The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1877-11-06

y
would efrectdalIy have deprived us ,of any
| fee. Mt all. {, All such bonds and coupons,
when paid to the State, would ipso fdcto
have been extinguished, and no legal power
anywhere exists to revive;lthem.. There
were numerous contingencies in which we
might succeed In relieving The State, by
compelling payment. OF debts on which she
was surety, and still we could, never have
received a cent for our disbursements, /
las 30 the contracts, 'Mr. William F. Tay-
lor, Auditor. .oj Public Accounts. testified
| before the committee: "I respectfully ask
| permission to add, as the only remaining
| member OF the Board 6i Public " Works now
| in Virginia, that in my opinion the Board
| did not transcend the authority given it in
| the resolution, and, that in this opinion, !
am fortified Gby that Of the Atterney-Ge Zen.
leFal, to whom i have submitted the ques-
ton. - 50 I am of opinion that the
contract, whan made, auas q most jadicious
one, and thai the results which have, follow.
ed have been in a uery high degree 5enef-
cial TO the State. ~. - :: .L:'
Joseph Bryan, Esq, who has been en-
gagged for years as counsel in litigation with
the canal company, growing ont OF ques-
tions Of disputed equities, and who is thor
oughly informed on the whole subject, tes-
titled: .,-... -..>-,>- -; .@, ....,s ...r
!. Considering the management OF the ca
| nal from its foundation in 1924, and the es-
tablished fact that it bad been, since its com
pletion to Cumberland in 1851, used chiefly
| for political purposes, and was absolutely
under the control OF the dominant political
party OF Maryland, and that the undertaking
of the counsel Of Virginia was not merely
| 81, 10 NJ ~ ri
troll OF political influences OF great and i'm
portant character-all OF which was to be
done at their own expense, and their reward
or compensation to be only in the evidences
of debt of the canal itself, the value OF which
was at that time little or nothing-I regard
the contract made by the Board with Messrs.
johnson, Poe & Poe as favorable as could
have been made with any counsel cOmpe-
tent to carry out the undertaking.
Think, therefore, that the counsel OF Vir-
siuia accomplished more than could have
been expected by the most sanguine friends
OF the State who had any knowledge OF the
legal bearings OF the case, not to mention
the political obstacles" ..... g. .-.,--n
| So much for the contracts and the COM
pensation agreed to be paid under theu1.
Immediately upon undertaking the work
we applied to the Legislature OF Maryland,
and enlisting body OF prominent men with
us, procured the passage OF a law In elect
turning over the administration OF the ca
nal to the bondholders. Governor Swami
declined to execute this law Decnuse be
claimed it was unconstitutional. We then
applied to the Constitutional Convention.
winch met in the summer Of 1867.
That body, after an arduous struggle, re-
| Dcalcd our law, and we were worse Off than
| "a
and were met on the threshold by the OBJ
lection that no suit could proceed until the
State OF Maryland became party to the
proceedings. We again applied to the Cen
eral Assembly OF Maryland, and in 1870
procured law to be passed which made
the State a party to our suit, and in the
summer OF 1870 we got the first decision OF
the Court OF Appeals OF Maryland on the
question involved. In October, 1871, we
obtained another decision on other points
which arose. But these legal proceedings
to ascertain and assert the legal rights OF the
State were only small portion Of our work.
During this we were laboring incessantly
to produce an entire change in the policy
and management OF the canal. We enlisted
a body OF political influence and moral force
by personal arguments, by public discus
sion, oral and printed, and procured the as.
sistance Of some OF the leading men OF Ma
ryland to accomplish our object. In June,
1870. we had the pleasure OF seeing the
ideas so long and urgently pressed by us
and our associates adopted by the admins
tration OF Governor Bowie, and the policy
OF canal management radically changed by
giving representatives OF the creditor-ih-
terest the control Of that work. The results
we anticipated Immediately commenced to
show themselves. The trade OF the canal
increased, confidence as to it grew apace,
and in one year, under the new policy, 1t
paid more debts than it had paid in all its
preceding existence. '.-. -
The policy and measures advocated by us
and subsequently adopted by the adminls-
tration Of Governor Bowie will be found
fully set forth in letter written by me to
him, dated February /, 1870, and the influ-
ence exertcd by our efforts may be appre-
ciated from the testimony OF the Hon.
Outerbridge Horsey, leading politician in
Maryland, who was member OF the Con-
stitutiona Convention Of 1867. It is on
page 81, Report House Committee on Chesa-
peake and Ohio Canal, 1915. ,..t.l ~ 'lE.D
"Ouestion by what. influence was the
act of 1867 passed and change in the policy
of the administration effected!
"Answer: The passage OF tue act was not
effected without great labor in the prepara-
ton Of public opinion. 1t was procured
through the direct influence Of the leading
men OF the State. These gentlemen had
been stimulated to their eXertions to pro-
cure its massage by the ncessant arguments
and appeals OF General Bradley T. johnson
and his associates, made to them directly,
together with the cooperative influence
upon them OF his personal friends in the
State, whose assistance he had procured.
General johnson and those who coop
Grated with him had, by constant interviews
with and representations to such gentlemen,
shown them the condition into which the
management OF the canal had fallen, and the
necessity that existed, as matter OF justice,
right, and true policy upon the part OF the
State of Maryland, that the canal should be
put under the control of its creditors. That
act failed because the Governor OF Maryland
refused to enforce. it upon constitutional
grounds, and it was subsequently repealed
by the Constitutional Convention OF 1867.
This action Of the Governor and the Con-
yention was brought about by tue pressure
OF the politicians from the canal counties.
But the same influences. which had pro-
cured the passage Of the act OF 1867 con-
tinued to operate upon public opinion in
Maryland until the election of Governor
Bowie in 1869. He pressed this policy upon
the Legislature and the public, and ulti-
mately succeeded by the appointment sos
Colonel James c. Clark as president, whose
administration for the first time impaired
vitality to the canal, and gave to the people
of the whole State the grounds OF hope that
at some day it might contribute to relieve
them Of the burden OF taxation, .... t....I
~" This result pdS mainly accomplished