F. 8. CRAWFORD, 
 
 CO.NCOHJ), N. II. 
 
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIEE. MEEEIMAOK COUNTY. 
 
 IN THE MATTER OP 
 
 CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION 
 
 vs. 
 
 GEORGE CLOUGH AND TRUSTEES, 
 
 BEFORE 
 
 HON. E. L. GUSHING, HON. H. A. BELLOWS. 
 HON. WILLIAM HAILE, Beferees. 
 
 FOR PLAINTIFFS: 
 JOHN H. GEORGE, C. W. STANLEY. 
 
 FOR DEFENDANTS: 
 MASON W. TAPPAN, H. P. EOLFE, J. Y. MUGRIDGE. 
 
 Exported by Jay Bead Pembcr, La^r Stenographer. 
 
 TUB PEOPLE STEAM PRESS, CONCORD. 
 1869. 
 
FOR INDEX, SEE PACE 524, 
 
 E F ACE. 
 
 IN October, 1865, as will hereafter appear in the folio wing- 
 pages, on account of the several times repeated assertion of Mr. 
 Joseph A. Gilmore, the then superintendent of the Concord Rail 
 road, that "the conductors were stealing fifty thousand dollars a 
 year," the directors put a detective force upon the cars, and con 
 tinued them for the space of about six weeks; and caused some 
 seventeen hundred dollars in money, more or less, to pass into the 
 hands of the conductors for tickets and fares paid for in the cars. 
 
 The result of the labors of that detective force was made known 
 to John H. George, counsel for, and then clerk of the road, and 
 to no one else in the government of the road. His deductions, 
 in the shape of a report, were given to the directors, the report 
 itself being concealed from them. Upon this representation, made 
 by Mr. George, the directors voted to discharge all the conductors 
 on the Concord road, and on the different roads connected with 
 it, as all were represented as. having embezzled the funds of the 
 road, but no action was commenced against any one of the con 
 ductors, though all were immediately discharged. This happened 
 about the middle of January, 1866. 
 
 February 10, 1866, Mr. Gilmore arid Mr. George found on the 
 person and in the possession of one James Whitcher, of Hooksett, 
 N. H., several hundred tickets, which he said were given him by 
 the conductors of the Concord Railroad, in exchange for brooms 
 and pails, and that the largest share of them were given him by 
 George Clough. Thereupon suits were at once commenced 
 against all the conductors who had any property, including Robert 
 N. Corning, who had not then been in the employ of the railroad 
 for six years; and by a vote of the directors, at a meeting subse 
 quently held, the action of the clerk, Mr. George, and of the su 
 perintendent, Mr. Gilmore, in this matter, was approved. 
 
 Mr. Everett, the conductor on the Manchester and North 
 Weare road, was soon put back and restored to his place, which 
 he has occupied since. James M. Jones has been continued in 
 the employ of the road as conductor till the present time, although 
 the original suit stands at the present time against him on the 
 
 M179212 
 
(locket. Mr. Kendrick, with whom George Clough, in this trial. 
 has been accused of dealing in bogus tickets, has been voted, by 
 the present board of directors, as guiltless of any fraud or ir- 
 regularity while conductor on the road. The suit against Henry 
 Katon was discontinued by the railroad upon their own motion, 
 with no previous knowledge of the defendant. 
 
 Tt is now three years and a half since these suits were com 
 menced, and no single effort has been made to bring Mr. Coming s 
 case to trial; although he has been dead over three years, no effort 
 has been made to summon in the executor of Mr. Coming s estate. 
 
 The basis of these suits was the testimony of said James 
 Whitcher and the detective, James G. Carney, of Lowell, and his 
 corps of assistants, and yet it will be seen, by an examination of 
 the testimony, that said Whitcher, although living within nine 
 miles of the place of hearing, was not brought in as a witness at 
 all, and the tickets which were found in his possession were proved 
 not to have been furnished him by Mr. Clough; while the testi 
 mony of Mr. Carney and his assistants did not show a single fare 
 taken in the cars by Mr. Clough that was not returned on his way 
 bills and paid over to the general ticket agent. 
 
 The entire evidence in this case has been taken down in short 
 hand questions and answers and has been reported at an ex 
 pense of eleven hundred dollars, and the printing has involved an 
 expense of thirteen hundred dollars more. All this expense has 
 "been incurred by Mr. Clough, in addition to the expense oc 
 casioned him by this trial, in order that any one and every one 
 who has either an interest in the road or feels any interest either 
 in the defendant or the trial, may have a full and fair opportunity 
 of judging for themselves of the true state of this controversy. 
 The public ear was burdened, for three years previous to the trial, 
 with all sorts of false and malicious stones, and now all the facts 
 as they are can be seen and read of all men. 
 
 On the 28th of May following the commencement of this suit, 
 Mr. George, then clerk of the road, went before the stockholders, 
 at their annual meeting, and gave a detailed ex parte statement of 
 his agency in the discoveries made by himself and Mr. Carney. 
 The stockholders gave him and his board of directors an uncon 
 ditional discharge, with the exception of Mr. Stickney. 
 
 Soon after this, as will be seen, Mr. Carney was employed in 
 his capacity as detective by the United States Treasury Depart- 
 
Ill 
 
 ment, but was soon detected in taking a thousand dollar bribe 
 from one Jolin Leighton, whose name is familiar to many, and he 
 received a discharge from the service of the United States, which, 
 if not honorable, was unconditional. 
 
 To the public generally, and more especially to those connected 
 with railroads, a careful perusal of this trial is very respectfully 
 commended. The judgment of the referees has been given. On 
 that no comments arc made none arc necessary. These pages 
 contain every word of the evidence on the trial. As will be seen, 
 it covers the entire history of Mr. dough s life during the time he 
 was a conductor on the Concord Railroad ; and the details of every 
 one of his business transactions, from the time when, a mere boy, 
 he started out from home with all his worldly effects tied up in a 
 pocket handkerchief, down to the time of the commencement of 
 this suit, have been gone into, and arc embodied in the evidence. 
 The way in which he has acquired his property is here stated; a 
 comparison of the amounts returned by him from day to day, 
 while he was conductor, with those of other conductors who were, 
 from time to time, on the same trains, is given; and the testimony 
 of the detectives who followed him like hounds on the track, day 
 after day for six weeks, unknown to him, trying every method in 
 their power to "spot" him, is set forth in their own language. 
 
 Mr. Clough feels that he has been unjustly and wrongfully pur 
 sued; and, conscious of his own innocence, he has felt compelled, 
 by way of vindication, to place before the public all the facts, as 
 they were elicited by the trial. To the candid and impartial 
 judgment of that public he submits his cause. 
 
 Sept. 1,1869. 
 
HEARING. 
 
 [FIRST DAY, July 21, 1S68.] 
 
 CONCORD, N. H., JULY 21, 1868. 
 
 At a hearing in the matter of the Concord liailroad Corporation vs. 
 George CJough and Trustees, before Hon. E. L. CUSIIING, Hon. H. A. 
 BELLOWS, aud Hon. WILLIAM HAILE, Referees, there appeared in be 
 half of the Plaintiff Corporation, Mr. JOHN H. GEORGE, of Concord, and 
 Mr. C. VV. STANLEY, of Manchester; and in behalf of the Defendant, 
 Mr. MASON W. TAPPAN, of Bradford, Mr. H. P. ROLFE, of Concord, and 
 Mr. J. Y. MUQLUDGE, of Concord. 
 
 Before submitting the opening statement in behalf of the plaintiffs, 
 Mr. George, counsel for the corporation, read the writ and the returns 
 thereon, and the specifications, which are as follows : 
 
 WRIT. 
 
 [L. S.] THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIEE. 
 
 MERRIMACK, ss. To thz Sheriff of any County in this State, or his 
 Deputy. 
 
 We command you to attach the goods or estate of George Clough, of 
 Concord, in said County of Merrirnack, Esquire, to the value of one 
 hundred thousand dollars, and summon him (if to be found in your 
 precinct,) to appear before the Supreme Judicial Court, to be holden at 
 Concord, in said County of Merrimack, on the first Tuesday of April 
 nexc, to answer to the Concord Railroad Corporation, a corporation es 
 tablished by law, and having its place of business at Conjord aforesaid,. 
 
 In a plea of the case, for that the said defendant, at said Concord, on 
 the day of the date of this writ, being indebted to the plaintiffs in the 
 sum of one hundred thousand dollars for goods, wares and merchandise 
 bargained and sold by the plaintiffs to the said defendant; and in the 
 further sum of the same amount, for goods, wares and ni3rchandise sold 
 and delivered by the plaintiffs to the said defendant; and in a further 
 sum of the same amount for work done and materials for the same pro 
 vided by the plaintiffs for the said defendant, and at the said defend- 
 ant b request; and in a further sum of the same amount for money by 
 the plaintiffs lent to the said defendant at the said defendant s request; 
 and in a further sum of the same amount for money by the plaintiffs 
 paid for the use of said defendant, at the said defendant s request ; and 
 in a further sum of the same amount of money had anil received by the 
 said defendant to the plaintiffs ; and in a further sum of the same" amount 
 for interest, for the plaintiffs forbearance, at the said defendant s re 
 quest, of moneys due aud owing from the said defendant to the said 
 plaintiffs; and in a further sum of the same amount for. money found to 
 be due from the said defendant to the said plaintiffs, on account stated 
 between them ; in consideration thereof promised to pay the said sev 
 eral sums to the said plaintiffs on demand. Yet no p irt of said sum* 
 has ever been paid. To the damage of the plaintiffs, as they say,, the- 
 sum of one hundred thousand dollars. 
 
 We also command you to attach the money, goods, chattels, rights 
 
and credits of the said Clough in the hands and possession of Henry P. 
 IRolfe, of said Concord, Esquire, and also in the hands and possession 
 *of the Union Bank, a corporation existing by law in said State, and 
 Jiaving its place of business in said Concord, 
 
 To the value of one hundred thousand dollars ; and summon said 
 trustees, if to be found in your precinct, to appear at said court and 
 tshow cause, if any they have, why execution should not issue against 
 them for the damages which may be received by said plaintiffs against 
 said Clough. 
 
 And make return of this writ, with your doings therein. 
 
 Witness, IRA PEELEY, ESQUIRE, 
 
 The -tenth day of February, Anno Domini, 1866. 
 
 J. D. SLEEPER, Clerk. 
 [Internal Revenue Stamp.] 
 
 MERRIMACK, ss., February 10, 1866. 
 
 I attached all the lands and tenements in the City of Concord, in 
 said County, in which the within named defendant has any right, title, 
 interest or estate ; and on the same day I left at the dwelling house of 
 Charles F. Stuart, the city clerk of said city, a true and attested copy 
 af this writ, and of this, my return, endorsed thereon, at 10 of the clock, 
 in the afternoon of said day. J. L. PICKERING, Deputy Sheriff. 
 
 FEES: Service, .23 ; travel, .10; paid clerk, .20 ; copy, 2.00; at 
 tachment, 1.00; travel to clerk s office, .10 ; revenue stamp, .15 $3.78. 
 
 MERRIMACK, ss., February 10, 1866. 
 
 I attached, as the property of the within named George Clough, four 
 Imndred shares in the capital stock of the Concord Railroad Corporation, 
 ;)>y giving in hand to John H. George, clerk of said corporation, an at 
 tested copy of this writ, with an attested copy of this, my return, there- 
 con, at nine o clock in the afternoon of said day. 
 
 J. L. PICKERING, Deputy Sheriff. 
 
 MERRIMACK, ss , February 15, 1866. 
 
 1 then attached the money, goods, chattels, rights and credits of the 
 within defendant, in the hands and possession of the within named 
 Chiion I>ank and Henry P. Rolf e, trustees, and summoned said trustees 
 fto appear as within commanded, by giving in hand to A. C. Pierce, the 
 ^cashier of the Union Bank, an attested copy of the within writ ; and on 
 -the ilOth day of February, by leaving at the usual place of abode of 
 Heury P. Rolfe an attested copy of this writ. I have also made service 
 -onfthe wjthin named Clough, by leaving at his usual place of abode an 
 ;atfcested copy of the within writ. 
 
 JONATHAN L. PICKERING, Deputy Sheriff. 
 
 FEES: Three services, .69; travel, .30; three copies, etc., 3.00 $3.99. 
 
 MERRIMACK ss., February 19, 1866. 
 
 I attached all the land and tenements in the town of Dunbarton, in 
 said county, in which the within named defendant has any right, title, 
 interest or estate ; and on the same day I left at the dwelling house of 
 
Gilbert B. French a true and attested copy of this writ, and of this* 
 my return, endorsed thereon, at ten of the clock in the forenoon of said 
 day. J. L. PICKERING, Deputy Sheriff. 
 
 FEES: Service, .23 ; travel, .80; paid clerk, .20; copy, 2.00; at 
 tachment, 1.00; travel to clerk s office, 1.20; revenue stamp, .15 $5.58- 
 
 SPECIFICATIONS. 
 
 MERRIMACK ss. SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT. April Term, 186GL 
 CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION v. GEORGE CLOUGH. 
 
 In the above action the plaintiff seeks to recover of the defendant thes 
 sum of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), being for moneys re 
 ceived by the defendant while acting as passenger conductor upon th.e 
 plaintiff s railroad for the fares of passengers over the plaintiff s rail 
 road and connecting railroads, not accounted for or paid over to the. 
 plaintiff. 
 
 Also for the value of passenger tickets, the property of the plaintiff^ 
 over the plaintiff s and connecting railroads, disposed of by the defend 
 ant and converted to his own use while acting as such conductor. 
 
 Also for the fares of passengers passed free by the defendant while 
 acting as such conductor, over the roads aforesaid, without right and. 
 for the defendant s benefit. 
 
 Also for moneys of the plaintiff received by the defendant while in? 
 pursuance of his duties as conductor as aforesaid, and not accounted 
 for or paid over to the plaintiff. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF ALONZO H. WESTON. 
 
 Mr. Alonzo H. Weston, of Manchester, was called in behalf of the 
 plaintiff, and was duly sworn and testified as follows : 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Weston, will you be kind enough to 
 state what is your business and where you live ? 
 
 A. I live at Manchester. 
 
 Q. How long have you lived at Manchester and been in business 
 there ? 
 
 Mr. Haile. He has not stated what his business was. 
 
 Q. What did you say your business was ? I don t know as you 
 stated that. 
 
 A. Clothing business. 
 
 Q. How long have you been in that business ? 
 
 A. About three years* 
 
 Q. Will you state whether you purchased any tickets of James 
 WhitcherV If so, when, and to what extent ? 
 
 [Here followed a long discussion between counsel as to the admia^ 
 eibility of evidence that Weston purchased tickets of Jim Whitcheiv 
 unless it was shown that in some way the tickets came from Clougfc~ 
 The referees ruled that the evidence might go in, but that unless it 
 
6 
 
 was shown by plaintiff s counsel that Clough furnished the tickets to 
 Whitcher the evidence would be incompetent] 
 
 Q. You stated that you were in the clothing business at Manches 
 ter, and had been for the last three years. "\Yhom did you succeed in 
 business ? 
 
 A. Jacob Morse. 
 
 Q. "Will you state whether or not, if you ever purchased tickets? If 
 so, of whom ? If you ever purchased tickets of James Whitcher, or 
 not ? Give the times, dates, and amounts, so far as you are able, and 
 .the kinds of tickets. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We shall be very glad to have all these tickets put in. 
 
 Mr. George. I cannot tell all these. These tickets came from 
 Whitcher himself ; those are entirely a different lot of tickets. 
 
 Q. You might state how many you purchased of Whitcher. State 
 when you purchased them, as far as you recollect, and all the circum 
 stances. 
 
 A. I could not say when the first was. 
 
 Q. Within how long? Was it after you went into business or 
 before ? 
 
 A. It was after I went into business ; yes, sir. It was after Aug. 1st. 
 
 Q. After August 1st, loGa? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, now state how much dealing you had with Mr. Whitcher; 
 and what portion was paid in tickets, and what kind of tickets they 
 were. 
 
 A. I could not tell anywhere near what portion in tickets, because 
 I credited everything as cash, because I considered them as cash. 
 
 Q. Make the statement to the referees as near as you can. How 
 much was your business with Mr. Whitcher? 
 
 A. It was sixty-seven dollars and fifty cents. 
 
 Q. Did you have any other trades besides what your books show ? 
 
 A. No, sir: not that J know of. 
 
 Q. Now, what portion of that was paid in tickets, according to your 
 best judgment and recollection? 
 
 A. Well, I couldn t tell. Sometimes he would come and pay me 
 
 I see $7 twice, $10.50, $14, and $29, and some proportion of these 
 were tickets. That is all I know. 
 
 Q. State as near as you can. 
 
 A. I have forgot all about it; I supposed the thing was dropped. 
 
 Q. State as near as you can. Your attention was called to it at the 
 time of Whitcher s arrest? 
 
 A. It was. 
 
 Q. Did you make a statement at that time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; I think I did; I don t recollect about it. 
 
 Q. Mr. Weston, did you make a statement at the time of Mr. 
 Whitcher s arrest? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Was that statement written down and read to you by me, with 
 regard to the amount of business that you had done with Mr. Whitcher 
 and the proportion paid for in tickets ? 
 
 A. I made a statement, and it was written down ; quite a long one, 
 I think. I don t seem to recollect whether it was addressed to me or 
 not ; I know I made a statement. 
 
 Ql Did you make a statement in regard to the proportion of tickets ? 
 
A. I presume I did. 
 
 Q. Don t you know you did ? 
 
 A. 1 think 1 did. 
 
 Q. Was that written down and read to you? 
 
 A. Not that I remember of. 
 
 Q. Was the statement that you made at that time true ? 
 
 A. Yes sir; so far as I could remember, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say there was a long statement written ? 
 
 A. I suppose there was a man writing there all the time, I know. 
 
 Q. Who was it ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Now, will you state, if you please, just as well as you can, the 
 proportion of $67.50 that was paid you in tickets, that you received 
 from Mr. Whitcher, according to your best recollection ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say for any certainty. 
 
