Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-02-19

CaIdwelI's Case.
Mr.. Morton gave notice that he woulC
call up the Caldwell election case Tu esday
and not on Saturday next, as he had pre-
viously intended. Adjourned.
/ HOUSE.
The bill directing a contract with MI
Mertagh, of the Washington Republican,
for reporting and printing the debates Of
| Congress was taken up. The previous
| question was not seconded by "a to Y, and
the manager of the bill, NJ. Beatty, having
thus lost control of it, the House went into
Committee of the Whole on the Sundry
| Civil Appropriation bill.
Credit Mobilfer-A Gala Day.
After progressing with the bill as far as
page l6, (the bill contains 4o pages) the
Committee at 1870 rose, and the Speaker
| having resumed the chair, Mr.. Poland rose
| to make report from the selecs Commit
tee on the Credit Mobilier investigation.
He presented the report which the Clerk
proceeded to read. Ali the members impli-
Gated by the report were in their seats, Mr..
Ames occupying q front seat and Mr..
Brooks occupying his own seat. The
Speaker took seat on the floor of the
House, the chair being occupied by MIR.
Cox, of New York, Speaker pro tenn. The
galleries were crowded with spectators and
a most intense degree of interest was man
Tested in the proceedings.
Synopsis of the Report.
The report of the committee is very volu-
minous. The committee, after stating their
Of tho Oft aor
the House in the premises, say they are of
opinion that the acts Of members not in the
present House should be treated as never
theless coming within the jurisdiction of
the present House. In relation to Ames,
he sold to members Credit Mobilier stock
at par when it was worth double that
amount, with q corrupt purpose. The facts
as to Brooks show that he used his infu-
ence as Congressman and Government
Director of the Union Pacific to get posses
sion of the stock. The statute applicable in
cases of bribery Of this kind is then cited,
and the committee proceed to say that 10
their judgment the facts reported in regard
to Ames and Brooks would have justified
their conviction Hereunder. The commit
to accordingly report resolutions expelling
Ames and Brooks.
The committee say they can't entertain
any doubt as to the motive and purpose of
Ames in contracting to let Congressman
have Credit Mobilier stock at par when it
was worth double that amount. He de-
sired to enlist friends in Congress to resist
any encroachments upon the rights and
privileges already secured, and his purpose
to create in them an interest identical with
his own is clearly avowed in his letters to
McComb, especially in those in which he
says he intends placing stock where it
would do most good, and eve want more
friends in Congress" Another letter gives
the philosophy of his action when he says
he has found no difficulty in getting men to
look after own property.
The committee do not deem it their duty
to make any special finding as to those not
members of the present Congress, and the
evidence in regard TO Senators has been
transmitted to that body.
In regard 10 members of the present
House, they find Speaker Blaine did not
take any stock, although recommended to
by Ames. Mr.. Dawes received no other
benefit from his transaction with Ames
than 10 per cent upon his money.
Scofeld gave up his Credit Mobilier, but re-
tanned 81, 900 in Union Pacific stock. BiDg-
hams connection with the matter was set
tied by Ames retaining the thirty shares Of
Credit Mobilier stock, and accounting to
Bingham for such dividend upon it as
Bingham had not already received. Bing-
ham was treated as the real owner Of the
stock. Kelley of Pennsylvania, had ten
shares of Credit Mobilier from Ames, but
there is an entire variance in the testimony
of both as to how the transaction was
closed. Relative to Garfield, the CON-
mittee find the same facts IS in Kelley'si
case, except that he received only 1929 divi-
dend.
The Committee say the Credit Mobilier
was a State corporation, not subject to
Congressional legislation, and the fact that
its profits were expected to be derived from
building the Union Pacific Railroad, did not
apparently create such an interest in that
company as to disqualify the holders of
Credit Mobilier stock from participating in
any legislation affecting the railroad COM
pany.
The committee do moi find as 10 the Con-
gressmen above named that they were
aware of Ames' object, or that they had
any other purpose than profitable invest
ment. The committee do not feel at liberty
to find any corrupt purpose or knowledge,
but they must have felt that there was
something SO out Of the ordinary course of
business in the extraordinary dividends
they were receiving, as to render the invest
melt itself suspicious. Had it appeared
that ii ey were aware of the enormous divi-
dends and how they were to be earned, the
committee could not acquit them.
The committee say the case of Mr..
Brooks stands upon different state offacts
from the others. They find that the $50
shares of stock appeared on the books of
the Credit Mobilier in the name of Nelson
were really the stock of Brooks and sub
ject to his control. Brooks had taken such
an interest in the Credit. Mobiier company
he must be regarded as having a full
knowledge of the relations between that
company and the railroad company and of
the contracts between them. He must have
known the cause of the sudden increase of
the value Of Credit Mobiler stock and how
large the expected profits were to be made.
The reading ofthe report, which occupied
an hour and quarter, having oeen COM
pIeted, Mr.. Poland said that the committee
did not expect any action to be taken on
the report until it was printed and until each
member had had an opportunity of exam
lining it. Nor did the committee propose TO
have day Fl xed for discussion until then.
Brooks Attempts a Defense.
Mr.. Brooks rose and said he desired to
submit to the House in reply of what
seemed to him most partial, unjust and
prosecuting report, two documents which
had not been noticed at all by the commit
tee. The first Of those documents was the
process verbal of the action instituted
by Mr.. McComb in the Supreme Court of
Pennsylvania, against the Credit Mobilier in
Dec, 1867, containing list of the stock:
holders as long ago as Dec. 1867.
Mr.. Poland said the list was printed at
length in the testimony.
Mr.. Brooks But it Is not alluded TO in |
the report.
Mr.. Poland-We had no occasion to al |
lude to it in the report. If it has any bear
ing on the Sc it will be before the House, |
because 1t is part of the testimony. l do |
not design to be led into discussion now.
The list was read, the point of it being |
that Mr.. BrooI;s' name did not appear as a |
stockholder, st that time, of Credit Mo- |
bilier, and that Chas. n. Nelson's name |
did anraar az a stnckhOldar of one hundred |