The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1880-06-26
The Charges Against Gen. Garfield. .


The HemM has no vndictve feeling toward
the Republican candidate for the Presidency.
Although it Ind borne a leading and persistent
part in denouncing the Poland report in 1873,
which made scapegoats of Ames and Brooks,
and absurdly shielded CoItax and Garfield
while admitting that they were smeared by
the same transactions we did not choose to
repeat what we had then said, but to await the
public judgment on Mr.. Garfield nomination,
preicTring To comment on the news Of 1880 IN
stead OF the news of 1878.
When the nomination had been made it be-
came our duty to show how il was received rs
an interesting part of the current news of the
day. Our vigorous and independent COntem-
pory, Ihe Sun, although exultiDg over the
defeat OF Gen. Grant, lost no time in proclaim
ing its sense Of Mr. Gartields untitness and
setting forth its reasons. It's prompt action
and COgent statements were fitted to command
attention. No rcScntatlOn of the manner
in which the result of the Chicago Convention
was received could have been faithful which
omitted 10 notice charges which must be fatal
unless they are reiuted No mode OF rccog-
nizing the existence of those charges and OF
the use certain to be made of them could have
been more conslderate to Mr.. Garfield than
the mode we adopted of altributing them mere.
ly to one journal and nsuiring whether they
can possibly be true. From the moment TIE
Sun presented them we saw that they could
not be ignored, and, fOrbearing to express any
opinion of their truth or falslty, we treated
them in the manner which seemed least likely
to wound the sensbilities of Gen. Garfield
Some Of his indIsCreet lIiends have made this
studied tenderness a matter of rcprOaCh, as if
because we did not 90 further back than the
present accusations of TIE Sun we thought
them new. These indiscreet friends should
not tempt us to reproduce what we said of Mr..
Garfield IN 1873, when he was too unimpor-
tant to be made a target for any other reason
than his completely in great public scandal
Our only purpose in retaining to go behind
the Authority of the Sun was to put the case rs
mildly as possible, and to indicate willing.
ness to waive our former severity, to give Mr.,
Garfield Il new hearing, and to Judge him on
the merits of his defense il defense shall be
made without being bound by the opinions
we expressed respecting HIM when the case
WAS new. HIS friends make a shabby return
for this COnsderatc reserve by trying TO ridi.
Cule rs If we had Just learned OF the existence
OF such charges. If his indisCreet champions
Will allow us we prefer to make a tdbUtd rdSd
of all the HerdM said when the subject was
fresh, and to give him the advantage of a new
hearing in state of the public mind more IN
vorable TO his defense. We are sincerely anx-
ious that he should be cleared, tor it would be
a reflection on our institutions if we jump out
of the frying pan of imperialism INTO the fire
of bribery, perjury and corruption
The Suns charges 1--WE trust our benevolent
Limitation of the source Of the charges to a
single journal will not be further objected To
by Mr.. Gartied's friends) are altogether too
grave to be dismissed without examination. If
The Suns charges are proved Gen Garfield 10
not tit to be President They arc SO utterly
damaging, If true, that we reproduce The Suns
statement in another part of this paper. The
parallel which The SIN draws between the
case of Mr.. Colfax and that of Mr. Garfield is
forclbe and striking, and tends to show that
the ruined Colfax Is AN injured man if Gar
field is innocent. They had the same amount
of Credit Mobilier stock assigned them; they
alike denied that they had received any; the
denlals OF both were re5utted by strong evi-
dcnce; but one of them has been seven years
in disgrace, and the other is nominated for the
Presidency, Ii the overwhelming ruin OF Col.
fax Is just, 1t behooves the friends of Gen Gar.
field TO show how their cases differ We are
willing to judge of Mr. Garfelds defense with
the same candor and impartlality as If the &C.
cusation were new, and rs If we had never pro.
nounced strong opinion against him. But the
fact that the charge Is old does not absolvc
him from the necessity of rctuting it,
The grounds of defense thus far offered by
his supporters are as damaging as the original
accusation. They try 10 belittle II by saying
that ii is raked up from the past DO they
really think that IL Gen. Garfield was corrupt
eight years ago that is no reason why he should
no, be elected President now! What is of real
ia not whether the charges are
old, but whether they are true. If true they
are as fatal bar to his election as If the Of.
Tense had peen committed Yesterday Would