J. E. Stevenson 
 
 Credit Mob'v \ \er 
 
Return this book on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. 
 
 University of Illinois Library 
 
 ! DEC -3 IBS 
 
 4 
 
 
 Jiff’ 1 for 
 
 ^ .i Jw v 
 
 
 
 vJuli jl -t. 
 
 iS'63 
 
 
 jl M 11 ISt 
 
 13 
 
 
 OrC 
 
 1367 
 
 
 **i8t 
 
 m 
 
 
 MAR 2 2 
 
 mi 
 
 L161 —1141 
 
■ 
 
 i 
 
 A 
 
LIBRARY 
 OF THE 
 
 P(f 
 
 SPEECHES 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. JOB E. STEVENSON, 
 
 OF OHIO, 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 
 
 FEBRUARY 26 AND MARCH 1, 1 S73; 
 
 AND 
 
 EXHIBIT OF CREDIT MOBILIER LEGISLATION AND OPERATIONS. 
 
 “ With absolute fairness we have striven to attain the truth, and in a sentence I declare, in all the 
 history of finance connected with works of this or any other country I never saw a scheme of villainy so 
 profoundly arranged, so cunningly carried forward, and so disastrously executed as this one disclosed by 
 the report now submitted to the House/’— Mr.Shellabarger,of the Wilson committee. 
 
 “ We have, as the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Shellabarger] says, the most unexampled revelation of 
 villainy which this country ever knew in relation to railroads.”— Mr. Cox. 
 
 “ And this is but a part of a great system of fraud; it is only the outcropping, the surface indications 
 of a vast system of fraud by which there have been turned into the hands and pockets of citizens, private 
 and official, within the last decade, the value of 200,000,000 acres of public lands and over $60,000,000 in cash. 
 The value of that land, according to the statements of land-grant railroad companies, is to-day not less ’ 
 than $1,000,000,000. This is the most mammoth robbery ever practiced on any Government or people.”— Mr<. 
 Stevenson. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 F. & J; RIVES & GEO. A. BAILEY, 
 
 REPORTERS AND PRINTERS OF THE DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 
 
 > 1873 . 
 
k 
 
i f W rr 
 
 1*> V'- c.t 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Page. 
 
 h Speech on Poland Report... 5-9 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Hale in reply. 8 
 
 Response to Mr. Hale..... 8-9 
 
 Note, bringing down the history of legislation from the spring of 1869 (where the 
 
 hammer fell) to 1873. 9 
 
 Appendix. 10 
 
 Mr. Blaine’s resolution of inquiry as amended by Mr. Butler, and debate and 
 
 proceedings thereon... 10-11 
 
 Appointment of committee. 11 
 
 Extracts from the Poland report..... 10-12 
 
 When Ames sold stock. 12 
 
 Extracts from the Wilson report—amount invested by Credit Mobilier $400,000. 12 
 
 Profits and dividends ...12, 13, 14 
 
 Dividends on Ames’s contract. 13 
 
 Corruption funds greater than investment.. 14 
 
 Ames’s letters to McComb and list of assignments of stock. . . 14, 15 
 
 Land grants and value of lands..... 16 
 
 0 Railroad debt $80,000,000. 16 
 
 Report of Secretary of Interior, November 30, 1868, showing Credit Mobilier frauds. 29 
 
 Pacific railroad legislation... 16, 36 
 
 Leavenworth, Pawnee, and Western (eastern branch) or Denver Pacific.16, 17, 29, 32 
 
 Washburne’s speech on... 17, 29 
 
 Van Trump’s speech. 30, 32 
 
 Act of 1862, corruption... 17 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Lovejov. 17 
 
 Remarks of Mr. E. B. Washburne.. 17 
 
 Amendatory act of 1864. 18 
 
 Corruption and lobby scenes. 14, 18 
 
 Speeches of Mr. E. B. Washburne.18, 19, 25, 29 
 
 Speech of Mr. C. C. Washburn.. 18, 23 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Holman... 19 
 
 Votes on...19, 20, 26, 27 
 
 Mr. Dawes’s resolution of December 16, 1867. 20 
 
 Debate on, by Messrs. Dawes, Washburne, Brooks, and Garfield.20, 21, 22 
 
 Vote on... 23 
 
 The Washburne resolution, (1867, 1868). 23 
 
 Proceedings and debate on. 23, 29 
 
 Remarks of Mr. E. B. Washburne.23, 25, 26, 27 
 
 Remarks of Mr. C. C. Washburn.23, 24, 25, 26 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Dawes..... 23 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Garfield. 23 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Holman.. 25 
 
 The Speaker’s ruling, (since reversed). 25 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Van Wyck. 27 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Johnson, of California..... 28 
 
 Remarks of Mr. Clarke, of Kansas. 28 
 
 Votes.23, 25, 28, 29 
 
 Bingham resolution. 32 
 
 Debate on, in Senate..32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 
 
 Mr. Stewart. 32 
 
 Mr. Nye. 33 
 
 Mr. Wilson, of Massachusetts... .34, 35, 36 
 
 Mr. Davis, of Kentucky. 35, 36 
 
 Credit Mobilier debates in House and Senate in 1868 and 1869....24, 28, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 
 
 See dates of dividends on Ames’s contract in 1867-68.. 13 
 
 Stockholders, &c., in land-grant railroads—Credit Mobilier. 37 
 
 Sioux City Pacific. 37 
 
 Iowa Falls and Sioux City..... 37, 38 
 
 Legislation in Congress and in Iowa on Iowa Falls and Sioux City. 37 
 
 Profits—value of land grant and cost of road. 37 
 
 Mr. Oakes Ames’s testimony. 38 
 
 Mr. Blaine’s testimony... 38, 40 
 
 !008404 
 
Credit Mobilier, 
 
 Tho Houso having under consideration the report 
 of the select committee appointed to investigate the 
 alleged Credit Mobilier bribery— 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON said: 
 
 Mr. Speaker : This is not a criminal court, 
 this is not a criminal trial, although crim¬ 
 inal lawyers so argue the matter and seem so 
 to consider it. If it had been a criminal trial 
 one of the parties charged would not have been 
 permitted to draw the indictment, nor would 
 he have been permitted to name a man to select 
 the committee, nor would he have been sitting 
 in the chief seat of judgment while the cause 
 is being tried.* This is a legislative inquiry. 
 Nor has the committee which has examined the 
 case treated it as a criminal trial. We are 
 admonished in the administration of criminal 
 law to temper justice with mercy. This com¬ 
 mittee has tempered mercy with justice. They 
 have found only what they were compelled to 
 find. They have sought nothing. There has 
 been no prosecutor on the committee, nor has 
 the spirit of prosecution appeared in the com¬ 
 mittee. ( 
 
 We are now here to consider the report j 
 extorted by the unquestioned facts from a | 
 reluctant committee, and well they might have 
 been reluctant. What was this charge? It 
 involved the Vice President and the Vice 
 President-elect, the Speaker of this House, 
 and the chairmen of the most important Com¬ 
 mittees of this House ; it involved the House 
 itself in its very organization and corporate 
 existence. And I am not disposed to blame 
 the committee when they found all these 
 leviathans of the great deep in their net that 
 they were not quite able to haul them all into 
 their little tub. 
 
 What is this question? It is a question of 
 an enormous fraud upon the Government of 
 the United States, a fraud which, according 
 to the report of a select committee of this , 
 House, seems to have put into the pockets of 
 certain men, some of whom have all the while 
 
 *Mr. Blaine presented the resolutions of inquiry 
 touching himself and others, selected a member to 
 name the committee, and presided over the House 
 pending the consideration of the report. 1 
 
 5 
 
 been occupying seats on this floor, the enorm 
 ous sum of $43,000,000. 
 
 Mr. HOAR. Will the gentleman- 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. 1 cannot be interrupted 
 by anybody. The amount of securities which 
 this fraud has placed in the possession of these 
 men is $43,000,000. If they were not worth 
 one hundred per cent, of their face, it was 
 because the frauds of their owners depreciated 
 them. Rut according to the report of the 
 committee they realized $23,000,000 in cash. 
 I refer to the table and the report of the com¬ 
 mittee of which the honorable gentleman from 
 Indiana [Mr. Wilson] is chairman, on pages 
 14 and 15. 
 
 And this is but a part of a great system of 
 fraud ; it is only the outcropping, the surface 
 indications of a vast system of fraud by which 
 there have been turned into the hands and 
 pockets of citizens, private and official, within 
 the last decade, the value of 200.000,000 
 acres of public lands and over'$60,000,000 
 in cash. The value of that land according 
 to the statements of land-grant railroad com¬ 
 panies is to-day not less than $1,000,000,000. 
 
 This is the most mammoth robbery ever prac¬ 
 ticed on any Government or people ; and how 
 has it been done ? In part by legislation, con¬ 
 gressional and State, chiefly congressional. The 
 influence of the lobby has been brought to bear. 
 Members have been interested, ex-members 
 and members-elect, until it seems to be the 
 common apprehension among the people that 
 we have made auction-rooms of our legisla¬ 
 tive halls; and I believe more values have 
 passed under yonder gavel than have been 
 knocked down under the hammers of auction¬ 
 eers in all the world. 
 
 How has this been done, how has this par¬ 
 ticular fraud been successfully consummated ? 
 Mainly by the suppression of inquiry on the 
 part of Congress. That has been found to be 
 the object of the leading men perpetrating this 
 fraud, the suppression of inquiry. The chief 
 offender—and I speak of no man personally, I 
 have had the greatest respect for all—the chief 
 offender is shown to have sold his stock far 
 below its true value to twelve leading men in 
 
6 
 
 Congress, and to have offered it to two more; 
 fourteen cases proven ; and he chose well; he 
 laid his hand, whether to bless or to ban, on 
 the heads of the coming men. He prophesied 
 the organization of the Forty-First and Forty- 
 Second Congresses. He knew his men. His 
 letters and statement show where he was plac¬ 
 ing the stock ; they show with what persever¬ 
 ance he endeavored to place it; how in the case 
 of one who refused to take it he trebled the 
 amount first offered before he finally failed. 
 His highest rate was $3,000 and his lowest 
 was $1,000. He began in his efforts at Maine ; 
 he came to New Hampshire, to Massachusetts, 
 to New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania; to 
 Ohio, to Indiana, to Illinois, to Iowa; and from 
 that on he and his associates owned the coun¬ 
 try without purchase. A cordon of corruption 
 sweeping from Maine to California 1 
 
 And, sir, he succeeded. Tell me not that 
 this was a failure. It has been the grandest 
 success ever achieved among men by such 
 economical application of means. Audi haye 
 the documents here to prove it. 
 
 Mr. FRYE. I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
 man one question. 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. I have not time to 
 yield for questions. I have all these books 
 before me to refer to. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. FRYE. The gentleman had better 
 confine himself to the books and the truth. 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. If the gentleman knows 
 the truth better than I do, I hope he will have 
 an opportunity to tell it. 
 
 Mr. RANKS. I object to these interrup¬ 
 tions. 
 
 The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio 
 [Mr. Stevenson] is entitled to proceed with 
 out interruption. 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. Now, Mr. Speaker, 
 it is said that there has been no proposition 
 of importance from this compauy before 
 Congress. I find that questions relating to 
 the Union Pacific railroad have been before 
 Congress, ever present and absorbing, in the 
 Fortieth, Forty-First, and Forty-Second Con¬ 
 gresses and will probably be in the Forty Third 
 Congress. There has been since these trans¬ 
 actions began no Congress, no session in which 
 important legislation has not been asked and 
 had at the instance of this company. True, 
 they did not ask more money ; even they had 
 not the conscience for that. They did not ask 
 more land : they had not the conscience. But 
 they did want favors ; one of which was to be 
 saved from being exposed. They came here 
 in the Fortieth Congress, even in December, 
 while these bargains were being made, while 
 the ink was fresh that recorded them, if they 
 ever were written; they came here on the 16th 
 of December, 1867, and asked authority to 
 change the time and place of holding their 
 meetings. This was asked through the hon¬ 
 ored Representative from Massachusetts, [Mr. 
 Dawes,] who said, “I was asked on their 
 behalf to do this,” and on that day this House 
 
 passed such a resolution. I refer to the Globe, 
 volume sixty-five, pages 211, and 233. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. Will the gentleman read the 
 resolution ? 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. I have not time now. 
 If the gentleman wishes to read it I will hand 
 it to him. This measure was passed by the 
 Senate, came here, and was passed through 
 the House on the next day. This was speedy 
 action. Among those voting against laying 
 the resolution on the table I find Mr. Alli¬ 
 son, Mr. Ames, Mr. Bingham, Mr. Blaine, 
 Mr. Dawes, Mr. Dodge, Mr. Hooper, Mr. 
 Kelley, Mr. Scofield, and Mr. James F. 
 Wilson. Among those voting in favor of 
 laying the resolution on the table I find my 
 colleague, Mr. Garfield. Upon that occasion 
 it appeared there was a quarrel among these 
 directors; Mr. Brooks represented one side 
 and Mr. Ames the other. Mr. Dawes acted, 
 as he stated, at the request of the directors. 
 Mr. Garfield, of Ohio, called attention to the 
 rule of the House forbidding an interested 
 person to vote. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. Mr. Speaker- 
 
 The SPEAKER. For what purpose does 
 the gentleman rise? 
 
 Mr. DAWES. Is it any more than fair that 
 I should ask the gentleman to read the resolu¬ 
 tion ? 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. If my time is extended 
 I will do so. If the House will give me ten 
 minutes 1 will have it read. 
 
 The SPEAKER. It is for the gentleman 
 from Indiana [Mr. Niblack] to state whether 
 he will extend the time of the gentleman from 
 Ohio. 
 
 Mr, STEVENSON. My proposition was 
 that the House extend my time. 
 
 The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the 
 gentleman from Ohio having ten minutes, not 
 to be counted out of the time of the gentleman 
 from Indiana. 
 
 Mr. SARGENT. For what purpose? 
 
 The SPEAKER. To enable the gentleman 
 to continue his speech. 
 
 Mr. SARGENT. If it is to read this reso¬ 
 lution more fully- 
 
 The SPEAKER. There must be either 
 objection or consent. Is there objection? The 
 Chair hears none. The gentleman from Ohio 
 has an extension of time for ten minutes. 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. I have not here a copy 
 of the resolution, but the substance of it was 
 stated by Mr. Dawes. I will read it: 
 
 “Mr. Dawes. I ask to introduce a joint reso¬ 
 lution for action at this time, to which I presume 
 there will be no objection. It is a joint resolution 
 changing the time of holding the annual meeting of 
 the stockholdes of the Union Pacific railroad.” 
 
 He states further : 
 
 “My resolution simply asks on behalf of the stock¬ 
 holders of this road that they may change the time 
 of holding their annual neotings from October, the 
 time now fixed by law, to March, and also that they 
 may designate at one meeting the place where they 
 may hold their next annual meeting, provided it is 
 held at one of the five or six places enumerated in 
 
7 
 
 the acts, where the books were opened for subscrip¬ 
 tions; that is, St. Louis. Chicago, Cincinnati, Balti¬ 
 more, Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and Wash¬ 
 ington.” 
 
 The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Voor- 
 hees] thinks he makes a point in favor of Mr. 
 Brooks when he says that Mr. Brooks did not 
 vote on this question. Perhaps that is ac¬ 
 counted for by the fact that my colleague from 
 Ohio [Mr. Garfield] called for the reading 
 of the rule forbidding members having an 
 interest in a question to vote, and that rule 
 was read and the construction of it. 
 
 Mr. PLATT. I ask the gentleman to have 
 the entire list of the yeas and nays read. 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. If desired they may 
 be printed with my remarks, but it takes time 
 to read the yeas and nays, and I cannot afford 
 to lose the time. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, the next item to which I call 
 your attention is the report of the Secretary 
 of the Interior made in 1868, and I do so in 
 order to correct a statement made by the gen¬ 
 tleman from Kentucky [Mr. Beck] when he 
 says no officer of the Government ever called 
 attention to the manner in which this road was 
 being built. The Secretary of the Interior in 
 his report for November 30, 1868, on page 
 12, did call attention to the fraud which was 
 being perpetrated by a quotation from the 
 report of Mr. Williams, of Indiana, who had 
 examined the road as a commissioner for the 
 Government. He says: 
 
 “ The actual cost to the contractors forming an as¬ 
 sociation which embraces most of the larger stock¬ 
 holders of the company is shown only by their pri¬ 
 vate books, to which the Government directors 
 have no access. 
 
 And he then gives estimates from the best 
 information he could get. 
 
 Mr. MAYNARD. What was the date of 
 that report ? 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. November 30, 1868. 
 He estimates from the best information he 
 could obtain that they would make $17,750,000 
 on the contracts then being executed. 
 
 On the 20th March, 1868, a debate occurred 
 in this House upon a resolution of Mr. Wash 
 burne to regulate the tariff of freights of this 
 company. In the Globe, volume sixty-six, 
 page 2029, it appears that Mr. C. C. Washburn, 
 of Wisconsin, made a speech on that question 
 which will be found in the Appendix to the 
 Globe, volume sixty-nine, on page 295. In 
 the course of that speech Mr. Washburne then 
 exposed this whole business, beginning with 
 the bill of 1864 and showing the frauds in 
 which it was initiated, showing the fraud per¬ 
 petrated by the company in deceiving the coun¬ 
 try as to the grade of the road, and exposing 
 the operations of the Credit Mobilier byname, 
 charging that it was formed of the directors 
 and chief stockholders of the railroad com¬ 
 pany, and was committing a fraud on the Gov¬ 
 ernment, and that they would make enormous 
 profits by its operations. 
 
 It has been said that some gentlemen in¬ 
 
 volved say they did not hear that speech of Mr. 
 Washburne, but I find the following members 
 recorded as taking part in the proceedings of 
 that day : Messrs. Bingham, Boutwell, Wilson 
 of Iowa, Scofield, Garfield, Blaine, and 
 Mr. Dawes himself interrupting Mr. Wash¬ 
 burne in the course of his remarks, as appears 
 on page 300 of the Appendix. Mr. Elihu B. 
 Washburne also spoke on that question. 
 
 I am asked what Mr. Dawes said. Mr. 
 C. C. Washburne proposed to restrain the 
 Pacific railroad companies by limiting their 
 rates of freight. Mr. Dawes inquired: “ Why 
 not apply your rule to the New York Central 
 and Erie road?” I cite this merely to show 
 the presence of these gentlemen. This de¬ 
 bate made a sensation. It was not done in a 
 corner. It was known of men. The vote was 
 taken on this question March 26, 1868, as 
 appears in volume sixty-seven, pages 2129 
 and 2130. Mr. Washburne, of Illinois, moved 
 that there be a call of the House. That vote 
 is recorded on page 2129. The following gen¬ 
 tlemen were present and voted in the nega¬ 
 tive; Messrs. Allison,. Ames, Bingham, Bout- 
 well, Dawes, Dodge, Hooper, Kelley, Sco¬ 
 field, and James F. Wilson. Mr. Blainh 
 and Mr. Garfield did not vote. 
 
 A motion was pending to refer the resolu¬ 
 tion to the Pacific Railroad Committee, and 
 on ordering the main question on this motion 
 the following gentlemen are recorded as vot¬ 
 ing in the affirmative, on page 230: Messrs. 
 Allison, Ames, Bingham, Boutwell, Dodge, 
 Hooper, Kelley, and James F. Wilson. Mr. 
 Washburne voted in the negative. Messrs. 
 Blaine and Garfield did not vote. Mr. Hol¬ 
 man called for the reading of the rule forbidding 
 members interested to vote. The question 
 recurred on the motion to refer to the Com¬ 
 mittee on the Pacific railroad. On that I find 
 voting in the affirmative, Messrs. Ames, Bing¬ 
 ham, Boutwell, Dawes, Dodge, Hooper, 
 Kelley, and James F. Wilson; in the nega¬ 
 tive, Mr. Washburne and others; and among 
 those not voting, Messrs. Blaine, Brooks, 
 and Garfield. The motion prevailed. 
 
 By the Globe, volume seventy-one, pages 463, 
 528, itappears that on the 19th of January, 1869, 
 Mr. Washburne, of Illinois, made a speech 
 upon the bill relative to the Denver Pacific 
 railroad in which he went over again this 
 subject. And on the 22d January, 1869, my 
 colleague from Ohio [Mr. Van Trump] made 
 a speech in which he developed with great 
 clearness and force the frauds charged against 
 this company. He stated the fact that the 
 road was being built by this Credit Mobilier 
 organization, and called attention to the re¬ 
 port of the Secretary of the Interior, to which 
 I have referred. 
 
 [Here the hammer fell.] 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. I ask a few moments; 
 more to refer to a debate in the Senate in 
 April, 1869, in which Mr. Stewart and Mr. 
 Nye exposed the Credit Mobilier by name and 
 
8 
 
 in detail, as appears by the Globe, volume 
 seventy four, pages 503, 505, 538. 
 
 Mr. NIBLACK, of Indiana. I cannot yield 
 further to the gentleman. 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. Then I ask leave to 
 print the balance of my remarks. 
 
 Mr. CONGER. I object to printing any¬ 
 thing that is not delivered in the presence of 
 this House. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts, took the 
 floor, and yielded to 
 
 Mr. HALE, who said: Mr. Speaker, I only 
 ask for a little time. The gentleman from 
 Ohio [Mr. Stevenson] has alluded to the 
 Washburn resolution introduced in 1868, 
 which limited and restricted the privileges 
 of the Pacific railroad, and in treating that 
 subject referred with marked emphasis to the 
 votes of certain members in this House. So 
 far as that affects my colleague, [Mr. Blaine,] 
 the Speaker of this House, I desire the record 
 shall be before the House and before the 
 country, and I ask the Clerk to read the 
 abstract of the Washburn resolution as it is 
 found in the Globe of the year 1868, which I 
 send to his desk. 
 
 The Clerk read as follows : 
 
 “It proposes to constitute the Secretary of War, 
 the Secretary of the Interior, and the Attorney Gen¬ 
 eral of the United States a board of commissioners, 
 whose duty it shall be on the 1st day of July in each 
 year to establish a tariff for freight aud passengers 
 over the Union Pacific and the Central Pacific rail¬ 
 roads and their branches, which tariff shall be 
 equitable and just, and not exceeding double the 
 average rates charged on the different lines of rail¬ 
 road between the Mississippi river and the Atlantic 
 ocean in latitudes north of St. Louis, Missouri; and 
 that it shall not be lawful for said railroad com¬ 
 panies to charge any sum in excess of the rate so 
 fixed.” 
 
 Mr. HALE. Mr. Speaker, that resolution 
 was introduced by Mr. Washburn, of Wiscon¬ 
 sin, on the 26th day of January, 1868, on a 
 Monday, under the second call. Objection 
 was made that Mr. Washburn had already in¬ 
 troduced one resolution under that call, and 
 his resolution went out on the point of order. 
 But immediately afterward he induced Mr. 
 Windom, of Minnesota, to offer the same res¬ 
 olution in terms, and the previous question 
 was moved. On seconding the demand, the 
 vote, being taken by tellers, was ayes 51, noes 
 63 ; there being no record, of course, of the 
 names on a vote by tellers, and so the subject 
 went over that day. 
 
 It came up again on the 12th of March, 1868, 
 tind & motion was at once made to lay the 
 resolution on the table. Upon that the yeas 
 and nays were ordered, and upon that record 
 1 find my colleague, [Mr. Blaine,] then as 
 now a member from Maine, voting “ nay,” 
 with both of the Washburns, the mover of 
 the resolution, and Mr. E. B. Washburne, 
 the known and unrelenting foe of all monopo¬ 
 lies. Upon that occasion I may say, without 
 going into the record of members at length, 
 that I find the gentleman from Vermont, the 
 chairman of the committee now reporting, 
 
 voting “yea,” while the gentleman from Mas¬ 
 sachusetts, [Mr. Banks,] who has just taken 
 his seat, is recorded as not voting at all on the 
 motion to lay the resolution on the table. 
 
 The resolution came up again on the 26th 
 of March, 1868, and upon two votes, one be¬ 
 ing on ordering the main question and the 
 other upon whether it should be referred to 
 the Pacific Railroad Committee, where it 
 would naturally go, as it had not been dis¬ 
 cussed in the House, as not a word had 
 been said about it, I do not find recorded the 
 vote of Mr. Blaine, he not being present. 
 It was then and there referred to its proper 
 committee, that on the Pacific Railroad, and 
 on May 12, 1868, that committee reported 
 to the House, aud the question arose upon 
 the passage of the resolution as reported by the 
 committee. Upon that question a motion was 
 made in delay, to recommit to the committee, 
 and again the yeas and nays were ordered 
 and a record was again made. The yeas 
 were 65, the nays 69, and on the question of 
 recommittal, I find that ray colleague, Mr. 
 Blaine, then voted against recommittal, and 
 that Mr. Washburne, of Illinois, who had jeal¬ 
 ously watched the resolution from its first re¬ 
 ception, voted “nay,” and the gentleman from 
 Vermont, [Mr. Poland,] as before, voted on 
 the other side, and the gentleman from Mas¬ 
 sachusetts [Mr. Banks] was not present or 
 did not vote. 
 
