The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1880-07-02

Ou4O0 AOG CIOSSoQO1 MulCu NIL. Aul6S OK J1d114SO
was because it had never been settled or ad-
justed. Here is the entry in full:
10 shares Credit M. 81 100000
mos. 10 days. 1896
Total s., O43 So
80 per cent bd div at NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. 776OO
s 26786
Int. to June 20. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 1854
Total NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. 271OO
1000 c. NJ
1000 q. P.
Notwithstanding he said he had no other en-
try in relation to Mr.. Garfield, on the 22d of
January Mr.. Ames presented to the committee
statement Of an alleged account with Gen.
Garfield as follows:
1863 To ten shares stock Credit Mobier of 81 900
Interest. a.
June 1J 10 caSn. oZ9
Total 81, 376
Or.
1868 BY dividend bonds Union Pacific railroad
$1,000 at 80 per cent, less 3 per cent. S 776
June IL. By dividend collected for your
count. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 60O
Total s., 1916
This account he claimed to have made up
from his memorandum book, but, when the
memorandum book was subsequently presented,
it was found that the account here quoted was
not copied from it, but was partly made up
from memory. BY comparing this account
with the entry made in diary, as first quoted, it
will be seen that they are not duplicates either
IN substance or form and that in this account
new element is added-namely, an alleged
payment of 1929 in cash June 10. This is the
very element in dispute The pretended proof
that this sum was paid Gen. Garfield is found
IN nASr .NRo Il, IL
Ames on the Sergeant-at-Arms. The following
is the language of the check as reported in the
testimony:
June o. 1868
Pay o. A. or bearer 1929, and charge to my ac-
count. OAKEs ANrEs
This check bears no Endorsement or other
marks than the words and figures given above
1t was drawn on the 22d day of June, and as
shown by the books Of the Sergeant-at-Arms.
was paid the same day. But, if this check was
paid to Gen. Garfield on the account just quot
ed, it must have been delivered to him three
days before it was drawn, for the account
says that he received payment on the 18th of
June
Gen. Garfield himself has made re-
view of the whole subject, and from it
claims that the following conclusions
are clearly established by the evidence !:
That I neither purchased nor agreed to
purchase the CreditssMobilier stock which Mr..
Ames offered to sell me, nor did receive any
dividend arising from it. This appears not
only from my own testimony but from that
first given by Mr.. Ames, which is not over
thrown by his subsequent statements, and is
strongly confirmed by the fact that in the case
Of each Of those who did purchase the stock
there was produced as evidence of the sale
either certificate of stock, receipt of payment.
check drawn in the name of the payee, or en-
4,,ao J1O,x S. d.
marked adjusted and closed, but that no one of
these evidences existed i'll reference to me.
This position is further confirmed by the sub
sequent testimony of Mr.. Ames who, though
he claimed that I did receive 1929 from him on
account of stock, yet he repeatedly testified
that beyond that amount never received or
demanded any dividend, that none was ever
offered to me, nor was the subject alluded to in
conversation. Mr.. Ames admitted in his testi-
mony that after December, 1867, the various
stock and bond dividends amounted to an ag-
gregate of more than 800 per cent, and that be-
tween January, 1868, and May, 1871, all these
dividends were paid to several of those who
purchased stock. My conduct was wholly in
consistent with the supposition of such owner
ship, for during the year 1869 was borrowing
money to build house in Washington, and Sc
curing my creditors by mortgages ON my prop
erty, and all this time it is admitted that I re-
ceived no dividends and claimed none. The
attempt to prove sale of the stock to me is
wholly inconclusive, for it rests, first, on
check payable to Mr.. Ames himself, concerning
which he said several times in his testimony he
did not know to whom it was paid and, sec
Ond, upon loose, undated entries in his
diary, which neither prove a sale of the stock
nor any payment on it. The only fact from
which it is possible for Mr.. Ames to have in
ferred an agreement to buy the stock was the
loan to me of $500. But that loan was made
months before the check of June %, 1868, and
was repaid in the winter of 1862 and after
that date there were no transactions of any
sort between u.s. and before the investigation
was ended Mr.. Ames admitted that on the
chief point of difference between us he might
be mistaken.
That the offer which Mr.. Ames made to me,
as [ understood it, was one which involved no
wrong or improperly. I had no means of
knowing and had no reason for supposing that
behind this offer to sell me small amount of
stock lay hidden scheme to defraud the Pa
clfic railroad and imper1 the interests of the
United States and on the first intimation of
the real nature of the case declined any fur
Their consideration of the subject. That what
ever may have been the facts in the case
stated them in my testimony as / have always
understood them and there has been no con
tradictlon, prevaricaton nor evasion on my
part.
In winding up his review of the whole
matter, Gen. Garfield uses the following
language:
If there be citizen of the United States who
is willing to believe that for 1929 have bar
tered away my good name and to falsehood
have added perjury, these words are not adj
dressed to him. If there be one who thinks
that any part of my public life has been gagged
on SO low a level as these charges would place
1t, do not address him. I address those who
are willing to believe that it is possible for
man to serve the public without personal dis
| honor. | have endeavored in this review to
point out the means by which the managers OF
corporation wearing garb of honorable in
dustry have robbed and defrauded a great ma
tlonal enterprise, and attempted by cunning and
deception, for selfish ends to enlist in its inter
ests those who would have been the first to crush
the attempt had their objects been known.