Alpena weekly argus. [volume] (Alpena, Mich.) 1871-1893, 1880-09-22


drafted portion OF iheinterrcgsicFies Iee prs-
iininary staiemcui the ampie a1la'i' Va
earlier.
Now, gentlemen, ! will turn over
a page and see what the case OF
Amy Mitchell was. She first made
an affidavit 10 the Custom House.
Afterward she was examined pm
vately by James A Garfield. That
affidavit was not full enough. He
prepared additional interroSa;o-
ries TO be propoundei 10 Der; and
IN her testim my before this same
Committee she afterward swore
that there was 10 truth in the tes-
timony given in response 20 the IN
terrogatories. IN answer 20 a qCes-
ton propounded by Governor Cox.
of Ohio. who is a Republican, Amy
Mitchell said-she repeated her d.
rect testimony-that the statement
contained in the affidavit was false
that she did not say anything be-
cause she knew il, but said what
they told her 10 say. Her testi-
mony also showed that she had
been trained in the Custom House
to testify before the Committee. |
don't say that Mr.. Garfield was
present when she swore 20 the in
terrogatories, but he prepared the
interrogatories that she answered,
and he prepared the iuterrogato-
ries after he had an interview with
that colored woman, when there
was no person besides themselves
present: and the same woman
comes before a Committee OF Con-
gress, not in an inner room, where
the light Of Gods day is shut off,
but she comes before a Committee
Of Democrats and Republicans,
and in that testimony, then given
under oath and under the test Of
a cross-examination by the Repub-
lican members Of the Committee,
she says there was not a word Of
truth in the testimony which she
gave in answers to the questions.
The next purpose, gentlemen. |
have in nv mine is to ask "why
did Garfield spend so many days
in the inner room in the Custom
House Why did be have private
interviews with the colored and
white people whose testimony was
to be taken 70 be used before the
Returning Board and why did he
prepare heterogeneous for the
witnesses | will answer that in
his own words:
Q.-But didut vou understand that IN the
cases where you suggested that in'errosatories
should b. prepared instead 81 afilavits, they
were % so bcfgf, The Returning Board A
Yes. sir
And when his work of taking
the testimony was completed he
then turned his attention TO the
preparation Of a brief. A brief. as
YOU all know, is a LAWYERS argu-
ment in writing. will show you
what he says upon that subject, on
page 797 Of the report:
Q-wss thu irief furnished 20 the Return
ing boardi 40, sir. That brief was not
furnished % ANYBODY but the President % The
United states. l. fact, q considerable portion OF
he brief wa written on The cars on my way 70
sshingtOn.
Q-written after you lef. New Orleans, A.
A considerable portion OF &C. had written the
siderable portion o. the brief vas vrittcn IN
pencil on The cars after left New Orleans on ny
way home"
You see be completes his evi.
depce. He is the only man that
prepares it for West Feliciana af-
ter the affidavits had been turned
over 10 him, and when be has done
that work, on his way from New
Orleans 10 Washington he pre-
pares an argument in the case
! wish to connect directly this tran
ssction with the duties Of the man
who takes solemn oath TO deal fair
iy as a member Of the Commission
But have not reached that point
quite yet The next question is
what did Mr.. Garfield know in re.
gard 10 Louisiana. That we find
on page 500. say that he knew
that Louisiana was Democratic by
5000 majority. When he sat in
that inner room and had private
conversations with the witnesses
and prepared interrogatories to
guide and control their testimony
when he was at that work, and
when he was writing a brief to
make it appear the other way be
knew that Louisiana had cast a
Democratic majority, and here il
his sworn testimony on that sub.
ject:
Odd you get any idea how the vote o.
LOUISIANA stood upon The face Of the returns
A.. oh, had all those ideas that could he co
from nevSpapers and the leaders Of the two
parties. We had had, Of course, very full infor
nation Of that sort.
Q--Presuming that there were not som,
Parishes 70 be thrown out by the Returnin.
Board 10 was very clear that tho State Ind on,
for Nichols aud Tilden, was 1t not At VA
very we'll understood by the time ] cot there
and, indeed, before got there, that II nothin,
but the face q the returns was 90 be considered
| and II every vote sent up was 20 he treated rs
/ legal vote, Mr. Tilden was ahead
| Q.-And ~ every vote sent up was a legal vote
/ and some more Republican votes wore not found
! u was very lear that the State had gone 10
/ Nichols and Tildcnl Aye
There is your man, Republicans
that you propose to place in the
chair that Washington occupied
IA voice, mo, never."1 It will
never be done. No, never. NJ
man with record like that die
ever take that chair, and in th,
kind providence Of the eternal Goo
it will never occur. He knew b,