The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1880-10-20
GEN. GARFIELD JUDGED BY
A REPUBLICAN.

A REPUBLICAN.
A few days after the adjournment
of the Chicago Convention Mr.. Il.
Fl. Hadley, an ex-soldier and a life.
long Republican, wrote to General
Garfield requesting information from
him to refute the charges of corrup-
tion made against him in connection
with the De Gelyer and Credit Mo-
bilier affairs. General Garfield re.
piled, stating his willingness to com
| ply with the request and asking on
what points Mr.. Hadley desired in.
formation. A farther correspond.
ence followed, which is given here.
with, and from which it will be seen
that instead Of furnishing plain
answer to the charges against him
General Garfield sent a number of
old pamphlets and newspaper ex-
tracts as his only reply:
MR.. HADLRY TO GENERAL GARFIELD.
No. 81 PARK Row. NEW YORK, !
August 10, 1880. {
Hon. James d. Garfield, Mentor, o.
DEAR SIR: Thanking yeu fer your
letter Of June %, permit me, as life
long Republican, soldier in the late
var, who was with you at Murfreesboro,
a native of Ohio, and one who desires
the perpetuity of the Republican party
In it's original purity, to ask you a few
plain questions for the satisfaction of
myself and large circle of my republi-
can friends.
FErst-Can you not make a more salts
factory answer to the charges brought
against you in the Ode GOlyer matter
than has so far been made public?
Second-Can Yeu not make a more sat-
isfactOry refutatien of the charges of
perjury against you in the Oakes Ames
controversy or refer me to some reliable
source for the same?
ThiTd-Please do me the favor to state
before which bar you were admitted as
a lawyer, and the date.
These questions entering largely into
the present campaign, claim the right,
as an American citizen, a voter, a soldier
through the war, a native Of your own
State and an earnest and conscientious
Republican, to a candid and early an
swer. Awaiting your reply, yours, re-
spectfully, II. 81. HADLEY.
GENERAL GARFIELD TO MIR. HADLEY.
MENTOR, o., August 10, 1880.
Mr.. II. II. Hat1Jey, 81 Park Rooo, N. y
Ny DEAR SIR: In response to yeul
letter of August 18 l send sSne docu.
ments which think answers your in
quiries. Wont 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.
MR.. HADLEY TO GENERAL GARFIELD.
No. 81 PARK Row, New YORK, |
September 19, 1880. !
Hon. James A. Garfield.
MY DEAR GENERAL: Your favor oi
the 18th came safely, aud was carefully
read. The documents referred to also
reached me in due course. Please ac-
cept my thanks. You ask my opinion
"regard to their merits in answering the
charges against you" Part of the pa.
pers had seen before, but I have re-
read them, ard studied them all witt
the view of dIgesting your defense.
I am disappointed with the answe
and refutation for which had waited
so long One of the objections to you
defense is, that you simply review tn
old matter and the old testimony from
your standpoint. If man is tried for
crime and Is found guilty by jury 0
his friends, and afterwards appeals 10 {
higher court, or to the people, he is ex
pected to produce new evidence an
new arguments, and in the presence o
his accuser. You have done neither
You waited until your accuser-MT
Ames-was dead, and then simply sub
mitted your own individual argument
and imperfect explanations, ex parte, t
your constituents aud others, many o
whom have forgotten the points as orig
inally brought out at Washington, an
after covering ferty-eight closely prin
: ed columns with your explanation, yo
close by saying: ''In conclusion, th
whole of this controversy is a simpl
matter of veracity between me an
Oakes Ames." Now that leaves til
case just where it was before you bega
to explain. In the spring of 1873 tn
Poland committee examined many creC
table witnesses, and after hearing yOl
sworn testimony and that of Mr.. AM
declared you guilty.
In the De Golyer matter your defens
is also weak. You have not satisfact
rily accounted for that So, 600. You sta
! that yOu would at least have had tc
: much respect for your own ambition
f have done such thing" You certai
ly know others who also had respect fl
their ambition and risked being caugI
in crime, who fell. Again, you fall baC
on your native statement that you cd
net know there was a scheme, j" X