The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1880-06-25

charge was mace as pubic as anything could
be. 1t was revived to some extent. in the
campaign last fall, and all possible new light
thrown upon it. In The course of the campaign
OF 1874. gentleman from my district wrote in
regard to it to Mr. Wilson, the Chairman of the
joint committee on the part of the House, and
received letter in reply, which I read:
Hon. George w Steele:
DEAR SIR: To the request for information as to
whether or not the action Of Gen. Garfield, in CON
necton with the affairs of the District of Columbia
was the subject OF condemnation by the committee
that recently had those affairs under considerations
answer that 1t was not; nor was there, in my opin
ion, any evidence that would have warranted any mn
| favorable criticism upon his conduct.
The facts disclosed by the evidence so far as he is
| concerned, are briefly these:
The Board of Public Works was considering The
question the kind of pavements that should be
laid There was contest to the respective merits
| OF various wooden pavements. Mr.. Parsons repre-
sented as attorney, the De Golyer & McCeland pat
| ent, and, being called away from Washington about
the time the hearing was to be had before the Board
of Public Works on this subject, procured Gen. Gar
field 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 It
was not question as to the kind Of contract that
should be made, but as to whether this particular
kind OF pavement should be laid The criticism Of
the committee was not upon the q1UUeDeat in favor
OF which Gen. Garfield argued, but was upon the
contract made with reference to it. and there was
no evidence which would warrant the conclusion that
he had anything to do with the latter Very respect
fully, ETC., j. M WILSON
want to say this, further, that If anybody in
the world holds that my fee in connection with
this pavement, even by suggestion or implca-
| ton, had any relation whatever to any appro-
priaton by Congress for anything connected
with this District, or with anything else, it is
/ due to me, it is due to this committee and it is
due to Congress, that that person be sum-
moned. Ii there be man on this earth who
makes such charge, that man is the most in
| famous perjurer that lives, and [ shall be glad
to confront him anywhere in this world. am
| quite sure this committee viii not allow hear
say and contradictory testimony to raise a pre-
sumption against me. Now, [ will say very
frankly to the committee that, if I had known
or imagined that there was an intent such as
this witness insinuates, on the part of anybody,
| that my employment by brother LAWYER to
prepare brief on perfectly-legitimate ques-
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, Wlthmy public duties, I certainly would
have taken no such engagement. would have
been weak and very foolish man to have
done so, and 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.
1t appears that in the De Golyer con-
tract there was a stipulation for an adj
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. Garfeld-Mr. Chairman, never saw this
contract before, but / 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-holders i'll the Dis
trict paid my assessment levied by the
Board Of Public Works for the improve
ments made i'll front of my property;
and the appropriation here referred to is
the appropriation by the District Government,
either out of the funds that it had raised by
bonds issued on the credit of the District or bv
assessments by the District authorities upon the
people whose property was improved. The
only connection that the United States had with
it. III reference to appropriations, was this
Whenever the Board of Public Works laid a
pavement on street, upon which any United
States building or ground was situated, Con-
gress as matter of comfy as it does in every
other city III the Union, paid its quota of the
assessment per front foot. That is the only re-
latlon that Congress had to any of these i'm
prOVoments, except in so far as we have been
compelled subsequently to advance money to
pay the interest ON their bonds; which of
course was a matter that nobody could have
foreseen.
Mr.. Nickerson-Allow me to ask you ques-
ton.
Mr.. Garfield Certainly.
Mr. hialy0 TN
1 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 on anywhere else !?
MIR. Garfield cannot be expected to explain
the language of this contract, which I have
never seen, but, if the Chairman will look at
the Appropriation bill, especially in 1878 he
will find that there were three appropriations
made; one ($180,O00, [ 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 filed up,
and the Smithsonian grounds had been bettered
| by that improvement, and there was an appro-
prlation 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-
prlation made to reimburse the Board of Public
| Works for the Governments share Of the i'm
proyements made IN front of the public build
ings and grounds.
The Chairman Do you recollect the amount
of that appropriation?
Mr. Garfield think it was about $3.50, 900.
fought to say, however, that that was put on,
not in the House, but in the Senate I was not
on the conference [ had nothing to do with it;
it was perfectly right if I had been on the COM
mittee, but L was not. That had no more to do
with anybody's pavement, or with any particu-
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 ac-
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've thoroughly ventilated,
have reelected him to Congress three
times. since then by large majorities, and
that the Legislature Of the State OF Ohio,
VIII his record clearly before it, elected