The Nevada journal., 1852-04-01
Water Lot lAvessigation.

WI >. ~ ol6NG1boN EX4hlNkp.-l
visited San Jose during the session Of the
Legislature last year to procure the pas.
sage Of the bills ceding the right Of the
State to certain water lot property in
San Francisco; | went to San Jose for
that purpose; was there at intervals from
early in January to the 22d or 23d Of
March; was there when the act Of
March 20, 1881 was passed.
Question by Mr.. Broderick- Do YOU
know Of any member Of the Legislature
having been offered or having received
bribe to influence his vote on the pas
sage Of the water lot bill?
Answer-lf the President and Senate
will permit it, desire to make state,
ment, for the simple reason that much
has been said in and out of this body
connecting my name with the affair.
If J should answer the question cate.
gorically, should answer NO" But
know something, and am willing to give
the Senate the benefit of the informa~
tion. 1t will be recollected that the
first Water Lot DILL passed the Senate.
and went into the House. 1t was before
the action Of the House upon the till
that had conversation with = mem
Der in relation to it, which | will relate
to the Senate, A member of the As
sembly tMr. McCandless) called at my
room my impression is that was not
personally acquainted with him when
he came in; he told me who he was: said
he understood hnd an interest in the
passage Of the water lot bill then be.
fore The House; told him had a very
deep interest in its passage Mr.. Me
Candless then informed me that he WINS
part owner OF 100 vara lot upon which
he and his partner hal made improve
ments, and been in uninterrupted pos
session for so Q time; that as their title
to this lot was merely possession. the
passage Of this bill would seriously affect
them; and that he and his friends in the
House would oppose the bill unless that
versation occurred as to how it could be
secured to them, and it was suggested
that the bond Of some respectable per-
son should be given them TO this pro-
perty. Mr. AlcC. stated that he could
influence three votes exc usi>e Of his
owr if the property was secured TO him.
| consulted with Gregory Yale, T, II
Green, and some other gentlemen. as to
the propriety Of giving such bond; the
result WAS, bond was prepared, signed
by myself, and | believe by MIR. Green,
for Howard & Green. and some one or
two other persons; my impression is thnt
a guarantee was given to McCandle~s
and II MIR. Cohen. The bond given to
McCandless WAS not conditioned that he
should vote for that or any other bill +;
but upon the passage Of the bill then
before the Assembly and its becoming
a law, they were IT, receive the title;
expected McCandlcss would exert him
self to procure the passage of the bills
| have no knowledge of the boundaries
as named in the bills, don't know
whether a title has been secured 10 hlr.
McCandless to the property referred to;
| learned that the property belonged to
Judge Pratt Of Oregon: would not hive
given S25OO for it, and yet these gem
tlemen estimated its value ut SIC, ,OO0
Question you ever contribute
any money or property to secure the
passage Of this act?
Answer-Not particularly. If any
gentleman asked me to loan him IS or
800 l. did it; ,leave two hfty vara lot-
after the passage of the bill ! gave
deeds to those lots in blank; both located
in or near the city of san FRANCHISE !,
| 90 not knew Of my own knowledge any
other party who contributed money or
property 10 the passage Of the water lot
bill; | have heard that parsons gave
large amounts; MIR Clark offered to uon-
tribute property, but do not know wheth-
er he did or not; my opinion is the Long
Wharf Co. contributed property to Sc
cure the passage of the bill; never
knew or heard it stated that any men,
Der Of the last Senate received any,
money or consideration to secdre the
passage of The bill never knew or
heard it stated that any member Of the
Senate was to be employed as counsel
in case the bill became u law Many
OF the members who borrowed money Of
me returned it many did not. Never
saw any drafts drawn by Howard, or
Palmer, or Green, in favor Of members;
Inever stated that any Senator was
anxious to receive retaining fee; ne
yer heard of it before. | have heard
that considerable amounts of money
were paid me embers of the Assembly,
and distributed among them. believe
there were very few members who
doubted it; it WAS admitted that there
we're men in the House who could be
approached. 1t was frequently said by
runners that certain members could be
bought for certain sums. do not know
who were their agents or who received
the property, though I believe property
was given, Il became 90 disgusted witt,
these hangers.on, that did not hesitate
frequently to say to them, that they and
the members might 60 to hell. If |
thought member was approachable I