Indiana State Sentinel, Volume 20, Number 45, Indianapolis, Marion County, 3 April 1861 — Page 2

WEEKLY SENTINEL.

WEDNESDAY APRIL. 3 1861 Crl Srkari get. a Place. The Arbninistration cares in the case of Cal ' Seam We seppoee it must be attributed to a "military necessity." He goes to Madrid, Cash Clat getting out of the way and taking in its stead the mission to Russia. This knocks H knr v Wrjrraa Davis out of the ring, but we presume he will be provided for hi due time. Mr. Siw au consented that Schi az should go to Madrid as bks jacobinical sentiments would not be a? i at that Court as at some of the other capitals. Tbe Cincinnati Commercial' Washington correspondent has the following in reaVeeace to the appointment: The transfer of Mr. Clay was made with his it, bat neat ran is nevertheless ex at the rumination of Carl Schurz. It known -a the course of the afternoon the Secretary of Sute consented to it only on the personal request of the President. There - au unanimous opinion among all unprejudiced parties that Schuirs importunities and indiscre tions during the last two weeks should have preI eated his reward in any such signal manner. The Journal' Logic Tbe Journal has a queer logic to justify its or public urmtine. Let us test it. The last time the Sentinel published the county delinquent lift, it got the job because it was the lowest Udder, all the offices in the city having sent in propositions for the ad vertisenient. For the publication of the last delinquent list competition w.is invited only from the two Republican organs. One ottered to do it for twenty-five per cent, lew than the other, but the job waa given to the highest bidder The Journal justifies this species of Republican economy upon the ground that its bill was at the same rate that the Sentinel got for similar work. Now it is well known to the readers of the Republican central organ that its columns have teemed with charges against the Sentinel for extravagant and unfair bills for public printing. When similar charge ere brought against the Journal, it does not attempt to deny the fact but tlie excuse is that its bills are the same as thoM of the Sentinel If the Sentinel was wrong, and the Journal baa been persistent in its charges that it was, can the Journal be right for doing precisely the same thing, and that, too, lipon im own admission? It follows then that either the Sentinel has got no more than it had a right to receive, or else the Journal is very dishonest for doing just what it has condemed in us. Which horn of the dilemma will the Journal take? The kaa kukrr Draining Company. A" i thin the present month a company has been organiied, by Col. J. C. Walkes, Hon. Gokdos Tass ut, and other gentlemen of northern Indiana, for the purpose of straightening, deepening and clearing out the Kankakee river. The ob jects proposed by this company are of such im portance, not only to our northern counties, but to the State, that we deem it proper to devote some space to a full discussion of the enterprise. The peculiar character of the Kankakee country has not heretofore been generally understood. Marshes and swamps of vast extent, on either side of the river, render access to the stream, in many place . almost impossible. Practically, it is a re gion of wilderness, in the very heart of the richest and mot highly improved section of the State. The oll is said to be an alluvion from six to ten feet in depth, underlaid by a stratum of black sand or gravel, which, in torn, rests upon a bed of clay. In 1852, the Legislature enacted a general law for the draining of the lands ceded to the State by the Oenaral Government as swamp lands; but its provisions were such that the swamp land commissioners of the several counties acted independently of each other, and no comprehensive plan of operations was practicable. The drains cut in this region perate to run the water into the Kankakee marshe-. wiSj th:n ;w nJ ne, or could be done, to carry off the water accumulated in the river, and upon the adjacent Lands. The entire proceed of the swamp lands were thus expended in the construction of ditches, which, in most cases, have been ol little advantage to the country; ami there is scarcely an instance where such drains afford the complete reclamation intended to be effected. In 1853, Col. Walk, then a member of the Legislature, submitted a bill to the Swamp Land Committee for the straightening and deepening of the Kankakee river. By his bill, the Swamp Land Commissioners of the counties bordering on the river were made a board, and required to act in concert. His plan was to make tbe Kankakee the grand center of a complete system of swamp land draining. Experience has shown that this plan would hare been not only more effectual. bat fur cheaper to the State, than the miserable system adopted. The Sute had not, at that time, alienated any of the land, and its provisions could have been easily carried out, thus saving at least a million of dollars to the treasury and render ing the K tnkakee marshes the best farming lands within our borders. The swamp land fund having been exhausted, and the State thus disabled to undertake the ac comp ishment of the work. Col. Walke, still hoping to attain the object in some other way, employed competent engineers, and in the summer of i -."! made a complete survey of the river, from a point not far from its source to the State fine. Tpon reviewing a report of that survey, we find that in a distance of seventy miles within this State, the channel, by reason of its ic and innumerable bends, is over two miles in length the distance bv the channel being about threefold the distance by a straight line. It was frequentiy found that in a single day's survey, em embracing but a short distance, th engineers, following the course of the stream, traveled toward every point ot the compass Generally the water in the channel, even in the dry months of summer, stands above the level of the surface of the adjoining or first bottom lands. The higher marshes, or second grade, are so slightly elevated as to be, in most cases, unsusceptible of complete reclamation, unless the water in the n be lowered. For a few miles before ; the Slate line the stream becomes rapid. and the water is confined, generally, between banks of dry land. Fortunately the fall between the State line and the rapids at Momence is sufficiently great to carry off any amount of water that tasy be thrown into the channel. The fall, for the length surveyed, will average about one foot per mile, by a straight line a greater fall than that of the Mississippi, or the Ohio, or the Lower Wabash. The channel of the Kankakee being about thrice the length from point to point of a straight line drawn through the same points, it becomes apparent that its fall can not be more than four incites per mile. If this channel, then, with four inches fall per mile, were only seventy miles hi length, it would carry off but one third the quantity of water in a given time that would be conveyed away by a channel of the same length with one foot fall per mile. Having not only about two-thirds less fall than a straight channel would have, but two thirds greater distance, it follows that tbe quantity of water carried off by the present channel, in a given time, must be but about one-sixth of what would be carried offby a straight channel. But this is not all. It is well known that every bend in a river, while it increases the length of the channel, acts also as a dam, which to a greater or less extent, retards the velocity of the current. Such is the crookedness of the Kankakee, that, in the State of Indiana alone, tbe survey shows over two thousand bends of every conceivable degree of tortuosity. Add to all this the fact that during the summer months

the present channel is almost completely clogged posed to yielding what the South declare to be their with water gras and other vegetable matter, and ! rights under the Constitution, then shall it be war it is safe to say that an improved channel, cleared j for the mastery, or a peaceful Operation the of al! impediment, two thirds reduced in length, , formation of two Confederacies? We should like with two thirds more fall, and without bends, j to see the sentiment of the North fairly tested would carry off fifteen to twenty times more wa- j upon this issue, and we know of no better way ter in a given time than is conveyed away by tbe than to submit to a popular vote the plan of river in its present condition. The above calcu- ' adjustment that would be acceptable to the border latioa is sarnie without regard to tbe well known slave States. A direct vote upon such a proposirole governing the increased velocity of water tion, or tlie Montgomery Constitution, would deariaing from an increased fall, which would show termiue whether the present disruption shall be that the quantity thai might be carried off by permanent or a reconstruction made probable.

J straightening the channel would be even greater than here stated.

