Juliet signal. [volume] (Juliet [i.e. Joliet], Ill.) 1844-1???, 1848-02-29
with him who was accused with themsel-


without any compulsory process, who will
testify, even Of fragrant acts within their
own knowledge, is very great. Men do
not often feel disposed Voluntarily to testi-
fly against public officer, in the commu.
nifty in which that officer lives. Il is an
irksome business, especially where they
are to procure the i'll will OF that officer
and his friends, without any compensating
benefit to themselves.
Independent of this, ] had no time al.
lowed. | reached Chicago on the 9th
ION the 29th | was expected to be pre-.
pared at all points for the investigation,
and to have Witnesses, residing all along
the whole line of the canal, ready for ex.
animation. An unreasonable expectation
in itself. ii 5 u#
At whose expense were the witnesses
TO be brought at whose expense norite d?
Difficulties of every character embarrass.
ed the proceeding, and yet 1t is more than
intimated that there was nothing in the
way of the investigation except my want
Of inclination to proceed. The whole
conduct of my associate Trustees in this
affair, was unfair towards me, selfish and
partial. ..t-. =. -.
Mr.. Gooding proceeded er parte, and
had his subordinate engineers examined,
who, as any person would have expected,
testified in support of Mr.. Gooding. Some
portions of that testimony is ridiculous
enough. Mr.. TaIcott says, no person
could knoao the cost of cork, which, in the
same breath, he says 'did not cost eighty
cents per yard" limo person could know
the cost, how did he know that il did no,
cost eighty cents per yard ? and particu
ularly when he does not state that the
work had been estimated until the 9th
Oct; leaving it to be inferred that it had
been estimated at that time-or if he did
know, why not state the actual cost, and
thereby let it be known what the actual
cost was. The whole of this garbled
statement of the testimony given, when
dissected, furnishes abundant evidence of
the suppression of truth, if it does not of
declarations Of falsehood
MIR. TalcotI also modestly says he has
been consulted about the estimates and
plans OF structures, in all of which he has
concurred with Mr. Goodlng, &c. &C.;
therefore all was of course right, in his
opinion, however laundering the transac.
tons might have been. Or ifhe thought
them wrong, alter concuTring in the error,
he would of course sustain it. .
1t is to be expected that the assistant
engineers, still employed under MIR. Good.
ing, would speak well of him. They are
united by common bond they will stand
or fall together, and they have to prop his
falling fortunes or sink with him in the
controversy. Their acts are his acts,
their opinions his, and they are alike good
or bad. 800 .
William P. Whittle, resident engineer,
says he don't k,lop no W have come to my
conclusions in relation to the quaifica.
tons OF MIR. Goodng, because he( WHITLEY
has never seen me on any portion of the
work but once. Mr.. Whittle had been
nearly all the time since my appointment,
up to October last, engaged on the Calu.
met and Kankakee feeders, and though
had been on other portions of the work
daily, he would not have seen me. The
fact is, | was on the works often-and
though did not see Mr.. Whittle, did not
suppose he was not performing his duty.
But suppose we apply Mr.. Whiule's test
to Mr.. Gooding, and it will at once be
seen by perusal of the testimony in the
Appendix, that Mr.. Gooding was as little
qualified to Judge of the work. &C., on the
canal as any person, for be has visited the
line but twice or thrice since his appoint
ment ..
Hiram Norton says che does not knop
Of Mr.. Gooding's borro wing money ofthe
contractors. "-Erastus Newton and Ly.
man Ne wton ''do not knoao" of his borrow
ing &c. 1t was useless for my associate
Trustees TO hold court in Chicago, to
hear witnesses testify as to what they did
not kno'c. They might as we'll have ex-
amined any one of the John Smiths or
John Browns, in New York or Washing
ton, to find out what they did not know.
In truth, most of the Witnesses examined,
were selected because of their want of
NHO"'OuS0'
Mr.. Robert Stuart kindly says that he
does not think that it would have any ill.,
fiuence upon Mr.. Gooding, if he had bor-
rowed money of contractors. | did not
say that it had influenced or would infu-
ence his conduct. left that matter to
MISUNDERSTANDING otherwise than Mr..
Stuart does My belief is drawn from
my general knowledge of human charac,
ter, and from what have heard. Perhaps
no one can better estimate the extent of
power the borrower has over the lender,
than Mr.. Leavitt. His experience, ifthe
fact shall be proved, will enable him to
appreciate with propriety, the extent of
bias such fact can have upon the con
duct OF men. But in this connection
will remark that Mr.. Gooding admits that
Il