The New York Herald Newspaper, April 7, 1852, Page 2

ANTI-SLAVERY AGITATION aT THe NORTH, KY THE WEWSPAPERS OF ALL FACTIONS. Violence Against the Fugitive Slave Law. NEW YORK MARKET, APRIL 2. - prow the Aluany Kvening Journal (whig, Thuslow Weed, editor}, April 8.) Mxenore—Prime quality, $700 a $1.000—holders firm. You will find on reference te a record drawn up on July 4th, 1776, that one Horace Preston was born free and equal with his fellow men, and was en- dowed at his birth with an inalienable right to life, diberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It seems that he must have had some inkling of this fact himeelf, fer about five years ago he settled in Williamsburg, ong Island, and commenced pursuing his own ppiness, enjoying his own liberty, and living his ewn life. It was @ peaceable, honest, Chrietian life, by all accounts, spent in earning @ maintenance for Bimeclfand his wife, helping his neighbors, and dealing fairly with the world at large. They were poor people, and they made no great noise in the world; but, notwithstanding, we have reason to be- lieve that they had in their quiet way as strong an appreciation of happiness, and as keen a sense of misery, as the best of us. One fine morning this weck, policeman Martin, ofthe Sixth ward, In New York, walked in and in- fermed Preston that he was charged with stealing. Stealing? There must be some mistake. What, er from whom? But upon these points he got no formation, and knowing his innocence, and not ubting that it would appear on the trial, he sub- mitted to be arrested, and was marched off to the police offiee, Antiquarians relate that a curious old document, which they have discovered, was once held in high repute in these parts, especially by policemen and United States Commissioners. “In 1759 it went by the name of the Constitution of the United States. Doubticss, by way ef a joke, the policeman and U. 8. Commissioner who had charge of this steal- g case, pretended that they would be guided hy it It provides that no person shall be deprived liberty without due process of law. This they enrried out by cheating this person into an unlawful arrest for an imaginary offence, with no other pro- eess than the lie by which they did it. It provides that in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. This they carried out by hiding him away out‘of sight, and bringing him privately before a single judge. It provides that such per- sons shall hay th ea ance of counsel for his de- fence. This carried out by refusing to let eounsel see him, and turning them away trom the door of his prison. It provides that they shall be entitled to reasonable bail, and this the facetious functionaries were likewise guided by, so faras to yefuse him any bail at all. On the trial, it came out that the crime with which Preston was charged was that of being an honest citizen of Williamsburg, that the theft for which he was arrested was that of his own body and soul. The issue was therefore made up, and is wow under trial, at the Commissioner’s office, whe- ther the life, liberty, and happiness of Horace Pres- ton belong to Horace Preston, or to William Rees, of Baltimore. If the suit shall terminate in Rees’ favor, there will doubtless he another guaranty of the finality of the Fugitive Slave law, and another piece of mer- ebandise in the Southern market; there will be a want house and a desol: woman’ in Willi burg, and an unhappy wretch in the bri Baltimore. Bat of such is the foundation of our glorious Union. P.S.—Preston has been declared to belong, not to himeelf, nor to his wife, nor to his children, but to Wm Rees, of Baltimore, and has been ‘taken off” accordingly. THE LAST FUGITIVE SLAVE CASE. iFrom the New York Evening Post, (free soil dem., Wm Cullen Bryant. poet editor.) April 6. The case of Henry Preston, who was sent back to the South as a fugitive slave on Saturday hard one, in fact, are mos f the cu arise under the present law. Preston escaped from the service of his maste’ ani ago. In this city he had formed domestic re he married a woman who appears to have been devotedly fond of him, a light-colored mulatto wo- man, whose little daughter, by a former husband, had been adopted by him, and cherished towards him all the fondness of a childfor a parent. He was suddenly pourced upon by a pettifogger and a polic officer, who seized him and dragged him to prison, on some pietence of larceny, for it seems that the Jaw, in most caves, cannot be executed without the help of falsehood. A brief examination followed, during which he was constantly attended by his wife, who gave the strongest tokens of the strength of her attachment to him, and of the suffering she must endure at a separation. On Saturday he was torn from his family, who clung to him with a de- spairing fondness, and carried back to his alleged owner in Maryland. The circumstances of their parting, which were truly affecting, are related else- where in this sheet. Great horror is expressed at the Afriean slave trade even by slaveholders. We remember that President Tyler, in one of his messages, spoke of it asacruel, atrocious, and accursed traffic, lavishing upon it epithets of the most vehement denuncia- tion. The cruelty and atrocity of the slave trade consist mainly in tearing men and women from their families and homes, in separating those whom God has joined, and sending its vietims to hopeless ser- vitude. The Fugitive Slave law brings the bar- barities of that tr 0 our doors, being perpetrated by pirates, armed with pistols and cutlasses, they are committed by lawyers, po- licemen, and deputy marshals, who plead the law as their warrant. and instead of taking place on a coast inhabited by savage tribes, they are inflicted in a country claiming to stand in the fir civilization, and to he the freest in the w This is the principal difference in the cases. The same Congress which passed the Slave law, enacted a law banishing slave tr from the District of Columbia. They were s on the subject of the slave-pens, ’ wher women were bought and sold like oxe a the capitol, but they felt no scruple in legalizing, within the bound: of the free States, some of the worst enormities which make that traftic i nable. Itis known to S our readers that many of those who are fayorah a law for the reclamation offu- itive slaves, are yet shocked at the operation of the present statute, in breaking up families, and dragging men from their wives and children; and earnestly desire that there should be some limitation oftime beyond which the slave shall not be reclaim- ed. the reoovery oi his slave ag not to pursue him forth- with, but chooses to lie in wait until, in the course | of years, some agent or attorney found willing tomake the experiment of speculating on the hu- | manity of the community, aud to carry him off from his family, in the hope that his neighbors wiil raise @ large sum for his liberation, he certainly deserve? Do assistance of the law. All these considerations, however, are answered by the advocates of the compromise, with a clamor against the enormity of agitating a question already peacefully settled. The agitation, in trath, comes from the other side. Every attempt to reclaim a slave under such circumstances, is a new agitation of the question—makes a new exhibition of the atrocities ofthe law—forces them upon the public attention, and compels their diseussion. Frequent eomiplaints arise as to the manner in which the law is administered. The true ground of complaint lies, we conceive, ia the law itself. It eannot ba a0 ad- ministered as not to revolt the better teslings of | mankind; it cannot be 20 administered disgrace our national character and tutions ag not t pur insti THE LATESLAVEC. fFrem the N.Y. Tribune. (wig. 1 man. editor. April 5.) ‘ We already commented on the