The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1859-03-11


their New York house in this city, in which
Mr.. Wendell was interested. Ii is in evi
dence that the establishment of this branch
. made material difference in the quantity O
work given to houses on the outside of thi
city.
Your committee have found connection
with the paper contracts, that Mr.. Seaman
made n contract with one party for $1,000
per year, upon the payment Of which sum te
, Mr.. Seaman that party was to have con.
tract for all the paper he could supply. Ir
the following December, the contract for the
45bs. paper was awarded to that party, bu
the agreement to pay 81 600 year was no,
carried out, and no further contracts were
awarded to that mandatory, by reason OF
the refusal Of the senior party interested
in furnishing the paper finally to execute
it.
Your committee are unanimously Of the
opinion, from the evidence, that Il COM
binaton existed for the purpose Of compell-
ing the paper contractors, and the litho-
graphers and engravers, to pay In some way
either in the character of loans, or commits
sions, or directly in money, for the contracts
awarded to them.
| One Of the most remarkable features in
| this case, is the fact that the parties having
| through the superintendent's Office, whom
your committee examined, found it neces-
sary or convenient to employ the same parties
In many instances these contractors had no
| previous acquaintance with the agents en-
poyed, yet they testify that no special con-
tracts were made for the services; that no
regular per centage was agreed upon bet
ween them, and that their business relation
was conducted in the most careless manner.
| The testimony in the case forces your COM
mtteee to the conclusion that some intimate
and confidential relations did exist between
| Mr.. Seaman and the principal parties involv
ed, and that they we're not ignorant Of the
action and interests Of each other.
/ independent of any criminal interest, this
conduct and the relations thus established
were undoubtedly wrong. Mr.. Seaman was
the officer of the government, whose duty it
was to inspect, and If necessary to reject the
paper furnished. While Mr.. Wendell was
the public printer who used the paper, who
knew the quality of the article, and who was
the only person likely to complain Of it's
quality. The superintendent was large
and constant borrower from the contractors,
and thus far lost his independence; while
the public printer became the hired agent OF
tho contractors, and positively interested in
the receipts Of this paper, no matter how in
different in quality.
Your committee find that Mr.. Seaman re-
ceived from the engravers, photographers,
and paper contractors, examined during the
investigation, in the way of loans chiefly, but
| q portion in money direct, about the gross
sum Of $50, 900
Your committe find, rs heretofore stated
that Mr.. Wendell received from the paper
contractors about $4,000. The evidence
also shows that he received from engravers
and photographers, during Mr.. Seaman's
SUPPLEMENTARY, about $27 900, making the
gross sum paid to him, rs far as ascertained
about $4,000.
That is the mode in which the Government
Superintendent and the Government Printer
combined to swinde the public and corrupt
all with whom they had business relations.
The Hardin County Jury Outdonc.
Our readers will remember that SEINE years
ago jury Of Hardin county, Kentucky, rem
dered verdict in criminal case that rem
dered "Hardin county jury" n by-word Of
universal infamy throughout the land. But
arecent report of grand jury in Hancock
county, in the same State, will tend to re-
heve the Hardin county jury Of public odium
If it does not have the effect to make them
respectable by contrast.
A rufian, by the name of Lowe, having
armed himself for quarrel with the Distric.
Attorney, insuted him in o crowd in the
Court House, and subsequently these parties
and their friends, with pistols, knives and
guns, engaged in general melee on the
streets, One Of loves friends was killed
and he was wounded; but eventually officer;
interfered, arrested Lowe and put him in Jail
Subsequently, two men went to the jailor
presented a pistol to his breast md demanded
and obtained the key Of the prison. They
T then proceeded to loves cell, unlocked tn,
door, and as he lay there wounded each O
them fired three shots into his body, any on
Of which would have killed him.
: The matter was brought before the gran
jury Of Hancock county, which, after due de
> liberation and examination Of facts, whic
q arc given in great detail, find no grounds 70
# indictiDg the murderers, but come to tn
i following very wise and moral conclusions
. SIN reference to the killing Of Lowe o
: the next day when he was unarmed and con
= fined in the jail, difference Of opinion exis,
!, - in the grand jury. A majority Of tho jury
70 however, believe that the lives Of the tw
y persons by whom he was said TO have bee
slain were threatened by him and would hav
- been unsafe if he had been permitted to liy,
! and that the same principles of self-preserva
= ton which justified the killing Of Aldridg,
- were applicable to the killing Of Lowe. TIL
= grand jury unitedly deplore that SO gre,
provocation to violence existed in this cour
:. ty and that blood has been shed ia the yer
y presence Of justice. They hope sincerely th,
- the bloody proceedings referred to may ha,
~ !. aa.u.sIT eject urcH tic cnmmcc;tr-th.