Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1873-02-14

/ whether he had learned anything about
that, and he said he had not found any
thing on the books of the company
showing it was sold. After that / saw
in the Dubuque Herald statement that
it was averTed by a distinguished ex-
Senator that the Union Pacific railroad
had advanced ten thousand dollars to
secure the election of Mr.. Harlan over
| Mr.. IirkwoOd in 1865, and that a check
was on file among the papers
of the company. / clipped out
| Mr.. DHrant, inclosing the newspaper arti-
Gle in relation to him, and asked him to
state what the facts were. He gave me
a statement substantially in harmony
with his testimony. He said in that
letter that nothing had been advanced
| by the Union Pacific railroad, and the
books would show it. have mis- state
ment, Isthink. The witness here pro-
duced the following letter:
NEW YORK, December Ig, 1871.
DEAR SRI have your favor en-
closing a newspaper paragraph in which
it is claimed that about the time of
your reelection to the United States
Senate the Union Pacific Railroad Com
pany gave you check for ten thousand
dollars, and that said check or draft was
in the possession of the railroad COM
pany, and could be produced. I should
scarcely think it worth your time to re-
fute this, or that you would deem the
idle charges of newspaper correspond |
ents, on the eve of a political contest, of
sufficient Importance to be noticed at
all. Should you think otherwise, why
not call on the company to deny it? At
the time referred to | was Vice-President
and Acting Manager of Affairs of the
company. and know that no moneys
were paid you by them, and that they,
consequently, can have no such draft or
check in their possession. l presume it
would give the present officers Of the
company pleasure to examine the checks
and drafts which are now at the office of
the company and testify to the fact. !
Trusting such charges will, in no
way, affect your prospects for re-elec-
ton, l am, yours respectfully,
[slgnedl THOs. c. DURANT.
To Hon. J. Harlan.
Witness resumed-l afterward saw
Durant, and told him I had promised |
Ames to restore any money to the COM |
pany if it had been used to aid in my
election. He said it was his private |
funds, and no account was made of it to |
the company. Witness further testified |
that he was not q member of Congress
when the money was given. He went |
out of the Senate on the fourth of March, |
1865, and went into the Interior Depart |
ment in May following. The two
checks were not received together. He |
felt sure they were received in the sum- |
mer or autumn of 1865, but could not |
remember the date; the first check, he /
felt sure, was signed by Mr.. Crane
Question-Did you have it cashed in |
Iowa?
Answer-No. I had it cashed in New
York.
Question-What had been your rela-
tions with Mr.. Durant prior to that |
time?
Answer-I had known him long
time; he was interested in building rail-
roads in my State, and l became ac-
quainted with him about 1856; witness
did not know what election was aided /
in New Jersey; Mr.. Alley said it was /
the Democrats who were aided, and ifl
Mr.. Durant wanted to elect Democrats, |
he ALLEY did not.
BY Mr.. Stockton-What do they DO |
with money for election purposes in
Iowa?
Answer-I might illustrate that by |
going on to state what 1 know about |
money being expended by the Demo-
Gratis and Republicans both at the last /
election.
By Mr.. Stockholm do not ask the
question as party question, but as a
member of the committee.
Answer-I know it, II was not ex-
pended improperly; it was used for hotel !
bills, printing, travelling expenses, etc. /
Mr.. Durant said that witness was an |
old resident of the State, and better |
than a new man in shaping legislation. |
BY Mr.. Morrill-Did the railroad COM
pany, during your occupancy of the Sec |
retaryship, call upon you for action?
Answer-I have to think to get up |
dates. Under the law, as fast as they
finished forty miles of road they report
ed to the President, who sent out COM
missioners to examine and accept it, |
whereupOn the company became enti-
tied TO land grants and lands.
Question-Was it the duty of the Pres
ident to accept the road?
Answer-The statute will show. I
think it was the duty of the President |
to accept it.
The committee took a recess.
The committee reassembled at two
o'clock in the afternoon, and Vice
President-elect Wilson was called. He
said he had no desire to add to or take
from his testimony before the Poland
Committee; at the time the purchase
was made with his wife's money he
would have done the same for himself
if he had had the money; didn't wish
to cover himself behind the fact that
the money belonged to his wife; Mr..
Ames stood second to no man in Massa-
chusetts, and witness had the most un-
limited confidence IN him, and would
have listened to his advice on any
investment. Things here have changed |
since, however. In his testimony the
other day he made one error in regard to
the interest due to Mfr. Ames, which he
forgot to mention then. 1t was an item
of sixty-six dollars due Mr.. Ames, and
paid him when the acc Junt was settled.
The amount paid for stock was two
thousand dollars; the dividend received
was two thousand seven hundred and
forty-eight dollars and five cents; and
the amount returned tO-Mr. Ames when
the account was settled was two thou
sand eight hundred aud fourteen dollars,
the sixty-six dollars beng the interest due
Mr.. Ames; witness was Just as response,
bic for advising his wife to put her
money in it as if it had been his own;
when the investmant was made he
knew nothing against it, but when he
learned that something was wrong, he
notified Mr.. Ames that he would have
nothing to do with it, and had the mat
ter settled at sacrifice to himself. or
rather to his wife; the witness
would never hold property which
he had to legislate upon,
and refused to take stock in the
National Bank in his own town, the
other day, for that very reason. If there
was any guilt about the stock, witness
desired to have it himself, and not to
say ne was unless he had advised her to
do it, and blame, if any, was his.
Mr.. Logan being recalled, stated that
he invited the most critical and search
ing examination, and was perfectly
willing to answer ali questions, but that
if any more charges were to be made he
wanted to hear them before testifying.
The committee agreed with Mr.. Logan,
and adjourned until tomorrow.
The Federal Council of Switzerland
have addressed letter to the Papal
Charge d'Affairs, denying in a sharp
manner the right of the Pope to dis
nenlhar the RishoDricS of Switzerland |