Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1859-07-06

u 8XeDCy
Mr. Magruder went on, slluding 70 the written
speech which the gentleman had read this eve
ming, and saying that he the speaker had, while
been reading an article in the q States, newspaper
of to-day, and II was little remarkable that he had
found the identical sentiments the identical ideas
IL not the identical words of the gentleman 8 writ
ten speech, In the Identical newspaper article re-
fsrred to. ILaughter1 = - -7-tI
MI Moore. al viii take occasion now to say
that have not read one Of the evening papers to-
Mr.. Magruder. "Of course not do not say
he has There was no necessity to look i'm the
paper Tor the printed words of which the gentle
"a hoios the manuscript copy in his hand now
laughter -
Mr. Moore went on to say that he had never had
any agency In the publication of any of the articles
another evening paper the report of bis own speech
made In this Board last Monday night, and supply
some omissions in IL, for the use of the evening
paper now referred to at the request of its editor
MI Magruder then went on to comment upon
the action OF the investigating committee in this
matter, and upon the assistance which had been
rendered by MIR. Moore during that investigation,
and drew the distinction between Mr.. Moore's
charges that the committee prejudged when
they went into the investigation, and his own
action before the committee In endeavoring to
fasten crime which had not been committed at
all, upon one Of his brother members.
Mr.. Magruder alluded TO Mr. Moore's state
ment, "that the committee had refused to allow
him to take Mr.. Browns written defence for
perusal," stating that It would have been highly
indecorous in the committee to let any one have
possession Of papers under their charge There
was still another reason why the gentleman had
been refused access to the defence Of Mr.. Brown
That paper had been mutilated by some. one
already, by the addition of the letter SIS, in one
or two places, which addition gave the language
an entirely different construction from what IL
had been Intended to convey. That defence was
A,ovA of 4 IT,,
hand, and 1t was little remarkable that the adj
ditonal SIS were not at all like the hand of Mr.
Brown; that they were made in different colored
ink from that in which the body Of the report
was Written and the most remarkable part of all
was the fact that they were Enthusiastically like
every 50 in the report Of the investigating CON-
mittee Of which Mr.. Moore was member, and
were unmistak ably unlike any other "s'sn except
such as are invariably made by that gentleman
himself, as that committees report will Show.
MIR. Moore here stated that the letters were un-
important that If any had been made by him they
had been made where the contraction tscom, for
committee occurred, or the contraction "com,'
for commissioner" occurred. in order to be a
guide to the printer, to prevent his mistaking the
one contraction from the other.
Mr.. Magruder went on to show that the contrac-
tons did not occur In any single case where il
would be at all necessary to add the ss, as guide
to the printer, or to any person whatever. Il was
an plain an language could make Ii. He then went
on TO show that Mr.. NJ, by his action throughout
the entire investigation, had evinced strong bias
against Mr. Brown, and strong purpose to con-
vict him, IL possible The gentleman fonnd fault
with the committee, alleging that thew were pre
judged In favor Of Mr.. Brown. Did the gentleman
expect the committee to 60 into the Investigation
with settled purpose to make out Mr. Brown a
criminal, TO suit the suspicious which he (Mr
Moore) was so anxious to confirm, The committee
did well to refuse the gentleman access to the ma
Pers after the discovery Of the inter polations in
Mr.. Browns written defence. Had any committee
right to correct testimony after it had been sworn
to by the party testfying, Was il TO be said that
any committee or any individual had a right to
nuniate Mr. Brown 8 written and attested de-
fence! ANY criminal in a court of Justice has
right to make defence, and to prove il. If DOS
sible. Should that right be denied i'm this cas-
because the gentleman wanted the accused con,
victed! VIII
The gentleman had complained of the cops.,t,-
tion Of the committee; said 1t was supplementary
because 1t was made up Of men entirely on one
SIDE OF the question. Did the gentleman expect
that II was to be composed Of any portion of the
committee who acted last year. or was To he com.
posed OF any person who voted upon the report
made Dy the committee last year! Such state
OF things would have been unparliamentary, in
deed, and was therefore studiously avoided by
the Chair In the appointment Of the committee
Fhere was an explanation due to himself in
THIS lnattr, and that was that portion Of Mr.
W. A. kennedy's testimony which was personal
to himself That portion in which MI Ken
nedy states that he came to the speaker who yvas
then Mayor Of the city, and asked him IL he had
,vs a s snd th iof the sewer to be changed to
was no authority for the change. The matter was
easily explained by saying that as Mr. Kennedy
alleges, this conversation took place in May, and
his term Of Office Mayor expired with that
month, and they all knew that the sewer had not
then Deen began; nor was il begun till after the
present Mayor had been installed in office.
Inc speaker remembered that many petitions
were sent him while Mayor TO have the sewer
begun. That among others Mr. Abner Young
came TO him twice, begging that the sewer mipbf
DE- commenced, as the alley in question was an
unbeatable nuisance; that at the request OF Mr.
Young he had gone up and inspected the said
alley and had found it much worse than had been
represented; that II was I'm fact an intolerable
nuisance and curse to the health of the neigh
borhOod, and feeling that IL should be abated az
soon as possible, he had come back to the office
and written the letter of instructions to the com
missioner TO have the work executed. After that
III was necessary ny law to advertise for proposals.
ana after the award of the contract il was nec,s
sary for the contractor to obtain the materials f,
the work, and during that necessary delay ne had
gone out VI office, and the work had not been
begun Till after the Inauguration of the present
mayor. During all this time Mr. Brown had
never approached him once. directly or indirectIv
upon the subject of this sewer ~
Mr.. Moore here stated that several of the p,p.,,
were only copies of the originals and that there
was rule of law requiring the original papers
always to be Produced. There was discrepancy
In the two statements of Mr.. Turton The first
cOntiicted with the second.
Mr.. Ward. lis Mr.. Turton's first statement
sworn -
MT. moore " l have not examined. I think
neither of them il sworn tor
Mr.. Magruder. Look and see;'
Mr.. Moore, after examination, stated that the
second paper was attcsted.
Mr.. Ward. That was all that was necessary I'm
the first statement. Mr.. TurtOn states that he can
not precisely remember, not having seen the bill
since Its passage. In the second paper he states
that he has now seen the bill and that IL is the
same. This last paper is attested by magistrate
MIR; Moore commended that the papers did not
look like the originals.
MIR. Turton, (ffom outside the bar) "They are
all In my own handwriting, every word; and are
the original papers, and not copiesn
Mr. Moore explained that, not being acquainted
with Mr.. Turton' S hand, he had been mistaken as
to this point.
The question now recurring OH Mr. Dunning-
toms motion to adopt the report and print it with
the accompanying papers,
MIR. Dove rose In his seat and stated that as th,,
gentleman from the Fourth Ward had seemed to
imPugn his motives i'm appointing the Committee
OF investigation he explained that he had but six
members to select from. There were but fourteen
members in the board, eight Of whom had acted
on the matter last year, and the chair had felt
disposed to select the committee from those mem
bers who We're strangers to the transaction of last
year, SO that there might be opportunity given
for any one to say that the case had been pre-
judged by the appointment of the COMMITTEES.
The chair had selected three new members each
m n nj trs.. 4