Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1827-02-17

the remaining fourth 10 person whose name
was not to have been mentioned. The title of
Vandeventer TO his fourth, at the time above re-
ferred to, appears to have rested a verbal and
confidential agreement between him and Mix, and
SO remained I'LL the Gath of April, 1919, when he
received written bill Of sale OF one half of the
whole contract Howes Goldsborough and CO.
subsequently, became the owners of one fourth,
by purchase from Samuel Cooper, who had pre-
| viously purchased from Major Vandev enter; and
they (Golsborough and Coz were recognized a,
the War Department, by the consent OF T.. Mix,
expressed in letter sent by him to the Secretary
OF War, and dated The 18th of April, 1921.
The first bond receiy ed at the Engineer Depart-
ment, on the contract, is dated 5,h of August,
1918, aud describes the contract having been
made by Elij,h Mix and George Cooper, for the
delivery of one hundred thousand perches of
stone, being fifty thousand less than Mix was en-
Titled to deliver This bond is signed by l.. Mix
and George Cooper, as contractors; and by Sam
uel Cooper and James Oakly, sureties; the sure
ties were regularly approved by r. Riker, Recor-
der of the Ci,yof New York. as appears by his
| certificate following Immediately after the sigma
lures, and dated the the bond. 1t will be
perceived, at once, that there is an obvious and
fatal variance between this bond and the contract.
In an official letter written from The Engineer De-
par'meni, on the lIth day Of August, 1918, to
Lieutenant George Blaney, and copied into the
letier-book of that Department, the contract is
|
stone. The language of the letter is as follows:
You will inform the Agent that contract has
been made with Captain L. Mix, 10 deliver, as
-oon as practicable, at the RIP Raps, one hundred
thousand perch of stone''
| In subsequent letter, written to James Mau
rice, also copied into tie same letter book, ard
dated the 2lsi day of August, 1913. The contract
is described as being for 200 900 perches The
language OF this letter is follows: Mr.. L. Mix
will soon commence to deliver s,one at the Rip
Raps, under Contract with this Department, for
| 200 600 pei CHI
Some time after the delivery at the Engineer
department of the first bond, but at what precise
Time does not appear, new bond was given for
the delivery Of l50, 900 perches, describing the
| contract as made by h. Mix This second bond is
signed by +. Mix contractor, and Saml Coop
er, aud James Oakley, as suretes-ard il is anie.
dated to 9th OF August, ISlS-but no certificate
In regard 10 the suiciency OF the sure,ies was at
| tached 10 ihisl instrument. The Committee have
been unable 10 ascertain when this second bond
was received at the Engineer Department; though
the impression of General Swift is tina, il was re-.
ceived before he left the office which was on the
ilih of Noyember, 1918. Major Yandev enter
also expresse. his belief, that it was delivered du.
ring the Fall of 1918. How far his Testimony
conf cts, ii al ALL with his letter Ia Mix dat ed
i7th OF October, 1920, in which he urges upon
the latter TO attend to :" the bond" the Committee
VIII not undertake to determine
"
directed, before the Committee TO the discI pan
cies IN the bonds, and also TO the 2 letters from
the EnSineer Depai 'ment, In which the contract is
alluded to. The explanation which he gives will
be found N his testimony, to which the Committee
refer.
Daring an investigation relative 10 this contract
oy Committee OF the II. of II. in 1922 a COPY
OF the bond was requested by that Committee In
| answer 10 which, the Engineer Department fur
hisheu copy OF the second bond, which had been
substituted Tor the one first given-but as there
was no certificate of the Recorder of New York
approving the sureiies on the second bond, copy
OIL The certitcate annexed 10 the cancelled bond
was made, and attached 10 the COPY of the bond
furnished. Capt. Smith, Of the Engineer Depart-
nen, who atie-ted these copies, has explaine ed the
cause OF his certifying to this naccuracy; and TO
his testimony, in that particular, the Committee
| here refer
| The question still remains, who was the secret
| partner! But he Committee being entirely salts
ned that the secret partner was not the Vice Pres
dent, which was the main question to be decided
viii leave the conflicting testimony on the other
point with the House, without attempting to decide
| upon lis relative weight.
! On the 9Th January, 1927, the Committee clos
Ell the examination of witnesses on their part ex-
rept as 10 or who had been summoned bu, had
not attended. On that day the friend and repre-
sentative OF the Vice PRECEDENT, was advised tina,
the Committee had so closed their examination AMI
he was also informed by member of the Com.
mHtee, In MS presence, that the Committee were
unanimously OF opinion that The Vice President
was innocent of the charge of having particioa,ed
, IN any manner IN any contract made with the War
department, - nile he was secretary OF War The
same day, at the instance Of Mr.. M Duifie sub.
pGnas were issued for witnesses TO appear and tes
thy on behalf OF the Vice President On the 2etb
OF January, the Committee Ieceved from the friend
and representative OF the Vice President a psper
protesting against the previous proceedings of the
COMMITTEE Considering this paper as prepared
aud presented under the sanction of the high Off
cer in whose behalf it protests, the Committee
have deemed it their duty TO transmit it TO The
House, bat they forbear all comment on its con-
tents.
The Committee submit herewith all the testimony
'hey nave received during The examination.
The report was read by the Clerk
On motion Of Mr.. Wright, it was then ordered TO
lie on the table, and be printed.
MIR. Floyd rose, and said, that the report which
had just been read with the single exception of the
passage declaring The conviction of the Innocence
OF the Vice President of the charges imputed 10
him, was from majority of the Committee Az
Ter being engaged Tor 40 days in this investigation
he, MIR. r.. had, so far as he could collect the
sense OF the committee, framed report according
ly, which report had not proved agreeable TO the
majority OF the committee. The objection which
he had TO the report adopted was, that it did no,
give the true color to the results of the enquiry.
The report which he had drafted s. which he held
In his hand, and was about TO offer TO the House
ala justice TO the views of the minority; and az an
exposition OF their views, he wished TO present il
to the House Mr.. +. said be had gone into this
inquiry WIN disposition to DO ample Justice to |
all concerned in II. The character and conduct of
b.I 49,.