The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1880-06-23
THEY s0UIRM.
The Radical Press Defending the Garfield
Credit Mobilier swindle.


The Radical Press Defending the Garfield
Credit Mobilier swindle.
New York Sun
That ancient, sedate and respectable daily
newspaper, the Advertiser, of Boston, which
could not countenance James G. Blaine be-
cause of his corruption, Processes TO be salts
fed Of the purity of James A. Garfield's char
acter. And il is the first Republican news
paper, 60 far as we know, that has undertaken
to defend his Credit Mobilier record. We
print every word which the Advertiser has
to say On this point:
al GARFIELD sole nniy denied connection with
that business; that the Committee of investi-
cation, which brought In a resolution to expel
not even suggest a censure of General Gar
field. Not only was his alleged offense not
proved. but his innocence was established as
who presided over the Convention, was a
member of the Poland Committee. and Cen
motors of the Investigation. Both these gentle
men are earnestly and enthusiastically In
favor Of Generel Garfield as a candidate.
that there was the least smell of corruption
about his garments; and there is not, and his
slaDderers know there is not.
The first specification in the Advertisers
defense OF Garfield is true. General Garfield
did solemnly deny connection with that
business. His denial was made in the most
solemn form which men have devised for
the protection OF justice against falsehood.
In the name OF God, and with the penalties
for perjury full in view, ne swore that he
had never owned, received, or sgreed to
receive, any stock of the Credit Mobiller or
of the Union Pacific Railroad, nor any divi-
dends or profits arising from either of
them"
But that solemn denial was not considered
a sufficient answer to the charge. A Repub-
lican Committee of Congress heard the evi.
derce of his corruption and saw the written
proof; and having heard AMI seen, they de-
clared that he did agree to receive Credit
Mobilier stock, and that he did receive q
dividend from the same. Let the Advertiser,
il 1t dare, print side by side Garfield's
sworn denial and the following final judg
ment of the Republican Committee which
tried him:
He agreed with Mr.. Ames to take ten shares
OF Credit Mobilier stock, but did not pay for
the same. Mr.. Ames received the 50 per cent.
dividend In bonds, and sold them for 81 per
cent. and also received the 90 per cent. cash
dividend, which, together with the price OF the
stock and interest, left a balance of $780, This
sum was paid over TO Mr.. Garfield by a check
on the Sergeant-at-Arms.
1.-The Committee of Investigation, which
brought in a resolution to expel Mr.. Cakes
Ames and Mr.. James Brooks, did not even
suggest censure OF General Garfield" To
the everlasting disgrace OF the Republican
party and OF the Republicans on the Poland
Committee, that also is true. Having tried
him and convicted him, and put him on
record as a bride taker and perjurer, his
personal friends and political associates al
lowed him TO escape some Of the conse-
quences of his offeDses. But what defense
of Garfield is that
Not only was his alleged Offer Sc not
proved, but his innocercs was established as
far as a negative can be made sure" On this
point let Us once more hear Judge Poland.
"He agreed with Mr. Ames TO take ten shares
of Credit Mobilier stock, but did not pay for
the same Mr.. Ames received the 50 per cent.
dividend In bonds, and sold them for 81 per
cent, and also received the 20 per cent. cash
dividend, which, together with the price of
the stock and interest, left balance of $500.
This sum was paid over to Mr. Garfield by a
check on the Sergeant at Arms"
Finally, the Advertiser is convinced that
the evidence was naught and the judgment
OF the Republican Committee libel, for the
grotesQue reason that Senator Hoar and
General Hawley "are earnestly and enthusi-
asticslly in favor of General Garfield as
candidate, and neither of them would be so
IL he believed there was the least smell of
corruption about his garments"
This is the sort OF defense that will elect
the man whom the Democrats choose next
week to run against Garfield, the convicted
bride taker and perjurer.