Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1880-06-18
RAKED UP FRon THE PAST.
A Searching Arrangement of De
GOIyer Garfield.
4bsaIOm Hung Up by the Hair

/ V as the nrlglNAl accusation ~
try to belittle it by saying that it is
raked up from the past. Do they
really think that if General Garfield
was corrupt eighteen years ago that is
no reason why he should not be cleo
ted presidentnow? What is ofreal con-
sequence is not whether the charges
are old, but whether they are true.
If true they are as fatal a bar to his
election as if the offense had been
committed yesterday. Would Colfax
be a fit candidate because so much
time has elapsed since his exposure?
1t is further said that Mr.. Garfeld's
constituents in his congressional dis
trict have recovered confidence in
dim. This counts for little until we
know whether they acquitted or con-
doned and the groundsa on which
hey acquitted him, if it was an ac-
l%uittal. Certain it is that he lost
many votes in the election which fol-
owed the exposure. His majority,
which had been nearly II ZOO in 1872,
lust previous to the exposure, fell to
2,52S in 1874. But a bare statement
IF the majorities is not fair to Mr..
fairfield, since there was a third can
lidate in 1874. The loss of confidence
best measured by his loss Of votes.
In 1872 he received 1879, and in 1874
'uIy lZ,09l-a loss OF nearly $500
a consequence of the exposures and
in spite of his strenuous attempts to
larry them. He afterward recovered
his usual majorities.
But when we are referred to his
constituents it is legitimate to inquire
N what ground they forgave or ac-
luitted him. If it was on the same
rounds that are now urged the Judge
nent cannot be accepted. We are
low gravely told that it was only a
mall matter of three hundred and
genty-nine dollars, as if the dishon-
st acceptance OF that sum were not
5 fatal as the acceptance of a larger
amount. lfhis constituents condoned
Ms ofense on this ground the country
will not approve of their leniency.
Sesides, it is sheer Misrepresentation
D say that the alleged bride was linn
tied to that amount. What is charged
) tnat he had Credit Mobilier stock
z the amount of two thousand dol
.ars; that he never paid nor expected
o pay a cent for it thatthe dividends
IN other stock which went with it
we're so enormoUsth that they paid for the
| Credit Mobilier stock and left asurplus
# three hundred and twenty-n nine dol
ars which was paid wei to Mr.. Gar
ield, making the actual bride two
wousand dollars Of stock which cost
him nothing and the surplus which
he received IN money. When the ex-
posure came he threw up and repudi.
ated his stock; but had there been no
exposure he might have retained it.
His acceptance Of the surplus Of divi-
dends beyond what was necessary to
pay for the stock looked like an
acknowledgment that the stock was
his. There must be some better ex-
PLANTATION than has yet been presented
before the country will think other
wise. We are willing and anxious
to see a defense which is not as dam
aging as the original charge. Will
any republican contend that if the
three hundred and twenty-nine dol.
lars which Mr.. Garfield received from
Cakes Ames was a surplus of diyi-
dends on his stock he is fit to be presi-
dent? If, as Mr.. Garfield tried to
have it appear at the time. it was bnr-
rowed money, why did he borrow so
singular a sum?
The defence put forward for the
five thousand dollars received in the
De Golyer business is equally lame,
1t is not denied that he received that
sum, but tits asserted that it was a
counsel fee. 1t is not yetshown what
service Mr. Garfield rendered to earn
it. 1t was equal to a full years sala-
ry as congressman, a salary which is
earned by many speeches on the floor.
much arduOus labor in several com
mittees, and many services for his
constituents. 1t is averred that he
never made a speech nor did any nam
able thing for that large counsel fee.
If he did let his friends present a bill
Of particulars. If they can find moth
ing to insert in such a bill let them
cease prating about a counsel fee, forit
will be evident hat the money was
paid him because be was chairman of
the committee on appropriations. We
waive the indecorum Of taking a coun.
sci fee in the interest of a lob for
which Mr.. Garield's committee was
asked to make appropriations. and
simply suggest that a precise state
ment be made of the services he rem
dcred as counsel. If the list of SER
vices proves to be a blank what
Interpretation will be put on the offer
and acceptance of the counsel fee?
Nh. Garfeld's defense is thus far in
such weak and unskillful hands that
he should take it up himself. We
respectfully offer him the courtesy of
our columns for that purpose. W.
will cheerfully give him all the space
he may require. His supporters will
damage him irretrievably If he leaves
his case in their hands much longer.
They have inflicted so much iniury
already that it will require all his skin
to throw their blunders into the shade.
~
The Lost Narragansett.
N. Y. Tribune, l4th.l
Frederick Alfred, Of Boston, took a