Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1880-08-25
AUGUST 20, 1880.


four hundred and seventy-nine) the day 1t was
drawn.
The Statement" which Mr. Ames produced
does not seem to fit his testimony in other partc-
ulars for by that the payment was made
June 18Th, in cash, while the check Is dated June
I'D, and was paid the same day to Mr.. Ames
himself. II we give Mr. Ames the full benefit Of
his great uncertainty there IL still another fatal
inconsistency, for II is not easy to see how he
could have paid General Garfield in cash, June
10TH from the proceeds OF check dated and
cashed the 22d of the same month. But this
" memorandum book had not been produced as
yet, and although he was before the committee
and testified several times, and was notified and
re-notified to produce 1t, still 1t was not produced
until February 18th, 1873 and then he
unwilling 1t should be used until the other evil
dence was in; besides, he said, 81 would like to
have an opportunity Of looking over the printed
testimony, and OF seeing what has been testified
to before going on with my testimony" page
four hundred and forty-four.) One can easily
understand the feelings that would prompt such
desire, although he may have wished to reconcile,
II possible, the many seeming hopeless contradic-
tons he had already made, but the committee
were memorable, and he had to go on. This book
contained entries in detail as to transactions with
various persons, and most Of them were a. crossed
out" by lines drawn across the entire account,
and which Mr.. Ames explained indicated that the
accounts thus Cancelled had been settled, page
four hundred and fifty-three) The accounts
are copied bodily into the report lines and all,
and when we come to page four hundred and
fifty-nine of the report we find that Mr.. Ames'
memorandum book shows the following
GARFIELD.
~ shares tredt 20
mos 10 dAys'.''''''''' '''..'..''...''''.... IS SO
sl,es %
,.,,., ,..a 2gss
27I 90
He is asked Queston-This general statement
Is not crossed off? No, sir. Again, on page AGO:
afa nf Mr. a il not
crossed off, which indicates, does it, that the
matter has never been settled and adjusted?
Answer-No, sir; it never has.
This is the original entry, and differs materially
from the copy he had before produced and
which he testified was prepared under his own
eye, reading and knolcing IL iods correct page
four hundred and sixty-two), still the fact that
the account was not crossed off is the strongest
kind OF proof that General Garfield entirely
correct in his testimony, and that Mr.. Ames un-
/ derstood the matter Just General Garfield did
/ Besides this he was asked page four hundred
and sixty-seven): Question-"ls there any entry
| in your memorandum book under the date OF
June 10TH To cash, s329?' and his answer, "No,
sir, agrees exactly with what he before said
| (page forty) Messrs. Kelly and Garfield never
paid for their stock and neuer received their divi-
dends."
The contradictions and inconsistencies of Mr..
Ames testimony might be multiplied, but will
only allude to one point farther in his testimony.
| The chairman remarked to him (page four hum
bred and sixty-one): " II there is anything you
wish to say relative to any of the matters in ref
erence TO which you have been inquired Of you
may now have the opportunity of doing sop and
he said, Mr. Garfield understands this matter
a Loan he says did not explain it to him Mr..
Garfield might have misunderstood me. | sup
posed 1t was like all the rest but when Mr. Gar
field says he mistook it for loan; that did not
make any explanation to him, and did not make
any statement to him, may be mistaken. am
a man of few words and may not have made
myself understood to him. have stated 1t as
remember, but man be mistaken.
OF course | cannot presume so far upon your
province as To comment upon the testimony
but will venture to say, In my judgment, General
Garfield was not implicated in Credit Mober
and that his statement remains mistaken so far
as the evidence is concerned significant end
ing Of the investigation is found in the fact that
while the committee reported a resolution which
was adopted by the house expelling Mr.. Ames,
they found nothing IN The conduct or notifies -
Of Mr.. Garfield that called for any recommends
ton. 81 know one" said Talleyrand, "who Is
wiser than Voltaire and has more understanding
than Napoleon and all his ministers who ever
were, are or will be, and this one is Public Opin-
ion" And confidently predict that that pub
lie opinion which has thus far steadfastly re-
fused to believe of General Garfield that he is
other than man of pure character, will take def
mite form in November next by decreeng that he
shall still further serve the American people with
honorable distincton-and as their chief magis-
trate.
J The New York Nation, an independent journal
, Vi tuo ihsHcSt aitcr rcNieWinB all tne
evidence in General Garfields case, arrives at the
following conclusions:
} We consider the admitted conduct Of both par
ties during the four years alluded to from 1868 to
1872. as sufficiently refuting the uncertain and
t vacatng testimony Of Mr.. Ames as to what Mrs
. Garfield agreed to do No doubt he held the ten
. shares of stock for Mr. Garfield he was very
0 DESTROYS that the name and good will of that
: gentleman should be secured, and he had no
reasons for otherwise disposng of the stock. The
transaction, entirely verbal in its form, was one
in which there was room for infinite misunder-
standing on both Sides and 1t Is quite possible
that Mr. Ames might have forgotten any verbal
0 refusal OF the stock. At the same time his fail
9 ure to tender either dividends or evidences OF
ownership lends color to the suspicion that he no
0 more looked upon Mr. Garfield as owner than
the latter did himself His apparent statement
that Mr.. Garfield, after he had been implicated
. by the testimony, claimed $500 due him, is so
: preposterous that we need not quote Mr. Garfield $
explanation OF the mistake. We must say, for
our own part, that until now we had overlooked
! the long interval which elapsed between the
t alleged distribution OF the stock and payment OF
: the dividend and the investigation. We are salts
! fed that Mr., Ames' admitted failure during all
, that period OF four years either to attempt to
deliver the stock or TO pay any subsequent divi-
bends on il, and Mr. Garfield admitted failure to
ask for either stock or dividends, though confess
Q eddy in great need OF money, give Mr. Garfield $
cersi0n Of The transaction the strongest Kind Of
, confederation, and taken in connection NTH Uhdt
is knOpn Of his lie and character, ioold be SUIT
Client, II he l0ere not presidential candidate 10
clear him in Me eyes Of all reasonable men Of every
4 inputdtion arising out cfh'
WADE HAMPTON, Consider tohat Lee and