The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1880-09-16
Butler on tho Three Hundred and
Twenty-Five.

Butler on the Three Hundred and
Twenty-Five.
Ben Buffers vagaries are as amusing
when our side receives the benefit Of
them, as they are irritating when exer.
cised against us. In his recent speech al
Boston he took the ingenious method ot
attacking Garfield under cover of a de.
fence of his friend, the late Oakes Ames. u
He said Mr.. Oakes Ames, of Massachu.
sets, had undertaken great enterprise
of doubtful success. The Union Pacific
Railroad Company had been chartered
by Congress. 1t had been given great
privileges and great subsidies, as they
afterward turned out to be. These weru
subject at any time, to be attacked in
Congress by any set of designing, un-
scrupulous men who should attempt to
levy blackmail upon its management
Mr.. Ames himself might not be there to
defend it. Nobody might take any in.
terest in that defense. He wanted no
further legislation in its aid. He only
wanted that it should not be exposed
as everything else with which the gov.
ernment has anything to do is, to be
prayed upon by those who, under the
name of lobbyists, and by connection more
or less with newspapers, make their liv'
ing by playing on business enterprises
within the power of Congress.
Mr.. Ames, therefore, sought to interest
leading members of Congress in his en-.
terprise by selling them shares of stock
in the construction company of his road.
Sanguine in its success, where men were
willing to ultimately become owners Of
the stock, he promised to carry it for
them; and 80 sanguine that he promised
to guarantee them 10 per cent. on the
investment. He offered to some half
score of his associates in the House and
Senate portions of this stock. They took
it. 1t was profitable. They took the
profits.
When the election of 1872 came on, an
attack was made upon these men who
took the stock. That frightened some of
the weakened Representatives and SEN
ators who hadrthe stock, or the profits OF
the stock, which had been allotted to them
by Mr.. Ames. And as some of them had
not received their certificates of stock,
they were foolish enough 10 come out in
the newspapers denying that they ever
had any of the stock. Congress came
together. The Speaker of the House
left his chai- aud called from the floor
for an investigation. That investigation
was ordered. The gentlemen who had
published these unfortunate cards were
put in this dilemma.
They must either testify that they had
not received any of the stock, directly or
indirectly, or the profits thereof, or else
their cards would show an evident at.
tempt to deceive. The only witness
against them was Mr.. Oakes Ames.
They concluded that half dozen of
them would have strength of reputation
enough to swear him down, as he hadn't
their names to any paper, having simply
paid them the stock dividends in money
and charged it against them on his books.
1t was hoped that the investigation
would lot be too close. MIR. Ames was
importuned to say simply that he had
not delivered any of the stock, and the
investigation was to stop there. That
he said, and said truly; but, unfortu-
nately, there were some men upon the
committee who had personal griefs with
some of these stockholders, and they
pushed the investigation so closely that
these men, in their testimony, we're OBJ
liged to deny that they had ever received
the profits from any stock from Mr..
Ames, which they did do. Among them
was the now Presidential nominee of the
Republican party. This put Mr.. Ames
in the predicament of having called
upon his company for dividends to be
paid to these gentlemen, which they
denied ever having received. That
brought Mr.. Ames to the stand again
with his memorandum book, and his
check book, which show this money had
been paid, and in some cases it was
traced into the bank accounts of some of
these men who had sworn they had nev-
er received any of it, and then these
swearers went under.
At least this testimony between the
Republican nominee and Mr.. Ames
seemed to agree that he had received
1929 of Mr.. Ames. But here arose q
question of veracity between them. The
nominee said the money he had was a
sum that he had borrowed of Mr.. Ames.
Mr.. Ames said it was dividend on the
Credit Mobilier stock which he had paid
him. 1t was agreed that, if it was money
,borrowed no note was given for it. If it
was dividend on the stock, no receipt
was given for it. Therefore the whole
question was left as to the probabilities of
what that money was for. Was it a loan,
or was it a dividend2 Now tho stock
dividend would exactly amount to 1920.
That precise amount was very odd sum
for one man to borrow of another, unless
the borrower had one dollar more and
wanted 10 make up $3.50 or unless he had
more and wanted to make up $3.50. AS
rule, however, even impecunious Con.
gressmen don't run as near the wind as
that in their financial transactions.
The probabilities, however, most likely
led the Republican Investigating Com
mittee to find that the nominee did re-.
ceive the money of Ames as dividends on
Credit Mobilier stock.
The facts in regard to Mr.. Garfield,
as found by the committee, are identical
with the case of Mr.. Kelly to the point
ofthe reception of the check for 1929. I
believe most of the gentlemen Of that
committee now say that there was moth
ing to impeach the integrity of the NOM
inee of the Republican party in receiv-
ing. that stock. agree with them. I
do not think there was any harm, and
never did think there was any harm in
anybody's receiving the stock from Mr..
Ames, under the circumstances. All
the members who frankly testified before
the committee that they had received the
stock received no censure from the COM
mittee or from the country.
But that is not the point of my objec-
ton, which I am trying to make plain.