Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1878-02-21

that in making your report, "matters not con-
sidered material were omitted" from the testi.
mony. Might not some of the persons whose
property was involved, have considered, not
only that all the testimony was material, but
that all that the witnesses knew about the sub
ject matter should have been taken down in
the testimony and its substance condensed in
the report2 In the examination of L. NJ.
Grist, the only occasion given the bond holders
for cross examination of witnesses, the writer
remembers the extreme reluctance governing
majority of the commission in admitting his
statement contradictory of Hullender; and it
was only after great effort had been made, and
long delberation on your part, that the modl-
fed statement of this witness, as ELECTED on
cross-examiuation, was taken down. "H.' y
may have remembered this circumstance, and
based his assertion upon a fair deduction
from it.
You say also, in this connection, that when
the Testimony implicated certain individuals,
the commission summoned the parties so i'm
plicated, that they might speak for themselves
and be heard in their own defence" You also
say: "Turn to the testimony of Hullender,
and learn that at the meeting which voted
the subscription, Roberts, its chairman, said {:
we will not have an election the people are
opposed to subscribing.' Did you ever sum.
mon Roberts, that he might speak for himself
as to this charge, as you say you did in every
such case? If so, no condensed statement,
even, of his testimony appears in the report.
The issue between us on matters of opinion
is very properly stated to be one for the
courts to decide. Mine is based upon the law
as it is written and expounded. Having no
further interest in the matter than as rep.
resentative of innocent holders Of these bonds,
| am satisfied to rely upon it.
You claim the right to proceed in the se-
cret manner complained of, because investi-
eating fraud, as you allege, and because "in-
vestgations of this sort before committees are
usually conducted in this way" But, gen.
tlemen, you are not a committee. You were
appointed, in the language Of the act, com.
mission "to ascertain" the real Indebtedness of
York county. You advertised for claims to
be presented The holders of the bonds ask.
ed to be represented, through counsel, at
your sessions. You admitted their counsel
once, and then afterwards evaded notice of
any other meeting. and admit that you never
held any other. At that meeting only one or
two witnesses were examined. You pro.
posed to meet in Rock Hill the next week to
write your report Was this r,se, merel y
to evade the appearance of bond holders, or
not ? All your evidence of any real con-
sequence was taken after that adjournment.
Let me ask, how was it possible for you
Ito ascertain" the Indebtedness Of the coun.
ty by examining only the debtors, or those in
their interests and evading any inquiry on
behalf OF its creditorsf True, you were not
court authorized to decide or conclude any.
thing; but you constituted All honorable
commission of whom the county expected an
impartial report of all the facts on both sides
of any question you might investigate.
You say in regard to this, that the witness
es examined by you were liable to take care
of themselves" Probably SO; but that i,
no answer to the objection. Their ability t.,
take care of themselves does not imply their
ability, or right, even, to take care Of those
whose rights we're in issue. They we're your
witnesses not ours.
The commissioners, in a note to their re.
cent article, call for the publication of Ger.
tain anonymous letters mentioned by H." in
his communication as also the name of the
supposed writer, and to whom addressed. A,
these letters, or one Of them at least, may
sub,erve a better purpose in behalf of the
parties interested, by being withheld from the
public for time, they will not at present be
made public. The name of the supposed
writer, and the person to whom addressed, i:
is not my province to give. II.