extraordinary features attending the commencement of the slave ease decided in this eity on Saturday. The ciconm- stances ationding its conelusion are eve more re- markakle. Instead of | rank of | it If the proprietor, they say, cares 80 little for | ¢ Geeeley. white | deciding cacee where eo is concerned, without hearing the testimony in favor of liberty? Why, on this principle, any obscure and friendless man in the community may be sworn away into bondage. It is the easiest thing in the world to trump up tes timony enough to accom such # speculation. An unserapulous constable may be found to seize the victim and immure in some obscure lock-up. A lawyer, equally unscrupulous, may be found to swear that he is aslave. Thus he is handed over into the custody of the U. S. Marshal and his arreet logalived. A witness is brought from Ala- bama or Tennessee to identify him. The ease is hurried through with all possible secrecy. If bene- vyolent men, hearing of the case by accident, appear in behaif of the defendant, it isin vain. They seck to examine the pers on whose affidavit the arrest became legal. He refuses to answer, and Mr. Com- mittissionor Morton allows the refusal. They in- troduce other witnesses to prove the defendant a freeman, but they eannot he sworn. The Commis- sioner has heard enough. He is satisfied that the man isaslave. His mind is made up. What need of further testimony to unsettle—perhaps to change it? And so, in trembling eagerness, the casa ia closed, the certificate of ownership handed to the attorney, the Commissioner pockets his fee of ten dollars, and hurries from the room, and the un- happy man is coaggen off into slavery. hat the case of Horace Preston was one of congpi- ra missioner Morton did, it might have been, with the same result as now. We ask, then, what excuse is possible for conduct such as his—for such disregard of the responsibilities attaching to the magistrate, charged with powers so tremendous? What right had Commissioner Morton to continne such a trial, when « principal witness for the prosecution refused to answer an important question on the cross-exami- nation? W right had he to go on when another witness, who had played an ene part in the arrest, refused to appear and testify ? These cireum- stance occurred In this case. “They alone were enough to justify the suspicion that the whole wasa conspiracy. What right had tod rd them? The laws make the presump- favor of freedom. What right had he to turn them in favor of slavery? And, above all, what right bad he to refuse to hear the witnesses for the defence, and to send that defendant into elavery alba listening to a word of testimony in his be- alt! No excuse but imbecility is possible for conduct so upbeard of. If Mr. Morton sees fit to urge that as his apology, we shall admit it. His behavior on the bench would give ample reasen for so doing. Bullied by the counsel from the beginning to the end, when at last Mr. Busteed interrupted the lega) by pugilistic preecedings, this magistrate, entrusted with the power of slavery and liberty, but destitute of the power of preserving order in’ his own eourt, had not courage or dignity enough to rebuke the room to invoke ore the peace! pistries of the hich outrage, but hurries out of the another magistrate to come in and re What a mockery upon the solemn law, what a satire upon the act of Congre entrust such persons with authority s Ifanything were wanting to coniirm the a’ si rsion of freemen to that act, it might be fonnd abundantly in these proceedings. Hereafter it Mr. Webster, or any other apologi say that the magistracy it creates able and reliable, and ‘the investigation it provides as good asa trial by jury. Ah, if the Massachusetts Senator had only stood 8 first convietions, and secured a Fugitive Slave bill, since one we must have—with such a trial as one of its features, what trouble and w disgrace the country would then have been spared. THE FACTS OF THE OUTRAGE. We have commented above on the conduct of the Commissioner by whom the recent slave case was decided. It is proper here to recall the facts of the entire praenecingss It will be remembered, and so the evidence on the trial shows, that Preston, the alleged fugitive, was arrested late in the afternoon of Tuesday last, on the pretended charge of stealing; that his master in Baltimore was immediately telegraphed that his man was caught; that, on the same evening, he ap- pointed Mr. Busteed, of this city, his agent to pur- sue and claim the fugitive for him; that the claim- ant’s son eame on next day. He arrived here in the evening, went to Busteed’s about eleven o'clock, and had an interview with him. Busteed, next morning, made an affidavit, swearing positively and unequivocally to the slavery, the title, and the es- oe making out the whole case. *reston, the ‘fugitive,’ was taken by officer Martin tothe Tombs, and locked upinthe Sixth ward cells. He could not, nor could Mr. Culver, his counsel, learn that any complaint had been pre- ferred against him, or any warrant issued, or any examination had, or any commitment made out. He was kept locked up in that place, as he says, till twelve or one ays at night, (mark the hour!) then taken out and conducted to the Second ward station he There he was held till the claimant’s son arrived, when, it appears, he, together with Busteed and Martin, held a consultation at the Se- cond ward station house. Preston's wife, his coun- alof his friends had been untiring in pursuit of, and inquiry for him, but could learn nothing whatever until a man halloed to the wife in the Park, that they had just taken her hus- band into the U.S. Court-room. Preston’s counsel and wife hurried with all speed to the Court-room, but_on arriving found a witness sworn and giving evidence. At this stage our reporter has taken up the case, and kept eur readers advised on the sub- ill be vain tor for the act, to most respect- ject. When the case was adjourned on Friday after- noon to Satwday morning, it was with the arowed understanding on the part of Preston’s counsel, and assented to by the Commissioner, that if the latter should deny the motion made and argued by Mr. Jay to quash or dismiss the proceedings, then the To that end, several witnesses were in attendance; others had process out for them, to be served as soon as found. Some of these witnesses had known Pres- ton in Baltimore, and were prepared to prove the | declarations of his former mistress as to his freedom, and the provisions in her will to thateffect. By others it was proposed to show the admission of the claimant, and others, to contradict Busteed’s afti- davit and prove a conspiracy. he Commissioner, instead of deciding the pre- liminary motion of Mr. Jay, and then stopping, took the counsel, the prisoner, and the audience ne prise. He dicided the whole e had his certifi- cate in his hand--delivered it over in the twinklin: of an eye—gathered up his papers, and retreatec toward the back door ofthe room. Busteed hardly had time to kiss the Bible held out to him by the | price, and the injustice done their client. Their effor ve all fruitless. The Commissioner refused to hear anything farther. Mr. Culver was drawing an affidavit for Presion to attach a witness. His client, however, was taken suddenly from him and removed to a back room in the Marshai’s office. Mr. Culver at once applied to | the Marshal for permission to go to the room and see his client, to have him sign an affidavit for a | habeas corpus. His request was sternly deniod— nor could he get sight ot Preston again till he was | brought out to be started off South. Preston's counsel then applied to Judge Judson for a habeas corpus, but be could not hear the ap- | plication. | Meantime the condemned man was got ready. His | wife went in and had her last sad interview with