National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-04-14

The Chairman stated that Mr.. Parsons, Of
the House of Representatives, was present, and
desired to DO heard on the subject of his alleged
connection with the DeGolyer s. Mcclellan
pavemspt, and also stated that Mr.. Parsons
had some ten days ago addressed note to the
committee to the same effect.
TESTIMONY OF HON. RICHARD G. PARSONS.
Hon. Richard G. Parsons was then duly
sworn, and testified as follows: -
By the Chairman: Q. State, II you please,
your knowledge of the DeGolyer & Mcclellan
contracts, and any fact which you desire to
present TO the COMMITTEES npou that subject
A. At the time read the note of which you
speak, prepared statement for the commit
tee, supposing they would desire It, and will
now read that statement, with the permission
of the committee.
Before proceeding to the matter before the
committee, II may be proper TO premise that
when accepted the position of Marshal of the
Supreme Court of the United States in 1855,
with its nominal salary, did 80 upon the dis
tinct understanding with the Chief Justice
that my acceptance of the Office should in no
manner prevent the practice OF my profession
as lawyer, either at Cleveland or Washing
ton, at any time, when the same did not inter-
fere with the discharge of my duties as Mar
shall. This understanding, Of course, excepted
the right to practice in the Supreme Court of
the United States and the Court of Claims.
In the spring Of 1872, q think in Apri)
was retained by Mr.. Chittenden, as q lawyer,
on behalf of the firm of DeGolyer & McClel-
Ian, of Chicago, to argue before the Board of
Public Works. at Washington the question of
the. superiority of their patent for cured
wood pavement. Mr.. Chittenden said he had
been promised large contract, amounting,
think, IN value to 800, 900 or more, provided
he could demonstrate to the board that his
that, after the most careful trial and the fullest
and most complete tests at Chicago and else
where, It had proved to be the best wood
pavement in the world.
At this time q large number of persons from
different parts of the country were in Washing
ton, with divers propositions for paving the
city, and the struggle for the work to be Or
dered by the board was very great. Mr..
Chittenden assured me, If his work was ever
seen, It would, In his judgment, supersede all
other kinds Of wood pavement, and make the
way clear to secure q large amount of work at
Philadelphia, as that city wast then celebrating
as to the propriety Of paving its streets largely
with wood. The pamphlets, papers, affidavits,
statements, printed documents, &C., relating
not only to the "DeGolyer patent" but to all
other patents then pending before the board,
were placed in my hands, together with q
model of the proposed work and l gave the
whole subject careful and thorough examina-
tion before conseuting to act for him. And
being satisfied that the patent was really o
preparation, before the Board of Public Works,
In open session and in presence of spectators,
and made my argument in favor of the supe-
riority of the "DeGolyer patent" The price
at which the work was to be done, was not al
luded to by me, but my understanding was,
that the price allowed by the board for the
best wood-cured pavement was substantially
the same 10 all cases, but of this do not speak
positively. remember that Mr.. Chittenden
said they must bring their machinery for curing
the wood from Chicago, and this involved an
extra expense of s25 900.
The point, argued by me related entirely to
/ the superiority of this pavement, the method of
curing the wood, its durability, the history of
| its service, and, which of all the patents then
before the board, In the light of experience and
all the facts presented, ought to be selected by
the board as most beneficial to the public inter-
est. The board gave me long and patient
hearing, each member at times asking ques-
lions, and entering into lively discussions as to
the merits of the several plans presented.
| At the time was retained In this case,
scarcely knew Governor Shepherd by sight, and
prior to my argument believe never had but
| one conversation with him, and then only with
| a view to bis. fixing the time when my clients
/ could be heard before the board. Mr.. Shepherd
said he had no choice whatever as to who did
the work, but he was determined that no wood
i pavement should be laid that was not first-class
With Governor Cooke, who was an old and in
innate friend, never spoke but once, TO my
recollection, on the subject, and then for the
purpose of asking him If he had not promised
Mr.. Huntington, then deceased, that DeGolyer
& Mcclellan should do this work, which he de-
MED. With the other members of the board
had no acquaintance, and never, to my knowl-
edge, spoke to one of them.
