, 1880-06-20

~ Ih1S account no Claimed TO nave Nude up
from his memorandum book, but when the
memorandum book Was subsequently presented
it was found that the account here quoted Ta;
not copied from It. hut was partly made up from
entry made in diary, us first quoted. it will be
seen that they nrc not duplicates either IN SUBJ
element il added--nalnely: al alleged payment
Of $50 In cash June ". This is tho very ee-
ment in dispute: The = pretended R proof that this
duction OF u check drawn by sfr. Ames on the
Sergeant 1t-Arms The following is the Ian
-guase OF the check Us reported in the tcsri-
~ JUNE e, 1ses.-Pay q. 4 or bearer three
hundred 1x ana dollars and eharge to
"Thls check bears no indorsctnent or other
marks than the words and figures given above
1t WIS drawn on the I'd day OF JUNG, and, as
was paid tho same day. But If this check was
paid to leu- GARFIELD on the ACCOUNT just quoted
it must have been deli vcrcd to him three days
before 1t was drawn, for the account says that
he received payment On the 18th Ut June.
"Gcn. Garfield himself hns nude Il review of
following conclusions are clearly established BY
".Ihat neither purchased nor agreed to pur-
chase the Cretlit-Mubier stock which Mr.. Amcs
offered to sell me, nor did receive any dividend
arising from it. This appenrs not ONLY from my
own testimony, but from that ilrst given By Nj.
Ames. which is not overthruwn by his subse-
quent statements, and is strongly confirmed by
the fuct that in the OF each Ut those who did
IS the st9sk there ws Podueea s cyl
receipt OF Payment, check 1rnwn in the
name of the puyec, OR entries III Mr. .Ames'
justeed and closed, baf % that ao'Aon no one Ao Of
these evidences existed in reference
to me. This position is further confirmed by
though be claimed that did receive sxsS frou,
ntm l on account Of stock. yet be repeatedly tes-
@de sat eey1n d ns tnat eesea
offered to mc, nor WIS the subject alluded tn IN
conversation. Mr. AHes admitted il his testi- @ j.
nony that nfter december, lGB7. the ynriu,ls
stock and bond dividends amounted to an at1
gregare OF more than $40 per cent and tf1at be-
tween January, 1sGs. and May, ISL, all thes,.
purchased stock. My conduct vas wholly incoro
sstcnt with the suppositfon OF s1ch ovucryhin
TO tof bU 6ne n oorowp
my creditors BY mortgages Oh my property ana
all this time it is admitted that rIceiyctl n
prove sale Of tho STOCK TO me IS suilY in.on !"
elusive. for It rests first On check parablt, To
3fr. Ames himself. concerning whi,h he sah}
k1 know to whom It was, pafi!:. md. sec &C.
end. atL. ,,!p2. upon. oo;e, undated entries in lis
"s s any wsa pa%sne nshss on f. Tho sf ony Or t @ ;
which it Is possible for Mr Amcs to b,vt. lsi it.i
ferred an agreement to buy the stock Bas the
months before the check OF June q, lSGS nnI
was re1ufd i'll tho winter Of 1869, and utter hat
aate there were no transactions IF amy snrt S.-
tween us, and before tho Investigation was
ended Mr. Anacs admitted that on the chief no;rt
Of difference betwee. us he might he 1pistakeu.
80 "'That the offer whch Sir. A,nes na1e to nc
as Understood 1t, WIS one which involved M
wrong Of improprtcty. l hed no ncuns OF know
inY and had M retson for supp.sntt TINT Lchitu1
this offer to sell small amount OF sto,.,1 i",s
hidden scheme to defraud the Pacific RaIiyn,d
and imperii the interests Of the United Ernfas
nad on THO tlrst imtimatou Of the real nature If
tho case: declined any further co,sldcration ~
the subject. That whatever may hare been thn
facts In the case stated then, In my testimony
As have always understood them: and shnr3.
mas mas been no contradiction, prevnrication nor
p" In winding up his review Of tho whole yno++o
Zen Garfield uses the following fanxunve. : T.
there be q citlzen Ut the United States who il