Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-10-12
FRIENDLY CORRESPONDENTS.
Which was Embarrassing to Garfield

Which was Embarrassing to Garfield.
No. 81 Park Row, New York, August
10, 1SsO.-Hon. James A. Garfield, Hen
tor, OAio-DEAR SIR: Thanking you for
your letter of June 26, permit me as life
long Republican, soldier in the late war,
who was with you at Murfreesboro, na-
tive of Ohio, and one who desires the per-
petuity of the Republican party, in its
original purity, to ask you few plain
questions for the satisfaction of myself
and large circle Of my Republican friends.
First-Can you not make more salts
factory answer to the charge brought
against you in the "DeGolyer matter
than has SO far been made public?
Second-Can you not make moro sat-
isfactory refutation of the charge of per-
jury against you in the Oakes Ames con-
troversy, or refer me to some reliable
source for the same.
Third-Please do me the favor to state
before which bar you were admitted rs a
lawyer and the date.
These questions entering largely into
| the present campaign, claim the right as
an American citizen, q voter. soldier
| through the war, 4 native of your own
| state, and an earnest and conscientiou S
Republican, to candid and early answer.
| SOul ASPy,
Yours respectfully,
II. H. HADLEY.
In reply to the above, a few plain but
pointed queries, which afforded General
Garfield an opportunity to vindicate him
| self at once and forever Of the charges
made against him, Mr.. Hadley receiv-
etl the following short and evasive reply :
MENTOR, Ohio, August 12, 1SS0.-M.
II. Hadley. 21 Ptrk Ror, Nev York :: My
DEAR SIR In response to your letter of
| August 10, send some documents which
think answer your inquiries. Won't
you please read them carefully and let ME
have your opinion in regard to their merits
in answering the charges made against
me' Very truly yours,
| J. A. GARFIELD.
| The Enclosures referred to in the letter
are simply copies Of an ordinary campaign
circular, prepared and circulated by the
national Republican committee.
AS an addendum, and as illustrating the
effect produced upon one Of Gen. Garfield S
old political and personal friends, the
pcrusal of Colonel Hadley's response is
recommended to the public.
No. 81, PARK Row, New YORK, Sep.
tember 1S, 1SS0.-Lon. James Il. Garfield
My DEAR GENERAL: Your favor of the
10Th came safely and was carefully read.
The documents referred to also reached
me in due course; please accept my thanks.
You ask my opinion ''in regard to their
merits in answering the charges against
you" Part Of the papers had seen be.
fore, but have reread them, and studied
them all with the view of diS costing your
defense.
1 am disappointed with the answer and
refutation for which had waited so long
One Of the objections to your defense is,
that you simply review the old matter and
the old testimony from your standpoint.
If man is tried for crime, and found
guilty by 4 jury Of his friends, and after
wards appeals to 4 higher court or to the
people, he is expected to produce new eyi.
dence and new arguments, ard in the
presence Of his accuser. You have done
neither. You waited until your accuser,
Mr.. Amcs was dead. and then simply sub
mitted your own individual arguments and
imperfect explanations, er parte, to your
constituents and others, many of whom
have forgotten the points rs originally
brought out Of Washington, and after
coverin. forty-cight closely printed col
umns with your explanation you close by
saying:
!. "In conclusion, the whole of this con.
troversy is simple matter of veracity be-
tween me and Oakes Ames." Now, tha
leaves the case just where it was before
you began to explain. In the spring O
1873 the Poland committee examined
credible witnesses: and, after hearing
your sworn testimony and that Of Mr..
Amcs declared you guilty.
In the DeGOlycr matter your defense
is also weak You have not satisfac
torily accounted for that S., 900. Yor
state that you "would at least have had
too much respect for your own ambition
To have done such 4 thing" You Ger
tainly know others who also had respect
for their ambition, and risked being caught
in crime, who fell. Again, you fall bacl
on your naked statement, that you "dit
not know there was any ring you "di(
not know there was scheme You iva!
not aware of the relation of the Credit Mo
bilier to the Pacific railroad," ETC., etc
Now, it seems to ME that rs 4 member o.
Congress it was your duty to know. If:
gentleman of your broad experience ir
congressional matters did not even sus
picion these men, what protection can th'
people rely upon from you, against schem
ers and thieves should you he elected presi
dent was in hopes you could have mad
better defense, but in my humble opin
ion it will not do.
/ Respectfully yours,
II. H. HADLEy.