Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1842-05-28

I forwards found to be Incorrect Mr. Beckwitf.
was afterwards prosecuted by Mr. Williams aud
Gov Noble and found to be guilty Of the basest
acts.
The testimony Of Messrs. P4Imer, Bright and
others sustain Mr.. Williams against another ac-
cnsatIOn made against him, TO wit: that he had
offered to let Beckwlth escape If he would tesl-
fy against contractors. This charge ts Supported
by the testimony Of but witness. l. Is refu-
ted by the testimony Of \. Noble, NJ. G Bright,
and \. b. Palmer. Mr., Williams prosecuted
Beckwith with becoming diligence and persever-
anco, when Informed of his rascaiity.
Your committee VIII barely notice some here
say testimony Of Gov. Hendricks by whIch il IS
attempted to be proved that charges Of a serious
nature were preferred to Mr.. WlllIanos and Gov
Noble. through the medium Of thlrd persons, some
three months tefore ms arrest. Gov. Hendricks
heresay statement would have been excluded
from the record by the committee, had Mr.. VII
Ilams desired II, as improper evidence. Bat the
array of facts presented by Mr.. Williams, forms
50 complete "A defence this head, thatIt - con
ceived the future attempt To attack him by such
improper means can do his character no hort
Charges have teen preferred against Mr.. VIII
la ms bv dismissed engineer on the New Alba
av and Vincennes road. The charges are, that
at Mr. Williams instance. the officers were dis
missed that road, and that two Of them were
dismissed from motive Of political prescription.
The facts are, as shown by The records, that n
violent controversy had arisen on that road he
tween The engineers and the commissioner. This
controv ersv was of the bitterest character, and
manifested itself in abusive handbills and an0nv
nous newspaper publications.. Ii Involved not
only the officers, bat the citizens and contractors
]er these circumstances, dismissal Of the
" hole batcn Of officers on that road was recon
nended to the board bv Mr.. Williams, and thai
recommendation was followed, and organi.
L ltion of The corps of engineers made. by which
a saving was made to the State in expenses. and
the public interest advanced. One Of the cngi-
necrs d dismissed, n Mr.. Smith, was temporarily
employed afterwards by the resident engineer as
an assistant, but against Mr.. Williams advice, as
~ shown by his letter % record In all this Mr..
Williams appears to have acted correcty-Mr. (
Frazier, the dismissed engineer, who preferred
these charges against Mr.. Williams, accuses him
Of lacking the necessary qualifications tor his sta
tiun. Your committee cannot determine wheth- .
er this charge be true no., they profess
-kill in the science Of engineering. II appears.
however. Just as probable 70 your committee that
Mr. Frazer himself Is incompetent to decide
Mr. Williams qualifications as Mr.. Williams h0uld
re so destitute Of skill as no suPPoses We must
have more evidence before can pronounce a
gaInst Mr.. Williams reputation for skill, based
on a long continued employ ment IN the service Of
Ohio aud Indiana.
Tncre may be several minor points N Mr.. vii
Iiams' case which your committee has omitted
to notice. But they think his vindcaton is com. /
pete and triumphant on all points, and viii be SO
found upon elimination. Tha, he has made
ri ihcss ana bitter enemies IN the public service
is crcIuabe to him. for every man has lis enc
mes who deserves them. He of whom all men
speak well is time server and n hvpocrite*
(Slgued by ]. c. EGGLESTON, !
: w PARKER
TIIOS. ID. BAIRD,
NATH'L WEST.