The Hartford herald. [volume] (Hartford, Ky.) 1875-1926, 1880-08-04
The DeGOlycr business.

AS there are many who do not fully
understand the DeGOlyer case, We re-
produce the following from the Cincin-
matt Enquirer, which is explanatory of
the job in which Garfield figured:
"rhe firm of De(iolyer X Mcclellan
We're anxious to obtain "A contract for
laying pavement i'm Washington. The
Board of Public Works of the District
of Columbia had charge of this matter,
and alone had power to decide what
pavement to adopt. The pavement,
like other Improvements in the District,
was to he paid for chiefly by the people
of the United States outside of the Dis
trict of Columbia. The appropriations
for this purpOSe-as for all other govern
mental purposes-were commanded by
the Constitution of the United States to
originate in the House of Representa-
tives. The Committee on Appropria-
tons had at this time almost supreme
control over these expenditures. Mr..
Garfield was chairman of this commit
tee. There were numerous contractors
competing for the chance to construct
pavements. No legal question was in
vOlved, as no patent right was disputed.
1t became the duty, or the privilege, of
the Board of Public Works of the Dis
trict of Columbia to decide upon the
merits of the several pavements beg
ging to he laid. The Board and the Dis
trict looked to Congress for the money
with which to lay pavements. The
chairman of the Committee on ApprO-
priations of the House of Representa-
tives, Gen. Garfield was employed to
advocate before this Board the merits of
the DeGOlyer X Mcclellan pavement.
The only court before which he was
hired to appear was this Board of Pub
lie Works. The only question lie was
asked to argue was the superiority of
this pavement over other pavements.
The only brief he was employed To pre-
pare related to the merits of the DeC;ol-
yer Il Mcclellan, who We're anxious to
contract with the House Appropriations
Committee, to construct this pavement.
For his services in this case Gen. Gar
I field received 5000 from DeGolyer &
Mcclellan. These are essential facts,
stated without malice and from his
I tory, concerning the connection of Gen.
Garfield with the DeGolyer pavement
matter. There is testimony to the effect
that the pavement was fraud but we
have nothing to say about that. Gen.
Garfield did not know enough about
pavements to know this, or he would
not. we candidly say, have advocated
this pavement. There is testimony to
the effect that $500 outside of these
| 81, 900 We're used in other legal expenses;
but there is no reason to suspect that
Gen. Garfield knew of this. The profit
in this business was immense-l33 per
cent.-but there is no reason to believe
| that Garfield knew this. Gen. Garfield
| received this fee OH the 18th of July,
1872. In December following, and
after, he was the conspicuous advocate
in the House of the Board of Public
! Works of the District of Columbia. We
have set down naught in malice. If
called upon by the friends of Gen. Gar
field, and if he wishes it, We will sub
stantiate from public records each state
ment we have made in this matter
We intend here, however, to drop this
subject, for there are far graver reasons
than those which grow out of these facts
why Gen. Garfield should not be elect
ed'to the Presidency. To the greater,
not to the small, reasons we propose to
address ourselves in this canvass"