The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-07-30
Further Testimony Concerning the Tam
many and Judicial Ring.
How Receiyerships We're Granted
to Friends of the Family.
Ohhand Decisions of EIia
Honor. the Judge.
ERIE AND ITS ALLIES

SARATOGA, N. Y, July 20, 1871
The Court met at ten O'Clock A. M-twenty seven
members present
Q. 8. Bushnell was sworn and testified ~ am
Director OF the Union Pacific Railroad Company
remember suit brought against the company BIZ
FISK; that was In July, 1868; remember suit II
March, lS69 was present at the election ON the 10th
OF March, 1869; the polls opened the SHERIFF
with a posse, appeared and served an inunctionS
cannot say how many votes been cast; some!
thing over nine hundred miles of the road
were then constructed. and over one thou.
sand miles were under contract; the lengtA
OF the road was one thousand and sixty or one
thousand and thirty miles; the company was in
good financial condition, selling bonds at l02; tho
money TO construct the road was raised by selling
bonds, which was done at 20 Nassau street; re(
member the order issued by Judge Barnard ap-
pointing Tweed receiver; also one directing the
safe to be opened; was present when the proceed.
ings to open the safe took place. the Sheriff and his
assistants attempted with sedges, &C.. to open tina
safe, but failed after several hours then he sent for
the manufacturer, AMI with q large force, ana
finally, with another days work. it was opened; the
practical effect Of these orders damaged us millions
of dollars; it reduced the price Of our bonds,
from 102 to IS; we suffered loss twic0
as great on land grant bonds; this loss.
there were two or three millions In bonds
In the safe; on intimatlon OF the proceedings tho
officers and clerks took them away and secured
them. Personally knew Fisk; had conversation
with him In the latter part Of June, 1893; 1t waG
before the suit was commenced, and when no.
threatened to commence the suit; think there was
an order to show cause why the Injunction shoula,
not ISSUE and think 1t was by Judge Barnards'
next evening or the same evening had
CONVERSATION WITH FISK
about the suit at the Fifth Avenue Hotel. Mr.,
Parsons, examining counsel, asked witness whether
anything was said in that conversation about APP
pointing receiver.
Mr.. Beach objected on the ground that unless
there was positive proof that there was q c0nspi-
racy between Barnard and Fisk this evidence was
conspiracy then the declaration by of the par
ties to the conspiracy would be admissible, but
Mr. PARSONS replied that the prosecution had
shown by the intimacy between Barnard and Fisk
that there was cause to believe there was con-
spiracy. Besides 1t was proper to show that when
there was no good cause for receiver the in
ference from such an appointment was that there
Mr. Beach responded that If there were black.
mailing suits IN New York connected with railway
companies, and ne would not say there were not
anything to do with them without proof 1t was
clear that there was just cause in the allegations
for Judge Barnard to issue these orders, and he,
should not be held responsible for what persons
might say in the streets.
The Chair ruled that the evidence was competent
as much similar evidence had been taken.
Mr.. Beach asked the judgment OF the Court
e 70 e
lection be sustained ~
1t was decided in the afirmative-yeas 49, nays IL.
Witness was then asked
WHEN TWEED BECAME RECEIVER,
and answered. 1t was six or eight months after. Id
money by the Union Pacific Railroad Company "a
prevent the appointment OF receiver.
Beach objected, unless It could be shown whether
Parsons replied that it was not necessary to show
that Barnard received any Of this money; 1t wa9
asked to show how much was the loss OF the Union
Pacific Railroad Company by Barnards action.
Mr. Beach replied that counsel knew that thera
was evidence; there could be no evidence to
show that one cent OF this money went to Judge
Barnard. He said the question had just been do.
outside parties could not be made to afYecs Jude3
Barnard to injury inflicted by Barnard's orders,
The payment of this money was not legitlmately .
loss to the company, II was bride to upset the
Alter explanation that this evidence was mad
mssable under the vote this morning. counsel
withdrew the question.
witness then went on to state that the company
n OF e
Mr. Parsons asked what the company did con-
corning these orders to protect themselves
Mr. Beach objected on the ground that It was
contrary to the ruling of the Court, but subse,
quently withdrew the objection. Witness then said
detectives, who reported daily during the month Of
March, 1850 that employment continued from thirty
Crosse xamined by Mr. Beach, was present
every day during the proceedings, but don't ro-
member Mr.. Tweed, as receiver,
APPLYING TO TAKE POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY
prior to the opening OF the safe; he may have made
a demand In one OF the other rooms; don't remem-
Der the sa ha Mr. Ma 81 s
combination, and he was In New Jersey; Mr. Ham
was not sent to. New Jersey with tho
sion; he was the auditor and custodian Of the
property his duties required his . Ss a item
IN In
action commenced in Pennsylvania against
the Credit Mobile, prior to these suits;
many scandalous charges about the connection Of
the Union Pacific Railroad with the Credit Mo-
bier; Judge that the depreciation OF the value
Of the bonds was caused by these orders, because
they commenced to decline on that very day d0n's
know OF any other cause; my opinion 9 is based on
hearing the order TO show cause why the order
of Injunction should not issue.
To Mr.. ParsOns-There were no scandals respect
ing the management OF the company prior to the
commencement Of Flsks suits; there were no
trouble In them; we were unable to borrow money
on our securities, owing to these suits.
TO Mr.. Bcach--D0 not know that there were any
accusations against the management or the road,
to its connection with the Credit MOber prior TO
the commencement OF Fsk's suits; cannot say
there were not at the time of the service of tho
Injunction one OF our officers, thinking they had no
right to enter, held the door against them, but they
pressed it open; that was
ALI the directors were arrested some OF them were
taken to court and others to other places and held
to bail, fearing they would be sent to Eldridgo
street jail; when the injunction against the cleo
ton was received we proceeded to count the votes;
don't know OF any more votes being cast; after tho
Injunction was served and we proceeded with the
count Fisk left; did not know OF his returning.
To Mr.. ParsOns-Our counsel informed US that
proceedings had been taken to remove tho case to
the United states Courts and that the proceedings
before Judge Barnard were invalid
To Chief Justice Church--Thc order of arrest was
served on us thirty minutes after the injunction was
served, and our Impression was that they went out
and got IL.
passed between
: JAMES H. COLEMAN AND JUDGE BARNARD
while the latter was at POughkcepsic.
Is. @. Thayer was sworn and tcstihed-KnOW
Judge Barnard; was counsel for the plantiif In tho
vase vi bVies agaiusv .ic'on "as n,aC
TOT leave TO lease before Judge Barnard OF TUG JUN
OF June, 1868; Barnard had issued an order to slV