The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1880-07-22
NUMBER Al.

Ion, any evidence that would have warranted Sny un.
favorable criticism upon his conduct.
The facts disclosed by the evidence so far a. he is
concerned, are briefly these:
The Board OF Public Works WAS cons;aar;no +,o
question ~ to the kind of payements that shou}d I've
ls!d !here was contest to the respective merits
a o. various wooden pavements. Mr.. Parsons repre-
sented, as attorney, the De Goyer McClelland nat
ent, and, being called away from Washington about
the time the hearing was to be had before the Rosrd
OF faohc Works on this subject procured Gen. Gar
eld TO appear before the board in his stead and ar
que the merits on this patent This he did and this
was the whole Of his connection in the matter II
was not question as to the kind Of contract that
KIND OF pavement should be laid. The criticism Of
inc committee was not upon the paren.ent in favor
cdn;rae o5 Hn;sn Gen Garfield argued but upon the
no evidence which would warrant the c0nc]naon that
% ne haa anything to do with the latter Very respect
1want to say this, further, that il ANYBODY in
the world holds that my fec IN connection With
thus pavement, even by suggestion or implica-
tion had any relation whatever to any appro-
prlation by Congress for anything connected
with this District, or with anything else. it il
due to me, it is duo to this committee, and it is
due to Congress, that that person be sum-
moned. II there bo man on this earth who
makes such charge, that man is the most in
to confront him anywhere in this world. am
quite sure this committee will not allow hear
say and contradictory testimony to raise a pre-
sumption against me. Now, I will say yery
frankly to the committee that, if had known
or imagined that there was an intent such az
thus witness insinuates, on the part of ANYBODY.
that my employment by brother LAWYER to
prepare brief on perfectly-legitimatc oues-
tion-a question Of the relative merits Of Ger
tain lawful patents~had any connection what
ever, or any supposed connection in the mind of
any man, withmy public duties, I certainly would
have taken no such engagement. would have
been weak and o very foolish man to have
done so, ana trust that gentlemen who know
me will believe that would at least have had
too much respect for my own ambition to have
done such thing.
It appears that in the De Golyer con-
tract there was stipulation for an ad.
ditional number of yards of paving to
be done, contingent upon an appropria-
ton being made covering the same.
In reference to this point, the official
record OF the investigation contains the
following:
Mr.. Garfield MIR. Chairman, never saw this
contract before, but I want to say word in
regard to the word appropriation used in it.
1t has no more reference to Congress than it
has to Great Britain The Board OF Public
Works (of the District of Columbia), under
the general law and the legislation of the Dis
trict Government, made the appropriations it.
self, and taxed the people Of the District along
the streets where these improvements were
made, by the front foot and I. in common
with other property y-holders in the Dis
trlct, paid my assessment levied by the
Board of Public Works for the improve
ments made in front Of my property ;
and the appropriation here referred to is
the appropriation by the District Government.
either out Of tho funds that it had raised by
bonds issued on the credit Of the District OF by
assessments by the District authorities upon the
people whose property was improved. The
only connection that the United States had with
1t, III reference to appropriations, was this
Whenever the Board of Public Works laid o
pavement on street, upon which any United
States building or ground was situated, Con-
gress as a matter Of comfy, as it does in every
other city in the Union, paid its quota of the
assessment per front foot. That ia the only re-
lation that Congress had to any Of these i'm
proTements, except in 80 far as We have been
compelled subsequently to advance money to
pay the interest on their bonds; which Of
course was matter that nobody could have
foreseen.
Mr.. Nickerson-Allov me to ask Won ones
ton.
Mr.. Garfeld-Certainly.
MI. Nickerson-In view Of your explanation,
l ask you to state what this provision in this
award in relation to that $4,000 square yards
refers to-what appropriation that refers to-,
around the parks Or anywhere else?
MIR. Garfield cannot be expected to explain
the language of this contract, which I have
the Appropriation bill, especially in 1873, he
will find that there were three appropriations
made one (3180, 900, I think) to reimburse
theold Washington corporation, previous to the
creation of the Board Of Public Works, for
work that was done around the Government
reservation. The old canal had been filled up,
and the Smithsonian grounds had been bettered
by that improvement, and there was an appro-
Prlatlon to reimburse the old corporation for
that part of its improvements which lay oppo-
site the public grounds Of the United States !;
and in the same bill there was also an appro-
priation made to reimburse the Board of Public
Works for the Governments share Of tho im-
provements made in front Of the public build
ings and grounds.
The Chairman-Do you recollect the amount
of that appropriation?
Mr. Garfield think 1t was about $3.50, 900.
l ought to say, however, that that was put on.
not in the House, but in the Senate. was not
on the conference {; I had nothing to do with it
it was perfectly right if had been on tho CON-
mttee, but was not. That had no more to dc
with anybody's pavement, or with any partic,l-
lar contract for any particular patent or pave
ment than with the man in the moon.
We think every candid person, who is
disposed to fairness and justice, will &C.
quit Gen. Garfield of any dishonorable
motive or action in connection with this
matter. Certain it is that the people in
his own Congressional district-one OF
the most moral and intelligent in the
United States-before whom the merits
Of the case we,e thoroughly ventilated,
have reelected him to Congress three
times since then by large majorities, and
that the Legislature Of the State Of Ohio,
with his record clearly before it, elected
him to the United States Senate last
winter. In his own State all the ISLANDERS
against him which the Democrats arc
now circulating throughout the country
have been thoroughly exposed time an,
again, and have long since been dropped
as gross absurdities.