Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1880-06-17
INVITATION TO aARFIELp.

damaging Than the Original
Charge.
The SIMS charges are altogether hoo
grave TO be dismissed without examina.
ton. II the suns charges are proved
dengral Garfield Ia not lit 10 be PresI.
dent. They are 80 utterly damaging, II
true, that we reproduce the S,m's state.
ment In another part oi this paper.
The parallel which the Sun draws be-.
tween the case OF Mr., Coliax and that of
Mr.. Garfield Is forcible and striking,
and tends To show that the ruined Col.
lax Ia an injured man II Garfield il limo.
cent. They had tho same amount of
Credit Mobilier stock assigned them I;
They alike denied that they had receiy.
eel any; the denials Of both were rebut.
ted by strong evidence; bat one Of them
has been seventeen years In disgrace
and the other Is nominated for the Pres
ldency. II the overwhelming ruin Of
ColiaN Is just Il behOOvea the friends of
General Garfield to show how their
cases differ. We are willing tn Judge Of
MIR. Garhelds defence with the same
oandor aud impartiality AZ II the charges
were new, AMI rs u We had never pro-
nounced strong opinion against him.
hut the Tact that the charge il old does
not ahsolye him from the necessity Of
rciuting il.
The grounds OF defence thus far oiler-
ed by his supporters are ar damaging IN
the original accusation They try To
belittle u by saying that ID is raked up
from the past. DO they really think
that II General Garfield was corrupt
eighteen years ago that is no reason
why he should not be elected President
nOw2 What Is oi real consequence Is
not whether the charges arc old, but
whether they are true. II true they are
as fatal a bar to his election IA II the OF
Tense had been committed yesterday.
Would Collax be- ID candidate because
so much time has elapsed since his ex-
pOsuTeP
Ia Ia further said that Mr.. Gariield's
constituents ia his Congressional dis
trict have recovered confidence in him.
This counts for little until We know
whether theg acquitted or condOned
and the grounds on which they mquit
teal him, II u was an acpuittal. Certain
u Is that ho lost many votes Ia the cleo
ton which followed the exposure. His
majority, which had been nearly Il 900
la 1872, just previous Ia the exposure,
frll Ia 2,b2s IA 1874. Buta bare state
mpnt ri the majoTities il not fair to Mr..
Garfield, since there was third candi-
date ia 1874 The loss al confidence IN
best measured 10y his loss of votes Ia
1872 le received ~, lS0, and In 1874 only
l2,bOl-a loss at nearly 5000 ia conse-
quence ri the exposure and IN spite al
his strenuous attempts 10 parry them,
tie aiterWarl recovered his usual major
tiles.
Hut when We are referred to his con
slitucnts II In legitimate tn inquire on
what ground they ioTgaye or acquitted
him. II n was ON the same grounds
that are nov urged their Judgment can
not be accented, We are now gTavely
tuld that II Was only small matter al
three hundred aud twenty nine dollars,
as ii the dishonest acceptance Of that
sum were not as fatal ~ the acceptance
1T larger amount u his constituents
Cundoned hls offences un this ground
the country will not approve al their le-
nieucy Besides u In sheer misrcprc.
sonIatiou tn say that the alleged brlhc
vas limited Ia that amount. What Ia
CHARGED In that hc hal Credit MObiller
stock tu the amount ui two thousand
dollars, that he never paid nor expected
to pay "A cent ior II that the dividends
on other stock which went with II we're
so enormous that they paid Tor the
Credit Mublhrr stock aud lett surplus
at three hundred aud twenty. nino dol
lars which Was paid over to Mr.. Garfield,
making the actual bube two thousand
dollars ui slOck WnlCh he received Ia
money. When the exposure came ho
throw up aud repudlaled his stock hut
hal there hern no exposure he might
have retained IL. Ills acceptance oi the
surplus al dividends beyond what Was
necessary tu pay iuT the stock was hls.
There must be- snme better explanation
than has vet been presented before the
country will think otherwise, We are
willing aud anxious to see defense
which h not as damaging as the original
change. Will any Republican contend
that ii the three hundred aud twenty
nine dollars which Nit Garfield received
from Oakrs Ames was surplus at IT,
yiIrnds on his stock he IL iit la he Presl.
dent n, rs Mr.. Garfield tried tO have
II appear at the time, It was borrowed
money why did he borrow 80 singular a
sum
The defence put forward for the five
thousand dollars received IA the he
tiolycr business Ia equally lame. u Is
not denied that ho received that sun,
hut Il was asserted that u was a counsel
lee. II IN not vet shown what service
Mr.. Garfield rendered tn earn Il. Ii was
equal Ia lull years salary as Congress
man, a salary which is earned 10y many
speeches On the floor, much aTduOus Ia
hnr la several committees, aud many
services Tor his constituents. IL Ii aI-
erred that he never madc a speech nor
did any namahle thing iOr that large
counsel lee. II lac did let his friends
present a hill ot particulars. itney can
hnd nothing t0 insert M such hlll let
them cease prating about counsel lee,
fnr n will he evident that the money
Mas paid him because he vas Chairman
AT the Committee on Appropriations.
NJ naive the indtCuTum at taking a
counsel Zee IN the interest at job Tor
which Mr. Gariicld's committee WAS ask
ed to make appropriations, anu simply
suggest that pr, Else statement be ma'in
of the services he rendered a. counsel
ii the services prove Ia hc blank What
Interpretation will hc put on the "ll'r
and acceptance al the counsel Icc2
MIR Garticld's defence ~ thus tar IN
such weak unskllilul hands that he
should take Il up himself. We respect
uully utlrr him the courtesy oi our col
umus iur that purpose We Viii cheer
fully give him all the space he may re-
uuirr Ills supporters VIII damage nm
irretrlcvahly It hu leaves his case ~ their
hand. much longer, They have miilct-
rd 80 much injury already that u viii
rrJuirr all his skill tu throw their blum
d,Ts Into the shade
rhs Strongest Man IA the World,
Professor H. Proctor found at Reno,