 Q. State as well as you can. 
 
 A. It might have been a quarter ; and it might have been a half. 
 That is as near as I can say. 
 
 Q. On what roads were these tickets ? 
 
 A. Manchester to Boston. 
 
 Q. What did. you do with these tickets? 
 
 A. On my way to Boston 1 rode on them. 
 
 Q. Did you sell any from your store ? 
 
 A. I did, once or twice. 
 
 Q. When you sold them, for how much did you sell them ? 
 
 A. A dollar and seventy-five cents to Boston. 
 
 Q. What was the regular fare from Manchester to Boston ? 
 
 A. About two dollars. I think, at that time. 
 
 Q. How many tickets had you on hand at the time Mr. Whitcher 
 was arrested ? 
 
 A. I think it was either two or three. They were coupon tickets, I 
 think. That is, they were if I recollect right, they were tickets 
 from Boston to Concord or Hooksett. I guess one was Hooksett or Sun- 
 cook. I know they were small not worth much, you know. I think 
 there were two or three. 
 
 Q. From Boston? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You said from Boston. 
 
 A. I don t think there was any from Boston. I had rode on them 
 up as far as Manchester, and they had been punched. 
 
 Q. Y r ou had rode on them ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were any tickets punched tickets partially so ; that is, punch 
 ed a portion of the way ? 
 
 A. Not that I 1 don t seem to remember that they were. 
 
 Q. Don t remember how that fact is ? 
 
 A. No, I do not. 
 
 Q. How was it with regard to your predecessor, if you know? 
 
 A. I don t know anything about it. I had heard [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. Did you ever see any tickets in their hands ? [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. It seems to me that is hardly admissible. [Ex- 
 cepted to by plaintiff s counsel.] 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} How happened you to be trading in tickets 
 with Mr. Whitcher? 
 
8 
 
 A. I knew that Mr. White here, my neighbor, had tickets now and 
 then ; and I think I got, perhaps, one of him ; and I think 1 must have 
 asked him where he got them. That is the only way how I happened 
 
 Q. Did you go to Mr. Whitcher, or Mr. Whitcher come to you ? 
 
 A. I could n t say. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you, sir, if Mr. Morse had any Concord Railroad 
 tickets had any tickets on hand, at the time you bought him out, to 
 your knowledge ; and if you, yourself, knew that he had them of Mr. 
 Whitcher ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. State what you know about Mr. Morse s having railroad tickets, 
 and where he obtained them ? 
 
 A. I think Mr. Morse had some tickets to Boston. That was before 
 I bought him out And that is all I know about it. I might, possibly, 
 have had one of them. I could not tell certainly. 
 
 Q. From whom did he have them ? 
 
 A. I don t know, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you see Mr. Morse sell tickets, or know of his selling tick 
 ets from Manchester to Boston ? If so, at what rate ? 
 
 A. 1 do not know. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Just a single question, Mr. Weston. I 
 understood you to say that at the time you were called upon, at Man 
 chester, you had two or three tickets. What were these tickets? 
 Where did they go ? 
 
 A, They went from Boston. My impression is that one went from 
 Boston to Suncook, or Hooksett, and the other one from Boston to Con 
 cord. I know I rode on them as far as Manchester as far as I wanted 
 to. 
 
 Q. Were these coupon tickets ? 
 
 A. Well, I think they were card tickets like that [referring to tick 
 ets upon table]. Each run through ; and of course as I rode to Man 
 chester they would be punched. 
 
 Q. Were they coupon tickets ? 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Had the Boston and Lowell or Nashua and Lowell part been 
 taken off from the tickets? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. You don t know how that was ? 
 
 A. No/ 
 
 Q. And you think you had some two or three of them at the time? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) And these, you have stated, you had of 
 Whitcher ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Over which road did these tickets go? 
 Over the Manchester and Lawrence, or the Nashua? 
 
 A. I had some on both. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM WHITE. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Mr. White, you are a trader at Manchester? 
 A. I have been, sir. 
 Q. For how long ? 
 
9 
 
 A. Twenty years. 
 
 Q. And you were in trade there at the time Mr. Whitcher was ar 
 rested, in February, 1866. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you state what your trade was ? 
 
 A. Dry goods. 
 
 Q. Have you bought tickets of Mr. James Whitcher, over the Con 
 cord Eailroad ? Had you prior to that time ? 
 
 A. 1 have had dealings with Mr. Whitcher, and I have had tickets 
 of him occasionally. 
 
 Q. To what extent ? 
 
 A. It would be impossible for me to tell. 
 
 Q. Tell as nearly as you can. 
 
 A. I don t know that I have any means whereby I could tell. I 
 could tell the amount of business I have had in a year or two, or four 
 or five years. It was some four hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. Did you give any credit ? 
 
 A. I had orders on his grocery store for merchandise, to offset his 
 account as cash, the whole thing. Therefore I couldn t state. 
 
 Q. Give as near as you are able. 
 
 A. The fact is, the whole thing would have to be guess work. 
 
 Q. Give the whole amount. 
 
 A. From a third to one half. 
 
 Q. What was the whole amount ? 
 
 A. Four hundred and thirty dollars ; and I commenced September, 
 1864. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} From what time to what time? 
 
 A. September, 1864, to January, 1866. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did you have some tickets on hand at the 
 time? Are these some of the tickets that you had? [Showing some 
 tickets to witness.] 
 
 A. I could not state. I don t recollect as you took any tickets, sir, 
 
 Q. Don t you recollect of any ? 
 
 A. You might have done so ; I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Are these similar? 
 
 A. I should say, of course, some of them resemble these. 
 
 Q. You cannot tell whether you handed me those two tickets f 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Did you ever deal with Whitcher before 1864 in tickets ? 
 
 A. I should think not ; but I could not be certain about it. 
 
 Q. What did you allow Whitcher ? 
 
 A. I think twenty-five cents less than the regular fare. I should 
 say, as a general thing, that that was the case. 
 
 Q. Did you sell them from the store ? 
 
 A. I may have disposed of some of them. 
 
 Q. What did you sell them for ? 
 
 A. At the same price. 
 
 Q. Did you sell some to Mr. Cutter, or his clerk? Did you sell 
 some to Mr. John D. Patterson? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of selling any to Mr. Patterson. I don t 
 think I ever did. 
 
 Q. Won t you allow me to refresh your recollection if I can ? Have 
 you any recollection of any conversation with me at the time .of Mr. 
 Whitcher s arrest, and saying that you had bought the tickets and paid 
 
10 
 
 for ttfem, and that if I took them you wanted your pay ? 
 
 A. It seems to me that conversation must have been with somebody 
 else ; I don t recollect it, upon my word. 
 
 Q. Won t you examine these tickets ? 
 
 A. I might have said that ; but it has gone from my ir.ind now. I 
 forgot it ; 1 have had so much else which has shoved it out, I suppose. 
 
 Q. I will ask you the same question I asked Mr. Weston : whether 
 your neighbors were dealing in these same tickets with Mr. Whitcher ? 
 
 A. Well, there was a time when the package ticket was sold by Mr. 
 Merrill and the other broker there. It was common talk about there. 
 
 Q. 1 am asking now about these tickets purchased of Mr. Whitcher. 
 I want to know if you have any personal knowledge in regard to your 
 neighbors dealing in this same kind of ticket with Mr. Whitcher. In 
 the first place, if you know anything about their having dealings? 
 
 A, 1 don t know about other parties having tickets. 
 
 Q. How is it? You have rode in the cars, I suppose, with Mr. 
 Clough ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. Ever passed you free ? [Objected to.] 
 [SECOND DAY, July 22, 18fc 8.J 
 
 The Chairman. We rule it to be inadmissible, unless the plaintiff 
 further shows that, as the result of this transaction, money, or some 
 thing which as between the parties ought to be considered money, 
 came to the defendant s hands. 
 
 Mr. George. Now, then, supposing I show that he passed people free ? 
 
 The Chairman. We rule that that is not admissible. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did you know Mr. Starkcy, who was a 
 brakeman upon Mr. Clough s train. 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether a dress was bought for his wife at your 
 store? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. George then submitted, in writing, what it was proposed by 
 plaintiff s counsel to show, viz: 
 
 We propose to show that Mrs. Starkey, wife of a brakeman upon Mr. 
 Clough s train, purchased a dress of the witness : and that Starkey, in 
 consideration of such purchase, agreed to pass him over the road ; and 
 that Mr. Clough, as the conductor of the train, did so pass him at 
 Starkey s request. 
 
 The Chairman. I believe we all think that this testimony now 
 stands on the same ground, so far as this is concerned, as what we have 
 already ruled upon. We do not conclusively rule it out, but we rule it 
 out for the present, until some evidence is offered to show that Mr. 
 Clough derived some equivalent of money for it. We consider this to 
 stand on the same ground as the last ruling. As a matter of discretion, 
 we do not think this evidence is now admissible. We think there 
 should be some further evidence tending to show that Mr. Clough de 
 rived a benefit from the transaction. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mttgridge.} I understand, Mr. White, that you com 
 menced your transactions in the ticket line with Whitcher, some time 
 in 1864, or about that time was it? 
 
 A. Well, to the best of my recollection ; I am not positive on that 
 point. 
 
 Q. You know Starkey? 
 
11 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether he was upon the road in the capacity of 
 a brakenym, at that time ? 
 
 A. Well, I really couldn t fix it in my mind whether he was, or not. 
 
 Q. Don t you recollect how that was ? 
 
 A. It seems to me that I didn t know Starkey as early as that, as 
 connected with the road ; I am not sure on that point. 
 
 Q. You say you received tickets of Whitcher from time to time-^ 
 did you receive tickets from other persons between the times you have 
 mentioned, in 64 and C6. 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Did you get them of Starkey ? 
 
 A. I had tickets of Starkey, but it wasn t in 1864. It was along 
 just before this. 
 
 Q. I say from 64 to 66 ? 
 
 A. Those I had of him was along sometime previous to this affair. 
 
 Q. It was between 64 and 66 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you have them of other people ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Did you send to Boston and get them of parties there ? 
 
 A. I have bought tickets in Boston for parties coming from Mon 
 treal, and sold to parties coming up that would make me some dis 
 count. 
 
 Q. Which you got North ? 
 
 A. I did not send there. I have had parties come to me ; for in 
 stance, coming from Ogdensburgh or Potsdam. 
 
 Q. Have you not procured a good many tickets in that way ? 
 
 A. I have a great many. At that time the fare from Ogdens 
 burgh to Boston was nine dollars, and the fare from there to Manchester 
 was nine dollars. Therefore people would buy their tickets to Boston, 
 because it was the same price as it was to Manchester, and sell them 
 for whatever they could get. 
 
 Q. Did you not procure a good many tickets in that way, from per 
 sons who purchased their tickets up North to go to Boston ? 
 
 A. As I said before, I have, a good many. 
 
 Q. And, as you said, you have had them from parties going North ? 
 
 A. Not as many. 
 
 Q. You have had some that way ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You say you had tickets from other parties. Did you ever have 
 a ticket, in your life, from George Clough? 
 
 A. I never did, to my recollection. 
 
 Q. Now, sir. you have spoken of tickets that you had from time to 
 time of Mr. Whitcher ; will you be kind enough to state what kind of 
 tickets those were, and from what stations to what stations, did those 
 tickets that you had of Whitcher go, as a general thing ? 
 
 A. Well, a portion of the tickets were package tickets. 
 
 Q. What proportion of them, do you think, were package tickets, 
 and between what stations upon the road did these package tickets run ? 
 
 A. I should not want to undertake to say what proportion ; because 
 I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Give us your best recollection upon that subject. 
 
 A. It would only have to be from recollection. 
 
12 
 
 Q. Let us have that. 
 
 A. Thirty-three per cent., or a third of them. 
 
 Q. Then you think that a third of the tickets that you had from 
 Whitcher were package tickets ? Now, sir, between what stations and 
 on what lines of road were those ? On what line of road were these 
 tickets to go speaking now of package tickets ? 
 
 A. Understand that one-third is more or less. 
 
 Q. Yes, sir ; I understand that is your best recollection. 
 
 A. These were on the road from Manchester to Boston, by the way 
 of Lowell. 
 
 Q. Now we will take the portion remaining. You may explain what 
 package tickets are. 
 
 A. Well, they are issued by the company in packages, at a discount ; 
 I suppose a discount from the regular 
 
 Q. Tariff? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I take it so. 
 
 Q. After taking out one-third that you received from Whitcher, 
 what kind of tickets were those that were left ? 
 
 A. Well, a portion over the other road. 
 
 Q. What road ? 
 
 A. The Lawrence road. 
 
 Q. Between what stations ? 
 
 A. Manchester and Boston. 
 
 Q. Manchester and Boston Manchester, Lawrence and Boston, on 
 the Maine road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, will you be kind enough to state what number of the tick 
 ets that you had of Whitcher went that way, over that road to Boston ? 
 
 A. My recollection could only be this, that it was less than the 
 other. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to indicate your best recollection on 
 that subject? 
 
 A. It was less, as I said. 
 
 Q. Then you mean those going to Boston that way, were less than 
 those going to Boston by Lowell ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How much less ? Have you an idea ? 
 
 A. Not so many by considerable. 
 
 Q. What were the balance that you had of Whitcher, I mean. 
 After taking out the package tickets, and the tickets to Boston by way 
 of Lawrence, where were the balance of tickets that you had of 
 Whitcher, and what kind were they ? 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Do you mean that the tickets by way of 
 Lawrence were package tickets ? 
 
 A. Miscellaneous varying. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Between what stations ? 
 
 A. Well, they were generally, I think, from Manchester to Boston. 
 There were a few from Concord to Boston. 
 
 Q. But over the line of the Lowell road, generally? 
 
 A. I should think, as a general thing to a large amount as near 
 as my memory would serve me. 
 
 Q. State whether you got any tickets from Whitcher, other than 
 those you have indicated in kind, at any time ? . 
 
 A. I could not say that I recollect positively. 
 
13 
 
 Q. Aside from those tickets that you have spoken of, the package 
 tickets ; tickets from Manchester to Boston, by way of Lawrence ; 
 tickets from Manchester to Boston, by way of Lowell ; and some few, as 
 you say, from Concord to Boston, by way of Lowell, did you get other 
 tickets from Whitcher ? 
 
 A. . Going anywhere any direction ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. I think 1 had one or two from Manchester to Portsmouth, or 
 down to the Junction, I can t tell which not to any amount. 
 
 Q. Was there any one time more than another when you received 
 more tickets from Mr. Whitcher ? That is, did you receive more tick 
 ets, at or about some particular time, than you did at any other time 
 during your transactions with Whitcher? If so, when? If at any 
 time between 1864 and 1866 you were receiving more tickets than at 
 any other time, won t you be kind enough to indicate that time ? 
 
 A. Well, my mind is 1 could not state whether there was any 
 
 particular time. 
 
 Q. Could you refresh your recollection by your book ? 
 
 A. I might have got more out of him at one time than another. 
 
 Q, Was there any particular time, in reference to this arrest of 
 Whitcher, that you received more tickets than at any other time ? 
 
 A. Well, it may be. It is an impression in my mind. He would 
 send orders, and come in and get orders, and left some tickets. I can t 
 tell you. 
 
 Q. In how large numbers were you accustomed to receive tickets 
 from Whitcher ? How many did you ever receive at any one time from 
 him? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell you. 
 
 Q. Give us your best recollection. 
 
 A. Sometimes a single trip, and sometimes three or four. 
 
 Q. Was there ever a time when you received more than three or four ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say, so that it would be of any use. L might say fif 
 teen dollars at a time. 
 
 Q. You say you had tickets of Starkey. How many did you ever 
 have of Starkey at any one time ? 
 
 A. Well, about all. The larger part that I had was just before 
 this Whitcher affair came up. 
 
 Q- How many did you receive from him at that time ? 
 
 A. I really couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. Give us some kind of an impression. 
 
 A. My impression is nothing unless it comes pretty near the mark, 
 you know. 
 
 Q. Give us the best impression you can of the number of ticketa 
 that you had from Starkey at any one time. 
 
 A. I don t like to go on guess work and impression very well. 
 
 Q. Did you receive ten from him at any one time ? 
 
 A. Might be ten of them. 
 
 Q. Did you receive from him, at some one time, more than twenty- 
 five tickets ? 
 
 A. I should say not. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you didn t receive from him twenty tickets ? 
 
 A. I shouldn t want to say it ; but I should think not. 
 
 Q. At the time he let you have these ten tickets, what kind of 
 tickets were they, and where did they go ? 
 
14 
 
 A. Manchester to Boston. 
 
 Q. Over what road ? 
 
 A. By the way of Lowell. 
 
 Q. State whether all the tickets you had of Starkey were tickets to 
 Boston over the Lowell road. 
 
 A. - Those that 1 had of Starkey were. 
 
 Q. Those that Starkey furnished you were not over the Lawrence 
 road, but all over the Lowell road ? 
 
 A. 1 think so. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) You have been speaking about Starkey 
 furnishing you tickets. About how many times did he furnish you 
 tickets? 
 
 A. Not many times ; two or three times. 1 was passed on the cars. 
 [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. I do not understand that there is any objection yet 
 made to proving that Starkey let him have tickets coming from Clough. 
 The referees do not see any connection between that and the fact that 
 Mr. Starkey may have passed him over the road free. They do not see 
 how that is one of the collateral circumstances. 
 
 Q Did Mr. Starkey s wife buy a dress at your store ? [Objected 
 to and ruled in.] 
 
 (The Chairman.} The counsel brought out, on cross examination, 
 the fact that this witness had tickets from Stafkey. I believe the ref 
 erees are of opinion that the plaintiff is entitled now to inquire as to 
 the circumstances connected with the giving of these tickets ; for in 
 stance, to show how he paid for them, arid all those circumstances. We 
 don t think, if I understand the opinion of the referees, that it opens 
 the case to show that Starkey got him passed over the road free some 
 times ; but that he proposes to show that Starkey was paid for them. 
 
