, 1875-11-13
kA5SCM.

DEs MoIHHs 1a., Nor. 12.-The Easson-T Teg-
tster ]ibot trial proceeded With to-tlay in thu
District Court hero. The p1alnsiir's Il deposition
was frat read in evidence. lie testified, among
other things, that he did not receive money for
ha vote OF influence In ConEfera on tic Kansas
raclilc Branch ot tho Union Pacific Railroad. III
regard to tho Dcs Moinca Ynlioy Railroad bill in
tho Iowa Legislature scsslon of 16JS, 1lr. kasaon
testified that ho had no recollection OF cithor
preparing or procuring 10 bo proposed or passed
an amendment to tic bill In those words: "Tbo
nou-tcceptaace by tho Dos aloiues Valley
Railroad Company Of this net shall not
prevent all tho provisions thereof from having
tho same effect "a II tho samo had heea accepted
by Tho Company" Further, l.e did not rocolloct
OF offering any amendment to tho bill, and that
the clause referred to waH part Of tho bill as
repcrtod to tue Eouao by tue Committee; that
he did not know who prepared tho clause above
quoted; that ho wns influenced by no other mo-
tive In supporting this amendment than the de-
sro to aid tho road that he never know of any
agent Of tic Railroad Company being present
with money TO influence legislation; Tint ho
mover received money or the offer Of money or
other consideration for his aid that no con-
aidcratton waB giynn or offered htua for lila
Influence or voto Oh tho Chicago Rock 1s!autl
4 Pacific nailroa1 bill that ho anp-
ported tho Tracy party against tho Chicago i
Northwestern Railway that D. I. Allen paid
linn $500 April 10, 1868. to act for the Com
pany against tho Chicago l. Northwestern inter-
cat. which YVES bitterly opposing the Chicago.
Ilock leland 4 Pacific Railroad, and which was
atter tho adjournment Of the Legislature; that
Tracy Wantod lin to accept $500. aud that he
| refused that he nleo told Allen lie wonld Md
| tho Company ulllo nt tho East, whcreupon
Tracy offered to retain him In their interest. He
sums up hy saying "1p neither the act Of legis-
! 1ation mentioned, nor Any other In Congress Or
the Legislature, have over agreed 10 receive, OF
| been Promised or have had any compensation
for voto, Bpoech, or inhuouce." Tho plaintiff
rested his caso.
| Tho defendants introduced tho deposition OF
| Henry Strong, General Solicitor OF tho Des
| In Des afoines In 1868 to aid in defeating uu-
friendly railroad legislation as to the pes M0ines
| Valley lfailroad that kaszou WAS GU the House
Railroad Committee; tbHt F. Tread md himRolt
that practically. nullitlcd tho Doad amcnslmont,
| hut did not remcmber whether tho ctAuae Vas
Lila invention or Kasaona; that Con. Iced was
Financial Agent Of the Company At Dos aEolncs
with plaintiff to induce lin to help tho Com
pany; that he saw tho clause that nul!ihed the
Donl amendment In his possession that be
was member Of tho Railroad Commttteo and ol
tue hub-GommltE60 WlAo1 fGpofleQ &u8 DILL
that Kaason and hil1sslf were joint authors ot
tue clause. and that he agreed to report tho bill
containing that clause; that kaasop and Heed
woro iu freqnent communication.
SAmuet Hoes Hwo1o that he MAS u1ornbsr of
tho Hub Committee with K&saou; that tho DeH
| Mo!uca Vattay Hallway bill VIVA prepared by kas
non, and was In htH handwriting; TINT tbs nnlli-
Tying olauaa was not In tho blll, hut that It was
understood 1t was to be put 10 somehow, be did
not know when Or howl that 1t MAS afterwards
found In tho bill a. passed, thAt ha did not
know how II como thero that It wks understood
| between tho 6ub-CoumIttao aud the &Eenta ot
the llAilroad Company th&t tho clause wAs 10 b
inserted; thAt It wAa not 10 when they reported
tue bill to the Committee, Or when It VAL report.
cd to tho House.
J. r. Young Secretary Of State, identified tht
priutcd copy of the Sub Committees bill now on
lilo In llis oifico the ono reported by the Com
mIttoe to the House, and which was mInua ths
nullifying clause.
Mr. woodruff. Clerk of tho llouse In 1868
identified tho bill reported by tho Sub. Commit
tea. which was Ia Kassou'a handwriting, togatl,e,
With tho memoranda nosed theseupon ~ such
Tho Clerk niso identihsii tho printed COPY Of tht
same. neither Of which contained the multiplying
| oanaA.
Mr.. Kanson IL yet absent. and ILLS oounae
stated IL court that ho probably would not com.
ausiag the ssll.