Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1842-06-25

in regard 10 Mr.. Hendricks interview with him.
is similar to that Of Mr.. Hays. (Seo page $50
Of report)
Ihave stated that the blank subpoena was con
fded 10 tho discretion Of a disaftected contractor
whose prei4dtces were Of The most VIndlctive ma
lure This statement is sustained by the testi-
mony of two Witnesses III addition TO Mr.. lays,
whose answers upon oath here follow. (See Jour
nal Of Senate Committee, page lol)
civilian Griffin returned his answer to the
following Interrogaiory:
In,erroea.ory No. I.-"5tate whether you have
heard BRAN Hendricks spe.k Of j. l.. Williams
IN such terms wouit shew a vIndcfIve feeling
or a strong prejudice against that individual?
hasuer--.'I answer this III the affirmative.
I'D X Bearss returned his to the fol-
lowing interrogatory
Iaterrog a,ory No Estate whether you have
heard Abram Hendricks speak Of J l.. Williams
in such terms as would show vIndctve feeling
or a strong pre- udice against that individual?
1ns,rcr.-"i have 50 henrd Mr., Hendricks
speak Of Mr.. J. J.. Williams frequently"
The prejudice Of Mr.. Hendricks, the witness
on whom MIR. Chamberlain mainly relied, arose
chiefly from difference Of opinion III regard to
his extra claims. Ga page 32:i oi tho testimony
no expresses the opinion that he would have been
$40 900 better of bad dono my duty. IL IS
well understood that his clear profit on his ID,
lhe Madison hIli) II settled, will not be
less than twenty to thirty thousand dollars. | am
not sensible lhat elected any duty III decii-
ming 10 add 81 900 more III the way of extra
allowances, &c, especially as the Legislature to
whom he appealed, also refused further allowance.
] refer :hIs only to show the probable oTIgn Of
those pref Iices entertained by few Of the con
tractors. of which MIR. Chamberlain so eagerly
nvailed himself for the purpose OF njuriug me.
1 leave tho public to form their own conclu7Iu
us to the Justice and fairness OF one who, with
full knowledge Of these extraordinary Efforts,
made by himself and others to eliminate Il public
officer, has thus sought to msIead the public BY
publishing the foregoing extract, charging the
faIure Of the plot, '.Scitcted LEitHCSSeSf' and
"packed Grrdng enaeRts" Ii viii be recoiicc,ed
that it IS not the investigation itself, nor even
these extraordinary efforts OF my accuser, that rs
here the subject of complaint. The investIga
ton invited to the fullest extent, and the man
ner in which ii should be conducted for the
committee to determine. Tho outrage IN the case
is IN tho utter disregard Of oil the facts elected
by the invest g alton IN statement thus eXten-
sively circulated with tho sanction Of u member
of the committee unaccompanied with the cvi-
dence bv which its misrepresentation might
have been corrected, TO be read by thousands who
will never examine the ties iimony.
MIR. Chamberlain also writes and publishes the
following sentence:
"Wilh tho exception of our Northern Canal,
which he has never bestowed any care or Mt
tcntion, other than 10 single II out tho special
object of his displeasure, he has been careful that
no Enpineer who was slIsnecIah nf hAinn q d.;a-
crat should be retained in the public service"
For the single purpose Of exhibiting still! further
his total disregard of the evidence, from which IN
oil this he protested to speak, the following OK
tract from my own testimony is appended, (see
page 1860 tho tenor Of which no attempt was
made TO controvert:
$50 far as am abo TO understand my own
motives, | have never employed or discharged
any Engineer on account OF his politics. nor haV c
ever awarded any con,rac, upon this principle.
I hty'yt ,,nt birds ri
the Contractors on tho Wabash and Erie Canal
from the State line to Lafayette have been Van
Buren, men. The person who has been clerk IN
the land office for the last two years, is opposed
to me in politics. | appointed him IN the place
Of Wing. OF tho two superintendent OF re-
pairs on tho Wabash and Erie Canal, Is OPP
posed TO in politics, and go was the person who
preceded him in that station. The majority oil
the Engineers in this State have been Wings, but
this think owing to the fact that 4 majority
of that profession IN the west, 50 lar as my
know ledge extends, are of Wing politics.
SIN the spring Of 1896, the Board directe me
TO visit the Eastern States for the purpose OF en-
gaging the service Of Engineers; three gentle
mon we're then engaged, tO~wit: Gen. Mitchell
Col Tobert, and Mr. Cory ell ; and at n subsequent
period | employed Mr.. Moore. These are all the
Engineers that have invited into the service o.
tho State from abroad. far as | recollect since
1896. Three out of the four were opposed TO me
in politics"
The brief notice OF the charge of politica
prescription is made not from any inherent i'm
por,ance IN the question. but as another proof O
the wlIful perversoa Of fact, which character
zes his letter.
As tho charge Of unfairuess in tho report Of the
committee, bears more upon his colleagues thar
upon uy self, ] shall not take up that point turthel
than TO say. that If there is one meuber OF the
Senate against whom the imPutation Of favoIit
ism towards an officer connected with the system
-
ter of the report. Always himself opposed L
the system, and so far | am concerned, hav'
ing no personal intimacy or even acquaintance
to Influence him, the charge OF pnrtIaltty taiis
harmless Ia fact the whole tenor of the report
indicates that whatever may be the peculiar TRAIT:
rNnI IrliI u