 Q. Will you then answer the question, whether Mrs. Starkey pur 
 chased a dress ? 
 
 A. I not only say that she purchased a dress, but that she had been 
 in the habit of trading with us, and paying for her goods, up to a cer 
 tain point. 
 
 Q. How was it after that point ? 
 
 A. Ihere was an order came in, brought by Hill s express, for some 
 goods ; 1 think a dress pattern. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Jfaile.) Did you state what time this was? 
 
 A. No ; I could not state. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) About what time was it, say? How long 
 before the arrest of Whitcher ? 
 
 A. Oh,, this must have been some little time before that. 
 
 Q. Some time before the arrest of Whitcher? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; of this dress we are now talking of. 
 
 Q. Was it while Mr. Glough was running as conductor? 
 
 A. I presume it was. 
 
 Q. And at that time was Mr. Starkey running as Mr. Clough s 
 brakemar ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Well, sir, how was that dress pattern paid for, if at all ? 
 
 A. Well, I was going on to state. 
 
 Q. I only want to know if it was paid for by tickets ; and, if so, 
 the circumstances under which it was paid ? 
 
15 
 
 A. I could not tell you, sir. This order that I have spoken 
 of came in enclosing a sample that his wife had previously taken, 
 stating that he would pay for it in a few days. / want it understood 
 that the dress was not sold expecting railroad tickets for it ; but it was sold 
 expecting the cash in a few days ; nothing said about any other kind of 
 pay for it but money. 
 
 Q. Well, go on and state how that was paid for. 
 
 A. I will state how he procured it in the first place. I talked with 
 Mr. Hill to know if he trusted Mr. Starkey. I wasn t very anxious 
 to sell the fellow, anyway. 
 
 Q. Go on, and state how that dress was paid for. 
 
 A. I couldn t tell whether he. did pay for that dress or not ; but 
 either that, or else he got another dress afterwards that he didn t pay 
 for. 
 
 Q. I want to know if he paid for it in tickets ? 
 
 A. Whether that is the last charge or not for the last one all I 
 ever got I got in tickets. 
 
 Q. Now, won t you tell how you got them in tickets and why you 
 got them ? Tell us all the circumstances. 
 
 A The simple fact is, that Starkey handed them to me. That is 
 all there was about it. 
 
 Q. How did Mr Starkey get the tickets? 
 
 A. That is all I know ; I don t know where he got them. 
 
 Q. Hadn t these tickets been used before? Ihat is, didn t they 
 have indications of use upon them, either stamp or punch ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell, sir. 
 
 Q. What is your recollection ? 
 
 A. It isn t clear enough to tell you. They were tickets that wcro 
 good from Manchester to Boston. 
 
 Q. I want to know if they were tickets that had indications of 
 being once used ? 
 
 A. My memory isn t good enough to tell about that. 
 
 Q. Where did he hand you these tickets? 
 
 A. 1 suppose his idea was 
 
 Q. AY hat point ? What place ? 
 
 A. Oh, I should think at the depot in Manchester once, and in the 
 cars. 
 
 Q. In the cars as you were going down ? 
 
 A. Coming up, probably. 
 
 Q. Of whom did he obtain these tickets that he handed you in the 
 cars, and who was the conductor on board the train? 
 
 A. I tell you, sir, the last tickets that 1 had was when he was boss 
 and all hands himself. 
 
 Q. My question was of whom he obtained these tickets. 
 
 A. 1 couldn t tell you, to save my soul.. 
 
 Q. Who was the conductor on the train at the time he gave yon 
 these tickets ? 
 
 A. I don t know what conductor ran on the train. 
 
 Q. Did ever Mr. Starkey go to Mr. Clough and get a ticket to pass 
 you over the road ? 
 
 A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Did you ever state that he did ? 
 
 A. Well, n^ptatements you have got. I can only say that from 
 
16 
 
 this point, to-day, I have no recollection of saying that Mr. Starkey 
 ever got a ticket from Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. You cannot tell whose train Mr. Starkey ran on as brakeman ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; I don t know as I ever knew. 
 
 Q. What did you pay Mr. Starkey for those tickets that you bought ? 
 How did you pay him, and at what rate ? 
 
 A. I suppose Mr. Starkey intended that there was a balance due, 
 and called it an offset, to settle his account. There was no talk about 
 it. I supposed it was so. 
 
 Q. You paid him no money for the ticket? Did you credit him for 
 the value of the tickets on his account ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, you was asking how that first dress was paid for 
 
 Q. I want to know whether you credited the tickets on Mr. Star- 
 key s account? 
 
 A. I think very likely I did. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Is your book here in which that account is 
 charged ? 
 
 A. There are more things than that dress. But still I could not 
 itell you the items there without another book. 
 
 Q. (By Mr George.} The book shows, prior to October 10, 1865 ? 
 
 A. It shows in 1865, July 25th, merchandise, $10 
 
 August 26th, 9 
 
 October 10th, 13 
 
 Cash is credited, July 25th, $5.25 
 
 27th, 1.75 
 
 August 1st, there is no amount carried out. Page 173. 
 August 21st, 3.00 
 
 September 20th, 1.75 
 
 September 25th, 3.50 
 
 October 4th, 10.00 
 
 October 8.00 
 
 February 27th, 1866, 12.13 
 
 February 7th, 1866, merchandise, 4.75 
 
 7th, 5.25 
 
 8th, 
 
 Q. This shows all your dealings with Starkey ? 
 
 A. No, not all our dealings ; 1 had some cash. 
 
 Q. All your ticket dealings ? 
 
 A. That is all the ticket dealing. That shows that the tickets are 
 in there somewhere. Whatever he has had that he did not pay cash 
 for is there. 
 
 Q. And you never bought tickets of him and paid cash for them ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Mr. White, have you any recollection of Mr. Clough being on 
 atbe train when Starkey was brakeman ? 
 
 A. I have no special recollection about it. 
 
 Q. Don t you know the fact ? 
 
 A. Did Mr. Starkey run on a particular train ? If he did, I don t 
 know. 
 
 Q. Have you any recollection of Mr. Clough s being on any partic 
 ular train when Starkey went on that particular train to Boston ? 
 
17 
 
 A. I have no special recollection of it. He might have been on, 
 and might not. If you ask me what I had for dinner last Thanks 
 giving, I could probably tell you something about it. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Do you know whether Starkey used to go 
 ove* the Manchester road to Boston rather than over the Nashua and 
 Lowell ? 
 
 A. All I know about it is that he used to run down on the Nashua 
 and Lowell road. 
 
 Q. Did you ever notice Starkey, when he was brakeman on the road, 
 commencing at the end of the train to collect tickets himself; that is, 
 to aid the conductor, while Mr. Clough, who was conductor, was going 
 through the train from the front ? 
 
 A. It seems to me as though I had an impression of seeing him, 
 once or twice, with a lantern, taking them up. 
 
 Q. He would commence at the rear of the train and go towards 
 the front ? 
 
 A. I never thought of it before, but it does seem as though I had 
 seen him in the evening coming up with a lantern. 
 
 Q. How frequently have you seen him doing this ? 
 
 A. I should think the cases were rare, and exceptions to the rule ; 
 but it seems to me that I have seen him. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect how far he would go, how many cars on a train, 
 or how many tickets he would take up in this way ? Have you such a 
 recollection ? 
 
 A. Nothing more than that of seeing him pass along. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether this Starkey acted as conductor for a 
 while on the road after Mr. Clough left it ? 
 
 A. I have an impression that he did for a few days. 
 
 Q. You don t .know when he was appointed, and how long he ran 
 the train on the road as conductor ? 
 
 A. No, l^do not; my recollection does not show me. 
 
 Q. Here seems to be, on your books, transactions with Starkey 
 upon the debit side, amounting to some eighty or eighty-one dollars. 
 Now the amount is not on the bills. You do not mean to give the ref 
 erees to understand that these payments, either of them, were made by 
 tickets ? 
 
 A. Not much. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state what proportion of the credits which ap 
 pear upon your books were made from the price of tickets ? 
 
 A. Not more than I have stated of the price of tickets. 
 
 Q. You don t mean that these tickets here resulted from the trans 
 actions between you and him ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Would you be able to come to a conclusion that would approxi 
 mate the truth as to how much of these debit charges were paid by 
 these tickets ? 
 
 A. I should have to take my memory along back, and do the best I 
 could. Still, I don t like to do the thing, because I may hit very far 
 from it. These things are matters that have dropped out of my mind. 
 
 Q. Yes, but we will take it as your best recollection. Ten dollars ? 
 
 A. More than ten dollars. 
 
 Q. Twenty ? 
 
 A. Well, I should set it along in the neighborhood of twenty-five 
 dollars. You don t take that only you know for what it is worth. 
 
18 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.") You were asked if you had tickets of Star- 
 key and others, Mr. White. Wasn t part of these tickets that were 
 bought of individuals ? Whether you had any from officers of the 
 road? [Objected to.] 
 
 The C/iairman. The referees think that this matter may be followed 
 up just as far as it was opened by counsel for the defence. We under 
 stand that the counsel for the defence put a general question. 
 
 Q. (By Mr George.} Will you tell me what others ? 1 don t mean 
 the Ogdensburg tickets. Have you had tickets given you ? 
 
 A. Well, that is pretty much a matter of my that is, 1 would 
 
 say individuals that 1 got them of. 
 
 Q. 1 mean, have you had any tickets from conductors upon the road 
 directly V And if so. of whom ? 
 
 A. None unless I made 1 don t know as I have, unless I was 
 
 passed. 
 
 Q. It is pretty essential that it should be stated correctly. 
 
 A. 1 may possibly have had a ticket or two of Noyes. You see I 
 do not want to do any injustice in that direction. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Noyes conductor upon that road? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Noyes s wife buy a dress and give you tickets in pay 
 ment for it. or part payment ? 
 
 A. His wife has traded at the store more or less. 1 can t say that he 
 ever paid for dresses. 
 
 Q. Has his wife bought a dress and had it charged, and given you 
 tickets in part payment? [Objected to, and withdrawn.] 
 
 Q. Mr. White, you have spoken of purchasing tickets thus far of 
 Mr. Whitcher going to Boston, principally, as you recollect, of people 
 from Canada, Ogdensburg and the West, and of Mr. ISoyes ; I will now 
 ask you of what other persons and to what amount you ham purchased 
 these tickets over the Concord Kailroad ? 
 
 A. Well, I can tell you as far as I can recollect the persons ; but as 
 to the amount, that will be impossible. 
 
 Q. (rive the amounts as near as you can. 
 
 A. I have had some tickets from Charles Morse (I think his name 
 was Charles). 
 
 Q. Now I want you to state about how many ? 
 
 A. It was so long ago it would be impossible to tell exactly. Per 
 haps if I set it at ten dollars I should not be within bounds, you know. 
 
 Q. When was it, as near as you are able to state ? 
 
 A. Well, it was in war time, That is about as nigh as I can give it. 
 
 Q. Now you say about ten dollars. What did you pay him for 
 them? 
 
 A. Well, the amount I would not state certain. 
 
 Q. What per centage of their par value ? How much did you pay 
 for the tickets ? 
 
 A. I should say about the same discount as those I stated here. 
 
 Q. That is twenty-five cents on a ticket from Manchester to Boston ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that s ray impression. 
 
 Q. Did you buy any tickets if so, at what time of Jacob Morse? 
 
 A. Yes, sir 1 ; I had a few of Jacob Morse. 
 
 Q. Who was Jacob Morse ? 
 
 A. He was a brother of Charles Morse, a trader at Manchester. 
 
 Q. ADi at what time did you buy them, and to what extent ? 
 
19 
 
 A. it was only during this year or two ; not a large amount. I 
 have no means of stating it. 
 
 Q. As near as you can ? 
 
 A. I want to tell you as near as I can. I cannot say. Not a large; 
 amount. 
 
 Q. I want you to tell the referees as near as you can. 
 
 A. Well, sir, I might shoot very wide of the mark, therefore let it. 
 be so understood. I should say twelve or fifteen dollars. 
 
 Q. Did you buy any tickets of Herman Hershfield ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When ? 
 
 A. I could not give the time. 
 
 Q. He was trading there ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. To what extent did you buy? 
 
 A. It was a small matter. 
 
 Q. About how much ? 
 
 A. I was trying to get hold of something or other to go from. It 
 was a small amount. 
 
 Q. Who was Mr. Hershfield, and what was his business, and where 
 did he live? 
 
 A. 1 think at that time he was in the store with Mr. Morse. 
 
 Q. He was a partner ? 
 
 A. I think he was not a partner ; he was in his employ. 
 
 Q. Was the brother, Jacob Morse, employed in his clothing store ? 
 
 A. Yes sir; at any rate there is this much about it he went to 
 Lowell after that; I know after he went to Lowell he asked me for a 
 ticket. 1 do not know what was said. I think I refused him. 
 
 Q. These tickets you used for yourself, and sold them? 
 
 A. Used them for myself and family 
 
 Q. What did you do with the balance of them? 
 
 A. Sold a few. 
 
 Q. To whom did you sell them? 
 
 A. Well, let me see ; there was, I recollect I disposed of a few to 
 E. K. Chandler. 
 
 Q. Well? 
 
 A. D, F. Straw. 
 
 Q. Well, any to William B. Johnson? 
 
 A. Johnson had some tickets of me. I have sometimes bought <& 
 package of tickets myself in Boston. Yes, I guess Johnson did have a 
 few ; I think he did. 
 
 Q. I mean not talking package tickets. How was it about John 
 S. Folsom? 
 
 A. I think Folsom had some to Boston once or twice. 
 
 Q. S. L. Hastings? 
 
 A. I recollect he hac^ a ticket down to Boston once. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that that is all he had? Did you give jour 
 deposition? Will you not look at your deposition and see what you 
 then sold? 
 
 A. E. L. Hastings had some; I don t know how many. [Ob 
 jected to.] 
 
 Q. How was it about Mr. A. H. Webb? 
 
 A. He must have had some. 
 
 
 
20 * 
 
 Q. Mr. William H. Elliott? 
 
 -A. He had some. 
 
 Q. Mr. Stanton, insurance agent ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many did you sell to Mr. Stanton ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. How many do you think ? 
 
 .A. I haven t any idea ; he had more than any other one. 
 
 -Q- Mr. Thomas P. Pierce sell him any ? 
 
 A. Well, I don t know what I told you at that time. My mind is 
 not clear on that point to-day. 
 
 [Counsel for the plaintiff proposes to show a deposition to the witness 
 which is objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. We think that is a kind of paper that may be sub 
 mitted to the witness, if he wants to see it to refresh his memory. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I will now ask you if you sold these tickets 
 to Thomas P. Pierce, or such tickets ? 
 
 A. It says so there, I think. My recollection is not clear on the 
 Pierce matter ; my recollection was better, then. 
 
 The Chairman. I suppose the true way is to ask him to refresh his 
 memory. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Looking at that paper, is your memory 
 refreshed ? 
 
 A. I don t seem to remember ; I should not want to say ; not at 
 ichis time. 
 
 Q. Now I want to ask you whether all these tickets that were pur 
 chased by you Concord Kailroad tickets in packages, were purchased 
 sat twenty-five cents discount whether that is the price ? 
 
 A. I take it for granted that that is the fact of the case. 
 
 Q. In what did you pay ? 
 
 A. Well, as I before stated, tickets were paid for in trade. 
 
 Q. In goods, you mean ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When you went to Boston in the cars, how often did you go to 
 JBoston from Manchester, say for six or eight years, or for five or six 
 ;years previous to this controversy ? 
 
 A. Well, sometimes 1 went down once a week, or twice a week, and 
 tthen again not for two weeks. 
 
 Q. That is, you mean it to be understood that you went all the way 
 from once in two weeks to once or twice a week ? 
 
 A. Seldom twice a week not as often ; may possibly have been 
 tiimes that we ran oftener than that. 
 
 Q. And you paid money in the cars to the conductors in all these 
 Ceases? 
 
 A. Well, I should say that I very rarely paid money in the cars. It 
 was provided for otherwise ; but still there is no doubt, but that occa 
 sionally 
 
 Q. Did you pay money to Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. I have no distinct recollection now of paying to Mr. Clough ; it 
 would be very strange, the number of times I rode on the cars, if I did 
 not pay something to Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. Is that the only answer you can give ? 
 
 A. Well, I guess that perhaps covers the ground. 
 
 
 
. 21 
 
 Q. Does it refresh your recollection ? Did you pay money in the 
 cars ? And was it to Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. 1 have rarely paid money. 
 
 Q. Did you at any time pay money to Mr. Clough in the cars, with 
 out regard to time ? 
 
 A. Well, to-day, this hour, and this minute, I have no recollection* 
 of taking out my purse to pay any money to Mr. Clough. There may 
 be such an occasion, and I have no doubt that there is. 
 
 Q. Have you any general recollection of that fact ? 
 
 A. I have nothing more than I should be quite likely sometime* 
 to be not provided. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that? 
 
 A. Having no ticket about me. 
 
 Q. That you would not have a ticket with you ? 
 
 A. Not having a ticket about me, and not having been to the office, - 
 
 Q. That is the only way ? Do you mean to swear that is the onljir 
 way you had to get to Boston ? 
 
 A. Only these, or else Starkey passed me. 
 
 Q. That is only three ways. 
 
 A. I have stated that Mr. Starkey had passed me. 
 
 Q. Have you had any conversation with the counsel for the conduct 
 ors since you have been at Concord ? 
 
 A. No v sir. 
 
 Q. With any other persons since you gave this deposition ? 
 
 A. Not that I recollect of. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION resumed. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) You have not had any conversation with 
 me, have you ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You have not had any with Mr. Tappan ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I do not recollect that I did. 
 
 Q. Have you had any with Mr. Kolfe ? 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q. Any with Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. I never spoke with him on the subject in the world. 
 
