The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1880-06-17

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 Gar
field, and had never any, conversation
whatever with him on the subject, Ae-
cording TO Ames, the stock was Garfield's,
but was never asked for nor delivered,
though for years after It ways paying diVi'
bends, all Of which Ames received and
kept to himself.
Mr.. Garfeld's explanation was, that
George Francis Train had advised him to
invest in the stock, but he had declined;
that, in want OF money, he obtained a
loan Of $500 from Ames, which loan he
subsequently paid. Ames said he paid
Garfield $780, Garfield said he borrowed
$500. AS Ames kept the stock which he
said belonged to Garfield and all the divi.
deAds thereon, and never thereafter had
any conversation with Garfield on the
subject, there is unquestionablY room for
the belief that the transactions were con-
founded in Ames' mind.
The Committee Of the House made a
full report OF all the testimony, comment
inc upop the case OF each member named
in the McComb.Ames list. After COM
meptipg upon the cases Of Mr.. Blaine, Mr.,
Dawes. Mr.. scofeld, Mr.. Bingham, and
Mr.. Kelley, it thus commented upon the
case OF Garfield:
The facts in regard to Mr.. Garfield, as
found BY the Committee are identical with
The case Of Mr.. Kelley to the point OF re-
cen,ion OF the check OF 1920. He agreed
with Mr. Ames to take ten shares oil Credit
Mobilier stock, but did not pay Tor the
same. Mr.. Ames received the 50 per cent
dividends in bonds, and sold them for W
mar cent, and also received the 20 per cent
cash dividends, which together paid the
price OF the stock and interest, and leit q
balance OF $500. This sum was paid over
to Mr.. Garfield by check on the Ser
oeant.at. Arms, and Mr.. Garfield then un-
3srstood this sum was the balance oil div
blends after paying Tor the stock. Mr.
| Ames received all the subsequent diVl'
dends. and the Committee do not find that
since the payment Of the s5Zv, IneIe III
been any communication between MI M.
Ames and Mr.. Garfield on the subject I'M
til this investigation began.
The Committee, speaking OF the mem
1bers named, report:
The Committee, therefore, do not find
as to the members OF the present HOUSE
above named, that they were aware Oh the
object OF Mr.. Ames, or that they had any
other purpose in taking this stock than &c
make profitable investment, 1t Is APP
parent that those who advancetheirm money
10 nav for the stock present more the ap'
pearance OF ordinary investors than those
Who do not; but the Committee do moi
feel at liberty to find any corrupt purpose
or knowledge founded upon the lace o.
non.payment alone.
THE Committee have not been able tc
find that any OF these members oil Con
gress have been affected in their Official
action in consequence OF their interest II
Credit Mobilier stock. 90,
The Committee do not 6nd that either
OF the above named gentlemen, in contract
ing with Mr.. Ames, had any corrup
motive or purpose himself, or was aware
that Mr.. Ames had any, nor did either o
them suppose he was guilty OF any i'm
propriety, or even indelicacy, in becoming
a purchaser Of this stock. Had 1t appear
ed that these gentlemen were aware oil the
enormous dividends upon this stock, anC
how they were to be earned, We could no
thus acquit them.
And this is the whole story told by thu
Investigating Committee. The whole var
lance between Ames and Garfield was Al
to whether Ames paid him $500. In eth
case Ames declares that Garfield never re
ceived any stock or certificates, nor an!
dividends which the stock earned from
1867 TO 1873.
The sreport expressly acquits all tn
persons named-Blsine, Dawes, scofeld
Bingham, Kelly, and Garfeld-of all cor
rupt or improper action or completely in tn
matter. In that acquittal the Democratic
members OF the Committee concurred will
the others.