him. Her cries and sobs were heard by the multi- tude outside. a We doubt if a more touching exhibition of the | workings of the Fugitive Slave law has ever been | witnessed. Thiv man’s wife stood by her husband | for three davs, with a devotion and tenderness un- | paralleled. Whenever permitted to sit near him, she | bad fast hold of his band in both of hers, wringing selfin the most intense, haif-suppressed agony. ear the time of the final separation, Busieed, the ry sole her, gave her an orange, or k, the proc mn appeared from | k room, Gen. Henry F. Tallmadge, United | States M . in front; his sons, one on the right | and the other on the left of the fugitive, and two sturdy deputies of foreign birth behind, Each seemed satistied with the honorable post he was permitted to take in doing the slaveholder’s work. the fugitéve was conducted out at the back door into Chambers street, where a sovered carriage was i into which be was pat. The crowd, lored people, rushed around te eatch st view of their friend—some running to the carriage doorto shake hands, and bid good-by, The ease was conducted before Hon. Ge Morton, United States Commissioarr, and Xtraoniioary laga!l prog ivilized country. The of the Commissioner, as he himself stated is, te satisty himself whether there wos suflivicat idence to prove the mam a dave. The provess « sisted iy in hearing the testimovy om ome site only; im lowing the witness on whose affidavit the arrest was made to refuse to answor on crom-oxami- nation, and to withhold al! faete that way have been in his knowledge ring on the right of the prisoner to his freedlem: in ining to take any measul ny gn the attendance of aa important itmoss for the defense: in refusing te hear the evi- donee of witnesses in attendances on that aide, al- though the respectable counsel deciarel it to be of vital consequence; and in finally deciding the case, Sep eeaiying the men of inte Mavery with that evidenes unheard aod uveouside OD ll fps adsimple a ent of the mattor confirmed by the card o! Jay and Culver, | the counsel for the defence, which wo publishin an- k, with all the calmness possible in view of such facts, can @ more outrageous violation of every legal vafegward of individual liberty be con- evived than this practiced hy Mr. Cominissioney Morton? Does be regard the right ofa man to his fwn roul and body us of s0 little consequence thai | it rony gefely he annul such # thie? | anner some in tears, some ia suppressed murmurs, some calling on God to avenge the wrong, and one devo tional old woman was heard crying, “* God’ll punish ‘em! God’ll punish “em!” ‘The cari ime of writing this article. Horace Preston is back in slavery for life. A wo- maa robbed of her husband. and a little girl four sold of ber father. So ends the fourth ingitive slare cass in New York. A CARD PROM THE LEGAL COUNSEL OF HORACE PRES- TON, CLAIMED AS A FUGITIVE SLAVE BY WILLIAM REE As this ca which the public have taken some lenly terminated this morning by ‘oner Morton giving a certificate tor the delivery of the fugitive to the claimant, to be removed to Maryland, without any rebutting evi- dence being introduced on his behalf, we deem it to state, in justice to ourselves, and as a mat- per to be known, the true facts as they oc- curre On Friday, the attorney for the claimant declared his cave closed, and we were asked by the Commis- sioner to proceed with the examination of witnesses for the defence. It was eaid in reply, that before doing so, we wonld move to dismiss the proceedings on the ground (hat the original affidavit of the attorney, on which the warrant wae ieened, and which was le, not on , We do not pretend to aver; but for all that Com- | Commissioner Morton | counsel should go into their defence on the merits. | | sure | that Maryland, had escaped Marzb, 1847, and "that the time of his oxeape, bis service or labor was due to the said Reese, and that the same has ever since been due to him, and that the said Reese has never with, and is still en- titled to, such service or and that he is the owner of and entitled to the control of the caid Preston”—was made, as ay d fret the testi- mony of Mr. Busteed, on his cross-examination, without any personal knowledge of the facts sworn to—and that the other testimony for the claimant was utterly insufficient to prove his title. It was raid, further, that if, upon this motion, the Court support the claim unless rebutted by proof for the | Gefdnee, we had a number’ of witnewes in attend- ance, besides others whom we had net yet found, but for whom subpoenas had been issued at our appli- cation by the Commissioner, and placed for service in the hands of the Marshal; but that as our motion to dismiss the proceedings, if granted, would render their examination unnecessary, we proposed to argue that motion first. This course was not objected to. The motion to dismiss the proccedinge, in the nature of a motion to quarh or for non-suit, Was argued at length with the distinct understanding, thus assented to by the Commissioner, that if that motion was denied we we were to enter upon the defence this morning. Our arrangements were made accordingly, and var witnesses directed to be in attendance. This morning, at the opening of the Court, the Commissioner aitivered his decision, denying the motion, and granting the certificate of removal, taking us altogether by surprise, and refusing hear our protests against conduct which we re, as absolutely violative of the liberties of the de: dant, and of our rights as his counsel. An affidavit was then made by Mr. Basteed, which, we presume, wae an affidavit of danger, for the purpose of procuring for the claimant the escort of the Marshal from New York to Baltimore, and the payment of the expenses from the United States treasury; but this we do not know DOREY aS: ag the Commissioner refused our request to be allowed to see it. Preston was immediately removed from the Court room, and soon afterward placed in a back and driven off. Application for the writ of habeas corpus was made to Judge Judson, who refused to hear the mo- tion, on the ground that he was engaged in another ye are under the impression that the motion would have been denied, upon the ground stated by Mr. Attorney General Crittenden, in his letter to Mr. Fillmore, after the passage of the Fugitive law of 1850, that ‘the certificate of a Commissioner is to be regarded asthe act of judgment, after a fair and impartial trial before a judicial tribunal, having competent jurisdiction.” How far the conduct of the Commissioner in this case, in admitting all evidence offered tor the claim- ant, of whatever character, including an affidavit made without knowledge, and confessions of the’ de- fendant while in duress—his refusal to compel an interested witness to answer on cross-examination, and his cutting off all opportunity of rebutting evi- lence by a snapjudgment, made in violation of good faith, comports with that strict impartiality and fairness which ought to be preserved in trials in- volving the right Ha Une is a question which the undersigned submit to the judgment of the com- munity. E. D. Cunver, New York, April 3, 1852 Joun Jay, THE NEW YORK STATE ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY. {From Frederick Douglass’ paper (Frederick Douglass, black man, editor), April 1.] A meeting of the friends of freedom was held at Oorinthian Hall, Rochester, March 18, 1852, for the purpose of consultation, in relation to the formation of an anti-slavery society. James Sperry, of Henrictta, was called to the chair, and George W. Clark, of Rochester, was ap- pointed Secretary. Addresseg were then made on the present state and prospects of the anti-slavery cause, the import- ance of organization for the pore of enna | and directing the efforts of the anti-slavery men an women of this State, by F. Douglass, Wm. Goodell, Benjamin Fish, Gerrit Smith, George W. Clark, J. R. Johnson, 8. H. Addington, D. Pickard, H. Bush, Rev. Mr. Cook, and others; after whieh, it was unanimously Resolved, Phat we do organize a New York State Anti-Slavery Society. The following persons were then appointed a com- mittee to prepare a constitution, and report thenext earns, at 10 o'clock :—-Wm. Goodell, Jas. Sperry, Geo. W. Clark, J.R. Johnson, I. Douglass, Stephen Cook, S. H. Addington, Benjamin Fish, Abigail Bush, Amy Post. Adjourned till 10 o’¢lock next day. March 19.