Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-01-23
WASHINGTON.
The Progress of Investigation.
How C0lfax Did and Didn't Owl
Credit MObilier.
A SI,2OO Difference OF Opinion Be.
tween Him and Ames.

I =
member delivering the stock to Colfax.
The check and proceeds of the Union Pa
cifc stock were paid for the Credit Mobilier
stock. In the June following gave Colfax
a check for twelve hundred dollars divi-
dends on the Credit Mobilier.
Question. What do you say about what
Colfax said in regard to bis making you a
present Of $500?
Answer, He said some such thing to me
about being sorry for my misfortune. l
cannot remember his words now. ColfaX
had never called upon witness for Credit
Mobilier stock. Had it ready to deliver
to him whenever he wants it. Supposed
that Colfax understood that 1900 dollars
was dividend upon the stock. Witness
had no recollection that Colfax paid him
that 1900 dollars. 1t don't belong to wit
ness.
Colfax who was present said he reassert-
ed what be said before in regard to the ], 200
dollars. He now gave notice to Anes that
he would prove negative.
Mr.. Colfax then questioned Ames as fol-
lows:
Question--Did 1 after you came to me
ask you to pay me?
Answer-That cannot tell.
Question-Didn't you tell me some divi-
dends had been earned, but were unad-
justed?
Answer-I told you dividend of so per
cent in Union Pacific bonds had been de-
clared.
Question-Did 1 ask you to buy the
bonds?
Answer-I did not buy the bonds; they
were dividends, and 1 sold them, account
ing for the proceeds TO you.
Question-Did you sell the stock?
Answer have not sold it. Witness re-
garded him now as a proprietor Of Credit
MObiler stock. Did not remember what
Colfax said at the next session about the
transaction being of. All that be remem-
bers about it is what Colfax said in his tes-
| timony. Did not remember of saying, af
| ter he heard the testimony Of Colfax on
| January 7, that what he said was correct.
Colfax-Well, Mr.. Crounz so informed
me that you told him SO and telegraphed to
! the New York Times.
Witness did not remember where Colfsx
was when he gave him the check for twelve
hundred doIa's.
Colfsx-Did not tell you the first week
in the session that wanted you to tell the
entire truth about this matter?
Ames-That is what have done to-day,
sir. Did not remember any other cash
dividend except the one in July.
ColfaX--Durant says there were alss
! bond dividends. Now what did you do
with the bonds belonging to me?
Answer-They were not bonds, but
bond certificates. hold them with your
| stock, for you are entitled 10 them.
Question-Have you ever offered them
to me?
Answer-No sir; 1 am awaiting the re-
suit of this suit. The check for 81 200 was
payable to Schuy Ter Colfax. 1t is in pos
! session Of the sergeant-at-arms as voucher
| TO my accounts. The check was given
! long time before the conversation about the
matter being of. That check, my dear sir,
was in June, and the conversation between
US about the matter being eff was not until
| the next session. Never gave Colfsx any
! bonds or stock in the Union Pacific Rail-
road.
! Mr.. Colfax-Now, if the committee will
allow, assert under oath that do not re-
member of having received a single dollar
! from Ames.
Mr.. Ames again repeated his statement.
| He had no recollection Of a conversation
! with Crounz.
Mr.. Colfax requested that the sergeant
at arms be summoned to produce the
books and papers referred to.
Allison.
Ames was then questioned in regard to
| Allison, of Iowa. Witness holds all the
stock belonging TO Congressmenl except
| that given to Senator Patterson, Bingham
and Painter. Allison received his stock
! certificates at the time he bought them, but
ra4y cd fhar tO
not know why be returned them. The en-
vslope merely contained the stock certif-
Gates, but no letter of explanation. Did
not remember offering Allison a small
amount of money to repurchase stock
| five cents or thereabouts, so that it could
be called the property of either one.
MeTrick-It was device on the part Of
Allison TO avoid being mixed up in the law
suit.
Answer-To avoid being mixed up in
this malicious charge OF bribery.
COnkIiRg, Fowler, BayAr Dawes.
Mr.. Ames then testified that Senator
Conkling, Senator Fowler, or Senator Bay
ard had never been stockholders in the
Credit Mobilier to his knowledge.
By Judge Poland-Wel, how about
Dawes stock.
Answer-Settled for it by paying
a thousand dollars, about the same as the
others. Witness had quite an account with
Dawes, having bought bonds for him to the
extent Of three or four thousand dollars,
and at anOl her time invested for him ST. 900
in Iowa Falls and Sioux City Railroad.
QUestion-Did you pay any dividends TO
Dawes.
Answer-I think did, sir. paid him
5000 dividend, or paid it in part, about
$4QO believe, as he owed me On other
matters.
Question-When was the matter ended
between you and Dawes.
Auswer-In December, 1853. He receiv
ed the stock and dividends, but he (Daw
sony got frightened at the Duf.GIeen suit
and we settled.
How Garfield Made Money on No In.
Vestment at aII-and stiIs Owns
Credit MObilier Stock.
Judge Poland-Well, as to Mr.. Garfield,
will you state tOthe committee the details
of the transactions between yourself and
Gen. Garfield in regard to the Credit Mo-
biler stock.
Answer-I agreed TO let him have 10
shares Of Credit Mobilier stock at par and
interest in December, 1867, or January,
1865. blr. Garfield did not pay me IL
money and sold the $1,000 bond received
with the stock and derived 700 and some
dollars from the sale. In June l received
a money dividend Of 5000 which, with the
money received ffom the bond, left bal
ance due Mr.. Garfield of 1929 which paid
to him. / did not deliver him any stock
either before or since. He never had the
stock aud the only thing he ever realized
from il was 1929.
Question-Has that 800 dollars ever been
repaid to you?
Auswer-I have no recollection Of it!
Questionable you ever loan Garfield
329 dollars?
Answer-Not to my knowledge, unless
he calls this loan, which believe he does.
| viii let ii so, as be wants it.
Judge Poland.-Well, but it must go as
the truth.
Mr.. Ames, Well the truth is what l am
telling you. Witness never supposed he
had any right to the 329 dollars given TO
Garfield and never claimed it. He would
not undergo what Garfield had undergone
:, 81, Lot ,lx