Ny entire connection with this case was
purely professional, and such as would have
been proper in any court of the country.
:. never used any influence of any kind to in
ducc the Board of Public Works, or any men,
Der thereof, to decide the case in favor of ms
clients, except as have heretofore stated.
. Before the board had finally made its award
Ewas called home to Cleveland, by matters Of
pressing nature, and feeling great solicitude
as to the result of my labors and, of course
DESTROYS of securing my fees, called upor
General Garfield and gave him history Of the
case as It then stood, and asked him, as Con
gress would adjourn in few days, If he would
act for me in my absence, and give the subject
careful investigation. He at first declined
on the ground of pressing business, but finally
, assented to have me send the model, books, pa
pers, &c., to his house for examination. Aftel
[ day or two called on him and he said ht
had looked through the papers, and as soon a
Congress adjourned he would prepare an opin
) ion de- TO the merits Of the patent, and attent
| 10 the case lOr HE. L SdlQ W uil1 ut4 u lS'
, in the case of importance to me, and would b
glad to share it with him. The same day o
, day after LEFT for Cleveland, and when re
ceived my fee, some considerable time after
from my clients at Chicago, deposited Gen
eral Garaeld's to his credit In bank, and 81
: wrote him.
, His being retained the case was purely acci
dental, and he consented to act for me as a
> old friend of many years standing, to reliey
me from embarrassment
Q. What year was that A. I think It wa
In 1872, In the spring.
q Q. There has been some evidence here show
I ing that DeGolyer g. Mcclellan paid, or agree
TO pay, the sum of s97 900 for this contract
) Have you any knowledge, and If SO, what know
ledge Of any such arrangement A. neve
4 had any knowledge of dollar being paid t
, anybody, except by heresay.
Q.Were you employed regularly as an attor
? neyi A. Twas simply employed as an attorne
and received my retaining fee, and Mr.. Chit
1 tenden afterward sent me my draft for the bal
; ance Of my fee, upon the award being made.
MI @. Do you know Mr.. Brown in connection
! with this DeGolyer & Mcclellan matterl A.
! do. Mr.. Brown was the brother Of Mr.. Thoma
n Brown, who was for some time acting SIS q
i acting Assistant Secretary of the Treasury
He was for six years consul at Hamburg.
: knew him very slightly; and only knew hiI
through his brother. He was appointed,
: Jnlnk, Oy freSluenL LlucOIn, as Consul 10 hdln
I burg In 1886. He was an Episcopal clergyman
and for many years was clergyman in-1 fol
4 get what town in New Jersey.
s Q. The reason inquired is this. Mr.. Cook
v stated that Mr.. Brown had received $40 ,00C
1 A. So I afterward heard, but know nothin
Il oft, and have no personal knowledge; ! hear
that he did receive such fee after this matte
n passed from any control or subject to any il
Il terest Of mine. g.-a
o Q. Where Is Mr.. Brown nowi A. I think b
Is In Hamburg. He Is man of considerabl
v means. he came here to get his consulate n
& established after It had been abolished. II
had some difficulty with Mr.. Bancroft, the mir
a lister, and 1t was finally settled By the sonsu
"a Or abolished as unnecessary.
amount recgou any objection to stating tn
n o. State the SSuXcui a. Not at all, SIR:
q from Mr.. Chittenden at ttSeai a. receive :,
d tanned, or within few days afterwsrls. sS,rt
r his check for IS 200, with the understahdIn
=; that II an award was made covering the amour
K Of his contract, as he had been promised thu
Ie should recover q contingent fee Of $1,000
g. which sometime afterward was sent to n
% from Chicago. The total amount received b
me was $4,000. ! received it and put it int
: my pocket.
r By Mr.. Harrington: Q. Have you any know
edge, either personally, professionally, or
l. hearsay, that any of this money either directl