Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-06-18
la,lcaster fntelligenrer.
FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE le, 1880.
An AudaciOus Demand.

a report that by the advice of his friends
he does not propose to make any further
explanations Of these matters beyond
that which he has already given to the
public. This decision may be the only |
one open to him. 1t is to be presumed
that he has said in his defence all that
can be said, as he would have had no
motive when heretofore seeking to ex-
plain his conduct to conceal any part OF
his defence. As that stands it is simply
denial of the testimony of
Oakes AmeS that he held stock
in the Credit Mobiiier and re
ceived as profits upon it its par value,
and 1929 in excess thereof. To his own
statement is added an expression of opin-
ion upon the part of Judge Black that
whatever connection Garfield had with
the fraud, was had ignorantly, and there
fore innocently. We publish elsewhere
the statement made by Mr.. Garfield in
1876, to his constituents in his congress
sional district, as embodying his defence
That it is lame and impotent hardly
needs to be said. 1t did not satisfy all of
his Republican fellow citizens as appears
from the resolutions passed by the War
rem Republican convention of that year
which we also publish. 1t presented
nothing that was not stated by him to
the congressional committee that in 1873
investigated the Credit Mobilier affair,
and which reported that:
Mr. Garfield agreed with Mr.. Ames to
take ten shares of Credit Mobilier stock,
but did not pay for the same. Mr.. Ames
received the 80 per cent. dividend in bonds
and sold the bonds for 81 per
cent, and also received the GO
per cent. cash dividend, which together
paid the price of the stock and interest and
left balance of 1929. This sum was paid
over to Mr.. Garfield by check on the SER
geant-at-arms, and Mr.. Garfield then un-
derstood this sum was the balance of divi-
dends after paying for the stock.
The New York Times declared then
that " Messrs. Kelley and Garfield pre-
sent most distressing figure. Their
participation in the Credit Mobilier
affair is complicated by the most unfor-
tunate contradictions of testimony" To
the allegation that the implicated con-
gresham had acted in ignorance of the
true character of the fraud it replies that
Ito those who knew any thing about the
Union Pacific railroad in the winter of
1867, the purpose and origin of the Credit
MObilier were so well known that they
may fairly be said to have been nOtO-
rious." Again it said: 1.-The character
of the Credit MObilier was no secret.
The sources of its profits were well
known at the time congressman bought
it," The New York Tribune denounc-
ing the report of the congressional COM
mittee which recommends the expulsion
only of Oakes Ames and James Brooks
said:
James A. Garfield, of Ohio, had ten
shares never paid dollar received 1929
which, after the investigation began, he
was anxious to have considered as loan
from Mr.. Cakes AmeS to himself.
Well, the wickedness of it all is, not that
these men were bribed or corruptly intiu,
enccd, but that they betrayed the trust OF
the people, deceived their constituents and
by evasions and falsehoods confessed the
transactions to be disgraceful, and now a
whole Congress of grown men is to delib
crate seriously upon a resolution that puts
the sins of all these upon two. Partisan
ship has never stooped SO low as this.
This was Republican opinion; and in
view of it the audacity of the party
which now presents Mr.. Garfield as it:
presidential candidate and his hardihood
in accepting the nomination without
seeking further to exculpate himself, is
made very conspicuous.
Mr.. Garfeld's disingenuousness il
asking his constituents to believe him in
nOcent because he would not he likel.
to barter his good name for 1929 is glar,
ing. No such charge is made. Though
Mr.. Garfield received but this amount O
money the stock which earned it for hin
stood in his name on the books of thu
company and it could have been at any
time claimed by him, together with thu
immense dividends accruing upon it
Prudence withheld him from claiming
any more of the swag until time enough
should have elapsed to make it probable
that it could be taken safely, and wher
shortly it became apparent that thi:
could not be done, of course he did moi
step further into the mire, but in the face
of the damning developments he sought
to retreat from the compromising steps
he had already taken.
His effort is vain; he committed him.
self too deeply. For his own word he
can ask no confidence. His conduct
does not entitle him to it. He did not
treat the people frankly. Prior to the
congressional investigation he denied all
manner of connection with its subject,
and his memory was revived to a remem-
brance of his negotiations with Cakes
Ames only when he was compelled to
face his testimony. In other matters his
record had not been clear. His Republi-
can constituents, in Warren county, it
will be seen, charged that since his entry
into Congress he had steadily arrayed
himself with rings and monopolies
against the interests of the people. His
connection with De GOlyer in successful
effort to draw immense sums from the
treasury for worthless wooden pave
ment is not less scandalous than his
Credit Mobilier affiliation. 1t is not dis
puted that he took fee of five thousand
dolIorc to imnOSo thic navomant IlnOn tho