The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-04-16
TIE RRIE INVESTIcATlow..
Continued Information az to How Erie Did Its
Legislative Business Testimony Of HAM
itcn Morris and ..an v. L. rruyn
ALBANY. ABril is. 1879.
ALBANY, April 10, 1873.
The Erie Investigation Committee met in TIL,
Court of Appeals at four p. NJ.

The Erie Investigation Committee met in the
Court Of Appeals at four p. M.
TESTIMONY OF HAMILTON NORRIS.
nsmilt9n Morris was called and swO1n and examined
he 1y ss pSs % in S and
$50 sssooS; wish 10 cay that these paid
Tor my services and 70 Pay ad I'm, hs'e
a Certain aeny
We're employed BY Cover parscnally and that PaIa
much the amounts were tsat paid out; i have no
Il pi fs 70
not the M amounts they We're payments on ma, % ne
q Che susqehanna LITIGATION fees and sher
on The settlement Of suits brought against the Erie
@ tvs s 5 5 Ra out s
4 asTAisia or TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS
ac r 1853 ss s Spe In O.
again in 1892 concerning another IN, as TO an
mis- time employed various COUNSEL may talked
to Van veste as to legislative but not IN the
% no with Dive DVen IN
money being paid e snysSdy
to- but cannot say how much; all used to pay for
my legal services for those Of other counsel and for ap
awe ns Rs STaS ="
"a ende q Of IN
not recoect seeing Mr.. butcher since last Winter.
seon 11 and io% Possibly
st ee 70 sS snsr
that time chairman Of the Republican General Commit
GOULD CONTRIBUTED SOME ELECTION FUND,
eceivcd since have been for
dollars per year Tor my own services all have
influence the Legislature Of its being used elect
Mr. Lincoln examined the witness; he reiterated his
sF re- besides ne addps
nc
ACTED BEFORE THE LEcIsLATURB
Sf NY Ta' A fsns
$ a S re af nSs he
courts II this city and district don't recoilect
during re- a..
Of these suits nor Mr. LITTLE :. A'''.0ns' NY
s s aS aST S hSw he sesd
70 hem after mat think lie acted yoraGIy them;
services rendered Wood
taners counsel in bank bulls but have recollection
M WriSSMy own services were solely IN
ssiSIs tHs Iegiss.ISs so%%i.sss
Der ever making arguments before committee know
Van vechten has done services for the Eric Company
siticns now Tsccllection, state what is
ays sn s e p IN n tSe
know any service Barber has performed for the Erie
10 Mr.. stckneyI understand that Barber is not law
yer; cannot understand what legal services he per-
formed calling the amount Of $4,000 to $5000
This ended the examination OF Mr.. Harris, and
JOHN v. L. PRUYN WAS CALLED.
He affirmed and said II am director of the Erie Rail-
Company; voted against tho dividend the COM
mon stock objected to 1t because did think the
Board sufficiently informed TO the true amount Of
the earnings eA
Witness then stated his reasons for his vote. He
wanted the company to walt till 1t became stronger
there great many objections to the act in his
opinion; one director, Mr.. Olphant he thought OBJ
cced the ground that he did not think the equipment
negotiating the bonds that was large percentage
helm Co.. who took the contract; 1t was very good
under ordinary circumstances one or two per cent
ought to be enough.
70 MT LinconThe argument in the Board in favor Of
dividend that the English stockholders wanted the
amount earned, whatever 1t was, divided In general
point Of view 1t not proper to reimburse Bschos
helm Co. for the expenses in efecng the dstGt
which put the Gould drcctoys that not legiti-
mate charge upon the company.
The committee then adjourned till tomorrow
afternoon.