The Kankakee Draining company propose, by straghtening the bend, deepening the shallow ?, and clearing out the obstructions in the river, to reclaim and render arable ti e adjacent marshes, promote the health ot' the surrounding country and the interest of the public generally. ; The work they propose will deepen the bed of the river throughout its length, and bring down the ! surface of the water in the rh.tnnel below the swamp muck, so as to carry off the water through the sandy subsoil and render the ditches made by the State available. It u estimttei that three hundred thousand acres of land are injured much of it rendered valueless by the waters of this river. These lands, at present rates, would not sell for more than an average of three dollars per acre, the aggregate of which would le nine hundreel thou and dollar. Dry lands, less fertile, equally re mote from market, in the counties of St. Joseph and Laporte, sell, at present rates, at '-ora thirty to fifty dollars per acre. It is a safe estimate lo say that the work contemplated would render the swamp an d wet lands on the Kankee worth an average of twenty dollars per acre, the aggregate of which would be ix millions dollars: It is estimated that the proposed drains will cost Jit hundred thousand dollars. If these esti mates are correct, and they are believed to be within bounds, the net profit to the owners of the lands will be at least four million six hundred thousand dollars. By reference to a general law authorizing the construction of levees and drains, approved June 12, 1852, and to an act amendatory of and supplementary to the same, approved March 4, 1S59, under which this company is organized, it will be found that the County Boards are required, uon application made by the corporation, ta-ppoit persons not interested in the propo! work, to make the assessment f benefits and damages to all lands in any way affected. The Assessors are required to swear to the truth and correctness of their assessment; and the assessment of etch tract, when filed in the Recorder's office of the proper county, becomes a lien in favor of the company Cor the amount assessed. It also provides for no tice to the owners of the lands of the time of making assessments. It provides, further, th;it the assessments shall be payable on demand bp the company, and prescribes the manner in which such demand shall be made. If the assessment j be not paid on demand, the lien may be enforced it law. The assessment of damages against the company, and the collection of the same, are fully provided for. The law unde,' which the company is organized has, in the caseo.MnaVrson rs. The Krrns Drain ing Company, 14 Ind., been dejidel to be constitutional and valid. The case arose under the law referred to. We regard this enterprise as one of the most important to the people interestei an! to the State that has been set on foot for manv rears. Its consummation would bring into cultivation, in a few years, a district of country larger and richer in soil than Marion county. No stream in the United States, of similar length, has as mnch in exhaustibly rich bottom land. This soil is now practically worthless. It may be made the most productive in the State. What is now a wilder -neis of water, mud. moss and grass, partitioned out among trappers and fishermen, may be made the garden-spot of northern Indiana. The object to be attained is so vast and incalculable in its results that the amount to be levied to accomplish it becomes insignificant. If land which could not now be sold for three dollars per acre can be made worth twenty, the owner should be glad to pay his proportion of the necessary assessment. The money necessary to construct the work will be expended in the midst of the community who pay it. We understand the company will offer resident land owners an opportunity to work out their assessment, or to pay it in articles they will need in the course of the work. They also contemplate making the assessment payable in such installments as will enable the proprietors to meet the demand without difficulty. Z3B A gentleman of high political position in Georgia has arrived in Washington from that State, and brings cheering intelligence of a grow ing desire to restore fraternal feeling. He states that Hon. A. H. Stephens frankly express-xl a hope "for reconstruction" tinder the Montgomery Constitution in his public speeches, and that he is warmly applauded. Is not this the quickest process "for reconstruction?" The Montgomery Constitution in many respects is a great improvement upon the Federal Constitution. The revenue system it provides is far in advance of any yet attempted since the General Government was organized. The territorial question has ceised to he practical issue. Slavery can not !e udvantageously extended, as a domestic institution, to any ol the Territories, and they are all now organized upon a basis which -ran not fail to !. - itisfactory to the great majority of the people North and South. Why should the North fight for the shadow when they have already achieved the substance? If the adoption of the Montgomery Constitution would restore fraternal feeling and once more unite the States upon a permanent basis, the North could well afford to make the concession for the greater advantages they would gam by a reconstruction of all the States in a harmonious Union. A reunion can never be accomplished without compromise. The experience of the past few months has proven that the Union is a great advantage to the North, and that the Northern people arc unwilling to let the Union slide upon a long heel political issue. The question is now a practical one and should be so considered. If disunion continues, the strife which will necessarily ensue, will do vast damage to the material interests of both sections of the country, il it does not end in the greater evil of civil war. And if the North should succeed in subjugating the South, of what benefit would lie conquered and hostile provinces? A national convention to propose amendments to the Constitution does not meet general favor and would not probably be participated in by the States which have seceded. If not, its object would not be accomplished. The Border States propose a convention to lay down the conditions uKn which they will remain in the Union. These States would not, therefore, favor a national convention when they will in advance have submitted their terms for the p nation of the Fede-al Government. While the slow process of a National Convention is progressing, the Southern Confederacy will be gaining strength, and will h ive perfected a permanent Government, before a convention can do its work, and which may not prove satisfactory. These are the objections to a National Convention. We favor that plan, or any other, which will re-con struct the Ui ion, but why not meet the issue promptly, and yield whatever is reasonable and just to satisfy the Union conservative men of the South, and thereby build up a National Union Party which will neutralize and destroy the ex tremists, the disunionists, of both sections? This seems to be the practical way of settling the issue, and restoring harmony and prosperity to the entire nation. We favor any scheme which will permanently settle the differences between the two sections of the conn try. If there was any reasonable probability that the labors of a National Convention would result in adjusting the political difficulties which threaten the overthrow of the Government, we should say amen! so let it be. But a crisis is upon the country and we believe the people understand the issue and are prepared to act promptly If a majority of the people of the North are op-

Northern Penitentiary Investigation. REPORT OF THE MINORITY or tus L ;C IS L. IT li E CO. 11. fllTTEK.

