The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1880-06-30

Now while such papers as the E'van-
geIeSt, and others equally influential and
conscientious, are holding Gen. Garfield
up to their readers as the ideal of Chris
tian statesman, the fact is, as we have
observed, that his character is seriously
lmpeached in two notorious transactions,
where the facts seem TO be agreed
First, the matter of the De Golyer pave
ment contract. In this matter the par
ties working to secure the contract be-
came greatly alarmed, and they raised
100000 to be spent in effecting their
object. 1t was primarily important to
secure the chairman of the House Com
mittee on Appropriations Mr. Garfield
was that chairman. He was secured.
He admits that he received Gin cash
$4,000, and defends himself by saying
that he took it, not as a committeeman
but as lawyerl
Secondly, the Credit Mobilier affair.
Here are the facts:
l never owed, received or agreed to receive
any SIOCh VI TIE OreulC hODlller or OF the Mon
Pacific railroad nor any dividends or profits
arising from either of them.-Frona Garfelds
o10n st0orn testimony before the Poland committee
January 49, 1878.
The facts in regard to Mr.. Garfield, as found
by the committee, are that he agreed with Mr.
Ames to take ten shares of Credit Mobilier
stock, but did not pay for the same. Mr. Ames
received the eighty per cent dividend in bonds
and sold them for ninety seven per cent, and
also received the sixty per cent cash dividend
which, together with the price of the stock and
interest, left a balance of 1929. This sum was
paid over to Mr.. Garfield by a check on the
Sergeant at Arms, and Mr. Garfield then under
stood this sum was the balance of dividends af-
ter paying for the stock.-From Judge Polands
Report, February Is, 1873.
Messrs Kelley and Garfield present most
distressing figure. Their participation in the
Credit Mobiller affair is complicated by the most
unfortunate contradictions Of testimony From
the New York Times, February 10, 1873.
The character of the Credit Mobilier was no
secret The source of its profits was very we'll
known at the time Congressman bought it,
Though Cakes Ames may have succeeded in
concealing his own motive, which was to bride
Congressman, their acceptance of the stock was
not on that account innocent The dishonor of
the act as participation in an obvious fraud
still remains. Some of them have INDUCED in
testimony with reference to the matter which
tlnctly rejects the testimony of several of the
members. This can only be done on the ground
that it is untrue. But untrue testimony given
under oath is morally, if not legally, perjury.
1t Is the clear duty Of Congress to visit with
punishment all who took Credit Mobilier stock
from Cakes Ames-Fronl the NeaO York Times.
February 10th, 1878.
James A. Garfield, of Ohio had ten shares :;
never paid a dollar; received 1929, which, after
the investigation began, he was anxious to have
considered as loan from Mr.. Cakes Ames to
himself
Well, the wickedness of all of it is that these
men betrayed the trust of the people, deceived
their constituents and, by evasions and false
hoods, confessed the tranaction to be disgraceful
1878.
1t is impossible to get out of this by
high moral talk, and rolling up the eyes.
Now it must not be said that ne are
taking part in politics. This would be
unjust. Any remark of ours, here in
Virginia, about General Garfield, would
have no political effect one way or the
other, and our sole object is to enter
protest: lst, against the mixing up of
Northern Presbyterian papers with poll
tics; and I'd, against this winking Through
religious spectacles) at corruption in high
places. Gen. Hancock may be as vulner-
able as Gen. Garfield We do not know.
1t is not our object to advocate Gen. Han
cock or General Garfield Our political
standards are not high, and our religious
journals, to say the. least, ought to be very
cautious in endorsing political paper.