 Q. You have been inquired of as to the different persons to whoim 
 you sold these tickets. I suppose you sold them all save what ypi* 
 needed for yourself and family ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That is, you used what you had occasion to use for your own 
 purposes, and you got them for twenty-five cents less ? 
 
 A. Just that and nothing else. 
 
 Q. You have been inquired of as to Mr. Charles F. Morse ; was he 
 a man who lived in Concord a clothing dealer ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was he a German ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And Hershfield was a German? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. *And you got all these tickets that you had during the war? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. They were Germans, and you had them of these men during th 
 war ? 
 
22 
 
 
 
 A. That is my impression that I had them. 
 
 Q. At the time the substitute business was carried on in Man 
 chester . 
 
 A. Of course that was carried oil during the war. 1 wouldn t say 
 that L did not have any from them before the war. 
 
 Q. The bulk of them were during the war . 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you know that Charles F. Morse and Mr. Hcrshtield or that 
 Mr. Charles Morse dealt in substitutes ? 
 
 A. I didn t know it particularly. 
 
 Q. You were not intimately acquainted with them . 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 (^. Did you know whether his brother dealt in substitutes during 
 the war? 
 
 A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Now L want to know, first, as to the tickets that you had of 
 hese persons ; to what stations and upon what lines of road were they 
 good ? Let me inquire particularly of those you had of Charles F. 
 Morse. 
 
 A. As far as my recollection is of the matter, 1 should think mainly 
 what I had, went to Boston by way of Low T ell I should s ay. 
 
 Q. And those that you had of 
 
 A. Possibly there might be some the other way. 
 
 Q. Were those you had of his brother and Hershh eld by the way of 
 Lowell ? 
 
 A. I should say they were both ways, by Lawrence and by Nashua. 
 That would be my opinion. 
 
 Q. Did they run from Manchester to Boston and from Boston to 
 Manchester, both ways? 
 
 A. Such is my impression. If I had known this thing was coming 
 up, 1 would have had these things down. 
 
 Q. How many tickets did you have in your possession at the time of 
 this controversy. Do you remember? 
 
 A. No, sir." 
 
 Q. Have you any sor~t of an idea as to how many ? 
 
 A. I could not have many. 
 
 Q. Half-a-dozen ? 
 
 A. What, do you mean half-a-dozen trips? 
 
 Q. Half-a-dozen trips? 
 
 A. I should not think 1 had half-a-dozen down and back. 
 
 Q. Half-a-dozen trains, do you think ? 
 
 A. I should think I had. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DR. JUSTUS BLA1SDELL. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Please state where you live? 
 
 A. I reside at Concord. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether you formerly kept your office in the Ma 
 sonic building, owned by Mr. Clough and Mr. Corning ? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. At what time, Doctor? 
 
 A. I hired of them; it was October, I think, 1859. 
 
 Q. And how long did you continue to occupy ? 
 
 A. I was there seven years. 
 
 Q While you were in the occupancy of that office, will you state 
 
whether you were passed over the Concord road by Air. Clough? and if 
 so, how many times, and under what circumstances ? 
 
 A. Well, 1 went over the road a few times. Clough passed me, or 
 gave me a pass. 
 
 Q. What kind of a pass, if you please, Doctor ? 
 
 A. It was a pass with his name signed to it, " Please pass Dr. 
 Blaisdell from Concord to Boston." 
 
 Q. From Concord to Boston, or to Boston and back ? 
 
 A. I think from Concord to Boston. 
 
 Q. Will you state now under what circumstances ? 
 
 A. Well, it was a favor. I had asked Clough to pass me, and he 
 done it as a favor. 
 
 Q. Dr. Blaisdell, you gave your deposition in this suit on the 27th 
 February, 1866, did you not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you please look at your deposition? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Tappan. Wouldn t it be competent to inquire and see what he 
 recollects now ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. He is your own witness. 
 
 Mr. George. I understand that certainly. 1 believe that 1 am in 
 the regular order. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It don t appear that his memory is at fault. If the 
 witness desires his recollection to be refreshed ; if he exhibits any inti 
 mation that he cannot testify, and desires to look at a proper memoran 
 dum for that purpose,, it is regular, and of course, proper, that he 
 should ; but he has answered every question that has been put, and has 
 not expressed any desire to refresh his recollection by a deposition 
 which they took some time in the past. 
 
 The Chairman. We think that the deposition should not be shown 
 to the witness, or any other papers, for the purpose of refreshing his 
 memory until it becomes apparent that his memory is at fault, and that 
 he desires to refresh it. 
 
 Mr. George. I move for leave to cross-examine this witness on the 
 ground that he has stated entirely different from what he stated before, 
 and in order to lay a foundation. I simply desire to pass the deposi 
 tion to the court, for the purpose of cross-examining the witness. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I should like to inquire whether it is usual and just 
 and fair to such a gentleman as Dr. Blaisdell or anybody, after parties 
 have gone on such an excursion as they have, and taken depositions in 
 the way these have been taken, and when the witnesses are produced 
 on the stand, and do not come exactly up to the scratch, that they are 
 to be put in the position of culprits 
 
 The Chairman. I believe the referees do not think at this time there 
 is a case made for putting leading questions. That is, they do not 
 think that the witness has at present shown any reluctance to testify, 
 such as could justify the counsel in putting leading questions. But I 
 do understand that the counsel may refresh his memory in any matter. 
 If, upon inquiring about anything, the witness don t remember, his 
 memory might be refreshed as to what he did testify. 
 
 Mr. George. Suppose the witness testified that he applied to Mr. 
 Clough for tickets, and supposing that Mr. Clough offered them to him 
 voluntarily as a consideration for repairs. 
 
 Judge Bellows. We think you might show him the deposition and 
 ask him to say, under the circumstances. 
 
24 
 
 The deposition was shown to the witness. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Well, Mr. Blaisdell, I have shown you your 
 deposition ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. I want to know whether it refreshes your recollection as to the 
 instances in which you received passes ? 
 
 A. It does. 
 
 Q. Now I want you to state how it was about you receiving passes 
 from Mr. Clough to Boston and back ; and how many times you re 
 ceived such passes ; and under what circumstances, and all the circum 
 stances of receiving such passes ? 
 
 A. Well, I asked Mr. Clough if he would pass me over the road ; 
 and I supposed that he had a right to do so. He said he would, and 
 did so. Well, that answers that question, I believe ? 
 
 Q. How many times did Mr. Clough give you a written pass to 
 Boston and back, if at all? 
 
 A. I could not say as to the number of times ; but few times for 
 myself. 
 
 Q. Did these written passes extend from Concord to Boston and 
 back? 
 
 A. Well, I couldn t say positive. I think a proportion or some of 
 them were to Boston and return, or something like that ; not on all of 
 them. I think they were only one way, some of them. 
 
 Q. Now I will ask you the same question as to your deposition, 
 when I read it to you, " How happened Mr. Clough to furnish you with 
 such passes? " 
 
 A. By my request I requested him to do it, I suppose. I asked it 
 as a favor. I supposed he had a right to do so, or else I should not 
 have asked him. 
 
 Q. Will you look at your answer to that very question, and see 
 whether it refreshes your recollection ? That is the third. 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I understand. I recollect of answering as they state 
 then. 
 
 Q. Is that answer true ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. To explain that, 1 would say I went on to suggest 
 
 Q. I will put the question to you, and I want you to answer it to 
 the referees. I will put this question. How happened Mr. Clough to 
 furnish you with such passes ? State fully. 
 
 A. That may be the question that you proposed ; 1 do not recollect. 
 
 Q. I propose it now. 
 
 A. I do not remember^that question in that form. 
 
 Q. Will you read that question ? 
 
 A. The question that 1 understood was, if there had been anything 
 said about repairs that these passes were to go for repairs. My 
 recollection of what I said was that Mr. Clough went into the office ; I 
 asked him to go in and asked him about repairs. He asked me what 
 the rent was, and I told him. Then he said that well, I said to him 
 that or he said to me that I might see Mr. Corning, and talk with 
 him. He thought they could not afford it, but whatever Mr. Corning 
 said, he would agree to. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} That was about the repairs? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. That is all I recollect of saying. I might have said 
 what it states here, but I have no recollection of it, or Mr. Clough s 
 Baying so to me. 
 
25 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Clough offer you free passes ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; he never did. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Clough say to you that he could not afford to make any 
 repairs, and if you would fix it up, he would make it all right ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection ; he might have said something of that 
 kind, but I have no recollection of his saying anything of that kind. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Dr. Blaisdell, I understood you that you occu 
 pied a room in Clough s and Coming s building? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. " Did you apply to Mr. Clough to make repairs on that room ? 
 
 A. i did. 
 
 Q. What did he say about it ? 
 
 A. I told him what needed to be done ; that it needed whitening 
 and painting. Well, he asks me what rent I paid. I told him, and he 
 said that he could not afford to make any repairs. 
 
 Q. Did he say anything about your going on and making repairs, 
 and he would make it all right with you ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you go on and make the repairs ? 
 
 A. I painted it myself. Painting myself cost me about two dollars. 
 If I had hired it, it would have cost about six. 
 
 Q. Did you at different times make repairs on that room that would 
 amount to about fifteen dollars ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. State whether you made repairs on that room at different times 
 amounting to about fifteen dollars? [Objected to and ruled out.] 
 
 Q. To what extent did you make repairs on that room ? To what 
 amount in money ? 
 
 A. I would say that when I moved in there, 1 said to Mr. Corning 
 that I wanted repairs made, and to have another room, and suggested 
 that I had been paying out considerable money and that he might put 
 it on to the rent. That was when I first moved in there, before the 
 building was completed, and his workmen were there, a3d they put up 
 a partition. The rent was to be seventy-five dollars, and he put it up 
 to one hundred dollars the first year. That was in another room. I 
 moved into the front room. That was in the back room, or on Pleasant 
 street. Well, sir, I moved the partition in there. Then I spoke of 
 these other repairs. That is all that I recollect of laying out on the 
 room. And when I moved out it was after Mr. Corning died I 
 spoke to Mr. Taylor about moving the partition ; he objected, and said 
 he had no right to remove it, and I let it remain there. It cost about 
 eight dollars to remove the partition. It cost me twenty-five. 
 
 Q. Now, Dr. Blaisdell, I wish to ask you the direct question, how 
 much did you expend in repairs ; in the repairs that you had a conver 
 sation wth Mr. Clough about, about which you have testified ? 
 
 A. Well, I have stated all the repairs and the amount, as near as I 
 could judge of what it would cost. 
 
 Q. I ask you directly, sir, how much did you expend for the repairs, 
 about which you spoke to Mr. Clough, when he said he could not afford 
 to do it ? 
 
 A. Well, I could not give the exact amount. It was at different 
 times, as I said. 1 had it colored and whitened overhead, and the 
 casing painted. It might have been ten or fifteen dollars. I could not 
 tell the whole amount, what it would be. 
 
26 
 
 Q. Did you ever have any compensation 1 am speaking of the 
 repairs that you spoke to Mr. C lough about if so, what was it? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How long after these repairs were made before you received a 
 pass to Boston ? 
 
 A. Well, I could not say. I think they were before ; it might have 
 been that he passed me once after the repairs. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Clough offer you tickets, or did you ask him for the 
 tickets V 
 
 A. 1 asked him for the tickets. 
 
 Q. He did not offer them to you V 
 
 A. No, sir ; not without my asking him. 
 
 Q. Were you ever in the cars when Mr. Clough came to you and 
 told you he would get you along, and bought you tickets and gave 
 them to you from Concord to Boston and back before you got to 
 Nashua tickets or passes V 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That is a pretty leading question, I think. 
 
 A. I have no recollection. 
 
 Q. Did ever I or any one else speak to you on the subject of these 
 suits prior to your giving your deposition V 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Holfe.) Has ever Mr. Clough spoken to you about this 
 matter, either before or since you gave your deposition, in his life ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you ever spoken to him ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Has any one in Mr. Clough s interest or employment ever spoken 
 to you at all about it ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. At thetfcime you asked Mr. Clough to do certain repairs, and he 
 stated he could not afford to, and referred you to Mr. Corning, was 
 anything said about passing you over the railroad ; or giving you any 
 favors in that direction ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of it there might have been; I would 
 
 not say ; 1 do not know but he said to me. when 1 asked him, that he 
 
 would make it right, straight, or something of that kind ; that he could 
 
 not afford to make the repairs at that rent. He rented it low to me, 
 
 lower than I. could get rent anywhere else. 
 
 Q. Did he say anything at that time by which you could infer, or 
 by which you did infer that he intended to grant you any favors, by 
 railroad, any free passes ; if so, what did he say ? 
 
 A. He never gave me any intimation, that 1 can recollect, that he 
 would pass me over the road, only as 1 had asked him. 
 
 Q. And you say that these times you had been passed free was pre 
 vious to your asking him to make these repairs? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think they were 
 
 Q. Now, Dr. Blaisdell, had you, previous to your being passed over 
 the railroad at all, stated to Mr. Clough your pecuniary condition ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; I had. 
 
 Q. Did you tell him in words that you were poor and had a hard 
 time to get a living, and that you would like to be favored in that 
 ^direction ? 
 
A. Yes, sir; 1 think I did. 
 
 Q. You stated to him what was then true, did you not ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. For what purpose did you want to go to Boston? 
 
 A. Well, go down there to see my friends ; I had a brother $nd 
 sister. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect, when you first went to Boston, whether you 
 asked Mr. Clough to pass you before you got into the cars or after? 
 
 A. Before, I think; I think it was just before the train started; 
 standing by the cars. 
 
 Q. And he told you he would pass you, and got you something to go 
 to Boston, did he not ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. The next time that you passed down in the cars, did you speak 
 to Mr. Clough before you got into the cars? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think I did. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Clough finally have to refuse, or did he refuse to pass 
 you ? 
 
 A. He did. 
 
 Q. You came back without going to your journey- s end, did you? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What time in the year was this ? 
 
 A. 1 could not tell. 
 
 Q. With reference to the time when this excitement was produced 
 in relation to the conductors ; how many months before that? 
 
 A. I do not know when the excitement was ; 1 did not hear much 
 about the excitement; i could not tell whether it was before or after. 
 
 Q. The time previous to the last time he passed you, did he suggest 
 to you that lie did not know as he o lirht to pass you, and did he finally 
 consent to pass you ? 
 
 A. No. sir; I have no recollection ol his intimating anything of 
 that kind. I always supposed that lie had a right to. I always sup 
 posed that a conductor had a certain amount of passes given him, that 
 he could give to friends. I never should have asked him for a pass if I 
 had not supposed that he had that ri<rht. 
 
 Q. What person did you do that business with ? To whom did you 
 pay your rents while you were in the office ? 
 
 A. Mr. Corning. 
 
 Q. And after Mr. Corning died, who to ? 
 
 A. Mr. Taylor. 
 
 Q. You never hired the office of Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) He was owner, was he not? 
 
 A. His name was signed. I supposed he was. 
 
 Q. Mr. Taylor continued to do Mr. Coming s business after he died ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tapj^tn.) Mr. Corning was postmaster, was he? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Mr. Taylor was his clerk ? 
 
 A. * Yes, sir. 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 
28 
 
 [THIKD DAY, July 2:3, 1868.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM ROBY. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Koby, please state where you live and 
 what your age is. 
 
 A. I live in this city, on Washington street. 
 
 Q. And what is your age, sir. 
 
 A. My age is seventy-two, nearly. 
 
 Q. Mr. Roby, will you state whether you and your wife had occa 
 sion to go down to Boston in the winter of 1865, and whether you did 
 go? 
 
 A. I was down there, and she was with me, some time in 1865, if 
 my memory serves me. 
 
 Q. Which way did you return when you came home ? 
 
 A. By Nashua and Lowell. 
 
 Q. You left Boston and came to Concord by way of Lowell. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who was the conductor on the Concord railroad when you got to 
 Nashua ? 
 
 From Nashua up here ? 
 
 Q. From Nashua to Concord ; yes, sir. 
 
 A. Mr. Clough, I think. 
 
 Q. Now, if you noticed anything with regard to tickets you may 
 state what tickets you bought and what you noticed with regard to 
 tickets ? [Objected to, and objection withdrawn.] 
 
 Q. Well, Mr. Roby, will you be kind enough to just state, when yon 
 got into the cars in Boston, what tickets you bought, and what trans 
 pired ? 
 
 A. I did not buy any myself ; my son stepped into a place where 
 he bought the tickets, and brought me four tickets ; two to go part way 
 up. The first conductor took two and Mr. Clough took the other two. 
 
 Q. Now, with regard to punching the tickets ; state what was done 
 by the conductors ? 
 
 A. Well, the first conductor punched his ticket, and the second 
 time he called on me he punched them again and took them. 
 
 Q. That was below Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. State what happened when you got this side of Nashua V 
 
 A. Mr. Clough took the two tickets, and made, either in this corner 
 or that, he did not happen to hit them. 
 
 Q. Mr. Roby, now you may show, if you please, exactly the motion 
 which Mr. Clough made. 
 
 A. The punch went by the end, either by that corner, or that, and 
 did not strike the tickets, and he handed them back to me. 
 
 Q. Now go on, sir, and state what further happened with regard to 
 these tickets. 
 
 A. When we got up this side, he took the ticket^and carried them off. 
 
 Q. Did he punch them ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When you got up this side of where, did he take the tickets and 
 carry them off? 
 
 A. Between here and Manchester, of course. 
 
 Q. Before you got to Concord ? 
 
29 
 
 A. Before we got to Concord. It might have been on the edge of 
 Concord. [No cross examination.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF ISAAC W. FAEMEE. 
 
 Mr. Isaac W. Farmer, of Manchester, N. H., was called by the 
 plaintiff and duly sworn, and testified as follows : 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Farmer, are you deputy sheriff? 
 
 A. I am, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you live at Manchester ? 
 
 A. I do. sir. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether you went to make an examination at 
 Mr. Whitcher s house, and if so, just state the circumstances, and what 
 you found ? 
 
 A. I went to Mr. Whitcher s house 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. 1 suppose the object of this testimony is to show the 
 tickets found on Mr. Whitcher ? 
 