 Mr. E. B. Washburne was so much inter¬ 
 ested in the passage of that resolution, which 
 immediately followed upon the defeat of the 
 motion to recommit, that he himself at once 
 moved a reconsideration, and the laying 
 on the table of the motion to reconsider, in 
 order to clinch the action of the House, 
 and secure its becoming the law of the land, 
 so far as this House was concerned. In all 
 this my colleague was found acting with Mr. 
 Washburne, and in what better company he 
 could have acted on such votes I do not know. 
 And if the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Steven¬ 
 son] finds anything in this record either of 
 fear of or favor for the Pacific railroad he has 
 a much deeper penetration than I have. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I move 
 that the House now take a recess until half 
 past seven. 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON. If the gentleman will 
 allow me, I wish to say that the record I quoted 
 as to these votes differs from that quoted by 
 the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. Hale,] as 
 I included that of December 17, 1867, and he 
 adds that of May 12, 1868. 
 
 Saturday, March 1, 1873. 
 
 The House having under consideration the deft* 
 ciency bill— 
 
 Mr. STEVENSON said: 
 
 I wish in this connection to correct a state¬ 
 ment made the other day by the gentleman 
 from Maine, [Mr. Hale.] The record ex¬ 
 hibited by me of votes on the resolution of 
 
9 
 
 Mr. Dawes, December 17, 1867, and that ex¬ 
 hibited by the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. 
 Hale,] of votes on the Washburne resolution. 
 May 12, 1868, these records show that Mr. 
 Blaine voted with Mr. Ames in favor of the 
 road in December, and with Mr. Wash¬ 
 burne against the road in May. The tes¬ 
 timony taken by the Poland committee 
 shows that Mr. Ames’s assignment of stock 
 was made in December. In his letter to 
 McComb, January 25, 1868, Mr. Ames says he 
 has assigned to one from Maine. The list he 
 gave McComb, February 1, 1868, begins, 
 “ Blaine, of Maine, 3,000.” The testimony 
 of Mr. Blaine shows that in the spring of 
 1868 he finally declined Mr. Ames’s proposi¬ 
 tion. Thus it appears that when the proposi¬ 
 tion was pending he voted with Ames, and 
 when it was abandoned he voted with Mr. 
 Washburne.* 
 
 [Here the hammer fell.] 
 
 NOTE. 
 
 The object of the resolution presented 
 in the first session of the Forty-First Con¬ 
 gress, April, 1869, was to release the Credit 
 Mobilier from Judge Barnard’s court in New 
 York, where Fisk was making the same 
 charges since proved by McComb. There was 
 protracted debate in the Senate by Messrs. 
 Stewart, Nye, Wilson, Davis, and others, 
 and amendments were adopted in the inter¬ 
 est of the Government, proposed by Mr. Sher¬ 
 man and Mr. Davis. The facts were stated in 
 that debate as they are now understood, save 
 as to persons involved. 
 
 At the second session of the Forty-First Con¬ 
 gress a bill was passed to fix the junction of 
 the Union Pacific and Central Pacific roads, 
 presented in the House February 21, 1870, in 
 the Senate, February 22; 1870. The Senate 
 bill having passed the Senate, February 25, 
 1870, was taken from the Speaker’s table and 
 passed April 30, 1870, the chairman of the 
 Pacific Railroad Company of the House say¬ 
 ing, “The committee has considered a counter¬ 
 part of the bill; both railroads agree upon it.” 
 
 At the third session of the Forty-First Con¬ 
 gress sundry bills and resolutions were pend¬ 
 ing, and March 3, 1871, during the night, sec¬ 
 tion nine of the Army appropriation bill came 
 into the House, in a report from a conference 
 committee, which was agreed to without print¬ 
 ing or reading, though Mr. Holman protest¬ 
 ed. The yeas and nays were refused. This 
 section compelled the Secretary of the Treas¬ 
 ury, against his will and judgment, to pay the 
 Pacific Railroad Companies one half their 
 earnings on Government freight. 
 
 The railroad debts to the Government had 
 then risen, January 1, 1871, to $64,618,832 and 
 $8,933,127 48. Total more than $73,500,000. 
 
 *Jn December he voted with Ames; in March he 
 did not vote at all; in May he voted with Wash¬ 
 burne. 
 
 It was time for some check. The Secretary 
 gave it, but Congress interfered in favor of the 
 railroads. 
 
 And now it is in evidence that the sum of 
 $126,000 was expended by the company to 
 procure this legislation ; but how it was applied 
 has not been ascertained, because Mr. Dodge, 
 who received it, has refused or failed to answer 
 the process of the House of Representatives. 
 He was a member of Congress and chief en¬ 
 gineer of the road while the frauds were per¬ 
 petrated, and participated in them, and has 
 since been employed in continuing and con¬ 
 cealing them. (See - report of Wilson Com¬ 
 mittee; extracts herewith.) 
 
 During the Forty-Second Congress we have 
 had resolutions of inquiry and bills affecting 
 this company, and finally these investigations 
 out of which important action and legislation 
 has come. 
 
 Thus it appears that from December, 1867, 
 to March, 1873, the Pacific Railroad Company 
 has been continually before Congress in mat¬ 
 ters affecting the interest of the Credit Mobilier 
 which has been constantly in peril of exposure. 
 Other kindred questions have been before Con¬ 
 gress. The records show that land-grant and 
 subsidy railroad bills and resolutions have 
 abounded. The index of those before the House 
 alone fills columns in the Globe. For the For¬ 
 tieth Congress they fill seventeen columns of 
 the index; for the Forty-First Congress, more 
 than twenty columns, and in the Forty-Second 
 Congress more* than one hundred and fifty 
 bills have been introduced proposing to give 
 to railroads lauds estimated at two hundred 
 million acres. 
 
 All will remember the contest on the St. 
 Croix grant. More than forty members of the 
 House took part in the debate, and the result 
 was a drawn battle. The Senate having passed 
 the bill reviving the grant, the House substitut¬ 
 ing a bill to restore the lands to settlement, 
 the Senate refusing to concur, and conference 
 having failed, here is a question for the future. 
 
 The bill “to quiet title to certain lands in 
 Iowa,” passed at this session, has become a 
 law without the signature of the President.* It 
 was passed by the House at this session from 
 the Speaker’s table. The House proceeding 
 to business on the Speaker’s table for the first 
 time during the session, passing this bill, and 
 not returning to the table until the last day of 
 the session. 
 
 Homestead, bounty, and educational bills 
 affecting public lands, and resolutions touch¬ 
 ing the policy of “land grants,” have been 
 pending, discussed, and passed upon. 
 
 Thus it appears that in many forms the sub¬ 
 ject has been before Congress in the Fortieth, 
 Forty-First, and Forty Second, from the be¬ 
 ginning to the end. 
 
 Comment affecting persons is withheld, and 
 extracts from public documents, arid from the 
 
 * The President did not return the bill within ten 
 days. 
 
10 
 
 debates and proceedings in the Congressional 
 Globe are submitted, with such remarks only 
 as appears needful to show their bearing on the 
 subject. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Resolutions of inquiry offered by Mr. Blaine , 
 as amended by Mr . Butler , December 2, 
 1872. 
 
 u Whereas accusations have been made in 
 the public press, founded on alleged letters of 
 Oakes Ames, a Representative from Massa¬ 
 chusetts, and upon the alleged affidavits of 
 Henry S. McComb, a citizen of Wilmington, 
 in the State of Delaware, to the effect that 
 members of this House wore bribed by Oakes 
 Ames to perform certain legislative acts for 
 the benefit of the Union Pacific Railroad Com¬ 
 pany, by presents of stock in the Credit Mo- 
 bilier of America, or by presents of a valuable 
 character derived therefrom : Therefore, 
 Resolved , That a special committee of five 
 members be appointed by the Speaker pro 
 tempore , whose duty it shall be to investigate 
 whether any member of this House was bribed 
 by Oakes Ames, or any other person or cor¬ 
 poration, in any matter touching his legislative 
 duty. 
 
 Resolved further, That the committee have 
 the right to employ a stenographer, and that 
 they be empowered to send for persons and 
 papers.” 
 
 Extracts from proceedings on adopting the 
 resolutions. 
 
 ALLEGED BRIBERY OF MEMBERS. 
 
 <f Mr. BLAINE, (Mr. Cox occupying the 
 chair.) Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of 
 the highest privilege, to one that concerns the 
 integrity of members of this House and the 
 honor of the House itself. It is quite gener¬ 
 ally known to the members of this House that 
 during the recent presidential campaign there 
 was a wide-spread accusation of bribery of 
 members; that members of this House were 
 bribed to perform certain- legislative acts for 
 the benefit of the Union Pacific Railroad Com¬ 
 pany by presents of stock in a corporation 
 known as the 61 Credit Mobilier.” Without 
 obtruding myself as one of eminent station, I 
 may say that the charge struck in high places. 
 It included the Vice President of the United 
 States, the Vice President-elect of the United 
 States; it included three Senators of the Uni¬ 
 ted States, two of them ex-Senators from Ten¬ 
 nessee and Delaware, and a present Senator 
 from New Hampshire; it included the Secre¬ 
 tary of the Treasury of the United States; it 
 included honorable and prominent members 
 of this House—my friend, the chairman of 
 the Ways and Means, [Mr. Dawes;] my 
 friend, the chairman of the Appropriation 
 Committee, [Mr. Garfield ;] the gentleman 
 from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Kelley,] the chair¬ 
 man of the Civil Service Committee j the gen¬ 
 
 tleman from Ohio, [Mr. Bingham,] the chair¬ 
 man of the Judiciary Committee ; the gen¬ 
 tleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Scofield,] 
 the chairman of the Naval Committee ; on the 
 other side of the House, the prominent and 4 
 distinguished member of the Ways and Means 
 Committee from New York, [Mr. Brooks,] 
 and a member from Pennsylvania [Mr. 
 Boyer] not now in this House ; and besides 
 these, a gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
 Eliot] no longer among the living, but sleep¬ 
 ing in what was considered an honored grave. 
 These accusations are that the several per¬ 
 sons received bribes from the hands of 
 a Representative from Massachusetts, [Mr. 
 Ames.] A charge of bribery of members is 
 the gravest that can be made in a legislative 
 body. It seems to me, sir, that this charge 
 demands prompt, thorough, and impartial 
 investigation, and I have taken the floor for 
 the purpose of moving that investigation. 
 Unwilling, of course, to appoint any commit¬ 
 tee of investigation to examine into a charge 
 in which I was myself included, I have called 
 you, sir, to the chair, an honored member of 
 the House, honored here and honored in the 
 country; and when on Saturday last I called 
 ’upon you and advised you of this service, I 
 placed upon you no other restriction in the 
 appointment of a committee than that it 
 should not contain a majority of my political 
 friends. 
 
 I therefore send to the Clerk’s desk, for* 
 adoption by the House, a preamble and 
 accompanying resolution. If there be no gen¬ 
 tleman desiring to discuss them, I will call the 
 previous question. 
 
 The Clerk read as follows : 
 
 Whereas accusations have been made in the 
 public press, founded on the alleged letters 
 of Oakes Ames, a Representative from Mas¬ 
 sachusetts, and upon the alleged affidavit of 
 Henry C. McCombs, a citizen of Wilmington, 
 in the State of Delaware, to the effect that 
 members of this House were bribed by Oakes 
 Ames to perform certain legislative acts for 
 the benefit of the Union Pacific Railway Com¬ 
 pany by presents of stock in the Credit Mobil¬ 
 ier of America, or by presents of a valuable 
 character derived therefrom : Therefore, 
 
 Resolved , That a special committee of five 
 members be appointed by the Speaker pro 
 tempore , whose duty it shall be to investigate 
 and ascertain whether any member of this 
 House was bribed by Oakes Ames in any 
 matter touching his legislative duty. 
 
 Resolved further , That the committee have 
 the right to employ a stenographer, and that 
 they be empowered to send for persons and 
 papers. 
 
 The question was upon the adoption of the 
 preamble and resolutions. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. This 
 resolution, by inadvertence I assume, relates 
 only to bribery by a member of this House. 
 The SPEAKER pro tempore , (Mr. Cox.) 
 
11 
 
 Does the gentleman from Maine [Mr. Blaine] 
 withdraw the ca.ll for the previous question? 
 
 Mr. BLAINE, (the Speaker.) Certainly. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I would 
 suggest to the mover of the resolution to mod¬ 
 ify it, or I will move to amend it, so that it 
 will read, “bribed by Oakes Ames or any 
 other person/’ 
 
 Mr. BLAINE. I will modify the resolution 
 to that effect. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. It should 
 be made as broad as possible. 
 
 Mr. BLAINE. Certainly. In intimating 
 a desire to call the previous question I had no 
 intention to cut off any amendment or remark. 
 I said that if no other member desired to 
 speak upon it I would call the previous ques¬ 
 tion. I will modify the resolution so that it 
 will read, “bribed by Oakes Ames, or any 
 other person or corporation.” 
 
 Mr. KELLEY. I would suggest to the gen¬ 
 tleman from Maine [Mr. Blaine] that he has 
 not given Mr. McComb’s name correctly. 
 
 Mr. BLAINE. I do not know the gentle¬ 
 man. I have seen the name in print as “ Henry 
 C. McComb.” 
 
 Mr. KELLEY. It is “ Henry S. McComb.” 
 
 Mr. BLAINE. I will make that correction. 
 If the gentleman who occupies the chair de¬ 
 sires any further time in which to make up 
 this committee, I will call the yeas and nays. 
 
 The SPEAKER pro tempore . The Chair 
 would suggest to the gentleman from Maine 
 [Mr. Blaine] that the resolution has not yet 
 been adopted, and therefore the Chair has no 
 right, as yet, to appoint the committee. [Laugh¬ 
 ter.] 
 
 Mr. BLAINE. “The gentleman from 
 Maine” stands corrected. [Laughter.] 
 
 The SPEAKERpro tempore. The question 
 is upon the adoption of the preamble and reso¬ 
 lutions which have been read. 
 
 Mr. ARCHER. I hope this resolution will 
 not be adopted. This question has been tried 
 by a higher tribunal than this House. The 
 charges were made broadcast all over the 
 country before the campaign through which we 
 have just passed took place. Upon them the 
 American people have spoken. We had much 
 better go on with the business ofthe country than 
 to continue such investigations as we have had. 
 
 Mr. RANDALL. I hope that this resolu¬ 
 tion will be adopted. I had hoped that it 
 would be adopted with unanimity. I trust 
 that, in the language of the Speaker, this 
 investigation will be full, thorough, and search¬ 
 ing. Less than that will not meet the expecta¬ 
 tion or the requirements of the people of the 
 country. There has been a dark cloud of 
 scandal raised over this House. It is due to 
 such members as have not in any manner 
 whatever been involved in any such proceed¬ 
 ings that their characters should be lifted 
 above suspicion ; and, further, that the heavy 
 thunderbolt of public opinion should fall upon 
 these few, if any, who are implicated in voting 
 
 for bills in which they were directly or indi¬ 
 rectly interested. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. I agree with the gentleman 
 from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Randall.] I hope 
 this resolution will be adopted without a dis¬ 
 senting voice. Without expressing any opinion 
 in reference to the result of such an investi¬ 
 gation, it is due to the House, as well as to 
 the members implicated, that there should be 
 no shrinking at this time from a thorough 
 exhaustive, fair, and impartial investigation. 
 In times that have passed I have borne my 
 full share in urging upon the House the pro¬ 
 priety of taking cognizance of charges of this 
 kind when presented by responsible authority. 
 I do not intend now to shrink from any such 
 investigation ; and I trust that those who 
 stand with me to-day will feel, as I have no 
 doubt they do, the propriety of calling upon 
 the House, without opposition and without 
 dissent, to pursue this investigation as they 
 would a judicial trial, in such a manner that 
 the result will command, as I have no doubt 
 it will receive, the approval of the American 
 people. 
 
 Mr. HOLMAN. It seems to me very proper 
 that this resolution should be adopted and this 
 committee raised. It seems to me that the 
 House, without dissent, with that unanimity 
 which will arrest the attention of the country, 
 should adopt this resolution. I think the 
 House owes this to itself, to the individual 
 members composing this body, and to the 
 country. I trust this resolution will be adopted 
 without a dissenting voice. 
 
 The preamble and resolutions, as modified, 
 were agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BLAINE moved to reconsider the vote 
 by which the preamble and resolutions were 
 adopted; and also moved that the motion to 
 reconsider be laid on the table. 
 
 The latter motion was agreed to. 
 
 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The present 
 occupant of the chair having been advised 
 beforehand that he would be called upon to 
 act on this matter, has had time enough to 
 select a committee, which he submits as the 
 result of his best judgment, having in view the 
 securing of a fair and impartial investigation. 
 
 The Clerk read, as follows, the names of the 
 members constituting the committee: 
 
 Luke P. Poland of Vermont, Nathaniel 
 P. Banks of Massachusetts, James B. Beck 
 of Kentucky, William E. Niblack of Indi¬ 
 ana, and George W. McCrary of Iowa.” 
 
 [Subsequently, Mr. Beck declining to serve, 
 Mr. Cox, as Speaker pro tempore , appointed 
 Mr. Merrick, of Maryland.] 
 
 Extracts from testimony and proceedings of 
 committee , December 17, 1872, page 29. 
 
 “ Witness. Oakes Ames. 
 
 By Chairman : 
 
 Question. And they have continued to be 
 owners of that stock, unless they have disposed 
 of it to somebody else? 
 
12 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir; Mr. Wilson disposed of 
 his some time ago. 
 
 The SPEAKER, in connection with the ques¬ 
 tion about Messrs. Wilson and Allison , re¬ 
 marked to the committee that in the Forty-First 
 Congress there was an investigation in regard to 
 the alleged sale of cadetships , which has led to 
 serious proceedings in the House , and that the 
 Committee on Military Affairs , which had the 
 investigation in charge, acting on its own 
 judgment , which teas afterward affirmed in 
 some form by the House , decided that it had 
 no power , and that it was out of the pale of 
 propriety for it to investigate the transactions 
 of men who had been in Congress , but who had 
 returned to civil life. He merely wanted to 
 make the suggestion to the committee. 
 
 All the proceedings before that committee 
 in the Forty First Congress touching any 
 members of the prior Congress had been 
 erased from the record, and no report made 
 of it to the House. 
 
 The Chairman. It is very clear that we 
 cannot deal with Mr. Wilson and Mr. Allison 
 in any way, but perhaps we may with Mr. Ames. 
 
 Witness, Oakes A rnes; testimony, page 339 : 
 
 By Mr. Merrick : 
 
 Question. Have you refreshed your mem¬ 
 ory in relation to your dealings with any other 
 members of Congress? 
 
 Answer. There is no other. ThereasonI 
 did not name Mr. Logan before was that Mr. 
 Blaine stated that this committee had nothing 
 to do with Senators .” 
 
 Extract from Poland report, pages 2 and 3. 
 
 “Mr. Oakes Ames was then a member of 
 the House of Representatives, and came to 
 Washington at the commencement of the ses¬ 
 sion, about the beginning of December , 1867. 
 During that month Mr. Ames entered into 
 contracts with a considerable number of mem¬ 
 bers of Congress , both Senators and Represent¬ 
 atives , to let them have shares of stock in the 
 Credit Mobilier Company at par , with interest 
 thereon from the ls£ day of the previous July .” 
 
 Extracts from report of Wilson committee. 
 
 Amount of cash paid in by subscribers to 
 stock of Union Pacific railroad, $409,000. 
 (See Wilson Report, page 21.) 
 
 “ 4. The statute requiring the capital stock to 
 be paid for in money at par, it has in fact been 
 paid at not exceeding thirty cents on the dol¬ 
 lar in road-building, excepting, perhaps, the 
 sum of about $400,000.” 
 
 Dividends and profits and corruption fund. 
 
 (See Wilson Report, pages 13,14, 15, 16.) 
 
 DAVIS CONTRACT. 
 
 “This was a contract made with J. W. Davis, 
 a man of but little, if any, pecuniary ability, 
 (and not expected to perform the contract,) 
 for the construction of that part of the road 
 beginning at the western terminus of the 
 “Ames contract,” and extending to the west¬ 
 
 ern terminus of the road, a distance of one 
 hundredand twenty-five and twenty-three hun¬ 
 dredths miles. It was upon the same terms 
 as the Ames contract, and was assigned to the 
 same board of trustees. Under it the residue" 
 of the road was constructed, and, from a bal¬ 
 ance-sheet taken from the books of the rail¬ 
 road company, it appears that it— 
 
 Cost the railroad company.$23,431,768 10 
 
 And, from a balance-sheet taken from 
 the books of the trustees, that it cost 
 the contractors. 15,629,633 62 
 
 Profit. $7,802,084 48 
 
 Your committee present the following sum¬ 
 mary of cost of this road to the railroad com¬ 
 pany and to the contractors, as appears by the 
 books: 
 
 Cost to railroad company. 
 
 Hoxie contract. $12,974,416 24 
 
 Ames contract.. 57,140,102 94 
 
 Davis contract. 23,431,768 10 
 
 Total... 93,546,287 28 
 
 Cost to contractors. 
 
 Hoxie contract.$7,806,183 33 
 
 Ames contract.27,285,141 99 
 
 Davis contract. 15,629,633 62 
 
 - 50,720,958 94 
 
 43,825,328 34 
 
 To this should be added amount paid 
 Credit Mobilier on account of fifty- 
 
 eight miles. 1,104,000 00 
 
 Total profit on construction.,$43,925,328 34 
 
 The balance-sheets, from which the fore¬ 
 going results have been obtained, were made 
 out by Mr. Crane and Mr. Ham, accountants 
 familiar with the books and with most of the 
 transactions. Your committee have earnestly 
 endeavored to get the exact cost of the road 
 to the company and to the contractors, and 
 if they have failed it is because those who 
 should know and have had the opportunity to 
 inform the committee have failed to give the 
 information. The books have been kept in 
 such a way and the transactions have been of 
 such a character that their true nature has 
 been very much disguised. 
 
 It is a matter of no little importance to know 
 what the cash profits of this construction have 
 been, and in this connection the following 
 summary is presented on that subject. 
 
 The attention of Mr. Ham was called to the 
 fact that the balance-sheets above alluded to 
 showed an aggregate profit on the Ames and 
 Davis contracts of $37,657,095 43, and he 
 was asked the question how much of it was 
 money, how much bonds, and how much stock. 
 His answer gave the following exhibit: 
 
 $3,777,000 first-mortgage bonds, at 90. $3,399,300 
 
 $4,400,000 certificates for first-mortgage 
 bonds, afterwards converted into in¬ 
 come bonds, at.. .... 4,425,000 - 
 
 $5,841,000 income bonds, at 60 . 3,486,600 
 
 $24,030,000 stock Union Pacific Railroad 
 
 Company.. 24,000,000 
 
 $2,346,195 cash. 2.346,195 
 
 Total. $37,657,095 w 
 
13 
 
 From this it will appear that in making up 
 this profit all the securities are estimated at 
 their cash value, except the stock, which is 
 estimated at par. 
 
 This shows that the profits on these two 
 contracts are— 
 
 Bonds (cash value)......$11,310,900 00 
 
 Twenty-four million stock, at 30. 7,200,000 00 
 
 Gash. 2,346,000 00 
 
 20,856,900 00 
 
 The profits on the Hoxie contract, as 
 
 before stated, were.$6,272,232 71. 
 
 Treating all of this as stock, except $1,- 
 125,000 of first-mortgage bonds, divided 
 as hereinafter stated, the profits, cash 
 values on this, would be as follows : 
 
 $1,125,000 first-mortgage bonds, at 85. 965,250 00 
 
 $5,147,232 71 stock, at 30. 1,544,199 81 
 
 Total cash profit.$23,366,319 81 
 
 In making this calculation the stock is placed 
 at thirty cents, because that is the value the 
 parties have placed on it. 
 
 If all the profits made have been divided, 
 the account should correspond with the amount 
 of profit above stated. But it does not cor¬ 
 respond, and whether the failure to correspond 
 is attributable to inaccuracy as to the amount 
 of profits or to disguises in making divisions, 
 the House can judge in some degree from the 
 facts hereinafter set forth. 
 
 The following are the dividends as appears 
 *in the evidence. First, by Credit Mobilier, 
 results of Hoxie contract: 
 
 The Credit Mobilier on the —— day of Jan¬ 
 uary, 1867, increased its capital stock from 
 $2,500,000 to $3,750,000, and for each $1,000 
 of additional stock taken, there was distributed 
 to the subscriber a first-mortgage bond of the 
 Union Pacific railroad company of $1,000. In 
 this way there was divided $1,125,000 in first- 
 mortgage bonds. 
 
 Then, on the-day of-, 1867, there 
 
 was a dividend made of twelve per cent, (six 
 per cent, for each of the years 1866 and 1867) 
 in stock of the Union Pacific Railroad Com¬ 
 pany, at thirty per cent, of its par value. This 
 would amount to $1,500,000 stock par value. 
 
 These two amounts aggregate $2,750,000. 
 