--The meeting again convened at 10 o'clock. ‘Winiai 11. Cund, uF Niegara Falls, was ppointed chainman, and George W. Clark, scero- tary. The committee, se te their chairman, William cedell, reported the following CONSTITUTION. This society shall be called the New York State Anti-Slavery Society. Its object shall be the abolition of slavery, by the promulgation and practice of the following truths: — 1. Slaveholding is, in its own nature, sinful, and ought to be immediately and unconditionally aban- doned. It is a crime, to be treated like other crimes. 2. It is morally wrong to apologize for slavehold- ing, or to vote for slaveholders or their apologists, or for those who will not use their powers for the abolition of slavery. 3d. It is morally wrong to support religious teachers who apologize for slaveholding, or who Neglect to bear testimony against it. 4th. It is impossible that slaveholding ean be either sanctioned by the Divine law, or be made legal by any human governments, constitutions, statutes, or judicial decisions, agreeable to that well-known and fundamental maxim of common law, recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States, and the Court of Kings Bench in England, that ‘ enactments contrary to fundamen- tal morality, are void.” ; Sth. Prejudice against color is wicked. The colored man is entitled to all the rights, privileges, and eligibiities of the white man, and all proposals for removing the former out of the country are as absurd and impertinent as would be similar propo- sals for removing the latter. y Fe 6th. Distinetions on account of color in religious assemblies, are preposterous and wicked. 7th. All persons, without distinction of sex or color, who assent to these truths, and act under their guidance, shall be entitled to membership in Commissioner. It was all in vain that Messrs. Jay, | this society, by enrolling their names, and eontri- Emmet, and Culver jumped upon the floor, asking | puting annual ly to its funds. the Commissioner to hear them—urging their sur- Sth. The officers of this Society chall be dent, Vice President, Recording and Corr n Secretaries, Treasurer, and an Executive Commit- tee, to discharge the cuetomary duties of such offi- cers, and to be elected annually. f 9th. The Executive Committee shall consist of thirteen, of whom the President, Secretaries, and Treasurer shall be members ex-officio, five of whom shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. 10th. The Society invites and recommends the formation of county, town, city, and vill re socie- ties in all parts of the State on the principles of this society and auxiliary to it. The report of the committee was accepted, and a motion made to adopt the constitution, article by article, which was carried. The first clause, on mo- tion, was then taken up, whereupon phen S. Foster moved, seconded by H. Bush, that the words, ‘Auxiliary to the American Anti-Slavery Society,” be added. This amendment was discussed at great ee Fe by Foster, Goodell, Cook, Porter, Douglass, Johnsen, Pickard, Avery, Addingtoa, Stebbins, and others, but was lost on final action—receiving but one vote in its favor. The 4th Article also elicited a thorough discus- sion, but was finally adopied unanimously. All the other articles were adopted without de- bate, and the following persons were elected officers of the Society :-- 4 President—Grenit Sra. Vice Presidents—-Wm. H. Childs, Niagara, Falls; ff al Plumb, Lodi; Geo. f 5h. le, Belfast; John Thomas, Syracuse; C. V. Covert, Farmersville; P. C. Schuy- er, Ithaca; Wm. R. Smith, Macedon; Austin Ward, Helland Patent; C. O. Shepard, Arcade; Wm. H. Topp, Albany; Samuel Thomas, Jr., Caze- novia; Dr. -MeCane Smith, New York; Leonard Gibbs. Union Village; Hugh Smith, Perch River; Nodiah Moore, Champlain, , Execviive Committee.—Jamea Sperry, Henrietta; Steven Cook, Roehester; Daniel Anthony, do.; Levi Reuben, do.; Lloyd Scott, do.; Ovid Miner, de. Alvin Ingersoll, do.; Mrs. Caroline Wright, do. Mrs. Jane Gifford, do. George W. Clark, Reeorling Secretary. Freder- ick Douglass, Corresponding Seeretary. George A. Avery, Treasurer. Wm. H. Childs, Chairman. Geo. W. Clark, Secretary. Kocuysrer, March 19, 1852. THE FUGITIVE SLAVE CASE. . (From the New York Sun, (Rev, Henry Ward Beecher, editor,) April 6, We refer our readers to the card of Messrs. Culver counsel of Horace Preston, claimed as a fu- clave hy Wm. Reese, and on Saturday delivered up to the claimant, to be carried to Maryland, as a slave. It must be a cause of regret even to those to whom the fugitive slave law is not obnoxieus, that the proceedings in this case have been managed with so much arbitrariness. The conduct of Commissioner Morton, and ofthe counsel for the claimant, ON the other hand; be cause of irritation to those to whom the law is obnoxious. If whatis stated in the card be true, the Commissioner has shown bimself utterly unworthy to hold the office, and should be promptly dismissed. Placing the question on the avowals of the President and Attorney General Crit- tenden, the rights of the alleged itive ir to have heen wantonly violaied. An evil aduynietra- es Con of gs.yle fae ‘ Seer meeapeet to be bustwined DY puWle epinion im | MiveerUm wOd Nene, wt motel), by (ay Shouse + LOR py law gam ony produce evil, | should decide that the evidence was sufficient to [ THE LATE CANAL LETTINGS, Speech of Mr. Hatch, of ric, IN ASBEMULY, MARCH 26, 1852, ON THE REPORT OF | ‘THE JOINT INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE, ON TUB RK | CENT UANAL LETTINGS. | Mr. Speaker—I sapposo the amendment of the eutleman from Tompkins embraced the whole sub- jeet matters of frau any, of illegality, if any, | in these lettings. True, it does not in expross terins declare the contracts valid and legal, but it ecks to | make them so, by directing the Auditor to pay the drafts of the Canal Commissioners. The question comes up under his amendment, whether these lot- | tings azo to be affirmed or disaffiruacd—and it is Wo | thix point that I shall contine the remarks I intend | to make on this subject this evening. The quostion of affirmance or disaffirmance of tho lettings—for neither the courts, nor the Canal Board, nor tho Legislatore has yet proneunced them contracts—the question, J repeat, of affirmance or disafiimmance, has been before the courts, and.a venerable judgo, before whom it was presented, hay not met it as we had hoped. The Canal Board, in the exercise of a duty which I have contended belonged to them, have | not metit. Ithas been tossed backward and for- | ward, from tho courts and from the Canal Board ; and the question now comes to this house—I mean the question of the affirmance tr disaffirmance of | these lottings, This house, this Legislature, has got to decide it ; and I am obliged to the gentleman from Tompkins that his amendment embraces the whole subject matter of these lettings, or, as I said before, the whole—the- whole subject of the fraud and illegality of theso lettings. No man regrets more than J do, the necessity which compels me to take the floor of this heuse again on this question, 1 dae hoped tae laa before the courts or the Canal Board, the question would have been disposed of, and that the effort I