Kt publican Paiiisiiiship Ventilated I.M';ion ut 1 ic li icon City Justified by liic Itcpiiblicun Legialnture. and tite Contract of albott A Co.. I uglified b the Same Hotly. Mr. Hkfkrl.n made the following minority report from the Committee on the Northern State Prison : Mr. Speaker : The undersigned, a minority of the joint committee of the Senate and House of Representatives, appointed to investigate the fraud, if any, in the location of the Northern State Prison, and in the contract for the construction of the same, beg leave to submit their views of the evidence in the case. LEGISLATIVE INVESTIGATIONS GENERALLY PARTAKE OF A PARTY CHARACTER. It is to be regretted that generally, in cases of legislative investigations, a disposition to manufacture party capital outruus and controls a desire for the elucidation of the troth. Before this juggernaut of jarty, the fair fame and hitherto unblemished character of our best citizens are often recklessly and rudely assailed and blackened, if thereby the success of putv can be in art !. And even where the evidence, fairly and fully considered, fails to achieve the putty end sought after, it is made to submit to manipulations and garbling of tlo most reprehensible character. All inles f law, and all rules of e i deuce, thrown as a safe-guard around the citizen, are rudely thrust aside and trampled upon, so that bse l!irty purposes uny be subserved. Tne undersigned regret that the action of the majori tv of the joint committee ha not been such hs to wholly acquit them of this censure. TH I UVLES OF LAW ..NO OK IVlIlLMK TOTALLY I8HKOAKDED. The meanest .and lowest criminal that, at the bar of his country, is tried for offenses of the most dialolical nature, is by the laws ofthat country, entitled to be heard by himself or attor ney; to have witnesses summoned and examined in his defense, and to cjnfront the witnesses for the prosecution, and cross examine them. And these provisions of the law are wise and proper. If the defense was not allowe! to confront and cross examine the witnesses, and summon his own witnesses, then would every citizen be at the mercy of the bad and depraved, who would scrupie not to stain their souls with perjury. A statement made by a Witness in a particular manner might carry a criminal interpretation, which, explained on cross examination, might appear quite innocent indeed. One man might not scru pie, in the absence of the defendant, to make a false statement, whic' , in his j resence, he would shrink from making. Hut it is u-eie-s to argue this point. Every citizen in the R -public knows that these safe-guards of the law are eminently wise, salutary and just. THE PEKENSE IONIFP EVTRY RIGHT. The undersigned exceedingly regret that a due regard for truth compels them to say that, in the. instance of this investigation, nil these sate gu irds nay, all these rights, guaranteed by the Constitution and the laws to the vilest criminal in the lind, were stricken down and trampled under foot. The defense was denied the right of being present ut the investigation, and confronting and cross-examining the witnesses. They were denied the right of appearing by themselves or attorney. They were even denied the right of having witnesses summoned and examined in their defense! Thecommittee resolved themselves into a Star Chamber, and with high hand excluded evidence and struck down the sacred rights of the citizen. From beginning until the end it was conducted us an cx parte concern. The character of the citizen was stabbed in the dark, and no op portunity afforded him to defend himself. In the secret conclaves of a committee room the fair name of men was blackened, and they were denied the right of wiping out the stain. Can such a proceeding be justified before an enlightened people in tnis the nineteenth century'? What is such evidence worth? TITE COMMITTEE RETt SE TO SI MMON WITNESSES KOR THE PEKENSE, 4C. The defense asked that Mr. J. H. McKim, architect, of Madison, Judge Samuel Hanim, of Fort Wayne, Col. Brown and Father Kilny, of Lafayette, Samuel Casey and C. R. Sanger, of Juliet, Illinois, C. B. Blair, Lyman Blair, J. P. Higgins and J. P. Stickney, of Michigan City, J. R. Seville and James Sexton, of Chicago, and others should be summoned and examined before the committee, yet this reasonable request was . denied them. 1 he defense asked the right of appearing and confronting and cross-examining the witnesses, yet this right was denied them. The defense demanded the right of appearing by counsel, but even this was refused. Are men's characters nothing that they are to be thus rudely assailed and no opportunity afforded for vindication and defense? Is the untarnished name of the citizen not dear to him, that it is thus to be offered up to the fell purpose of manufacturing political capital? Is party to override all considerations ot justice, of right and of honor? Wherein consists the boasted freedom of our institutions, if the rights of the citizen are to be thus recklessly invaded and violated? It would be strange, indeed, if in an investigation conducted in this manner, where disappointed men were the chief witnesses, where all the wise restrah.ts of law were thrown aside, where even the defense was denied the right of cross examining, where every induce ment was offered to perjury, some evidence could not be procured to blacken the character of any public official. But what is such cx parte evidence worth? Error, said a great statesman and a wise man, may well be allowed to roam at large where truth is left free to combat it, but in this case truth was crippled and pinioned, while defamation, and slander and perjury were allowed free scope, nay, sheltered and protected from exposition in the secret Star Chamber of the committee room. And it is upon such ex parte evidence that citizens, bearing hitherto unblemished names and fair characters, are to fe dragged before 1 1. e country as criminals, without trial, without opportuni ty to confront and cross examine the witnesses, without being allowed a hearing in their own de fense, without even being permitted to have their witnesses examined! Where is the man who can stand up dure a freepeoplejealous of their rights, and deknd such a partial, one sided and outrageous procee ling? The proverbial love of the American heart for fair play and justice has be fore row curdled into bitter hatred for injustice, oppression and wrong; and the men who, by trampling upon right, sought to avenge their party feelings by striking down a political opjonent, and manufacturing political capital at the expense of every principle of honor and justice, have, before now, by the stern verdict and rebuke of the je ple. learned that the American heart loathes oppression come in whatever garb it may. And when they see a partis in commit tec violating every principle of law, denying the defense the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, and by their secret proceedings, sheltering and protecting, if not holding out' an inducement to the com mission ot perjury, that withering rebuke intended for their victims, may fall uKn their own bends. The people may not fail also to be lieve that those who love darkness better than the clear light of day, do so because "their deeds are evil." Truth never dreads light. Evil ahme skulks into dark recesses. If the elucidation of the truth was all the Majority of this committee desired, why did they dodge from the light of day, and deny the defense the right of confronting and cross examining the prosecuting witnesses? Why refuse them the right of defending themselves by counsel? Why deny them even the right of having their witnesses examined? Was perjury to be protected from the withering exposition of a cross examination? Was the testi mony of " swift witnesses" too weak to stand before the crushing evidence of other witnesses? Why, in the name of justice and right, of honor and truth, was evcrv principle of law violated and trampled upon, and the accused denied the poor boon of vindicating their characters from aspersion nnd slander, if an honest de-ire for truth was all the committee desired? Were the committee afraid that if such oportunity were afforded that they would successfully vindicate themselves before the public, and bury their ac cusers in the guiltof perjury? Whether innocent or guilty, these men were entitled to a fair trial and an impartial hearing. Who will so far dare to violate truth as to pretend to say that they have had such a trial? THE COMMITTEE DISTORT, GARBLE, AND M ANl'KACTl'RE EVIDENCE. There is a power, a latent power in truth, that ever rises, no matter how " crushed to earth " and asserts the divinity that rests within it. " The best laid schemes of men and mice, gang aft agley'." So in this case. Despite the Hagrant outrage upon the rights of the accused, despite the secret and dark proceedings of a partisan committee, we affirm that the evidence, fairly and fully weighed and considered, does not warrant the general inferences ami conclusions of the committee. We go a step further and aver that the evidence has been manipulated, distorted, and garbled, in nearly all the c ises set forth in the report of the committee. We go a step still further, and emphatically state that in that report, quotations are made as from the evidence which can not be found in any portion of it. THE $30,000 TRANSACTION. On page four of this report we are informed by the committee that Mr. May swore that he got $.'10.000 from parties in Fort Wayne as a bribe "to be distributed among the memlers of the Hoard of Control and himself in the event that the prison was located at Fort Wayne," nnd that this is established "by the evidence of disinterested and highly credible witnesses, ami from facts and the sUtement of the Directors theoi-

selves," that the Directors "not only knew all about it, but planned the whole scheme, and while Mr. May had $10,000 in his hands, Mr. Mullen or Blake, or both of them, demanded it to be paid over to them. This Mr. May refused." The best comment upon this statement is the evidence itself, as now lying lefore us. Mr. May sweats that $110,000 was placed in his bands by a gentleman of Fort Wayne, $10,000 in money (in a draft), $10,000 in a cash note, and a power of attorney to draw $10,000 out of the State Treasury, in case the prisou was located at Fort Wavne. He says, "I proposed to Governor Willard to pay the $30,000 to the State (that is, iu case he confirmed the selection of the site 1 1 Fort Wayne), but the Governor declined, as he deemed it unfair, unless there was something in the law to place other poinLs on an equal fooling with Fort Wayne." Mr. Dunn swears: "After we easM home, and had located at Fort Wavne, Mr. .Mav s.,id to me. he had a bill of exc.mnge for $10,0. I told him to send it right back, which he did. Personally. I know nothing of any offer made ti us or any of us, to induce us to locate at F1 Wavne." Mr. Blake swears: "Mav told nie f-r the location was made at Fort Wayuw.'fVt a donation was made bv the citizen-- Jt Fort Wayne this was two or three davs utter the location .waa made at Fort Wavne. I ordered May to send it back immediately. I never had an offer nude to me, either directlv or Indirectly, to induce me to vote for the location at any place. Neither do I know of any member of the Board having any offer ol a siowfar character." Dr. Mullen swears: "I never was informed, until we had located at Fort Wayne, that May had anv money or notes placed in his hands to secure the location. I never did demand any money

