Rensselaer Union, Volume 5, Number 25, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 13 March 1873 — Report of the Senate Credit-Mobilier Committee. [ARTICLE]

Report of the Senate Credit-Mobilier Committee.

> Washington, February ft. Having Examined the testimony taken before the Housoof Representatives, and heard the statements of Senators in relation thereto, and taken snch testimony as was acceptable tending to shed light upon the subject matter, and having attentively considered the same, the Committee fa the first instance present the facts as ascertained, touching each member of the Senate. In the list of members of the Senate supposed to be affected bythe evidence taken by the Committee of the House of Representatives is the name of John A. Logan. In December, 1867, Logan made an arrangement with Ames to purchase ten shares of stock commonly known as shares of the Credit-Mobllier of America, upon recommendation of Ames that the stock was valuable, and payment conld be made in consideration of agreement at any time, and the stock was never delivered. In June following, Ames showed Logan an account in which he credited him with two dividends, arising on the stock subsequent to its purchase, from which he deducted $1 .ODO, the price of the stock, and gave Logan a check on the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House for the balance, $329, which check Was paid on the 10th of July following. Having become doubtful whether it was a good stock, or whether there would not be difficulty about it, Logan repaid Ames the amount of money received on the check and interest thereon, stating to him that he had concluded not to take the stock, which Ames consented, and here the transaction ended, Logan having no further interest in it. Logan and Ames were members of the House of Representatives at the date of the transaction. The testimony does not affect Logan in any sense which would call foaaction of the Senate, if it possess jurisdiction over acta happening before his election to the Senate, a question on which, under the finding of the Committee, it is unnecessary to express an opinion. In the record from the House of Representatives is the name of Roeeoe Conkling, memlier of the Senate. Conkling does not appear to have been connected in any way with stock of the CreditMobllier, or of the Union Pacific Railroad Company, and, consequently, is In no way affected. On or about December S, 1867, Senator Wilson, on behalf of his wife, at the instance of Ames, and undn the advice of friends, contracted for twenty shares.of Credit-Mobiller stock, paying therefor In cash $2.00° which belonged to his wife, Ames giving a receipt for the same, and a guarantee of ten percent interest thereon. Wilson became dissatisfied with the transaction, from what he had learned of the differences in the management of the Credit-Mobllier and Union Pacific Companies, and concluded to regard the transaction as incomplete. He m stated to Ames, Who consented to so regard It, and an adjustmeat was taerefore made. It was by contract by tier husband, and Mr. Wilson had no right of interest therein, except such as grew out of those facte. Whether the action is or is not inlaw to be regarded as that of his own or that of his wife is not deemed material. It is certain that the money invested was contributed by friends to bW wife, that he treated it as belonging to her. considering the investment far her benefltfium it, and the money w» Anally repaid to and disposed of by her. Mr. Wilson does not appear to have been well informed as to the character of. the CreditMobiiier. nor does it appear that he was aware or had reason to suspect that Ames had any object in commending the investment, other than that of friendship. , The Committee do not believe Senator Wilson Is affected by the transaction with Ames, but they feel constrained to advert in this connection to the fact that, on the 15th of September last Wilson authorized to be sent to the public press of New York a dispatch, which in effect is regarded as an unqualified denial that he had ever obtained from Oakes Ames, or my other person, the slightest interest in the Credit-Mobllier, and to remark that the dispatch was calculated to convey to the public an erroneous impression. The evidence relating to Senator Harlan show*

