Wilmington daily commercial., 1873-02-27
Tho Credit nIobiIIer.

SPEECH OF JUDGE MERRICK, OF MARYLAND, IN THE
HOUSE, ON TUESDAY.
Hon. VIM. II. 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 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-
ignsted as a whtewashng 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 hls olficial duty had
been fulfilled until he fully inquired as to the
nature OF the stock, Andhe soonfo found 1t was too
good TO be honest.
Mr.. Merrick referred to the fact that Of ths
gentlemen declared gnilty by the committee,
one was Democrat and the other Republican,
but he was glad to say that no partisan consider
atons ever crossed the threshold OF that COM
mitttee room. The committee felt that II was
their duty to acquit the gentlemen they were
charged with whltewashing, but it was equally
their painful duty to pronounce verdict OF
guilty against the two others. Mr.. Ames fully
knew and understood what he was doing He
knew what were the relations OF the Union Pa
cifc Railroad and the Credit MObler. But 9TH
or 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 a contracting
company. They did not know the large divi-
dends they were to receive.
Mr.. Eldridge inquired whether Il was possible
for men to receive such large dividends and not
be aware Of ii.
Mr.. Merrick replied there WAS evidence that
they knew not until some time after they had
ceived the stock, ami then many OF them returned
it. II all the persons charged could be proved
TO have guilty knowledge,h he would go with the
gentleman from Wisconsin and expel ali 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 mon 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.
Mr. Merrickreplied, he certainly did He knew
| it was fraud. He wanted to get men 30 much
interested that they would after a while, act
| II he had told. would have deferred other men,
bers from taking stock.
In reply to question by Mr.. ShellabaFger,
| Mr. Merrick repeated that there was no evidence
that Ames told one OF the members with whom
he bargained Of the real value OF the stock
He told the parties tho Credit Mobilier was 8
contracting company, but he never explained
the relations between the Credit Mobilier and
the Union Pacific Railroad Company. II Il
could have been ascertained that Ames did OK,
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 Lpel
guilty Of the reception Of bribea.