The New York herald., 1875-09-01

the Legislature he Lord TO receive twothrds Of the
award when made for such services
MI COgsWeu said his client would nave TO decline 10
answer that question, on the ground that it might have
a tendency To criminate him.
senator Cole said the witness was privileged to de-
cine 10 answer on the ground stated and the commit
tee could only report the fact TO the Legislature
TESTIMONY OF JOHN KILEY
John kiley, whose name is alleged to have been in
the agreement TO represent Lord was called and
sworn. He asked the same questions put TO Lord
when MT Cogswel, as his counsel said the same rea-
sons LOT declining TO answer applied to Mr. kley
Althougn no proceedings had been, TO his knowledge,
commenced against him, yet his connection with the
answer the question.
After some discussion the question was put again and
the witness declined TO answer, il might tend TO
crmlnate himself Other similar questions we're put
and the witness declined any question the
subject on the same ground by advice Of his counsel,
Chairman Cole then announced that It would be the
duty Of the committee to report Mr.. Key being in
contempt to the Legislature, and he left the stand.
TESTIMONY OF CANAL COMMISSIONER WRIGHT.
MT W. W. wright, the Canal Commissioner,
called and examined concerning the payment of the
voorhees, claim He explained that he hesitated long
while before drawing his certificate; he made full in
quiry and Investigation; got contradictory testimony
ana determined not to pay it time passed and he lost
the rights OF appeal; then mandamus brought 10
compel him TO pay IL; he then put into the hands OF
the Attorney General; then he heard nothing more
about it for time when at length Judge Pratt met
him and told him II had been nut into his
hands Judge Pratt asked me what | was going
to do and / said 'nothing:D he then asked me
finally to investigate the matter further Witness said
he renewed his inquiries and found the claim was JUST
then Auditor Dayton refused to pay my draft and |
again investigated and became convinced that the claim
oush. " pe paa ne saa ne was not satisfied that 1t
ought to to be paid and that 81 o5o was too much.
MT Peckham-And yet he claimed only 81, 900 when
he went TO the Legislature?
Mr. Wright-This man a very ignorant man. he
was told that the contractors would pay him something
and that the State officers would also, but they never
paid him anything Perhaps he thought when he came
to the State for 81, 900 he would get something
others.
Mr. Peckham-Did you authorize the grubbng Of tho
479 of land at Osco Lake after the three
had been grubbed and clearedY
Mr. Wright-Not till after law had been passed
authorizing it,
Mr. Peckham-If you will look at the supplemental
contract you will see that there is grubbing pro-
vded for.
Mr. wright-There was to be some grubbing
Mr. Peckham-Yes; but you will see the effect of
that contract that the contractors received the
travagant price of $40 per for simply cutting and
clearing. They did no grubbng
Mr. Wright-Well, admit that the fact; but
this contract was presented TO and thought it
all right The fact is never the ground, and
never saw the reservoir If had the work
would never have allowed it.
Mr.. Peckham-Now, why, you being Canal Com
missioner in charge did you not see this work.
Mr.. Wright had to take the word Of others in some
things; could not see everything.
The committee then adjourned till ten A. NJ to-
morrow.
WHAT LAW SAYS.
During the examination of Auditor Thayer this
morning by the Joint Legislative Committee, the law
appropratng $500 900 for continuing the work tho
Cnanplan Canal enlargement was READ, In which II
required that survey of the work should be made
and map, plans and estimates submitted to the Canal
Board before the work let But in direct violation
of this law, on the 9th day of May 1874 three days
after the passage Of the law, at meeting Of the Canal
Board State Engineer Sweet offered the following reso
lution:-
Resolved surveys maps plans and estimates for
that portion Of the Champain Canal embracing sections
laid down under the act chapter 7 Laws of 1870 which
approved by the State Engineer and Surveyor and
adopted by the Canal Board September 81 1871 the
are hereby approved and adopted by the Canal Boed
the provisions of the act chapter 800 Laws Of 1874
line and plan of enlargement the having been
examined and approved by the State Engineer
1874.
This resolution was adopted by the following vote-
YEAsRobinson, Pratt, jackson, Barkley, Stroud and
Sweet--6
NAYs.-Willers and Hopkins-2