Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1859-08-03

was scarcely meeting of the board that the con-
tract was not brought up But cannot admit, that
as member of the committee to settle the account
of the contractors for the first DIVISION that Mr.
Fisher ever talked" with me. The solicitations
of Gov. Morehead for my attendance on the commit
tee and my lively and vivid recollection Of my re-
peatcd asseverations to him that had not been in
vited to attend the meetings of the committee or
consulted by any one of them, confirms my memo.
ry and places my recollection antagonstc with that
Of Mr.. Fisher The difference between Mr.. Fisher
and myself can be readily accounted for. He has
doubtless COMPOUNDED prior conversations in refer
ence to the account of the contractors OF the hrst
division; for the subject was mooted at several ses-
sions of the board prior to the appointment OF the
committee.
And this accounts for another error into which
Mr. Fisher has fallen, viz: that the committee pro
ceeded to act, having an account submitted by the
Chief Engineer for their basis of action ms
statement is in conflict with another Immediately
following the above in Mr. Fishers letter, viz: " 1t
is very we'll understood that the Chief Engineer de-
cned to adcise any settlement" Now my recol
lection goes to restore harmony to these contradlc
tory statements, for it obliterates both. certainly
submitted no account or statement to the commit
tee The committee may have had before them the
general account or estimate of the contractors show
ing the entire cost of the contract with perhaps the
bi-monthv estimates and other memoranda furnished
by me to the board from time to time, and probably
the account of the contractors which MIR. Menden-
hall in his letter (hereunto anneXed says he fur
nished Gov Morchead, then President of the Com
pany and these accounts Mr.. Fisher has perhaps
mistaken for an account "submitted" to the COM
mittee by the Chief Engineer for their basis OF ac
ton"
But in fac. the contract specified the amount to
be paid after deducng the cost of several sections
designated by numbers in the contract so that the
amount to be paid the contractors could be readily
ascertaned by deductng the aggregate cost of those
sections from the whole to be paid, conditioned
on the execution of the work in accordance with the
specifications Such beiEg the nature of the con-
tract and the Chief Engineer being the final arbl-
ter had submitted any account as a basis for the
action of the committee it would have been contin-
ed to specification of the failures of the contract
ors in the performance of their contract the amount
of damage in each case to the Company, &c; all
which would have checrfully furnished had been
called on by the committee.
was ever ready and willing to settle the account
of the contractors for the first DIVISION despite of
any imputation which might have been cast upon
me in consequence of my having, from sense OF
duty and self respect declined to hold any personal
intercourse with them, and was taken by surprise
when committee was appointed to settle the ac-
count Nevertheless as | said in my reply to
communication from Mr.. Worth, chairman, &c, 81
made no complaint nor did make any enquiry as
to the motive for taking the settlement out OF my
hands. | inferred it done at the solicitation OF
the contractors
In conclusion, l would observe that. until saw
the report of the Joint select committee, land
month has Scarce elapsed since it first met my eye
l never knew how the committee had settled the ac-
count of the contractors of the first division. |
could therefore, express no opinion, either one way
tha thor in tn
count. Mr. Fishers remarks. therefore, in regard
to any dissatisfaction" and from what have here
tofore said his impression that the officers of the
company were not only very glad to be relieved of
the duty of making this settlement. but were well
satisfied with its terms" can have reference to
me.
Reverting to Judge Saunders | accept the issue
of veracity made in the concluding sentence of his
letter. wherein he refers to the recollection of his
committee, taken upon the recollection Of that
committee.
WALTER GWYNN.
Pendeton, S. c., July 81, 1859.
IS Gov. Moreheads letter did not come to hand
until the 10Th inst, hence the delay of my reply to
Judge Saunders card.
If any editors have published Judge Saunders
card, appeal to their sense of justice and fairness
to publish my reply. VIC.
GREENSBORO, n. c.,
July 5, 1859.
Col. Walter Gmynn:
DEAR SIR: Your favor of the 18th ult was duly
received, asking my recollection as to what trans
PRED before the committee appointed by the direct
ors of the n. c. Railroad Company, in December,
1854, in relation to the settlement of the contract
the first division of the road.
After the adjournment of the board of Directors,
left the City of Raleigh and returned home did
not attend any of the meetings of the committee
do know who attended or what TRANSFERRED before
them. furnished Gov. Morehcad then President
of the road) with copy of the account of the
tractors on the first division, and it some weeks
before learned what had been done in the matter.
l recollect very distinctly hearing Gov. Morehoad
state when he returned to Greensboro after the set
tlcmen that he endeavored to get you to 60 before
the committee but that you declined doing with,
out being invited by them; that you were not pres
ent at any time when he was there and that you
told him you had not been present at any time, mol
invited to attend by any member of the committee.
Yours very respectfully,
GREENSBORO, July 16, 1859
| COL Walter Gmynn:
DEAR SIR: In reply to yours requesting me tt
state whether have any recollection of your being
present at any time before, or being consulted by
the committee appointed by the directors of the n
C. Railroad company to make final settlement be
tween the company and the contractors on the frs
division of the road, have to state: That remem
Der distinctly, when the committee were about t,
commence their investigations at Raleigh called
your office in Raleigh and stated to you that l. Cbe
ing then President of the company desired tina
you should appear before the committee, whethe
invited by them to do so not and state the objec
tons you had to the manner in which portions o
the work had been executed on the first division
and that I thought it was due to yourself and tn
company, that you should give the reasons why 20,
had withheld from the contractors estimates on thos
portions of the work. You replied in substance
and, l think in about the following words 70,
said you had frequently laid before the board of d
rectors the difficulties you had with the contractor
on the first division, as to the manner in whic
hey had executed portions of their work, and ha
stated to the board the reasons why. you had no
given them estimates on those portions. The boar
being thus fully advised by you, had thought prope
to take the settlement out of your hands and plac
it in the hands of a committee which Won though