from May, or threaten to shoot him if he did not pay this money over to me." There is the evidence, so far as it appears, as furnished us bv the Clerk of the Committee, in regard to this $30,000 transaction. Does it warrant the inference or conclusion of the comn'ttee ? Mark the impression sought to lie conve d by the Report, that these things arc admitted ' y the Directors themselves. Where is theevide i.-e " from the facts and statements of the Directors themselves," that " they planned this whole scheme." that " thev knew all about it" before thcr maue the location, that " Mr. Mullen or Blake, or both of them, demandel the money to be paid over to them" and that "Mr. May refused." Very probably, the Committee heard such talk in the "streets indulged in by scandal-mongers, and the miserable partizan peddlers of slander, w ho infest our large citie--, or perchance they made another draft on their fruitful imagination. Cer tain it is that their statement is totally unsupported by the evidence of the Directors, whom they represent as having admitted it. HOW MICIIIOAN CITY WAS SELECTED. The Directors first located the prison at Fort Wavne, it appears; but, for some reason, the Governor refused to approve the location.hc being iu favcr of L transport. Afterward this difference between them was compromised, by locating the Prison at Michigan City. The committee are sorely perplexed at this "magic like" termination of the differences between the Governor and the Directors. They can not sec how the Governor, deeming Michigan City the next eligible site to Logansport, and the Directors deeming it the next eligible site to Fort Wayne, could finally give up their first selections, and compromise upon the point they both agreed to as the second choice of each, fill if. isn't it? Practical, common scnic men could at a glance perceive how re illy natural the compromise upon Michigan City was, but the committee, gifted with supernatural foresight, smell fraud at ouce! And nobixly could unravel the fraud but Mr. Achcv, who, they inform us. "was the peace commissioner the angel of mercy that did the whole thing, and that with out him there could have been nothing done that was done," and straightway Achey was brought before the committee. We are then informed that Mr. Achey swears; "That he told the Directors he would see the Governor, and he would 'fix it.' He did see the Goveruor.fixed the matter up, and harmoniously had the location made at Michigan City. He swears that when he went into it he was 'for sale,' and was to h ive $1 ,000 for what he did. Who was to pay him he does not dis dose." Here the impression is left that Mr. Achey was to be paid by the Directors. The committee lacked the maulinc.vs to make the charge, but the sneaking insinuation is clearly put forth. "Willing to wound, but yet afraid to strike." Now, what are the facts in the case? Mr. Achey knew that Michigan City was the second choice of each party, and, like a sensible man, he perceive 1 al once that where they could not get their first choice, reasonable men were generally willing to compromise upon the second. Hence he went to both parties, as he swears, and tofd them it "had become a State talk," etc., and finally the matter was arranged between them. In regard to his pay, he considered $1 ,000 a fair remuneration for his trouble, and that "Mr. Allen May (then a citizen of Laporte county, in which the Prison was located,) said I should be paid tor my services in securing the location at Michigan City." And this is the terrible fraud and bribery, about which the committee is so much perplexed! WHAT THE KVIDKNCK OF INTERESTED PARTIES IS WORTH. This brings U t the consideration ot the lo cation, the real question in which the people of the State are interested. By any amount of misrepresentations, ridiculous figures and absurd statements, the committeo, in the very face and teeth of the great bulk, seven-eights, of the evidence, pretend to think that Logansport or Fort Wayne would have been the mo.-t eligible site for the Prison, on account of the cheipness of materials, &c And in order to bear out this impression; we are told by that man and this man, in terested, of course, in their respective localities, that lumber, stone, and brick could have been funihed at their place at such and such low rates. And the architect is censured because he would not take their figures to estimate upon, when his own knowledge taught him that they could and would be furnished at no such rates. Let us burst the bubble by one illustration. A man by the lutme of Fleming states in his evi deuce, the price of brick in rort Wayne at " $4 a thousand, kiln burnt, delivered on the ground, and that the usual prices for furnishing materials and laying up brick is from si .-.'ö to $"2 per thousand," und the price of oak lumlier is from "$8 to $10 per thousand." Now, in order to show how sectional feeling will waq the judgment of personally -interested men, let us turn to the evidence of Mr. May. who is the architect of the new court-house now being built at Fort Wayne. Mr. M ly sweirs that the contrnct for building the court-house at Fort Wayne w. per thou sand for common brick in the wall, and for front brick in wall $10 per thousand, " and the price paid for o ik timber was " $12 per thousand." It is to be presumed that this contract, let out to the lowest bidder by the Comini-sionei ; of A'ien county, where ail the mechanics contestel for it, is a better and safer index of the red price of commodities there, than the unsupported stitcment of this man Fleming, who is personally interested, and guided by disanK)intment nnd revenge, seeks to gratify his feelings'hy throwing odium ujxui the location and the dire- tors, and it fully demonstrates how unsafe it is for an architect to base Iiis calculations upon the enthusiast statement of persons deely interested in any matter. Before we pass from this point, we will notice the statement of price for Logansport. Dr. Taylor states the price for lumber there at $10 to $13 per thousand Mr. May states that " the rice for lumber at Logansport was reprted at $14 per thousand," and " that the price ol Materials w.is fairer at Michigan City than at Logansport." THE HEALTHY ATMOSPHERE OF FORT WAYNE AND LOOANSrORT. But say the committee : " If the location h id been at Fort Wayne or Lagansport, a saving by donation at the one, or in cost of material, and donation at the other, as stated bv Governor Willard, would have been $30.000 oo Exerts of cost of shipment unit traveling exptnsefl on ar mint of remoteness of location, my.. Exces" . oott A Co.'k bill over that of Duulap Excels Jpaid to Director ov.-r lawful w.ick... Exres to Seely do do. The whole expense at 25 per cer.t. too larue s tbe evidence Miow Takl for land S.ooo oo M.MCl .13 MM tu n.i'Ki a." 4,500 00 f124,600 72 There now, if thit committee has not immortalized itself, then is immortality a dreiin and a delusion. What wonderful magnetism Fort Wayne and Logansport posse-s indeed. If the location had been made at either place, the Directors and the Governor, now the vilest rascals in the land, according to this committee, would have become honest at once, would have accepted Dunlap's bid and saved the State $.6,000; wouldn't bar charged anything for traveling expenses, and would have been content with their "lawful wages," nnother savingto the State of over$14, 000; wouldn't have had any excess of 25 per cent, and no land to pay for, being another saving of over $21 ,000; and "finally even Superintendent Seely would have become so patriotic tin he wouldn't have charged a ceut for his services and thus saved the State $2,663,! 1! We never he fore knew that Fort Wayne and Logansport possessed such a "healing balm" that can thus w ipe out all stains of dishonesty and make scoundrels honest men! Wc will not suggest that the uieni hers of this committee might improve their morals by a "location" at these noted places, for that might be considered personal. And hilflos, the wonderful cleansing effect it has had upon one member might not commend it so highlv to the public as the committee . report would indicate. One of the signers of this report has unwittingly, to use a homely phrase, "let the cat out of tlie bag." We entertain no doubt that had the prison been located where he desired, wc should never have heard from him, at least of this greit loss to the State; it would have been all right then in his estimation. Seriously, is it not presuming too mnch on the ignorance off this EToOM, h it n ?t an insult upon its intelligence for a committee an lointed by its authority to seek thus to cram such tut! and nonsense upon it as a deliberate state

ment of the loss sustained by the State? But to i go on, and upon these figures solemnly state that the actual cash loss to tiie Slate $IT.f:i0 72. is too ridiculous for serious consideration. Weaver that these figures are incorrect in cvery0particul.ir. The -t iteinent in regard to Gov. Willard that $30,000 would be saved by locating the prison at LogajKport, rests upon the unsupjiorted and unsustained evidence of one man, and is rebutted bv the plain facts of the case. We will

