New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1885-10-05
HILLS BIG CANAL FEE.
PAID FOR "sKILLED LABOR" AT ALBANY.
NOW THE lob WAS WORKED AND $4,000 Ex-
rp.orEp FROM THE PUBLIC TREASURY.

arp,SY. Oct 4.-Since Governor Hill returned
D.. +his citv he has not been in an amiabe frame of
mind over the exposures of his dealings WIN
Tweed. To a friend he is reported TO nave saiu
that the best policy was to treat these matters
with contempt" The complete failure OF the Gov
ernors effort by means of the Kidd afhdavlt' 10
meet the charge that Tweeds investment IN the
stock Of an Elmira newspaper Injured 10 the Deheni
Of Hill NAV have had something to do with the re-
solve In that affidavit it is stated that
the money to pay for Tweed's stock at fifty
cents on the dollar was borrowed of the late
DIR. Edwin Eldrldge of Elmira. That gentleman
was the wel-known associate of Gould and Fisk IN
Numbering the stockholders of the Erie Railroad
and Mr. HIPS connection with that ring IS also q
matter Of record. His vote defeated the repeal OF
the Classification act, which gave the Erie ROAD
over to the control of those men, though they
owned only minority of the stock. The whole
country was scandalized by those transactions,
but Hill came back to Albany the following year
as the representative of Eldridge and Patrick, and
again boldly fought against the repeal OF the
Classification act. But through the ad-
vocacy of Samuel J. Tilden and others
the bill was passed i'll spite OF
Hill and his few TO flowers.
1t is pow said, on apparently good authority, that
it was Patrick-afterward sent 10 the Pcniten-
tiary-who suggested to Hill that he might make
some money by getting up some claims against the
State on account of alleged damages through an
overflow of the canal and that through Patrick
the influence of Eldridge and Tweed was obtained
to help tho matter along. Be that as 1t NAV, the
fact remains that before the Legislative Commit
Tee which investigated this grave scandal-as
shown bv testimony already quoted-1t was cstab-
lished that Mr. Hill and his partner went to these
farmers and suggested that they had a clam
against the State because of damages alleged To
have been sustained by them through a supposed
overflow of the canal twelve years previous to
that time Mr.. Hill aud his associate were to make
out the papers and do the work without cost to The
claimants; but in return One-half, and in some
cases one third of the total amount collected was
10 be retained 10y the two lawyers. This arrange
ment was speedily made. Before the ella ms could
have any standing whatever, "a special act OF the
Legislature had to be passed to lcralze
them. Patrick was n member of the Lcgls-
lature and Eldrldge secured the influence of the
Erie king and the bill was slipped through.
The valley, or gorge where the overflow of the
canal-in reality the overflow of two small creeks
was alleged to have taken place was so small and
the land so poor that old aud honorable citizens
swore before the Legislative Committee that the
total value of all the property there i'll 1857 did
not amount to $50. OOO-whch was the sum these
claims cost the State As there was visible
dIminution IN the value of this property, because
of an overflow of water, Mt the time Mr.. Hill
brought forward these claims. il should have been
impossible for him even with his one
sided trial. to have stretched matters so far a
20 have obtained in damages more than the whole
value of the property in the valley. But he got
round this point in some way peculiar 10 himself by
getting the State 20 pay interest Of the high rates
then prevailing on the sum awarded, computing II
from June, 1857 the date of the alleged overflow.
In this way the amount of the award was nearly
doubled This was an unpreceden ted allowance, as
these claims for damages had never before been
heard of by the State a. II. BoaIdman Sui Ia tcstl-
fed before heLegisativc Committee that he had
never heard the question of interest these claims
mentioned that the Federal Government
never allowed interest on such claims, and that 1t
was an extraordinary proceeding IN these cases
To appreciate this testimony ii should be Temen-
bered that this Mr.. Smith was the man VINO David
t. Hill swOre was the counsel for the State III these
cases. OF course Mr Smith testified that be was
never employed 10 defend the state against these
claims but what more. he never even heard OF
tine claim of $4,000 for interest until the Legis-
lative Committee began its investigation Of the dis
graceful affair.
By Mr. HIPS testimony, gwen in Saturday.
TRinCSE, ii was shown that he aid not deny his
part IN the shameful AFFAIR but
bodily swore that the claims were
good ones and that they were only allowed
after far and well-contesed trial ON the part OF
the State On cross-examination he admitted that
no witnesses heard for tie State aud that only
the claimants were examined IN their own behalf.
BY the testimony of A. II. Boardman Smith it was
shown that the State was Mt even represented by
counsel. By the testimony of some of the claim
ants before the Legislative Committee, extracts
that Mr. Hill and his partner first suggested to those
farmers twelve years after the frcshct, that the
State owed them something. il now only remains
to show the thoroughly bogus character Of some OF
the claims J. 5. Locke wasawardcd $l1,415 and
iii his case Mr. Hill retained 81 800 more than the
share he agreed 10 take for collecting the claim
| That 81 800 Mr.. Hill has never paid TO Mir. Locke
The following il extract from the testimony of
| tins witness:
Q-It didn't TO you for several years that you
| had any claimi Al thought somebody ought 10 DO
O,~why didn't you consult somcboiyI Al don't
| know as am prepared TO answer why didht; only
! did not
! Odd you furnish any paper. any testimony
proofs 70 DO presented TO TIC Lssslaare or legislative
Q.-Is there any way by which yOl con give the date
OF this arrangement with your conusclt A-SO sir;
want 20 say that nobody enough keep
copy OF that contract and they refuse 20 show IL now
There was no one smart enough to keep copy oft
| Cept those lawyers
Q-Was this clalm presented to more than Legisla
ture ANOw. dont know that how they heidi IT, dont
know, they didn't tell much about ~ whom they wanted
anything they called paid expenses two three
J times " hIch VIC did not expect 10 do.
Q-YOu had several meetings for tho purpose OF dis
cussing this matter; wasn't there any discussion how
the Legislature to he induced TO pass law for the
rcIcf OF this stale old thingl Al coulin't answer
questions and tell what the talk presume II
| talked about
! Q-when you made a statement your claim It was
! entirely from memory A.-FrOm memory mostly
Q-Can you tell who prepared the statement OF your
clam} A.-NO. can't tell that now.
Odd you keep any invoice or your accounts OF
your property on hand A.-SO, sir never did such
| IA thing In my llfe.
Q.-You were examined before the Appraisers your
claims. We're any books or papers or mcmOrandums
called for Al think not.
Q.-Any investigation as to how YOU got at those
] LaL..I IL. - LIZ Il...ILI