Litchfield enquirer., 1880-07-01
The De GoIyer Matter.
TAKEN FROM THE RECORDS OF AN 1NvEsTIGA- TON IN 1874.

What is known as 'the De Golyer. charge" against General Garfield is this: That for the sum of $5,0O0, nominally paid him as a re- taining fee ill case in which he really had nothing to do, he sold to firm of paving con- tractors ill the District of Columbia his official influence as congressman and especi- ally as chairman of the house committee on appropriations.
 This matter was investigated in 1872 by joint committee of the senate and house, and Tn 1874 by committee Of the house, in both instances ln connection with general inquiries into alleged corruption in the District of Columbia. In the investigation of 1872 Gen. eral Garfield, learning that his name had been mentioned by some witnesses, notified the chairman of the joint committee that if any of the testimony reflected upon him he wished to be called and to answer it. Ihey neger cGlZed liae, because tt eoGs not te1a s7oacaa dt he had been qui1ty of 0ny dishonesty or ins- pr0p3ety At the second investigation in 1874 he was heard on the matter, which had been discussed extensively by the press Tn the preceding campaign in his district From the official record of that investigation are taken the following extracts:
 The following is General Garfield's explicit statement of what there was to the matter:
 "A day or two before the adjournment of tue congress which adjourned in the latter part of May or the first part of June, 1872, Rich- ard C. Parsons, who was practicing lawyer in Cleveland, but was then marshal of the su- preme court, and an old acquaintance of mine, came to my house and said that he was called away summarily by. important busi- ness; that he was retained in case on which he had spent great deal of time, and that, there was but one thing remaining to be done, to make a brief of the relative merits of large number Of wooden pavemeuts ; that the board Of public works had agreed that they would put down certain amount of wooden pave ment in the city, a certain amount of concrete and certain amount of other kinds of pave ment; that they had fixed the price at which they would put down each of the different kinds and that the only thing remaining was to determine which was the best pavement of each of these several kinds He said he would lose the fee unless the brief on the merits of these pavements was made, and that he was suddenly and necessarily called away home, and he asked me to prepare the brief. He brought his papers to my house., and models of the pavement. I told him could not look at the case until the end of the session. When congress adjourned sat down to the case, in. the most open manner, as I would prepare brief for the supreme court, and worked upon this matter. There were perhaps iOfty Aiuus oi Woou pavement ana several chemical analyses of the ingredients of the different pavements I went over the whole ground carefully and thor oughly, and prepared brief on the rela- tive claims of these payments for the consider ation of the board. That was all did I had nothing to do with the terms of the contract l know nothing of it's conditions and I never had word to say about the price of the pavement. knew nothing about 1t; 1 simply made brief up n the relative merits of the various patent pavements and it no more oc- cured to me that the thing I was doing had relation to ring, or to 8 body of men connect ed with any scheme, or in anyway connected bwith congress or related in any way to any of ImY duties in inc0nnection with the committee on appropriations, than it occurred to me that it was interfering with your personal rights as a citizen. prepared the brief and went home Mr. Parsons subsequently, sent me a portion of his own fee A year later, when the affairs of the District of Columbia came to be over hauled, congress became satisfied that the government of the district had better be abo-
 ished, and this whole matter was very thor eughly investigated by committee of the two houses. They went into the question of the
 merits of this pavement, some claiming that
 1t was bad and some claiming the government had paid too much for it. Mr. Chittenden was called as witness. ought to say here that
 never saw MT. Chittenden until about the ttlme made the brief; did not and do not know DeGclyer and McClelland; would not