The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1876-10-06

THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE
FOR PRESIDENT.


In the Chicago Times OF last Saturday is
the proof that Gov. Hayes did receive
money, for safe keeping, from soldiers now
dead, and refuses to account for the same.
The parties to the correspondence are all
Republicans and their letters are dated in
1869. The article fills four columns Of
small type in the Times and is too lengthy |
for our available space. The facts. are
simple, credibly attested, and apparently
uuanswerablo. Nelson LeRoy,a lad killed |
at the battle of Winchester, before going |
into action was possessed of $1,000 in |
bounty money. As every soldier knows, |
in the latter years Of the war, the recruits
were paid their government and state
5ounties just as they were about to leave
for the field, in order that they might not
be plundered by the harpies that at an
earlier day beset the camps to pillage the
careless recruits. 1t is true that provision
was made for renting the money at once
to such address as the soldier desired, but
IL is well known to those who served in the
volunteer regiments that fully third of
Of the recruits, especially the granger ones,
brought their money with them. Nelson
Leroy was lad of unthinking years and
careless habits As he went into action he
entrusted his money in bulk to his colonel,
(Hayes), as was done universally in every
regiment in the field The boy never
came out OF the action alive. Years passed
and quite incidentally some of his :ompau-
ions, in conversation with his father, men.
toned the money which had been given
the colonel. The father, ignorant of the
fact, makes inquiry. He writes to the
boys colonel Rutherford B. Hayes, then
just elected governor Of Ohio. The
governor responds that be never
knew of such a boy. The father pro-
cures afidavits and forwards them to
the governor. He then remembers the
boy, but says he never received the money,
The father strengthens the case and
forwards the result. The governor has
another lapse, and no recollection of boy or
money, and thinks the inquiring parent
must be imposing on him. Finally, suit
being threatened, he does find out that
there was such person; that he did have
money, and that the money had been in
trusted to him (Hayesl but he had re-
turned it to the boy before the battle
The letters show au utter lack Of man
illness on the part Of Hayes. He had been
asked, ciyilly, as the letters show, by the
father Of the dead boy, to explain the circum-
stances, when he returns bare line that
he knows nothing, and cannot be annoyed,
The subsequent discovery Of the startling
aud corrborative proofs in the possession
of Leroy, forced him to an examination of
the subject, when he is made to remember
that he did know the boy; did receive the
money, but returned it! Yet there are
two witnesses at least that saw the money
go to him aud saw the soldier die, before
he could get chance to return it! Gov.
Hayes may be, and will be, we trust, able
to dispel this frightiul stain from his repu-
tatiou. He has himself to blame, however,
if it shall be a more difficult matter to re
gain public confidence, since other charges
almost as terrible arc hanging uuan-
swered against him. He was not fairly
warm in his shoes as a candidate for the
presidency when chaplain who served
with him in West Virginia told startling
story Of $500, in money taken
from the body Of man shot for desertion.
and not accounted for by him, when he was
in command of a brigade in that state
He doesn't seem to have made the state
ment public in the usual campaign way,
as he is of the governors party. and even
in its publicity it came rather as demand
that coull be satisfactorily explained, and
the money restituted, than as an evil com
munication which should damage an i'm
plicitly trusted public man. The state
ments are fairly startling, but on the explicit
denial of the governor that he had put the
money to his own use, the public dropped
the matter with an uneasy conviction that
all might be right but that more thor
ough explanation would have been more
satisfactory. The amazing facts presented
revive the previous story with chilling
story. Fine character and standing go a
long way 10 the governors favor, but he
must bear in mind that year ago such a
charge as bribery brought against General
Belknap would have been read with in
dignant incredulity by friends and foes
alike. Had the tax impeachment and
the Harper story received the categorical
and detailed treatment presented in Judge
Sinnot's refutation, the present charge,
though it might startle and puzzle the
people. would not have shaken their faith
so badly in the character of a generally
respected citizen.