The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1873-03-10
WHEELING, W, VA, MONDAY MORNING. MARCH 10. 1878

replied thatit was very likely. (see pag,
4SI Of the report) In regard to one por
tion of the check from Ames, drew 10
this June dividend, there is no Controver
sy. Four OF them had their names il
full, Logan and Allison, both Of whom
returned their diYidendsto him, and Pat
terson and James F. Wilson. Four o
them, however, for this very same JUNE
dividend, were made out payable TO tht
initial, namely, s. O., for 81 200; another
toS. O. for 5000, which he says are in
tended for Scofeld, W. d. K. for $500
claimed by by him to be for Kelly; one
o. A. for $500, said by him TO be for Gar
field. But Kelly, Garfield lnd I have
declared that neither Of US ever saw
these initial checks. Scodeld says he
may have received the money, but he
does not remember any such dividend
Kelly and Garfield are positive they neV.
er saw the checks, but that Ames loaned
each OF them $500 about that time, and ]
repeat that [ never saw the check and
never received dollar Of money from
him in my life. 1t Is a very significant
fact that there arc no endorsements on
either OF these initial checks, and no re-
ceipt has been presented for either Of them
as there has been for some Of the other
checks. all OF which confirms me in the
conviction that they, with the entries in
the memorandum book about them, re-
lated TO the controversy between Ames
and BLcComh in the McGom6 suit, and
that Mr.. Ames did state the exact facts
in his earliest testimony conhrmatory ol
mine, rather than il his latest testimony.
Alter he had produced these checks, he
claimed to be acting as trustee, These
memorApdas, il made out at the time, may
have been tho mGmOrGndIs OF his trust.
l will now read TO you the frank letter to
me of Mr.. Dillon, the cashier OF tue Ser
geant. Arms, u gentleman whose integ.
rity Is beyond all question, which letter |
think explains the whole matter conclu-
sively:
OFFICE OF THE SERGBANT-AT ARMS,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,,
WASHINGTON, March l, '73.
DEAR SIR-When Ames made the de-
post of $4,000 In June, 1868, in this
office, my mind was naturally excited as
to the purpose he had in view, and was all
at sea till the checks began 10 be pre-
sented. Isurmised that Mr. Ames was
the acting chairman OF some investigating
and that its contingent fund
Of the House was exhausted and he was
paving the expenses OF the committee
himself till an appropriation should be
made. AM very confident the checks
TO the initials or bearer were all paid to
Mr.. Ames himself, and especially the one
of $1,000 marked ITO. s. y or bearer" |
then thought he was himself drawing the
lions share OF his own deposit These
thoughts had passed out Of my mind till
Ames came into tho Office this session
and demanded his checks should be
shown him, the moment l saw them |
recollected these thoughts Of over four
years before as vividly as though they
had occurred tho day before, and US soon
rs MIR. Amcs had returned remarked to
Mr.. Ordway, tho Sergeant at Arms, that
had paid that 81 200 $, G. check to
Amcs himself, and how | had paid IT.;
namely, 10 two $500 and two 500 notes.
| was demonstrated with however, and
urged not TO testify under oath to- such
belief, rs it was improbable that should
reculIcct transactions OF such character
four years, being unfamiliar with the laws
DF evidence, / very naturally, did not at
Iirst, slate my strong Impressions, but
Testified to the facts, only at my second
examination, however, | freely stated
these strong Impressions, and If l had the
possession OF one accustomed to courts l
would have stated the foundations Tor
these decided impressions This strong
impression that had paid this S. G.
check to Ames was conducted by him
self in answer TO question put
10 him the day before my sec
Jnd examination, l asked him,
Did I not pay that check 10 you, .Mr.
Amcs?" He replied, II think II very
likely" Indeed, the more have thought
Of the whole matter the more firmly l
am convinced that 1lr. Ames drew the
noney for the 81 200 S. G. cheek himself.
If he had, when writing i, intended it Tor
YOU, why did he not, as he did with sew
,ral others who have acknowledged the
receipt Of the money, write the name in
.ull. All the members who are charged
with tho initial checks deny ever having
,een them, and ! repeat, as ! testified at
my second examination, that my very
strong impression is paid all the initial
checks to Mr.. Ames himself.
rendering my congratulations on what
regard as your triumphant Vindication
from tho well arranged plot to iujure you
in the estimation Of the people, am very
respectfully, &c, tz--.
MOSES DILLON, Cashier.
| will also read you from the following
absolutely conclusive letter from w. Scott
Smith: "a.
"OFPrcE OF THE EVENING Press Asso.
CITATION, WASHINGTON, March s, 1879
On the evening Of the day alluded to, Mr..
Ames came into the room OF o friend
upon whom | was calling at the ArliDg'
ton House, and after u talk to some ex-
tent Oh various matters, he said with
much earnestness that hO was surprised
10 SEQ you had stated 10 the committee
that he (Ames) still owed you the sum you
had originally paid him US a su6scrip'
lion to the stock OI the Credit MoO!lIeF:
Collsx astonished me said Mr.. Apes, mud
have been looking up the matter, to see
Il he is correct. l remember well Of his
paying me the $500, and Of his coming to
me afterwards and saying he had con
cluded TO back out OF tho transaction, but
my memory is clear, and III fact know
that paid him back the money Ht the
time, and that tho matter was ihen
closed up without his taking the STOCK or
nv paving over to him any dividend; Il
was much impressed with what MIR.
Amcs said, and believed, us ho stated,
that you had never taken the stock or
received any Of the dividends, and con-
fess between the public statement made
after his conversation with me, in which
he maintained that you took the stock
and received the dividends, and his pri'
yate statement, l felt that | must accept
= a. Al. -