 Mr. George. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. W^e would like to inquire whether the referees will 
 constantly receive this testimony with regard to tickets found in the 
 possession of Whitcher, until it is shown that a portion of them are 
 found to be coming from Mr. Clough. There has been a large amount 
 of evidence here, upon that point, upon the assurance that there would 
 be evidence adduced hereafter, connecting these tickets with Mr. 
 Clough. The counsel on the other side is now introducing cumulative 
 testimony on that point, and the question is how far the court will 
 receive evidence of this kind until it is shown to be connected in some 
 way with Mr. Clough. We object to admission of the testimony. 
 
 The Chairman. We do not see any occasion to change our principle, 
 or the course that we have adopted before, if the counsel states that he 
 has evidence by which he expects to connect with Mr. Clough. 
 
 Mr. George. I shall prove it from Mr. Clough s own deposition. 
 
 Q. You say, Mr. Farmer, that you are deputy sheriff? 
 
 A. I am. 
 
 Q. Were you called upon to go and arrest Mr. Whitcher ? Can you 
 give the day? 
 
 A. February the tenth. 
 
 Q. Will you state the circumstances of his arrest ? 
 
 A. Mr. Whitcher was arrested in Manchester, and I was sent up to 
 his house on purpose to find the tickets at his house. 
 
 Q. What time of day was this, sir ? 
 
 A. This was in the afternoon, I think. 
 
 Q. How did you go ? 
 
 A. Upon an engine, or a special train. I think it was upon the 
 engine. 
 
 Q. When you got there what did you find ? 
 
 A. I found, in one room un, stairs, in a small bureau, one hundred 
 and seventeen railroad tickets. 
 
 Q. What was done with those tickets ? 
 
 A. Those tickets I took and brought down to Hooksett, and gave 
 them to Mr. George. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. George do? 
 
 A. He took them and marked them with the letter G on the face of 
 them ; marked them there in the depot. 
 
 Q. In the depot at Hooksett, on the desk ? 
 
A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Won t you see if these are the tickets V 
 
 A. JL should presume they were ; they look like it. 
 
 Q. Were these tickets the one hundred and seventeen tickets that 
 you found at Mr. Whitcher s ? 
 
 A. Found at his house. 
 
 *,). Were they all together ? 
 
 A. All together, in one place, in a small drawer in a bureau. 
 
 Mr. George. I want, in this connection, to call attention to the 
 stamps on the backs. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That applies only to a portion of the tickets, with 
 regard to being stamped. 
 
 GROSS EXAMINATION. . 
 
 . Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Substantially, is your testimony that you 
 found one hundred and seventeen tickets? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know that these are the same tickets ? 
 
 A. That is my impression, so far as they are marked in that way. 
 
 Q. 1 suppose you cannot say but what somebody else might have 
 put on that G ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; if he counterfeited his hand. 
 
 Q. Are you able to say that a single one of these tickets was among 
 the tickets that you found in Mr. Whicher s house? 
 
 A. Oh, 1 could not identify positively. 
 
 Q. Are you able to say that a single one of the tickets presented to 
 you is a ticket you took from Whitcher ? 
 
 A. I have no particular mark on them. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You say the general character of them is the 
 same ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Is there anything about the general character of them that would 
 enable you to identify them ? 
 
 A. No. sir. 
 
 Q. Or is there anything about the letter G that would enable you to 
 identify them ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Mr. Farmer, 1 want to ask you one ques 
 tion, and that is whether or not you saw these tickets marked, or 
 Vhether they were marked in your presence ? 
 
 A. I did ; yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any knowledge of Mr. George s hand-writing? 
 
 A. Well, I ve seen his hand- writing, but am not very familiar with it, 
 
 Q. These tickets that you have examined this morning, you can 
 state what you think about them. 
 
 A. They have every appearance of being the same tickets. 
 
 Q. I mean the marks that you saw on them ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Do you mean that every ticket was marked 
 at the time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think they were. 
 
 Q. Now, let me ask if all the tickets contained in these packages 
 are marked ; 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
31 
 
 Q. Your impression is that all the tickets that you saw taken from 
 Mr. Whitcher were marked G by AJ r. Geonre ? 
 
 A. That is my understanding. I think they were. 
 
 Q. There were one hundred and seventeen of them? 
 
 A. There were one hundred and seventeen tickets taketo from the 
 house. 
 
 Q. And they were tickets over definite roads ? Tickets over the 
 Manchester and Lawrence and Boston and Lowell ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; and the adjoining roads. 
 
 Q. Are you particular that all the tickets were marked ? 
 
 A. I was not particular. I saw him there marking them. 
 
 Q. Was it made a point that they should all be marked ? 
 
 A. Y"es, sir ; he asked me to see them marked. 
 
 Q. All the tickets ? 
 
 A. That is my recollection. 
 
 Q. (By Mr George.} Do you recollect that you handed the tickets, 
 one by one, to me while 1 marked ? 
 
 A. 1 do not remember about that 
 
 Q. Who took the tickets from you ? Who went with you ? 
 
 A. 1 have the impression that there was somebody else there. 
 
 Q. Who carried them to the depot? 
 
 A. 1 took them to -the depot. Mr. Whitcher went and showed me 
 where they were. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) You went up to Whitcher s on an engine 
 that ran up from Manchester ? 
 
 A. He was arrested in Manchester. 
 
 Q. To make search for the tickets ? 
 
 A. 1 went with Mr. Prescott. My impression is that there was some 
 body else. 
 
 Q. Who was present at the house at the time Mr. Whitcher pro- 
 duced the tickets ? 
 
 A. Mr. Whitcher himself. 
 
 Q. Colonel George ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. And you took them from Whitcher s house to the depot ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you seen them until to-day? 
 
 A. Not until I came here to this court. 
 
 Q. And you are not able to say positively that they are the very 
 same tickets that you took from Whitcher s house at that time ? 
 
 A. I have no particular mark. 
 
 Q. Would you be able to say, with any degree of certainty, that 
 either one of these was a ticket that you took from Whitcher s bureau ? 
 
 A. I would not swear to it. 
 
 Q. Is there the slightest mark as being the tickets taken from 
 Whitcher, and they have not been in your possession since ? 
 
 A. They never have. 
 
 Q. Is there anything about that ticket by which you can identify it ? 
 
 A. There was a mark that was put on. It has the general appear 
 ance of being the same ticket. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to take one of those tickets that has 
 got a "G" on it. There is a ticket marked G too. Are you able to 
 swear that that G is, or not, Colonel George s? 
 
 A. No, I could not. 
 
. 
 
 Q. Now there are two G-s ; is there any resemblance ? 
 
 A. There is not. 
 
 Q. Are you able to say that either of them is in Colonel George s 
 hand- writing ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now take either of these tickets in that package, and are you able 
 to say that Colonel George made a G on them? 
 
 A. No, 1 am not. 
 
 Q. Now, 1 ask you if there is anything connected with them which 
 may enable you to identify them as taken from the drawer of Whitcher ? 
 
 A. Not positively. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Any doubt about it? 
 
 A. 1 have not any doubt about it, but still I could not be positive. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Let me ask you if there is anything con 
 nected with the tickets that enables you to swear with any degree of 
 certainty ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. If an equal number of tickets were laid before you, marked in 
 the same way, would not you be just as positive ? 
 
 A. If they were similar tickets to those, I would be. 
 
 Q. And you would have no more doubt about those than you would 
 about these ? 
 
 A. I might have. 
 
 Q. Supposing they were brought in an envelope like these and laid 
 <soa the table before you ? 
 
 A. If 1 had not known where they were, arid where they were kept, 
 or had any knowledge of it, I might be. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) Mr. Farmer, will you be kind enough to 
 look at that and tell us whether you have any knowledge of the writing ? 
 
 A. I have not much knowledge of Mr. George s hand-writing, 
 though I saw him mark the tickets at that time. [ have seen his 
 writing, but I could not identify it. 
 
 Q. What is your best impression about that hand-writing, whether 
 it is or is not the hand-writing of Mr. George ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it is, but I am not able to swear positive 
 ly about it ? 
 
 Q 4 Now, will you not tell me about that ; whether it is or is not 
 the hand-writing of Mr. George ? 
 
 A. That is the ticket that was found there. 
 
 Q. That is not the question. The question is whether you think 
 that is Mr. George s hand-writing ; or what is your impression ? 
 
 A. I do not know, I am sure. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) There are two tickets with two Gs on them ; 
 do those tickets look alike ? 
 
 A. Not much. 
 
 Q. Which of those Gs looks most like Colonel George s hand 
 writing ? 
 
 A. That is the kind he generally makes, I guess ; that is the kind 
 that most of them are marked with. 
 
 Q. Is there anything about that that is like Colonel George s hand 
 writing in any single particular ? 
 
 A. I do not know as there is. 
 
 Q. Do those two Gs look alike ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
33 
 
 Q. Now, assuming that one of those Gs was made by Col. George 
 and one by Col. Tappan, could you say which of the two was made by 
 Col. George? 
 
 A. No, I could not tell. 
 
 [The deposition of William B. Hardy was put in evidence, and read 
 by Mr. Stanley. Mr. Mugridge objected to that part of the deposition 
 which related to free passes. The chairman suggested that as there 
 seemed to be a difference of opinion, it would be better to hear the de 
 position, and see if there was any evidence that Mr. Clough received 
 .any benefit from them.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DANIEL E. PEESCOTT. 
 
 Mr, Daniel E. Prescott, of Manchester, N. H., was called in behalf 
 of the plaintiff, and duly sworn, and testified as follows : 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Prescott, you are a police officer? and 
 you were in 1866 ? 
 
 A. I was deputy marshal of the City of Manchester, 
 
 Q. Would you state how it was on the tenth of February, 1866, 
 about your arresting James Whitcher, of Hooksett, and state where 
 you arrested him ? 
 
 A. A warrant was put in my hands by Mr. Stanley. I went to find 
 Mr. Whitcher, and found him very near the depot. 
 
 Q. That was in Manchester ? 
 
 A. 1 cs, sir. 
 
 Q. About what time in the day ? 
 
 A. I am not able to state that. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether it was in the forenoon or afternoon ? 
 
 A. I think it was in the forenoon ; I am sure it was. 
 
 Q. Well, sir ; after the warrant was placed in your hands, where 
 did you go ? 
 
 A. I went to several places where I thought he would be, and at 
 last I went to the depot, thinking he might be going on the train. I 
 met him on the street, near the depot, very near the platform of the 
 depot. 
 
 Q. Well, sir ; you arrested him ; where did you take him ? 
 
 A. To the office of Messrs. Morrison & Stanley. 
 
 Q. Well, sir ; when you got to the office of Messrs. Morrison & 
 Stanley, you may state what he produced or took from his pockets ? 
 
 A. He produced different tickets ; tickets on various railroads, to 
 the amount of two hundred and twenty-six. 
 
 Q. Have you a memorandum ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. What did you give the number at Hooksett? 
 
 A. One hundred and seventeen. 
 
 Q. You took these from his vest pockets ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you state now what was done with the tickets as he pro 
 duced them ? 
 
 A. As he produced them from his pockets they were passed to Col. 
 George, and he put the letter G on them in my presence. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You are speaking now of those you found 
 at Manchester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Whether was it in the front or back office ? 
 
A. It was in the back room. 
 
 Q. As the tickets were produced, will you state how it was that I 
 put my name on them ? 
 
 A. Well, sir ; you put them on as 1 passed them to you. 
 
 Q. On the face or back ? 
 
 A. On the back, I think. 
 
 Q. Won t you examine these tickets, sir? 
 
 A. L don t recognize the figure 2 on these. 1 don t know about 
 that. The other ones I should say these were the tickets. 
 
 Q. Any doubt about it? 
 
 A. Xo doubt about that package. 
 
 Q. Won t you look at them and see. 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; 1 have no doubt ; these with the extra figure 1 think 
 1 cannot tell. There is the figure 2 on some of them. There is an 
 other package, but that I have no doubt they are the ones. 
 
 [Seven packages identified arid marked with the initial P.] 
 
 <.^. After Mr. Whitcher had produced these, and you had passed 
 them to me, and they had been marked, where then did you go ? 
 
 A. In the afternoon I came with Mr. Farmer to Hooksett, to Mr, 
 Whitcher s house. 
 
 Q. And what did you find there ? 
 
 A. We there found one hundred and seventeen tickets. 
 
 Q. In what place ? 
 
 A. In his chamber, in a bureau. 
 
 Q. What was done with those tickets ? 
 
 A. Those tickets were delivered to Mr. Farmer. 
 
 Q. Were you present when they were marked ? 
 
 A. I was not. 
 
 Q. Did you see the tickets yourself? 
 
 The one hundred and seventeen? 
 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 A. Yes ; I had these in my hand. / 
 
 Q. What was the age of these tickets ? 
 
 A. They were various ages. Some very old, and some of them not 
 so old. I note the tickets on the different roads. 
 
 Q. But you simply made a memorandum of the number of tickets ? 
 
 A. That is all. 
 
 Q. Won t you read your memorandum, if you will ? 
 
 A. Saturday, February the 10th, 1866. Arrested, for being con 
 cerned in the railroad robbery, A. H. Weston, William White and 
 James Whitcher. Found upon Whitcher two hundred and twenty- six 
 tickets, on different roads ; also, one hundred and seventeen tickets at 
 his house in Hooksett. That is all. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Can you state how many of these pack 
 ages there are that you do not identify ? You have given seven that 
 you do ; now how many are there that you do not identify ? 
 
 A. Ten. 
 
 Q. Now, out of seventeen packages you can identify the contents of 
 seven. I understand you to say that you arrested Whitcher at the 
 depot and took him to Morrison s office immediately? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
85 
 
 Q. You were there present in Mr. Morrison s office after you had 
 got Mr. Whitcher there? 
 
 A. In a private room. 
 
 Q. Who was there ? 
 
 A. Colonel George and Mr. Stanley and, 1 think, Squire Morrison, 
 
 <J. Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. i am not able to state. 
 
 Q. 1 want you to tax your recollection and see if Mr. Gilmore wa* 
 there. 
 
 A. It is my impression that Mr. Gilmore was not there. 
 . y. Are you certain ? 
 
 A. 1 would not say. 
 
 <J. Mr. Farmer there "? 
 
 A. No. sir. 
 
 Q. What was done in the back office after they got Whitcher in 
 there ? Or, in the first place, who was with Whitcher in the back office ? 
 
 A. Colonel George, Mr. Stanley and myself. 
 
 Q. Mr. Morrison in there ? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. What was done by these gentlemen, with reference to Whitcher, 
 after they got him in the back office ? 
 
 A. Nothing ; only he was asked to give up the tickets. 
 
 Q. And did he give them up ? 
 
 A. He did, after awhile. 
 
 Q. Now, without going into circumstances, was there a large amount 
 of talk between Mr. Whitcher, Colonel George and Mr. Stanley, in ref 
 erence to this matter ? 
 
 A. There was a long consultation about giving up the tickets ? 
 
 Q. How long were they in the office there together ? 
 
 A. I should think thirty minutes or more before he gave up all the 
 tickets. 
 
 Q. Was there evidence written down there in the office by anybody ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, I did not see any, except putting the initial on these 
 tickets. 
 
 Q. Did you leave before Colonel George and Whitcher and Morrison 
 left ? - 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. Were there any statements of Whitcher s taken down there? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. None at all ? 
 
 A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Now, I understand you to say that you saw Colonel George mark 
 some tickets. Let me ask you if there is anything in the seven pack 
 ages that enables you positively to identify them ? 
 
 A. They correspond to these tickets. 
 
 Q. Is there anything else ? 
 
 A. The hand-writing corresponds, as I saw him put them on. 
 
 Q. Do you know Col. George s hand- writing ? 
 
 A. I know that he wrote on them. 
 
 Q. That is not the question. Did you ever see his writing before ?, 
 
 A I never did. 
 
 Q. Were you then, or are you now, familiar with his hand ? 
 
 A. His general hand-writing I am not. 
 
36 
 
 Q. Now, 1 want to ask you if you can swear that that is Colonel 
 George s hand- writing ? 
 
 A. I have no doubt. 
 
 Q. Will you look at these Gs and see if they are in Col. George s 
 hand- writing, any of them ? 
 . A. I should think they were not like these on the back of the tickets. 
 
 Q. See if you can find a G there that resembles at all any G that 
 lie put on the back of any of these tickets ? 
 
 A. I suppose there might be quite a difference in a man s hand 
 writing. As he put them on there, he put them on very fast. 
 
 Q. Can you find a G that he made V 
 
 A. Yes, sir; there are several that are similar to these on the tick 
 ets. 
 
 Q. Will you pick out a G that you are able to say he wrote ? 
 
 A. 1 am not able to say that he wrote any of them. There is one 
 there similar to the ones that he made on the tickets. 
 
 Q. Now find any one that you say he made. 
 
 A. i don t say that he made any. 
 
 y. Find a single one that you think he made. 
 
 A. He may have made the whole of them. 
 
 (,). Find one that you think he made. 
 
 A. There is another that looks similar to those. 1 suppose that 
 there are very many different letters on the tickets in the same hand. 
 
 Q. Now, are you able, from the examination of the hand-writing on 
 these tickets, and with your knowledge of the hand-writing of Colonel 
 George, to point to a single one on that paper that was made by him ? 
 
 A. Let me point out to you a difference ; I do not pretend to state 
 that Colonel George made these ; I state that there is a resemblance ; 
 but if you look at that you will find that the point is the other way. 
 
 Q. Well, without going into the reasons, point out any of those that 
 are his ? 
 
 A. I do not say that any are his. 
 
 Q. Are you able to swear, from having seen him mark on the ticket, 
 and from your own knowledge of his hand-writing, that either of those 
 Gs were made by Colonel George ? 
 
 A. I would not swear that there was one of them made by Colonel 
 George. 
 
 Q. Are you able to tell, from your knowledge of his hand-writing, 
 and from the tickets, that a single one of the tickets were marked by 
 Colonel George ? 
 