 But the balance sheet shows a profit to the 
 Credit Mobilier— 
 
 On the Hoxie contract of...$5,168,232 91 
 
 Add amount received on fifty-eight 
 
 miles..... 1,104,000 00 
 
 Total. . .$6,272,232 91 
 
 This shows a discrepancy of $3,522,232 91. 
 But that the above dividends are delusive, and 
 are not all that was divided, is disclosed by 
 * the testimony of Mr. Ham, pages 277-383, to 
 which attention is especially called. 
 
 Mr. Ham was asked what amount of profits 
 was made by the Credit Mobilier on the Hoxie 
 contract, and what they had received on the 
 
 fifty-eight miles west of the one hundreth 
 meridian. 
 
 Answer. The amount of profit they have 
 received is $6,272,232 91. 
 
 After stating that of this amount $1,125,000 
 was divided in first-mortgage bonds, as above, 
 in his further examination as to the disposi¬ 
 tion of this profit, (see pages 377-383,) it 
 appears that the whole of the profit above 
 stated was divided. 
 
 So it is apparent that much more has been 
 distributed on account of this Hoxie contract 
 among these stockholders than what the divi¬ 
 dend statements would indicate. 
 
 2. The following are the dividends, as ap¬ 
 pears from the books, that were made out of 
 the proceeds of the Ames contract: 
 
 First dividend December 12,1867, of sixty per cent., 
 
 in first-mortgage bonds. $2,244,000 
 
 Sixty per cent, in stock Union Pacific 
 
 Railroad Company. 2,244,000 
 
 Second dividend January 3, 1868, of 
 twenty per cent., in first-mortgage 
 
 bonds. 748,000 
 
 Third dividend June 17, 1868, of forty 
 per cent., stock Union Pacific Railroad 1,500,000 
 
 Sixty per cent, cash. 2,250,000 
 
 Fourth dividend July 3,1868, first-mort¬ 
 gage bonds. 2.791,500 
 
 Fifth dividend July 8,1868, in cash. 1,095,168 
 
 Sixth dividend December 29,1868, in stock 7,599,000 
 
 Total. $20,471,663 
 
 Here, it will be observed, is another large 
 discrepancy between the dividend account and 
 the amount of profit made, as shown above. 
 Whether this difference has escaped under the 
 cover of some fog into the pockets of these 
 managers, as was obviously the case under the 
 Hoxie contract, or whether the books show too 
 large a profit, your committee will leave the 
 House to judge. 
 
 The Ames and Davis contracts having been 
 essentially the same, the accounts were so 
 kept that it was difficult to separate them and 
 know exactly the profit on either—this is the 
 testimony of Mr. Ham and Mr. Crane—and a 
 part of the profit charged to this Ames con¬ 
 tract may have been divided under the Davis 
 contract, as it will hereafter be seen that un¬ 
 der that contract a division was made of largely 
 more than the profit par value of the stock 
 divided. 
 
 NEXT, THE DIVISIONS UNDER THE DAVIS CONTRACT 
 
 The mode of making divisions under this 
 contract was this : 
 
 On the-day of-, 1869, the trustees sold to 
 
 the stockholders of the Union Pacific Railroad Com¬ 
 pany— 
 
 Twenty-seven hundred and fifty first mortgage bonds 
 
 for.$275,000 
 
 Twenty-seven hundred and fifty land grant 
 bonds for. 275,000 
 
 Total.....$550,000 
 
 They distributed to the persons to whom these 
 bonds were sold in stock two and one half times tho 
 
14 
 
 amount of bonds purchased, namely, stock Union 
 Pacific Railroad Company.,,.,.. $1,375,000 
 
 2. The trustees sold stockholders thirty- 
 
 nine hundred and one income bonds, 
 at eighty cents to the dollar, amount¬ 
 ing to $-, and divided stock Union 
 
 Pacific Railroad Company. 7,802,000 
 
 3. The trustees sold stockholders nineteen 
 
 hundred and nine income bonds at 
 eighty cents to the dollar, and divided 
 stock Union Pacific Railroad Com¬ 
 pany. 3,818,000 
 
 Total stock.$12,995,000 
 
 This is a division largely in excess of the 
 profit on this Davis contract in stock, par 
 value, as shown above; but, as before indi¬ 
 cated, this excess may have been carried from 
 the Ames into the Davis contract. 
 
 This excess, of profit over the dividends 
 appearing on the books, in all probability was 
 disposed of in some such way as was used in 
 the disposition of the Hoxie profits. 
 
 Mr. Ham having given the amount of bonds, 
 stock, and money embraced in this $37,657,- 
 095 43 profit on these two contracts from the 
 books, is very strong if not conclusive evidence 
 that the statement of profit is correct, and con¬ 
 sequently that the books do not show all that 
 was divided, or that there is yet in the hands 
 of the trustees undivided profits. 
 
 In this connection the committee calls atten¬ 
 
 tion to the following facts : 
 
 First mortgage bonds issued. $27,213,000 00 
 
 Sold at a discount of.. 3,494,991 23 
 
 Net proceeds. $23,718,008 77 
 
 Government bonds issued. $27,236,512 00 
 
 Sold at discount of. 91,348 72 
 
 $27,145,163 38 
 
 Aggregatenetproceedsof both classes.. $50,863,172 05 
 Cost of whole road to the contractors... 50,720,958 94 
 
 $142,213 11” 
 
 It appears, then, speaking in round numbers, 
 that the cost of the road was $50,000,000, 
 which cost was wholly reimbursed by the pro¬ 
 ceeds of the Government bonds and first mort¬ 
 gage bonds; and that from the stock, the 
 income bonds, and land grant bonds, the 
 builders received in cash value at least 
 $23,000,000 as profit. 
 
 CORRUPTION. 
 
 The committee deem it proper here to direct 
 attention specifically and separately to the fol¬ 
 lowing transactions in disbursements of por¬ 
 tions of the assets of this road, which seem to 
 the committee to have been wrongful, and to 
 demand the immediate and grave consideration 
 of the present directors of the Union Pacific 
 Railroad Company and of whatever authority 
 may be charged with the duty of securing the 
 recovery of the property of the company from 
 those who are responsible for or the recipients 
 of these illegal disbursements : 
 
 1. One hundred and twenty-six thousand 
 dollars were paid C. S. Bushnell on the 9th 
 
 day of March, 1871, and denominated “ special 
 legal expenses,” which was disposed of as 
 follows: 
 
 First. To G. M. Dodge for services in procuring the 
 passage of the act of March 3,1871, in relation to 
 transportation by said company for the Govern¬ 
 
 ment. $24,500 
 
 Second. Amount paid by C. S. Bushnell to 
 
 Thomas A. Scott on private account. 19,000 
 
 Third. Amount retained by C. S. Bushnell 
 on his own account. 82,500 
 
 $126,000 
 
 Twenty-five thousand dollars were paid to a 
 Government commissioner to secure the ac¬ 
 ceptance of a portion of the road as com¬ 
 pleted. 
 
 Four hundred and thirty-five thousand, 
 seven hundred and fifty-four dollars and 
 twenty one cents, designated as “ suspense 
 account,” were allowed to T. C. Durant, vice 
 president of the company, which appear from 
 the evidence to have been disbursed in con¬ 
 nection with the passage of the amendatory 
 act of July, 1864, of the particulars of which 
 disbursement the committee have been unable 
 to obtain satisfactory account.” 
 
 Thus it appears that while the amount of 
 cash invested was only $400,000, the first div¬ 
 idend returned this amount and more. So 
 that the profits above this amount—over 
 $43,000,000 in bonds, stock, and cash ; equiv¬ 
 alent at market rates, on bonds and stock to 
 over $23,000,000—were made without any 
 investment whatever. The amount shown to 
 have been expended for corruption of Con¬ 
 gress aud Government officials in 1864, and 
 subsequently, is more than half a million dol¬ 
 lars, a sum greater than the whole cash capital 
 paid in yet there is a large field of corruption 
 prior to 1864, untouched.” 
 
 [Thus it appears the amount invested was 
 $400,000; the dividends within one year in 
 stock, bonds, and cash, $20,471,688; total 
 cash profits for whole time, $23,366,319 81. 
 The profits in stock, bonds, and cash, 
 $43,925,328 34, all on $400,000 invested. 
 What per cent. !] 
 
 Oakes Ames's letters , with list of assignments 
 as given to McComb , (see report of Poland 
 committee } testimony , pp. 4, 5, 6, and 7.) 
 
 Washington, January 25, 1868. 
 Dear Sir: Yours of the 23d is at hand, in 
 which you say Senators Bayard and Fowler 
 have written you in relation to their stock. I 
 have spoken to Fowler but not to Bayard. I 
 have never been introduced to Bayard, but 
 will see him soon. You say I must not put 
 too much in one locality. I have assigned as 
 far as I have gone to four from Massachusetts , 
 one from New Hampshire, one Delaware, one 
 Tennessee, one Ohio, two Pennsylvania, one 
 Indiana, one Maine, and I have three to place, 
 which I shall put where they will do most good 
 to us. I am here on the spot, and can better 
 
15 
 
 judge where they should go. I think after 
 this dividend is paid we should make our capi¬ 
 tal to four millions, and distribute the new stock 
 where it will protect us, let them have the 
 
 * stock at par, and profits made in the future; 
 the fifty per cent, increase on the old stock I 
 want for distribution here, and soon. Alley 
 is opposed to the division of the bonds; says 
 we will need them, &c. I should think that 
 we ought to be able to spare them, with 
 Alley and Cisco on the Finance Committee— 
 we used to be able to borrow when we had no 
 credit and debts pressing. We are now out of 
 debt and in good credit—what say you about 
 the bond dividend—a part of the purchasers 
 here are poor, and want their bonds to sell to 
 enable them to meet their payment on the 
 stock in the C. M. I have told them what they 
 would get as dividend, and they expect, I think, 
 when the bonds the parties receive as the 
 eighty per cent, dividend, we better give them 
 the bonds—it will not amount to anything with 
 us. Some of the large holders will not care 
 whether they have the bonds or certificates, or 
 they will lend their bonds to the company, as 
 they have done before, or lend them money. 
 Quigley has been here, and we have got that 
 one tenth that was Underwood’s. I have 
 taken half, Quigley one quarter, and you one 
 quarter. J. Carter wants a part of it; at some 
 future day we are to surrender a part to 
 him. 
 
 Yours, truly, 
 
 4 OAKES AMES. 
 
 H. S. McComb, esq. 
 
 , Washington, January 30, 1868. 
 
 Dear Sir: Yours of the 28th is at hand, 
 inclosing copy of letter from, or rather to, Mr. 
 
 > King. I don't fear any investigation here. 
 What some of Durant's friends may do in 
 New York courts can't he counted upon with 
 any certainty . You do not understand by your 
 letter what I have done and am to do with my 
 8ales of stock. You say none to New York. I 
 have placed some with New York , or have 
 agreed to. You must remember that it was 
 nearly all placed as you saw it on the list in 
 New York , and there was but six or eight m. 
 for me to place. I could not give ail the world 
 all they might want out of that. You would 
 not want me to offer less than one thousand 
 m. to any one. We allow Durant to place 
 some fifty-eight thousand to some three or four 
 of his friends, or keep it himself. 
 
 I have used this where it will produce most 
 good to us , I think. In view of King's letter 
 and Washburne's move here , I go in for mak¬ 
 ing our bond dividend in full. We can do it 
 with perfect safety. I understand the opposi- 
 
 * tion to it comes from Alley ; he is on the 
 Finance Committee, and can raise money 
 easy if we come short, which I don’t believe 
 we shall, and if we do we can loan our bonds 
 
 ,to the company, or loan them the money we 
 
 get from the bonds. The contract calls for 
 the division, and I say have it. When shall 1 
 see you in Washington? 
 
 Yours, truly, OAKES AMES. 
 
 H. S. McComb. 
 
 We stand about like this : 
 
 Bonds, first mortgage, received on 525 miles, at 
 
 16 m. $8,400,000 
 
 Bonds, first mortgage, received on 15 
 
 miles, at 48 m. 720,000 
 
 Bonds, first mortgage, received on 100 
 miles, at 48 m. 4,800,000 
 
 13,920,000 
 
 Ten millions sold and to sell to pay our 
 debts. 10,000,000 
 
 3,920.000 
 
 Eighty per cent, dividend on 3,700,000 
 C. M. of A. 3,000,000 
 
 920,900 
 
 Government bonds received this day. 960,000 
 
 Due for transportation four hundred 
 m., one half cash.. 200,000 
 
 $2,080,000 
 
 In addition to this we can draw Government 
 bonds for two thirds of the work done in ad¬ 
 vance of track, if we desire it.” 
 
 “Oakes Ames’ s list of names as showed to-day 
 to me for Credit Mobilier : Blaine, of Maine, 
 3,000; Patterson, New Hampshire, 3,000; 
 Wilson, Massachusetts, 2; Painter, reporter 
 for Inquirer, 3; S. Colfax, Speaker, 2 ; Elliott, 
 Massachusetts, 3 ; Dawes, Massachusetts, 2; 
 Boutwell, Massachusetts, 2; Bingham and Gar¬ 
 field, Ohio; Scofield and Kelley, Pennsyl¬ 
 vania; Fowler, Tennessee. 
 
 February 1,1868.” 
 
 Indorsed on letter and sworn to by McComb. 
 
 Washington, February 22, 1868. 
 
 Dear Sir: Yours of the 21st is at hand; 
 am glad to hear that you are getting along so 
 well with Mr. West; hope you will bring it 
 out all satisfactory so that it will be so rich 
 that we cannot help going into it. I return 
 you the paper by mail that you ask for. You 
 ask me if I will sell some of my Union 
 Pacific railroad stock. I will sell some of it 
 at par Credit Mobilier of America. I don’t 
 care to sell. I hear that Mr. Bates offered 
 his at $300, but I don't want Bates to sell out. 
 I think Grimes may sell a part of his at $350. 
 I ivant that $14,000 increase of the Credit 
 Mobilier to sell here . We want more friends 
 in this Congress , and if a man will look into 
 the law , (and it is difficult to get them lo do it 
 unless they have an interest to do so ,) he can¬ 
 not help being convinced that we should not be 
 interfered with. Hope to see you here or at 
 New York the 1 1th. 
 
 Yours, truly, OAKES AMES. 
 
 H. S. McComb, esq. 
 
16 
 
 LAND GRANTS. 
 
 Recapitulation.— {See report of Commissioner General Land Office 1872, page 308.) 
 
 States. 
 
 Estimated quantity 
 embraced in the 
 limits of the grants, 
 (acres.) 
 
 Estimated quantity 
 which the com¬ 
 pany will receive 
 from the grants, 
 (acres.) 
 
 Number of acres 
 certified or pat¬ 
 ented under the 
 grants, (acres.) 
 
 Mississippi. 
 
 Florida.. . 
 
 Arkansas.. 
 
 Michigan. 
 
 Wisconsin. 
 
 Minnesota. 
 
 K ansns. 
 
 2,595,053 
 
 2,062.240 
 
 3,579,120 
 
 2,360,114 
 
 1,578,720 
 
 4,878,149.14 
 
 2,985,169,21 
 
 6,795,527.31 
 
 4,712,480.29 
 
 3,758,433.07 
 
 9,913,495.95 
 
 9,370,000 
 
 2,595,053 
 
 1,137,130 
 
 2,708,135 
 
 1,760,467 
 
 669,411.70 
 
 2,753,171 
 
 1,949,175 
 
 4,064,545.11 
 
 3,239,110.75 
 
 3,143.458 
 
 7,507,492.95 
 
 4,297,000 
 
 iiiiii! 
 
 Corporations: Pacific Railroads. 
 
 54,588,495.97 
 
 159,689.966 
 
 35.815,149.51 
 
 150,299,966 
 
 24,899,244.95 
 
 3,725,750.85 
 
 Wagon-roa.ds ! Wisconsin.. 
 
 214,278,461.97 
 
 302,930.96 
 
 221,013.27 
 
 1,168,600 
 
 186,115,115.51 
 
 302,930,96 
 
 221.013 
 
 1,143,600 
 
 23,624,995.80 
 
 302,930.96 
 
 143,816.76 
 
 625,768.41 
 
 Michigan. . 
 
 Oregon... 
 
 Deduct for lands reverted and lapsed, and 
 for lands declared forfeited by Congress.. 
 
 Total... 
 
 215,971,006.20 
 
 6,539,544.55 
 
 187,782,659.47 
 
 4,350,385.75 
 
 29,697,511.93 
 
 4,007,590.73 
 
 209,431,461.65 
 
 183,432,273.72 
 
 25,689,921.20 
 
 
 Department of the Interior, WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner 
 
 General Land Office, October 26, 1872. 
 
 VALUE OF LANDS. 
 
 Circular of Jay Cooke & Co. 
 
 The value of land grants, the average price 
 at which the twenty-five leading land-grant 
 railroads have thus far sold their lands is 
 $7 40 per acre—the highest average of any 
 grant being $13 98, and the lowest $3 07. 
 The list is as follows: 
 
 Acres granted 
 
 Land grant roads, per mile 
 
 of road. 
 
 Grand Rapids and Indiana.. 3,625 
 
 Burlington and Missouri. 1,287 
 
 Illinois Central. 3,840 
 
 Hannibal and St. Joseph.3,840 
 
 Chicago, Rock Island, and 
 
 Pacific.1,613 
 
 Atchison, Topeka,and Santa 
 
 Fe.. 6,400 
 
 Flint and Pere Marquette... 7,680 
 
 Southern Minnesota.8,960 
 
 Atlantic and Pacific. 4,545 
 
 St. Paul and Pacific. 6,400 
 
 Winona and St. Peter. 5,486 
 
 Iowa Falls and Sioux City... 3,840 
 
 Minnesota Central. 1,518 
 
 Cedar Rapids, and Missouri 
 
 river. 4,138 
 
 Jackson, Lansing, and Sag¬ 
 inaw.. 4,348 
 
 Dubuque and Sioux City. 4,378 
 
 St. Paul and Sioux City.6,834 
 
 Missouri River, Fort Scott, 
 
 and Gulf.. 
 
 Des Moines Valley. 1,879 
 
 Little Rock and Fort Smith.. 8.666 
 Marquette and Ontonagon... 6,389 
 Lake Superior and Missis¬ 
 sippi . ,10,880 
 
 Union Pacific.12,800 
 
 Denver Pacific..9,415 
 
 Kansas Pacific....12,800 
 
 Average price 
 per ; acre at 
 which 8old. 
 $13 98 
 11 70 
 11 42 
 11 00 
 
 7 63 
 
 7 70 
 7 18 
 7 04 
 6 77 
 
 6 50 
 
 7 03 
 6 50 
 6 33 
 
 6 00 
 
 6 00 
 6 00 
 
 5 67 
 
 6 39 
 6 00 
 5 30 
 5 00 
 
 4 88 
 4 25 
 4 18 
 3 07 
 
 With few exceptions, the average selling 
 price has steadily increased from year to year. 
 
 THE RAILROAD DEBT. 
 
 The report from the Treasury Department 
 showed the rise and progress of the debt of 
 these subsidized railroads to the Government, 
 and no public man can be supposed ignorant 
 of it. These documents show that these debts 
 were as follows: 
 
 Date. Principal. 
 
 July 1,1865.$1,258,000 
 
 January 1, 1866. 3,002,000 
 
 July 1, 1866. 6,042,000 
 
 January 1, 1867. 11,002,000 
 
 July 1,1867. 14,762,000 
 
 January 1, 1868 . 20,714,000 
 
 July 1, 186S. 29,089,000 
 
 January 1,1869 . 50,097,000 
 
 July 1, 1869. 58,638,320 
 
 January 1, 1870... 64,135,320 
 
 July 1, 1870. 61,457,320 
 
 January 1,1871. 64,618.832 
 
 July 1, 1871. 64,618,832 
 
 January 1, 1872. 64,618,832 
 
 July 1, 1872. 64,623,512 
 
 Interest. 
 $37,740 00 
 99,214 36 
 235,327 04 
 510,206 78 
 853,543 75 
 994,492 78 
 1,314,020 49 
 2,176,257 04 
 3,455,632 88 
 5,018,742 80 
 6,949,859 34 
 8,933,127 48 
 10,621,792 01 
 12,512,272 80 
 14,447,254 26 
 
 This last sum, with interest due on interest 
 account, $1,585,613 50, makes the total sum 
 due the United States $80,656,379 76. 
 
 PACIFIC RAILROAD LEGISLATION. 
 
 Extracts from debates and proceedings in the 
 Globe touching the Pacific railroads. 
 
 The Leavenworth , Pawnee, and Western 
 Branch. 
 
 The germ of the Pacific railroad legislation 
 was the charter granted by the pro slavery 
 Legislature of Kansas Territory in 1855, for 
 the Leavenworth, Pawnee, and Western Rail- 
 
17 
 
 road Company, which afterward became the 
 Union Pacific, eastern division, and is some¬ 
 times called the Denver Pacific. It is under¬ 
 stood that this company furnished the funds 
 used in Congress in 1862 to promote the Pacific 
 railroad bill, that road having been made a 
 branch. Detailed statements of the distribu¬ 
 tion of these funds have been published, but 
 as they are not official they are not included 
 here. (See New York Tribune, September 28, 
 1872.) 
 
 It was said in that debate that this road was the 
 • ‘ pivot ’ ’ of the bill. The length of the branch 
 was not limited save by the one hundredth 
 meridian, and the main stem (Union Pacific) 
 was to begin where the branch should end, 
 
 Mr. Pomeroy, who introduced the bill in 
 the Senate, said the friends of this branch had 
 abandoned two degrees of its proposed length 
 in compromise. 
 
 The circumstances attending that legisla¬ 
 tion of 1862 led Mr. Lovejoy to say in the 
 House: 
 
 4 4 Mr. LOVEJOY. I am for a Pacific railroad, 
 although I am free to confess that I dislike 
 the idea of converting Congress into a rail 
 road company . We are not here as a railroad 
 corporation (See Globe, vol. 47, p. 1699. 
 
 Speaking of the origin and character of this 
 company iu his speech on a bill for its further 
 benefit, pending January, 1869, Mr, E. B, 
 Washburne, of Illinois, said, (see Globe, vol. 
 71,, pages 463-64:) 
 
 “ Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, it is the 
 Pacific Railroad Company, eastern division, 
 which is the successor of the Leavenworth, 
 Pawnee, and Western Railroad Company, 
 which was chartered by the border-ruffian 
 Legislature of Kansas Territory in 1855. 
 Among leading corporators are William. H. 
 Russell, of the Fioyd-Thompson trust-fund 
 defalcation notoriety of $870,009, and Judge 
 Lecompt, of the infamous ‘Lecdmpton con 
 stitution ’ notoriety. The company had the 
 power to receive and hold donations of bonds 
 or lands to be given them by any State or the 
 United States. Knowing the immense value 
 of the trust lands of the Delaware tribe of 
 Indians, through which the railroad was to 
 pass, the company procured the making and 
 ratification of an extraordinary treaty in 1860, 
 by which it was provided that the said corn 
 pany should have the exclusive authority to 
 purchase such of their lands as were not re¬ 
 served and set apart for special objects at a 
 valuation not below the sum of $1 25 per acre, 
 This land was mostly rich timber bottoms, and 
 worth from ten to fifty dollars per acre. Being 
 thus chartered, and having obtained the extra¬ 
 ordinary privilege of purchasing the land 
 under the treaty, wheu in 1862 Congress acted 
 upon the subject of a Pacific railroad, this 
 Leavenworth and Pawnee company had influ¬ 
 ence enough to thrust the following section in 
 the bill to aid the construction of a railroad, 
 
 approved July 1, 1862. The ninth section of 
 that law provided: 
 
 ‘ That the Leavenworth, Pawnee, and West¬ 
 ern Railroad Company of Kansas are hereby 
 authorized to construct a railroad and telegraph 
 line from the Missouri river, at the mouth of 
 the Kansas river, on the south side thereof, so 
 as to connect with the Pacific railroad of Mis¬ 
 souri, to the aforesaid point, on the one hun¬ 
 dredth meridian of longitude west from Green¬ 
 wich, as herein provided, upon the same terms 
 and conditions in all respects as are provided 
 in this act for the construction of the railroad 
 and telegraph line first mentioned, and to meet 
 and connect with the same at the meridian of 
 longitude aforesaid.’ 
 
 Thus it will be observed what was done by 
 one short section of the law for a private rail¬ 
 road corporation, chartered by a border-ruffian 
 Legislature, granting to the said border-ruf¬ 
 fian company the same privileges; lands, and 
 bonds for a certain distance as were granted 
 to the company chartered by Congress, reserv¬ 
 ing no rights to the United States, not even the 
 privilege of appointing commissioners or di¬ 
 rectors to look after the interests of the United 
 States, and no such right was had until the 
 passage of the law July 8, 1864. Having be¬ 
 come tired of the old border-ruffian name of 
 the corporation—the Leavenworth, Pawnee, 
 and Western Railroad Company—in 1864 Con¬ 
 gress changed the name to 4 Union Pacific 
 Railroad Company, eastern division.’ I have 
 no time to go into the extraordinary and dis¬ 
 reputable operations of this border-ruffian rail¬ 
 road; the litigation, the wranglings and fights 
 of different rings and companies who were all 
 endeavoring to enrich themselves out of these 
 stupendous grants of the people’s lands and 
 money to this railroad corporation ; the use of 
 the United States troops to drive off one set 
 of claimants for the benefit of another, and 
 the killing of Hallet, the man at whose instance, 
 the troops had been called out. 
 
