Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1880-06-25
Garfield and Credit MObiIIer.

AultS, drought Sulb III u IbOnSNlNdulb
court against various parties for a set
Element of accounts. Among the papers
filed was a letter from Oakes Ames,
stating that he had disposed of certain
shares of the Credit Mobiler stock to
certain persons indicated by initials on
a list, and McComb explained that these
initials indicated certain persons, as
follows:
JIG. Blaine. S3C01: Senator Patterson. 5000;
Senator Wilson, $4,000; $. CoifaK, s2,0'0; Eli
Oft, of Massachusetts. $1,000; Dawes, Of Mas
sachnsetts, $1,000; Boutwell,, of Massachusetts
field and Kelley, Of Pennsylvania; Fowler, Of
Tennessee.
At the meeting of Congress in Decem-
Der, 1872, on motion of Mr.. Blaine, q
Committee was appointed to examine
and report the facts of the case. OF
this Committee, Judge Poland, of Ver-
mont, was the Chairman. The Com
mttee took full evidence of all the par
ties implicated, and of other persons.
AS the result of their investigation they
reported two resolutions, one for the
expulsion of Oakes Ames and the other
for the expulsion of James Brooks. The
whole testimony in the case, so far as it
related to Mr.. Garfield, was given by
Oakes Ames. The statement of Oakos
Ames concerning Garfield was brief. 1t
is as follows:
ON regard to Mr.. Garfield, state to the
| Committee the details of the transactions be
tween you and him in reference to Credit Mo-
bier stock? Al got for Nr. Garfield ten
shares of the Credit Mobilier stock, for which
he paid par aud interest[Y
Q.-when did you agree with him for that?
A.-That agreement was in December, 1857, or
January, 1868. About that time. About the
time | had these conversations with all or
| them. II was all about the same time.
Q.-State what grew out of it; A.-Mr Gar
field did not pay me in money. sold the bonds
! belonging to his SL000 of stock at 81, making
! $778. In June received Il dividend in cash on
his stock for 5000, which left n balance due him
of SS29, which paid him. That is all the trans
action between us. did not deliver to him any
stock before or since That is the transaction,
| By Mr. Merrick-The $500 which you paid him
| was the surplus of earnings on the stock above
! the amount to be paid for it-par valueI A.
! Yes, sir. He never had either the Credit Mo
! hilier stock or Union Pacific Railroad stock.
The only thing he realized from the transaction
! was the $@2J
! O.-I sec on this statement in the account
| with General Garfield there Is a charge of S47.
| 1t is interest from the July previous, is it2. ~
Q.-And the $T7Gon the credit side is the eighty
| per cent bond dividend sold at ninety-sevcn
! per cent? Ayes, sir.
Q.-And the $500 ON the credit side is the
money dividend? Ayes, sir.
| Q.-And after you had received these two
sums they in the aggregate Ovcrpaid the prices
of the stock and interest SS2J, which you paid
him? A.-Yes, sir
Q.-You did not declare certificate of stock
to him? A.-No, sir; he said nothing about
| that.
o.-why did he not receive certihcate A.
Q-Do you remember any conversation he
tween you and him in the adjustment of these
accounts2 Al do not.
Q.--YOu understood thnt you were the holder
of his ten shares? Ayes, sir.
Odd he so understand it2 Al presume
so; it seems to have gone from his mind' now
Q.-was this the only dealing you had with
him in reference to any stock Al think So 80.
Railroad stock on these ten shares? A.-f os,
! Odd General Garfield ever receive these?
A-No. sir; never received but 1929.
Q.-Has there been amy conversation be-
tween you and him IN reference to the Pacitlc
stock he was entitled to? A.-No, sir.
Q.--IIas he ever called for III A.--No, sir.
Q.-Have you ever offered it to him? A.
O.--Has there been any conversation in rela-
ton to il? A.--No.
