Wilmington daily commercial., 1873-02-26
The Credit MobIier.

SPEECH OF JUDGE MERRIOK, OF MARYLAND, IN THI
HOUSE, ON TUESDAY.
Hon. VIM. H. Merrick, of Maryland, one of
| the Democratic members Of the Poland Com
mittee, spoke upon the report, on Tuesday
From the reported summary of his remarks, we
give the following, presuming that as a Demo
| crat, he did not especially favor any Republi-
| can view OF the questions involved Before GO
ing into the argument, he said the report of
the committee had been misunderstood and mis-
| represented, and the committee had been held
up in the light Of criminals. He said that part
of the report especially which alluded to the ca
ses Of Garfield, Dawes and Others had been des-
ignated as whitewashing report. He denied
that there was any purpose to whitewash. On
the contrary, an implied censure had been
passed upon them, for in noble contrast to
these men the committee held up the case of
the venerable ex-senator from Delaware, (Bay-
ard,) who did not think his official duty had
been fulfilled until he fully inquired as to the
nature OF the stock, and he soon found il was too
good to be honest in
Mr.. Merriek referred to the fact that of the
gentlemen declared guilty by the committee
one was Democrat and the other Republican,
but he was glad to say that no partisan consider
ations ever crossed the threshold of that COM
mitttee room. The committee felt that it was
their duty to acquit the gentlemen they were
charged with whitewashng but ii was equally
their painful duty to pronounce a verdict Of
knew and understood what he was doing. He
knew what were the relations Of the Union Pa
cific Railroad and the Credit Mobilier. But 9TH
er gentlemen did not fully understand it. Ali
the evidence shows that Mr.. Ames represented
to Mr.. Garfield and others that he was merely
giving them good investment In contracting
company. They did not know the large diyi-
dends they were to receive.
Mr.. Eldridge inquired whether it was possible
for men to receive such large dividends and not
be aware of it.
Mr.. Merrick replied there was evidence that
they knew 1t rot until some time after they had re-
ceived the stock, anil then many of them returneI
it. II all the persons charged could be proved
to have guilty knowledge, he would go with the
gentleman from Wisconsin and expel all of them.
But he was not here to find men guilty. He was
here to shield the innocent, il they were inno-
cent. The presumption from all the evidence
was that these men did not know the real value
Of the stock.
Mr.. Lamison, of Ohio, inquired whether Ames
knew of the value of the stock when he bar
gained with the members.
MIR. Merrick replied, he certainly did. He knew
it was fraud He wanted to get men SO much
interested that they would, after while, act
with him. Ames withheld information which,
If he had told. would have deferred other mem
bers from taking stock.
In reply to q question by Mr.. Shellabarger,
Mr.. Merriok repeated that there was no evidence
that Ames told one of the members with whom
be harRained nf the real value % the stock.
He told the parties the Credit Mobiier was
the relations between the Credit Moblieir and
the Union Pacific Railroad Company. II it
could have been ascertained that Ames did ex-
plain the relation Of the two companies to each
other the committee would have found them
equally guilty with Ames, but under the evi.
dence the committee could not find these men
guilty of the reception of bribes.