 * * * * * * * * * 
 
 What has this railroad company, which now 
 comes here and asks us for this additional 
 subsidy, already received from the Govern¬ 
 ment? It is a startling exhibit, and I demand 
 that it shall be well considered before this bill 
 passes. In the first place, it subordinated the 
 Government mortgage for $6,303,000 to ha 
 own mortgage, and in the second place it has 
 received as an actual subsidy in United States , 
 bonds the same amount of $6,303,000. Now, 
 how much subsidy has it received in land? IL 
 has received in land subsidy twenty miles on 
 each side of the road, alternate sections, 
 making seven million six hundred and eighty 
 thousand acres. ***** 
 
 It certainly cannot be deemed extravagant to 
 average them at three dollars per acre, which is 
 the average of the price fixed by the company. 
 At that price, therefore, the value of the laud 
 granted to the company would be $23,240,000.. 
 
18 
 
 Recapitulation . 
 
 United States bonds subsidy.$6,303,000 
 
 Land subsidy, worth. 23,240,000 
 
 Privilege of subordinating first mortgage 
 
 bonds.:. 6,303,000 
 
 Total aid.$35, 846,000 
 
 This amount of $35,846,000 is what this 
 
 company has received for building a railroad 
 four hundred miles in length which is repre¬ 
 sented as being one of the easiest and cheap¬ 
 est ever constructed in America, and which is 
 equal to $89,615 per mile. Putting the cost 
 of the road at the-highest possible estimate, 
 $30,000 per mile, it would leave a net profit 
 to the company of $59,615 per mile, which 
 for four hundred miles would give to the com¬ 
 pany $23,846,000; or, in other words, the 
 company will have its road built by the Gov¬ 
 ernment, and the land subsidy, worth between 
 twenty-three and twenty-four million dollars, 
 thrown ia. ,f 
 
 The act of 1862 was overloaded with 
 branches, receiving subsidies in lands and 
 bonds which were not needed to secure the 
 roads, and herein consisted the abuses of that 
 act. These branches extended into Kansas, 
 Nebraska, and Iowa, (with branches of branches 
 crossing the States.) Out of one of these Iowa 
 branches grew the Sioux City Pacific, which 
 was diverted from extending westward from 
 Sioux City across Nebraska to aline running 
 southeast down the Missouri river, and Gov¬ 
 ernment lands and bonds were taken on that 
 line. 
 
 Speaking of these branches in 1862, Mr. 
 Lovejoy said. (See Globe, vol. 47, page 1700.) 
 
 “Mr. LOVEJOY. We propose to give 
 $67,000,000 or $100,000,000 for this enter¬ 
 prise, the main trunk to receive not over 
 $50,000,000 ; but when we come to trace up the 
 side roads and branches you find $17,000,000 
 more stowed away in these roads to which we 
 ought not to give one cent.” 
 
 Mr. Morrill, of Vermont, moved an amend¬ 
 ment to require that $10,000,000 cash capital 
 .;be paid m, but it was defeated. The result 
 ids (that speculators have operated on Govern¬ 
 ment subsidies, spending more money in cor- 
 i ruption than they have invested in the road. 
 
 THE ACT OF 1864. 
 
 'But the great wrongs began in the act of 
 ; X;86,4, which dou bled the land grants, abandoned 
 the Government security by enabling the com¬ 
 panies ito place prior mortgage, and provided 
 ■equal amounts that only half the earnings on 
 Government freights should be applied on in¬ 
 terest due the United States. 
 
 The time fixed for the completion of the 
 roads was passing. The Union Pacific was 
 scarcely begun. They claimed that eighty mile3 
 of the eastern division were graded and twenty 
 miles in running order. They also claimed 
 to have $2,698*000 of stock subscribed and 
 .$200,000paid Aa, and to have expended $300,- 
 
 000. On this subject Mr. E. B. Washburne, 
 said, (see Globe, vol. 53, p. 3151:) 
 
 “Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. It must 
 be understood that under the existing law 
 parties who have subscribed for $1,001,000 
 worth of stock (the whole amount subscribed 
 being only $2,000,000) can control the whole 
 concern. While the Government is liable for 
 nearly $100,000,000, and has donated millions 
 upon millions of acres of public land to this 
 great work, yet this entire organization has 
 gone into the hands of parties who have put in 
 but a trifle over one per cent, of the whole 
 amount that the Government is liable for.” 
 
 It was charged by the Washburns in 1868, 
 and we know now that corrupt means were 
 used to pass this bill. (See extracts from Wil 
 son’s report herewith.) 
 
 During the debate in 1864, Mr. E. B, Wash- 
 burne said, (see vol. 53, p. 351:) 
 
 “ Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Who are 
 the men who are here to lobby this bill through ? 
 Have the men of high character and of national 
 reputation whose names were at an earlier 
 period connected with this enterprise been 
 here, animated by a commendable public spirit , 
 by motives of patriotism, to ask us to pass this 
 bill ? I have not heard of such men being 
 here for that purpose, but on the other hand, 
 the work of * putting the bill through ’ has 
 gone into the hands of such men as Samuel 
 Hallett and George Francis Train, par nobile 
 fratrum .” 
 
 Speaking of the passage of this act of 1864, 
 Mr. E. B. Washburne said in 1868, (see Globe, 
 vol. 67, p. 2135:) 
 
 “Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Thecon- 
 sideration of the bill was again resumed in the 
 evening session of June 21, 1864, and no gentle¬ 
 man who was here at that time will ever forget 
 the extraordinary scene which was presented. 
 
 The lobby mastered in its full force. 1 say 
 nothing of the shameful means which it is 
 alleged were used in a ‘confidential way’ to 
 carry through this bill; but I do say that the 
 scene was one of the most excitiog and ani¬ 
 mated that I have ever witnessed in a service 
 of nearly sixteen years. 
 
 The galleries were packed with people in¬ 
 terested in the measure, by lobbyist male and 
 female, and by shysters and adventurers. 
 
 Your gilded corridors were filled with lob¬ 
 byists who broke through all rules and made 
 their way upon the floor and into the seats of 
 members.” 
 
 Mr. C. C. Washburn, in his speech of March 
 20, 1868, (see Globe, vol. 69, p. 297,) said : 
 
 “Mr. WASHBURN, ofWisconsin. I believe 
 I state nothing more than what is notorious 
 when I say that the vice president of that road 
 has charged the company with $500,000 as 
 having been expended in Washington to secure 
 the passage of that act, claiming that the money 
 was expended in a confidential way, and de¬ 
 clining to furnish any vouchers. 
 
19 
 
 Mr. PRICE. The gentleman is referring to 
 the first act. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURN, of Wisconsin. No, sir; 
 the act of 1864.” 
 
 And he proceeded to say that this act voted 
 away $60,000,000 of the people’s money, yet 
 its opponents were denied the yeas and nays 
 on adoption of the conference report which 
 passed the bill. 
 
 Under such influences this act was passed. 
 Mr. Holman, of Indiana, opposed it, object¬ 
 ing to the provision requiring the Government 
 to pay for transportation. He said : 
 
 44 Mr. HOLMAN. It is the settled policy 
 that corporations receiving these grants shall 
 make transportation without charge to the 
 Government.” 
 
 He moved an amendment to this effect, 
 which was defeated June 22,1864. (See Globe, 
 vol. 53, p. 3156.) 
 
 The vote stood—yeas 39, (among whom 
 were Messrs. Eldredge, Holman, Orth, Ran¬ 
 dall, and E. B. Washburne;) nays 82, (among 
 whom were Messrs. Alley, Allison, Ames, 
 Arnold, Boutwell, Brooks, Dawes, Eliot, Gar¬ 
 field, Hooper, Kelley, and Wilson ;) not voting 
 61, (among whom were Messrs. Blaine, Cox, 
 Scofield, Yoorhees, and Fernando Wood.) 
 
 Mr. E. B. Washburne made vigorous oppo¬ 
 sition, especially to postponing the Govern¬ 
 ment lien. On this point he said, (see 
 Globe, vol. 53, p, 3152:) 
 
 44 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I come 
 now to the tenth section of the bill, and I confess 
 to a sort of admiration of the sublime audacity 
 which parties must have to come here and ask 
 Congress to enact such a provision into a law. 
 
 I have called attention to other provisions 
 of an extraordinary nature, but this proposed 
 enactment throws all others far into the shade, 
 and stands out in bold relief as an indication of 
 the 4 base uses’ that this company have conceived 
 that Congress may be put to in their behalf. I 
 carefully read the section, that every gentleman 
 may know its exact meaning and purport: 
 
 Sec. 10. And be it further enacted , That 
 section five of said act be so modified and 
 amended that the Union Pacific Railroad 
 Company, the Central Pacific Railroad Com¬ 
 pany, and any other company authorized to 
 participate in the construction of said road, 
 may issue their first mortgage bonds on their 
 respective railroads and telegraph lines to an 
 amount not exceeding the amount of the bonds 
 of the United States authorized to be issued to 
 said railroad companies respectively. And 
 the lien of the United States bonds shall be sub¬ 
 ordinate to that of the bonds of any or either of 
 said companies hereby authorized to be issued 
 on their respective roads, property, and equip¬ 
 ments. And said section is further amended 
 by striking out the word 4 forty’ and inserting 
 in lieu thereof the words 4 on each and every 
 section of not less than twenty.’ 
 
 Now, it will be recollected that the fifth 
 section of the existing law provides for the 
 
 repayment of the bonds issued to the com* 
 pany, and declares that the issue and delivery 
 of them to the company shall ipso facto con¬ 
 stitute a first mortgage on the whole line of 
 road and telegraph, together with the rolling* 
 stock. This was the security which Congress 
 had a right to demand of any company that 
 should be organized. It was its duty to require 
 it unless it was intended to surrender up every¬ 
 thing and place the most gigantic interests at 
 the feet of the company, without control and 
 without challenge. We donated, as I have 
 before stated, millions upon millions of acres 
 of the public lands to the company for this 
 purpose, then we agreed to give our bonds for 
 the amount, with the interest thereon, of 
 $96,000,000, and if Congress had required less 
 than a first mortgage as its security it would, 
 in my judgment, have been derelict in its duty 
 to the country, whose interests in this regard it 
 can alone protect. 
 
 What is now proposed by this amendment ? 
 I demand that gentlemen shall look at it; let 
 the mirror be held up to nature. Nothing less 
 than the Government, with its liability of a 
 hundred millions, shall relinquish its first 
 mortgage and subordinate its lien to the leius 
 of all the companies created for building the 
 road. The bonds of the United States are to 
 be issued to the company, and the Govern¬ 
 ment is to have no prior lien for its security ; 
 but by this provision the company, represent¬ 
 ing as it may but one per cent, or a little over 
 of the amount that the Government is liable 
 for, is to subordinate that Government to its 
 own interests, raise money on the means that 
 the Government has furnished, give a first 
 mortgage for the security of that money, and 
 leave the United States as a second mortgagee, 
 obliged to pay off the first mortgage before it 
 can be in a position to take advantage of any 
 security there might by possibility be as a sec¬ 
 ond mortgagee. But who is wild enough to 
 believe that should the provisions of this sec¬ 
 tion become a law the remaining security of 
 the Government will be worth a straw? 
 
 It is worse than idle to contend that we 
 shall have any security left for all our liability 
 if this bill shall pass. And further, by the 
 fifth section of the law bonds cannot be issued 
 till forty consecutive miles of the road are 
 fully completed and equipped. It is now pro¬ 
 posed by this tenth section to strike out forty 
 and make it twenty. This company* not con¬ 
 tent with snatching from the Government the 
 security it now holds for the bonds it issues, 
 cannot even wait to finish the forty miles of 
 road at present required before grabbing what 
 is proposed to put into their hands, but they 
 must cut it down so they can go in on twenty 
 miles. Sir, on my responsibility as a Repre¬ 
 sentative I pronounce this as the most mon¬ 
 strous and flagrant attempt to overreach the 
 Government and the people that can be founds 
 in all the legislative annajs of the country? 
 When we look at the original law with all its. 
 
20 
 
 liberal and just provisions, when we look at 
 the company organized under it and see how 
 far it has failed to meet its proper obligations, 
 and consider the extraordinary amendments 
 here proposed, are we not filled with astonish¬ 
 ment at what is demanded of us as the guard¬ 
 ians of the people’s rights? Indeed, may we 
 now exclaim: 
 
 * Gan such things be. 
 
 And overcome us like a summer's cloud. 
 Without our special wonder?' 
 
 I warn the true friends of the road, I warn 
 Congress and the people what will be the 
 result. The present directors of the company 
 hold for three years, and the whole business 
 of the directors is done by an executive com¬ 
 mittee of the board, who hold for the same 
 time. The real state of the case seems to be 
 that the executi ve committee is the board of 
 directors, and one man is the executive com¬ 
 mittee.” 
 
 The vote on the motion of Mr. E. Wash- 
 burne, to strike out this tenth section subor- 
 dinatingthe Government lien, was taken June 
 24, 1864. (Globe, voL 52, p. 3244.) 
 
 The yeas were 38, nays 81, not voting 63. 
 Among the yeas were Messrs. Boutwell, Farns¬ 
 worth, Holman, Orth, Scofield, Spalding, and 
 E. B. Washburne. 
 
 Among the nays, Messrs. Allison, Ames, 
 Blaine, Broqks, Dawes, Eliot, Kelley, and 
 Wilson, 
 
 Among those not voting, .Messrs. Alley, 
 Garfield, and Hooper. 
 
 The final vote on the passage of the bill was 
 taken June 25, 1864, (see Globe, vol. 53, p. 
 3267.) and resulted, yeas 70, nays 38, not 
 voting, 74. 
 
 Among the yeas were Messrs Allison, Ames, 
 Blaine, Brooks, Dawes, Eliot, Garfield, Hoop¬ 
 er, and Wilson. 
 
 Among the nays, Messrs. Boutwell Hol¬ 
 man, Orth, Scofieid, and E. B. Washburne. 
 
 Among those not voting, Messrs. Alley, 
 Cox, Eldredge, Farnsworth, Kelley, Randall, 
 and Voorhees. 
 
 The bill returned to the Senate, and finally 
 passed on a conference report, which was not 
 printed, the call of E. B. Washburne for the 
 yeas and nays being refused. (See Giobe, 
 voi. 53, p. 3481.) 
 
 Extracts from the debate and proceedings in 
 the House of Representatives , December 16 
 and 17, 1867, on Mr. Dawes's resolution to 
 change the time of meeting of the stock¬ 
 holders of the Union Pacific Railroad Coni' 
 pany, and to enable them to change the place 
 of meeting , introduced and passed the Ho use 
 December 16, 1867. (Globe, vol. 65, pp. 
 211 - 212 .) 
 
 “Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I desire 
 to add to the resolution the following proviso : 
 
 Provided , That hereafter the said railroad 
 company shall not be allowed to charge and 
 receive for freight or passage over tl>* *aid 
 
 road more than double the amount which shall 
 be charged on the principal lines of railroads 
 between the Mississippi river and the Atlantic 
 
 coast. 
 
 1 presume the gentleman from Massachusetts 
 [Mr. Dawes] will not object to that. 
 
 Mr, DAWES. I do not desire to have 
 attached so important a provision as that upon 
 this simple resolution in reference to the 
 choosing of the officers of this road. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I shall 
 continue to press this matter upon Congress 
 while I have a seat here, until Congress shall 
 adopt the provision I have read, and I think 
 I can convince the House that there is no more 
 just provision than the one I have proposed; 
 and I am surprised that my friend from Mas¬ 
 sachusetts [Mr. Dawes] should stand here and 
 oppose it. I would ask my friend whether he 
 knows that this company, whose road the Gov¬ 
 ernment is building by its enormous subsidies 
 of $95,000,000 and some forty million acres 
 of land, the company getting the road without 
 the expenditure of a single dollar of its own 
 money, is charging ten cents a mile for every 
 passenger, and on freight one cent per mile on 
 every hundred pounds, more enormous charges 
 than have ever been known in any country? 
 I think it is the duty of the Representatives of 
 the people, unless they intend to become a party 
 to this monopoly, to step in at the earliest 
 moment and put a stop to this system of 
 exorbitant charges. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. Mr. Speaker, I wish to state, 
 in reply to what the gentleman from Illinois 
 has said, by way of justification of my asking 
 the House to pass this resolution, that he 
 knows me well enough to know if I ever failed 
 to cooperate with him in any opposition he 
 makes to any appropriation of laud or money 
 it is because he not only opposes such meas¬ 
 ures in season but sometimes he opposes them 
 out of season. It is only then, sir, that I fail 
 to cooperate with him. I know very well the 
 gentleman’s position on land grants, and almost 
 always go with him ; but why does he bring 
 that in here in connection with this simple 
 proposition to allow these stockholders to 
 change the place of annual meeting? It is a 
 privilege accorded to every corporation. 
 
 Mr. HARDING. Where do they meet now ? 
 
 Mr. DAWES. I will tell the gentleman all 
 about that. They are required to meet in the 
 city of New York and nowhere else, and on a 
 particular day in October. They want the 
 privilege to hold their annual meeting in the 
 spring instead of iu the fall, and to designate 
 at one meeting where they will assemble at the 
 next within certain limits; that is, within five 
 places named. 
 
 Mr. GARFIELD. I desire to make an 
 inquiry of the gentleman from Massachusetts, 
 [Mr. Dawes.] I understand that there has 
 been a serious dilference, not to use a harsher 
 term—perhaps we ought to call it a very severe 
 quarrel—in the board of directors in reference 
 
21 
 
 to the management of the affairs of this rail¬ 
 road; as the gentleman from Massachusetts 
 suggests, it might well be called the 4 recent 
 unpleasantness ’ in connection with this road. 
 I desire to know whether the proposition here 
 offered has any relation to that quarrel and 
 makes us in any way a party to it—whether we 
 take sides with either party to that quarrel? 
 I would be glad to know that before I am 
 called on to vote on it. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. I am frank to say that I 
 know nothing about this quarrel, and 1 do not 
 represent any one party. But i do not see 
 how this can affect it at all. It simply changes 
 the time and fixes the place for holding the 
 next annual meeting. That is all. 
 
 Mr. GARFIELD. That change of time 
 may get one party out of power and the other 
 in. That is the only point that I raise. 
 
 Mr. DAWE3. I move to suspend the rules 
 to enable me to introduce the joint resolution.’ ’ 
 
 The resolution having passed the House was 
 returned from the Senate with amendments , and 
 its consideration was resumed by the House 
 December 17, 1867. (See Globe, vol. 65, pp, 
 232, 233.) 
 
 “union pacific railroad. 
 
 “The next business on the Speaker’s table 
 was an amendment of the Senate to the joint 
 resolution of the House No. 126, changing the 
 time of holding the annua! meeting of the 
 stockholders of the Union Pacific Railroad 
 Company. 
 
 The amendment of the Senate was to add 
 to the joint resolution the following : 
 
 And provided f urther , That on the election 
 of directors herein provided for, to take place 
 in March, A. D. 1868, the terms of office of 
 the persons then acting, or claiming the right 
 to act as directors of said company, shall cease 
 and determine. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. That amendment is merely 
 expressing what of course would be the legal 
 effect of the joint resolution without it. 1 move 
 that the amendment be concurred in : and upon 
 that motion 1 call for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. BROOKS. Will the gentleman from 
 Massachusetts [Mr. Dawes] allow me a few 
 moments? 
 
 Mr. DAWES. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. BROOKS. 1 think this subject should 
 be referred to the Committee on she Pacific 
 Railroad. It seems we have already passed 
 this joint resolution through this House, But 
 it has not undergone any investigation or dis¬ 
 cussion here, and we know nothing definite in 
 regard to it. 1 protest against the passing of 
 this class of measures without even having 
 them printed. 
 
 Now, Mr. Speaker, I am totally uninterested 
 in this matter; no human being can have less 
 personal interest in it than I have. 1 take an 
 enlarged view, I think, in regard to this par¬ 
 ticular road. But behind the proposition now 
 presented is a private quarrel. It is full of 
 meaning, and the House will discover it to be 
 
 so. In view of such circumstances it is not 
 wise for U3 to pass a bill of this kind without 
 printing it and giving members an opportunity 
 to read it. To do so is most hasty and most 
 dangerous legislation. 
 
 The ^chairman of the Committee on the 
 Pacific Railroad [Mr. Price] is a gentleman 
 upon whom we can all rely in reference to 
 questions of 'this kind. To him and to that 
 committee, made up from the ruling majority 
 of this House, the custody of a bill of this 
 character belongs; and to that committee it 
 should be intrusted. I appeal to the House, 
 without any special reference to this particu¬ 
 lar question, not to legislate in this way; not 
 to pass a bill of this importance without its 
 being printed, without a reference to a com¬ 
 mittees and with no proper comprehension of 
 the measure on the part of members. 
 
 In this private quarrel that exists in the 
 Union Pacific Railroad Company I mean to 
 take no part whatever. My interest, my de¬ 
 sire is, that the great. Pacific railroad shall be 
 built as soon as possible; and it is the interest 
 of alt parties who are concerned in that road 
 to build it in amity and in harmony without 
 the introduction of any more bills upon thia 
 floor. These are opinions which I submit to 
 the consideration of this House as the result 
 of twenty years of legislative experience. The 
 hasty passage of this bill in this House, the 
 amendment of the Senate which has been 
 adopted to maije this a legal bill—-an amend¬ 
 ment which the introducer of the bill confesses 
 to be necessary for a full understanding of the 
 bill—the hurried passage of the bill in the Sen¬ 
 ate ; these things exhibit a hasty method of 
 legislation which should not be adopted. I 
 submit to the understanding of the House that, 
 by all the proper precedents of legislation, a 
 biH of this kind ought to go to a committee 
 for deliberate examination before it can be 
 appropriately discussed and acted on by the 
 House. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. Mr. Speaker, the gentle¬ 
 man from New York [Mr, Brooks] has mis¬ 
 understood me if he supposed that i acknowl¬ 
 edged this amendment to be necessary. On 
 the contrary, it seems to me to be the merest 
 surplusage in the world, when we have pro¬ 
 vided for a meeting in March to elect directors 
 of this road, to add to that provision a declara¬ 
 tion that when electors shall have been thus 
 elected the present directors shall cease to act. 
 
 This bill went to the Senate Committee on 
 the Pacific Railroad, and was unanimously 
 reported back. I do not understand the chair¬ 
 man of the House committee on this subject 
 as expressing the slightest dissent to this propo¬ 
 sition. I yesterday stated to the House why 
 this measure was introduced for action with¬ 
 out formal reference to that committee, 
 although I had taken the pains to submit it 
 to the committee informally. The sole object 
 was to enable the stockholders to obtain this 
 legislation before the recess. This amend- 
 
22 
 
 raent of the Senate being mere surplusage, 
 the chairman of the Pacific Railroad Com¬ 
 mittee not asking the reference of the subject, 
 it seems to me it would be idle to refer it to 
 that committee. 
 
 I entirely agree with the gentleman from 
 New York that we should not interfere in 
 any quarrel in the board of directors in this 
 company. I am entirely ignorant of the quar¬ 
 rel or of the parties to it. I look upon the 
 Pacific railroad as one of the greatest enter¬ 
 prises in which this Government is engaged, 
 an enterprise in which are wrapped up the 
 greatest interests of the country; and I would 
 contribute, so far as may be in my power, to 
 promoting the speedy completion of that road. 
 I am acting here in no man’s and no com¬ 
 pany’s private interest. As these parties want 
 to change the time of holding their annual 
 meeting, and as I can see nothing objection¬ 
 able in the proposition, I merely ask this 
 House to provide for that object in the simplest 
 manner possible. A reference of this bill to 
 the Committee on the Pacific Railroad when 
 that committee does not ask it, would be simply 
 postponing this legislation till after the begin¬ 
 ning of the new year. I do not think, Mr. 
 Speaker, that any one asking the passage of 
 this bill has at heart any purpose hostile to 
 the interests of this road, or desires thi3 Con¬ 
 gress to take part in anybody’s quarrel. Of 
 course if the bill passes it will have the legal 
 effect set forth in. the amendment of the Sen¬ 
 ate. The bill has been unanimously reported 
 by the committee of the Senate, and has passed 
 in that body without a dissenting voice. I call 
 the previous question. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Will the 
 gentleman permit me to ask a question ? 
 
 Mr. DAWES. Certainlv. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I ask the 
 gentleman whether there is a quarrel between 
 two sets of directors, and whether this is not 
 in the interest of one set of directors? 
 
 Mr. DAWES. I will answer that when I 
 came in with this resolution yesterday I did 
 not know that fact. I have no communication 
 with any set of directors. I told the House 
 then frankly all I knew about this subject. I 
 never heard of a corporation before that had 
 not the power in and of itself to change the 
 time for holding its annual meeting. It was 
 proper in the organic act to fix some time. I 
 have no doubt the stockholders will designate 
 the proper time. 
 
