The Pacific commercial advertiser., 1908-11-05
LETTERS MADE FAMOUS
IN FORMER CAMPAIGNS
The Morey Letters of The Garfield Campaign in
I88O---The MulIigan Letters of Blaine,
and the Murchison Letter


IN 1867 ITS chief representative, Oake
Ames, came to Washington and tolC
several members of Congress eOnfden
TALLY that his purpose was to buy land
/ along the lines of the Pacific railroad
! where they thought cities and villages
would grow up.
Among those with whom he talked OF
the subject was Garfield. and it was as
serted afterward that Garfield accepted
$1,000 worth of stock ana received from
Ames dividend Of 1929. A committee
Of the House of Representatives inves
tigated the matter, and reported in 1878
in favor of expelling certain members
and censuring certain others. Garfield
was not on either list, and he declared
before the committee that the only
money he had received from Ames was
loan Of $500, which he had repaid. In
his explanation Garfield said:
The stock of the dit-Mobilier
Company was offered to me as a plain
business proposition, with no intimation
whatever that it was offered because
the subscribers were members of Con-
gress. for it was offered to many other
people, and no better men lived than at
TO whom it was offered. Some men are
cautious about making investments; !;
others are quick to determine. To none
of these men was any explanation made
that the company was in any way con-
nected with ring of seven men who
owned the principal portion of the
stock, and who had contracted with the
directors of the Union Pacific road for
building 600 or 700 miles at an extrav-
agant price. That was a secret held
only by these seven men. 1t is now I'M
derstood that Mr. Ames, who was the
center of the company, sought to gain
the friendship of many prominent Con-
gressmen with the view of protecting
himself and the railroad against any in
vestigations which might be made: but
1t was necessary part of his plan not
to divulge that purpose, or in any way
to intimate to them that he might draw
on them for favors''
Garfield denied fatty that he received
or paid for any stock of the company.
Before the presidential campaign of
1880 he published a pamphlet on the
Credit -Mobilier matter, which convinc-
ed most persons that he had not been
guilty of any wrongdoing; but the Dem
oerats utilized the old story for all it
was worth.
Another investigating committee was
by the same Congress to in
vestigate the government of the Dis
triet Of Columbia, and particularly the
trading contracts made by t.Boss'
who was then governor of the
District. Testimony was given before
= ba A0% II
cepted bribe of $4,000 by the company
which had patent on the De Goyler
wood pavement, and several letters were
put in evidence Garfield s explanation
was that he had no interest in the com
pany, and that he had simply acted as
counsel for it, and received pay as such
This is an extract from his statement:
When it was decided TO repave the
streets of Washington, paving com
panies from all parts of the country
presented themselves, in nearly all
cases through their attorneys. A com
pany in Chicago employed Mr. Parsons
of Cleveland to go before the Board of
Public Works IN Washington in its in
terest. One day Mr.. Parsons came to
me and said that he had an important
case, but that he had been called away.
He asked me if I would argue the caase
for him, look into the merits of the
pavement, and make a statement of it
before the board When Congress ad-
iourned, two days later, the papers of
patents were sent to me, and / worked
On the task as faithfully as anything
ever worked at
Garfield acknowledged that Congress
had supreme control over the District
# Columbia, but he said that the local
authorities were not interfered with in
the matter of local improvements, and
that the fee he had received wac in no
way connected with his position in the
House Of Representatives. The salary
Lrab charge had little effect in the
national campaign because both Re-
Dublicans and Democrats had voted to
increase their salaries.
Garfield : opponent in 1880. General
Fanco OK, lad nothing to defend on the
stump; but he made some blunders.
he tariff was then an issue of some
orominence. but Hancock did not seem
70 appreciate it. He airiIv disposed Of
The whole affair by saving that the
-arltf was only local issue. This was
very much like Croker famous dec
aration in 1900: ''Where is the sense
Il all this fuss about the free coinage
# silver at Is to !? If We find that
his ratio doesn't work, we can in
,rease il or lower it as often as we
wish. I am in favor Of gold and silver.
and all kinds Of money and plenty of
T. Hancock 5 tariff declaration in
.uTed him greatly, and was perhaps
he main cause Of his defeat at the
7OIls.
In the presidential contest between
James G. Blaine and Grover Cleveland.
Il 1854. letters that were not intended
,oT the public gaze figured in the cam
oaign-the Nulligan letters. They
we're not new. They were brought 10
he surface when Blaine was speaker
f the House of Representatives. but
hey served effectively in the national
.amDaigr. The Democratic managers
.ra-torcd copies of them all over the
.ountrv, with the purpose Of showing
hat Riaine had used his influence IN
he House Of Representatives in favor
# corporations. and had profred large
Y IN consequence. On the strength Of
hese letters he was accused Of having
'eceived $4,000 from the Union Pacific
Railroad Company for services rem
4nra9