The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1880-06-25
The Credit MObClIcr.


Gen. Garfeld's own view of the Cred
II Mobilier matter, made In 1874, Is as
follows: THAT neither purchased
nor agreed TO purchase the Credit Mob
ilier stock which Mr.. Amos offered to
sell me, nor did receive any dividend
arising from II. This appears not only
from my own testimony, but that first
given by Mr.. Ames, which Is not over
thrown by his subsequent statements,
and Is strongly confirmed by the fact
that In the case of each of those who
did purchase the stock there was pro-
duced as evidence OF the sale either a
certificate OF stock, receipt of payment,
q check drawn in the name of the payee,
or entries In Mr.. Ames' diary Of stock
account marked, adjusted, and closed,
but thatno one Of these evidences exist
ed in reference to me. This position is
further confirmed by the subsequent
testimony of Mr.. Ames, who, though he
claimed that l did receive three hun
dred and twenty-nine dollars from him
on account of stock, yet he repeatedly
testified that beyond that amount new
er received or demanded any dividend,
that none WAS ever offered to me, nor
was the subject alluded to In converse
ton. Mr.. Ames admitted in his testi-
mony that after December, 1867, the
various stock and bond dividends am
ounted to an aggregate of more than
800 per cent, and that between Janua-
ry, 1867, and May, 1871, all these divi-
dends were paid to several of those who
purchased stock. My conduct was
wholly inconsistent with the SUPPOSE
ton of such ownership, for during the
year 1869 was borrowing money to
build house in Washington, and sec
uring my creditors by mortgages on my
property; and all this time 1t is admit
Med that 1 received no dividends and
claimed none. The attempt to prove a
sale of stock to me Is wholly inconclu-
sive, for it rests on check payable to
Mr.. Ames himself, concerning which he
said several times in his testimony he
did not know to whom it was paid, and,
second, upon loose undated entries In
his diary, which neither prove sale OF
stock nor any payment OH it. The only
fact from which it is possible for Mr..
Ames to have inferred an agreement 10
buy the stock was tho loan to me of $500.
But that loan was made months before
the check of June %, 1868, and was re-
paid in the winter of 1869, and after
that date there were no transactions OF
any kind between us, and before the
was ended Mr.. Ames adj
mitted that on the chief point of differ
ence between US he might be mistaken.
That the offer which Mr.. Ames made
me, as l understood 1t, was one which
involved wrong or improperly, had
no means of knowing and had no ress-
on for supposing that behind this offer
to sell me small amount of stock lay
hidden scheme to defraud the Pacific
railroad and imperil the interests of the
United States. and on the first intima-
ton of the real nature of the case l de-
clined any further consideration of the
subject. That whatever may have been
the facts in the case, l stated them in
my testimony as have always under
stood them and there has been no con-
tradiction, prevarication, or evasion on
my part"
In winding up his review of the
whole matter Gen. Garfield uses the
following language: "If there be cit.
izen of the United States who is willing
to believe that for 1929 have bartered
away my good name and to falsehood
have added perjury, these words are
not addressed TO him. If there be one
who thinks any part Of my public life
has been gagged on 30 low level ~
these charges would place it, do not
address him. address those who are
willing to believe that it 10 possible for
a man to serve the public without per-
sonal dishonor. have endeavored in
this review to point out the means by
which the managers of corporation
wearing the garb of honorable indus
try have robbed and defrauded great
national enterprise, and attempted by
cunning and deception, for selfish ends,
to enlist in the enterprise those who
would have been the first to crush it
had its objects been known"