 Mr. BROOKS. Is it settled who are the 
 stockholders of the Pacific railroad? Is it 
 known who they are? 
 
 Mr. DAWES. I am told since I came here 
 that there has been a difficulty about the elec¬ 
 tion of directors, and that makes it necessary 
 to have a provision for calling another meet¬ 
 ing in March next, so the stockholders can 
 meet and settle it. With whom can it be 
 more safely trusted? With whom shall we 
 trust the question who shall be the directors 
 
 better than the stockholders themselves ? And 
 here is a promulgation to every stockholder in 
 the wide country of this meeting for the elec¬ 
 tion of directors. What can be fairer than 
 that? I have no interest with one side or the 
 other. 
 
 Mr. BROOKS. The gentleman has not 
 answered my question. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. I will if I can. 
 
 Mr. BROOKS. Who are the stockholders ? 
 
 Mr. DAWES. I do not know ; I am not 
 one. I do not own a fourpenny in any rail¬ 
 road in the world, and therefore am poor as a 
 church mouse. I hope my friend is not so 
 poor. 
 
 Mr. BROOKS. I am not as poor as a church 
 mouse. There are $150,000,000 of stock in this 
 road, and only $5,000,000 of stock have been 
 paid in, and here is a large margin for litiga¬ 
 tion in the courts as to who are directors. Who 
 are the stockholders ? 
 
 Mr. DAWES. I will answer in the words 
 of the friend before me, that the stockholders 
 are those who hold the stock. [Laughter.] I 
 demand the previous question. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, called for 
 fellers. 
 
 Tellers were ordered; and Mr. Dawes and 
 Mr. Brooks were appointed. 
 
 Mr. GARFIELD called for the reading of 
 the twenty-ninth rule. 
 
 The Clerk read as follows: 
 
 ‘ 29. No member shall vote on any question 
 in the event of which he is immediately and 
 particularly interested.’ 
 
 Barclay’s Digest adds: 
 
 ‘As to what the iuterest here alluded to is, 
 the true construction doubtless is it shall be a 
 direct personal interest or pecuniary one.’ 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Read the 
 one hundred and thirty-fourth rule. 
 
 The Clerk read as follows: 
 
 ‘ 134. No person except members of the 
 Senate, their Secretary, heads of Depart¬ 
 ments, the President’s Private Secretary, for¬ 
 eign ministers, the Governor for the time be¬ 
 ing of any State, Senators and Representatives* 
 elect, and judges of the Supreme Court of the 
 United States and of the Court of Claims, and 
 such persons as have by name received the 
 thanks of Congress, shall be admitted within 
 the Hall of the House of Representatives, or 
 any of the rooms on the same floor or leading 
 into the same: Provided , Ex-members of 
 Congress not interested in any claim pending 
 before Congress, and shall so register them¬ 
 selves, may also be admitted within the Hall 
 of the House; but no person except those 
 herein specified shall at any time be admitted 
 to the floor of the House.’ 
 
 The House divided; and the tellers report¬ 
 ed—ayes G7, noes 58. 
 
 So the previous question was seconded. 
 
 The main question was then ordered. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved 
 i that the amendment of the Senate be laid on 
 
23 
 
 the table ; and on that motion demanded the 
 yeas and nays. 
 
 The yeas and nays were ordered. 
 
 The question was taken ; and it was decided 
 in the negative—yeas 44, nays 97, not voting 
 47.” 
 
 Among the yeas were Messrs. Garfield, 
 Logan, Eiihu B. Washburne. 
 
 Among the nays were Messrs. Allison, Ames, 
 Bingham, Blaine, Dawes, Eliot, Hooper, 
 Kelley, Peters, Pike, Scofield, James F. 
 Wilson. 
 
 Among those not voting, Messrs. Boutwell 
 and Brooks. 
 
 So the House refused to lay the amendment 
 on the table. 
 
 The amendment of the Senate was then 
 concurred in. 
 
 Mr. DAWES moved to reconsider and lay 
 on the table; which was done. 
 
 THE WASHBURNE RESOLUTIONS. 
 
 Debates and extracts from proceedings on the 
 Washburne resolutions to regulate the tariff 
 of freights on the Pacific railroads , extend 
 ing from December , 1867, to May , 1868. 
 The original {II. R. No. 252) was intro¬ 
 duced by Mr. Washburne , December 9,1867, 
 and referred to the Committee on the Pacific 
 Railroad. 
 
 Provisions of the resolution .—It constitutes 
 the Secretary of War, Secretary of the Inte¬ 
 rior, and Attorney General of the United 
 States a board of commissioners, whose duty 
 it shall be, on the 1st day of July in each 
 year, to establish a tariff for freight and pas 
 sengers over the Union Pacific and Central 
 Pacific railroads and their branches, which 
 tariff shall be equitable and just, and not 
 exceeding double the average rates charged 
 on the different lines of railroad between the 
 Mississippi river and the Atlantic ocean, in 
 latitudes north of St. Louis, Missouri; and it 
 shall not be lawful for said railroad company 
 to charge any sum in excess of the rates so 
 fixed and established. 
 
 The committee not reporting on the resolu¬ 
 tion, it was reintroduced in the morning hour— 
 Monday, January 20, 1868—by Mr. Windom, 
 as No. 168, and read the first and second time ; 
 but the previous question not being seconded, 
 and Mr. Higby rising to debate the resolution, 
 it went over under the rules, it came up 
 again March 12, 1868, (see Globe, vol. 66, 
 page 1861,) when the following proceedings 
 occurred : 
 
 “pacific railroad. 
 
 The next business lying over under the 
 rules was House joint resolution No. 168, to 
 regulate the tariff for freight and passengers 
 on the Union and Central Pacific railroads 
 and their branches, introduced by Mr. Win¬ 
 dom, January 20, 1868. 
 
 Mr. GARFIELD. I move to refer itto the 
 Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, 
 and call the previous question. 
 
 Mr. WASH BURNE, of Illinois. I hope the 
 House will not second the previous question. 
 Let us have a square vote and see who is in 
 favor of this resolution. 
 
 Mr. DAWES. We had a square vote the 
 other day. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. And the 
 gentleman was with the monopolists. [Laugh¬ 
 ter.] (See vote on Dawes’s resolution, 
 page 21.) 
 
 On seconding the previous question there 
 were—ayes 52, noes 51. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I demand 
 tellers. 
 
 Tellers were ordered; and the Chair ap¬ 
 pointed Messrs. Garfield and Woodward. 
 
 Mr. ALLISON. Let the joint resolution be 
 reported in full. 
 
 The SPEAKER. The Clerk not expecting 
 this business to be reached to-day, the joint 
 resolution is not here; it is on the files at the 
 Clerk’s office. 
 
 Mr. GARFIELD. I think it is very proper, 
 therefore, to have it referred. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. It is a 
 resolution that ought to be passed. 
 
 The House divided ; and the tellers report¬ 
 ed—ayes 42, noes 54. 
 
 So the previous question was not seconded. 
 
 The SPEAKER. The Clerk will now report 
 the joint resolution. 
 
 It was read. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded 
 the previous question. 
 
 Mr. VAN HORN moved to lay the resolu¬ 
 tion on the table. 
 
 Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts, called the 
 yeas and nays ; and they were ordered. 
 
 The vote on laying on the table stood—yeas 
 53, nays 70, not voting 66. 
 
 Among those voting to lay on the table were 
 Messrs. Beck, Brooks, Dawes, Eliot, Hooper, 
 Kelley, Scofield, and Twichell. 
 
 Among those against, Messrs. Allison, 
 Blame, Garfield, C. C. Washburn, and E. B. 
 Washburne. 
 
 Among those not voting, Messrs. Ames, 
 Bingham, Boutwell, Dodge, and James F. 
 Wilson. 
 
 So the House refused to lay the bill on the 
 table. 
 
 The SPEAKER. The morning hour has 
 expired, and the bill goes to the Speaker’s 
 table.” 
 
 March 20, 1868, (see Globe, vol. 66, p. 
 2029.)—The resolution was again in order, and 
 Mr. C. C. Washburn, of Wisconsin, addressed* 
 the House. The following are extracts from* 
 his remarks as printed in Globe, vol. 69, pp. 
 297-98, Appendix: 
 
 “grade of route. 
 
 “Mr. WASHBURN, of Wisconsin. There 
 is great exaggeration about the difficulties 
 attending the building of these Pacific rail¬ 
 roads. If gentlemen want information I will 
 
24 
 
 give it to them. I will give the gentleman 
 from Iowa, [Mr. Dodge.] the very able and 
 distinguished engineer of the road, some of 
 his own figures, i will refer to his report of 
 1808. 
 
 It was asserted in Congress in 1804 that 
 there were miles of this road that would coat 
 $500,000 per mile to build. Here is my friend's 
 own report made in 1868. The table of grades 
 shows upon the line from Omaha to the eastern 
 line of California a distance of one thousand 
 six hundred and twenty-two and a half miles ; 
 of dead level ground, two hundred and seventy- 
 two miles ; from level to twenty feet per mile, 
 six hundred and sixty-five miles ; ranging from 
 twenty feet to forty feet, three hundred and forty- 
 three miles; from forty to sixty feet per mile, 
 ninety-six miles ; from sixty to eighty feet per 
 mile, eighty one miles; from eighty to one 
 hundred feet per mile, forty-five miles; from 
 one hundred to one hundred and sixteen feet 
 per mile, thirty-seven miles. 
 
 Such are the grades of this Pacific road as 
 determined by their own engineers. The 
 almost impassable mountains of which “Path¬ 
 finders” and others give such marvelous ac¬ 
 counts, when brought to the unerring test, of 
 the engineer’s level, dwindle into insignifi¬ 
 cance. And I think I can safely assert here 
 that there is no sixteen hundred miles of road 
 running in any given direction in the United 
 States that show such easy grades as from 
 Omaha to the line of California. There was 
 much difficulty in determining where the base 
 of the Rocky mountains was, but it was finally 
 determined in the level valley of the Platte 
 river at Crow creek crossing, and from that 
 point to the summit of the mountains the 
 distance is only between thirty-one and thirty- 
 two miles, although we give them a subsidy of 
 $48,000 per mile for one hundred and fifty 
 miles at this point of the road, 
 
 COST OF ROAD. 
 
 Now, sir, I have asserted that this road can 
 nearly or quite be built with the Government 
 subsidy. The first five hundred miles are 
 nearly a dead level, I am assured by gentle¬ 
 men who have traveled over the route that up 
 to the base of the Rocky mountains it is a dead 
 level, so that the sleepers are laid down for 
 miles and miles ou the naked soil without any 
 grading, only a ditch on each side. 
 
 There cannot be a shadow of doubt that 
 your subsidy in bonds will nearly or quite 
 build and equip the road, for this part of the 
 line at least, with the vast grant of lauds 
 thrown in. 
 
 I have always said that this road could be 
 built for the Government subsidies, and I re¬ 
 iterate that, provided it is built as other roads 
 are built, by contracting with the lowest bid¬ 
 der. To make the road cost the stockholders 
 no more than absolutely necessary, and at the 
 same time to make it represent a nominal cost 
 that would relieve the stockholders from the 
 
 appearance of not putting in money of their 
 own, and also to relieve them from the ten per 
 cent, dividend proposition, they resort to a 
 device unheard of before in this country. 
 
 CREDIT MOBILIER. 
 
 The stockholders in the Pacific road are few 
 in number. ^ They could easily have made a 
 contract with themselves for the building of 
 the roacl, without bids or advertisements of 
 any kind. They could have agreed to have 
 paid themselves one or two hundred thousand 
 dollars per mile, and swelled the nominal cost to 
 such a figure as to neutralize the ten per cent, 
 proviso in regard to earnings. But would such 
 a transaction have been regarded as an honest 
 or legitimate and straightforward one, and 
 binding on the Government? Clearly not. 
 Would a transaction which amounts to pre¬ 
 cisely the same thing, arrived at in an indirect 
 manner, be any more honorable and straight¬ 
 forward or binding on the Government? In¬ 
 stead of contracting for the construction of the 
 road as all other roads have been built, what 
 do they do? A, B, C, and D are the stock¬ 
 holders of the company. A, B, C, and D, 
 under a charter from the State of Pennsylvania, 
 organize themselves into a company called the 
 Credit Mobilier of America. A, B, C, and 
 D, stockholders, enter into a contract with the 
 Credit Mobilier to build this road at fabulous 
 prices, and the Credit Mobilier let out the 
 contract at the lowest figure at which the road 
 can be built, making a clear profit of the dif¬ 
 ference between the price at which the con¬ 
 tract is taken and the price actually paid to 
 those who do the work, a sum I am assured 
 that will not fall short of many, many million 
 dollars. It will readily be seen from this that 
 the company practically contracts with itself 
 to build the road, and that the enormous figures 
 they exhibit as representing the cost of the 
 road are absolutely fictitious.” 
 
 March 25, 1868, (see Globe, volume sixty* 
 seven, pp. 2109, 2113,) the resolution was again 
 in order, and was debated at length, Mr. Price 
 answering Mr. Washburne, and Messrs. Gar¬ 
 field, Scofield, and Dawes look part in the 
 proceedings. Mr. Price moved to refer the 
 resolution to the Pacific Railroad Committee, 
 and demanded the previous question. The 
 morning hour having expired, Mr. Garfield 
 asked that the time be extended in order to 
 reach a vote, which was done; but pending 
 the previous question the House adjourned. 
 
 March 26, 1868, (see Globe, volume sixty- 
 seven, p. 2129.)—The subject was resumed. 
 Mr. Washburne, of Illinois, asked further time 
 for debate, as ( here was no quorum. This was 
 resisted, and Mr. Washburne moved a call of 
 the House; and upon division there were— 
 ayes 33, noes 55; no quorum voting. Tellers 
 were ordered, and announced—ayes 40, noes 
 61. Mr. Washburne demanded the yeas and 
 nays, and they were ordered; and on the mo¬ 
 tion for a call of the House there were—yeas 
 45, nays 86, not voting 58, 
 
25 
 
 Among the yeas were Messrs. C. C. Wash¬ 
 burn and E. B. Washburne. 
 
 ikmong the nays, Messrs. Allison, Ames, 
 Bingham, Boutwell, Dawes, Dodge, Eliot, j 
 Hooper, Kelley, Scofield, Twichell, and 
 James F> Wilson. 
 
 _ Among those not voting, Messrs. Biaine, 
 Brooks, and Garfield. 
 
 The previous question was seconded, and 
 on ordering the main question on referring the 
 resolution, the yeas were 73, the nays 54, not 
 voting 62. 
 
 Among the yeas were Messrs. Allison, 
 Ames, Bingham, Boutwell, Dawes, Dodge, 
 Eliot, Hooper, Keiley, Twichell, and James 
 F. Wilson. 
 
 Among the nays, Mr. E. B. Washburne, 
 
 Among those not voting, Messrs. Biaine, 
 Brooks, Garfield, and Scofield, 
 
 So the main question was ordered. 
 
 And thereupon the following proceedings 
 occurred: 
 
 u Mr. HOLMAN. I rise to a privileged 
 question. I make the request that, under the 
 twenty-ninth rule of the House the gentlemen 
 who are interested io the result of this ques¬ 
 tion may be permitted to withdraw their votes. 
 If it be proper I make that point now. 
 
 The SPEAKER. That point cannot be 
 made during a roll-call, as the gentleman 
 from Indiana is aware. 
 
 Mr. HOLMAN. Must, it be made before I 
 • the roll-call? • 
 
 The SPEAKER. It must; it cannot be j 
 • made while the roll-call continues, and the 
 roll-call continues until the Chair announces 
 f the result. Otherwise there might be roll- 
 calls within roll-calls, the yeas and nays being 
 ordered on the questions arising under the 
 point of order.* 
 
 The vote was then announced as above re¬ 
 corded. 
 
 The question recurred on the motion to refer 
 to the Committee on the Pacific Railroad. 
 
 Mr. WASHBCJRNE, of Illinois, demanded 
 the yeas and nays. 
 
 The yea3 and nays were ordered. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I ask 
 that this vote shall be considered as a test 
 vote on this question. Those in favor of the 
 resolution will vote- 
 
 Mr. PRICE, I call the gentleman to order. 
 
 The SPEAKER. Debate is not in order. 
 
 Mr, HOLMAN. I now rise for the purpose 
 of asking the Clerk to read the twenty-rnnth j 
 rule of the House. 
 
 The Clerk read as follows: 
 
 i No member shall vote on any question in 
 the event of which he is immediately and par- j 
 ticuiarly interested, or in any case where he j 
 
 * This ruling was reversed at the last session, in I 
 the case of Mr. Hooper voting on question affecting i 
 his interest as a stockholder, and in the case of I 
 members who voted to pay themselves for contest- i 
 ing elections. It is understood to bo the ruling of i 
 T which Ame3 boasted to MeComb. i 
 
 was not within the bar of the House when the 
 question was put.’ 
 
 The question was taken; and it was decided 
 in the affirmative—yeas 83, nays 49, not vot¬ 
 ing 57. 
 
 Among the yeas, Messrs. Ames, Bingham, 
 Boutwell, Dawes, Dodge, Eliot, Hooper, 
 Twichell, and James F. Wilson. 
 
 Among the nays, Messrs. Holman and C. 
 C. and E, B. Washburne. 
 
 Not voting, Messrs. Blaine, Brooks, Gar¬ 
 field, and Scofield. 
 
 So the resolution was referred to the Com¬ 
 mittee on the Pacific Railroad, and Mr. Wilson, 
 of Iowa, moved to reconsider and lay on the 
 table; which -was done.” 
 
 The resolution having been thus referred, 
 Mr. E. B. Washburne raised the question in 
 another form, (see Globe, vol. 67, p. 2133, 
 of March 26, 18(58 :) 
 
 ‘'union pacific railroad. 
 
 u Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I rise" to 
 a privileged question. J call up the motion 
 submitted on the 26th of February by the gen¬ 
 tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Washburn] to 
 reconsider the vote by which the letter of the 
 Secretary of the Treasury relative to the Union 
 Pacific railroad was ordered to be printed. 
 
 I congratulate my friend from Iowa [Mr. 
 Price] on his success io preventing my being 
 heard this morning, by getting the previous 
 question on his motion to commit the joint 
 resolution to the Committee on the Pacific 
 Railroad, of which he is chairman. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURN, of Wisconsin. Mr. 
 Speaker, 1 was desirous at the close of the 
 remarks of the chairman of the Pacific Rail¬ 
 road Committee [Mr. Price] and his colleague 
 [Mr. Dodge] yesterday of making a few re¬ 
 marks in reply. But, sir, so determined were 
 the friends of this great®hionopoly to stifle 
 discussion that they resisted every appeal that 
 I could make to allow me even that poor privi¬ 
 lege. That I am now enabled to defy ail at¬ 
 tempts to silence discussion is in no degree 
 due to the friends of these roads, but in spite 
 of them. It is simply due to the fact that I 
 bad *ke foresight some time since to enter a 
 motion to reconsider a vote upon a proposition 
 connected with the Pacific railroad. I en¬ 
 tered that motion because I thought an occa¬ 
 sion might arise such as has actually arisen 
 here. 
 
 I stated that I had become satisfied when I 
 offered the resolution that there would be great 
 delay in reporting, even if the resolution did 
 not sleep in the committee “the sleep that 
 knows no waking,” which I feared it would. 
 
 Now for the facts upon which I based that 
 declaration; and I will leave the House and 
 the country to judge whether or not I had 
 good reason to believe that the committee 
 intended to let that bill sleep on, whether 
 they were friendly or unfriendly to it. I in¬ 
 troduced that bill as long ago as the 9th of 
 December, and’ it was referred to the Pacific 
 
26 
 
 Railroad Committee. Nothing having been 
 heard from it, and thinking that perhaps the 
 committee would not be called for some time, 
 or that there might be very considerable delay, 
 I introduced on the 17th of February the joint 
 resolution which was discussed yesterday, A 
 motion was made to lay that joint resolution 
 on the table. Who voted against laying it on 
 the table? Certainly not my friend from Iowa. 
 
 Mr. PRICE. Do me the justice to say that 
 I did not vote the other way. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURN, of Wisconsin. 1 will; 
 I was going to say that. I will say that he 
 was not found voting at all, from which I cer¬ 
 tainly had the right to infer that he was not 
 particularly friendly to the joint resolution. 
 There are three members of the committee 
 who did not vote; 1 do not know why. 
 
 * * -x- * * -x- -x- -x- * 
 
 The gentleman says in his speech that I 
 ought to have known that the committeee in¬ 
 tended to report it, because he had told me 
 so. Well, he did tell me that the committee 
 intended to report something, and that they 
 were considering the matter; and he said yes¬ 
 terday that the committee had instructed him 
 to write to these different companies and find 
 out what their earnings and expenses were 
 and what they thought would be right. 
 
 Now, if the committee are friendly to this 
 proposition, it is most astonishing that they 
 should wait until they could hear what the 
 wishes of these railroad companies are. The 
 calling on these companies to learn what 
 should be done to protect the people sounds 
 very like some fable I have read at some time. 
 Now, my friend represents a State blessed 
 with vast flocks of sheep, and, if I mistake 
 not, a colleague of his in the last Congress was 
 a great shepherd. Now, what would be thought 
 of that former colleague, if, when his sheep ap- 
 pealed to him for protection against the wolves, 
 whom they alleged were claiming more mutton 
 than enough to satisfy their reasonable appe¬ 
 tites, he should say to them, i I have written 
 to the wolves to know if they are not going it 
 rather strong, and to ask if they could not 
 suggest some measure by which you may be 
 restricted in your forays upon my flocks?’ 
 It occurs to me that that would be about a 
 parallel case to that of my frieud from Iowa 
 calling on those roads for information; and, 
 if I mistake not, I read in HSsop’s Fables 
 when I was a boy a fable very much resem¬ 
 bling this.” 
 
 Mr. Wasbburne, of Illinois, reviewed at 
 length the legislation of 1864, quoting his own 
 argument made when the bill of 1864 was 
 pending, and showing under what circum¬ 
 stances it was passed and how the amendment 
 of Mr. Holman relative to freights was voted 
 down, and repeating his own speech of 1864 
 against the tenth section postponing the Gov 
 eminent lien. 
 
 On the 22d of June, the House again re¬ 
 sumed the consideration of this bill, and the 
 
 gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Wilson] got on an 
 amendment for a grant of land for the Bur¬ 
 lington and Missouri River Railroad Company. 
 A long discussion followed on many of the 
 provisions of the bill, participated in by Mr. 
 Sweat, of Maine, a member of the Pacific 
 Railroad Committee, and by the gentleman 
 from New York, [Mr. Pruyn,] who, though 
 connected with the building of the road, was 
 not satisfied with the bill, with that sense of 
 honor which belongs to him, refused to vote, 
 furnishing an example that might well be fol¬ 
 lowed. 
 
 On the 24th of June (Congressional Globe, 
 volume 53, page 3244) 1 moved to strike out 
 the tenth section, which provided that the 
 Union Pacific Railroad Company, the Central 
 Pacific Railroad Company, and any other 
 company authorized to participate in the con¬ 
 struction of said road, might issue the first 
 mortgage bonds of their respective railroad 
 and telegraph lines to an amount not exceed¬ 
 ing the amount of the bonds of the United 
 States authorized to be issued to said railroad 
 companies respectively, and that the lien of 
 United States bonds should be subordinated 
 to that of the bonds of any or either of said 
 companies which were thereby authorized to 
 be issued by said railroad companies on their 
 respective roads, property, or equipments; 
 and which provided, further, that the fifth sec¬ 
 tion of the original act should be further 
 amended by striking out i forty’ and inserting 
 in lieu thereof 1 on each and every section of 
 not less than twenty.’ And other startling 
 provisions were in the bill doubling the amount 
 of land, making a grant amounting to more 
 than double the area of Great Britain and Ire¬ 
 land, as I have before said. Upon that amend¬ 
 ment the yeas and nays were ordered, and 
 that section, thus subordinating the security 
 of the United States to that of these com¬ 
 panies, was retained, and the amendment 
 rejected by a vote of 38 to 81. 
 
 YEAS.—Messrs. Ancona, Arnold, Bailey, John 
 D. Baldwin, Boutwell, Cobb, Creswell, Dawson, 
 Denison, Eden, Edgerton, Farnsworth, Hale, Hard¬ 
 ing, Harrington, Herrick, Holman, William John¬ 
 son, Orlando Kellogg, Kernan, Law, Marcy, McDow¬ 
 ell, Morrison, Nelson, John O’Neil, Orth, Rogers, 
 Edward II. Rollins, Scofield, Sloan, Spalding, Stiles, 
 Thayer, Tracy, Upson, EUhu B. Wasbburne, and 
 Joseph W. White—38. 
 
