareholder in the Union Pacific Railroad, and also the Credit-Mobilier, testified in a California Court that he, said shareholder, had used the money and stock of the Union Pacific Road, and of the Credit-Mobllier, to bribe Congressmen, to inaugurate influence, and to carry through, by bribery and corruption, legislation in the interest of railroads. Charles H. Neilson, son-in-law of James Brooks, produced his certificates of stock in the Credit-Mobilier, the first certificate being for 100 shares, dated December 26, 1867, and the second for 50 shares, dated February 29, 1868. He testified that Brooks had no interest in the stocks further than that he had advanced the money to purchase a portion of them, and had secured to the witness the chance to obtain them, saying he did not care to hold the shares himSfelf. James A. Garfield testified before the Committee on the 14th to the effect that he had no knowledge of any dealings between Ames and any Congressmen; told Ames he wouldn’t have any stock where a controversy existed; derived his knowledge of the Credit-Mobilier from Mr, Train: Ames never tried to influence his legislative action; never saw a share of the Credit-Mobller until shown him a few days since by Brooks; once borrowed S3OO of Ames and returned It. Benjamin F. Ham, Treasurer of the CreditMobilier, testified that Nellson’s name appeared on the books as the holder of 150 shares; didn’t know of Brooks having anything to do with the shares, nam produced several books of the Company, and said others had been sent on bv express; the stock transfer book had disappeared, and he did not know what had become of it; he had not destroyed It. ■ Thomas C. Durant testified that he was a Director of the Union Pacific Railroad till 1869; was President of the Credit Mobilier Company, and one of the trustees to. whom the Ames contract was assigned; has certified copies of the books; signed a paper to distribute some- stock on hand; tne stock was transferred to the witness to enable him to fulfill a prior engagement; did not knew to whom Ames was to transfer the stock; Ames said he had an engagement to deliver some to Mr. Colfax; thinks other Congressmen were also men-

tioned, and It mado fin Impression on him, as he believed Ames gave the names, and intended keeping the stock himself; never conversed with Neilson; had a business transaction with James Brooks, bnt it had 10 reference to Brooks being a Congressman; Brooks desired some stock, ana witness arranged to let Brooks have 100 shares of Credit-Mobiller, with $20,000 worth of Union Pacific stock and first mortgage bonds. Brooks, being a Government Director, did not want to bold the stock, and therefore had it transferred to Neilson; knew nothing about tbe fifty shares additional stock received by Neilson. T. C. Durant testified further on the 15th to the effect that the shares given to James Brooks were tbe result of a special agreement with him in 1867. Brooks claimed more than 100 shares, and he compromised in Union Pacific stock and bonds. He (Durant) had no knowledge of Congressmen influenced by the Credit-Mobilier. He never arranged to give Any Congressmen stock, except In case of Boyer, of Pennsylvania, and Brooks. He gave two checks of $5,000 each to secure the election of Senator Harlan, of lowa. Harlan was an old personal friend. The witness thought he would take care of the interests of the road. Mr. Bushnell testified that when the Credit-Mobilier got ashore, Ames went to his friends, in Congress and out of Congress, to get them to take stock. He thought there was a want of moral courage on the part of certain men, who did agree to take stock, but now would not stand up and say they agreed to take it. The witness never offered any stock to any member of Congress. It was the understanding that Ames got a large amount °f stock to enable him to fulfill engagements which he had entered into previously. He felt, as Ames had expressed it in one of his letters, that If they went back on tbe Congressmen after the stock had gone up, when it had been promised them, then when it was down Congressmen would go back on them.