New-York tribune., 1875-10-06

ard Lord lad withheld from him. some days aiief tho
division Davis called at Benefits olce wheh the latter
says handed Davis sealed envelope without hny ad
dress containing OF the $1,000 certificates. Whom
askcd how IL happened that no gave $1,000 to DAVIS In
! addition to what Davis had previously received, mr.
Bennett said: looked upon 1t that got large mum
her OF certificates and he had boon friendly. Although
he had not made any claim against me Tor H. Ie' us
ought not to 1t all. That is all thought "ouid
| be ~ friendly as he had boon"
O Did you think Mr. Davis hal boen instrumental IN
getiing you larger amount than you expected 10 70
ceye and therefore you thought he ought to
Rad friendly and had secured large reward anu IL
did hot properly belong to me. ., % ,,,,-v,no d,a
it belong to IL didn't to youi A Tho State OF new
Q. Why didn't you give it to the State Of NewYork.
instead Of Davis A. Because it was not customary
| thcn to be giving anything TO the state
Mr. Bennett teJtlHcs that when he handed THIS note 10
Mr. Davis no words passed between them in relation to
f. nor has Davis since ever acknowledged its receipt or
made any aluson to II.
| MR. BARKLEY AND THE CERTIFICATE.
For some reascn which OF witnesses are abo,
or a least willing to explain, Mr. Davis on or abous ho
Let day of March, handed this certificate for $1,000 In
sealed envelope to Alexander Barkoy ono Of the Casal
| Commissioners who bad united in this award Mr..
Barkley describes tho act and Immediately followed
| in this wise:
Knight make statement OF Just what the facts are
Iast Winter abou. The last Oi February OF me lS OF
March met Mr. Davis at the DelSyan Hotse-Thad. G.
Davis lie had biz Oyercoat ana hat on, ana appeared 10
called LEGAL envelope about inches longer than
common envelope, and TIE Same Widtn; my name Eas
on the hack Of t-lust written Alexander Iarkiey on
tie back Of it said he There is lettcr Mr.. Bennett
requested me hand you;' took the letter and put it
and opened IT, and in the letter Canal Commission
err certificate for $1,000; there power OF attorney
Sssgnce 'ie was len bisns; / looked ut il nnd
The Thought struck t ms IN mSmept ong IhaTo rd li
mp and went out 10 see If I could hnd Mr Davis
gentlemen tEoro, and they SAID he mao gone ou. "ths
10 the office and got snal envelope went III tlo
abou, tvo uclcs put il in that envelope and backed
70 L. j. Bennett Bnfalo; put stamp on ~ ana droi pea
hal the certificate in my possession ap0 80 minutes;
| | was satisfied in my own MIND there was something
wrong about it, and thought would make some ts
niOny that GIT call on In case OF necessity; lsPOhe
two confidential irend5 OF mine 2nd ,2d jhen N WliI
have the certificate since, ara that Is al
knew & apo"t y {t;,. '~ Win reInsmber what told item
| VINO, think viii swear to II. ,.,.. .,,. c,,,,
mission ana no. tcing such thing had occurredi A.
ditut know 1t oil right un'ii this tAing came
o. You have Just said mott A was fearful there WIS
Yom sslon'l ioS Dayis's handwritugi A. No. Sir
don't know Bis Handwriting; want TO say further ~
had known wia- was In tho envelope J shonid hot nave
received from AlT. Davis, bat d!nt kno" "hat was
40 % Do Yor reTacm5cr what was written on tho cnvo
| oIel A. Alexander Baik!ey'-nothins "sei nSht on
u
O. You sent thas back A. 80, Cir; tore It open and
thry, it te gOor unccr te tade; coud ho1 a,hu te
envelope back BECAUSE had destroyed 50 that couo
Q. Did you understand that it was addressed BY Dayis
| A well Sir. don't know iis's handIr1tinS.