show at the appropriate place that the other figu. are alike unsupported by the evidence. ELIGIBILITY OF MICHIGAN C As to the elioibilitv of MichimsrtJitT as the site for the new prison, we will mfft? from two Witnesses, whose testi ijuwfare amply corroberated. and are not dopMQ bj any witness in refer- j ence to this Yjp lr- Hendri k-, the Rcprc-1 sentative frunrrk. Joseph county, and one of the I proscctUpw-itnesses, being also one of the re- ' iectesHaidders, swears: "I regard the location at I rciugan vjitv as neuMiv ami e:!gime as anv i place in the northern part of tlie State, and from iti peculiar location the work could be done che iper there than an v other place in the northern part of the State." Mr. May. whose duty it was to inform himself of the prices of material at every place visited, not from the enthusiastic statements of interested and irresponsible persona, but from the amount paid by mechanics in buildings being erected, as he did, swears: "I think Michigan City a better location for a prison (than the other places) from the fact that we found we could procure stone cheaper there than at any of the other places. In rubal stone I do not think we could have procured so good an article as that which we secured at Michigan City, but the Wabash rubal stone could be obtained at about the same price as at Michigan City. The dimension stone procured at Michigan City is about 'M per cent, cheaper than the stone of same character could be procured at the other points. The rubal stone work of the prison will cost about $17,000, and the dimension stone work about $60,000. The cost of furnishing brick was f'.und to be less at Michigan City than other places. Pine lumber was much cheaper at Michigan City than ut any other point. The cost of the prison grounds at Michigan City was $4.500. All other points asked the full price, to wit:$10.00i) for the location, so far as I am informed." It is in evi deuce that according to the arrangement entered into by the Directors and the railroad company a heavy saving, at least $10,000 in transportation, was saved to the State. Mr. Hendricks swears: "I think stone could be obtained at tbe Jolliett piarries (where they are now obtained) cheajKir than any other place iu the West. I have paid a higher price to transport stone three miles on ood roads than it will cost to carry it to Michigan City under the con tract with the railroad." Yet thus sage commit tee conclude.-, from what data the report does not say, that the excess of cost of shipment, kc, on account of the location, is $5,000. Talk about your clairvoyants and your spiritual mediums. They pretend at least to have some basis for their optical delusions, but this committee, with optics keener far, "can sec what is not to be seen." A mill stone is no impediment to their visions. It is also in evidence clear and undispntable, even in that of the chief witness, Mr. Dunlap, that convict labor is worth ten cents per person more at Michigan City than the other points. So that when the prison is full according to the plan, containing 750 convicts, the g hi to the State in Michigan City over any other place wo'uld be $75 per day. or $27,675 a year. In addition to all this. Michigan City is only fifty six miles distant from Chicago, one of tlie bc-t markets in the Union. It is on a direct line to Cincinnati, Detroit and Buffalo, with railroad accommodations of a very superior character, much better iu this respect than any other point in. the northern portion of the State. With a har bor that could by a small appropriation be ren dered one of the best on the lakes, -the great ad vantages of lake navigation would be added to its railroad facilities. Everything combines to render it the point at which the prison should have been located. But it is useless to multiply proofs on this head. The Representative from Fort Warne on the committee, Mr. Jenkinson, himself calked from a comparison of the advantages of the two places as a site for a prison. He well knew that such a comparison would be fatal to the claim of Fort Wayne. TAI.HOTT a COSTIOAN's BIO IX TISTE. This brings us to the consideration of the contract, but before going into its merits we propose to first brush away the rubbish the committee has so dexterously thrown in our path. The committee state that the "only bid that embraced the entire work was that of 1 albott A Costigan, and it appears that their bid was not submitted by the time allowed, nor until after the Governor and Mr. Mullen had returned, when the Board, together w ith the Governor, had their first meeting on the day of July." The admission of the committee that the "only bid that em braced the entire work was that of Talbott & C tigan," is from their own mouths, the strongest evidence that the contract ought to have been awarded to them. Any person who has the least acquaintance with lcttings of any character, knows that it is a "trick of the trade" for bidders to bid low on some articles and leave some specifi cations untouched to make up for their loss in other matters by charging exorbitant prices upon them. The bid of Talbott & Costigan covered evervthing, leaving no room for fraud or exhorbitant charges. Upon its face it was an honest bid, and thus presented the strongest claim for its consideration nnd acceptance. The other portion of the comm ttec's statement is not only wholly unsupported by the evidence, but is rebutted by it. Mr. Dunlap himself, the chief prosecuting witness, swears that Mr. Mullen returned the hitter part of May, not July, and the Governor sometime before him. Mr. Blake, whose evidence is clear, explicit, and undented on this point, swears that "alter Gov. Willard got back, (anil before Dr. Mullen had returned,) we held a meeting at the Governor's room to take into consideration the question whether we should-open the bids betöre Dr. Mullen returned, there being three out of the four members present ; that day, when I first entered the room, the Goernor handed me Talbott & C).'s bid, and told me it had been placed in his drawer, and i placed it with the other bids." After Mullen's return they met, and " first took up the regularity and legality of Talbott & Co.'s bid. Dr. M and Dunn both objected to the reg ularity of the bid, on the ground that it hail not been received by Major D. and myself on the day we received the other bids. We had some discussion over the question. Gov. W. stated that it h id been deposited in hisoflice in time, but that he not being there, it was not handed over to us. We submitted the matter to the Attorney Gen eral for his opinion. He decided that it was a regular and legal proposal." It raiv be necessary to add that the bids were all sealed up and opened at the samt- time. The public can now judge of the truth or falsity of the committee s s tatement. T1IK CONTRACT. It may be well before noticing the other misstatements of the committee, to give here a plain and succinct statement of the matter connected with the contract. After the bids were all in, it was found that Talbott & Co.'s bid was the only formal one that covered all the points that Dunlap had failed to put iu any bid for 12.514 su pcriicial feet of jwiinted work, ll '65 feet of lamber, :i,(M0 lineal feet of cement finish, and f'r 1 ,724 yards of pugging, and that he afterward.withdrew his bid for 30,765 pounds of cast iron, and 188,634 pounds of wrought iron that Dunlap's bid was lowest for foundution of ruble stone, for cut stone, and for galvanized iron, and that Talbott & Co.'s bid was lowest on brick work, on carpenter's work, on joiner's work, on speaking tubes, on painting, on ctass and glazing, and on plumbing, and that both bids were the same for plastering that on the aggregate, c il dilating that for the work upon which Dunlap had made no bid, he would accept the prices in Talbott & Co.'s bid, Dunlap's bid was lower than Talbott Ac Co.'s bid ny $21,7 "5 38 mtsi that Moore':; bid for plumbing was lower than either of them. After ascertaining these facts, the question arose with the Directors, what would be the interest of the State-in miking a division of the work, instead of letting out the entire work to one party or comp my. The Directors at last concluded thas it would be liest to make the award on each item to the lowest responsible bidder, which was done. The a ward of the plumbing was made to Mr. Moore, the iron to Talbott Co., and the wood and stone work to Dunlap, leaving the brick question unsettled. Mr. Bl.ikc notified the parties, and was informed by Keed & Baggott, Dunlap's partners, that " it would he impossible for them to take a partial award with out getting the whole bid." Mr. Moore was nut prcc;it, and had nobody to represent him. Talbott & Co. acquiesced iu the award for the iron. " Mr. Dunlap said he thought that the award of the stone and wood work to him might possJbly lie carried out. but as his bill on -tone was low, be thought it was unfair to make division." This plainly indicates the purpose of Dunlap Co., and shows that the omissions in their bid were purposely intended to be used bv them as an advantage, as we will conclusively demonstrate hereafter. Several days after the Direct ors met, and as Dunlap & Co. were di-satisfiel with tlie award made to them, and their conduct showed they did not intend to accept it, the ques tion came up upon his aud T. & Co.'s bid as a whole. Governor Willard and Judge Blake voted for Talbott & Co., Dr. Mullen and Major Dunn voted for Dunlap, thus making a tie. Mr. Bag got, the responsible man in the firm of Dunlap, then sent in a letter, withdrawing all connection with the firm of Dunlap, and stating that it would be im;ossible to take the contract under the bid. for it was " too loir." The contract was then awarded to Talbott & Co. We return to the mis statements of the Com mittee. The Committee, upon Dunlap's own mtimatc, gravelv state that " the difference in favor of Dunlap's bid was $56,093 33." The official statement of the architect, setting forth the dif ferenee on every item, shows the statement of the Commitiee to be utterly false. We quote from the report of the architect, premising that upon the items for which Dunlap put in no bid,

