Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1880-07-15

committee OF investigation was appointed,
and they have published some nineteen
hundred pages OF report. They have
gone over the whole ground of the doings
of that Board OF Public Works and the
CITY Governm ant, and as result of it we
have abolished mat form OF government
aud had TIE President appoint Commits.
sionaIs, and he has appointed Gov. DENIM.
son, OF our State, as one of them, to man.
age the affairs OF the District of Columbia
until winter, That Committee OF lnvesti.
cation went over the whole ground of
this business in Washington. 1t
was committee that had Senator
Thurman, OF this State, on it
for one; Judge Jeweti OF Columbus,
for smother man, who is now Pres,
cent OF the Erie railroad, both OF them
Democrats of the strongest stamp. We
had on from the House, as Chairman OF
mat Committee, Judge Wilson, of lndi.
ana, one of the strongest and ablest snd
best OF our members, and they went over
this ground most thoroughly and severely.
MIR Parsons went before that committee
and told them all he knew about this
pavement, told them what he knew OF
its merits, aud Told them he and | argued
that case, 1t WAS early in the session
been said about that in Washington
Don't you think some OF the one hun
dred Democrats would have been ex.
ceedingly willing to hit me blow on
the head il they had discovered anything
in that to find fault wlthY The Committee
made its report In full, and not only made
no possible reelection on me, but when
asked about II said there was nothing
whatever in the case that reelected in the
slightest degree uyon Mr.. Garfield.
Now, in the midst OF this tempest that
was raised in the gainesville teapot few
weeks ago, the lon. George w. Steele, of
gainesville, wrote a letter to the commit
tee who had charge oi that investigation,
and he wrote back the following letter:
CoNSEgsyulE, Ind, Aug. 1, 1874.
The Hon. George ", Sttti,.--
DEAR SR-ro the request for information as to
whether or not tbe action Of General Garheld In
cor. "ctcr with the affairs OF the District of
G. lumbia The echiect OF condemnation by
the committee that reCoGtly nau those affairs
under confederation, answer that II was not,
nor vas there, In my opinion, any evidence that
would have warranted any unisyorabe criticism
upon his conduct,
| The facts disclosed by the evidence, so far as
| he II concerned, are briefly these:
The Boaru of Pablo Works was considering
the question as TO the kind OF payements that
| should be laid There was contest as - the ro.
spectiye merits ot various wooden psyements.
| Mr.. Parsons represented, AZ attorney, the Do
! Golyer McClellaud patent, aud, being called
| away from Washington about the time the hear
| ing was 60 be had before the Board OF Public
| Works on this subject, procured Gen. Garfield -
| appear before Tho bosrd In his stead, aud argue
| the merits OF this patent This no did, and this
| was the whole OF his connection with the matter.
| IL was not question AS to the kind of contract
| that should be made. but ~ 20 whether thie mar
tculsr pavement shoald DO laid. The criticism
| OF The committee was not upon the parsHasHt In
| favor OF which Gen, Garfield argued, but upon the
| contract made I'm reference TO 1t, and there was
| no evidence witch would warrant the conclusion
! that he bad anything TO do with the latter Very
respectfully, etc. JAMES WILSON.
| Now, fellow citizens, it is not pleasant
| for me to be reading things OF that sort
concerning myself, that the man who had
| charge OF the Investigation In the District
| OF Columbia, the man who wrote the re-
port on the part OF the House, who WAS
the Chairman OF the Committee, who
knows all the facts In regard to it, says
there was nothing whatever In the case
that in the slightest degree reflected on
me. IL Is left To the excessively virtuous
Judge OF tho Probate Court OF Paines-
| vile, and perhaps the Judge OF the Pro-
bate Court OF Trumbull county, to dis.
cover that this ODE Golyer business" was
fearful business on the part OF General
Garfield. Tremendous applause.
II there is any gentleman in this hall
who has any question TO ask in regard TO
| the DE Golyer pavement business, |
should be very glad to hear 1t.
Question Was Tho appropriation for
| the payments for the ravemeuts made be
| fore or after II was accepted by the Bosrdf
Gen Garfield am very glad to answer
that question. by the first act OF the
| Legislature of the District OF Columbia,
no contract was to be made, no work was
to be done, except upon appropriations
| already made. Congress had adjourned,
The appropriations for the District OF Co
umbia were made before | touched or
had anything 10 do With this matter 1t
is true that the next year there were APP
preparations made tor the District OF Co
lumbis but tho appropriation thu, Con-
gress msdc never had anything to say
about one pavement or another. Congress
knew no moro about the De Golyer pave.
meni, or any other pavement than you
in Warren did. II simply made the APP
preparation to pay far paving in front OF
its own building If il thought proper to
do so, and that IL all
understand Mr.. Parsons was retained
by theCe parties IN Chicago, and they paid
MN retaining ice OF S1OJU lor ms sefV'
ices, whether he succeeded or not. And
they were to pay him $4,000 as q con.
tngent fee If he succeeded. Mr., Parsons
had done the bulk Of the work. He came
to me saying there were 10000 depending
upon his success, Of which he would pay
me half In case made The argument aud
was successful. | suppose that is fair
explanation. | understand some gentle
men think that is a large fee. Well, it Is
A lnren fee. hnl IL MAA nothing for that.