The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1880-08-13
N. Y. Post.l
In a Nutshell.

We are surprised to find so candid, indepen-
dent and sensible journal as the Buffalo
Courier initiating the reckless and foolish or
gans of its party by printing standing natter
made up of one-sided views and forced assump.
tions in regard to the Credit Mobilier charges
against General Garfield. The right course
from the point of view of justice, and from the
point of view of partisan expediencs in the
long run, would be for our contemporary to
examine the case and form its own opinion ON
1t. We take for granted that our contem-
porary has not looked into the testimony
printed with the Poland report, because il it
had done so it is too honest and fair a newspa-
per not to announce the conclusion which il
would be compelled to reach. III the Courier
will take the trouble to examine the Poland
report-and we shall be glad to forward a copy
OF the document to it if it has not one within
easy reach-it will find it as follows:
1. The only disputed question is whether or
not General Garfield agreed to take the
shares, and whether or not he received 1920
on account of the profits of the shares. This is
the enormous total of the alleged pecuniary
transaction. 800
2. General Garfield testified before the in
vestigatirg committee that he did not take the
shares, and that his only pecuniary transaction
with Cakes Ames consisted in borrowing
sum of money and returning it. This testi-
mOny is clear and circumstantial. Standing
alone, no jury in the world would need to
leave their seats in order to found verdict of
acquittal upon it.
8. General Garfeld's story is confirmed by
undisputed facts. The Garfield account which
Ames produced was unsettled Other ac-
counts were closed. There is no pretence of
any payment or any financial transaction ex-
cept this one of 1929. We are therefore re-
qnired to believe, if we reject General Gar
fields story, that although Garfield made an
agreement to take the shares with view to
large profits he never claimed the dividends he
never asked for them, he never took the troub-
lie 70 saw word about them: and Ames never
PAID them or SAID anything about them. This
is preposterous.
4. General Garfield's story is contradicted
only by Ames. When a question of veracity
arises one man cannot be convicted of false.
hood on the evidence Of the other unless that
other is shown to be more worthy of belief.
Nothing of this sort has been shown in behalf
of Ames as against Garfield.
D. When two men give an account of 0 mat
ter: If the story OF one of them is straghtfor-
of the other is crooked, contradictory and inco-
herent, superior credit will be given to the for
mar as a matter of course, N,t-tG
6. But Ames's story is not distinct enough
even to raise a'question of veracity: AT first
lie admits that Garfeld's account Of the mat
ter is correct. Then he says that he cannot re-
member anything about it. Later he tells,
from vague recollection, with much self-con-
tradction and contradiction by other witnesses
as to particular facts, a story different from
Garfeld's. Finally. almost his last words on
the subject are to the effect that after all Gar
|. field may be right and that he (Ames) cannot
remember, or may have misunderstood the
case. .'5
There is not an outcast in the Fourth ward
| Of this city, who has served several terms in
| the penitentiary, who would be convicted of
| stealing jacknife upon such evidence as this.
We refer to this subject just now simply to
ask our candid and Independent contemporary,
the Buffalo Courier, if it really believes any
party strait, however desperate, warrants
treatment so disingenuous of any public ques-
tion whatever as the treatment by Democratic
newspapers of the Credit Moblier charges
| against General Garfield