Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1880-07-09

FRIDAY MORNING. JULY 9. 1880.
The Readiusters of Virginia in conven-
ton at Richmond Wednesday, completed
the equipment Of their party organization
by putting in the field Hancock and
English electoral ticket. This makes two
Democratic and one Republican electoral
ticket in the field. In the present fairness
Of the Republican party of Virginia this
may not seem so serious matter, but let
the Democratic wings war against each
other few weeks until reunion is impos-
sible and the National Republican Com
mittee will turn its attention to Virginia
and pour such speakers and money within
her borders as will arouse an enthusiast
tic, capitation tax paid Republican vote
which may carry the Garfield ticket from
under the very noses of the quarrelling
Democrats. If the Democratic leaders OF
the two wings have one 1.-THE of the COM
mon sense and patriotism we credit them
with they will submit their difficulties at
once to the National Democratic Commit
tee for arbitration. It would be the heighth
of madness in either wing to let hatred or
overweaning confidence of strength on Its
part give even chance for Republican
success in Virginia. Such an arbitration
as we suggest would preserve the self re-
spect Of the voters on both sides and the
union on the Presidential ticket would be
enthusiastic.
If a man is disqualified from perform
ing the duties Of juryman it makes little
difference to those interested in the mat
ter at the bar what that mans opinions
are on the merits of the cause. So, if
citizen is disqualified in advance in public
opinion for the high Office of President it
is matter of small Importance to the PEG
pie Of this country what his views are up
on finance, the tariff, state rights or those
other questions upon which it is generally
desirable to know them. A committee, {
majority of which was of Mr.. Gar
fields own party unanimously, sew
en- years ago, decided that Mr.. Garfield
had sworn to an untruth. The following
was his oath
stock of the Credit Mobilier, OF the Union Pacific
srairoad, nor any dividend profits arising from
''either of them"
The members of that committee did not
look upon this oath as the truth, for in
their report on the matter they said:
'sThe facts in regard to Mr.. Garfield, as found by
sthe committee are identical with the case of MI
.sKeey to the point of the reception of the check
afor 1929 He agreed with Mr.. Ames to take ten
sshares of Credit Mober stock but did not pay fol-
the same. Mr.. AmeS received the eighty per cent
dividend in bonds and sold them for ninety seven
per cent and also received the sixty per cent, cash
dividend, which, together with the price of the
stock and interest, left a balance OF 1929. This
s'satna aoas paid to Mr., Garfield By q check on the
'Sergea1at at Arms Mr.. Ames received all the sub
asequent dividends, and the committee did not find
that since the payment of the 1929 there has been
stany communication between Mr.. Ames and Mr.
Garfeld on the subject, until the investigation be
tsgan. Some correspondence between Mr.. Garfield
aand Mr.. Ames, and some conversation between
stthem during this investigation, will be found in the
reported testimony
This report was signed by three Repub-
licans of national reputation-Gen. N. P.
Banks, of Massachusetts,, Geo. W. Nc
Crazy, of Iowa, afterwards member of
President Hayes cabinet) and Judge Luke
P. Poland, of VT, 1.-THE chairman and by
two Democrats-W. e. Niblack, of Indi-
ana and W. M. Merrick, Of Nd. In the
recorded judgment of this committee it
appears that Mr.. Garfield s oath did not
outweigh the evidence against him and
that he aid agree to receive the stock and
that he did receive money as dividend
from it.
But it is claimed by some Republican
orators, notably U. S. District Attorney
!. T.. L. Lewis. at Republican meeting here
q few Gays ago, that the endorsement OF
Mr.. Garfeld's constituency In his re-elec-
ton to congress created strong presump-
ton, overwhelming Mr.. Lewis regarded it,
Of his Integrity. But Mr.. Lewis was in
error. Mr.. Garfield IS constituents did not
give him the overwhelming endorsement.
1882 he was elected from the Ashtabula
district in Ohio by majority of 1894
{ votes. After the Credit Mobilier expo
sure be was again put up by the party ma
chinery as the Republican candidate for
reelection. At that convention in ac-
cepting the nomination he challenged
a full discussion of his public re-
cord. The challenge was at once accepted
by his opponents and the following cores
pondence ensued;
WARREN, Ohio, Sept. Is, 1874.
Mr.. 4. A. House or Mr.. II. B. Perkins, members
for. Ifun,b,W County or the Republican Central
committee of the Nineteenth Congressional Dis
trict.
GENTLEMEN:-Inasmuchs as General Garfield.
in his speech at the gainesville Convention, &C
cepting his denomination, expressed his earnest
desire to meet his opponents and discuss with them
his public record their representative in Congress
and as the committee of which you are members
have announced Mr. Garfield to speak in Warren on
Saturday evening next and nferring from that fact
that he will not meet and discuss the subject at
gainesville at that time as requested by the anti
CART ED committee of Lake County, we ask will
fair division of the time be given at next Saturdays
meeting to those Republicans who oppose his re
election, so that rec fair, and honorable discussion
of the public acts of Gen. Garfield may be heard
dnd jatdged An answer is respectfully asked as
early as P. NJ. to-day
s. M. LAIRD.
JOHN NJ STULL
HOMER E. STEWART.
The following reply was received
WARREN Sept. Is, 1874.
Messrs. s. NJ Laird, John NJ. StuH, Homer B..
Steacdrt
GENTLEMEN: Yours of this date, addressed to Mr.
A. A. House or myself, was handed to me by Mr.. s.
Bartlett at about II o'clock
In reply, would say that Gen. Garfield has &C
copied the invitation OF the Congressional Commit
tee Of the Nineteenth District to address the people
of Warren on Saturday evening. We do not feel
authorized as members of the committee or as indi
viduals to change the character of the meeting
from an address to discussion.
H B. PERKINS
The prompt offer of public discussion
was, it is seen as promptly declined by Mr..
Garfiald's friends At the next election