The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1876-04-20

Hrom the Cincinnati Enquirer, April lith'l
THU BOWLER ESTATE,
An Authoritative Statement at Last,
What the Eldest Heir has to Say,
A Conclusive Defense of Hon. Geo
H. Pendleton.

One of our reporters, hearing that Mr.
Geo. P. Bowler, one Of the principal heirs
in interest to the Bowler estate, to which
the Republican press are giving such
tender care Just now, was in the city,
called upon that gentleman yesterday
He found him at his Office, that OF Cen
eral Manager of the Kentucky Central
Railroad. AS no one directly interested
has spoken on the subject yet, we thought
a talk with Mr.. Bowler on the subject
would be good reading. After the ex'
change of the usual courtesies, we opened
up with;
When did You return, Mr. Bowler2
Mr.. Bowler-Day before Yesterday,
having been detained in Baltimore by
the illness of Mrs, Bowler.
Reporter-It was after you left, be-
lieye' that the original charges against
Mr.. George H. Pendleton were first made
public2 n.. ,1ou
day morning that l left. had expected
toleave the Saturday previous, but, being
detained until Monday, took the II a. m.
train on Monday from Cumminsvllle. l
read the papers that morning
Reporter-You seem to have gwen the
matter no public attention.
Mr.. Bowler-No; even if l had cared
70. | have ran home since for four days,
and that was because of and during the
absence of all the officers Of the railroad
Mr.. Pendleton, Mr. Ernst and Mr. Ran
som-at Washington, when the business
of the road required my entire time.
Reporter-I would very much like to
have your comments on the affair Tor the
Enquirer.
Mr.. Bowler-Well, l have no objection,
provided you get at the straight OF the
story. which nobody seems to have done.
Reporter-Did not Mr.. William Ernst,
in an Enquirer interview, give the Ken
tucky's Central railroads version OF the
affair correctly? go
Mr.. Bowler-He gave the public busl-
ness of the road correctly, but did not
treat, as in fact he could not, of the ,pri-
vate affairs which have been raked up
and misrepresented since. -,
Reporter drawing an Euqtirer OF the
10Th of March, 1875, from his pocket
Why, he is reported as saying, The
whole matter can be summed up in a
nutshell as follows. Mr. Pendleton is
not the guardian of the Bowler heirs.
He did not elect himself as president OF
the road. He did not contract with him.
self to collect this claim. His compensa-
ton was fixed in advance by the roads
board of control. The board is satisfied
with the result, and as it is a private mat
ter think the public ought to be salts
fed Also"
Mr.. Bowler-That is not what | mean.
| referred to the misunderstanding OF
our estate in which Mr.. Pendleton has
falsely been accused of taking advantage
of minor heirs" :,
Reporter-You don't look much like
minor. If not impertinent, how old are
youF ,,.,
Mr.. Bowler-I am in my thirty-frst
year,
Reporter-how old were you then when
Mr.. Pendleton collected this claim?
Mr. Bowler was twenty-five.
Reporter-You are related to Mr.. Pen
dleton, l believer
Mr. Bowler-He is my uncle, being
my mothers eldest brother. That's all.
Reporter-You have of course read the
comments of the press of the country
Would you object to simplifying matters
by giving sucCinCt statement OF the
whole affair?
Mr.. Bowler-Certainly not
Reporter-Well, l should be glad to
have it in that shape.
Mr.. Bowler then proceeded to make
statement, which ran, substantially, as
follows:
During my five weeks absence have
read with the greatest Indignation the
.scurrilous articles containing the unjust
and malicious attacks upon Mr.. Pendle-
ton. was member of the Board of
Control of the Kentucky Central rail-
road at the time the arrangement was
made fixing his compensation for the
collection of the claim against the gov
ernment, and it met with my hearty
consent and rull approval. My mother,
in her own interest and as guardian of
the two minor children, was consulted,
although that was not obligatory accord
ing to the articles of the association ofthe
K. G. r. R., and the arrangement was un-
hesitatingly confirmed by her. The set
tlement as made by Mr.. P. to the Board
was entirely satisfactory to us and is now.
Ny brother, now within few months of
his majority, has expressed himself in
the most positive terms as to the justice
of the compensation, and gives it his
most cordial approval.
My father died July 4, 1874, and since
that time Mr.. P. has had charge of the
estate and of the separate property of my
mother. By no words can convey our
feeling in regard to the faithful and un.
selfish manner in which he has devoted
his time and talents to the administra-
tion of the trust. He sacrificed his con-
venience, private interests and the prac-
tice of his profession. At the time of my
fathers death there were large debts
which were paid, not by the sacrifice of
valuable securities, but by money raised
by Mr.. Pendleton on his individual
credit and the pledge of his private for
tune. This continued for years. Several
lawsuits, involving large amounts of
money and very intricate questions, were
pending at the time of my fathers death.
One required the attendance of Mr.. PEN
dleton and counsel for weeks on several
different occasions at Cleveland. The
suit of the Covington & Lexington Rail-
road Company VS.. Bowler heirs and
others was protracted through ten years
of constant and severe litigation. 1t went
through the courts of Kentucky, aud e.