Summed up, the statement is that
Ames made a memorandum that 81 900
of this stock in his hands was held for
Garfield; that the stock earned 81, ,329;
that he paid Garfield SS29-the surplus
] after paying for the stock; that during
| the five years following, though the
/ stock continued to earn dividends, he
| never delivered the stock itself, nor any
: dividends, to Garfield, and had never
any conversation whatever with him
on the subject. According to Ames,
, the stock was Garfeld's, but was never
, asked for nor delivered, though foI
= years after it was paying dividends, all
, of which Ames received and kept tC
himself.
= Mr.. Garfeld's explanation was that
= George Francis Train had advised him
to invest in the stock but he had de-
! clined; that, i'll want of money, he OBJ
! tanned n loan of $500 from Ames, which
S loan he subsequently paid. Ames said
Q he paid Garfield S329 Garfield said he
D borrowed $780, As Ames kept the
Q stock which he said belonged to Gar
5 field and all the dividends thereon, and
4 never thereafter had any conversation
$ with Garfield on the subject. there is
$ unquestionable room for the belief that
\ the transactions were confounded in
4 Ames' mind.
0 The Committee of the House made Q
a full report of all the testimony, com
4 menting upon the case of each member
; named in the McComb- Ames list. After
G commenting upon the eases of Mr..
e Blaine, Mr.. Dawes, Mr.. Scoield. Mr.
Bingham and Mr.. Kelley, it thus conf
mented upon the case of Garfield:
v The facts in regard to Mr. fairfield, as fOun,
- by he Committee, are identical with The cas-
} of Mr.. kelley II the point of reception OF IN
: check for 500 He agreed with Hr. Ames q
" take ten shares of Credit Mobiher stock, hu
' did not pay for the same. Mr.. AmeS receives
! the eighty per cent. dlvidends IN bond; an
G sold them for nincty-seven per cent, and als
received the sixty per cent. cash dividends
> which together paid the price OF the stock AN
e interest and LETT Il balance Of s 80. This sun
n was paid over to Mr. Garfield by cheek oi
the Scrgeant-at-Arms, and Mr.. Garfield thel
i understood this sum was the balance OF div
, dends after paying for the stock MIR. Anne
j, received all the subsequent dividends, and TN
Z Committee do not find that, since the paymen
L of the 1929, there has been any communicated
!, between Mr.: Amei ana Mr' Gaf1eid on IN
!, subject until this investigation began.
The Committee, speaking of tn
: members named, report:
: The Committee, therefore, do not find, as L
!, the members of the present House ahoN
u named, that they were aware of the object o
:, in taking mis- stork than 10 mnke n d, ofitabl
investment. Ii is appalelt that those who nd
vanced their money 10 pay for ther stock pre-
sent more the appearance of ordinary invest
ors than those who did not; but the COmmitte
q do not feel ut liberty 10 find any corrupt pul
Il pose or knowledge founded upon the tuct q
n The Committee have not been able to I'm,
e that any of these members OF Congress nav
"a been affected in their Official action in cOnst
= quence of their interest in Credit Mobile
% stock.
"a The Committee do not indthnt eitherof tn
/; nboVo-nAmed gentlemen, in contracting wit
i Mr.. Ames, had any corrupt motive or purpos
}. himself, or was aware that SIR Ames had any
, nor did either of them suppose he was guilt
: of any improperly, or even indeiicacY, in bI
n coming pun chaser Of this stock. Had it aI
peared thut these gentlemen were aware OF tn
enormous dividends upon this stock, and hOl
they were To be earnod, we could not thu
a Ocquit them.
/ And that is the whole story told b,
;. the Investigating Committee. Tn
/, whole variance between Ames and Gar
If feld was as to whether Ames paid hin
II 1929 or whether Ames loaned him $500
d In either case Ames declares.that Gar
d field never received any stock or Ger
g tificates, nor any dividends which th
o stock earned from 1867 tu 1873.
- The report expressly acquits all tn
persons named--Blaine. Dawes, SEQ
field Bin0ham. Kelley and Garfield