Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-01-16
THE RUTLAND HERALD
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY IS, 1878.
.cnrses r,kc Chicnens,, &c.

what at length, to the testimony Oohoio
the Credit Mobilier Investigation COM
mittee. and stated that, in our Judgment,
so far as the evidence had then bceh
taken. there was nothing disclosed look
ing like bribery, or any attempt or in
tent of bribery, so far as Ames, Blaine, |
Wilson, Colfax and others were concern
ed. Cakes Ames had, in his testimony, |
fully denied all thought or intention OF
such motive on his part, and the other
gentlemen named, so far as they had
been examined, utterly repudiated any
such idea. Mr. Dawes has since appear
ed before the committee, and also shows
that his hands are clean in the trans
action. Now, the Springfield RepudhS-
can, or its correspondent "Warrington,
cannot be suspected of any undue parti-
atty towards the Republican party and
her prominent statesmen or politicians.
Indeed, the Republican did its utmost to
defeat General Grant and the Repub1-
can party generally, while, although he
was not, perhaps, supporter OF Horace
Greeley, Warrington was certainly hos
tile to Gen. Grant, and just now is eX-
periencing the bitterness of a defeat at
the hands of the Massachusetts, Repubh-
cans. If there was the ghost of chance
to find anything wrong in the transac-
tions of Republican congressman, War
rington, with his keen scent, would be
sure to discover it. In his last letter to
1 l,Iac
ing of the New York Tribune and the
Credit Mobilier, cit (thc Ia'i6at7ee) Is
committed to this view and probably
really believes it, 1t cannot be expect
ed to back ut,-at least all at once Gas
it has been compelled to do in its oppo-
sition to Conkling). Yet nobody, or
but few. now believe the NJ. c, were
bribed. Still the Tribune keeps on, ,
etc. Furthermore, he says, Il heard,
substantially, Mr.. Alleys and Mr.. Ames'
stories, long ago, and l believe they are
correct, and that what l wrote in Sep
TENDER is true now, viz: that the mem
bers of Congress never had the remotest
idea of being bribed or influenced, nor
even that Mr.. Ames, bad as his letters
are in terms, had any idea of bribing
any of them, but acted from mixed
feeling composed of a desire to be on
friendly terms with influential people
everywhere and of doing a kindness to
personal friends" But enough of this
branch of the matter. There is, how
ever, another aspect of this Credit Mo-
bilier business that is both amusing and
serious, but it does not concern Mr..
Ames or Republican members of Con
gress Our readers will all remember
the origin of this scandal. The Tribune
and Sun and all the little dog Trays
down to Vermont hybrid sheets, all
through the summer and fall, were
making this bribery and corruption
charge against prominent Republicans.
Probably not single democratic or lib
eral republican newspaper in the coun-
try went to press without containing
these charges. They were except before
the people" and were iterated and re-
iterated in every conceivable way, botl
in the press and on the stump. Ever
Mr.. Greeley himself, in one or more OF
his speeches, endorsed the charge.
What was the argument? Simply THIS
because, as they alleged, Cakes AmeS
and some half dozen Republican mem
bers Of Congress had been dealing il
Credit Mobilier stock Tor corrupt pur
poses, therefore General Grant SHOULD
not be reelected. We could not ther
and cannot now see the force of the ar
gument. 1t looks to us exceedingly like
an egregious non Sequitltr, but it wa!
their argument. Perhaps they did no
know it then, but it now seems as i
they did "but teach bloody Instructions
which, being taught, return to plague
the inventor" We commend the 'pois
oned chalice' to their own lips. How
stands the case now? So far as the ties
timony is developed, Ames and Colfax
and Wilson, and Blaine, and other
stand forth without the shadow of s sus
picion attached to their names. Who
hit ? James Brooks, if any one. Jane
Brooks, one of the most eminent o
Democrats, supported by the Democrat
and Liberal Republicans and, by thei
votes, elected member of Congress. |
is not McComb, alone, that implicate
him, but his own son-in-law. Charlie
II. Nelson was before the committee
Monday, and testified that he was th
son-in-law of James Brooks that h,
purchased one hundred shares of tn,
stock with ten thousand dollars furnish
cd I'M Inv hat iCi
nally mentioned the matter to him (Neil
SOM and stated at the time that he ha
the power of putting him (Neilson) i
the Credit Mobilier, but made no expla
nation beyond saying he did not care t
hold shares himself; the money was a
advancement by Brooks in the form o
speculation on his (Neilson's) account
that he subsequently was entitled to an
paid for fifty more shares, and had re
ceived nine thousand dollars in cash fo
dividends. In addition to this, he ha
received eight hundred and TWENTY-FIVE
shares of stock in the Union Pacific raj
road, received in the way of dividend
from Credit Mobilier; turned some @
them over to Brooks and some to Di
lon; gave latter enough to cover the loa
received from him; he still owns fiy
hundred shares of the stock of the Unio
Pacific railroad; none of his stock eve
had been held in tie name of Brooks
Now this, it will be remembered, is th
testimony not of an enemy but of th
son-in-law of Mr.. Brooks. We kno,
not whether it be capable Of explana
ton or not, but it certainly has an ugl
look.
The TREASURY DEPARTMENT. -SecrC
tary Boutwell,, in his report for 1877:
stated that there was deficiency of So
274, 051 SO between the books of the loa