 NAYS.—Messrs. Allison. Ames, Anderson, Ashley, 
 Baxter, Beaman, Blaine, Blair, Blow, Boyd, Brooks, 
 Broomall, Ambrose W. Clark, Cole, Thomas T. 
 Davis, Dawes, Demiug, Dixon, Donnelly, Driggs, 
 Eckley, Eldridge. Eliot, English, Finck, Gooch.Gris¬ 
 wold, Benjamin G. Harris, Higby, Hotchkiss, Asa- 
 helW. Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, Ilulburd, Julian, 
 Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, Knapp. Knox, La 
 Blond, Littlejohn, Long. Longyear, Marvin, Mc¬ 
 Bride, McClurg, Samuel F. Miller, Morrill, Daniel 
 Morris, James R. Morris, Amos Myers,' Leonard 
 Myers, Noble, Norton, Charles O’Neil, Perham, 
 Pomeroy, Price, Samuel J, Randall, John PI. Rico, 
 James 8. Rollins, Ross, Schenck. Scott, Shannon, 
 Smithers, John B. Steele, William G. Steele, 
 Stevens, Stuart, Sweat, Yan Valkenburgh. Ward, 
 William B. Washburn, Webster, Whaley, Wheeler, 
 Williams, Wilson, Windom, Vfinfield, and Benjamin 
 Wood—81 .—Congressional Globe % vol. 53, page 3244. 
 
 The previous question having been ordered 
 
27 
 
 and the bill having passed to its third reading, 
 the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Holman] 
 called for the reading of the engrossed bill, 
 
 * which resulted in postponing its final passage 
 until Monday, June 25. The bill was on that 
 day brought before the House and was passed 
 by a vote of 70 to 38; which vote is recorded 
 in the Congressional Globe, volume fifty- 
 three, page 3267, as follows: 
 
 YEAS—Messrs. Allison, Ames, Ashley, Augustus 
 C. Baldwin, Beaman, Blaine, Blair, Blow, Brande- 
 gee. Brooks, William G. Brown, Ambrose W. Clark, 
 Coffroth, Cole, Creswell, Thomas T. Davis, Dawes, 
 Deining, Dixon, Donnelly, Eliot, English, Fenton, 
 Garfield, Griswold, Hale, Iligby, Hooper, Asahel W. 
 Hubbard, John H. Hubbard. Hulburd, Jenckes, 
 Julian, Kalbfieisch, Orlando Kellogg, Knox, Little¬ 
 john, Loan, Longyear, Marvin, McBride, McClurg, 
 Moorhead, Morrill, Morrison, Amos Myers, Noble, 
 
 . Odell, Charles O’Neill, Pa tterson, Perharn, Pomeroy, 
 Price, John H. Rice, Ross, Schenck, Shannon, 
 Sloan, Smithers, John B. Steele, William G. Steele, 
 Stevens. Stuart, Sweat, Thayer, Upson, Webster, 
 Wilson, Windom, and Benjamin Wood—70. 
 
 NAYS—Messrs. Ancona, Bailey, Bliss, Boutwell, 
 Chandler. Dawson, Denison, Eden, Edgerton, Gooch, 
 Grider, Harding, Harrington, Benjamin G. Harris, 
 Holman, Philip Johnson, Kernan, Knapp, Law, 
 Le Blond, Mallory, Marcy, McDowell, McKinney, 
 John O’Neill, Orth, Radford, Robinson, Rogers, 
 Edward H. Rollins, Scofield, Stiles, Thomas, Eiihu 
 B. Washburne, William B. Washburn, Chilton A. 
 White, Joseph W. White, and Fernando Wood—38. 
 
 The members of the present Congress who 
 voted for the bill were as follows: Allison 
 of Iowa, Ames of Massachusetts, Ashley of 
 Ohio, Baldwin of Massachusetts, Beaman of 
 
 * Michigan, Blaine of Maine, Brooks of New 
 York, Dawes of Massachusetts, Dixon of 
 Rhode Island, Donnelly of Minnesota, Eliot 
 of Massachusetts, Garfield of Ohio, Griswold 
 of New York, Higby of California, Hooper of 
 
 1 Massachusetts, Hubbard of Iowa, Jenckes of 
 Rhode Island, Julian of Indiana, Loan of 
 Missouri, Marvin of New York, McClurg of 
 Missouri, Moorhead of Pennsylvania, O’Neill 
 of Pennsylvania, Perharn of Maine, Pomeroy 
 of New York, Price of Iowa, Ross of Illinois, 
 Schenck of Ohio, Stevens of Pennsylvania, 
 Upson of Michigan, Wilson of Iowa, and 
 Windom of Minnesota. 
 
 Those members of the present Congress 
 who voted in the negative were as follows: 
 Boutwell of Massachusetts, Chanler of New 
 York, Holman of Indiana, Orth of Indiana, 
 Scofield of Pennsylvania, Washburne of Illi¬ 
 nois, Washburn of Massachusetts, and Fer¬ 
 nando Wood of New York. 
 
 The bill then went to the Senate and came 
 back with amendments, upon which a com¬ 
 mittee of conference was ordered. On the 
 1st of July the committee of conference re¬ 
 ported, bringing in such new matter as would, 
 in my opinion, be in violation of every rule 
 which governs committees of conference in 
 t legislative bodies. Gentlemen by turning to 
 the Globe, volume fifty-three, page 3480, will 
 see that the new matter so introduced covers 
 nearly a page of nonpareil. And this report, 
 changing so materially the bill as acted upon 
 f by the House and Senate, was gagged through; 
 
 the opponents of the measure were not per¬ 
 mitted to have it printed and postponed so that 
 they could see what it was. I struggled in vain 
 for the printing of the report and for its delay 
 until the members of the House could have an 
 opportunity of reading it; but the gentleman 
 from Pennsylvania [Mr. Stevens] demanded 
 the previous question, which was seconded and 
 the main question ordered to be put; and it 
 would seem incredible that in a matter of 
 legislation involving interests so vast and 
 pledging amounts of money so enormous even 
 the yeas and nays were refused; that even 
 tellers were refused. I read from the proceed¬ 
 ings as reported in the Globe, volume fifty- 
 three, page 3481: 
 
 “Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded 
 the yeas and nays on agreeing to the report; 
 and tellers upon the yeas and nays. 
 
 Tellers were-not ordered, and the yeas and 
 nays were not ordered. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded 
 tellers on agreeing to the report. 
 
 Tellers were not ordered. 
 
 The report was agreed to.” 
 
 Thus ends the story of the action of the 
 House touching this extraordinary legisla¬ 
 tion, which will go into the history of the 
 country. 
 
 “Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Let the 
 country understand that the Sioux City branch, 
 instead of running toward the Pacific ocean, 
 runs to the east in the State of Iowa, and is 
 twenty-five miles further from the Pacific 
 ocean when it gets south than it was when it 
 started. These were the lands that I 
 
 referred to. * * * * * * 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The gen¬ 
 tleman from New York [Mr. Bailey] does 
 not desire to speak now. I therefore move 
 to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. 
 
 The motion was agreed to.” 
 
 On May 12, 1868, (see Globe, vol. 67, p. 
 2421) the committee reported a substitute for 
 the resolution, adding to the original a pro¬ 
 viso that it should not take effect until the 
 road should be both completed (they are not 
 yet held by the Government to have been com¬ 
 pleted in 1873) and limiting the discretion of 
 the board so that they could not reduce 
 charges below eight cents per mile for freight 
 and six cents per mile for passengers. 
 
 Mr. Upson objected to this proviso, and 
 Mr. Van Wyck of New York, and Mr. John¬ 
 son of California, made speeches against it, 
 in which they said: 
 
 “Mr. VAN WYCK. Now, what do we see 
 from the company’s report? That a road 
 eleven hundred miles in length, by their own 
 report, is to be built, which will cost, with all 
 their fabulous prices for construction, $82,- 
 000,000. That is the cost according to their 
 report. And then they show what they have 
 to build this road with. They have of the 
 United States bonds, $29,000,000; of first 
 mortgage bonds, $29,000,000; of capital stock 
 
28 
 
 paid in, $8,000,000 ; of land grants, fourteen 
 million eight hundred thousand acres, which at 
 $1 50 per acre, amounts to $21,000,000, mak¬ 
 ing in all $88,000,000. 
 
 Now mark, they say the cost of eleven hun¬ 
 dred miles is $82,000,000, and yet they have 
 $88,000,000 to build it. So they will have 
 $6,000,000 more in their treasury when the 
 road is completed than they have resources to 
 build it. Of that $88,000,000, $8,000,000 is 
 money which they have put in their hands for- 
 building the road ; so that when it is finished 
 they will have paid out, according to their own 
 figures, only $2,000,000 to build it. 
 
 But this road does not cost $82,000,000. 
 These gentlemen have made contracts with 
 themselves, whereby they pay double the 
 amount to build the road that it ought to cost. 
 They have contracted to build it for the first 
 five hundred miles at $50,000. per mile ; and 
 the Government commissioners, who certainly 
 are not unfriendly to these parties, in speaking 
 of this matter, dated July 8, 1865, say : 
 
 4 In October, 1864, when we assumed the 
 duties of our appointment, we found that in 
 the months of August and September previous 
 a contract had been arranged and consum¬ 
 mated by the executive committee, in which 
 are vested the powers of the board when, not 
 in session, for the construction and equipment 
 of the first one hundred miles of the road west 
 of the Missouri river at the rate of $50,000 
 per mile, payable $5,000 per mile in the stock 
 of the company, and the balance in the cur 
 rency bonds of the .Government and the se¬ 
 curities of the company. From the first the 
 contract price appeared to us to be very high. 
 At present, with the probable decline in the 
 cost of labor and materials and advance in the 
 value of Government bonds, it seems extrava¬ 
 gant. ’ 
 
 Another commissioner reports, on the 26th 
 of August, 1865, that the balance of the five 
 hundred miles could be built at a small cost 
 compared with the rate at which the first one 
 hundred miles were contracted. And yet; 
 $50,000 per mile has been paid for building the 
 road, which could not have cost over $25,000. 
 
 The eastern division, a more expensive road, 
 cost less than $30,000 to build it. The Atch¬ 
 ison branch has cost less than that. 
 
 CREDIT MOBILIER. 
 
 These men, then do not go outside of their 
 own corporation to make contracts. They 
 have created a Credit Mobilier. They have 
 created a ring inside the corporation. Look. 
 In 1864 there were one hundred and twenty- 
 five stockholders in this Pacific railroad, hold¬ 
 ing two thousand shares of stock. In January, 
 1866, there were one hundred and twenty- 
 three stockholders, holding twenty-eight thous¬ 
 and shares of stock. In the report wh.cb these 
 gentlemen were required to make they named 
 the stockholders and the amount of stock held, 
 In the last report the number of stockholders 
 had dwindled down to fifty-three, and they do 
 
 not state the number of shares they own. 
 Only fifty-three stockholders, a year and a half 
 ago, owning a road representing $100,000,000 
 of capital! It takes twenty of these stock¬ 
 holders to make a directory, so that you have 
 thirty outside. Sir, they have demonstrated 
 that the obstacles in the way of the construc¬ 
 tion of this road have passed away. The com¬ 
 pany is now drawing a triple subsidy of $96,000 
 a mile for building what was said to be the 
 most * ‘difficult and mountainous’’ part of the 
 road. From the foot of the Black Hills, which 
 are claimed to be the base of the Rocky mount¬ 
 ains, they run about forty-five miles and then 
 strike the Laramie plain and run one hundred 
 m iles almost on a level, and on these one hun¬ 
 dred and fifty miles they are receiving the 
 triple subsidy. 
 
 Mr. JOHNSON, of California. The Central 
 Pacific division of that great road is now charg¬ 
 ing the people of the State of California fifteen 
 cents a mile for freight, and ten cents a mile 
 for passeugers. 
 
 Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. In gold? 
 
 Mr. JOHNSON, of California. In gold. 
 The net proceeds of that road, which is only 
 about ninety miles in length, were last year 
 nearly one million and a half dollars. In a 
 very short time that road, like a mighty vor¬ 
 tex, will drink up all the wealth of our new 
 and growing State. Now, Mr. Speaker, if 
 there is any honest intention on the part of 
 this House to protect our people against this 
 oppression, I ask that the demand for the pre¬ 
 vious question be voted down, and allow this 
 amendment to be made, restricting this cor¬ 
 poration, and not leaving them the latitude of 
 the four winds. 
 
 Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas. At the mo¬ 
 ment the merchants of the city of Topeka 
 are transporting their freight by oxen and 
 horse teams to the city of Leaven worth—a 
 distance of forty-five or fifty miles—instead of 
 sending if by railroad ”- 
 
 After further debate the following votes were 
 taken, May 12,1868. (See Globe, vol. 67, pp. 
 2428-29. 
 
 On Mr. Farnsworth’s motion to recommit 
 the yeas were 62, nays 59, not voting 58. 
 
 Among the yeas, Messrs. Ames, Brooks, 
 Dodge, Eliot, Hooper, Kelly, Scofield, and 
 Twicheil. 
 
 Among the nays, Messrs. Allison, Blaine, 
 Butler, Garfield, E. B. Washburne and James 
 F. Wilson. 
 
 Among those not voting, Messrs. Bingham, 
 Boutwell, Dawes, and C. C. Washburn. 
 
 The next question was on motion to amend 
 the substitute by striking out the proviso on 
 which the yeas were 75, nays 48, not voting 66. 
 
 Among the yeas, were Messrs. Holmau and 
 E. B. Washburne. 
 
 Among the nays, Messrs. Allison, Ames, 
 Brooks, Butler, Dodge, Eliot, Garfield, 
 Hooper, Scofield, Twitchell, and James F. 
 Wilson. 
 
29 
 
 Among those not voting, Messrs, Bingham, 
 Blaine, Boutweil, Dawes, and Kelley. 
 
 And thereupon a further amendment was 
 * adopted and the substitute for the resolution 
 passed without division. 
 
 It. went to the Senate, was referred to the 
 Committee on the Pacific Railroad, and there 
 it “ slept the sleep that knows no waking.” 
 
 Thus was begun, prosecuted, and ended one 
 of the bravest contests ever made for the rights 
 of the people. 
 
 Extract from Report of Hon . 0 H Brown • 
 
 wg, Secretary of the Interior , November 30, 
 
 1868, p. 9: 
 
 “The road, when examined, was built eight 
 hundred and ninety miles from Omaha. Its 
 construction, so far as excavations and em¬ 
 bankments were required, was remarkably 
 easy. From Omaha to a point five hundred 
 and thirty-five miles west there are no rock 
 excavations, and the natural surface of a great 
 portion of the intermediate country presents 
 nearly practicable grades. From the latter 
 point to the end of the track the work is less 
 than on eastern roads of the same length, and 
 the most difficult parts are light in compari¬ 
 son with roads in the Alleghany mountains. 
 There is but one tunnel. It is on the bank of 
 St. Mary’s creek, two hundred and thirty feet 
 in length.” 
 
 % Page 14: 
 
 “As the actual cost, of this road is a matter 
 of public interest, I deem it proper to present 
 in a condensed form the estimates submitted 
 on the 14th instant by Jesse L. Williams, esq. 
 
 1 He states that the cost of the road, as shown 
 on the books of the railroad company, is, of 
 course, equivalent to the contract price per 
 mile. 
 
 CREDIT MOBILIER. 
 
 The actual cost to the contractors forming 
 an association , which embraces most of the 
 larger stockholders of the company , is shown 
 only by their private books, to which the Gov¬ 
 ernment directors have no access. The cal¬ 
 culations were, therefore, made from the most 
 accurate and available data, and the estimate 
 cost of the first seven hundred and ten miles 
 of the road was taken as the basis for comput¬ 
 ing that of the whole line. Should the road, 
 as is expected by the company, form a junc¬ 
 tion with that of the California company, near 
 the northern extreme of Great Sait Cake, a 
 little west of Monument Point, its length v/ould 
 be about eleven hundred and ten miles. The 
 cost of locating, constructing, and completely 
 equipping it and the telegraph line is $38,824,’- 
 821, an average per mile of $34,977 32. 
 
 * The Government subsidy in bonds for that 
 distance as pay amounts to $29,504,000, an 
 average per mile of $26,580. The company’s 
 first mortgage bonds are estimated at ninety- 
 two per cent., and would yield $27,113,680. 
 
 Y The fund realized by the company from these 
 
 two sources amounts to $58,647,680, being an 
 average per mile of $51,034, exceeding by 
 $16,056 68 the actual cost of constructing and 
 fuiiy equipping the road, and yielding a profit 
 of more than $17,750,000.” 
 
 The letter of Mr. Williams is dated Fort 
 Wayne, Indiana, November 14. 1868. (See 
 Executive Document, 1888, volume 7, No. 
 15, part 3, pages 27, 28, 29. 
 
 DENVER PACIFIC BILL. 
 
 On June 26, 1888, Mr. Harlan, Senator 
 from Iowa, presented S. No, 570, for a grant 
 of land and granting the right of way over the 
 public lands to the Denver Pacific Railway 
 and Telegraph Company, and for other pur¬ 
 poses ; which was referred to the Pacific Rail¬ 
 road Committee. Go July 3, 1868, it reported 
 with amendments, and on July 25 it was dis¬ 
 cussed in the Senate and passed, and on the 
 same day was received in the House. On 
 January 19, 1869, (see Globe, vol. 71, p. 462,) 
 the bill was taken from the Speaker’s table 
 and discussed. Twenty-six members of the 
 House participated in the debate, among whom 
 were Messrs. Butler of Massachusetts, Dawes, 
 Kelley, Scofield, Van Trump, Washburne of 
 Illinois, and Wilson of Iowa. 
 
 Mr. Washburne, of Illinois, said, (see Globe, 
 vol. 71, pp. 463-464:) 
 
 “ Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The bill 
 before the House opens up the whole discus¬ 
 sion of the question of land grants and sub¬ 
 sidies to build railroads. In the observations 
 I propose to submit it will be impossible for 
 me to analyze the legislation of Congress 
 upon this subject for the past fifteen or eigh¬ 
 teen years. I must therefore content myself 
 by simply calling the attention of the House 
 to the fact that nearly one third of the en¬ 
 tire public domain has been made over to 
 the control of railroad corporations. The 
 number of acres granted for railroad purposes 
 is estimated at one hundred and eighty-five 
 millions At the minimum price for the public 
 land, $1 25 an acre, this amounts to more 
 than $231,000,000. But this is by no means the 
 real value of the lands granted away. While 
 a very considerable portion of this land may 
 not be really worth the minimum price of the 
 Government, taking it altogether it is worth a 
 great deal more. A great deal of it is worth 
 $2 50 an acre. A less quantity, though a very 
 large quantity, is worth five dollars an acre. 
 Tens of millions are worth ten dollars an acre, 
 and millions are worth from ten to twenty 
 dollars an acre. 
 
 It is therefore not an overestimate to say 
 that the value of public land voted away by 
 Congress in the last eighteen years has not 
 been less than $500,000,000. And as to the 
 quantity of lands conveyed by these grants, I 
 ask the attention of the Huose to one of the 
 reports of the Commissioner of the General 
 Land Office. He says it * is of empire extent, 
 exceeding in the aggregate by more than live 
 million acres the entire areas of the six New 
 
30 
 
 England States added to the surface of New 
 York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Dela¬ 
 ware, Maryland, and Virginia/ He says the 
 grants to the Pacific railway lines alone ‘are 
 within about a fourth of being twice the united 
 area of England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, 
 Guernsey, Jersey, the Isle of Mans, and the 
 islands of theBritish seas, and within less than 
 a tenth of being equal to the French empire 
 proper.’ 
 
 This extraordinary statement must startle 
 the American people, if it do not arouse their 
 intensest indignation. And this is in addition 
 to the untold millions of subsidies, to which I 
 shall hereafter refer. When it is contemplated 
 that this empire of the public land goes into the 
 hands of gigantic corporations controlled by 
 men thousands of miles away, who have neither 
 interest nor sympathy with the people in the 
 States and Territories where the land lies, and 
 when you contemplate the vast power of these 
 non-resident land-holders, the overshadowing 
 land monopoly created, the evils and oppres¬ 
 sions always connected therewith, we must all 
 be filled with amazement at the reckless and 
 shameless legislation of Congress on this sub¬ 
 ject. I do not myself claim full exemption 
 from blame in this regard, for I voted for some 
 of the earlier bills. But when I saw the use 
 that was being made of these grants, the brazen 
 greed of speculators who obtained possession 
 of them to use for their own interests, regard¬ 
 less of the public interests; when I looked 
 beyond the present and saw looming up in the 
 future the evils, the abuses, the corruptions, 
 and the oppressions which would come out of 
 these grants, my views in regard to the whole 
 policy of land grants were very materially 
 modified. And only a small band of members 
 of this House resisted the passage of the act 
 of July, 1834, amending the original Pacific 
 railroad law, an act which swept away all the 
 rights the Government had reserved to itself 
 in the original bill, which subordinated its 
 prior lien on the road to a railroad company; 
 an act which I have heretofore denounced in 
 this House, and one which will stand out in 
 history as being more infamous than any act 
 ever passed by any legislative body in the 
 annals of the world. 
 
 I say this deliberately. For under and by 
 virtue of the provisions of that act the report 
 of Jesse L. Williams, esq., the Government 
 director of the Union Pacific Railroad Com¬ 
 pany, shows the following state of facts : that 
 the entire length of the road will be eleven 
 hundred and ten miles, and that the Govern¬ 
 ment subsidy in bonds for that distance at par 
 amounts to $29,504,000, an average per mile 
 of $26,580. The company’s first mortgage 
 bonds are estimated at ninety-two per cent., 
 and would yield $27,143,680. The fund real¬ 
 ized by the company from these two sources 
 amounts to $56,647,680, being an average per 
 mile of $51,034, exceeding by $15,056 68 the 
 the actual cost of constructing and fully equip¬ 
 
 ping the road, and yielding a profit of more 
 than $17,750,000. And thus it will be seen 
 that this Union Pacific Railroad Company will 
 have, in addition to this vast empire of public 
 land, a railroad eleven hundred and ten miles 
 long, fully equipped, free of cost, and a sur¬ 
 plus of $17,750,000 put into the pockets of its 
 directors. With the amount of the people’s 
 money voted to this company sufficient to build 
 the road, with the amount of $17,750,000 in 
 addition, generously voted into the already 
 well-gorged pockets of its directors, the rates 
 of fare and freight charged to the people over 
 this road, built by their money, and $17,750,- 
 000 thrown in, are oppressive and extortionate. 
 
 A joint resolution passed this House at the 
 last session, after a severe contest, limiting 
 these rates of fare and freight; but that reso¬ 
 lution now, 1 believe, ‘ sleeps the sleep that 
 knows no waking’ in the Senate; and it fur¬ 
 ther may be said that this company has not 
 made a road as required by law, ‘ equal in all 
 respects to a fully completed first-class rail¬ 
 road;’ but, on the other hand, the commis¬ 
 sioners appointed by the Interior Department 
 last September to examine into the locatiqn, 
 construction, and equipment of the road have 
 reported that it will take $6,489,550 to make 
 it a first-class road. As to subsidies in bonds 
 which Congress has granted to railroads, the 
 report of the Secretary of the Interior made 
 on the 30th of November, 1868, shows that 
 bonds to the amount of $44,337,000 had been 
 issued to various railroad companies: 
 
 Union Pacific, eight hundred and twenty 
 
 miles. $20,238,000 
 
 Central Pacific of California, three hun¬ 
 dred and ninety miles. 14,764,000 
 
 Union Pacific, eastern division, three 
 hundred and ninety-three and nine 
 thousand four hundred and twenty-five 
 
 ten thousandths miles. 6,303,000 
 
 Sioux City and Pacific, sixty-nine and 
 
 a half miles. 1,112,000 
 
 Western Pacific, twenty miles. 320,000 
 
 Atchison and Pike’s Peak, one hundred 
 
 miles... 640,000 
 
 Central branch Union Pacific, one hun¬ 
 dred miles.. 960,000 
 
 Seventeen hundred and ninety-three 
 miles, nearly.. $44,337,000” 
 
 On January 20, 1869, Mr. Kelley addressed 
 the House at length in reply to Mr. Wash- 
 burne, (Globe vol. 71, pp. 487. 488,) and on 
 same day and on January 22, 1869, (see Globe 
 vol. 71, p. 528,) Mr. Van Trump addressed 
 the House. He said : 
 
 “Mr. VAN TRUMP. The annual re¬ 
 port of the Secretary of the Interior, laid 
 upon our tables only a few days ago, con¬ 
 tains a statement of the most startling and 
 alarming character. Sir, if I am not much 
 mistaken, it is a disclosure of the acts arid 
 doings of these railroad cormorants which will 
 astonish the people; one which will arouse 
 them from their lethargy, and draw down upon 
 the heads of these unconscionable speculators 
 their deepest condemnation. I honor the Sec- 
 
31 
 
 retary for his well-timed and manly independ¬ 
 ence in making the statement, for he must- 
 have known that nothing could have been 
 more damaging to the interests as well as the 
 
 * character of these railroad managers.’ ’ 
 
 On page 14, of his printed report, the hon¬ 
 orable Secretary makes the following state¬ 
 ment: 
 
 ‘As the actual cost of this road is a matter 
 of public interest, I deem it proper to present 
 in a condensed form the estimates submitted 
 on the 14th instant by Jesse L. Williams, esq. 
 He states that the cost of the road as shown 
 on the books of the railroad company is, of 
 course, equivalent to the contract price per 
 mile. The actual, cost to the contractors 
 forming au association, which embraces most 
 of the larger stockholders of the company, is 
 shown only by their private books, to which 
 the Government directors have no access. 
 The calculations were therefore made from 
 the most accurate available data, and the 
 estimated cost of the first seven hundred and 
 ten miles of the road was taken as the basis 
 for computing that of the whole line. Should 
 the road, as is expected by the company, form 
 a junction with that of the California com¬ 
 pany near the northern extreme of Great 
 Salt Lake, a little west of Monument Point, 
 its length would be about eleven hundred and 
 ten miles. The cost of locating, constructing, 
 and completely equipping it and the telegraph 
 
 % line is $38,824,821, an average per miie of 
 $34,977 32, 
 
 The Government subsidy in bonds for that 
 distance at par amounts to $29,504,000, an 
 average per mile of $26,580. The company’s 
 
 • first mortgage bonds were estimated at ninety- 
 two per cent., and would yield $27,143,680. 
 The fund realized by the company from these 
 two sources amounts to $56,647,680, being an 
 average per mile of $51,034, exceeding by 
 $16,056 68 the actual cost of constructing and 
 fully equipping the road, and yielding a profit 
 of more than $17,750,000.’ 
 