O. Do You remember the handwriting wei enough TO
be able to identify it A. dont believe would those
-i6e men-ierc only two men tha: ever mentioned
O. Who are thcyi \. Is 1t necessary 10 tell IWi tell
g. If YOU dout want it put down. we don't A. Ono
| y-ag
| O. They wero at the hotel at tue time A. Yes, Sir;
| sutt,o 10 them sbout It before lsit the hotel.
O. Have you had any conversation with DAVIS sncef
! A. Nd sir
Mr. Bennett tcsfes that lie hoard Of the certh
cate after he handed it to DaviS. Mr. BarAiey testihes
that no posted it Bennett, at Buffalo, within thirty
| minutes after it given into his hands. Why mr.
Davis handed Ibis certificate TO Mr. Barley without any
exclamation why BGrkicy shoud lave posted 1t TO Mr.
Bennett, Instead Of returning IT to tho man from whom
be received 1t; why il he supposed there was anything
wrong in IT, he did not seek explanation from one at
least OF the two parties, and especially from DAVIS
through whom reached him and why, as appears by
his own testimony has referred to the subject
ia his subseluent conversation with Davis, never &C
DoycGgcd its receipt, taken the trouble to ascer
ain whether it ever reached Mr. Bennett Gro all qnes-
tons 70 winch Mr. Barey has failed to furnish any sat
isiactory explanation.
THE CHIEF CONsPIRAToEs.
Tho more guilty parties il there be any gradation In
"'-'''
have had occasion to inYo yOnr attention, were not
b0ae Tor whose ostcnsbc advantage they perpe-
trated Hand, in whose name tho contfacs was nGde,
seems TO have had no direct connection Wth the c0nspr
acy nor 10 shared any OF the plumber; Bennett
seelns 10 have yielded 20 the scduction5 OF Lord,
Bowman, and Davis without fully comprahendinS
the nature or gravity OF his crime. lie has re
turucd 10 this Commission. in money and certin-
catcs Of indebtedness, $l2-5i 80; he has promised
ull restitution OF Tytaing which he uay appear to
have Illegally received from the state, and haa mani
Tested an appareuty s'nccre contton Tor his conduct
The conspiracy defrand the STATE seems to have oo
mated with Lord. and TO Gyo been contaminated iy him,
with the assistance OK Kcy Davis, and Behn the Canal
Commissonets the Official protectors Of ihe States inter
est oTerin no se-ious resistance Mr. Jackson testified
that bo knew nothing tho fraudulent character Of the
claiins set UP in behalf OF Bennett aud supposed the
proofs sufficient II that constitutes any dc;eu,e TO him,
he Is entitled 10 the benefit Of 1t.
PREDATORY LEGISLATION.
We cannot dsmss the subject OF Mr. Lords legislative
experience without directing your attention 10 the fact
tbpt while be occupied scat in the Assembly act
passed authorizing Gnd in fact directing the Auditor 10
Day all claims which had becn previously cal by any of
the repair contractors OF the state with the certificate OF
an engineer attached We reets this clause Of The sct
one Of the most notable specimens o: predatory legsG
| ton on the statute nook
For the pa mcnt Of the expenses OF the ordinary
rair, OF the completed canals .! tAs state, aud f0r tho
tin8 that may due 20 .no CONTRACTORS ior repair,
no r TnoIes and ia thereon heretofore pended
in saplra.ion OF breaches casualties, dcnuced from
the aggregate expenditures, account or the same as
certified 70 bY TIE thEhteiS an1 iS''...n il"i @ @ lo
required TO their drafts therefor on the Auditor OF
f5f canal rmeut IN eases Hhere ana only where.
Tie money has been actually expended 20 shown by the
records thereof In the Canal pepa tin"u ana eFe an
acronrt FOR the same has heretofore been filed In the
Canal Department by the parties making sucn cApendi
lures tCir cOnIcia aEd Tor 40 otncr oect ana
,mirrose Whatever the sum of ~ 100000, or much
| "A