Morning journal and courier., 1886-10-07
more or less Influenced. Was

| more or less Influenced. Was il
done corruptlys I say NO; but
it might have been foolishly. Is
there a particle of evidence that the rail
road company used money corruptly fo1
| gaining the votes of the Common Council!
| say not. Aside from the statements of Mr..
| Gum and Mr.. Martin there has nothing been
| shown pointing to the corrupt use of this
| money. Now, in Mr.: Gums testimony, as
| the credibility of witness depends first up
| on his ability to tell the truth and sec
ond upon his will to tell the truth,
I say that Mr.. Gum had the ability, but not
the willingness to tell the truth, and say
that he failed to tell the truth from the very
beginning. This story of Mr.. Gum about
having received money cannot be traced
back to the summer of 1885. He says that
he told Mr.. Lake about it Immediately after
and Mr.. Lake comes in and fatty denies it.
When Mr. Sargent took this matter up it
was in April, 1886, and I have no
idea but what it grew out of Mr.. Gums sto-
~. Why did he not tell this story soonera
Because he did not know he was shut out of
the custom house, and then, finding it out,
ne did this as a revenge, and that is all there
is to it. There is certain thing about
this matter, and that is, had Mr.. Gum been
offered $50 he would have taken it. OF di
rect testimony there is not any, except from
Mr.. Gum. as Mr.. Martins statements were
not testimony, but hearsay. Mr.. Martin
says that Mr.. Clark told him that he had
been offered money. l have no doubt but
that Mr.. Martin now believes what he said,
but that was two years ago and he might, as
he probably did, misunderstood Mr.. Clark to
the effect that he was offered money. The
gentleman who wrote these letters says that
he did not say that any member of that
Board received any money. When it is said
that corporation has appropriated and paid
money for votes what has it done? Sargent
said he meant it was to buy votes. Who
was to be bought? It must have been those
who vote. There is no statement in that
letter that is not insult to the Common
Council. And when the Common Council
arise in indignation and call for an investi
cation the committee allow all the evidence
to be brought in and what does it
confirmed Tiara Do our books lie
in this matter as he charges us with? False
entries I don't think the books of his
own corporation would show any fairer ones.
He says the railroad company has been max
ing an attempt to a barefaced steal-a crime,
gentlemen. This mans prejudices have run
away with his wits, and these statements are
made up of the testimony given. 1 was
born in this city and thought it
excellent one, and now in my manhood for
the first time 1 see the finger of scorn point
ed at the government. have seen it jeered
at all over the country by press and politi-
clans, and through the innocent statements of
MI. OdIScuG, WIZ WAS 1letlS ZIG oupo VI d
liar, and that is all, gentlemen.
Judge Blydenburgh then said in reply to
Attorney Tyler's argument: will say that
when an attorney has doubtful case on
hand he goes in Mr.. Tyler did in talking
of Mr. Sargent, which time he could well
have spent in talking about the lobby. The
question is, Were the funds of the road used
for an improper purpose? and that ask you
to think about. The same manner in which
Mr. Tyler attacks Mr.. Gum 1 trust you will
attack Mr.. Wagner, who could not remem
Der. I think the citizens of New Haven will
thank Mr. Sargent in doing as he has done
in the matter, and don't think that gentle
man needs any defense.
Ex-A1derman Benton said: AS the case
has been presented here I say that we feel
bound to say a word or two. In the first
place we would thank the committee who
heard the case and the Court of Common
Council in appointing that committee. Mr..
Sargent says it is a steal. The proposition
originated in the mind of the treasurer of
the city and not in the mind of one of the
directors of the Derby railroad. What have
the plaintiffs shown, granting that the testi-
mony of their two witnesses is true! They
have proven that money was offered to two
members of that Board, who refused it, and
is that parallel to the case of the Board of
Aldermen of New York4
The meeting then adjourned.