The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1872-08-17
GEN. GRANT ON CONTRACTS.
Will Man Dishonest in Private Trans
actions be Honest in I1is Public
Official Conduct?


! From the Washington Transcript.
| In November, 1865, Gen. Grant en-
tered into Il sealed contract With =. J.
Bowen, then Mayor Of this city, wit
Messing that he had sold to said Bowen
his residence on l street, which had
been presented to him by A. n. Stewart,
Moses III. Grinnett, Thomas Murphy,
Gen. Buttertield, and other citizens of
New York, as Il future residence for
himself and his family. The price
named i'll the contract with Mr.. Bowen
was $4,000. This contract was duly
recorded among the land records of this
District, and will be found in Libcr -.
No. Z, folios 155, etc.
Having heard of this sale and tho
failure of its consummation, we took
the trouble to examine the record, and
find the contract dated Nov. 27, 1865,
and signed by "Kitbourn & Latta,
agents for Gen. u. S. Grant, "U. $.
Grant, and s'S. J. Bowen.' On the
contract is a receipt, duly signed and
stamped, for 81 900, which appears to
have been paid AS 'earncst money! on
the signing of the contract. The con-
tract goes on to state thnt for the sum
of forty thousand dollars the party Of
the first part (Gen. GranD has sold lots
ditions of payment being 81 200 on exc
cutting the contract; $4,000 on March
10, 1869, Cat which time possession was
to be given Mr.. Bowen) and the re-
mainder ($3O,OOO) in ten years, with
interest at the rate of 6 per cent. per
annum.
With this contract on record, unan-
nulled, with the $1,000 paid him by
Mr.. Bowen in his pocket, Gen. Grant,
assuming 4 military prerogativc, sub
sequently sold the property to Gen.
Sherman for $65, 900, received the cash,
and executed and delivered a deed for
the conveyance of the same, thus pock-
citing $25, 900 more than he was to have
from Bowen, who was legally and
honestly entitled to the property, and
could have compelled Gen. Grant to
have decided it to him even after he
had decided it to Gen. Sherman, had he
chosen to resort to the courts for Justice.
Mr.. Bowen has been put to conside-
fablc expense, for searching title, exc
cutting and recording papers, and Gen.
Grant had had the use OF the 81 900 for |
five months before it was repaid: Not
II penny Of this has ever been refunded,
and now we understand that Gen.
Grant absolutely rcft,scs to pay the in
tcrest on the 81 900 or any of the eX-
pe',ses Mr.. Bowen incurred, although
he has several times been requested to
do so!
Could mcanncss go further than
this: is there Il business man in this
or any other community who would
be guilty Of such II dirty, dishonorablc
action, and be suffered to remain in
the neighborhood We confess we
did not believe the story when first
told us, hut the half has not been told
in this article, nor have we space nor
heart to relate all we hear concerning
it. We're we to put iii type what has
been told us by those who are below
cd to know whereof they speak, how
Gen. Grant, apparently forgetting he
had signed the contract himself, de-
MED his having authorized KiibOurnc
4 Latta to act for him; pleaded that he
was mad when he sold the property, as
an excuse for reselling it; that he had |
sold the property to Mr.. Bowen ut too
low Il figure; told General Huttcrlield |
he had never sold the property to
Bowen, or signed any contract or pa
per Of any kind for it's sale; threatened
Mr.. Bowen with political ostracism if
he di.l not cancel the contract; how the
difference Of s25,ODO was used by Cor
bin in gold operations prior to the
'ti'fack Friday" in New York; the in
famous 1alSclDDdS that nave been clrcU-
lated from the White House concern
ing this transaction, etc, ctc.--sh0uld
we attempt to publish all this our pa
per would contain nothing else.
Yet it is all true, and it is also well
known by many OrOur people i'm Wash
ington. But as the party guilty of
the rascally conduct is President of
the United States, he is not only tolcr
atcd here but AZ tho matter has been
kept from the eye of the public because
of his high official position and IL wish
to screen from deserved infamy the
character of Il man who ought to be,
in liis dealings with his fellow man,
"not only pure but above suspicion.'
Now, however, when that man is en-
dcavoring to force himself upon the
people for II perpctuation of his power
and position, we deem it necessary
and proper to make known his pri- |
vatc as we'll as his public character,
believing, as we do that no man will
hesitate to dcfraud the Government |
and the public who is openly dishon |
est ana dishOnorablc in his private
transactions. Men have been known
,,S,f.