New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-01-12

Total, 'sSoOVV
There were besides several others Of less prOml-
nenee who pocketed the unclean lucre. As to Mr.
mcfarland who received the largest OF the fees
aisbursed by Mr. Albert, he cleared himself from ali
completely i'll the transaction. except knowledge
of 1t. He promptly sought the witness stand, and
acknowledged that he received the money as stated
by Albert but said he was simply the bearer OF 1t
from the hands of one man to those of another He
said he was simply sent for the money by Col John
w Forney into whose hands he delivered it on the
same day of it's receipt lie did not receive dollar
himself from other Col. FOrney OF MIR. Albert and
his whole connection with and knowledge
of the subject was as messenger.
Mr. Shaw, upon being examined, said his
money was received for services, etc. carrying the
inference that it was the result of stock operations
He was in favor of subsidies Of all kinds, and the
way in which he earned his tremendous fee was by
supplying information to the company in New
York and Irwin in this city during the tendency OF
this bill in Congress. BY strange circumstance
HE fee was larger by $500 than was Mr.. Schu-
makers who disbursed over quarter million OF
dollars and served the company as lawyer for
more than year. 1t also larger than Mr.
Parsons by $1,000, although the latter was
lawyer and drew up elaborate and exhaustive
statistic tables and documents and larger by two
thirds than the x-Postmaster-GeneraPs. The cross
examination Of Mr.. Shaw was very slight. Mr.
Averill on the stand defended the receipt by him Of
$1,000 and said be paid no part Of it to anybody,
and thinks he earned it. His part of the services
were to watch the agents of those who were trying
70 defeat the subsidy. The two strangest witnesses
were Mr.. Boyd and Mr.. Hersey, the dOOrkeepers.
The former has enjoyed an excellent character and
was respected and liked by all. lie would have
been the last man who would ordinarily be chosen
LII. ,.tof H. tfaHf hot haA
nothing more than he would have done for any
body, and that the amount he received
was an unexpected gratuity from Mr. Irwin.
General sympathy is expressed in his behalf, but
nobody expects that he will be retained in his
present position Mr.. Hersey is one-armed soldier
who has been in the House for over ten years. his
position being subordinate one His testimony
was similar to that Of Boyds. He had watched the
enemies Of the subsidy and had reported their move
ments TO Mr.. Irwin and his friends. He said he had
kept all the money himself aud had divided lit with
nobody This statement, it is proper to say is not
believed by a single member of the Committee.
Col Irwin was to smart business man
to waste S11 900 fees on doorkeePers merely
for doing the work of detective for a month or
two Ii 10 probable that both Boyd and Hersey will
be closely cross-examined at o future meeting.
Col Piatt of The Capital has not yet been sum
noned but the statement is made by Twins
sent that the 5000 paid him simply loan paid
back hong since, statement that will be judged by
the Committee. Sam. Ward, In conversation, g.
he received Of the $500 equal half, and be has
no doubt he spent it at Welckers. He goes before
the Committee he says, very cheerfully Nearly all
Of the witnesses not yet examined have been sum-
noned for to morrow. The Committee, excepting
during o short recess. was in continuous session
from 1880 to o'clock to-day Previous to the testi-
moDy Of Albert. Lyman Elmore gave his version of
the facts as to the payment b. Representa-
tive Schumacher of $4,000 to Gen.
Smith. Elmore did not succeed very well in i'm
pressing the Committee wsth the logic of his story
They did not seem TO understand how man, par
sssisfiy business man and lawyer like ElmOre,