Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-10-09
0. A,---s329--.J. A. G.

! d Conscientious Republican AsEs so,oo
Questions Witch Are not satisfaotortIv
| Anst0ered.
Shortly after the Chicago convention Mr..
FL. Fl. HedleY, prominent Conservative Re-
publican, of this city, wrote to Gen. Garfield,
requesting information about the chargea Of
corruption which had been made against
him. Gen. Garfield replied, stating his will.
ingness to comply with the request. Ths
| following correspondence then ensusd:
s'No. 81 PARK Row,
"NEw YoGK, Aug. 10, 1880
"HoN. JAMES a. GARFIELD, Mentor, o.
DEAR Sir: Thanking you for your letter Of
June 26th, permit me, as life long Repub-
lican, soldier of the late war Who was With
you at Murfreesboro, native Of Ohio, and
one who desires the psrpetuity Of the Rspub-
lican party in its original purity,t ask you e
few plain questions for the satisfaction of my
self and a large circle Of my Republican
friends.
81. Can you not make mere satisfactory
answer TO the charges brought against you in
the De Golyer matter than has so far been
made public?
"2. Can you not make moro satisfactory
refutatior of the charges Of perjury against
You in the Oakes Ames controversy, or refer
me to some reliable source for the samer
''8. Please do me the favor to state before
which bar you we're admitted as q lawyer,
and the date.
'Thess quotations entering largely into
the present campaign claim the right. az
an American citizen, q voter, soldier
through the war, a native Of your own State,
and an earnest and conscientious Repubii-
can, 10 candid and early answer. Awaiting
your reply, yours respectfully,
II. II. HADLsY."
General GarheId's answer came as fol-
lows:
'MEEToR, Ohio, Aug u. 1880.
Mr. II. Il. Hadley, q Park Row, New
York-My dear Sir: In response to your
letter of August 10th I send some docu-
ments, which, think, answer your inquiries.
Won't you please read them carefully, and
let me have your opinion in regard to their
merits ID answering the charges made
against nae? Very truly yours,
j. A. GARFIELD."
After examining all the documents care
fully, Mr.. Hadley replied:
"No 81 PARK Row,
New YoRK, S-pt IL, 1880.
Sion. James A. Garfeld-My Dsar Cen
erai: Your favor of the 12ih came safely,
and was carefully read. The documents re-
ferred to also reached mo in dno course
Please accept my thanks.
s'You ask my opinion in regard to their
merits in answering the charges against
you. Part of the papers had seen before,
but have reread them and studied them all
With the view of digesting your defense. I
em disappointed with the answer and refuta-
ton for which had waited so long. One
of the objections to your defense is that you
simply review the old matter and the old
testimony from your stand point. If man
is tried for crime, and is found guilty by
Jury of his friends, and afteFEard appeals to
higher court, or to the people, he is e1-
pected TO produce new evidencs and new ar
guments, and in the presence of his secuser.
You have done neither. You
waited until yonr accuser, Mr.. Ames, was
dead, and then simply submitted your own
individual arguments and imperfect expla-
ntaions, er pGrte. to Your constituents and
others, many of whom have forgotten the
point as originally brought out at Washing
ton; and after covering forty-eight closely
printed columns with your explanations, you
close by saying: SIN conclusion, the whole
of this controversy ls simply matter of
VSIHCiiy DOtntCn hnG OohcS hl4SE NOV
that leaves the case just where it was before
you began to explain. In the spring of
1878 the Poland committee examined many
credible witnesses, and, after hearing your
sworn testimony and that Of Mr.. Ames, de-
clared you guilty,
Gin the De Golyer matter your defense is
also weak. You have not satisfactorily &C
counted for that $4,000. You state that you
would ct least have had too much re-
spect for your own ambition to have done
such thing You certainly know others
VINO also had respect for their ambition, and
risked being caught in crime, who fell.
Again you fall back On your statement that
| you did not know there was scheme You
was not aware of the relation OF the Credit
Mobilier to the Pacific railroad, etc.
Now, it seems to me that, as member OF
Congress, it was your duty to know it. II
gentleman OF your broad experience in
Congressional matters did not even suspect
these men, what protection can the people
rely upon from you against schemers and
thieves should you be elected President?
was in hopes you could have made q better
| defense, but IN my opinion it will not do.
Respectfully yours, "H. 81. HApLEY."
The documents forwarded by General Gar
| field with his letter of August 18Th were old
pamphlets and newspaper extracts, with
which the public are already familiar.
|