 A. I do swear that I saw him mark two hundred and twenty-six 
 with the letter G, and these resemble them. 
 
 Q. You say you saw him mark two hundred and twenty-six tickets. 
 Will you be kind enough to count those tickets and see whether there 
 are two hundred and twenty-six tickets in them that are marked that 
 are in the seven packages ? 
 
 Mr. George. Excuse me ; there is another package that you have not 
 Keen. Question withdrawn.] 
 
 Q. I want you to point out the differences that there are between 
 the letters G on the tickets and the letters G on the lower line [hand 
 ing papers to witness], and explain the differences that you notice be 
 tween the letters on the ticket and the letters on that lower line ? 
 
 A. In finishing the point at the lower end of the letter G in this 
 line, it is brought this way, and in finishing these it is brought to the 
 
37 
 
 right. On the ticket the point is carried to the left, and on the paper 
 to the right. 
 
 Q. Now then, sir, from your knowledge of Colonel George s hand r 
 and your opinion of the tickets, did he make any of the Gs there on 
 that lower line ? 
 
 A. Well, in deciding, 1 should decide on the turning of that point 
 altogether. 
 
 Q. Now did he, in your opinion, make either of those Grs on the 
 lower line ? 
 
 A. I should hardly want to say that this was. both the same hand 
 writing. 
 
 Q. Did he, in your opinion, make either of those (Is on that lin 
 [calling attention to another line on the same sheet] ? 
 
 A. I should hardly think that it was the same hand-writing. 
 
 Q. From your knowledge of his hand-writing, independently of the 
 fact that you saw him mark any tickets at any time supposing these 
 tickets were shown to you and independently of the fact that you saw 
 him mark on any tickets at Manchester at any time, let me ask you if 
 you are able to say that either of these Gs were made by Colonel 
 George ? 
 
 A. These are exactly similar to those that I saw him put on the 
 tickets. 1 should say that they were made by him. 
 
 Q. Aside from the fact that you saw him put the letter on the tick 
 ets ? 
 
 A. Aside from that fact 1 am not able to state. If 1 may be al 
 lowed, there is a difference in these three ; these are straight, and the 
 others turn to the left. 
 
 [Mr. Tappan stated that at some period of the case he should call 
 for a description of each one of these tickets.] 
 
 Q. You say that you arrested two others besides Mr. Whitcher. 
 Who were they ? 
 
 A Mr. White and Mr. Weston. 
 
 Q Are they the gentlemen who were examined here yesterday V 
 
 A. I understood that they came here ; I did not see them here. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George. ) Have you identified the others ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Now let me ask you if you had under ar 
 rest White and Weston ? 
 
 A. 1 had a warrant for each of them, at Stanley s office. 
 
 Q. Did you have them there at the same time, or before ? 
 
 A. Before. 
 
 Q. Did you have them there at the same time, or did you arrest 
 them and bring them in separately ? 
 
 A. I think they were both in there at the same time. 
 
 Q. What did you arrest them for ? What offence ? Have you got 
 the warrant? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What offence did you understand, or did you give them to un 
 derstand that you were arresting them for ? 
 
 A. I supposed the warrant sufficient authority, and J took them at 
 Mr. Stanley s request. 
 
 Q. Did you understand the nature of the offence charged against 
 them in the warrant? 
 
 A. I am not able to say now whether I did or not. 
 
38 
 
 Q. Did you understand it ? 
 A. I did afterwards. 
 
 Q. What was it? 
 
 A. In regard to railroad matters. 
 vQ. Did you understand what they were arrested for? 
 A. Mr. Stanley gave me warrants. 
 \>. Were you present when they were made ? 
 A. I was not. 
 *Q. How long did you have them in custody? 
 
 A. Not a great while. 
 
 Q. Did you have them in custody elsewhere than in Stanley s office? 
 
 A. No, sir : I did not. 
 
 Q. Were you present ;ill the time they were in >t;,ni<y s office". 
 
 A. 1 was not. 
 
 Q. You don t know that during the time that they were under ar 
 rest they made any statements in writing? 
 
 A. No, sir ; f did not. 
 
 Q. How long a time did you have them under arrest ? 
 vA. Long enough to get from the stores to Stanley s office. 
 
 -Q. You arrested them and took them to Mr. Stanley s office ut the 
 request of Mr. Stanley ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. At Stanley s request? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. Have you had them under arrest since then? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 "Q. AVho directed you to bring them to Stanley s office and leave 
 them ? 
 
 A. He did. 
 
 Q. Did you go and arrest them and bring them to Stanley s office 
 and leave them there ? What did you leave them for? 
 
 A. Because 1 done all that I had to do. 
 
 Q. Is that the way you do ordinarily? 
 
 A. Not always. 
 
 Q. Why did you abandon them ? 
 
 A. Because l supposed it had been fixed according to Mr. Stanley s 
 satisfaction. 
 
 Q. Were you told anything to that effect? 
 
 A. I may have been told that it was all right. 
 
 Q. Can you account for it in any other way? 
 
 A. I cannot account for it in any other way than I was satisfied 
 that it was all right. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman,) Mr. Prescott. I understood you to say that 
 you took the warrants, and went and invited these men to go up to Mr. 
 Stanley s office. Did you inform them that you had warrants ? 
 
 A. No. sir. 
 
 Q. Did you show the warrants ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. In point of fact, you did not give them any notice that they 
 were under arrest ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I merely asked them to step up to Mr. Stanley s. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridr/e.} Didn t you say that you wished them to 
 go up to Mr. Stanley s office, and wasn t that according to your usual 
 e ustom ? 
 
A. That s what is called arresting them, if we have a warrant. 
 
 Q. It is the same way that you arrest half that you do arrest ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And were they as completely in your custody as nine-tenths of 
 the parties that you arrest? 
 
 A. If they had refused to go, I should have shown them the war 
 rant. 
 
 Q. Did you not regard them as much under arrest as nine-tenths of 
 the parties you do arrest ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) You went for the purpose, if they had not 
 come, of arresting them ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. So far as you know, did either White or Weston know that you 
 had warrants against them ? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Didn t they know very well that you were 
 the assistant marshal of the City of Manchester ? By the way, what 
 day of the week was it that you arrested Whitcher? 
 
 A. Saturday. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you had him in your keeping all the time? 
 
 A. I put him in charge of a keeper and another officer. 
 
 Q. Who was the other officer ? 
 
 A. His name was Griffin. 
 
 Q. What was done with him ? 
 
 A. He was taken to Concord. 
 
 Q. On Sunday ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What time in the day was he taken to Concord ? 
 
 A. I think it was in the afternoon. 
 
 Q. How was he taken ? 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore sent a special train. 
 
 Q. Did you come up with him on Sunday ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; Mr. Farmer, also. 
 
 Q. You came up with him on Sunday ? 
 
 A. I came up with Mr. Farmer. Farmer was sheriff of the county ; 
 I was not. 
 
 Q. Where was he taken to after he got here ? 
 
 A. He was taken into the second story of the depot down here. 
 
 Q. Who was present in the second story of the depot there, on Sun 
 day, after you got him up here ? 
 
 A. I think that Col. George and Gov. Gilmore took him into another 
 room from where we were. I am very sure. 
 
 Q. He was taken on a special train from Manchester, on Sunday. 
 What time did you arrive in the city here ? 
 
 A. I am not able to state. 
 
 Q. About what time ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it was about two o clock. 
 
 Q. About two o clock in the afternoon ? Now who came up in the 
 train with him, besides you and Mr. Farmer ? Anybody ? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. He was taken by you into the second story of the depot, and 
 there you found Gilmore and Col. George ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long was he there before he was taken away by Col. George 
 and Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
40 
 
 A. I can t remember ; it was some time ago. 
 
 Q. They took him in another room ? 
 
 A. They took him in another room. 
 
 Q. How long did they keep Whiteher in that private room ? 
 
 A. 1 should think it was two hours or more. 
 
 Q. Well, sir ; when he came from the room he was under arrest 
 
 at the time he came here ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you take him into custody after he came from (Jol. George 
 and Gov Gilmore ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What did you do with him then ? Did you let him get off at 
 Hooksett ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did the train run back that day ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you take him into custody after he came from Col. George 
 and Gov. Gilmore, and take him on board the special train running 
 back that day, and let him get off the train at Hooksett ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Has he been in your custody since then? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether he locked the door ? 
 
 A. I do not. 
 
 Q. Did they come out from the time they went in until they finally 
 came out? 
 
 A. I am not able to state. 
 
 Q. Did anybody go in during that time ? 
 
 A. I am not able to state. 
 
 Q. So far as you remember, were they in consultation with Whiteher 
 two hours or more ? 
 
 A. It is my impression that they were. 
 
 Q. What time did you start with Whiteher to go back to Hooksett ? 
 Do you remember that? 
 
 A. I do not remember. We got home, I think, about dark a little 
 dusky. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Mr. Prescott, what day of the month was 
 this this Sunday ? 
 
 A. The eleventh day of February. 
 
 Q. The day after his arrest ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where was Whiteher during that time, between the time of his 
 arrest and the time you brought him here ? 
 
 A. He was in charge of an officer ; I think they stayed at the City 
 Hotel. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) At Manchester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Mr. Prescott, 1 would ask you whether Col. Cheney was there ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Do you know whether they came up at the 
 request of Gov. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I think it was on the train. 1 had forgotten that. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) Was he before any police court, or magis 
 trate, before that ? Was he before any tribunal ? 
 
41 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who directed you, if anybody, to release the custody that you 
 had over Mr. Whiteher ? 
 
 A. L ain not able to state whether it was Col. George or Mr. Giliaore. 
 
 Q. Was it either of them ? 
 
 A. I think it was. 
 
 Q. Was the warrant put into your hands the same time as the war 
 rant for White and Weston ? 
 
 A. I think not the same. 
 
 Q. Did they give you orders to release them, after the interview 
 with Col. George and Gov. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. I think they gave us these instructions on the platform in the 
 depot. 
 
 Q. After the interview ? After you got ready to start ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you directed by anybody not to take Whitcher before any 
 tribunal not to return the warrant. 
 
 A. No, sir ; I was not. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF F. M. CRANE. 
 
 Mr. F. M. Crane, of Concord, N. H., was called in behalf of the 
 plaintiff, and duly sworn, and testified as follows : 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Please state whether you were a clerk to 
 Mr. Gilmore at the time of the arrest of Mr. Whitcher, and of the 
 finding of the tickets upon him ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. You were confidential clerk ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether these tickets came into your possession, 
 and you sorted them *? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Whether these were the tickets, and you sorted them ? These 
 are the tickets given you by Mr. Gilmore V You have examined them ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Whether they were put together in one package or separate 
 when they were given you ? 
 
 A. They were all together. 
 
 Q. You assorted them ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are these packages in your hand-writing ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are these the same tickets ? Can you identify them ? 
 
 A. I can only identify them by the G that is on them. 
 
 Q. Well, you know my hand-writing ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; they were all marked by you at the time. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt that that is my hand-writing G on the back ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, you must state when Mr Gilmore gave you those tickets, 
 and where you assorted them, and what you did ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect how long after ; it was certainly a fortnight. 
 
 Q. Certainly a fortnight after the arrest of Whitcher ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What directions did he give you ? and where were you when he 
 gave them to you ? and what did you do in pursuance of those direc 
 tions? 
 
42 
 
 A. He gave them to me in my office, and told me to assort them 
 on thu different roads and mark on them where they were from, and 
 who they were taken from, and so forth. 
 Q. Well, sir ; you did it, did you ? 
 A. I did it. 
 
 Q. And you put them in the same envelopes they are in now V 
 A. These are the envelopes. After 1 assorted them he requested 
 me to turn them over to the cashier. 
 Q. The cashier? Mr. Webster? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And have you seen them from that time till now ? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where were they kept ? 
 A. In the safe in the cashier s office. 
 
 Q. How long did they remain there ? How long did you know of 
 them remaining there until the governor s death ? Or did you leave 
 before that ? 
 
 A. I left about the fifth of September. 
 Q. Were they there when you left ? 
 A. I think they were. 
 
 Q. Are you familiar with the tickets of the Concord Railroad ? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Won t you look at these, and see if they are not genuine tickets 
 of the Concord Railroad tickets in general use on the Concord Kail- 
 road ? 
 
 A. They are : but some of them are dated back, and were out of 
 use at that time. 
 
 Q. That is, they were not the kind of tickets that were used at that 
 time ? 
 
 A. I recollect at the time they were some two or three years old. 
 Q. Mr. Crane, did you make an abstract of the various tickets, and 
 the amounts, and so forth ? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect what was done with that ? 
 
 A. It was handed over to the cashier with those tickets. L think. I 
 made several copies of it. 
 
 Q. For whom did you make the several copies? 
 A. I believe for Mr. G-ilmove. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether any abstracts were made and given to the 
 conductors ? 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know how many abstracts were made ? 
 A. I think I made three. 
 
 Q. Did you make any abstracts of those found at one place, and 
 those found at the other places : that is, those found on Mr. Whitcher, 
 and those found at his house ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; T made two different abstracts. If I am not mistaken 
 they are here. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That is of no consequence, as a mere memorandum 
 made at the suggestion of Mr. (lilmore. 
 
 The Chairman. The suggestion is correct, perhaps, that he made it 
 at the suggestion of Mr. Gilmore. but he will testify as to the different 
 marks. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You nia.de a separation, just as you were in 
 structed. 
 
A. Yes, sir. 
 
 J/r. Muyridg,". No man has sworn that they were marked G 2. 
 
 J//. George. That is where the back an<.l face were just alike. 
 
 Q. (7% Mr. George.) How did you mark those found on his per 
 son, as distinguished from those found at his house ? 
 
 A. They were given to me in different packages; those on his per 
 son in one package, and those at his house in another. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} What is your knowledge? 
 
 A. Simply from what Mr. Gilinore told me. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 <.^>, {By Mr. Mugri lge,) Mr. Crane, are you able to testify, posi 
 tively, that these are the tickets? 
 
 A. Only by the G on the back. 
 
 Q. Supposing other tickets were marked on the back? 
 
 A. 1 could not testify. 
 
 Q. Was there any distinguishing mark pointed out to you to desig 
 nate those found at the house, from those found on his person . 
 
 A. No, sir. , 
 
 Q. There was no mark on the back of those found on his person 
 that was not found on those found at the house ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; neither of them were marked ; that is, designating 
 where they were found. Mr. Gilmore gave me both packages, 
 
 Q. But was there any figure 2 on them ? 
 
 A. I did not notice, 
 
 Q. Was figure 2 pointed out to you as being a distinguishing mark 
 upon those tickets ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; it was not. 
 
 Q. Now, then, are you perfectly confident that the tickets handed to 
 you at that time had any figure 2 upon them ? 
 
 A. 1 can say that there was no figure 2 on them. 
 
 Q. Are you pretty confident that the figure 2 did not appear on every 
 one of the tickets that were handed to you at that time ? 
 
 A, I should have noticed it if there had been. 
 
 Q. Now then, sir, if the figure 2 appears upon any of these tickets 
 here (there is one with the figure 2 on it), did you see any such tickets 
 handed to you by Mr. Gilmore? 
 
 A. No, sir ; there was nothing said about it, 
 
 Q. Did you see any ? 
 
 A. I did not ; simply because J was not requested, 
 
 Q. Wouldn t you have noticed the 2 as well as the G? 
 
 A. I probably should 
 
 Q. Do you remember how many tickets you marked at that time ? 
 
 A. I do not. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea with regard to the number ? 
 
 A. I don t think I have. 
 
 Q. Could not you tell. I mean marked on the envelopes ? Have 
 you any idea of the number of tickets passed to you to sort, at that 
 time ? 
 
 A. I should say perhaps there was in the vicinity of two hundred. 
 
 Q. And I understand you that these were not handed to you to be 
 sorted until some two weeks after Mr. Whitcher was arrested ? 
 
 A. 1 think it was two weeks. 
 
 0. Then he brought them along to you in these envelopes ? 
 
44 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That is, he brought to you a lot of tickets that he wanted you to 
 sort and mark in the way you did, and that these were sorted in the 
 envelopes ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if it was not four weeks ? 
 
 A. I could not say ; 1 know it was some time. 
 
 Q. From your present recollection can you say that it was not two 
 months ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; 1 cannot. 
 
 Q. Was it more than three months ? Would you say that it was not 
 more than three months? 
 
 A. No, sir. That is after Mr. Whitchcr s arrest. 
 
 Q. You would not say that it was not? 
 
 A. No, sir; I should not. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether you were down at the depot ? 
 
 A. 1 was. 
 
 Q. Was there a meeting of the officers of the Concord Railroad, with 
 regard to railroad matters ? and if so, who was present at that confer 
 ence"? And how long a time was spent ? 
 
 A. 1 think they arrived between half past two and three. 
 
 Q. In the afternoon ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who was present ? 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore and Col. George and Mr. Pecker. 
 
 Q. Mr. Pecker, a correspondent of the Boston Journal ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Pecker, the correspondent of the Boston Journal there, 
 with Col. George and Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; he was not. 
 
 Q. Where was he ? 
 
 A. He was in the depot Pecker attempted to go into G-ilmore s 
 office, and Gilmore told him he would kick him down stairs if he did 
 not get out of the way. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if this Pecker is a special correspondent, living 
 here in Concord? 
 
 A. He was at the time. 
 
 Q. He is a man who telegraphs his effusions from here over the 
 signature of " F. F." ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Whether Pecker had been down there before on that Sunday ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether a communication had been handed to 
 Pecker and he had telegraphed it to the Boston Journal ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. There had been ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who prepared the article to be telegraphed by Pecker to the 
 Boston Journal next morning, with regard to the railroad robbery ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Was it prepared by Colonel George and Gilmore and Pecker, al 
 together ? 
 
