Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1880-07-25

The Republican nominee for President
is out in a pamphlet in defense of his con-
nection with the well-authenticated
charges of corruption made against him.
This is pitiable. tits enough to see a great
party put upon the defensive, but what
are We to think when a candidate finds
it necessary to attempt the task of boil
STEERING up his own crooked record in a
printed pamphlet. No party or man ever
won by such tactics. And besides the
defense is too weak to be of any service
to the person it seeks to help. 1t, in fact,
amounts to little less than a plea of guilty
to all that has been charged by the press
of the country. As things look now Dea-
con Garfield will not carry a State in the
Union. The New York Herald reviews
his lame defense as follows /:
In another column we print what appears
to be General Gar6eld's formal and final
defence against the charge Of official mis-
conduct in the Credit Mobilier case. 1t is
extracted from q forthcoming campaign life
Of the candidate, all the details Of which
are announced as obtained by the author
directly from General Garfield himself. 1t
will be noted that the statement of the cir
cumstances on the specific point of General
Garield's personal dealings with Cakes
Ames is made in the first person, as if the
Generals actual words were written down
for the defence. Much has been said with
in a few months past, especially by orators
and organs of the Republican faith, on the
unhappy condition Of a great party put on
the defensive by the record OF its candi-
date, and in view of the document referred
to Republicans will have new reason to re-
fleet deeply on that point and even to con-
slider that if q party on the defensive is
badly off, a party en- the defensive without
any defence is certainly in a much more
lamentable position. General Garfield is
exceedingly generous in his statement and
vouchsafes answers to many questions that
are not asked in this connection. His gen.
erosity, indeed, in giving abundant infor-
nation on points as to which there was no
doubt, is in proportion to the rigid strict
ness of his delivery OF particulars as to
which a freer speech would have better sat
isfed public curiosity. He defines the
Credit Mobilier, and the people already
AucW JUST VIA III was. ne gives q Stdte-
ment Of the formation Of the "ring of
seven persons" and a glimpse of how they
operated and kept to themselves the secret
OF their game, as if to lay the ground for
the suggestion that this very secrecy guar
anteed the innocence Of the persons who
received a part Of the spoils. But it
is . virtue in q man not to know
that which 1t is his official duty to know
Secrecy was part of the game. Of course.
and they paid for it; bribed Congressman
not to legislate for them, but to help them
along by leaving them alone. Did General
Garfield accept q valuable consideration
Tor his silence? That is the point before
the country, and the answer is not s~atisfac-
tory. He says he had q loan. Evidence
enough to guide the popular judgment on
that point has already been given. In this
defense there Is Q new trait Of vacillation.
The accused returns to that statement Of
his case which he made before the Con-
gressional investigation had proved his
completely, yet holds on to the loan theory.
which was q prevarication due to the fact
that the investigation had proved his
original statement to be false. But it is
not strange II in a case where every de-
fence made is so poor a man should not
be able to decide which to stand by for q
nnality.