a transaction in 1865, while he was Secretary of the Interior Department. The transaction was not in its nature continuous, and It does not appear to have influenced his actions as Senator since his election, or that it was so intended, and however strongly the Committee would deprecate the use of money for the purpose for which, in this case, it was contributed and used, and, with whatever judgment, they would resist any and all attempts, by the free use of money, to control popular expression, they do not, however, refrain to remark upon the fact that Durant, Vice-President of the Union Pacific Railroad Company, a corporate creation of Congress, which would probably be again subject to legislation, contributed SIO,OOO with the avowed purpose of its being used in securing the election of Harlan to the Senate of the united States, he being, at the time of its receipt. Secretary of the Interior. This discloses an evil upon which the Committee cannot too severely animadvert. The use of large sums of money to influence either popular or legislative elections strikes directly at the fundamental principle of republican government. It undermines public and private virtue, upon which alone republican institutions can stand. It cannot be concealed that it is one of the threatening dangers to the permanence of our Government. While this receipt and use of money la open to censure, the evidence adduced to prove that Senator Harlan was influenced by the giftihusmadetoMmfaHed to establish any such results. In relation to Senator Patterson, the Committee say there Is little doubt that Patterson wasthe purchaser of thirty shares of Credit-Mobllier stock in 1867, and that he received dividends arising thereon as stated, and it only remains to be considered how he would be affected as Senator by the factshad he such knowledge of the relations of the CreditMobllier to the Union Pacific Railroad Company, and of the interests of Ames in connection with this Company, and in the disposition of the stock, as should have caused him to hesitate to enter into this transaction, or to retire from it when once entered npt>n. Assuming, at the date of purchase, in August, 1867, that he was not well advised of the nature of the investment he was making, did not the same rumors which came to others who had embarked in the same enterprise of the differences and difficulties that had arisen between the companies, and which, at a late date, led to public debate in both Houses of Congress-come to him; ho retaining the stock and receiving his dividends? Is it, then, unreasonable to presume that he had acquainted himself with the character of the corporatkuLin which he was a stockholder? How are we to account for the concerted efforts of both parties to conceal from the public the transactions when questioned, except from a consciousness that it Was something more and other than an ordinary business affair between private individuals? The Committee further find that at a date subsequent to that of the purchase of the stock in the Credit-Mobllier, and at a period when the character of this Credit-Mobiller and relations existing between it and the Union Pacific Railroad Company had become a matter of public notoriety, and must become familiar to Patterson, and while' he was in receipt of dividends from his purchase of Credit-Mobllier stock he was still dealing with Ames in stock and bonds of the Union Pacific Railroad Company, and disposing of the same in the stock markets in New York through his bankers there. The Committee find, on the statement of Patterson before the Committee of the House of Representatives, as before this committee, a con tradlctory relation of transactions between himself and Ames, the suppression of material facta, and denials of other facts which must have been known to him when first called before that Committee. They cannot escape the conclusion that Patterson, being a Senator of the United States, tn 1867, contracted with Oakes Ames, then and still a member of the House of Representatives, for the Surchase of thirty shares in the stock of the Creditfoblller of America at jates greatly below its esteemed value, and subsequently came into possession of the same; that he received dividends which from time to time were declared thereon; that he subsequently, in the year 1867, dealt with Ames to a large amount in stockand bonds of the Union Pacific for the purpose of profit, and disposed of some stocks in the markets of New York with the knowledge of the character of the Credit Mobiiier and its relations to and its connections with the Union Pacific Railroad Company; and further, that be had the knowledge of the interest of Ames and his connection with said Company; also, that the object of Ames in this dealing with him was to secure his friendly recognition of the interests of the said Companies, and bis own interests therein, and to influence his action as Senator in the matter of legislation affecting the same; and further, being inquired of in relation thereto before-the committees of both branches of ConSess, he gave false account of the actions between mself and Ames; suppressed material facts, and denied the existence of other material facts, which must have been known to him. The Committee have reached the conclusion, after the most attentive consideration and anxious deliberations, which they would fain wish were otherwise, but which a sense of duty compels them to declare. They submit the following resolution: Resolved, That James W. PattersorT be and he is hereby expelled from his seat as a member in the Senate. The report is unanimous. -- The Committee consists of Morrill (Me.), Chairman, Scott, and Wright, Republicans, and Stock- ' ton and Stevenson, Democrats.