The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1880-06-16
WHY NOT AN HONEST MANI

publican party confesses Its inability to
select for its siandard-bearers upright and
patriotic citizens. 1t was heralded every
where that lightning could flash the news that
Grant could not be, and ought not to be,
trusted. His administrations of the Gov
eminent while President were referred TO
as the most execreble in American history.
Republicans We'd with each other In covering
the great chief with the vilest charges
of corruption and that he was spared uni.
versal denunciation and possibly impeach-
ment because of his military rerown and the
fact that he was soon to retire from Office.
But when his name was brought forward In
connection with the nomination at Chicago,
Republicans again opened fire upon him
and his managers and friends, and declared
that he was so full of treason that ne was
ready to commit an act compared
with which Arnolds treachery was as
nothing. 1t was q Republican YER
dict in Grants case, and nothing worse
was ever said Of jeff Davis and his co-lVbor-
ers in the field OF rebellion. Conklipg. Cam
eron and Logan felt the idamning insults to
which their chief and themselves were sub
iected, but defantly stood erect aud went
down at last shouting for tine Empire. Hav-
ing disposed of Grant, why did the Conyen-
ton degrade Blaine? The response comes as
quick as lightning from the clouds: Blaine
had shown himself to be so thoroughly cor
rupt that the leaders realized the fact
that they could not carry him. He too
must be slaughtered. He could not be
defended. He could not be whitewashed
His guilt, like the scales on leper, covered
him all over, and as a consequence, with his
loathseme record of rings and jobs aud Null
ligan letters, Blaine went into everlasting
exile. Those two distinguished Republicans,
condemned by the action of their own party,
and out of the way, why not Sherman?
There he was with Garields Endorsement
and with about 100 delegates at his back,
brought forward and bought by official
patronage. When Blaine's ranks broke,
why not go to Sherman? Simply be-
cause Shermsn's record was worse,
If possible, than Grants or Blaine's. His
prominent connection with the great crime,
or crimes, hat reversed the will of the
American people, his bartering Federal Offices
for perjury; his investigation, in which the
poor, miserable, driveling Mrs. jerks came
to his AID when conviction was pointing its
damning finger at him, led the Convention to
retire from him as they would from q
scourge. In fact, Sherman never had
ghost of a show at Caicsgo. With Grant,
Blaine and Sherman out OF the
way, because OF thei- corruptious.
why not an honest man? Why Garfield,
who stands on level with the most execra-
BILE of the Republican mar==SScrs? II dark
korse, why not a decent one? In selecting
Garfield the Republican party has put in
nomination man whose record is inetfaca-
bly, stained with official rsscality. The New
York Sun recspitulates his corruptions, and
says that the character of General Garfield
can be judged by the following conspicuous
facts:
when in 1872 the Credit Mobilier bribery
and corruptions among members of Congress
were frstexposed, General Garfield was one
among those accused. He Immediately
published letter expressly and positively
denying that he had any share in il. Next,
on January IA, 1878. he appeared before the
Committee of the House of Representatives,
and under oath declared: Il never owned,
received, or agreed TO receive any stock of
the Credit Mobilier, or of the Union Pacific
Railroad, nor any diridead or profits arising
from either Of them
But on January g next following, Hon.
Cakes Ames was examined before the same
Committee. and proved by record evidence,
partly in General Gar6eld's own handwrit-
ing, that General Garfield had had stock Ia
the Credit MobilIer, and that he had re-
ceived dividends thereupon. Mr.. Ames
also testified that General Garfield had viz
tied him subsequent to tie commencement
of the investigation by the House, and had
endeavored to induce him to swear before
the Committee that money thus paid him as
dividends had been delivered to hiR as q
loan; and yet at the very same time that he
had endeavored to procure this false testi-
mony from Mr.. Ames, General Garfield had
called upon Ames to pay him an additional
Mobilier, claiming that the dividends he had
already received had not been as large as
they should have been.
"A perjurer, and a man who attempts to
suborn perjury, is not fit to be President.
lone other important feature in the history
/ of General Garfield is his relation to the De
Golyer paving contract. One De Golyer had
made contract with the Shepherd Ring in
Washington to put down quantity Of
patent pavement. General Garfield was
Chairman of the Committee on Appropris.
tons in the House of Representatives. In
order to pay for this patent pavement. an
appropriation was needed from Congress
The sum of 5000 was paid to General Gar
field on behalf of De Golyer, and sppropria
tons to the amount of millions of dollars
were thereafter granted to the Washington
Ring, the appropriation for the De Golyel
pavement being included therein"
The Republican party by putting forward
James A. Garfield must explain away hi