 Now, Mr. Speaker, I. put the question di¬ 
 rectly to this House whether this is not a most 
 extraordinary statement of the management 
 of the affairs of this road, in which the money 
 of the people is so deeply involved? It is to 
 be borne in mind that this is no personal or 
 partisan allegation, no idle newspaper charge, 
 no imputation resting upon mere common ru¬ 
 mor; but that it is a sober, serious statement, 
 upon reliable data, in a public official State 
 document, by one of the great Departments of 
 the Government, and which remains to-day 
 unchallenged and uncontradicted by any of 
 the ‘ high contracting parties ’ alleged to 
 be connected with the transaction. 
 
 CREDIT MOBILIER. 
 
 There are one or two features of this state¬ 
 ment calculated to challenge an attention at 
 once intense and painful. The very worst fea¬ 
 ture of all is the fact that “most of the largest 
 
 stockholders of the company” should have 
 combined with each other to “form an associ¬ 
 ation,” thus creating an adverse interest, as 
 “contractors,” to the interests of the corpora¬ 
 tion, for the purpose of building a road in 
 which the Government had invested the sum 
 of nearly $30,000,000 as guarantor of that 
 same corporation ; a situation so delicate and 
 so full of temptation to prey upon and fraud¬ 
 ulently deal with such an immense outside 
 capital that no honest man or men would 
 desire to occupy. 
 
 I should like to see a list of those contract¬ 
 ing stockholders. 1 think it would open the 
 people’s eyes. Sir, it is a specimen of the 
 “confidence game” in which we might well 
 affirm that its turpitude is almost lost in its 
 magnitude. If we could look in upon all its 
 secret springs and hidden movements, what an 
 interesting and spectacular drama might it not 
 present! But it is to us and to the people a 
 terra incognita. Railroad embankments, ex¬ 
 cavations, bridges, and underground masonry 
 are capital inventions to hide away ill gotten 
 treasure with no danger of its discovery or 
 exposure unless through the instrumentality 
 of honest and disinterested science in a full 
 and accurate measurement of the entire work 
 from one end of the line to the other. One of 
 the Government directors, Mr. Williams, in a 
 letter of November 14, 1868, says that the 
 actual cost of the road to the contracting 
 company is shown only by their private books, 
 of which the Government directors have no 
 knowledge. He knows what the cost of the 
 road is to the corporation, and consequently 
 to the Government, by the terms of the con¬ 
 tract ; but all else growing out of this Credit 
 Mobilier arrangement ‘ shadows and dark¬ 
 ness’ rest upon it. * * * * 
 
 Sir, is it not strange that none of these 
 stockholders or contractors have ever ad¬ 
 mitted or denied this most remarkable state¬ 
 ment made in an official document issued by 
 one of the great Departments of the Govern¬ 
 ment? And yet as to this immense sum thus 
 found in the hands of these disinterested pa¬ 
 triots it is to be borne in mind that not one 
 dollar of it comes from the millions of acres 
 of lands granted by the Government to this 
 all-grasping monopoly. That great subsidy 
 yet remains intact and untouched, and will 
 hereafter add millions of dollars more to this 
 “profit” fund when they shall be sold by the 
 company to the people, the original and right¬ 
 ful owners. Sir, it is indeed time that the 
 people should ponder well and seriously upon 
 these most extraordinary transactions. The 
 people will have some idea of the vast resources 
 placed in the hands of a few favored individ¬ 
 uals when they are informed that over tifcy- 
 one million dollars of the bonds of the 
 Government have already been issued to a 
 single line of road and its tributaries and con¬ 
 necting branches. The Union Pacific railroad 
 
32 
 
 is connected with, and therefore will control 
 the following other roads, to wit: Central 
 Pacific of California, Union Pacific, eastern 
 division, Sioux City and Pacific, Western 
 Pacific, Atchison and Pike’s Peak, and cen¬ 
 tral branch Union Pacific. The last annual 
 report of the Secretary of the Interior shows 
 the amounts of Government bonds issued to 
 these several lines, which, with the $7,000,000 
 issued last month and since that report was 
 made, make the aggregate sum over fifty-one 
 million dollars, as above stated, 
 
 ******** 
 
 Thus, sir, it will be seen that this road is also 
 deficient in its construction and equipment, to 
 an amount almost equal to one third of the 
 entire sum which would have completed and 
 fully equipped it as a first-class railroad. And 
 yet every dollar of the full quota of Govern 
 meat bonds have been issued and delivered in 
 violation of the express provisions of a law 
 passed almost in f urore by a Congress but too 
 ready and anxious to serve the interests of a 
 banded clique of capitalists and speculators, 
 who have from the beginning looked more to 
 the construction of the road than to the road 
 itself and its business afterward as the means 
 of private profit to themselves. Does any one 
 doubt that these stockholding contractors in 
 the Union Pacific railroad feel more interest 
 in their contract than they do in their stocks, 
 and that the temptation to sacrifice their un¬ 
 paid stock to the profits of their contract is the 
 key to this most remarkable arrangement? 
 The stock as an investment and the ultimate 
 success of the road is a naked experiment; 
 the profits of the contract made under such 
 circumstances can be placed beyond all con¬ 
 tingency. In such an alternative self-interest 
 never hesitates. It will sacrifice the lesser 
 to the greater interest, and so between two 
 modes of speculation, or even peculation, it 
 will grasp the certain at the expense of the 
 uncertain. 
 
 ****** * * 
 
 Mr, Speaker, Ido notknow how the fact may 
 be, for 1 have not the means of knowing, but 
 I do know that the opinion prevails pretty ex¬ 
 tensively among the people that not a dollar 
 of the large stock originally subscribed to the 
 Union Pacific railroad has been applied to its 
 construction. I see my colleague on the com¬ 
 mittee, the gentleman from Massachusetts, 
 [Mr. Ames,] now sitting before me, smiles at 
 this declaration. I do not state the fact as of 
 my own knowledge; I state it as a common 
 belief. But, however this may be, sir, one fact 
 is certain, that by the amendatory act of 1864 
 the miserable pittance of five per cent, semi 
 annually may be assessed upon the stock¬ 
 holders ; so that in any event sixty per cent, 
 of its entire stock yet remains undue, and 
 of course not paid in. The inference to be 
 drawn from all this is at once suggestive and 
 alarming.” 
 
 Extracts from debate in the United States Sen * 
 ate on the resolution of Mr. Bingham, of 
 Ohio, for the 'protection of the interests of 
 the United States in the Union Pacific Rail¬ 
 road Company, April 5 and 6, 1869, passed 
 the House March 15, 1869. The object of 
 this was to enable the company to remove 
 causes from the State courts to United States 
 courts , in order to escape Fisk 1 s suit in New 
 York, and to give them other relief. ( Con¬ 
 gressional Globe , volume seventy-four , p. 
 503.) 
 
 Mr. Stewart, of Nevada, having denounced 
 the measure as in the interest of a com¬ 
 bination which was defrauding the Govern¬ 
 ment and seeking aid from Congress in order 
 to escape the jurisdiction of the courts in New 
 York, where a suit was then pending between 
 the parties forming the Credit Mobilier , and 
 having exhibited some of the contracts be¬ 
 tween Mr. Oakes Ames and other Credit Mo¬ 
 bilier stockholders, proceeded to say: 
 
 “credit mobilier. 
 
 44 Mr. STEWART. He alleges that there was 
 a conspiracy between a certain lot of people styl¬ 
 ing themselves the Credit Mobilier , a ‘ring’ 
 inside of the Union Pacific Railroad Company, 
 to swindle all the world pretty near; and he 
 makes out a strong case. His first allegation 
 is—and it is one of the leading allegations in 
 this case, and it is stated everywhere in the 
 public prints and in the reports of the com¬ 
 missioners—that the Credit Mobilier has made 
 very large dividends, enormous dividends. I 
 believe the Credit Mobilier people themselves 
 admit that fact. They are put as high as 
 $30,000,000, $15,000,000 in stock. One of 
 the company, 1 believe, testified before the 
 Committee on the Pacific Railroad that there 
 were dividends of $15,000,000 of stock made 
 through the Credit Mobilier. I could not get 
 at the exact data as to the amount of Govern¬ 
 ment. bonds, but the profits of that concern 
 have been enormous. He asserts that the 
 Credit Mobilier have made contracts with 
 themselves, being also the trustees of the 
 Union Pacific road, so as to absorb the entire 
 Government bounty, and have made dividends 
 among themselves. He even goes so far as 
 to charge that members of Congress are inter¬ 
 ested in this thing. I have heard it stated 
 that leading members of Congress, members 
 of the Committee on the Pacific Railroad in 
 the House, were not only in the Union Pa¬ 
 cific, but in this identical Credit Mobilier , 
 and were the recipients of enormous divi¬ 
 dends ,* and I have not heard it deuied. It is 
 farther stated that for that very reason the 
 thing never would be investigated; and it is 
 said, 4 You want to take it out of the courts; 
 you want to stifle investigation everywhere.’ 
 Are we quite prepared to place Congress in 
 that situation if there is anything wrong about 
 this matter? There may be something wrong. 
 
33 
 
 Before we pass any law on the subj'ect we 
 should know that it is alleged that this Credit 
 Mobilier, using the Union Pacific railroad, 
 has made further contracts incumbering the 
 ♦ road—coal contracts and other contracts lap¬ 
 ping ahead.’ ’ 
 
 Speaking of McComb’s suit, he says, (page 
 533:) 
 
 “The complaint charges that Oakes Ames 
 holds three hundred and forty-three shares as 
 a secret trustee for persons whose names do 
 not appear on the books, and the allegation 
 is that he is distributing the dividends among 
 parties unknown. Mr. McComb says in his 
 complaint: 
 
 4 That the concession of the said three hun¬ 
 dred and forty-three shares to Oakes Ames as 
 a secret trustee for persons not designated or 
 named, and the agreement of said Ames to 
 hold the said shares for the use of such 
 unnamed persons, and all payments of div- 
 v idends or profits to them or to the said Ames 
 for their use are illegal, corrupt, in fraud of 
 the plaintiff’s rights, of non-effect, and void.’ ” 
 
 Then, again, he uses the following language: 
 
 44 And for further relief in this behalf your 
 orator prays that in case the defendants shall 
 fail, refuse, or be unable to make such specific 
 restitution fully and completely, it may be 
 decreed and adjudged against all the defend¬ 
 ants, severally and jointly, that they pay to 
 him, the plaintiff, in lawful money, the full 
 and entire value of the three hundred and 
 seventy-five shares aforesaid, at the rate of 
 $500 per share, and also all the dividends and 
 profits thereon which have accrued since the 
 3d day of March, 1866, which dividends and 
 f profits amount at this time to the sum of 
 $752 upon each share, and amount upon the 
 three hundred and seventy-five shares aforesaid 
 i to the aggregate sum of $280,000. 
 
 * * * * * * * * * 
 
 Senators, one thing is very certain: the 
 Credit Mobilier have got enough of this stock 
 that they have issued since they obtained the 
 management of the affairs of the company to 
 control all elections. One of the managers of 
 the Credit Mobilier testified before the Com¬ 
 mittee on the Pacific Railroad that they had 
 made stock dividends amounting to some 
 $15,000,000. That appears to be in direct 
 violation of the spirit of the law. 
 **** ***** 
 
 (Page 534.) How have these men all this 
 stock ? By subscribing a little, then closing the 
 books, organizing the Credit Mobilier , contract¬ 
 ing with that concern that it shall keep in power 
 the present directory, making contracts with 
 that concern whereby enormous profits are 
 realized, and making dividends in the stock 
 of the company, and thereby placing it out of 
 t * the reach of all the world. With what have 
 they bought up this $15,000,000 of stock? 
 With their own money ? No, sir ; but with the 
 bounty of the Government. 
 
 Now, as to the cost of this road to Cheyenne, 
 
 five hundred miles, they receive $16,000 a 
 mile in Government bonds, $8,000,000; one 
 hundred and fifty miles from that place forward 
 they receive $48,000 a mile, $7,200,000. Say 
 they have gone four hundred miles further— 
 they have gone more than that I believe—they 
 would have $12,000,000. They have had 
 $30,000,000 in round numbers of Government 
 bonds. I do not know the exact distance they 
 have gone ; but that is about the amount. 
 Thirty million dollars more of first mortgage 
 bonds would make $60,000,000. Then there 
 is all the stock of the company, which if sold 
 for the value fixed by law, its par value, would 
 be $100,000,000. If sold for the value that 
 Fisk proposes to pay for it fifty-five cents on 
 the dollar, it would be $55,000,000. Now we 
 have over $100,000,000 besides the land. How 
 much is that worth ? It has not been estimated. 
 This stock should have sold for fifty-five cents 
 on the dollar. Men were willing to buy it at 
 that.” 
 
 Mr. Nye said, (see Globe, vol. 74, pages 
 538, and 548, 549,^550:) 
 
 “credit mobilier. 
 
 44 Mr. NYE. They have violated their char¬ 
 ter a dozen times. They have used the Credit 
 Mobilier —that myth, that nondescript, that 
 4 What is it,’ that 4 who is it.’ When that belly 
 into which all this matter has been swallowed, 
 this hole into which $2,000,000 of supposed 
 capitol was covered, has swallowed all the 
 Government subsidy, all the first mortgage 
 bonds, all the lands, it is as voracious to-day 
 as the horseleech’s daughter that cries 4 Give, 
 give,’ when there is no more to give. This 
 Credit Mobilier when you come to search for 
 it, is less than a myth; there is not a mark 
 where it sat except of ruin. When men have 
 done wrong they resort to all devices that are 
 possible. The Union Pacific railroad is ar¬ 
 raigned before a tribunal in New York, and 
 immediately the Union Pacific railroad is here 
 asking for a congressional enactment to inter¬ 
 pose between it and the courts of New York. 
 If there are any two things that seem to me to be 
 compatible they are the Credit Mobilier and 
 Judge Barnard. I doubt whether Barnard ever 
 found his match before, and it is a fit place for 
 them. Let Barnard search with his judicial 
 glasses to find the Credit Mobilier . It has 
 done its work, and now wants a congressional 
 enactment to screen it from Judge Barnard. 
 It is an old saying, that 4 when rogues fall out 
 honest men get their due.’ 
 
 Tell me, some good financier, how in the 
 name of fair dealing a company has divided its 
 millions that has borrowed every dollar it has 
 had? They owe the Government its bonds 
 to-day ; they owe the bondholders all their 
 own bonds that they have issued; if they have 
 stock out, as is charged in the case of Fisk, 
 and they have not appropriated the money for 
 which that stock has been sold, they owe that; 
 and in fact it is said it has not been sold at all, 
 and if so, they are committing a fraud upon. 
 
34 
 
 the stockholders. Now, I want to know how 
 money is to be made in that way? The more 
 a man owes the more he makes 1 Is that the 
 idea ? I see the head of this affair here in 
 my eye, [alluding to Mr. Oakes Ames.] I 
 should like to have him cipher it out and show 
 me how it is that when they borrow from thirty- 
 two to sixty-four thousand dollars to the mill 
 and owe it all they have got so rich ? I will 
 tell you how it is. The Government, in its 
 munificence and in its magnanimity, allowed 
 the law to be so amended that they should 
 issue their own bonds first, and the security 
 of the Government for its bonds should be a 
 secondary consideration. 
 
 I am now supposing this Credit Mobilier to 
 be a living thing, and the manipulator and 
 manager of the whole. If I was going to 
 guess—and being a Yankee I believe I have a 
 right to guess—the way they are to make their 
 money i3 about this: they have got a road 
 made, at least some of the way, of very doubt¬ 
 ful material, some of the way crookeder than 
 the horn that was blown arqund the walls of 
 Jericho,* they call it themselves, in their re¬ 
 port, the Z. My honorable friend from Ne¬ 
 braska says that they had a right to make Zs 
 or Ws or anything else. They had no right to 
 make the road in such a manner as to trample 
 down the obligations they were under to the 
 Government and to their real genuine stock¬ 
 holders. This Credit Mobilier will be blown 
 into thin air, as it is now. It is something 
 that you cannot find. It had its origin in 
 Pennsylvania, and has crossed the line and 
 got into New York, and where it will be next 
 God only knows. 
 
 The way they intend to make the money is 
 to let the road be sold upon the first mortgage 
 bonds and ask the Government where it is 
 going to get its security. That is what they 
 mean, if anything. That is not fair dealing. 
 
 Magical financiering, indescribable skill! 
 The Credit Mobilier and the Union Pacific 
 railroad are the same thing precisely. Fisk 
 has sworn to it, and not one of the company 
 has sworn to the opposite. Why do they not 
 answer solemnly in that court? There is no 
 answer put in, and therefore Fisk stands un¬ 
 contradicted before the world in his charges 
 that this company is steeped in fraud to its 
 very armpits. They have not denied it, but 
 they appeared yesterday in court in New 
 York, and, as if by magic, their action was 
 printed and laid on the tables here this morn¬ 
 ing; but it does not meet the case. It is 
 not what the law of New York requires—a 
 solemn answer to the complaint under oath. 
 They will never make it there ; and if they fail 
 to get Congress to say that they may hold their 
 meeting here, Fisk will be compromised with 
 pretty quick, because he knows too much 
 about it. Why get it here? Are there no 
 courts? I have a little pride in the judicial 
 history of New York. Whatever may be said 
 of the local courts of New York city, at the 
 
 head of the judiciary of that great State sits 
 a tribunal as pure as the water that flowed 
 from the fountain when smitten by the prophet’s 
 rod, and as able as any other judicial tri¬ 
 bunal of this nation, and whose decisions are 
 regarded as law as wide as civilization is known. 
 These people have no business to be afraid of 
 and to ask to flee from the courts of New 
 York. No, sir; her judicial names will shine 
 when the Credit Mobilier will smell unsavory 
 in the nostrils of a defrauded people. Why 
 enter into an agreement, binding with fetters 
 that the stockholders cannot break, that they 
 should perpetuate Mr. Ames and Mr. A B 
 and Mr. C D as directors so long as they 
 held the stock ? 
 
 That is the inquiry the country will make. 
 
 That is the inquiry that will answer the hon¬ 
 orable Senator’s question why is it that we 
 want no new commissions for these parties to 
 manipulate. Everything that they have taken 
 hold of has felt the blast of the upas ; and 
 for God’s sake let them wither no more. Let 
 there be no new commissions. Why, sir, this 
 Credit Mobilier as compared with the corpora¬ 
 tion to build the railroad reminds me of an 
 incident that is said to have occurred in Eng¬ 
 land. When the Bishop of Rochester swore, 
 one of his flock overheard him and said it was 
 entirely unbecoming a bishop to use profane 
 language. Said he, ‘You do not understand 
 the point at all; I did not swear as a bishop ; 
 
 I swore as simple, plain John Delainey.’ The 
 reply was, ‘ When the devil came for tha 
 bishop where would Delainey be?’ So I 
 inquire when the law goes after the Credit 
 Mobilier where is the Pacific railroad ?” 
 
 Mr. Wilson, of Massachusetts, and Mr. 
 Conkling took part in the debate. (See Globe, 
 vol. 74, pp. 545-547, and 548, April 6, 1869.) 
 
 “ Mr. VYILSON. As I have listened to the 
 zeal and earnestness with which the question 
 has been discussed here and elsewhere, I hava 
 felt sometimes that the Central Pacific rail¬ 
 road had friends, that the eastern division had 
 friends, that the Union Pacifie railroad had 
 friends, and that the Government had very 
 few. I think our business is to take care of 
 the interests of the country, and not to take 
 care of the interests of either the Union Pacific 
 railroad or the Central Pacific railroad. The 
 men who represent the interests of this Gov¬ 
 ernment in the work stand before Congress 
 and the country and unite in asking action. I 
 believe they know what the interests of the 
 country are, and I think we should have acted 
 long ago. Now, sir, here we are to-night. I 
 think we ought to act upon this joint resolu¬ 
 tion, and to finish it now. We propose to 
 adjourn on Saturday. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. I understand the honor¬ 
 able Senator from Massachusetts to say that 
 he belongs to that party which he thinks, and 
 I am inclined to agree with him, is rather 
 small, composed of the friends of the Govern¬ 
 ment, in this matter. I would like to join him % ( 
 
35 
 
 as a member of that party and follow him. 
 With th.at view I should like to make two in¬ 
 quiries. Does the Senator tell the Senate that 
 ^ the five gentlemen constituting the Govern¬ 
 ment directors in this company have ever, in 
 any form, suggested or asked for legislation 
 since the Cabinet, upon the opinion of the 
 Attorney General, took action, which occurred 
 about the 1st of March last? 
 
 Mr. WILSON. An attempt was made to 
 elect directors in the city of New York, but it 
 was broken up by the intervention of the courts, 
 at the instigation of Mr. Fisk. The five Gov¬ 
 ernment directors came here and united in a 
 written and printed call upon Congress to so 
 legislate as to allow the election of directors of 
 that road and allow the company to remove to 
 some other place its business office. That is in 
 the first section of the joint resolution. As to 
 the second and third sections, I do not know 
 that any of them are recommended at all by 
 the Government directors. They are moved 
 by the Senator from Ohio, and are distinct 
 propositions from the other. 
 
 Mr. CONKLING. That obviates the ne¬ 
 cessity of my asking the second question which 
 I rose to put. I understand, then, and the 
 understanding of the Senator is like my own, 
 that these five gentlemen did ask to be rescued 
 by Congress from the litigation in which they 
 were involved, and to be permitted to change 
 their home office from the city of New York 
 % to some other place, which was originally pre¬ 
 sented with many alternatives, putting in a 
 good many cities ; and I was desirous to know 
 whether they asked more than this, because 
 I thought I had, and I think I have, unmis- 
 * takable evidence that no one of these men has 
 ever proposed, under pretense of protecting 
 the Government, such provisions as are found 
 in the second section.” 
 
 Mr. Davis, of Kentucky, proposed an 
 amendment providing that the Attorney Gen¬ 
 eral should investigate the condition of the 
 companies, and the conduct of the directors, 
 and if need be institute proceedings against 
 • them ; and upon this amendment the follow¬ 
 ing debates occurred. (See pages 670 and 
 671, 672, 673.) 
 
 u Mr. DAVIS, of Kentucky. This corpora¬ 
 tion has received an endowment from the Gov¬ 
 ernment that has no parallel in the history of 
 all other works combined. Now, sir, there are 
 a few principles of law and of common honesty 
 that ought to regulate all such works as the 
 Pacific railroad. I will name some of them. 
 One is that all the current expenses of the pro¬ 
 ject ought to be paid as they arise. After the 
 current expenses are paid, all the revenues and 
 produce of the company ought to be appro- 
 r priated to the construction of the road. There 
 ought to be no dividends declared and parti¬ 
 tions made among the stockholders until the 
 work is complete. 
 
 Mr. President, we were informed a few 
 f days ago that there had been the most marvel¬ 
 
 ous amount of dividends declared among the 
 stockholders in the eastern section of this 
 road. How did that come about? This road, 
 it seems beyond all question, is very far from 
 being finished, and to a considerable extent 
 that it has been constructed the construction 
 has been very inadequate and the work very 
 insufficient to come up to the requisitions of 
 the charter. How happened it when the road 
 was in this state of incompleteness and of im¬ 
 perfect execution to some considerable extent 
 that such a marvelous amount of dividends 
 was made among the shareholders by the di¬ 
 rectors? 
 