am now called upon to make, under a high senee of duty, could have been avoided. The con- test in which we are engaged—for the question in- volves the whole lettings--is an uncqual one. On one side are the people’s representatives—on the other igthe State. ‘The power of the State is in- terposed to protect its officers, and to shield official delinquencies. I say, therefore, that the contest in which we are now engaged, is an unequal one; for ‘inst us are the State officers and the patronage of the government. Tho trained bands, the trained officials, the recipients of official patronage, united with the power of the State to put down the repre- sentatives of the people—those who would endeavor to follow out fraud—1 say, to put them down, in every possible way. Ihave said on another occa- sion, that in a former contest between a corrupt monied power and the people, the corrupt monied power had ite feed attornies and creatures, hired advocates everywhere, that the press had been cor- rupted by them; and Ido not hesitate to say that here, in this contest against this corrupt combina- tion, a portien of the press of this State has be- come corrupted; that it has become venal-that it garbles facts, and panders to the depraved desires of a mercenary class, and corrupts the public senti- sent which surrounds us. All know that in the | material world, decaying and rotten matter throws up its mists and obscures the natural vision, and through the dim and hazy atmosphere, objects be- come distorted and mis-ehapen. So in the political world, private slander is also abroad—personal defamation—the coward’s weapon—which follows the steps of erring humanity to note its trips, and misrepresent every action of the life of those it would assail. It is against such an array of official power, and a corrupt sentiment so created, and against euch cowardly and flagitious means that the people's representatives are called upon to in- terpose the unterrified sovereign power, which the people have confided to them, in order that the rot- ten spots of the government might be cut out. All know that— ‘The flesh will quiver where the pincers tear, The blood wili follow where the knife is driven. When you strike from the clutch of avarice its ill- gotten gain—when you dash from the lips of the political profligate his bowl of wicked pleasure— every man knows you stir up the bitterest hostility— you rouse up the worst passions of the heart—and that man or set of men that undertake to withhold the possession of ten millions, if he has not found it out already, willfind it out, thathe is rousing the thousand mercenary and disappointed demons in the pursuit of their ill-gotten gains, and that demoniac rage that is never stilled, while it fears the escape of its prey. Tho occasion calls for severe and per- haps painful duties, but under the obligations of the oath that every member of this house has taken— his recorded oath—there is a duty devolving on him, and that duty calls on him to dismiss from this question all personal and political considerations, and to act, when he does act, like a determined man, determined to protect the power of the State he represents, and not to abandon it on this floor. Whatever may be our divisions on other questions growing out of our local, politital, or social rela- ions, I trust on these we may not be divided, but ound fighting hand to hand against fraud and cor- uption as a common enemy. All discretion granted n laws, whether restrained in terms or language, is o be used in the spirit of honesty. It must be exer- ised with prudence and propriety. When otherwise ‘eventually be increased Uhaiby thrvo miltions of dotaza; | this increase will be oocasi chietly from atlowances by | the Legislature and the Canal Board, upon the appileation | of the contractor for extraallowaness on that kind of | work, hardpan and quicksand. amount necessarily | to be paid of that three millions by the Uanal Commis | Torhnnap apse cg ert eat Sees rity of the Jommiis- Sore eatboeiees ¥ Cone Te, It is said by a majority of the Select Committee in the conclusion of their report:— ‘That no facts have been ascertained showing anyfrauds in the letting of the contracts awarded, or the execution of the canal law, but on the contrary, the uniform tenor bye ie Vesa taken effectually repels all suspicion of the kind. Fraud and collusion are usually proved by cireum- stantial evidence, or by the comparisons of circum stanees and combinations of things and facts, which in their connecting links lead the mind to an inevit- able conclusion. In this, there are two distinet oharges; one, in the conduct of the State Officers; the other, in the combinations and confederavies of the bidders. Vor instance, if there should be com- bination to prevent bidding at a legal sale, so as to haye pro) k off at lees than its value, the salo would ‘ide as fraudulent, although the officer selling might be innocent; but if the officer should confederate with the bidders to sve the property old for tess than responsible parties would give, there would be an aggravated fraud, and the Officer would, for his participation, forfvit his office, and be liable to damages and punishment. As to the combination among the bidders, I read from the report of the majority of the Select Committee:— Accordingly when, after duc notice had been given for the receipts of proposals forthe entire work on the Erie, Generee Valley. Slack River, and Oswego Canals, the Canal Board, on the 2th of November last, proceeded to open and examine the same, a scene was presented un- parallclea in the history of the public works of this State, ‘rom ail parts of the Slate—from other States—from all walks of life--from every profession, pursuit, and trade-— from every division and eub-divieion of political sects, there swarmed upon the capital a legion of applicants, all anxious and itportunate for a participation in the an- ticipated profite of some ebare in this improvement—the last, for many ys ‘at least, to be obtained upon the pubiie works of this State, The expectations of alt ran | June high. Some hadclaims, real or imaginary, for political services. Others relied npon personal friend-hip for suc- cers; while others, destitute of such recommendations, resorted to other and less credible means, to secura a fa- vorable consideration, Associations. combinations, and partnerships were formed. almost without numbers. and embracing components of ever conceivable complexion, for the purpore of securing, inthe name of some of them, a rhare in the contracts. As graphic as this Serer nian is, it doubtless comes short of the reality. he political cauldron boiled. Hecate’s invocation went forth--- Black rpirits and white, Red spirits and gray; Mingle, mingle, mingle, You that mingle may. Before referring to the clear and convincing evi- dence of fraud upon your table, I will state somo general well known facts, in order that I may make myself understood, as I shall proceed with the evi- dence. When the canal law was passed, the canal board was politically divided, five whiga and four democrats ; the letting board, three whigs and two democrats; the State Engineer, whig, being a mem- ber of both boards, as well as_ the Canal Commis- rioner, and having under his SEetee and manage- ment the estimates. In the Canal Board the Comp- troller, Treasuxer, and Canal Commissioner, Cook, acted unitedly and for a common end, and the whig engineer and surveyor was found united by some common tie, with the democratic commissioners, and in hostility to the three whigs. The Secretary of State having early satisfied himself ** that the work could not be awarded unless about three millions of the work was first awarded to certain democratie arties,” he was not supposed to sympathize with r. Cook and his whig