The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-02-17

by Mr.. .Hambleton-"As a monument to your
Honor's Administration ?"
Mr.. Swami -"No--for the good of the people. -
At the close of Mr.. Swanns examination the coun-
sci orBrnck expressed themselves highly gratifed
with the Mayors evidence, and asked no questions
Inc Sergeant-at-Arms here reported that of the
witnesses he was required to summon--Mr. Beach,
OF the Sun-was sick in bed Mr.. Abell had dodg-
ed; he could not be found. Mr.. Barnum was in
| New ork; telegraphed to him, and received re-
ply that if they wanted him they must come after
him.
Mr. Hambeton said Mr.. Whitley was in Wash
lngton city, and could not be reached; Mr. Beale
had stated that Mr.. Carter had proffered him
bribe there were several witnesses present if the
committee would examine them upon that point
The committee declined, stating that one witness
stlod good against the other; Carter against Beale
Mr. l. ). Alexander then, on the part of Brock
d Co., rose to explain their position, not to make
any argument He contended that corruption and
fraud had been charged but he thought, mot proved
when Black Republicanism had been charged, and
letters from gentlemen in Philadelphia had been
published, giving currency to this charge. They
mad rebuttng letters which would be handed to the
Committee. He then referred to the fact that
there was not any three cent fare proposition on
the journal of the City Council because it was out
o. order, he supposed. The veto message will suff-
GENTLY explain Mr. Swann's reasons for opposing
the trst Bill which passed the Council; thinks it
will be conceded that Brock has exercised good
faith in everything but carrying out the seventh
section. Did not wish to present any argument
only to make statement of their position thought
he could prove, if necessary, that in April, 1859
money could not have been raised in Baltimore to
| build the Railroad 1t was no doubt intended that
books for subscription to stock were to be opened
but the great defect of the ordinance was that it
was so drawn as to be impossible of execution
There was no capital fixed by it, and the learned
gentleman stated so many other objections, so fatal
to- the ordinance any other supposition than
that 1t was drawn for the express purpose of being
! sold to Brock that no doubt if Mr. Alexander had
been "making an argument" as he expressly stated
| half dozen times in the bandest manner that he
| was not, he would probably have thought it worth
while to answer the natural inquiry which presents
Itself to every mans mind, whether the fact that
| the only equitable and acceptable provision in the
| ordinance was illegal and incapable of execution is
not the very best proof of the fraudulent character
| OF the transaction.
| Mr.. Alexander continued to state not To aroma
as respects the power of the city to pass the ord
nance, that it was the general impression that such
a right existed, and that if it did not it ought to
exist The city close and open streets can pave
streets, can allow a railway to be put down, provi-
ded it does not interfere with the use Of the streets
lfit has the power to allow rails to be laid down it
seems sort OF contract on the part Of the city to
| allow them to be used by the party putting them
| down. The Legislature is bound to respect that
| implied contract, and Mr. Brock only asks the ia
cllty OF chlrter to enable him to proceed with his
| duties.
Mr.. Hambleton said he was not aware it was de-
signed, when he entered into this case to argue it
| before the Committee; but simply to state the pur-
pose OF coming before the Legislature, and offering
/
| them and the counsel on the other side was this
| They are here asking ac of Incorporation as
right, on moral and legal grounds-are here asking
| afavor. lie denied that the city had the right to
| give up the franchise they have done. And when
the other side speak of their moral right to ask it
! of the Legislature, he asked the Committee to look
| to the fact that when Brock & Co. could screen
| themselves behind the seventh section they did So
and said they never did intend to carry it out
| They came here on the merest technicalities and
are here simply before the Committee on the ad-
vice of their able counsel
| 1t they had opened subscription books in Bati-
more, the Legislature would have been spared this
| expense, and there would have been no right to
complain the city would have control of the road
and ltWouid not have been verging on a monopoly.
The parties are here without good faith-thev did
not intend to open books. He would show on the
| other hand that this favor should not be granted
to Brock d Co., on grounds of public policy. He
| was not here expecting members Of the Council
| would come and admit that they took brbe. 1t
| is for them to explain whether in expending ST 800
! they have approximated close as possible to
! what has been alleged.