 A. I could not say by whom it was prepared. 
 
 Q. Were they all present at the time it was prepared ? 
 
45 
 
 A. I could not say whether Pecker was there or not. 
 
 Q. Did Col. George and Mr. Gilmore prepare that article themselves, 
 in the absence of Mr. Pecker ? 
 
 A. That I could not say. 
 
 Q. Did you see Mr. Gilmore and Col. George at work upon an arti 
 cle that was to be telegraphed to the Boston Journal ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. What day of the week was this communication prepared by Col. 
 George and Gov. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. That I could not say. 
 
 Q. Was it Sunday ? Was it the day they came up from Manches 
 ter ? 
 
 A. Yes, it was, sir ; I think it was Sunday evening. 
 
 Q. Did you see the communication ? and who did the writing and 
 who did the dictating in the preparation of the article ? 
 
 A. I thought at the time it was Col. George. 
 
 Q. He did the writing and the dictating. Should you recognize the 
 article ? 
 
 A. I copied the article myself. 
 
 Q. Should you recognize the article if you saw it again. 
 
 A. I think I should. 
 
 Q. At whose suggestion was the article prepared ? 
 
 A. It was handed me by Col. George. 
 
 Q. So far as you know, did anybody but Col. George have anything 
 to do with getting it up ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. So far as you know, could anybody else have? 
 
 A. Nobody except Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Gilmore make any suggestion as to what should be in 
 corporated in it ? 
 
 A. I do not know. 
 
 Q. So far as you know, did not Col. George himself write that ar 
 ticle ? Do you know that there was a single sentiment that came from 
 Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. I could not say that there was. I recollect that Colonel George 
 came from Mr. Gilmore s room and handed it to me, and asked me to 
 copy it. [Intermission. | 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to look at that article in the Boston 
 Journal and see if that is the article prepared by Col. George? 
 
 A. The latter part was something that was added after I copied it. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you have had any conversation with any one 
 in regard to this since the adjournment? 
 
 A. I have; with Col. George. 
 
 Q. What did Col. George say to you? 
 
 A. He simply asked if I understood why this was sent. I told him 
 I did ; and he asked me what I understood from him, and I simply told 
 him it was sent that the public might ascertain from this an idea of 
 things, so that there would not be an exaggeration, or anything of that 
 kind. 
 
 Q. Did Col. George say that there was? 
 
 A. He asked me if I knew that there was. 
 
 Q. Did he call your attention to the last part as added after it was 
 copied by you by somebody? 
 
 A. No, sir; he didn t state that, but he asked me if I was aware 
 of it. 
 
(J,. Will you be kind enough to Miy where that article ends, as 
 copied by you ? 
 
 A. i think it was The commencement of that that was added 
 
 was that about the city clerk s office. 
 
 The counsel for the defendant proceeded to read the article in ques- 
 tion, beginning Avith the headings of the article ; whereupon the counsel 
 for the plaintiff objected to the reading of the headings, as not forming 
 a part of the article as originally sent. 
 
 The Chairman. We think it proper for the plaintiff s counsel to in 
 quire about that matter, in order to determine what was actually stated. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Gevryr. ) Was there any heading to the article given 
 to Mr. Pecker \ 
 
 A. In speaking of this article 1 had no reference to the heading. 
 
 Q. {By Mr. Mugridge. ) After you copied that article, what did 
 you do with it? 
 
 A. 1 handed it to Col. George. 
 
 Q. For what purpose did you understand from Col. George that the 
 copy you made was made ? 
 
 A 1 understood it was to be given to Mr. Pecker. 
 
 Q. For publication ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, after having copied it, you handed it to Col. George ? 
 
 A. 1 did. 
 
 Now, we shall argue from that that it was prepared in that office V 
 
 Mr. George, i object that the testimony was not relevant. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. Now then, it appears that a portion of this article was 
 prepared by Col. George, and that a portion of it was copied, and that 
 it went into the hands of Col. George. And one part of our defence is 
 this, may it please your Honors, that this whole affair against the con 
 ductors is a conspiracy to cover up the fraud and infamy of the rail 
 road managers themselves, to make a scape-goat of these conductors. 
 And it does not make any difference whose shoes are trodden upon in 
 this investigation. This whole thing was concocted if) raise a great 
 smoke, under the cover of which they were to go out harmless. Sus 
 picion had already attached to the managers of the Concord Railroad. 
 There was a great deal said in regard to that management, and a great 
 deal of talk going on everywhere. The annual meeting was soon to 
 come off, and it was necessary for Mr. Gilmore, and perhaps others, to 
 get up something that would draw public attention from themselves and 
 what they had done, and would palm it off and shoulder it upon others. 
 And we shall show 7 in this investigation that not only this gentleman, 
 but others, were innocent of the frauds which were the frauds of the 
 principal, and not of the mere servants and agents of those who went 
 over this road 
 
 Mr. George. The remark of my brother to Gov. Oilmore himself 
 was not exactly like what he says here. " Sir, we do not accuse you of 
 anything any of these things ; if you had had the management of 
 these things everything would have been all right." I notice that his 
 remarks of Gov. Gilmore now are very different from what they were. 
 
 The question here is whether Mr. George Clough has been guilty of 
 such conduct that under this writ and action of assumpsit we are 
 entitled to recover of him what he has taken from the Concord Rail 
 road. If he has not taken anything from the Concord Railroad, why 
 then, of course this suit cannot be maintained, If Mr. Gilmore has 
 
47 
 
 not stolen anything, and if -Mr. dough has not stolen anything; then 
 this writ cannot be maintained. And Mr. Gilmore s conviction cannot 
 increase nor lessen Mr. Oiough s. We are here to try this case on the 
 law and evidence applicable to this case. 1 have not objected in this 
 matter, because when you talk about sensation, i should like to have 
 an opportunity of showing the number of lawyers retained in this case,- 
 and the number of sensation people. I do not think it would be diffi 
 cult to see the source from which the sensation came. If we cannot 
 maintain our case, then it is our misfortune. Let me say this : if the 
 present directors of the corporation do not unanimously insist that this 
 suit shall be prosecuted to the end, then 1 am misinformed. And if 
 the gentleman will satisfy me of the fact that they are not, i will go 
 out of this case immediately. When the gentleman undertakes to say 
 that these suits which were ordered to be commenced when the old 
 board was in office, are not desired by the present board, 1 think he 
 will find himself mistaken. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I do not think it is necessary to prolong this discus 
 sion. 1 have only stated strongly what 1 thought necessary to state ; 
 and we think that all the circumstances surrounding this matter should go 
 in. We say that the whole thing, to repeat, was gotten iip by Mr. Gil- 
 more I won t name the others, they will appear in the course of the evi 
 dence for the purpose, not so much of ever getting anything from this 
 conductor, or that conductor, as for the purpose of getting up a smoke 
 under which the guilty parties could go clear, and securing a re-elec 
 tion, which was not secured. Now gentlemen, 1 do not think it comes 
 with a very good grace to talk about multiplicity of counsel. You see 
 before you all the counsel in this case. 1 suppose Mr. Olough has a 
 right to employ all the counsel he chooses. Mr. Noyes and Mr. Jones 
 have a right to employ whom they choose. And I think considerable 
 capital has been attempted to be made from the fact that Gen. Butler 
 has been engaged to prosecute these men. And Gen. Butler has been 
 conferred with, and he lias been consulted. And therefore I do not 
 think the array of counsel is greater on this side than on the other. 
 But this does not amount to anything here. W T e ask to put in this article 
 as part of the res gestce in order that the commission may understand 
 where this originated, and the means and appliances used to carry it on. 
 
 The Chairman. There is no question macle but that certain portions 
 of it should be read. 
 
 Mr. George. I am willing that everything should be read, except 
 the headings. 
 
 Mr. Mngridge. We regard the headings as a material part. 1 sub 
 mit that the article, as he understood, was written by Col. George for 
 publication, and it was presented to him to copy, and was handed back 
 by him, and the next we see it is this article in the Boston Journal. 
 And the presumption is that as it went so it was forwarded ; that it was 
 sent as it appeared in the Journal. 
 
 The Chairman. We think that, as far as the heading of this article 
 is concerned, it would be better to pursue the inquiry a little further 
 and ascertain, as well as can be done, what the condition of the article 
 was, and how much of that article was handed to the correspondent. 
 J understand the counsel do not object to that article being read. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Wont you be kind enough to look at that? 
 article, and state what part of it was made in the copy you made ? 
 
 A. I copied to where it is turned 
 
48 
 
 Q. Where did you commence ? 
 
 A. 1 commenced here [pointing to the beginning]. 
 
 Q. You commenced, then, with the first line of the article and copied 
 down to the words " city clerk s " ? Now, having copied it in that way, 
 you handed it back to Col. George, to be published ? Didn t he say, at 
 the time, that it was for publication ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 1 think he was aware that I knew the fact that it was 
 to be published. 
 
 Q. How did you learn the fact? 
 
 A. On account of Mr. Pecker being there to receive it. 
 
 Q. From what did you learn it? 
 
 A. I inferred it. 
 
 Q. \Vas Pecker present at the time you handed this article to Col. 
 George ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think he was. 
 
 Q. Did you see Pecker when he left the room, or did you know 
 whether this article had been handed to Pecker before he left the room ? 
 
 A. He left the room with it. 
 
 Q. With the article ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether any alterations had been made in the arti 
 cle by Col. George, after it was handed to him ? 
 
 A. I know that they added something, but whether it was Colonel 
 George,, or Mr. Gilmore, or Judge Upham, I don t know. After that 
 was added to it, permission was given to him to have it published. 
 
 Q. Did you know that something was added to the article after it 
 was copied by yourself, and returned to Col. George, before Pecker took 
 it? 
 
 A. No, sir; I think not. All the addition that was made wa.s 
 made by Mr. Pecker himself. 
 
 Q. In the presence of these gentlemen? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. In the presence of Mr. Gilinore ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think not. I think he went into the telegraph office 
 and brought it back. 
 
 Q. After he had been to the telegraph office and altered it, he then 
 returned ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, And then permission was given him to publish it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; from some authority. I don t know who. 
 
 Q. Now who was in Gilrnore s office when Pecker returned with the 
 article from the telegraph office? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Mr. Gilmore was there, was he ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say that. 
 
 Q. Upham ? 
 
 A. Well, I couldn t say who was there. 
 
 Q. Who gave him permission to publish it ? 
 
 A. It was one of the three, or from some one connected with the 
 affair that had authority to do so. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Did you see that article after Pecker went 
 in the hall ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether there was any heading to it ? 
 
49 
 
 A. No, sir ; there was not. I simply read it over with the addition 
 that he made. I think there was no heading on it. 
 
 Q. Then the article, as it was published, hadn t headings on it? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge offered in evidence the entire article, including the 
 headings, as evidence of an alleged conspiracy against the conductors. 
 
 The Chairman. I think the opinion of the referees is, that they 
 would not rule in any more than what is authorized to be published, as 
 shown by the witness. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge then read the body of the article, which is as follows : 
 
 " In October last, on account of information officially communicated, the Board of Di- 
 " rectors of the Concord Railroad directed Colonel John H. George, clerk and counsel for 
 " the corporation, to make a thorough investigation as to the manner in which the pasen- 
 " ger conductors discharged their duties. Colonel George employed Major George J. Car- 
 " ney, of Lowell, to act as a detective agent. Major Carney, as an excuse for residence 
 " at Concord, and for constant riding in the cars, established a large claim agency here, 
 and for the following mouths spent most of his time passing over the various roads oper- 
 ated by the Concord Corporation, without exciting suspicion. It is understood that the 
 result of Major Carney s investigations show not only disregard of the general niles of 
 the road, but a failure to account to the corporation for money paid for tickets in the cars. 
 Upon the submission of Major Carney s report, all the conductors were immediately dis- 
 charged and new appointments made. Since that time a very searching investigation 
 has been going on in furtherance of the general object. Yesterday, Governor Gilmore 
 and Colonel George went to Manchester, having learned that tickets were being sold upon 
 " the streets for far less than their value, and caused a careful examination, and also several 
 " arrests to be made. One of the person^ arrested had in his possession several hundred 
 tickets over the Concord and connecting roads, which he alleges he purchased of the 
 conductors. A further investigation in the same direction is still in progress. Last evening 
 writs were made against the conductors for embezzlement, and all their property attach- 
 ed; and there can be no doubt, from the character of those having charge of the investi- 
 gation, that this matter will be probed to the bottom. An examination of the City Clerk s 
 office shows that attachments have been made in the sum of three hundred thousand 
 " dollars, from, which it may be inferred that the defalcations have been of a large and 
 " of an alarming character. 
 
 " Two of the parties arrested for alleged participation in the sale of illicit tickets are 
 " merchants of high standing, whose names are not yet given to the public. The individ- 
 " ual upon whom was found the large number of tickets, is James "Whitcher of If ooksett, 
 " a manufacturer of wooden ware, and formerly a Canterbury Shaker. 
 
 " There seems to be no doubt but that the alleged system of plunder had gained a mag- 
 " nitude before detection, that will completely astonish the public. 
 
 " The discharge of the conductors, several weeks ago, led people to think that some- 
 " thing was wrong, but they were not prepared for such startling disclosures as the above. 
 " and their announcement in our city to-day js attended with great surprise, and no little 
 " astonishment. It is now reported that further arrests have been made to-day and that 
 " more disclosures are in progress. The result of further investigation will be looked for 
 " with intense interest." 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Now, Mr. Crane, do you know anything 
 of the preparation of the article that appeared in the Boston Journal 
 next day ? See if you know anything about that article. 
 
 A. No, sir ; I do not. 
 
 Q. You know whether that was prepared at Grilmore s office, by any 
 body in his office ? 
 
 A. I don t know that it was. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect of another article being prepared the next day ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect of Pecker, the correspondent, being there with 
 reference to obtaining information ? 
 
 A. I saw him there. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether he made any inquiries and made min 
 utes of the information he received ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Do you know what his object in being there was ? 
 
 A. I suppose it was to get information. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether there was any talk made in Gilmore s 
 office in reference to the commencement of suits against the conductors ? 
 
 A. I don t know that there was. I was generally present when he 
 was. 
 
50 
 
 Q. How long were they in consultation Col. George and Mr. Gil- 
 more what part of the day about this business ? 
 
 A. I should think in all from an hour and a half to two hours. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Crane, you remember, after you copied 
 what has been read do you remember, when I handed it to Mr. Pecker, 
 the remark that Mr. Pecker made. 
 
 A. I heard no conversation. 
 
 [Plaintiff s counsel then offered in evidence the deposition of Martin 
 Starkey, and a portion of the same was admitted and read. 
 
 Mr. Tappan stated that the defendant s counsel did not object to the 
 testimony of Mr. Starkey in regard to free passes, but did not with 
 draw their general objection. 
 
 Judge Bellows stated that it had been distinctly understood that, 
 although some evidence had gone in upon this point, the same objection 
 applied generally. 
 
 Mr. Eolfe objected to testimony as to conversation between Mr. 
 Whitcher and Mr. Starkey, in which Mr. Starkey attempted to state 
 what Whitcher told him, and the same was ruled out. 
 
 Objection was made to the seventh interrogatory, as to Mr. Whitcher s 
 having given some tickets away. 
 
 It was stated that in the view of the referees what was done was 
 evidence, and what was said was not evidence.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF BAKUCH BIDDLE. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} What is your occupation ? 
 
 A. I have charge of the depot. 
 
 Q. You are what is called depot-master? 
 
 A. I am not now. 
 
 Q. Have you had any such charge ? 
 
 A. I have, until within a year. 
 
 Q. During the war, Mr. Biddle, did you keep an account of the 
 number of cars attached to each train ? If so, by whose direction ? 
 
 A. By Mr. Gilmore s. 
 
 Q. Did you keep such an account ? 
 
 A. I did, sir, at times ; I should say about six months ; short of a 
 year. 
 
 Q. During the war? 
 
 A. It was during the latter part of the war. 
 
 Q. Where is that record, if you know ? 
 
 A. I do not, sir. Mr. Gilmore took it from me, and I never saw it 
 afterwards. 
 
 Q. You may state, from your recollection, as near as you can, how 
 many cars a train take the 10.15 and the 3.30 trains from Concord 
 how many cars a train ran out of Concord during this period that you 
 kept this account ? 
 
 [Defendant s counsel objected to showing the amount of travel by the 
 number of cars as bearing upon the question of stealing by the conduct 
 ors. A long discussion ensued. Mr. Biddle was withdrawn, and was 
 not afterwards put upon the stand.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF JAMES E. KENDEICK. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Kendrick, I want you to explain to the 
 referees the manner of doing the passenger business on the Concord 
 Kailroad, so far as the sale of tickets is concerned, and the return of 
 tickets made, and the number of passengers, and from what it is 
 determined. 
 
51 
 
 The Chairman. What you want to know is, what it was at that 
 time. 
 
 Q. What is there how did you determine the number of passen 
 gers from the Northern road ? 
 
 A. They made a return monthly of the sales. 
 
 Q. And what account did you have ? 
 
 A. We have a coupon from that road for each passenger that passes 
 over it. 
 
 Q. The Concord Kailroad takes up that coupon ticket ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And these two should agree, if correct? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. They make a return to you arid you take up the coupon ticket, 
 and if they agreed, it was correct ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir ; that is the principle that we go upon. 
 
 Q. Now then, how did you make up the number of passengers on 
 the Concord road V I mean the local business of the Concord Eailroad. 
 
