The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1872-05-03
TWEEDISM IN HARTFORD.

member of the House was interested in the
printing contract, and if so, whether that fact
violated such members oath or was inconsis-
tent with public morality.
This resolution was referred TO u special
committee, of which Mr.. Spencer, of Balti-
more county, was chairman, and Mr. STREET.,
one of the proprietors ofthc Hartord Democrat,
was member. The investigation commenc-
ed, in secret session of the committee. Evil
dence in the matter was taken and finally a
report was submitted, to the House by the
chairman of the committee. We quote from
the proceedings of the Legislature, as first
published in the daily papers
Mr. Spencer submitted the report of the
select committee appointed to inquire wheth-
cr any member of the House was interested
in the printing contract, and if so, whether
it was consistent with his oath of office.
The report states that the committee have
fully examined the question; sets forth the
reasons for holding such position to be in
consistent with the oath, and finally declares
that Mr.. Cotton, delegate from Balti-
more city, is interested in such contract.
The evidence accompanied the report, and
Mr.. Spencer requested that it be read in full;
saying that he had found it possible to bring
it before the House only when it was discov-
cred that if it was suppressed he would write
out his own copy and make oath to it before
magistrate. Since the copy was prepared,
pencil marks had been placed upon it by
members of the Committee.
The day after the above appeared a state
ment was published to the effect that the re-
porters had made mistake, and that ma
jority ofthe committee eXonerated the mem
Der; but notwithstanding this explanation
the affair still remained shrouded in mystery
and doubt, so far as the public were concern
ed
The report with the evidence, &c, was not
read but was ordered to be printed in the
Journal of the House. and that was the end
of the matter, for tile report las nat act been
printed. Why it has been suppressed we are
not able to say.
Mr.. Street,, one of the publishers of the
HuTord Democrat, was also Il member of the
Printing Committce-one of the regular
standing committees of the House To this
committee appertained the duty of advertis-
ing for bids to do the printing for the Legis-
lature-the law requiring the contract to be
given to the lowest responsible bidder. No
public notice, however, was given of the time
when the committee would meet to examine
bids, although there were many responsible
men who desired to offer bids. The commit
tee held secret meeting, and awarded the
contract to certain parties, whose bid was, as
the committee alleged, the only one before
them. The sum allowed for the work was
$4,000, when Mr.. Iglehart, perfectly reli-
able and responsible gentleman-but not q
member of the Legislature-had bid ready
offering to do the work for S1j,500 less
His bid was not considered because it was
not before the committee and it was not be-
fore the committee because he was unable to
ascertain when they would meet. He desired
to explain his bid personally and members
ofthe committee had been informed and knew
that MIR. Iglehart proposed to hand in bid
Mr.. Street,, as we have said, was member
of this committee which awarded contract
by which the State lost $4,000. He can not
escape the responsibility of his action in the
matter. He was also a member of the special
committee appointed to examine whether
any member ofthe Legislature was interested
in the printing contract. If the member
against whom the resolution pointed was in
fact entirely free from the charge, it would
seem natural and proper that he would de-
mand and court the most rigid investigation,
and that his friends would do the same for
him. In the examination of witnesses, the
chairman was impeded in the investigation
by captious objections, on the part of Mr.
Street,, to questions asked; so that from
all we can learn, the part enacted by the Har-
ford delegate seems to have been rather that
of lawyer defending his client in court, than
Il member of an investigating committee en-
deavoring to arrive at truth. Perhaps his
zeal is accounted for, by the fact that in Sc
curing for his own paper the publication o!
the general laws, lie has placed himself in the
precise position of the man whom he defcn.
died.
AS a singular comment on the part he
took in the affair, by which the State was
made to lose So many thousand dollars, it is
only necessary to read the article eulogizing
himself, and which he published in the Har-
tDrd Denloc1ut last week 1t was taken from
the Annapolis Republican, Mr.. Colton's paper
and Mr.. Cotton was the person to whom the
resolution of inquiry pointed. Surely sucl,
words of eulogy are rarely bestowed upon
the living and man must indeed be fond OF
tickling himself with straw" who could in
his own paper publish such fusome praise OF
himself
Strangers who read it will naturally con.
clude that pre- eminently great man has
arisen in Harford but we can assure them
that there are many such hereabouts. He is
regarded here as quite an ordinary man
indeed-one who does not tower above the
common level like some tall obelisk in the
desert. The writer who could thus pour out
such eulogistic strains upon one of Harford's
ordinary men, must have viewed him in the
light of benefits conferred, or else he does
great injustice to the other members of the
Legislature by comparison. Some of them
at least, were not little-great men.
Rev VIM. S. Baird has btea asso :iat d
with Rev. John Poisal, in the publication Of
tie Episcop7l Nethtdist, Of Baltimore. L..