The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1871-01-07

you have here?
A. Not so full, think, sir. don't th'hk
/ said anything of the subscriptions.
Q. Wasn't the legality of this organlza-
ton the subject of investigation by the
committee at that time?
A. There was something said about 1t.
Z. Was not that organization bitterly
attacked.
A. / don't know, sir.
Q. Wasn't your brother there as your I'D.
yocate to show that the company was
organized and to secure money
due you? ..
A. MY brother was there to secure an
to the bill requiring the new
company to pay the debts of the old COM
pany before having It's privileges.
Q. Didn't you wish to defeat that bill II
the amendment was not passed?
A. / wished the money due me. didnt
care who built the road, but / did desire
the defeat Of the bill five were not to be
paid. / favored the Ficklin charter, be-
cause it bound them to pay the old debts OF
the company, and of course was to me pre-
ferable to any charter not doing go.
q. Have you claim to prefer against the
new company for services rendered the
company while 1t was under the control OF
Stewart
A. As long as there Is an Alexandria and
Fredericksburg Railroad Company claim
that it owes me for services performed on
its road. The Ficklin charter was obtained
April 26. 1867.
Q. Was there any organization under it :?
A. don't know. The first money saw
of the Alexandria and Fredericksburg Rail-
road Company was the 81 900 put to my
credit in Fredericksburg.
Q. Do you know how much money was
expended for land damages?
A. About Sill 400, which included legal
fees, &c.
Q. What became of the $4,000 realized
from the $4,000 Of bonds? Did it 60 to
the credit of the company in Huyck's bank?
A. 1t couldn't possibly have gone there,
for the bank failed before that money was
realized. The sum paid to the contractors
under Bodtish, Mills Il Co. was about
$1,000.
@. How much work was done on that
road:
A. think about $4,000 worth of work
had been done, according to the last esti-
mate made, and good deal of work was
done after that estimate.
q. What was that work?
4. Graduation, delivery timber, bridges
over creeks, &c.
Judge Ould here said that this side had
only two witnesses to examine-Mr. Oscar
Stevens, Of Alexandria, and Mr.. q. W. e..
Ramsey-neither of them now here. He
thought it proper that Mr.. 7. V. Daniel,
the president of the Richmond, Fredericks-
burg and Potomac Railroad Company,
should be allowed, without suggestion of
counsel, to make statement relative to his
road in reply to what had been said by Mr.
Roberts. They had also TO offer the record
of the trial in the court before Judge Lowe,
whose opinion has been put in evidence by
the other side.
Mr. Smith, of Alexandria, Counsel for
the Alexandria and Fredericksburg rail-
road,) said there was no objection to the
introduction of the record. The testimony
were two witnesses-Messrs. Stevens and
Ramsey. He would ask what they expect
ed to prove by these witnesses, because
perhaps we may admit it, and thus save
time.
Judge Ould.-As the Committee of In
vestigation is to do their duty independent
of parties, it is a question whether we have
q right to make any such arrangement to
dispense with the appearance of witnesses.
The committee should determine that mat
ter,
MR.. STEVENS SICK OR NOT?
Mr.. Smith.-Of course it is with the COM
mittee. Why should we wait for witnesses
when we don't know whether they know
anything or not? AS I understand, the
committee don't want these witnesses. We
have taken pains to ventilate MIR. Stevens's
reported sickness. Here are two dispatches
from q gentleman in Washington, who says
Stevens was out yesterday and to-day doing
business, and has not been sick, or made
any pretence Of being SO, and said to-day
he was going to Richmond tomorrow to
fight the Pennsylvania railroad.
Judge Ould.-All we know of it is the
receipt Of dispatch from Mr.. Stevens him
self stating his sickness.
Mr. Daniel.-We will make him come.
Judge Ould.-Mr. Kelly, who offered the
resolution in the House Of Delegates, sum-
moned MIR. Stevens himself.
Mr.. Smith.-Mr. Kelly the other night,
before this committee, declined to give the
name of the person who furnished him the
information on which his resolution was
based.
Mr.. Kelly.-I said, also, at that time that
/ would not have offered the resolution
unless | had heard from gentleman in the
Exchange Hotel a confirmation Of what the
person who furnished the resolution had
told me. The gentleman at the Exchange,
l have since learned, was Mr.. Stevens, and
much of what he told me has been con-
firmed by the evidence already given here.
l have also suggested summoning the bank
examiner, who could tell about the affairs
OF Huyck's bank.
Mr.. Smith. h.-Mr. Stevens resides in the
District OF Colum bia, out of the State and
beyond the enforcement of subpoena.
Mr.. Smith pressed his point that the oppo-
sition counsel should state what they ex-
pected to prove by Stevens and Ramsey.
Mr.. Il. r. Daniel said the Legislature had
empowered and directed this committee to
probe this matter to the bottom. 1t was
extraordinary that the committee should
be asked to force one side to state what they