The Cambria freeman. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1867-1938, 1868-09-24
Attacks upon Grant.

beyond denial, that of the serious lmPuta-
tions now resting on the Radical candidate,
not one can be traced TO Democratic
source When the nomination of Grant
was vet uncertain, the Radical leaders op-
posed it, on the score of his personal hao-
it's. 1t was Theodore Tilton, the editor
of the rabid Radical sheet, the LRdepsRd-
e7u, who led off with circumsiantial chdrg-
es Of intemperances, and Wendell Phillips
and Horace Greeley reiterated and rein
foIc them. The criticism of Grants
military success, as due to The mere reck,
less expenditure of his soldiers lives
which he had moi the talent or the hunan>
ity TO spare or TO husband, came from
Radical sources. The present Radical
Senator from lowe, Mr.. Harlan, was the
first to impugn the military reputation of
Grant, in an elaborate speech IN the Sen
ate, He said +: "The Iowa troops have
=" no confidence in his capacity and fitness
- for the post he holds. They regard
chin as the author of the useless slauz h
50 ter of their comrades" Congressional
Globe, Thirty-seventh Congress, p. 2006].
But tie WORT charge of all comes from
source nearer still to General Grant
Here no promptines of Democratic hostil-
ity can be fapcied Grants connection
with the cotton speculations is proved by
the oath of his own father! We will
give again the formal record in this case
Its accuracy has never been denied, since
its first publication, months ago, in this
and other journals. Here we have the
statement of Jesse Grant, the plaintiff,
verifi "a by his oath, that he sat once and
faithfully carried out his agreement" and
that agreement was that "plaintiff on his
/" part was to 60 with tie men, &C., TO the
" headquarters to General Grant, and
6. procure permit for them to purchase
" cotton, secure transportation, &c" He
had to prove this to show that he was
entitled to the profits he sued for. There
was, however. no doubt about the facts.
The defendant, indeed, admits them, but
dsmurs that the agreement, being ''con-
trary to public policy" should not be
enforced in a court of justice. To all this
tie Radicals have as yet framed no CO
herent answer What purports to be
letter to his father, was lately published,
in which Grant is made to say he would
not give the permits. But here we have
old Jesse swearing and proving in a court
Of justice, that his son did give him the
permits We do not know any worse
chapter Of family history than this of the
Grants, contained in the following record:
TIE SUPERIOR COURT OF cISCISSATI, HAM
ILTON COUNTY, OHIO.
Jesse r. Grant
uoruon M.ct IIenrv Mack Petition.
and Simon Mack, partners
as Mack Brothers.
The plaintiff states that on about the
sixth day of December, A. ID. 1882, he
entered into an agreement with the defend
ants for the purpose of partnership purchases
Of cotton in the Military Department COM
nanded by Genera .. s. Grant, the condi~
tious Of said agreement being as follows:
Defendants were to furnish all the money
that might be required in the said business,
and the necessary number Of men to purchase
and ship the cotton, they being allowed
seven per cent. per annum for the money
so employed during the lime it was necessa-
rily used. Plaintiff. ON his part, was to 60
with the men farnishel as aforesaid by the
defendants, TO the headquarters of General
Grant, and procure permit for them to
purchase cotton, secure transportation and
such other facilities as might be consistent
with the usages and interests of the army.
The defendants were to have the cotton thus
purchased shipped Immediately to New York
and sold, and the let profits Of sales, after
deGucting from the gross proceeds the neces-
sary expenses of buying, freight and selling,
except the wages of the men furnished as
aforesaid by the defendant, were to be divided
among the parties, in the proportion Of three
fourths to the defendants and one-fourth to
the plaintiff. the plaintiff in no event being
liable for any portion of loss that might be
incurred. Plaintiff says that said agreement
was az once and faithfully carried out upon
his part. and also was by the defendants SO
far as the purchase of cotton, its transporta-
ton to New York and sale were concerned,
but defendants having broken said agreement
in this that they have utterly flled and re-
fused to render to plaintiff any account of
such transactions, or to pay over 10 him any
portion of his share OF the profits arising from
the same, although said account and pay
ment have been repeatedly demanded by the
plaintiff Plaintiff says that under SAID
contract large amount of cotton was pur-
chased, as many as three hundred bales or
more, at an average cost Of from fifty to fifty
four cents per pound, and which was sold in
New York at such prices as to realize a net
profit of forty thousand dollars or over. The
exact number OF bales purchased, the precise
price of such purchase, and the exact amount
of expenses and of proceeds of sale, he is
unable to state, the account of the same be-
ing in the possession of the defendants, who
refuse to furnish statement Of it. But the
amount purchased, and the net profits real
lied, are not less than as above stated, while
the same may, and probably will, exceed the
amounts before stated.
Plaintiff asks that an account may be taken
between himself and the defenda ats, aad that
the defendants may be ordered to pay over
to him such an amount as may be found duo
to him from them, under the agreement
hereiDbeiore set forth, and that all such
other orders may be made in his behalf as
he may be equitably entitled to in the
premises. (SignedJ II. Snow,
Attorney for Plaintiff.
The State of Ohio, Hamilton County, ss.:
jesse R. Grant. the plaintiff. makes oath
that he believes the statements of the fore
goiug petition to be true.