New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1854-07-28
The bribery Investlgation.

tigatipg Committee of the Council has honored
the fruits Of their investigation, leads one to
wonder if it be Of the slightest Importance.
The Committee intimates that it is of theyery
slightest. With view to weighing its value,
published, in mournful isolation, on the fourth
page Of the Picayune.
Several gentlemen were examined, and many
others, whose names we learn were given in to
the Committee, were not examined The Com
mittee obviously thought the matter quite I'M
important. OF course it was. What impor
lance could there be to them IN making further
parade of such statements as those published
of Mr.. Conant, Mr. Place, aud Mr.. Cooper,
and what security had the Committee that if
examinations were continued, developments less
Hattering to the amor propre Of the Alder
manic body might not be blurted out' So after
the examination Of Mr.. La6at, g the Commit
tee, considering that no important information
would be elicited, discontinued further interrog-
atories, and closed proceedings
Now of what did the Importance Of this in
vestigation consist The Committee was not
an examining magistrate, constituted to commit
offenders for trial, nor a grand jury finding
true bills Of indictment, but was simply en-
powered to find out if the imputations of bride
9 ry were unfounded, or if not so, to expose the
guilty parties to public condemnation. Whether
this work has been fully performed or not will
{ be easily seen from the exhibit made.
Mr.. Maddox was first examined, and stated
again the facts containedin the cards he had
published, which led to the investigation. By
reference to the statement, of any and all Of
the other witnesses, excepting only Mr.. Eyer
ton, it will be seen that they are precisely
Of a color with that of Mr.. Maddox. But
Mr. Egerton's is of another color. OF course
it is. 1t might be asked what business Mr.
Egerton had before the committee. But
doubtless she Council, which was endeavor-
ing to exculpate itself and Mr.. Egerton, had q
right, on the mutual reciprocity principle, to
call on Mr. Egerton to exculpate himself and it.
They were out in the same boat. The alacrity
with which the President of the Pontchartrain
Railroad Company responded to this call may
be imagined. We know nothing of it, But as
suredly Mr.. Egerton did not go before the Com
mittee to plead guilty. Nor was he at all
backward in carrying the war into the camp Of
the enemy.
MI Egerton does not Of any offers either directly
or indirectly made to any member of the Boards by Mr.
No such conversation related by Mr. Maddox tool
place in relation to bribng securing Mr.. Bennett'
vote by q discount In bank. 1t is not true.
i This is very explicit, and involves nice
question Of ysracity between Mr.. Maddox and
Mr.. Egerton, the existence of which induced the
investigation. and the solution of which was the
very business upon which the committee was
engaged. Have they resolved the issues One
Of these two Opponents states clearly, upon oath
what is false. Have the committee decided
which They have not They have intinated
that the matter is of no Importance although it
involves immensely broader issues, and they
leave the public mind to come to its own eonclu-
sion BY what means 1t may.
Can Mr.. Egerton require the public to think
60 little of his sagaeity, as to believe he would
himself jingle the gold and silver of the corpo.
ration in the ears of honorable members' Oh
course he
Does not directly indirectly know any thing that
could put the committee in the way of discovering ii any
improper influence had been used to obtain the votes d
members either in favor or against the ordinance.
And in'relation to the mysterious conversion Of
Alderman Bennett, all Mr.. Egerton knew was
the following:
Mr.. Bennett offered a note in the Southern Bank
which was rejected Witness did discount indiyi
dually. Mr.. Bennett withdrew his account from tn,
bank Witness told by several parties that if h
note was discounted by the bank Mr. Bennett woult
vote for the ordinance Witness declined discountnt
the note.
Probably Mr.. Egerton did not even know thai
Mr.. Benefits notescas discounted by somebody
and, probably, it was only through the public
prints that Mr.. Egerton learned that Bennett
had voted for the ordinance. Yet these ques
tions were not asked Mr.. Egerton. He was no
asked whether Mr.. Benefits account was with,
drawn as q precautionary measure, preliminary
to Mr.. Somebody's discounting Mr.. Bennett
i note. EceryJody knows Mr.. Benefits not,
scas discounted knows by whom
everybody knows that Mr. Bennett, its bitter
est opponent, voted for the ordinance-5soboda
knows why.
But We have not space to dwell on the disin
terested statements of President John Egerton
and shall refer briefly to the other dispositions
1t is a remarkable popularity in this inyestiga
ton that Mr.. Egerton is the only witness VIII
knows nothing tchateuer of promises, hints o
conversations touching the question of bribery
The other witnesses had various, though Sigh
experiences.
TESTIMONY OF MIR. coNASr.
friend Of witness mentioned to him that if he wshe
to make thousand dollars he could tell him how to max
that sum, If he promised to say nothing about It, Wit
ness having promised his friend stated to HIM that ii
would vote Tor the railroad he would get him check
$1,000 The gentleman who made the proposition had n
connection with the road with the parties at the hea
of it. Witness cannot say with gertrude but natural
supposes that the to be furnished by partie
connected with the Pontchartrain Railroad
Witness refuses to give the OF his friend Has nc
heard that any money hao been spent by the opponent
Of the road to defeat it before the Council
Sworn to and subscribed before US, July 5, 1854
w. Al GoRpoN,
Chairman Committee Of Board Of Aldermen
4si H. L. TRACY
si Chairman Committee of Board of Assistants
This is loud talk to our auricular organs
g ssThe gentleman who made the proposition ha
no connection with the road, nor with the par
ties at the head Of it, To be sure not; n
doubt some remote philanthropist and friend {
internal improvements, residing in Kamsehatks
was the gentleman's principal in the PROPOSE
ton, and he wished his name suppressed, bein
Of a modest disposition. Mir. President Egel
ton " is not cognizant Of any promise made b
the agent or agents of the road" How, theI
should that unsuspecting gentleman be s'cogn
zant" Of proposition made by this remote phi
lanthropist! Or course he knew nothing of i
And how the witness NATURALLY supposed tn,
the money was to be furnished by parties col