The citizens of Baltimore afraid if the Legis-
! lature endorses this ordinance it will make them
liable to be again put at the mercy of foreign cap
| talists. They protested against anv charter and
say this grant was obtained By fraud-they have,
! they think, shown it. With the imputation that
money was employed, it is for them to clear them
selves of that imputation. He was not here rela-
tive to the construction of the seventh section and
the Legislature is not looking to technicalites and
obtained and forced upon the citizens of Baltimore
| IT Brock Co. had carried out the ordinance, if
! the Legislature was convinced money expend-
| ed to pass it, they would not give them charter
II IT cost Brock Co. Sl00, 900 to get it, and will
cost 81 10000 600 more, the Legislature will not
stand on the question whether Brock and Co. are
liable t" any loss, but whether the grant was pro
| perly obtained, and no fraud was used
Mr. Campbell explained that prescriptions were
| always in favor of the innocence of parties until
| they are found guilty, It was monstrous doc
trine announced by Mr.. Hambleton, that in this
case the rule should be reversed and these parties
| required to show clean hands.
Mr. Hambeton stated that his position was mis-
stated by MIR. c. He had said that these parties
being strangers in the State, and coming here to
ask favors, should be required to prove their spe-
cial claims rather than we should be asked to show
that they have none
Mr.. Campbell said all that was of no conse-
quence, but repelied Mr. Hambletnn's remark that
tbs first effort of Brock was to find counsel who
would give him opinion that the seventh section
was Illegal to enable him to evade his plain obiga-
tions. Nobody could get any but conscientious
opinion from him. Mr.. Brock introduced to
him by most respectable member of the Bar
Mr.. Brock consulted him about the seventh section
OF the ordinance. He thought it was impractical
BILE and Illegal, and so stated to his colleague Mr.
Alexander, who at first thought differently, but
came into his views better consideration. Very
distinguished counsel in Baltimore had also con
curred in that opinion.
Mr.. W. Pinkney Whyte then asked leave to read
some letters that he had been on to PHILADELPHIA
for, to rebut the impression produced by the publ
cation of letters from Mcssrs Vandyke and others
charging the Brock party with being Republicans;
also affidavits from several of Brooks associates
to the effect Mr.. Whyte read these letters
some six or seven, and the atfdavits, which exon
Grated the parties completely from the imputa-
tions cast upon them in this respect. Mr.. Whyte
then remarked that he had other letters which he
proposed to read to show, they charged with
being strangers and foreigners that one of the par
ties on the otherside was endeavorng to sell out the
three cent charter to Phiadephians, it is
obtained. He then asked General Mankn who was
present. fcertain letters produced by him were in
his handwriting.
After the examination, General Mankin admitted
the handwriting to be genuine. He then said that
before the reading of the letters he wished make
a statement. Permission being granted, he rose
for the purpose, but asked moments indulgence
as he felt unwell. He became very pale sank into
his chair, and finally fell on the floor in fainting
mt. There was large crowd and the room was
hot The windows were thrown open, and after
some minutes Gen. Mankin revived sufficiently to
proceed with his explanation. 1t should be uEder
stood that when the counsel of Brock saw the eff
feet which appeared to be produced by the produc-
tion of these private atter, they proposed to with
draw them, unless Mr.. Mankin preferred having
them read. Gen. Mankin explained that he had
been ill all night, had not been able to eat break
fast, and was faint and weak in consequence.
He was the pioneer of the hOrse-railway in Bal
tlmore. de was owner of suburban property which
he wished to improve, but in his wish to benefit
himself, he bad never attempted to iniure Others
lie had applied to the last Legislature for a charter
for horse-railway, but without success.
As last resort, he went before the Council
His plan was most extensive and comprehensive
one. The enterprise was a new one, and thought
he was firmly persuaded that railways were profit
able, and had got some persons to Join him; he had
found it necessary to look elsewhere for assistance
This had placed him in correspondence with parties
at the North. His OBJ ject only to invite for.
eign capital, if it would not be found in Baltimore
For this purpose, he had commenced, in 1858, the
correspondence OF which the letters which Mr..
Whyte had obtained by betrayal of confidence,
were part; if the whole correspondence were on
hand, he would not object to its being read;
but did not think it fair to read or two letters
out OF long correspondence, no just conception
OF his position could be thereby attained. After
General Mankn had closed. some rather sharp re-
marks passed between member of the Committee
and the Chairman, about the letters The subject
however, was soon dropped, and the counsel on
either side having announced that they had no
further witnesses, the committee, by a unanimous
vote, adjourned the investigation SINE die.
The Brock party feel in rather better spirits in
consequence of the effect produced by the reading
ot their letters and aidavis, and also by the Man
kin embrogo. 1t is difficult, however to see how
this affect the case, unless the Legislature con-
ceives that it is merely deciding private contro-
verSy between Messrs Brock and Mankin. Even
in that view Of the case, the citizens of Baltimore
would, by no means, entertain the same objection
to have three cent grant sold out to northerners
as they have expressed to 4 five cent one, under
similar circumstances.
The Senatorial caucus last night resulted in no
choice. The only candidates of any real strength