the price of Talbott k Co.'s to sav the least, was unfair t

bidVxaken, which. albott ii. Co.. and more than fair to Dunlap Dl-NLAr. TALIiOTT. K.-undatinii f ruM- t ...12,W 00 $17,410 (0 I'. intfd work (no XS n) 3.12H 50 3,12s 50 Cut stone .y-' S5.939 94 f170 00 Mrick workj 37,89 13 34,0C 4 Lurr' r Javhill by D.) 1.90184 1J01 H4 Carctr - 2,87 01 JJSl 6.1 ' r work .1,717 90 4.5.V, vj ast iron (bid withdrawn bv I) 922 S5 Ö22 95 J Wromclit Hull do 17.920 23 17.92" 23 Galvanixodiroi 4.S14 19 5,879 H4 SpeakitiK tubes. 75 00 500 00 ; PlasftriiiK and cement work (no bid for cement by D) 816 48 816 48 i Paintiiur.. 2,088 00 1W2 00 j Glass and Glazing 1 800 00 1.057 SO i riumbintr 3.600 00 2,049 50 ! Puginng (oo bill l.j Dunlap 431 00 431 00 Total f9s,304 65$147,h14 55 I Difference in favor of Dunlap's bid $34,786 38, instead of $56,01)3 33, as given by the commit tee. " Figures never lie," is an old adage, but i in those days figures never passed through tlie ma- I nipulations of this erudite and conscientious committee. Tin: Nil Bins compahid. The committee noxt assure us that before the bids were awarded, "at least a part of the Direc tors, and the Governor, combined, and went to work to induce Dunlap's bid to be w ithdrawn, or vacated; the Gove nor visiting the parties, and seemingly doing all in his power to bring about such a result. Finally, after several days' negotiation between the sinies, the Governor, Directors, Talbott k Co.. and Mr. Bagot, itwasagreed that Talbott should pay Bagot $1,000," etc. in justice to the dead, who now bleeps iu his cold and silent grave, beyond the reach of slander and defamation, we brand the statement as basely, meanly, grossly false and infamous. There is not one word of ccidence to sustain the atrocious uud diabolical calumny. It has no foundation except in the unsigned memorandum or letter of a drunken loafer. The testimony of the witnesses on both sides shows that Bagot, one of Dunlap's partners, and Dr. Mullen were great friends, and thai Mullen wat anxious for Hsgot's success. According to Bagot, Mullen told him that it was impossible for him to get the contract, and advised him to withdraw and make the best bargain witn i aiuott & u0. that he could, etc. According to Mullen, when the first award was made Bagot told him that he would have nothing to do with the contract that he understood him then as virtually withdrawing at that time that afterward he approached Tiim and said he would sell out to Talbott for a sum sufficient to pay bis expenses that he did so and tendered ft letter to the Board withdrawing that inasmuch as Bagot lived in hU county, Mr. Talbott, after the letting, placed a sum of money in his hands to be conveyed to him, etc. Now, where is the evidence that Gov. Willard or the other Directors knew anything about this transaction, that they combined and w ent to work to ii,duce Dunlap's bid to be withdrawn? Where is the evidence that the Governor visited the parties, and interested himself to bring about this result? We defy the committee to point out the testimony that would give the least plausible ground for such a calumny. Let them do so, or, liefore the public, bear the odium of having quoted us evidence that which can nowheres be found in it, for the unworthy purpose of not only maligning the living, but defaming and blackening the memory of the dead. That greit statesman and nature's own unrivaled orator now "sleeps the sleep that knows no waking," but his memory is yet dear to every true hearted Indianian. His spirit has fled to another land, but his services to Indiana are yet remembered in the hearts of a grateful people; the echo of his clarion voice is yet ringing in their ears, and his manly form and lofty bearing yet loom up before their minds' eves. Ashbel l'. Willard will live in the hearts of the jcople, and on the undying pages of history, when his petty maligners will have sunk from mortal vision, and been buried in oblivion's deep waters, and the base slanders spread upon the pages of this report w ill lie smothered in their own atrocious infamy . The commiitee next inform us that they have ' good reason to believe" that Dr. Mullen was the "secret" partner in the Dunlap bid," instead of his brother Alexander Mullen; and in another place we are told that one of tlie Directors "was at least ndirectly, if not dire ctly, deeply interestei! in the Dunlap bid." The committee must be gifted with exceedl y short memories indeed. Only a few lines before they represent this very Director, Dr. Mallen, as combining with the Governor, and going to work to induce Dunlap's bid to be w ithdraw n, the very bid in which he was a "se iet partner," and in which he was "deeply interested"! Most astute, paradoxical committee! Either one of your statements must lie untrue, for the one knocks tire foundation from the other! You can take whichever horn of the dilemma you please. Now, we aver that the committee had the best of reasons to believe the very contrary of what thev say they believe in reference to this matter. Their own witness. Dunlap, swears that Dr. Mul len did not return here, and knew nothing of Dunlap until the latter part of May; the committee themselves say he returned in July; yet the part nership agreement lying before them shows that it was formed, with Alexander Mullen as a part nor. us early as the 11th of May; so Dr. Mullen could have had nothing to do with it. PfXI.AP's RESrOXSIBILITr. We come now to the merits of the contract itself. The committee say that Dunlap was good, and that one of the securities he offered was the Hon. James Guthrie, of Kentucky. The defense asked that Col. Samuel Casev.of the Joliet Prison, Illinois, should be examined on this point. This gentleman had told Gov. Willard that, if Dunlap got the contract, the work not only would never lie finished, but would never be begun. The com mittee refused to hate him examined, Wl IV Let tbe public decide. But who, except the committee, says that he is a responsible man? Himself! The very witness they summoned to sustain him gives the best of reasons why he should never have had tlie contract. He (Col. Ilunnion) swears: "He (Dunlap) will take a spree occasionally. I have known him to stick to his work for three months at a time. hate seen him drinking freely fonr or fite times per ytar, when he came to town." And this is the responsible man, who actually had been known to stick to his work for three whole months at a time! Wonderful perseverance! Remarkable industry! J ust to think that for three niontlis be stuck to his work, and was not drunk once! The committee may regard, perhaps, his drinking capacities as a recommendation, and tluit a spree occasionally has the effect of making a man "good," but w c opine they will have some difficulty in convincing the people of Indiana that a habitual or even an "occasional" drunkard is a fit person to take charge of their public buildings, and to be en trusted with responsible duties, where the Slate may become a heavy loser. nt'NLAP's BIDS KRAt IU LFNT. But we unhesitatingly state that upon its veryface the bid was a fraudulent one. It proposed to do a jiortion of the work at a pi ice so low as to raise the presumption at once that other portions would lie so exorbitantly high a to make up, if not exceed, the loss, and for this very purjiose there were omissions in the bid. The architect swears: "The State would have lost, in mv opinion. $55,01) or . Ili.tiOO. If they had taken Dun lap's bid, because Dunlap propo ed to eut stone at 7 cents per superficial foot, which he could notaf fori 1 to do, and other work which would have to have leen completed liefore the cat stone was furnished, was ut a fair price under his hid. and I think there would have had to have been a reletting of the cut stone." In other words, the trick was this either to go on and do the work that preceded the cutting of the stone, for which he would have been well paid, and aller getting the pay for this, leave the State in the lurch by uhari doning the cut stone work, which alone could have induced the giving of the contract to him, and thus plunge the State in heavy expenses, or go on and do it, and then charge a double or treble price upon the work not included in I he bid. And Mr. Dunlap had given himself ample space lo do the latter. The work omitted in his bid amounted in Talbott k Co's. bid to over$24 000. If Dunlap had got the contract and gone on with the work us soon a he got to cutting stone, he would either h:u e abandoned it, or going on would have charged $5' 1.000 or $t!,00 for what Talbott k Co. were only to get $J 1,000. These are well known tobe the "tricks of the trade," and experienced men, whenever they see such a bid, write "fraudulent" across its face, und pitch it aside. Let us give an instance of this latter prac ! ti-e. In Dunlap's bid the item of minting uud ! flushing is omitted. The architect swears: "The j pointing und Hushing is 'a trick of the trade." You i will find generally that when a bid is made with out saying anything ulmut flushing and pointing, ! uf'ter the wall is put up you will have to pay extra J for flushing." This is t lie way these tilings are j managed. The Directors ought to h.ue insl intl I rejected the Dunlap bid for fraud upon its face. As to Dunlap's ottering the Hon. James Guthrie as security, there is no truth in it. He talked of I ottering him, but iiexer made the otter, and never showed anv authority from Mr. Guthrie to make such an offer of his p..u;ic. Trtt COXTRACT A FAIR OXE. Was Talbott & Co.'s bid a fair one? Let the ! tc-tiinony of E. J. Peck, President of the Tcrre H.'Ute road, a staunch and decided Republican, ai. 1 who for fifteen years has been u builder ami architect, whose honesty no man dare im,x-ivch, answer. Mr. I'eck swears: " I have examined the bid ol Talbott & Co. on the Northern Prison Without specifying each item, but taking it all together, if anything i.- to be in i bv the contractors under this bid it will have to be done by close management, and not only that but the be-t kind of management. And 1 will say further that were I out of business, and had the capital, I should lie very loath to take the . contract at those prices, for the reason that I don't believe 1 could make enough out of it to justify 1 me." Upon this evidence we are willing to rest tlie case. THF. WORK WELL KOT. Has the work been well done? On this jioiut the evidence is annihilating. But one man, and he Dunlap. has dared to venture a different state ment, and he examined it only about fifteen in in Ms ne ir sundown. Hon. A. B. Line, one of the

