, 1873-07-11
MR. c0LFAx AND CREDIT MoBu1ER.


people. Tho prcss Of tho country would worry
gladly drop tho subject since ho has retired to
private lifo. But, since Ills intontion is an-
nouncod OF reyiylng tho investigation Of his caao
before tho noxt Congress-, it is pertinent to re-
view 1t in tho light Of the now ovidonce offered
In AIr. Drow'a lottcr. Mr.. Drew ia practicng
attorney and lobbyist in Washington, having
also aomo connection with tho Custom House
cases arising in Now York. Ills homo is in Bur-
lington, Vt. 1Io writes to Ar. Poland, tho CIair
man Of tho Credit Iobilier Investigating Com
mitteo, that whilo lobbying in tho interest Of q
certain cotton claim in 1865 ho saw tho 81 ZOO
check, which Oaltcs Amos sworo that ho gavo
to Mr.. Colfnx, in the hands Of AmoB, and that
lie also snw Amea prosont this check, payable to
rs. @. or bearor," to tho sorgcant-at-Arms and
receive tho money on it, ono $500 bill md Hoveral
s1O0 bills. Nfr. Drew explains that lo hna not
made this statement boforo bocauao lo WIS in
Europe at tho timo Of tho Investigation aud did
not return until after Congress adjourned. lie
did return, however, before Oakss A1nes diod,
for llo tolls III hiB letter to Dir. Poland of Ills
having mentioned to Mr.. Ames tho circumstances
under Which ho saw tho $1,000 check, and Of
having asked who finally received the money.
Mr. Amos anBwor, 80 Mr. Drow Gays. WAS, TINT
it waB "nono Of his businosB.''
Tho only important disagreement between tho
testimony Of oakos Amos Rnd TINT OF 1Ir. Colfax
before tho Committee related to tho payment Of
this check. Dir. Amos sworo positively TINT ho
gave the check not tho money, to Mr.. Colrax;
aud alr. Colfax aworo just as positively that he
mover received tho check from Mr..
Amos. II A1r. Drew's statement ia accepted.
therefore, it giyos additional strength to Mr..
Co1faxa evidence over that Of Mr.. Amos. The
circumstance which militatoa against its accopt-
auco is, that Mr., Drew delayed making Ills Btate-
mont until after A1r. Amos died, whom ho Ind
| ample time to make it bofore, thus depriving
Mr.. Ames Of an opportunity to bring robutting
evidence or explain tho alleged circumstances
| under which 1Ir. Drew saw check which WIS
| made payable to "s. G. or bearer"
But oven if it be admitted that hlr. Drew's
statement, coming. rs it does. after tho tloath of
oakos Amcs, is worthy of crolonce, and tlat it
establishes as O fact that Dir. Amos did not give
Mr. Colfax tho check as he stated, this disposes
OF only one foaturo Of the case, and by no
| means tile most important. Tho testimony Of
| Mr. Amcs and that Of 1lr. Colfax up TO this
| point agree. Mr. Ames produced before tho
| Committee statement marked s s. o." show
| Ing on tho debit side twenty aharos of Credit
AIobilier stock worth $4,000, and ssG.72 interest
due from Mr. Colfax on tho credit side, s53A.72
cash paid by Mr.. Colfax, and a dividend OF Union
Pacific bonds worth 81 ,552, thus oxact1y balnnc-
ing tho statement exclusive Of tho 1000 item.
Mr.. A1nes says that ho delivered m oxact copy
Of this memorandum to 1lr. Colfax, and tho lat-
ter admits that he may havo received Btatc-
ment OF the amount Of money which ho Ind to
pay, ton d slip OF paper," aud tlat
ho did pay Mr. Ames tho BUM of 953l.72.
The naaiu fact was admitted by NIr. Colfax,
viz: That ho paid 9534.72 for stock that waa
worth -, 900 at par, aud actually worth two Or
throe times that amount at tho rate Of diyidonda
It was then paying. Tho only discrepancy i'll
the evidence, thus for, WAS hlr. Anes' statomou.
| that lo had submitted tho whole memorandum
to Mr.. Co'fax at tho timo of tho transaction just
US lie submitted it to tho Committee, while Mr..
Coifax claimel that tho most TINT was
given him in tho way of memorandum was
the amount of s53l.72 ION slip Of papor.'
The e59i.72 was the sum which Mr. Colfas
claimed tint he subsequently donntol to Mr.
Amos on account Of tho lattor's financial en-.
barrassmonts-a gift-ontorpriso which Mr
Arnes could not racall to Ills mind.
Coming to tho $1,200 check which lfr. Amos
claimed to have givon AEr. Colfax in payment ot
dividends collected for his account, wo find tho
first important contradiction in tho Testimony
received tho chock, aud that he had ovo,
seen it before it wns produced IN tho presence o
the Committee, ho added: Nov, could no
have had 81 zoo added to my income without 70
mcmboring it worry positively" Subsequently II
WIS ascostainel that Alr. Colfax did have 81 20(
added to his income about this tmo. Tho cllool
for this amount, marlsed "S. @. OF bearer" wa1
paid Juno 10; hIr. Colfax deposited lis,
amount in his bsnk June 90. Whom this tliscoy
cry WAS nude, Mr.. Co!fax clG1med that tho lo
poat Of 81 400 Of tint date consisted in part Of
$1,000 bill which hal boon sent through th
mail by A1r. George i. Nosbtt, Gov
er1ment contractor. Eoycrtheloug, 1t ap
ponrs TINT Mr.. Co!fax did all $1,000 to Iii
income about this timo "without remembering
1t yory positively" or TINT, ii ho did ron,o1nbo
II very positively, llo Withhold tho fact from th
Committee. Tt ia not necessary now to dwol
upon the curious circumstances TINT hIr, NoB
bitt. caroful buHinoHB man, should have Bent
e1U00 bill In n lottor to Mr. Oolfax. when Il,
nado other quarterly romttancos OF tho sam
amount III the usuul business way by ohook
that this money camo at or near tho worry tim
that Mr1 Amos claimed to haye gyon tho check
and thahM Colfa1 should have added just $40