The Portland daily press., 1884-05-28
How Gen. Grant was Used.

1OW 1O4. 1TduU WIS OS6Q.
The New York Tribune publishes an in
terview with ex-President Fish, of the Ma
rine Bank, in which the latter is reported as
saying that Gen. Grant was fully coguizant
of the fact that Ward professed to be deal
ing in Government contracts, and that he has
letters from Gen. Grant which incontesiably
prove this assertion. In so far as the charge
rests upon President Fish's unsupported as
sertioD, it is entitled to no credit. The
books of the Marine Bank show that Fish
has frequently resorted to falsehood to de-
ceive the directors and stockholders of his
bank, and the maxim of the law is, falsus
IN aao .fdlSaS in omnibus. But the docu-
mentary evidence which Mr.. Fish alleges he
has in his possession cannot be ignored.
Mr.. Fish himself has not yet given it to the
public, but Gen. Grants counsel have fur
nished copies of the letters on which they
suppose that Mr. Fish relies. 1t appears
that about the last of June, 1882 Mr.. Fish
sent some paper of the firm Of Grant &
Ward to the Lincoln Bank for discount
July 1st the president of the bank wrote
note to Mr.. Fish asking if he was general
partner in the firm of Grant & Ward. Mr..
Fish's answer has been lost, but the presi-
dent remembers the substance of il, which
was that both Mr.. Fish and Gen. Grant were
general partners in the firm of Grant g.
Ward. July 9Th Mr.. Fish addressed letter
to Gen. Grant, in which he enclosed Presi-
dent James letter of inquiry and his reply.
Referring to the note which he presented to
the Lincoln Bank for discount he uses this
language:
You may be aware that / am on the note of G g.
W. as enGorser, which have discounted myself,
and have held to get negotiated to the extent of
100000 in aggregate at the same time and at
once, which is not trifing amount for me. 1t is
necessary that the credit of G 8 W. should deserv-
edly stand very high. These notes, as understand
it, are given for other purpose than to raise
money for the payment of grain etc., purchased to
fill the government contract.
To this letter Gen. Grant replied as fol-
lows:
New YORK CRY, July 6, 1882.
MY DEAR MIR. FISH: On my arrival in the city
this morning find your letter of yesterday with a
letter from Thomas L. james, president of Lincoln
National bank and copy of your reply to the letter.
Yonr understanding in regard to liabilities in
the firm of Grant g. Ward are the same as mine. If
you desire it, am entirely willing that the adyer-
tisement of the firm shall be so changed as to ex-
press this Not having been in the city for more
than week have large accumulated mail to
look over. and some business appointments to meet
50 that may not be able to get down to see you to-
day. But if l can, will 20 before O'Clock. Very
truly yours. U. S. GRANT.
This letter was, body and signature, in
Gen. Grants handwriting
Subsequently Mr.. Ferdinand Ward pre-
Mr.. Spencer, who was the cashier of the firm
of Grant g. Ward, to copy. Mr. Spencer
copied it and handed the copy to Mr.. Ward,
Mr.. Ward handed it to Gen. Grant. and the
latter signed it. The letter is as follows:
NEW YORK. July 6, 1882
My DEAR MR.. FISH In relation to the matter
of discounts pending, made by you for account of
Grant Ward would say that think the invest
ments are safe, and am willing that Mr.. Ward
should derive such profit he can for the firm that
the use Of my name and influence may bring.
Yours very truly, US. GRANT.
Read in connection with Fish's letter of
July 9Th, which distinctly states that the
discounts pending were for the purpose of
raising money to fill Government contracts,
this letter of Gen. Grant seems to iAculpate
him in knowledge of the fact that Grant
d Ward were protesting TO be interested in
Government contracts. That it should ap-
pear to SO inculpate him was no doubt the
purpose of the man who drew it up-Mr.
Ferdinand Ward. Ward undoubtedly habit
ually repres ented that 1t was largely through
Gen. Grants influence that he was able to
secure the contracts which he professed to
have, and many of the men who entrusted
their money to him did so on the strength Of
the supposed connection of Gen. Grant with
these alleged contracts.
Against the unfavorable inference which
may be drawn from these letters is to be
placed the unqualified denial of Gen. Grant
that he ever had any knowledge in regard to
quire very convincing testimony to shake
the confidence of the country in his absolute
honesty. Then the circumstances under
which the second letter was obtained are to
be considered, Gen. Grant says that when
he signed the letter which Ward prepared
he had no idea that 1t had any reference to
the letter which Fish wrote him under date
of July 5tb. He had answered that letter
himself, and he considered that correspond
ence closed. Read without reference to
that letter it simply expresses confidence in
the investments of Grant & Ward. Stand
ing alone there is nothing to show that he
knew what these investments were. He
had full faith in Wards financial ability, and
when the latter asked him to sign letter
confidence in his investments he |
sigued it without scrutinizlng it carefully, |
Wards statement that it was
nothing but an ordinary business letter.