Investigating Committee, testifies: " When I ar

rived at Michigan City, owing to the snow, 1 could not examine the stone work as well as I desired, but determined to prosecute tlie investi fation of the wood work, and in order to do so, climbed through the scuttle hole to examine the roof. I found the roof as complete a piece of work a I erer saw in my life of the kind; and as proof of that, I found there was not a single

l the sweeping g stone and brick

then blowin work, so far as I could examine, I found to be verv well done, and the wood work throughout the building was substantial and well calculated for the purposes for which it was made," Ac. Mr. Line is a carpenter by tnde. and h is followed the business for twenty nine years. His opinion is, therefore, entitled to great weight. Even the committee's own architect, Smithmver, swears: " The work done thus far is done well." And Mr. Hoofer, whom he employed to assist him; testifies: " 1 have examined and measured the wood work, and find the work well done to all visible appearances. And also the brick work, which has teen done in a substantial manner. I pronounce it a good job." Mr. Lot Day, jr., testifies: " I cut through the wall for the purpose of putting a sewer under it. I had two or three hands helping me, and it occupied nearly a day. We had to use crowbars ana sle.lL'f bummers to cet through the wall. The wall was much stronger than I thoueht it 1 was. and we cut the -tone with as much ease as we did the mortar." Yet iu the face of such facts, Mr. Dunlap swears that it is not a good job, and that " there was no more cement used in me tounuaiion 01 me wall tlian 1 woulil have 1 useu in tne foundation ot a two story dwelling. I 1 tus snows the prejudiced condition ot this man s 1 mind, and also how little his evidence is entitled to consideration. co.vraADicToav testimony of uixlat, A short digression here to show the contradictions in this man's testimony may not be out of place. At the commencement of his evidence he swears: " I heard no intimation from the Board that my securitios were insufficient." Toward the close of the evidence he swears that Dr. Mullen told him that " the Board did not consider my bid responsible." Here is a direct contradiction. It is very evident that had this man been sub jected to a cross examination by the defense, as was their right, his gross falsehoods and misstatements would have been o apparent that no one, not even the committee, would have had the hardihood to quote him as authority for any t ateraent. Again, he swears: " Before the bids were opened, Mr. Lord, whom i was informed 1 bidder for the iron work, made me a proposition, and wished me to withdraw my bid for the iron work. In order to compensate the party who had bid for tlie iron work with me, Lord ngws-id to pay $500 if he got the work." Whereupon he, Dunlap, withdrew his bid. Baggot, his silent puttier and man Friday, swears: I know of Mr. Dunlap withdraw ing his bid for the iron work. Mr. Dunn got me to go and ee Dunlap. and get him to withdraw in favor of Lord and Bryant, and as an inducement to us, he (Dunn) told me that the balance of the contract would be ours. saw Dunlap, and he agreed in consideration of that promise to withdraw his bid on the iron w ork." Who is the liar? Dunlap or his man Friday ' Most likely both! Aud it is upon such testimony, taken in tbe secret recess of a committee room, without being subject to crossexamination, that we are called upon to blacken the characters of respectable and honorable men. Hut this is not all. Dunlap further swears: "Sometime after the bids were opened, Mr. Bag gott said to me that Dr. B. F. Mullen wanted his brother, Dr. Alex. Mullen, to have an interest in the work. After conferring with Keed, Baggott, and Dr. A. Mullen, it was agreed that he, Dr. A. Mullen, should nave one fourth interest in the work. Acliev I per cent, to be paid in proportion by all. This was a written agreement, and witnessed by Dr. Lynch, and was w ritten in his office." In his written statement, or memorandum, which the committee or some other person has altered to suit the report of the committee, and which we submit marked "A," Dunlap says that Dr. H. F. Mullen returned "sometime in the latter part of May' Dr. M.J. Lynch, another of the prosecuting witnesses, swears: Ab tne first thing Mr. Dunlap brought to my notice was that Dr. Alex. Mullen was, in connection with others, secret partners in his (Dunlap) bid." The "written agreement" is lying before us, and bears date the eleventh of May. docs not say one word about Mr. Achey, and is not witnessed by Dr. Lynch. So in the abo-, e short statement of Dunlap there are five distinct falsehoods: 1st, that the contract with Alex. Mullen was made after the bids were opened, they not being opened until after Dr. B. F. Mullen returned, while tlie contract bears date some weeks before; 2d, that it was at the instance of Dr. B. F. Mullcu that his brother Alexander was made a partner; 3d, that anything was provided in the contract for Achey; 4th, that the written agreement was witnessed by Dr. Lynch; and 5th, that it was written in Lynch 's office, it having had an existence previous to Lynch's knowiug anything about it. Is it not asking too much of public credulity that upon the evidence of such a man, the fair name of not only the living but the dead should be blackened and dishonored? We could show other material contradictions in his evidence, but it is hardly ne cessary. This brings us to the consideration of the last point is reference to the contract. According to the estimate of work done by the contractors, upon measurement of the work by Messrs. Mc Kim k Hodgeson, architects, the amount is $17,23H 20. Not content with this estimate, the committee employed another architect, Mr. J. L. Smithmver, to make an estimate for them, and he brings in the amount at $40,2b'2 2b. Showing a difference of $6,975 94. It may be necessary here to ask who is this Mr. Smithmver ''. We ran answer the question. He was employed by his part) friend-, the Com iiiis.-ioiu.'r- of St. Joteph county, to build a county jail. And be was afterwards dismissed by the same men for incompetency and malfeasance in office. And this is the competent and honest architect, whose estimate is to overturn the estimate of cooqieteut men. Unable to do the work himself, he employed a Mr. Hooper; a millwright, to help him do the measurement and maka the estimate! And for his most important services, be had the modesty of putting in the following bill, which wc copy entire us evidence of Kepublicrn modesty and Kepublicsn economy: Expense of the Architectural Branch of Investigation of the Sorthern Prison. iKDtAMArotjs, Ind., February B, iMft. For drawiur mnterialü 914 50 " traveling expenses 33 OS " teams... 33 no " assistant 7s 00 " help li 00 " tralin ex p. nndpielp 6 50 " Frofesfclcnal Charit- for estimating and nienmiring tlie work, (amounting n t4u.2:i,l 1 jterceat) 403 3 Total KecWved . r.71 3 : i $541 -X John I.. SxiTuru. Architect of the Committee. Go it, Smithmyer, while you can. It is no: ofie.i you belong to the " Architectural branch " of such a distinguished committee! Talk about the salaries, indeed, of Directors, after this exhibition of Kepublicrn economy ! But Smithmver made his estimate; and is not Smithmver u great man and a noted architect, "the architect of the committee,'' aud does he not belong to the "architectural brauch of the investigation of the Northern Prison '? And it he can neither incisure nor estimate himself is he not entitled to have au assistant, a millright, who can, and is he not entitled to "help" besides, and should he not be Allowed his "professional charge"? tire-it is Smithmver! (heat is his assistant, the millright! An 1 great is the committee that employed theui! The tiling is too ridiculous for serious consideration. et we jiresume it may lie neccspary to sh w from his assisUnt, Mr. Hooper, evidence that Smithmyer's estimate is not entitled to any weight. Mr. Hooper swears: "We were not very e plicit about the iron work which is inside the wall, as we could not get at it," and again "wc made nn estimate of all the lumlier and lim licr in the House except 10,600 feet, which is in the temporary partition, ami the trimmings of si xteen doors." And this is the intelligent estimate that is to -et a.-ide the estimate of architects who w ere "explicit" in arriving at the measurement of everything! But we have a Mr. Hodgson brought in here, who on one day can estimate the work at $47,00 and then after being rubbed down by his Kepub lican keeper-, can come ill the next day, and make a different swear on the matter. Vet the c iiiimittcf ref'u-ed to summon Mr. McKim, who had measured the work accurately, and who would hae exiosed the humbug and unprofes siou il tricks of these little architects. Was this fair or just? PAT or THK niBECTOBS ANp WABPLX. In reference to the pay of tlie Directors, all that i necess.uv to be said on that subject isth:-. that the $1,000 received by c ich, included not only nearly two years' pay, but their traveling expen.-es, which must have been very he ivy while they were traveling all over the State -eekiic: a location. Every person in the State must know tii.it it would cost not less than $6 or $7 a day for traveling exiienses in this Sute on the rail roads, especially where the distance traveled ht ' day i.- short, I10111 city to citv, us thus committee. - - 01 Mr Sco'ev did not receive $3. 5,'4 for Iiis seniles, nor has he been uid as Warden, though his account as Mich has lieen allowed by the Directors. The very sUtement of warrants jaidat the State Treasury, on account of the prison, shows that he onlv received altout $'J,f"'l0, and this included his pay, traveling expenses, and all. The disbursement of $46,000 made by him was for nil the expenses of prisoners, guards, clothing, provisions, etc , and even of this amount over J-.'. (10 w is piid back for the Southern Prison for clothing furnished, and his rep art made tu this very Legislature show - 1h.1t he has ,,n hand" in good order. St ite protcrtv to the amount of $14. it; I :.

