The Tipton advertiser. [volume] (Tipton, Cedar Co., Iowa) 1856-1962, 1873-02-27
Mr.. coLFAxs v1uD1cAT1oE

question OF disputed veracity pepdipR
for some days between Oakes Ames
and Vice-President Colfax, has at last
been settled, and in favor of the latter.
The final testimony which clears up
Mr. Colfax's record as man Of his
word, was given on Tuesday, before
the Credit Mobilier committee.
Cakes Ames having returned from
i'oston, was present with his long de-
sired memorandum book, which, how
ever, he did not put into the hands Of
the committee. but read therefrom
such extracts as they required. The
only additional point made by the
book in the case Of Mr.. Colfax related
to the payment by Ames to Colfax Of
S6O.75 in January, 1869, the receipt of
which Mr.. Colfax emphatically de-
MED. As to the disputed 81 200 the
memorandum book had nothing to
say further than that Mr.. Ames had
already testified, and Mr.. Ames was
Obliged to acknowledge that, after dill.
isent search, he had not succeeded in
nnding any letter or receipt from Mr..
eoifax covering the points in contro-
versy. Here the case rested on the
part OF Ames, just where he left it be-
fore bis trip to Boston In search of
corroborating evidence.
But Mr.. Colfax made q detailed
statement Of his financial transactions
during the Credit Mobilier period, and.
in particular, satisfactorily accounted
for the deposit Of 81 200 on the 2ond of
June, 1868. This money, he showed,
came not from Oakes Ames, but from
two different sources, namely, 500
from his step father, Mr.. Matthews,
and 81 900 from Mr.. George W. Nes-
bitt as contribution toward Mr.. Col
fax's campaign expenses, he having
just been nominated for the Vice Pres
idency. This statement Of Mr.. Colfax
is confirmed by several collateral
proofs, which in case Of disputed
veracity like this, must be held con-
elusive and convincing. They are
these:
Mr.. Matthews swears that he paid
Mr.. Colfax 5000 about the 10th of June,
1865. He also crorroborates in detail
Mr.. Colfax's testimony as to the re-
ceipt by the latter Of a 81 900 note by
mail from the New York gentleman
named, about the middle OF June, s6s.
Mrs. Caroline Hollister, a half-sister
OF Mr.. Colfax, then a member Of his
family but now living in Utah, came
all the way from her distant home, to
testify to the same facts. OF which she
was witness. Mr. Colfax's mother,
who was present on the OCCASION, is
now dead, but married sister of Mr..
Colfax living in Iowa states that her
mother wrote her in the summer Of
1868 relating the identical circum-
Mr.. Nesbitt, from whom the
81 900 came, died the next year, and
his executors have failed to find any
account Of his gift to Mr.. Col fax among
his books aud papers. The letter con-
tanning the enclosure, however, re-
quested the contribution to be consid-
cred confidential; and Mr.. Colfax
shows by his checks and receipts that
on the very day on which the deposit
in question was made, he sent draft
for 81 900 TO the Chairman Of the State
Republican Committe of Indiana, to
be used In the campaign; thereby, rs
he says he intended to do, executing
the trust of his friend Nesbitt.
But it will be remembered that Mr..
Colfax's deposit Of June %, 1868, was
not Of - 1850 only, but of q 1913 ,83.
This fact was used by the New York
World as the final and convincing
proof of Mr.. Colfax's guilt on which it
based its clamor for his impeachment.
The Words argument was this: Nc
Comb, in his Philadelphia suit, swore
that on the 18th Of June. 1868, he re-
ceived dividend Of go per cent in
cash, and 40 per cent in Union Pacific
stock on his Credit MobiIier stock.
Hence, the World reasoned, Mr.. Col
fax must have received the same, and
figured out the proceeds as follows:
First, q go per cent. dividend in
cash on twenty shares Of 500 each
would be ST 200; second, . 40 per cent.
dividend in Union Pacific Railroad
stock would be $500 Of such stock. In
June, 1868, the market value Of this
stock was 9S, equal in cash to $784.
Now, II Mr. Colfax received on the goth
Of June, 1865. the 60 per cent cash
dividend on his twenty shares of Cred
It Mobilier stock, he must have re-
,eived at the same time the 40 per cent.
dividend in Union Pacific stock.
Selling it a. 9S, he would receive S7S4,
'r allowing two per cent. for broker
lge, stamps, &C., S76S 80. Add to this
he 81 200 in cash, and we obtain ST.
,6S 81, the exact amount to within
.hirty-one cents of the 81 1868 63 depos-
ted by him with his banker, June %,
1851
This is what the World calls 'irre-
'istible" evidence Of guilt warranting
he impeachment of the Vice Presi-
lent! But now see how Mr.. Colfax's
checks refute the Worlds hypothesis
md confirm Mr.. Colfax's statement.
Mr.. Colfax saws:
"The total deposit was 81 1868 63, aud
here being no previous deposit later
han the lst of June, it shows that
his amount was the accumulation of
The moneys paid to me during the in
.ervening three weeks. This is also
proven by the dates of the checks
deposited. One check was for Sl6,63,
lated June 18th, signed by J. n. Sey-
nour, since deceased, one for $3.50,
lated June 18th, signed by E. c. Car
lin, and one $500, dated June 18th,
igned by T. Denny & Co., none Of
hem having the slightest connection
With the subject ofinvestigation before
his committee"
This at least proves that the S76S.63,
deposited in checks June %, 1868,
we're not the proceeds of a 40 per cent.
Credit Mobilier dividend paid in
Union Pacific stock; and the facts
lbove related show that the 81, 200 de-
oosited in bills on the same day, was