Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-01-08

Testimony Of MacOmb and Alley.
Blaine and COlfax On the Stand.
WASHINGTON, d. G., Jan. 1.-THE fol-
lowing is additional of testimony taken by
the Credit Mobilier investigation commit
mittee. The testimony OF Mr.. Blaine, re-
ferred to by Mr.. Ames, is as follows:
MIR, Blaine testified as follows: 81 wish
TO state without reservation or qualification
that | never owned a share of stock in the
Credit Mobilier in my life, either by gift,
purchase, or in any way whatever; nor didl
receive, either directly or indirectly, single
cent derived in any manner or shape from
the Credit MobiIier, or from the Union Pa
cific Railroad Company. No persons bold
or ever did hold for me any stock in either
corporation, as agent or trustee in any
capacity whatever. l wish my testimony
to be taken as exhaustive, and IS intendedto
exclude every form or phase of ownership In
the Credit Mobilier or Union Pacific Railroad
Company, both past and present. desire
further to state that some time IN The spring
of 1868, the precise date | will not affirm,
Oakes Ames asked me one day if L would
like to purchase some stock in the Credit
Mobiier. He said it would prove good
investment, and he would sell NE ten shares
of stock at a rate somewhat above par--l
think some $i06 for the ten shares. We
had some conversation in regard TO the
matter, and Mr.. Ames told me very frankly
that in regard to those shares there was
| Law suit either pending or threatened,
though he said his right to sell the shares
was perfect and undoubted. l concluded
that | did not desire to purchase the stock,
and therefore declined. In justice to Mr..
Ames and myself, l will state that it never
occurred to ma that Ames wished to bribe
me, or secure my influence as Represen-
tatiVe.
McCcmb's Testimony.
In Mscomb's examination the following
appears:
Question-Did you understand that 9th
er stock was given to any persons except
! these named in your memorandum?
| AnsWer-I think be (Ames) claimed that
| Brooks, a member of Congress, got what
was spportioned to him out of this amount.
| Mr.. Brooks is the only member Of Con-
! gress who is known to have received any
Of this stock without fair consideration.
Question-Are you speaking Of the stock
obtained for him by Ames?
Answer-A portion of it, thrty-two
shares came from him.
Question-Was this stock put into his
hands?
AnsWer-I do not know. l think the
stock MIR. Brooks received was given BY
Alleys direction and not by that of Anes.
All | know in regard to Mr.. Brooks re-
oeiving any of this stock is this: l saw
Brooks and Alley together several times,
and heard BROOKS pressing Alley to let him
hsYe fifty shares of Credit AObilier stock.
heard him say to Alley that if he would
accord him that privilege--give him the
stoCk-he would take care of the Demo
cratic side Of the House. Brooks was all
that time either Government Director, or
said be would have himself made Govern
ment Director of the Union Pacific railroad
l overheard such conversation between
Brooks and Alley. Alley finally consented
to give him fifty shares of that stock. It
was transferred to Brooks or his sOn-in-
law, Nelson l don't know precisely when
the transfer was made. Alley gave his
pledge that Brooks should have fifty shares
Cakes AInes Cross-Examined.
The following is an abstract of the cross
examination Of Oakes Ames at meeting
oF 80 nn-,'nttna m the 18th If Deremhar
! Oagcs Aues testified to the correctness OF
his previous testimony as reduced to writ
ing. In answer to questions by the Chair
man he gave further testimony as follows 1:
The Credit Mobilier is still in existence
as a corporation with Sidney Dillon, Presi-
dent, and Benz. Ham, Secretary. But the
forty-fiye million c0ntrac5, as it was called,
was not guaranteed by the Credit Mobilier.
Witness thought that company had nothing
further to do with the building Of the rail
road after his contract. Witness could not
give the dates of the various transactions
between him and the several members OF
Congress in regard 70 their becoming OWL
ers of Credit Mobiier stock. He never
could remember dates. When the stock OF
the Credit Mobilier Company was increased
from TWO and hall millions to So, 150,O QUO,
the increase was no. d dividend. share
b llders were entitled to take the increase
O lly if they pal for it pro rata. The coin
q ,ny could not get it all taken. Ames took
b 8 private share Of the additional stock
bat had to dispose Of it, as lie did not think
| it anobiect 10 keep it.
Witness tessisfied that he received
ON COlfax par value sfOr twenty shares,
although the stock was never transferred
to hin. IL was witness's impression that
G lfax received dividends on this stock, but
2 he couId not recOllect whether or not hC
mid them. Colfax is now owner Of TWEEN
= " shares and entitled to dividend On 1t
In December, 1867, witness sold Wilson
r twenty shares for two thousand dollars a
an investment for Mrs. Wilson but some
, months afterwards the money was return
? ed az Wilson Tdid not think the inve st
ment a good one. Patterson bought thITt!
- shares which by his direction were trans
farred to a New York banking house 10
him, Witness agreed that the transac@oI
4 | with Blaine was substantially as BIall
. stated il. Witness did not know Whethe
{ Dawes received any dividend on the stocl
. in which be intended to invest Sl,OVU, ou
] which was never transferred to HIM
Dawes on his own request received b2c
: the ZOO from witness with the ten pc
cent interest guaranteed thereon. Some
q time after he had given it to witness TO III
2 vest, but how long afterward witness couI
not say. Bingham bought twenty share
y from witness at par and in 1870 wItnes
: took the stock off his hands at its marSS
o value. In the meantime Bingham
6 received whatever dividends Weg
( declared on it. Witness bought Bingham
e dividend consisting Of Union Pacific stoc
q at 10. Garfield never took any STOCK
: Witness thinks he never received any div
/, ! Gends. Garfield once received three or fol
= ! hundred dollars from witness which Ga
II field SAYS he considered loan, WitDe9
so understood it. Does not recollect ps.
u ing him any dividend. In regard TO Bou
e well and Kelly neither received any sock
a d vidends from witness. Witness advise
d Kelly to take the stock, but he did no
: Garfield paid witness par value for te
r shares, but afterward became dissstisle
n and witness took it back. Witness thouS
,r Garfield received dividends during the tim
he had and retained them. Fowler new
u received any stock. Wilson and Allisonr
,a cei7ad ten shares. Senator COnkling wi
p never owner Of any stock. There was ne
ID er any negotiations between him and wi
10 ness. Witness identified the letter to ii;
,e comb concerning the assignments OF stoc
-e The stock was given witness to distribute
1. lie saw f.. His plan was to sell the stock al
ID not give it. That was the way be iniend'
al to place the stock, but he had not SO plac'
m it. Mr.. Malcomb wrote to witness, askiI
80