associates. The Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General acted with both files. They stood in the centre between these divi- sions. For convenience I shall call one wing the right bower, the other the left bower of this gam- bling transaction. I am justified in going to Hoyle for iflustrations, as the testimony of these immacu- late State officers foreed me there to find an explanation of ‘ points,” and as their trans- actions assimilate the gambler’s acts more than the honest discharge of public duties. It is, I believe, in the game of ‘“eucre” that the terms “right” and ‘‘left_ bower” are used, and cach bower is then represented by a knave in a technical sense. In this case, there was a real representative, a distinguished colonel of Geneseo corresponding to the three straight whigs, and sometimes aiding them by his counsel and advice, and a no less distinguish- ed personage than George Law standing for the right bower led by a non-sympathizing whig. Thus were the two great political parties represented, be- tween whom the nine millions were to be equally divided. It is probably thought of very little con- sequence what the 250,000 democratic voters of the State dink uf theee lettings, if Mr. Law & Co. are satisfied with them. The whig party seems dis- pored to acknowledge Mr. Abel's claim to be the party itself. He has revealed nothing. He has set the authority of this house at defiance. Like the scape goat in the Jewish ceremonial, which was brought to the door of the Tabernacle, when the exercised, it ceases to be discretion, and becomes a wrong---if the abuse is great, a crime. The more important the discretion, the more delicate its character, the higher the obligation to observe strictly the rules of prudence and propriety. Of all discretion vested in a public officer, that of deciding upon matijers of a pecuniary character, between op- posing interests, requires: in him the greatest cau- tion, the most rigid justive,and the most enlight- ened impartiality. It is not the discretion of the mad- man, the imbecile or knave, that is to judge, but a State officer, sworn to take care of and protect the interests of the State---sworn “to award the con- tracts to such parties as should propose to perform the work on terms most safe and advantageous to the State,” to favor no individual at its expense, to obtain for it the most favorable terms as to price, to find the ablest man andthe best security. Discre- tion is not a physical but a moral power, to be exer- cised by an honest man. The Governor of the State is amenable in the discretion he exercises. The Judges ie the beuch---every State officer is amen- able. This discretion means something---it means an honest discretion. It is in vain that Pavly has published a system of moral philosophy, and Locke written to enlighten the understanding, if fraud and corruption can be justified under a plea of dis- cretion. The clause of the canal law above cited conferred no new power in regard to making con- tracts. Without it, the officers were bound to ac- cept such [atl secre as were most safe and advanta- ous to the State, having a due regard to price, to the ability of the party, and the security offered, which I will subsequently show the letting board did not do. Not only the law has been violated, but the pretence of the exercise of a legal, sound discretion is refuted by the lettings. By the resolutions of the Canal Board, of the 22d of December, the letting board were not only in- structed in the manner they should let the work, but were told how their discretion was to be exer- cised. Two members of the letting board, (Messrs. Mather and Follett), voted fer those resolutions. Messrs. Olmsted and Clark, Division Engineors, were in favor of complying with them. In what light is the eonduct of officers voting for those reso- lutions, and wantonly disobeying them, to be re- garded? Has no one a right to complain of this aot of insubordination and perfidy? May not those who have been wronged, deceived, say so? Are the lips of all those whose proposals were rejected, not be- cause their terms were not most safe and advan- ta; to the State, closed to the inquiry, at least, why they were unceremoniously cut off? Why a bid 25 or 30 per cent higher, was awarded to some puny lawyer, or editor, while an old, well known contractor of ability, and an unquestioned seeurity, is rejected, merely because his terms were most safe and advantageous to the State? Is not so glaring high priest laid-his hands upon him, confessing the tins of the people and putting them on the head of the goat, he is sent into the wilderness, bearing away the iniquitics of the people. , His mission was symbolical; and I can imagine the high priests of the lobby, after getting through with theee lettings, sending him forth as an emblem of their doings, and of the necessity of purification. The ceremony is dsscribed in Leviticus, chap. xvi, verses 21 and 22. 21. And Aaron rhall lay both his hands upon the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the chil- dren of Israel. and wll their transgressious in ull their sins, putting them upen the head of the goat. and shall send him away by the hands of a fit man into the wilderness: 22. And the goat shail bear upon him all their iniquities into a land not inhabited, and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness. It certainly is a noticeable fact, that his attend- ance and that of another fayorite of the letting board could not be procured before the investigating committee. In regard to Mr. Law’s connections with the State Engineer, the Heel? notice from the New York Ties will give the public a key to the willingness of the latter to unite with the demo- cratic members of the board, provided the fermer could haye about three millions of canal work at fair rices :-— Prthe Ohio and Mississippi Railroad Company have put forth an able report from Prof. Mitchell, of Cincinnati, who made the recent contract with H. A. Seymour and George Law. of New York. to build the whole road. The work from Cincinnati to St. Louis—345 miles—is to cost, complete in equipments, nine millions of dollars, the con- tract to he filled in five years. Seymour & Co. age to re- ceive $3,500,000 in cash. (derived from stock.) $2,750,000 in 7 per cent first mortgage honda, and $2,750,000 im stock. A provision is made for $1,000.000 second mortgage bonds for other objects and contingencies—imuking the debt $3,750,000, and the stock $6,250,000. The project is a magnificent one for the West; and, though the figures teem Jarge for « single firm of contractors, one at least of their number is known for his success in carrying through whatever he puts his hands and purse and enterprise to; and success thus fur is understood to have given him the means for further large uudertakings. Great country this, and greater age, when two modern Atlases like Geo. Law and David A. Neal are found ready to take twenty- #ix millions of dollars in railways on their shoulders, Equally willing, it would seem, was this Mr. Law to shoulder three millions of these canal lettings, for he is truly an ‘‘ Atlas”--a magnificent gentleman of large calculations and large hopes. Various ‘‘slates”’ were formed and broken by different combinations of the centre, the eccentric movements of the Secre- tary of State, with different wings of the division— or rather the right and left bower—preserving each its three State officers in the formation of all th “slates,” until the letting board, being part of the Canal Board, passed the resolution of ecember; and for the motives which induced Cook, Follett, and Mather to vote fer that reaolution, the only true a Bt 2 to a large and numerous class of your citi- zons, the spurned, rejected lower responsible bid- dere—particularly, and to the State in