Lamoille newsdealer. [volume] (Hyde Park, Vt.) 1860-1877, 1872-11-27
-rlIffff 1sf HasalfFf 70 tfEI7 . y V y
Ne" ITO. d. RlrcB. Dr.
And in the same article, the following

mig ceeeloh W 'VVet
$1,000
And in the same article, the following
r,.,,,. and vs.ager, Vsrrzo.t csnirai and Vsrmsaf
& Caaafa kofireatf, -
10 10. d. MATCH. Dr.,
Dec. 8. 1869. For expenses at Montpelier.
session 1869, in resisting adverse legislation
snd in preparation for and opposing application
for parallel road from Burlington to Canada
line, &c: One thousand dollars. lslOOO.)
Received payment, 10. ID. HATCH.
,i A ecmmitte was appointed by the pres
ent Legislature to investigate the charges
preferred against the managers, and held
it's FIRST meeting on Tuesday evening Of
last week, at which the following persons.
implicated by the Trarell.r, voluntarily
came forward and testified substantially
as follows -
WuErLocK &. VEAzEY said that, after
Summer of 1869 BY Mr.. Hatch to 60 to
what had been published, he dc emed it
proper to say that he was mpIoy ed in the
Mddlcbury aud Vergennes, and perhaps
19 10 Burlington, to attend to matter of
of business for them which he did do,
taking, as he thought, most of two days.
In that business he paid as disbur sements
anoul s3C. He saw aud heard nothing
further till he was at Montpelier Gay or
two during the session of that Fall-his
sole objec in coming to Montpelier bcing
10 attend the Officers Reunion. While
here ,Ir. Hatch paid him s50-being
. about $40 duy for his time, besides ex-
. penses out. That was all. He was new
e er employed by that road, or any other,
in reference to any matters Of legislation.
He never was member of the legislature
until the present session.
J. Il. DICKERMAN desired to state that
in tho winter or spring of 1868 or 1869,
he was at Burlington, and there met Mr.
Hatch, who told him that the Central road
was constantly annoyed with claims for
lost baggage and injury to freight, and he
had been directed to retain counsel in
different parts Of the State to aid them in
such matters. He replied, very WELL
He expected to be called on when needed
He made no charge for retainer, aud does
not under such circumstances. He was
then riding upon pass from the road, and
should not have asked pay simply for a
retainer. If they saw fit to pay, very
well. Was Senator from Orleans county
in 1869. Had no words said to him by
Mr.. Hatch or any other person connected
with the Central road Was not sure
that anything was before the Senate that
fall ofspecial interest to them On the
18th November, juso as he was starting
for home after the.legislaturc adjourned,
Mr.. Hatch called his attention to the fact
ofhaving retained him-said he was in
oarneet. and desired him to consider him
self regularly retained, aud gave him $50.
for which he gave receipt. That was
oil. His retainer was for legitimate
services 10 his profession-and in no sense
for services before the legislature. In
reply to interrogatories, Mr.. Dckerman
said that, while there was no measure af.
iecting the Central road before the Senate
that fall til ere was a bill in the House to
charter road from Burlington to Swan.
ton. He was on the Railroad committee
Id the Seuate, and sat with the House
committee during the hearing, but had no
consultation about it. His purpose in be.
ing present was to avoid rehearing, in
case the matter came to the Senate. Was
positive that he spoke 20 no member of the
House-much less tried to influence any
one--in reference to any measure of this
character Aud no one asked him to dc
PHILIP *. GLEED.-ln the fall Of $50
he was member of the House. Gu the
morning Of the day after the House adj
journed, was retained by J. D. Hatcf
for one year, with the understanding tina
nv retainer did not interfere witt
nv fealinga in favor nj the portIand