ance of $3 per dar te enona-u td sa that it him for 1 is in evidence that such lawyers as Moses Jenkin son, Esq., Chairman of this committee, Jonathan W. Gordon, tbe Republican Clerk of tbe House. J udge Major and tlie Attorney General decided that the Directors were entitled to their traveling expenses, aud as Mr. Seeley had accompanied them round the State, and ' had rished other prisons iu other States in order to make himself thoroughly acquainted with tlte business. $3 a day was allowed him as a fair equ:valent for traveling extenses. His .-;, mtmeut a so long before tbe locution of the prison, tor which, be it understood, he h is not received one cent, was because tbe Directors expected, at tbe time of his appointment, that the location would be made in a verv short time, and he would have to select the prisoner! lers from the lower prison and prepare himself for hi r lus duties THE COSl OF KLLPIMi IHK COSvlCTS. In regard to tlie coat of everv well informed iersou must der the arrangement at the Northern Prison, JU.-l S HiW UmMVU IUI J IV, PUIIKICUI " commodutions. with a large guard force to board, etc , and with oulv a comparative! J small Boa her of convicts requiring just as much "help" as a large number, worked, too, outside tbe building. rer4u1nr.fr many more guards to prevent their P4'' the v 01 keeping them must he lrer tban ln y rerulai prison. the state aiditsml The committee travel out of their war to ataaS the Stale Auditor, and charge that be no authority to audit and puv anv money 01 of the construction of th-7100, above the $M, (Uli appropriated by the Legislature. If the committee can lie made to understand the 1 ing and force of the English language, we respectfully invite thci'. attention to the provi of the law: Sec IL In order to carry out the provisions (the erection of a new prison) of this act, there is hereby appropriated the sum of fifty thousand dollars, out of anv inonev in the treasutv. Sec. 12, The necessary expenses of said prison, aad the control and management thereof, shnll be paid out of the State Treasury under such regulations and restrictions as may be adopted by the Board of Control, and, as far as practicable, in conformity with tbe practice and usages of the 1'resent Sute Prison. Now is there a lawyer in Indiana with an ounce of brains in his head that does not see at once that the $50,000 appropriated in section 11 is onlr for the erection of a prison, while the 12th makes an unlimited annronriation for the 1 sary expenses, and the control and management thereof, including such items as the pay of the Directors, Warden, guards, help, clothing, provisions, etc., etc. We warrant tbe assertion that there is not a lawyer in the State of Indiana, of any note, w ho would peril his professional character by giving it a different construction. Then the committee's statement that the Auditor exceeded his authority is simply false. The committee also travel out of their way to talk about swamp land frauds. Do they think that the people of Indiana have forgotten that one of their State officers was detected in steal ing 16,000 acres of the swamp lands, and that another of them lost tlie Sute $100,U00 in cash." MANIKACTUBINU 1.VIDKXC. The undersigned regret exceedingly that they can not close their report without bringing to the 110f.ee or the House ttie ract that the evKlence of some of the witnesses lias been distorted and changed by some person, and that the memorandum or letter marked A., of Mr. Dunlap, has been changed, and altered, and injected into his evidence, when it had no business there. This letter or memorandum is made a part of this report, in order to show the reprehensible conduct resorted to, to manufacture evidence to suit the occasion. The undersigned are unable to decide what other interpolations and alterations have been made in the evidence of the w itnesses, for the reason that the book of the evidence was in the possession of a Senator, who refused to surrender it. until yesterday afternoon, so no op portunity was afforded the undersigned to compare that with the evidence as originally uken down. OBJ SOT OF TBE INVESTIGATION. To what end and for what purp'4 '''-' I"" pie of Indiana been nut to the heavy expense of this investigation? Tbc answer is easy. Not for any public good, but that the Republicans might get the spending of the money at this prison into their own hands. They hare spread their infamy upon tlie sUtute book of Indiana! In the face and teeth of their denunciation of Michigan City, and their vehement protesU that they would never vote any more money to complete the prison at that point, no sooner do Talbott k Co. agree to surrender their contract than these men forget their denunciations of Michigan City, forget their vehement declarations thai they would vote no tore money to complete the prison, forget tlie report of their committee that Talbott k Co. were not entitled to any more pay, and actually placed upon the sUtutebook a law nuking an appropriation of $13,000 to Talbott k Co., and another appropriation to complete the prison. There is Republican honesty for you! Upon the sUtute book that law wdl re mam as a monument of their infamy and disgrace. Hokai k HrjrrasK, Jas. R. Slack. Tlie Immoral Tariff. The Cincinnati Commercial ( Republican) says that Mr. Lincoln admitted in his Pittsburg speech that the tariff plank of the Chicago platform bad been variously construed, and be very prudently refrained from attempting to give it the proper construction. It probably would not have become him to have sUted that tbe plank aforesaid been constructed exitresslv to iear vn stnictions, yet ruch was the fact. But he Terr frankly admitted that he had not probed tlie tariff question to the bottom. lie did not thoroughly understand it. Indeed we do not know who does understand in all its parts the puule of Pennsylvania protective policy. Mr. Lincoln promised to study the Urifi' question. The raid of office seeker from Pent isylvania and "the great North-west" may not leave him much time for study. But there mc some lessons that will be speedily learned on the tariff question, in which the President will, we hope, share with the conti try. One of these is that tbe protective policy is destructive of commerce and revenue, and that its effect will be to drive the import trade South, while the country will be still demoralised by an enormous system of smuggling. The AdmimiMration I'olic) . The New York Courier uud Enquirer is universally known to be the chief organ of Governor Skward, the SccreUry of Sute. "That paier has an able corre-ndent at Washington, who ha Mr. Skwabd hole confidence, and al ways writes considerately and thoughtf ully What he professe-t to knw, he doe know. Iu the New York CvurUr and Enquirer of the 25th ult , a letter of its distinguished Washington correspondent i published in a very prominent manner. From that letter we copy this pregnant pas- ige : Now this is tbe truth of the matter in a brief sentence; let your readers believe or disbelieve as they think best. No "coarehre" steps will beUken with regard to the collection of the revenue in the Southern j -rt not, le it understood, be cause the Oovemmeitt yields anv right whatever in the matter, hut !causC it 18 dient and unavailing to ei p!e or section disaffected i n eminent, which ieople eminent hope, not without reason, to lag to their allegiance when timeshall thoroughly convince them that the Adminintt-Mtioii doer not single rightful claim of theirs under the Consti tution. I use autheriutive language when I läpeat to you, that thn.c in authority are fullv wen sible of the real condition of the country 's nun !, and chooseto consider tlte act of smuiBini as the f Jpaed brothers, and not rebellious en emie ffaHjiBaS; 1 .n country." .Vhai is the difference between the i!icy proposed by the .StWABii Lincolx administration and that pursued by Mr. Buhanam? And who weie more v.ti: .;. oi,u . aations of the course of tlie last Administration than some of the very distingui-he 1 individual.- who not only 1 support the present nnet. but even a portion. if not all of those who now compose K. " Consistency thou art jewel." Tlie The New Detlruriiaa of Traar." York .Vre cono-s the follow nur in - wi scription on a Uinpl hanging in front of a note 1 business place, which has enjoyed uriuterrupted lirosperity for the last ten years : THIS 8TOKK TO I JET. Ft'RMTTKK YK Ar.: m- irwiirr naming mrn rnmpriw! iv nan imv to rtw 1 lra.V. hr ha- Ino, f. r f..nv vrnr- ill Oil. lOsfaaV . rj, .. ., r.,mmi1 . tB !' ot Iii. p 1. . The News sUte- that 011 Friday last it counted, without Uking any sjie i il ptins to do o. forttsix closed pi n .- of business, on which were the printed or ritten evidence of bankruptcy, blighted hopes ane rniue I prospects. The allabMibiaa, topic of conversation, when men noil in the city of New York, is not " a great fall ing off iu business." or " tlie tightness or the inonev market." but 1- "the de-!ni tion of trade " This is what wraps the great " Commercial Fm porium'" in gloom, and almost iu desroir.

In rein

would

crt force against a peo-

toward the (.eneral