general, worthy of your notice? The virtae of republics should be sueh that a wrong done to the meanest citizen is a wrong done to the whole people. If this government has not integrity enough to in- vestigate and punish these gross priwate and publia wrongs, these arbitrary and unjust proceedings, now spread before us, it is not a government worth preserving, and its weakness must soon become con- temptible in the eyes of the people. I should here remark, a8 characterizing theve lettings, and stamp- ing their eharactor, that a resoluti presented tothe Canal Board, resolving that they would award these contracts to the lowest responsible and compe- tent bidders, and was rejected. On the 19th of Jan- uary, when I called your attention to those lettings, it was fer the purpose of having an investigation. I then stated, from the best infermatien I could ob- tain, that the prebable difference between the low- est and those te whem the contracts had been awarded, was $3,000,000. I them stated, as well ag & hasty inspection of the lettings of the Western Division would enable me te do, that ‘the aggre- gate amount of the difference om the Westera Divi- sion, between those whe have been favored by the special beard, who vielated the law and instructions ef the Canal Board, in making the distribution, and the lowest bidders that were rejected, on the see! awarded to favorites, and who yet obtained other jobs, where they in tura were underbid, will not fall ‘much below soven hundred and fifty thousand dol- lars!” This had stood before the people fer two months, uncontradicted. This of iteclt—on the face of the contracts—showed fraud and corruption, aad needed no investigation to make it manifest. Ona subsequent day called the attention of the House to the article of quicksand and nm. How stands that account now? John T. Clark, Division Engincer, a member of tho letting beard, an honest man, and about the only one who ‘desired to do his duty impartially in these transactions, and who stood uncorrupted and surreunded by all theiriniqui- ty--he rays at page 9-— LT have no doubt. from my general experience, that by introdueing the pv ‘of qaebeand and Bardpan into the contyoets ar # ey eified item, the expense of eniatyement, y oad Of ts Dec bs bees Ube ie vb ats, tad and honest basis upon which these lettings could be made, I must refer one to their testimony—-claim- ing, however, that if the resolution did restrict them to the lowest competent and respoasible bidder, it was not binding on them, for tho Canal law would ae them in an unlimited disoretion, although the letting board could only be put in motion or em- wered to act by the action of the Canal Board, hat the agent could exceed the authority of his principal. In other words, they could givecontracts to political favorites—relatives--whethor they were higher or lower bidders—responsible or not. It also speears that, after the passage of the resolution of ¢, 22, the letting board suddealy disappeared, and only turned up from incarceration in Cengress Hall No. 7, where they became victims to ublic duty until the last day of the year, when, it will appear from tes- timony, they desired to find out whother their illegal and fraudulent acts would be confirmed in Canal Board. By looking at Auditor Ruggles’ testimony, it willa) from the bill he audited for the expenses of these State prisoners in their confiemont at Con- gress Hall, No.7, that their sufferings were miti- ated, as far as possible, by the generosity of the State; ae it seems he allowed a considerable amount for their expenses, and I have no doubt an exami- nation into its items would show that they did not conform toa bran broad diet. From schedule G of the testimony, the first meeting and organization of the sub-board appears to have been held in Albany on the 29th of Decomber, when three sepa- rate schedules of the letting board were presented and adopted. It is known that their consultations were held at No. 7, Congress Hall, instead of the State Hall, where by law they ought to have met. There had been tay words and low language be- tween two of the Canal Commissioners on the 20th of December in the Canal Board—one Commissioner had characterized another as having ‘no more brains than a hen,” and in this narrow and scant estimate bad made no allowance for hardpan and quicksand; while the victim of thie assault had yesponded that his adversary had the mark of Cain upon him—he might have added the mark of Abel also--but in the sub-board all appears to have been harmonious. The act was imperative that the contracts should be awarded on terms most safe ord advantageous to the State, due regard being had to price. pbitity, end recurity. 1 will now on emo Amn y wbd wis saad dean nyo Acuna Se + a threo members of the letting board before the* proporals were put in, to violate the positive in- of the law. At page 103 of the printed testim Mr. Follett says ior ‘After thate] saw Mr Seymour on that subject, and I then inquiréd of him if Le wes © ws to lead himself to the consummation of such a scheme, as T have tated was rumored in diffe { rhe State, or whether he was willing to join work between the two to the latter, om the cou large aruount of work. : L assonted to, providing his proporitions were fair onvs for the State, Mr. Seymour, at page 99, states this agreement, with a ¢light variation. He suys:— ‘At the conelusion of cur lntery iow, we both agreed that 5, vere men to whom, pre- y. we would be justified, xperience and. ability, ‘is was before the bids were ilar conversations after they Law could have a viding their bids in giving work, bee pecuniary and otherwis put im. and we had e committtee will ebserve the terms of this ar- rangement. In the first place, Mr. Seymour, « whig, was to join the deimocrats to make an equal division between the two political parties, on con- d dition that George Law, « democrat, should have three millions in the demo: column. New re- call to your mind the counection between Messrs. Law and Seymour, us appers trom the above testi- mony, and also the articls read to youfrom the New York Times, and let evory member answer apon his oath, whether thiswas a’ lesal and @ proper agree- ment for State officers to mato before the bids were patin. Sir, it was a traudulent agreement; nay, more, it.was corrupt and illegal. If the Canal act had read thus—‘Contraci» »oull be awarded equally between the two political parties, on condition that George Law shal! have three millions of work, if Mr. Seymour thinks his proposi- tion fair,” then these vilicers would have eomplied he law. We ave to recollect this agreement is sworn to by most relociant and unwilling wit- ses; that they have ted it in its mest fayora- ble terms consistent with yid memories. Now, wilt some member of this committee auswer me what ob- ject the two democratic commi 1 to enter into this arrangement. Mr. mour’s interest ix apparent: he desired to confer a favor on his patron, and the democratic « issiouers had sons and brothers-in-law to prov jor, It mado a sate opening forthem. Tho ors was mob let as directed by stutute. The manner letting board pro- ceeded in awarding we » v8 that no means were taken to ascertain whe ber tho terms of the pro- posals were or were iivé **1ost sufo and advan- tageous to the vor was a due regard had * to price, the ability of the parties, and the seeu- vity offered for the performance thereof.” Mr. Ohnstead, division eng says i— ‘The Board was comp’ mocrats and whigs, and each party was to huye hnif; one man of one side would say of one bid, this must bo +o : I must have the controt of such a picee of work; this was called making a point ; en another from the opposite side would make another Ra andafter proceeding in this way for some time, the rest of the work was decided to be given to the