Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1873-02-25
CREDIT MOBILIER.
Roper, Of the Poland comm.rtee-Reas IL.


which they were appointed and acted.
The committee gave history of the
connection of the Credit Mobilier
with the Union Pacific RliIroad, by
the Hoxie and Ames contracts, the
facts in connection with which have
oeed heretofore published. Tue CON-
mittee thee rehearsed the operations
81 Mr.. Amss in placing some of the
stock of the Credit NJ JoilIer and the
difficulties which arise between him.
Durant and McComb Prior TO lhe
session OF December, 1867, Ames had
lad no negotilions with Congress
men, except Mr. Scoield. TIE COM
nittee say they cannot entertain any
i0ubt as TO the motive and purposs.
# Ames in contracting to let Con-
Sressmen have Credit Mobilier stock
At per when il was worth double
hat sum. H. desired TO enlist friends
IN Congress to resist any encroach
nents upon the privileges already
secured, and his purpose to create 10
them an interest identical with his
own is clearly avowed 10 his letters
TO McComb, especially 10 those in
which he says: Il intend placing
stock where it. will do The most good,
and we want more friends in Con-
sress Another letter gives ,be
philosophy of his action where h.
,ays: Il have found no difficulty in
getting men to look after their oan
property" The committee are salts
lied that Ames feared that when the
great profits became known there
would be danger of Congressional in
vestigation Of tts,se with whom he
iealt he did not fear any hostile legis-
lation, and the committee believes
imes specially designed 10 secure
he defeat al the eff)rt OF the WASH
,urnes of Wisconsin and Illinois u
egulate transportation over the Pa
Itic Road and other measures, and
they quote reference OF Ames to
WsshDurne, in one of his letters il
support Of this belief.
In taking es idence, the names OF
Senators were involved, and their
Eases were investigated, and tina
'viderce hsvi' g been sent by tn,
House to the Senate the Committee
consider their duty as TO the Senator
fully performed
The committee do not deem it their
luty TO make an especial findlng a
o those not mem bers of the present
Congress-, leaving the facts for the
House and the country TO judge upon.
The eviden in regard To member.
# the present House, the committee
proceed TO state. is 10 some instan cer
painfully conflicting. They find thai
speaker Blaine did not take any
took, although he was recommended
TO by Ames.
Mr. Dawes received no other bene
il from his transaction with Ames
han ten per cent upon his money
nd after settling with Ames had ne
'urther interest in the stock
The evidence relative to Mr.. Scho-
field is rehearsed, showing a so thai
5chofield gave up his CredI; Mobilier,
put retained 81 900 in Union Pacific
The precise terms of the settlement
are unknown from lack ofSdate, bu,
,ince the settlement SchofieId has
rad no interest in Credit MobiIier.
Mr.. Bingham's connections with
the matter was settled by Ames re.
aiming the thirty shares of Credii
Mobiher stock aud accounting to
Bingham for such dividend upon il
~ Bingham had not already received
Bingham was treated as the real
,wner of the stock from the time OF
ne agreement, late in December,
1867, to the settlement in February
1872. and had the benefit of all the
ilvidends upon it. Neither Anne
nor Bingham had such records of
their dealing as TO be able To give the
precise amount of hese dividends
Tue COMMITTEES find that Mr.. Kelly
# Pennsylvania, had ten shares OF
Credit NJ ,hiIier, taken upon the sole
,tation of Anes, the later carrying il
for Kelly until the dividends pad fr
y, and that on the % of June, 1868
Kelly received 1929 from Amos IT,
heck from the Srrgent-at Arms Sub.
4eqnent dividends were paid in Union
Pacific stock or bonds. In Ssptem-
her, 1868, Kelly received $3.50 from
Ames, which was understood tc b.,
IN advar ce to be paid out of the div
lends but there has never been any
adjustment of the matter, aud there
X AN entire variance ia the testimony
# both as to what this transaction
was Subsequent conversations and
negotiations between them are in the
a0idence, but the committee does not
deem il material.
ReIative to Mr.. Garfield, the COM
mittee fnd the same facts as in Ksl
Tvs case to the point Of the reception
# a check for 1929 The committee
10 not find that since the payment
of the 1929 there has been any COM
munications between Ames and Gar
field on the subj sct, till this investi-
CATION began Some correspondence
between Garfield and AmeI and SOM
conversation will be found in the 70
ported testimony.
The committee state that it ap
pears that Ames did not give anv
detail of the relations between the
Credit Mooilier and the Union Pacifi-
Company, nor did any of the parties
know that dividends would be paid
in stock or bonds of the latter. The
committee say that the Credit Mobi~
lier was State corporation, not sub
jsct 10 Congressional legislation, and
the fact that its profits were expect
ed to be derived from the building of
the Union Pacific Railway did not
apparently create such an interest in
that company as IT, disqualify the
holder of Credit Mobilier stock from
participating ia any legislation aff,c
ting the railway company Amss
nao