 We had a little inkling into this matter when 
 the subject was before the Senate the other 
 day. There was a director of the eastern sec¬ 
 tion of this road, a member of the other House, 
 and there was the chief engineer of the pro¬ 
 ject, and also a member of the other House, 
 who were confronting the Senate during the 
 whole time of the debate upon the subject. I 
 ask how does it come about that the chief en¬ 
 gineer of the company instead of being upon 
 the line of the road and supervising and super¬ 
 intending the road in its construction every 
 day through its whole length is found to be a 
 member of the House of Representatives ? He 
 does not represent the private stockholders 
 alone. No engineer does. He is the legiti¬ 
 mate and responsible representative of every 
 interest in the road. He represents the Gov¬ 
 ernment as well as the private stockholders in 
 that road; at least it is his duty to do so. He 
 is a thousand miles or more away from the 
 field of his duties, a member of Congress, 
 vottog upon every proposition in relation to 
 the interests of this road, when he ought to be 
 in the field exercising and executing the im¬ 
 portant duties of chief engineer of the road. 
 What is he here for? Can he better repre¬ 
 sent that road and ail its interests by serving 
 as a member of Congress in the other House 
 or by being upon the line of the road perform¬ 
 ing the high and important duties of chief 
 engineer? 
 
 There was another member of that private 
 corporation from the other House on the fioor 
 of the Senate during the whole of the debate. 
 He represents, it seems, and owns interest in 
 the road to the amount of hundreds of thou¬ 
 sands of dollars. He was one of the direct¬ 
 ors of the road. He was one of the three 
 parties to the contract that was read by the 
 honorable Senator from Nevada, [Mr. Stew¬ 
 art,] to which the Credit Mobilier was a party. 
 With ail his interest in the road, I presume, 
 and I believe the fact is, that he was voting 
 upon every proposition involving the construc¬ 
 tion of the road, and of course his princely 
 interests in it. Is that a right condition of 
 things? We have a rule of the Senate, and 
 there is a rule of the House also, that posi¬ 
 tively interdicts any member from voting upon 
 any question in which he has a direct interest. 
 
 I suppose there was no proposition in relation 
 
36 
 
 to these roads, and especially in relation to 
 the conflict of interest and pretension and 
 right to the endowment by Congress of the 
 roads to the enormous amount that Congress 
 has endowed them, in which there was not a 
 rival interest between them, and in which the 
 personal interests of that director and that 
 large shareholder in the private stock of the 
 road, and also the personal interests of the 
 chief engineer, were not deeply involved; and 
 yet we have a positive rule of both Houses 
 that no member shall vote upon any question 
 in which he has a direct personal interest. 
 
 Sir, are not these extraordinary features in 
 the management of this road, in the con¬ 
 tracts which are made for it by its directors ; 
 in the presence of two men who are as deeply 
 interested in it as the two men to whom I have 
 referred, being members of the other House 
 of Congress, and voting on all the questions 
 involving at least the large pecuniary interests 
 of one of them! These matters ought to be 
 looked to by Congress. The members of Con¬ 
 gress, and especially the committee who have 
 charge of this great work, owe it to the coun¬ 
 try, owe it to the Government, owe it to them¬ 
 selves, to undertake a close examination and 
 supervision of all the interests of the road, and 
 especially of the conduct of the directors and 
 of the chief engineer generally. I do think 
 that this subject ought not to be dismissed by 
 the Senate, late as it is in the session, until 
 there are provisions attached to this joint reso¬ 
 lution that will guard the interests of the Gov¬ 
 ernment and of the country generally in the 
 road against the anticipated catastrophe of the 
 honorable Senator from Nevada. What was 
 his prognostication ? That this company by 
 declaring such an amount of dividends was 
 making a case to go into bankruptcy. 
 
 It is not my amendment that will bring dis¬ 
 credit upon the road, if it is to be discredited. 
 
 It will be the disclosures that have been 
 made in this debate of the enormous misman¬ 
 agement of the road by its directory. I under¬ 
 stand that dividends have been declared to the 
 amount of about twenty million dollars. I 
 understand that the amount of subsidies which 
 this end of the road has received from the 
 Government is about twenty-nine million dol¬ 
 lars, and that the amount of the debt which it 
 owes, and which it has secured the payment 
 of by its mortgage, amounts to $29,000,000. 
 There are, then, $58,000,000 of indebtedness 
 by this company, either due or to fall due, and 
 the road is unfinished. It will take a large 
 amount of money yet to finish it as a first-class 
 railroad. 
 
 I ask the honorable Senator what kind of 
 direction is it for a road to make dividends 
 of $18,000,000, when it owes $58,000,000 to 
 honest creditors, and the road is so far un¬ 
 finished as to require many millions more to 
 make it a first-clas3 road? Is there any 
 fidelity, any honesty, any good faith or 
 . morality in that sort of management? Will 
 
 that sort of management of this railroad be 
 tolerated by Congress? Is it not a violation 
 of common honesty, and of ail sound and 
 correct management of roads, when such divi¬ 
 dends take place when the road is incomplete, 
 and when there is such an amount of debt due 
 to creditors ? 
 
 These facts are laid before the Senate ; they 
 are uncontroverted. They are in an official 
 report which I have before me. 
 
 Mr. WILSON. It is enough to make the 
 heartsick to hear what we hear and see what 
 we see in regard to the railroads of the coun¬ 
 try. All sorts of schemes are here, all kinds 
 of interests are here, and it is a very difficult 
 thing to give a vote or utter a word without 
 subjecting one’s self to the imputation of 
 being owned, or run, or directed by some cor¬ 
 poration, or some combination, or some ring 
 of men. But, sir, it is our duty to take care 
 of the public interests. We determined to 
 build a railway to the Pacific ocean, and that 
 railway has been pushed with a vigor and 
 energy never surpassed, never equaled in any 
 portion of the world. 
 
 But, sir, while this construction of the 
 Pacific railroad has been pushed with great 
 vigor, it cannot be denied that some actions 
 have taken place in reference to the building 
 of that road calculated to injure persons con¬ 
 nected with it, and it cannot be denied that 
 the thieves have made a raid upon the road 
 and upon everybody connected with it. The 
 public mind has been led to believe that there 
 are wrongs somewhere. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS, of Kentucky. It is not denied 
 that the chief engineer of the Union Pacific 
 railroad is a member of the other House. 
 
 Mr. THAYER. He is not now.. He was 
 formerly. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS, of Kentucky. I ask the hon¬ 
 orable Senator from Massachusetts if it was 
 seemly, if it was right and proper that he should 
 have held these two positions ? I do not know 
 when the other member of the late and present 
 House who has been spoken of became attached 
 in interest to this great project. I have no preju¬ 
 dice whatever against that stockholder and 
 that member of the House of Representatives. 
 The honorable Senator from Massachusetts 
 does not controvert that this directory has de¬ 
 clared large dividends among the stockholders. 
 I say that there cannot be a more flagrant der¬ 
 eliction of duty than the declaration of large 
 dividends, considering the indebtedness of 
 this company, and the unfinished condition of 
 the road. In the report of Mr. Snow, giving 
 a statement of the liabilities of the Union Pa¬ 
 cific Railroad Company, he puts them down 
 thus : 
 
 United States bonds. 
 
 First mortgage bonds. 
 
 Bills payable, loans, &c., January 1, 
 
 .$29,328,000 
 
 . 29,328,000 
 
 1869... 13.059,847 
 
 Making an aggregate of. 
 
 $71,715,847 
 
 That is the enormous amount of indebted- 
 
37 
 
 ness of this road according to this showing; 
 and with all this vast load of debt the company 
 has the hardihood to declare dividends and 
 ^ divide out among its principal shareholders 
 the amount of millions. I ask if there ever 
 was a more flagrant denouement of mismanage¬ 
 ment upon any corporation whatever? If 
 ever there was a vast corporation having under 
 its management millions and tens of millions, 
 almost one hundred million dollars, in which 
 there is such a mighty interest of people, of 
 stockholders and of Government, that needed 
 investigation, thorough and searching, this is 
 the subject, and this is the time and the occa¬ 
 sion ; and I hope the Senate will adopt the 
 amendment which provides that this investi¬ 
 gation shall be made by the Attorney General 
 of the United States.” 
 
 The amendment was adopted, and became 
 part of the act, but if any investigation was 
 had under it, the fact or the result has not 
 been published. 
 
 By the Poland report, No. 77, among the 
 admitted Credit Mobilier stockholders appear, 
 (see list on p. 67-68, and findings and evi¬ 
 dence as to purchasers of stock held by Oakes 
 Ames as trustee:) 
 
 Thomas C. Durant, George F. Train, J. M. 
 S. Williams, H. S. McComb, J. W. Grimes, 
 Oliver Ames, J. B. Alley, Samuel Hooper & 
 % Co., Oakes Ames, C. H. Neilson, H. L. Dawes, 
 Glenni W. Scofield, John A. Bingham, Wil¬ 
 liam B. Allison, James F. Wilson. 
 
 SIOUX CITY AND PACIFIC. 
 
 f Among the stockholders in the Sioux City 
 and Pacific Railroad Company, a branch of 
 the Union Pacific, as appears by the record 
 of a case in the supreme court of New York, 
 containing the testimony of Ames and others, 
 are: 
 
 Oakes Ames, John I. Blair, Blairtown, 
 New Jersey; John B. Alley, Samuel Hooper 
 & Co., J. F. Wilson, William B. Allison. 
 
 IOWA FALLS AND SIOUX CITY. 
 
 Among the subscribers, stockholders, and 
 bondholders of the Iowa Falls and Sioux City 
 railroad—which connects with the Sioux City 
 and Pacific at Sioux City—as appears from 
 the report of the Poland committee on that 
 road (Forty-Second Congress, third session, 
 report 82, pages 45 and 5, 6, 7, 18, 19, and 
 20) are: 
 
 Oakes Ames, John B. Alley, John I. Blair 
 (of Blairstown, New Jersey,) Oliver Ames 
 and Sons, A. & P. Coburn, James G. Blaine, 
 Frederick A. Pike, James W. Grimes, Glenni 
 W. Scofield, H. S. McComb, Samuel Hooper 
 , k & Co., James F. Wilson, William B. Allison. 
 
 REPORT ON IOWA FALLS AND SIOUX CITY. 
 
 This report shows that this company re¬ 
 ceived a land grant by act of Congress, March 
 t 2, 1868, reviving the grant to the State of 
 
 Iowa, made in 1856, and lapsed in 1866, for a 
 road from Dubuque to Sioux City, that the 
 old company had made about one hundred and 
 wenty miles and failed. The revived grant 
 gave the company until January, 1872, to 
 build the road. The new company was 
 formed in 1857, and procured the act of Con¬ 
 gress reviving, and concurrent legislation in 
 Iowa to applying it. They thus received be¬ 
 tween six hundred thousand and seven hun¬ 
 dred thousand acres. The Commissioner of 
 the Land Office estimates it at 688,563 acres. 
 (See his letters with report.) These lands 
 have sold and are selling at from six to seven 
 dollars per acre, averaging $6 50, and are 
 therefore worth over $4,500,000. (See testi¬ 
 mony of Ames and Biair and statement of 
 Jay Cooke & Co.) Mr. John I. Blair, the 
 chief corporator, swears, on page 43 : 
 
 “ Question . What was the actual cash cost 
 of that road originally ? 
 
 Answer . We paid in fifty*seven per cent, on 
 eight millions, about $4,625,000. That was 
 the cost of the road, depots, round-houses, 
 side tracks, and everything. That was the 
 whole amount expended.” 
 
 This road runs through a very fertile region, 
 and it is safe to say that with probable advance 
 in the value of lands, the land grant is worth 
 all the road cost, so that its constructors, and 
 those who join them on the “ground floor,” get 
 the road for nothing. Before it was built it had 
 been leased unstocked to the Illinois Central 
 Railroad Company at thirty-five per cent, of 
 the gross earnings for the first ten years, and 
 thirty-six per cent, thereafter, the lease renew¬ 
 able forever. 
 
 The report of the Poland committee on this 
 road states: 
 
 “Among the subscribers was Mr. Oakes 
 Ames, then and now a member of Congress 
 from Massachusetts, and he and his firm and 
 members of his family subscribed $950,000; 
 Samuel Hooper & Co., of Boston, sub¬ 
 scribed $200,000. Mr. Samuel Hooper, of 
 the House, is the senior member of the firm. 
 Mr. William B. Allison, of Iowa; Mr. James 
 
 F. Wilson, of Iowa ; Mr. J. W. Grimes, of 
 Iowa; Mr. F. A. Pike, of Maine ; and Mr. 
 
 G. W. Scofield, of Pennsylvania, were also 
 subscribers, and were at the time members of 
 Congress. 
 
 Among other subscribers were Messrs. A. 
 and P. Coburn, of Maine, to the amount of 
 $200,000. It was claimed that this subscrip¬ 
 tion was made in whole or in part for the 
 benefit of Mr. Blaine, the present Speaker of 
 the House, and we have therefore investigated 
 that matter and all connection of Mr. Blaine 
 with the road. 
 
 The Coburns are gentlemen of large wealth, 
 and have been concerned largely in railroad 
 and other business enterprises for many years. 
 In some of these matters Mr. Blaine has been 
 connected with them. In the latter part of 
 1863, or early in 1869, Mr. John I. Blair, 
 
 STOCKHOLDERS IN LAND-GRANT AND SUBSIDY RAIL¬ 
 ROADS— CBEDIT MOBILIER. 
 
38 
 
 before mentioned, spoke to Mr. Blaine about 
 becoming a subscriber toward the building of 
 this road, and Mr. Grimes also had similar 
 conversation with him. Mr. Blaine said that 
 he was not then in a condition to become a 
 subscriber, but that, from their representation 
 of the character of the investment, he thought 
 the Messrs. Coburn might desire to do so. 
 At the suggestion of Mr. Blair or Mr. Grimes, 
 Mr. Blaine wrote to the Messrs. Coburn on 
 the subject, and it resulted in their making the 
 above-named subscription. We find that Mr. 
 Blaine bad no share or interest whatever in 
 the subscription made by them. 
 
 In 1870 and 1871 Mr. Blaine purchased 
 about $20,000 of the bonds issued by the 
 Iowa Falls and Sioux City Company at eighty 
 cents on the dollar. 
 
 In January, 1872, in a settlement of some 
 matters between Mr. Blaine and the Messrs. 
 Coburn, he let them have a portion of these 
 bonds at ninety cents on the dollar, and at the 
 same time he took from them a quantity of the 
 stock of the road at sixty cents on the dollar. 
 
 Except by the ownership of the bonds and 
 stocks thus purchased by Mr. Blaine, the 
 committee find that Mr. Blaine had no inter¬ 
 est whatever at any time in said Iowa Falls 
 and Sioux City railroad. ” 
 
 Mr. Oakes Ames sworn, page 5. 
 
 11 Question. We are directed by this resolu¬ 
 tion to find out, if we can, what members of 
 Congress had to do with this corporation. Do 
 you know about that? 
 
 Answer. It is my impression that Mr. Alli¬ 
 son was k subscriber to the stock, and myself. 
 I understood Mr. Blaine was interested in the 
 Coburns’ subscription. Mr. Alley was in it, 
 but he is not a member of Congress. He is a 
 stockholder now, and I think a director.” 
 
 Oh pages 6 and 7: 
 
 u Question . What do you know in regard 
 to any members of Congress being interested 
 in it? 
 
 Answer. I think Mr. Blaine had some friend 
 in Maine, by the name of Coburn, who ad¬ 
 vanced money for a subscription which he made 
 and they divided the profits and he paid inter¬ 
 est on the investment. That was my under¬ 
 standing. I understood, at the time, that the 
 Coburns of Skowhegan, very wealthy men, 
 offered to advance the money to Mr. Blaine 
 for anything he thought was a good operation. 
 
 Question. Did he become a stockholder? 
 
 Answer. That is my impression. 
 
 Question. Have you any personal knowl¬ 
 edge on the subject ? 
 
 Ansioer. I think he paid the assessments the 
 same as I did. 
 
 By Mr. Merrick : 
 
 Question . You have no knowledge touch¬ 
 ing Mr. Blaine’s connection with this except 
 what you saw on the books ? 
 
 Answer. I have not. 
 
 Question. Have you any recollection how 
 many shares stood in his name on the books ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Had you any conversations with 
 him in reference to it here? Did he make 
 any statement of his ownership in it ? 
 
 Answer , I cannot recollect. I got the im¬ 
 pression, I think, from him that he subscribed 
 for the stock when we thought it was going to 
 be a good investment.” 
 
 And on page 20: 
 
 u Question. What other railroads are you 
 interested in there ? 
 
 Answer. I do not know that that has any¬ 
 thing to do with this question ; I have no ob¬ 
 jection, however, to answer; I am interested 
 in the Chicago and Nebraska, in the Cedar 
 Rapids and Missouri River,* in the Iowa Falls 
 and Sioux City, in the Sioux City and Pacific, 
 and in what is called Lion’s Plug Road. Is 
 there anything else you want to know about 
 Iowa? 
 
 Question. I have no personal desire in the 
 matter. The committee invited me here to 
 ask you some questions. 
 
 Answer. I do not believe the committee 
 invited you here to go outside of this resolu¬ 
 tion. I did not know it was a crime to build 
 a railroad until this investigation commenced, 
 and I am not fully satisfied of it yet. 
 
 Question . Did you know at the time the 
 Iowa Falls and Sioux City Railroad Company 
 was formed that the Coburns, of Maine, were 
 interested in it? 
 
 Answer. I cannot say that I did or did not. 
 I guess the company was formed before any¬ 
 body took an interest in it. The company was 
 formed, and then looked out for subscrip¬ 
 tions. 
 
 Question . You knew it as soon as they made 
 their subscription ? 
 
 Answer. I do not know; I did not see the 
 
 books very often. 
 
 Question. When did it come to your knowl¬ 
 edge that they were interested in it ? 
 
 Answer. I cannot tell you; probably soon 
 after they became interested in it. 
 
 Question. Did you, at that time, know that 
 the Coburns and Mr. Blaine were interested 
 in such operations? 
 
 Answer. I suppose so. I supposed the Co¬ 
 burns, of Maine, and Mr. Blaine, were inter¬ 
 ested in a great many other things. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. It is perfectly well known in 
 Maine, and in New England generally, that 
 such has been the fact.” 
 
 Mr. Blaine testifies on page 15: 
 
 “ The company had for its president a very 
 eminent railroad man, John I. Blair, of New 
 Jersey. He came on here and interested many 
 persons of capital in the enterprise, and, I 
 think, through Senator Grimes, asked me to 
 take an interest in it. He said the grant was 
 entirely within the control of the State of 
 Iowa, and that the State would give it to this 
 
 * Official testimony shows that members of Con¬ 
 gress have been interested in this road. Indeed, 
 wherever inquiry has been made such things appear. 
 
39 
 
 company. I said to Senator Grimes I had no 
 money, but that I had some friends in Maine, 
 
 ** and I mentioned a particular friend, Mr. A. 
 
 - P. Coburn, of Skowhegan, Maine, a very 
 wealthy man, whom I had known to make in¬ 
 vestments in such enterprises before, and who 
 would, perhaps, take some of the stock on my 
 advice. 
 
 This Iowa Falls and Sioux City Company 
 was organized with a capital of $6,750,000, if 
 I remember right. Of this stock the Coburns 
 took $200,000. The company was organized 
 with the understanding that the stockholders 
 should answer all assessments upon them for 
 building the road, and that the assessment 
 should be paid in cash. It began by assess¬ 
 ments of five or ten per cent., and so on until 
 the aggregate of assessments had reached in 
 the neighborhood of sixty per cent., and the 
 Coburns had paid on their subscriptions some 
 where near $120,000 in money, and within 
 eighteen months the road was built and com 
 pleted the entire one hundred and eighty miles 
 in length, between the spring of 1869 and the 
 autumn of 1870. It was built absolutely for 
 cash. They did not issue a share of stock, or 
 any bonds or anything of the sort until the 
 last rail was laid and the last spike driven. 
 When they got through the company then 
 issued at the rate of $15,000 to the mile of 
 bonds, and $25,000 of stock, if I remember 
 correctly. These bonds brought in the market 
 
 * about 80; the stock was worth about 60. That 
 would be in cash value $12,000 and $15,000, 
 altogether, $27,000 a mile; and they had paid 
 
 * in cash about $23,000 a mile to build the 
 road; so that the profits, if ever realized, are 
 
 t to be mainly in the appreciation of the bonds 
 and stock, a profit not yet realized. 
 
 Last January, a year ago, having large busi¬ 
 ness connections with the Messrs. Coburn in 
 various matters, I had a general settlement 
 with them, and in that settlement I took a por¬ 
 tion of this stock at about sixty cents on the 
 dollar, which I paid in cash. That was the 
 beginning of my ownership in the Iowa Falls 
 and Sioux City railroad. I hold that stock 
 to-day, and it is in my name on the books of 
 the company. 
 
 I want to ask Mr. Stevenson what there is 
 in the law of morals or ethics by which a 
 member of the House, or the Speaker of the 
 House, should not hold that stock?” 
 
 On pages 18 and 19: 
 
 u Question. Do you, or not, have a general 
 interest with them (the Coburns) in specula¬ 
 tions ? 
 
 Answer. In railroads or other things ? 
 
 Question. In various transactions ? 
 
 Answer. Yes ; in a great many other things 
 besides railroads. They are generally under¬ 
 stood to be worth about $3,000,000, and very 
 comfortable friends to have. 
 
 Question. From what time did your interest 
 begin with them? 
 
 t Answer. Twenty years ago, perhaps. 
 
 Question. And it has extended continuously 
 down to this time ? 
 
 Answer. Down to this time. I hope it will 
 extend many years more. 
 
 Question . Does it refer to railroads gen¬ 
 erally ? 
 
 Answer. I am not very generally in that 
 business; I would like to be more than I am. 
 
 Question. Do you know how much interest 
 they had in this road ? 
 
 Answer. I told you they took $200,000 of 
 stock. If you want to go into an investiga¬ 
 tion of all their transactions, you had better 
 send for them. I can say that, generally, 
 their investments have been very large. 
 
 Question. What was the nature of your 
 arrangements with them in regard to these 
 general investments? 
 
 Answer . Timber, coal lands, and many other 
 things.” 
 
 The Chairman suggested that this was some¬ 
 what amplifying the sphere of investigation of 
 this committee. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I have had relations of this 
 sort with other gentleman besides the Co¬ 
 burns, that you can go into also if you desire.” 
 
 Reexamination of Oakes Ames: 
 
 ‘‘By Mr. Stevenson: 
 
 Question. Have you sold to Mr. Blaine any 
 of the bonds of this company ? 
 
 Answer. I think I sold him $5,000 of the 
 bonds of this company. 
 
 Question. Did you not sell him ten or twenty 
 thousand ? 
 
 Answer. I think not. 
 
 Question. When did you sell him the $5,000 ? 
 
 Answer. I cannot remember.” 
 
 Reexamination of Mr. Blaine: 
 
 11 Mr. Blaine. Let me answer that; I can 
 give Mr. Stevenson all the information he 
 wants on that subject. I bought six thousand 
 of these bonds of Mr. Ames at eighty cents on 
 the dollar, and accrued interest made the 
 amounts I paid just about $5,000 in money. 
 I bought in Boston at another time, I think, 
 $15,000, for which I paid eighty cents on the 
 dollar. 
 
 Mr. Stevenson. When was this purchase ? 
 
 Answer. This purchase was in the fall of 
 1870 or beginning of 1871. I cannot give you 
 the exact date. 
 
 Question. Were these bonds turned over by 
 you to the Coburns ? 
 
 Answer. A part of them were turned over 
 to the Coburns, and they took them as so 
 much cash at a certain valuation. Mr. Ames 
 thinks I ought not to have sold them so low ; 
 they were seven per cent, bonds, and good to 
 hold; if I had had the money I should not 
 have turned them in. I bought the first lot 
 of $6,000 of Mr. Ames, and the other $15,000 
 of J. M. S. Williams, of Boston, who was a 
 general medium for the exchange of that sort 
 of securities. Persons who wanted to buy or 
 wanted to sell went to Mr. Williams. 
 
40 
 
 By Mr. Merrick : 
 
 Question. When you say you bought $6,000 
 of bonds you mean $6,000 par value? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir; I meant six separate 
 bonds of $1,000 each; eighty was the price 
 they were being secured for; I think they 
 have been advancing some little since. I will 
 say to Mr. Stevenson that I hold $10,000 of 
 them still. That is a question he has not 
 brought out yet, but I am willing to make that 
 statement, and I am only sorry it is not ten 
 times as much. 
 
 By the Chairman : 
 
 Question. Mr. Stevenson has said in his 
 statement that you purchased these bonds at 
 one price and turned them into the Messrs. 
 Coburn at another. 
 
 Answer. Ido not think thatis important; if 
 the committee think it is I am willing to state 
 
 what the transaction was. I sold some of 
 them to the Messrs. Coburn as high as ninety 
 and some for eighty-five. My business with 
 these gentlemen has been very large, the 
 transactions have extended over a long period,, 
 and it would take the committee longer than 
 they would desire to devote to this subject to 
 go into all the details, involving the details of 
 many business transactions purely personal in 
 their relations. I have no concealment about 
 it at ail, if the committee desire to investigate 
 all my transactions. 
 
 The Chairman. That does not seem to be 
 germane to what we are now inquiring about. ” 
 
 Other Iowa roads in which Mr. Ames was 
 interested are land grant roads, and he was 
 while a member of Congress engaged in in¬ 
 teresting other members with him in them, 
 as appears in evidence. 
 
 t 
 

 
 
 /