Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-02-20
THE RUTLAND HERALD.
THURSDAY. FEBRUARY 90, 1878.
Tne credit Mobiiier Report.

The report and conclusions of the
Credit Mobilier investigation committee
Is now before the country, and we trust
that II will be the beginning of the Gnu
of the controversies that have for 50 long
a time distracted the country, occupied
the attention of Congress and afforded
an unwonted field for comment by the
newspaper press. There is one point in
reference to the committee and its re-
port that will carry weight with it to the
thinking, rejecting men of the country,
and that is that the committee was not
partisan In its constitution and char
acter, and also the entire absence
of party or political bias in the re-
port and the conclusions at which
It arrives 1t will be remembered that
the committee was appointed by S. S.
Cox, a democratic member of Congress
from New York, temporarily occupying
the Speakers chair, on the motion and
at the request of Speaker Blaine that
majority Of the committee should be his
(Blaine's) political opponents. The COM
mlttee consisted of five members, OF
which Mr.. Poland of Vermont, republi-
can, was chairman; the remaining men,
bers being n. p. Banks of Massachu-
setts, liberal republican, William Mer-
rick of Maryland, democrat, William E.
Niblacl1 of Indiana, democrat, and
George W. McCrary of Iowa, republi-
can being two democrats, two republi-
cans and one liberal republican. This
fact should be borne in mind, as it mega
tlves all idea of any attempt to ''white-
wash" republican members of Congress.
The conclusions of the committee may
be briefly stated. They find that Mr..
Blaine never had any stock and that Mr..
Dawes and Mr.. Schofield, although pur-
chasing stock, rescinded the contract of
purchase and received no benefit there
from. As to Mr.. Kelley, Mr.. Bingham
and Mr. Garfield, they say that although
they became owners of the stock and re-
ceived dividends thereon, yet it does not
appear that they had any corrupt inten-
ton or even knew that legislation in ref
would affect, adversely or favorably,
their interest in Credit Mobilier stock.
For this reason they made no recommen-
dation in reference to these gentlemen,
and virtually acquit them of all blame.
In reference to Cakes Ames, they say
that although he may have had no cor
rupt intent to bride members of Con-
gress, yet it is apparent that his intent
was, as he expressed it in one of his let
tiers, "to place it where it will do good;"
that is, if it was held by members of
Congress, they would not be likely to
legislate adversely to their own interests,
and that he had this especially in mind
when conducting the negotiations on his
part. Mr.. Brooks, they find, was the
actual owner of Credit Mobilier stock,
Union Pacific railroad stock and bonds,
aud that the placing of it in the name of
his son-in-law, Nelson, was simply col
orable that he received the fifty adj
ditional shares of Credit Mobilier stock,
not because he was entitled to it, but for
services and influence in Congress. We
need not recapitulate more in detail the
conclusions and facts found by the COM
mittee indeed our readers are already
familiar with the facts in the case, we
having, from day to day, presented the
testimony as given before the committee
to our readers nearly if not quite in full.
The report concludes with resolutions
for the expulsion of Mr.. Ames and Mr..
Brooks, and here, perhaps, it would be
well enough to leave the subject. There
are. however, one or two points that
will receive comment, and upon these
we have a word TO say. 1t is undoubt-
eddy understood that the House of Rep
rcsentatves have nothing to do with the
conduct or actions of Senators, and for
this reason the report is silent in refer
ence to Mr.. Patterson and the other SEN
ators involved. The testimony as taken
In reference to Senators Wilson, Patter-
son, Harlan and others, has been com
municated to the Senate, and il remains
for that body to take action thereon. 1t
may be matter of surprise to some that
no notice Is taken of Vice-President Col
fax. 1t should be remembered, in this
connection, that he is Vice President of
the United States and can only be reach
ed by impeachment. This committee
has nothing to do with the question of
impeachment. They were appointed for
an entirely different purpose. Their sole |
duty was to investigate in reference to |
members of the House of Representa-
tives. When they have done this their
duty is finished. The sole object of ex-
aiming Mr.. Colfax and Mr.. Patterson
and the other Senators was in reference
to the conduct of Cakes Ames. Their
evidence is only to be considered in its
bearings on his case. If the testimony
developes causes for the impeachment
of Mr. Colfax, it is the right and duty
of any and every member, on his own
responsibility, and not as a member of
this committee, to move in the matter.
The other question, which will probably
provoke discussion, is the power of Con-
gress to expel member for acts COM
mitted before his election. Of this, it
does not seem that there should be any
doubt. Without examining the prece-
dents, pro and con, cited by the commit
tee, the mere fact that such power
would be necessary to purge Congress of
3 murderer, forger, perjurer or horse
thief, if perchance, he should obtain
seat after the Kansas method, would
seem to determine the question. In fact
the constitution gives this power to Con-
gress by providing that they shall be the
sole judges of the election and qualifica-
tiens Of their members. We need not
enlarge upon this topic, it carries its own
argument with it. We have no doubt
that the report, in its entirety, will COM
mend itself to the considerate Judgment
o,crooz onI 4l,a ,oo,1Io 4