lowest competent bidder. The democratic members made the Black rivera point. The whigs made points on most of the work from Oriskany to Iigginsville, and some work onthe Black river. I thought some of it was let too high, and opposed it; I succooded at one time, but they got it at last. Two picces 1 opposed yery strenuously, which were given to Squire Uticy ; they were both above the estimates ; when a poiut was thus conceded, it was understood that those who got the point hag the right to select the propositions for the section or piece of work, and it was soawarded. I do not wish to be understood that I went for the lowest bidder, until after the direction of the Canal Board, which I understood required the work tobe given to the lowest bidder, whieh, in the opinion of the board, was responsibl Thave before referred to the game of ‘eucre ;”? and in looking into the same authority (and if these fetting officers had mastered the Bible, as they have evidently done this book of Hoyle, the State would have saved millions by it.) _ I find the whole systent ofthe game of making ‘ points” developed in what is characteristically called the game of ** cribbage.’” The division engineer, John T. Clark, shows that the board actual iy rejected a programme made in conformity with the law, and substituted the theo- ry of an equal political division, without regarding price, ability, or security. Mr. Clark says:— I made this programme in my judgment, in conformity with the resolution of the Canal Board, and I apportioned the work to the lowest bidder (on each section lock and mechanical structure.) who was comptetent to do the fame, and offered responsible security. as far as my know- ledge of the same extends. This agreed. as a general rule, with my own judgment as to the proper mode of awarding eontracte. This programme of mine was rejected by « fuil vote of the letting board of the middle division 4 to 1, though some few allotinents of mechanical structures are the seme. with the awards therefor. The difference be- tween the sum total of my programme and the final award was $217,590, including $5011.75 for the Oswego locks; Mr. Follett says :— When the letting board first met, it was understood smong ourselves that there was to be a fair distribution of the work between the two political parties, and as nearly equal ax could well be made, How was this understanding produced in the let- ting board without consultation? Both Mr. Mather and Mr. Seymour concur in saying that the awards were political. Mr. Cook ismore minute--he say: It was well understood that the whole work should be ar equally divided between tho two political parties as we could allot it; keeping on the avorage full ten per eent. in the aggregate, below the estimate of the engineers, repre- rentative of the respective parties in the board taking care of the interests of their party in the allotment of the work; az the allotment progressed, each party kept some memorandum of the division. and frequent ealeula- tions were made to see how thoy stood with reference to each other. It was difficul’ to get an exact result, the political character of the bidders being *o mixed up im their propositions; some of the propositions would stand politically half-and-half, which would be considered x balanced propotition. In other cases there would betwe democrats to one whig. two whigs to one democrat, and oon in almost every other proposition, sometimes im favor of one party and sometimes of the other, but the result of he allotment was considered by us as substan- tially an equal division between the two parties. From this testimony, I am justified in saying the work was not let in accerdance with law; on the contrary, it was awarded in a manner entirely un- authorized and illegal. Political connidevations and private intorests [ice the whole transac- tion, Commissioner Cook's testimony shows « curious method for the letting of public work—that the-contracts were to be “ half-and-half”-alternately between whigs and demoerats. If the whigs got the start, then cries one of the democratic commis sioners, ‘‘ that won't do,” and in goes anotherdemo- erat! This curious exhibition at room No.7, Congress Hall, would have been a fine spectacle for the people of this great State. There sat the State officers around the table with the scale before them. ° Atone time the whig soalo is down. This the demo- crate ean’t stand, and in goes a democratic resign- ing senator, which now raises the balance. Ther comes forward a whig senator, who aleo resigns to wee his bid, and yet ho is too light; then the whig commissioner is obliged to throw in the re- served weight of a brazing politician and farmer contractor, who was used throvgh all the bidding: to even up ‘the haifand-haif” principle of allet- ments, and was always ceady to step in and take any balance claimed by his party. It wae unani- mously agreed that a democratic senator who re- signed because a bill was unconstitutional, and whe believed the whigs thieves before the Canal bill be- came a law, could outweigh, in receiving awards for frauds, any two whigs, however meritorious, on ac- count of the ponderosity of his constitutional seru- les, and the great wear and tear of his conscience. th parties made a “point” on Black River. & was unable to see why both ‘ies were so earnest about the Black River & , until I came across the testimony of Mr. Clark, the divigion ens. gincer, who swore that hardpan and quicksand can be found almost indefinitely on the Black River section. But this contract was not award- ed to Wright & Co. until they had permitted the bid to be altered, after it was opened. Ang then, too, the whigs objected, and it was not until Dick- inson was admitted into the contract that it was consummated. Can there be found a more seanda- lous and shameful j lo than lettings made in thie manner—the proposalschanged after bids are ed, warm personal friend of ome of the com: loners admitted as a now bidder before the contract is rded, while there lay upon the tablo the Propo: of a competent and responsible contractor ofter- ng to do the work at $17,000 less? Ii these abuser are not sufficient to condemn these lettings I will re- fer to others. One commissioner gives ass reasow for his assent that the lettings he united in making were better than thoss proposed by the Attornes General. Commissioner Cook says that the aggre- i of two lettings was to be kept full ten per cent elow the estimate of the oogincers. If the lett board adopted this rule, teey should have made it» uniform, and adhered to tt strictly. If it can be shown from reliable tostimony that in many“in- stances, they awarded work to parties they took es- cial interest in, above tae estimate; to others, # Brite below ; ‘and then to other parties, at more than thirty per cent below, what is the inference but that there was undue favoritiam, amounting to fraw and corruption? At Page 235 of the report of the select committee, you will find « table of prices and valuations. Out of 88 prices of work, 22 were let more than 15 per cent below the estimate, while 12 were let above it. The gross estimates of the Eastern division, Krie ( Deduct 10 per ceat. UN $914,329 About half of thisywork was lot at 20 per eent be- low the estimate. Ofcourse very little deduction need he made from the other half to bring the whole down 10 per cent. Of what use were the estimate: Cari a carry out the fraud? Take, for example. lock 89, let to Jesse Van Zile, a whig, a mechanie at Troy, for whom ono of the Commissioners waz anxious to obtain a job. There were only forty lower bidders then Van Zile, and yet the work ix iven him above the estimate, Leok at sectiow sixty-one, awarded to C. T. B. Van Horne, et at. oT, HOt loess Ott eee 18,257 ei DL vies Sa yes wunnl WeloW tine eopimanve, dang