 A. They are made up by returns from the different ticket-sellers 
 monthly. 
 
 Q. And the general ticket agent ? 
 
 A. Makes up an account. They are rendered to me. The ticket 
 sellers make a return to me of the sales monthly. 
 
 Q. W^hat does the conductor do with the returns ? 
 
 A. They are returned to the office. 
 
 Q. To whom are they returned ? 
 
 A. To the general ticket agents, every trip. 
 
 Q. Suppose a man does not buy his ticket at the ticket office, but of 
 the conductor ? 
 
 A. The returns are made by the conductor to the general ticket 
 office every trip. 
 
 Q. Just tell me how the number of passengers over the Concord 
 Kailroad was made out ? 
 
 A. From the returns of the ticket sellers arid the returns of the 
 conductors. Those two are the only two that we have ; the returns* of 
 the ticket sellers the report of the tickets that they sold and the 
 returns of the conductors of those without tickets. I suppose, put both 
 these together, they would make up the amount of travel upon the road, 
 
 Q. What do you call a trip on the road by a passenger conductor ? 
 
 A. A trip down and back from Concord to Nashua and back, or to 
 different places. 
 
 Q. You would call from here to Nashua a train, and from here to 
 Nashua and back a trip ? 
 
 A. That is the usual way. 
 
 Q. Suppose a man runs to Nashua ; at the end of the trip, where 
 does the conductor take the tickets ? 
 
 A. The tickets are carried into the general ticket office, and the 
 money is paid to the cashier. 
 
 Q. Supposing, Mr. Kendrick, that ten men should get into the cars 
 at Concord to go to Nashua, and they should pay ten fares to the con 
 ductor in the cars, and the conductor should not return these ten fares, 
 would the road have any evidence whatever of the passage of these ten 
 men ? 
 
 A. If the conductor did not return the amount on his way-bill, I 
 don t know as we could. 
 
52 
 
 Q. These ten men would not be reckoned in the number of passen 
 gers ? 
 
 A. Not if they were not returned. 
 
 Q. Supposing ten persons should buy their tickets at the ticket 
 offices, and the conductor should take up the tickets going down, and 
 then re-sell them, so they would be used six times, and at the end of the 
 week returned, would there be any record or evidence of more than a 
 single passage ? 
 
 A. Of these ten tickets ? 
 
 Q. Of these ten persons ? 
 
 A. No, sir; these ten tickets were represented as the first ten fares 
 that were taken, or rather the sale of the first ten tickets. 
 
 Q. And the others would not find any representation on the records 
 of the road ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) I was going to ask Mr. Kendrick this ques 
 tion : In the first place, under what circumstances, by the course of 
 business, does the conductor have tickets to sell ? 
 
 A. He has tickets to sell only to stations below our road. He has 
 tickets to sell to Lowed, Boston, Lawrence, and those points that he 
 doesn t run to himself, with which we connect ourselves. He has con 
 ductors checks for that purpose himself. They are furnished by the 
 feueral ticket agent and charged to the conductor, and he is accounta- 
 le, the same as the ticket seller. 
 
 Q. These would be used in cases where he took fare on the train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What has been the usage in regard to date ? putting the date 
 .upon tickets sold ? How is it, for instance how has been the usage as 
 to tickets sold by the Northern or the Vermont Central road ? Are 
 these tickets dated ? 
 
 A. Some of these are dated, I think, and some are not. I am not 
 eertain in regard to them all. Mr. Sanborn could tell. 
 
 Q. How was it with regard to ours ? 
 
 A. At our own office we furnished our own tickets they are not 
 d.ated. 
 
 Q. Suppose it should happen that a ticket is sold at your office in 
 Ooncord we will say the 22d day of July, and is dated on the 22d day 
 of July and is returned by the conductor on the 10th of August. 
 What is the course of business in regard to that ticket? 
 
 A. We make no difference with the tickets we take the tickets 
 without regard to dates, so far as our road is concerned, at that time. 
 
 Q. Then, if I understand you, this date of the ticket does not 
 : furnish any check ? 
 
 A. So far as the date is concerned it is no material check. We 
 lhave now the consecutive checks, and in that way we keep track of the 
 cheeks. 
 
 Q. Does that enable you to show whether a check has been used 
 more than once ? 
 
 A. I suppose it does not, unless it is punched by the conductor. It 
 enables us to see that our tickets are collected. We can keep better 
 track of our tickets in that way, than if the tickets were not numbered. 
 
 Q. If I understand you, there is no check. This dating of the 
 ticket, as it is practiced, does not furnish any check to prevent the 
 ticket being used over and over again a great many times, before it gets 
 
 &idi to the 
 
53 
 
 A. Well, no sir that is the ticket is presented to the conductor of 
 an old date, and he very often questions the passenger in regard to it^ 
 and in some cases, I believe, where they are very old, they have been 
 refused. 
 
 Q. The question is, when the conductor brings it back to the ticket 
 office, whether it furnishes any check ? Is there any check by which 
 you can prevent, or by which you can know, whether one of your tick 
 ets is used more than once, supposing your conductor is violating his 
 duty, is there any way by which you can ascertain, supposing the ticket 
 is purchased one day and returned a week afterwards ? 
 
 A. I should not be able to tell, as I know of, by the date. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Is there any sort of a check? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t know as there is. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Gushing.} Do you know anything about the practice of 
 other roads ? 
 
 A. I am acquainted with those that we connect with. The practice 
 is pretty much the same, I expect. As we sell a ticket we advertise 
 that the ticket is good only for that day, but it has been ruled by law 
 that we cannot oblige a passenger to use a ticket on the day of sale, 
 and as a practice we have done away with it. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Supposing, taking all passengers on one 
 train, according to the course of your business, what ought the return 
 of the conductor to show that is, how far ought it to show the exact 
 number of passengers who traveled taking those who have passes and 
 season tickets, or mileage tickets, or anything else ? 
 
 A. The return of the conductor would show the travel with the ex 
 ception of the tickets going on to the roads below. Those, I think, we 
 did not take up a coupon of our sales. I mean by that, a man buys 
 a ticket from Concord to some place below our road we did not take 
 up the coupon ; we punched the ticket, and it goes on to the other road. 
 Tickets on the roads above us we took a coupon. Every passenger 
 going over our road to Boston buys a ticket from here to Boston, and 
 we have no coupon ; that is returned to us at the close of the month, 
 with their collection of tickets. But a passenger going from here to 
 Boston, we should have no coupon returned to our office. Our local 
 tickets are taken up. The ticket from here to Manchester would go on 
 to the lower road, and be taken up there. 
 
 Q. How is it in regard to those who have passes ? 
 
 A. From connecting roads, if they are going over our road, the 
 conductor takes a record of them usually. That is his direction usually. 
 Of the employees of our own road they are not taken ; that is, our 
 working hands those doing our own work. Where a pass terminates 
 on our road it is taken up on our road. 
 
 Q. In case a pass is given by other roads ? 
 
 A. The conductor takes the name and the pass is returned. 
 
 Q. If it is a season pass? 
 
 A. There is a record taken of the person holding it. The conductor 
 furnishes nothing more than this record. 
 
 Q. That is the same as a season ticket ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; we keep no record of the season ticket passengers. 
 
 Q. And the mileage tickets ? 
 
 A. The mileage tickets there isn t any record taken of them. The 
 ticket shows itself when it is taken up. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} The mileage tickets have come into use since 
 you were on the road ? 
 
54 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. The season tickets were used before ? 
 
 A. The season tickets were before. 
 
 Q. You said the tickets were returned? 
 
 A. The tickets themselves are returned from the other roads at the 
 end of the month. 
 
 Q. That is, these local tickets. They returned the tickets them 
 selves, from which you ascertained the number of passengers ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. That is, we verify the amount, by these collections, at 
 the close of the month. 
 
 Q. Is there any check whatever, or has there ever been ! mean a 
 check, or any system by which, if a conductor takes fifty dollars on a 
 day and returns only twenty-five, you Would know it from the records 
 which 3^ou have ? 
 
 A. No, sir : I don t know that there is. 
 
 Q. Is their anyway, by your statistical information, that you can 
 show that fact at all ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 M. (By Mr. Mugridge.) With regard to the manner of your busi 
 ness between the roads above you and yourself to illustrate, between 
 Plymouth and Boston suppose a passenger buys a ticket at Plymouth 
 to go to Boston, is there a record made at the Plymouth office of that 
 fact ? 
 
 A. 1 suppose there is. 
 
 Q. Now when that passenger gets into Concord, he gets in, having 
 in his hand what is called a coupon ticket, from Plymouth to Boston, does 
 he not ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now. then, is a coupon taken off on the Boston, Concord and 
 Montreal Railroad ? 
 
 A. I think that is their system. 
 
 Q. The next one is taken off on the Concord road by the conductor 
 on the Concord Railroad train, is it not ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And the others are taken off below Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Kendrick, it is the duty of your conductor to return 
 that coupon ticket, taken on the Concord road, to the general 
 agent, is it not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Because by that return of the coupon your account for the travel 
 is settled with the Boston, Concord and Montreal Eailroad ? 
 
 A. That we didn t settle by account. 
 
 Q. It represents your interest? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. But then, if we should lose the coupon we should get 
 our pay. 
 
 Q. Because they have got a record of it at Plymouth that is your 
 evidence ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, that is our evidence ; that is what we check our record 
 
 by- 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Kendrick, at the end of the month, your tickets being 
 all returned, you make an account of all the tickets sold for the Boston, 
 Concord and Montreal road ? 
 
55 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now the coupons at your office should agree with the number of 
 tickets charged at the Plymouth office ? 
 
 A. The number that they reported to us ? Yes, sir ; if they were 
 all taken up. 
 
 Q. At the end of every month you should have in your office a cou 
 pon for every passenger to whom they sold a ticket ? 
 
 A. We should, if these passengers all went through. A passenger 
 might start the last day of the month and come to Concord, and the 
 next day we were to take it. up, our record would not show it in the 
 month in which it was sold. But take six months together it would 
 show, or substantially show. 
 
 Q. Now we will suppose, Mr. Kendrick, that fifty tickets are sold at 
 the Plymouth office to go to Boston on the first day of the month ; if 
 the plan is properly carried out there should be fifty coupons in your 
 office at the end of that month V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Suppose a conductor should take fifty coupons and turn over 
 twenty-five of them, wouldn t that defalcation be manifest at the end 
 of the month, when you came to make up your record ? 
 
 A. It would, of course. 
 
 Q. Well, suppose a thousand tickets were sold north of Concord, 
 upon the Boston, Concord and Montreal, Northern, and Concord and 
 Claremont roads, all going to stations below Concord, and that the con 
 ductor takes up one hundred of those tickets on the Concord road cou 
 pons, I mean one hundred from the Boston, Concord and Montreal, and 
 one hundred from the Concord and Claremont making three hundred 
 and should return only these three hundred tickets to the general 
 office, when you come to make your monthly statement it would be seen 
 from the return that the conductor had abstracted the difference ? 
 
 A. Without there might be an error in the account. 
 
 Q. It would be palpable, if there were any taken away, that the 
 conductor had abstracted them V 
 
 A. It would look as if he had forgotten to return them, or had mis 
 laid them some way. 
 
 Q. Now, if you will allow me, Mr. Kendrick suppose that your 
 plan worked perfectly, just as it is intended, isn t there a perfect check 
 upon the conductor in regard to his stealing tickets, in the operation of 
 that plan. That is, can the conductors improperly withhold any amount 
 of these tickets without its being surely discovered at the time of the 
 monthly settlement? 
 
 A. We have half a dozen conductors we don t keep each conduct 
 or s returns in that shape. If there was one conductor, and the returns 
 were kept in that way, it would show in that way, or else a good many 
 passengers didn t travel that way. 
 
 Q. Now is there any possible way for a conductor to withhold, or 
 keep back, coupon tickets sold to passengers over the upper roads going 
 over your road to any amount, without that discrepancy or that lack be 
 ing made manifest at the time of your settlement ? 
 
 A. The amount of it is, I don t suppose we agree each month, be 
 cause passengers go from one month to another. 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 
56 
 
 [FOURTH DAY. Friday, July 24th, 1868.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF G. G. SANBOEN. 
 
 The hearing was resumed, and Mr. G. G. Sanborn, the general ticket 
 agent of the Concord Eailroad, was called by the plaintiff and sworn, 
 and testified as follows : 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You may state your residence. 
 
 A. I live in Concord. 
 
 Q. How old are you ? 
 
 A. Forty years old. 
 
 Q. What is your business on the Concord Eailroad ? 
 
 A. General ticket agent. 
 
 Q. How long have you been general ticket agent ? 
 
 A. About eleven years. 
 
 Q. How long have you been connected with the road in any capacity ? 
 
 A. About twenty years. 
 
 Q. Before you were general ticket agent, what were you ? 
 
 A. I sold tickets at the station. 
 
 Q. How long did you sell tickets at the station ? 
 
 A. About six years. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, I want you to explain, just as clearly as you 
 can, and just as minutely, the whole ticket system of the Concord Eail 
 road. I will just indicate generally what subjects I want you to 
 explain, and then you can go on in your own way. As to how tickets 
 are given out to the ticket sellers ; and what rates, if any, you take ; 
 how much you charge ; what tickets you give to the conductors : explain 
 how the conductors make their returns, and to whom they are made ; 
 and how the conductors make their returns for sales of tickets in the 
 cars ; and then I want you to explain how the accounts are kept, as to 
 the number of passengers carried on the trains, and as to the amounts 
 received for passengers. Now, I will begin at the beginning of the 
 whole thing. Who gets the tickets printed in the first instance ? 
 
 A. I will state, so that you can see how it is done. The system is 
 now different from the system that existed several years ago, and as I 
 found it when I came on the road. The tickets were printed here by 
 Morrill & Silsby, until within two years ; all the tickets were printed 
 alike, and could be used over and over again, without regard to their 
 age, so long as they were legible ; and after that the thin card was 
 printed, which was used only once. Well, sir, I should think about 
 four or five years ago the old card system was abandoned. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} For the thin ticket that you speak of? 
 
 A. For the thin ticket. 
 
 Q. Now, then, that was about fifteen years ago. Who procured the 
 printing of these card tickets ? I mean, what officer of the road ? 
 
 A. The general ticket agent. 
 
 Q. Did he keep a record of them ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Well, then, about fifteen years ago this system was abandoned ; 
 what was the next system that was adopted ? 
 
 A. The next was the thin card with coupon card. 
 
 Q. The general agent procured the printing of these tickets ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And what should have been done with the ticket when it was 
 once used ? 
 
57 
 
 A. It was entered on the book and destroyed. 
 
 Q. Now, I am speaking about the conductor. 
 
 A. It was his duty to return it. 
 
 Q. And what with regard to mutilation ? 
 
 A. To punch them. 
 
 Q. You procured the printing of these tickets at Morrill & Silsby s ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What did you do to authenticate them ? What mark did you 
 put on to authenticate them ? 
 
 A. 1 put a stamp on them. 
 
 Q. A raised character ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. You will see it better on the back. 
 
 Q. Now you procured these tickets to be printed ; what check did 
 you have on the printer, apart from this die ? Any ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. This die was simply to prevent the use of any other tickets ? 
 
 A. That was the object of it. 
 
 Q. That is the way you got the possession of the tickets in your 
 office? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, then, just go on and state how you supplied the ticket 
 officers. 
 
 A. The ticket master at this time was supplied with a given num 
 ber of tickets to each station, and their number was made good each 
 month. 
 
 Q. You may, if you please, Mr. Sanborn, if you can make it any 
 clearer, go on and state further the practice in this respect. 
 
 A. For instance, from Concord to Manchester, he was supplied with 
 one thousand tickets, and when he made his report at the end of the 
 month, that number that was taken out the number indicating his sale 
 -was returned to him. 
 
 Q. If he sold nine hundred tickets you returned nine hundred tick 
 ets to him, and he kept his thousand good every month? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that was the case at every station. That was the sys 
 tem. 
 
 Q. Go on and explain, if you please. 
 
 A. If the ticket seller at Concord sold out five hundred, or at the 
 first of the month he is charged with five hundred, and during the 
 month sells five hundred and makes such a return to me at the end of 
 the month, then I take that report and return him the five hundred that 
 he has sold, and that makes the number good. 
 
 Q. Where is he charged with the number that he has ? 
 
 A. At my office. 
 
 Q. He is, then, charged with the number of tickets that he has sold ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, will you go on and state as to this ticket office system. If 
 you supplied any tickets to the conductors, won t you state what kind 
 of tickets they were ? I mean under this system that was adopted four 
 or five years ago. 
 
 A. We furnished the tickets to Lowell and Boston and Lawrence ; 
 and these tickets were charged to them. 
 
 Q. You say, to Boston, Lowell and Lawrence. From what points to 
 Boston and Lowell ? 
 
 A. From the Concord road. 
 
58 
 
 Q. Without regard to stations ? 
 
 A. Without regard to stations. On the back, however, of each 
 check, was printed the various stations on the road, and the latter part 
 I think for the last five years I cannot be certain about that date 
 my impression is that for the last five years they have printed the 
 stations. 
 
 Q. Mr. Sanborn, tell the way in which you delivered these checks to 
 the conductors ; how many you delivered ; what receipts you took, and 
 what accounts you kept. 
 
 A. These checks are charged, perhaps from five to twenty-five, to 
 the different conductors. Some of them used a great deal more than 
 others. Those that had occasion to use more, we charged more to them. 
 Whenever they returned any on their way-bills, that check was re 
 turned to them ; at least a new check was furnished to them to make 
 the number good. The checks were charged to them the same as they 
 were to the station agents ; precisely the same principle. 
 
 Q. Now, what return did the conductors make to you as general 
 ticket agent? You were the person, you said, whom the conductors 
 made their returns to ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; they returned to me a way-bill. Originally they re 
 turned to me the money ; but for the last few years, I think, the money 
 has not been returned to me. For two years the money was returned to 
 me. Since then I think for eight or nine years the money was re 
 turned to the cashier, and the way-bills and tickets were returned to me. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.] What do you say the way-bill shows ? 
 
 A. It shows the number which they sold in the cars. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Haile.} The amount of tickets sold? 
 
 A. Yes ; that was carried out and the amount put down on the way 
 bill. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} All the tickets were returned to you? 
 
 A. The collections in the cars. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} That is, they were accounted for? 
 
 A. They were returned to me. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George. ) Were any tickets furnished to the conductors 
 between stations on the Concord road I mean between local stations 
 to be sold by them in the cars? 
 
 A. No, sir; not until recently. I think not until within two years. 
 
 Q. Since the new conductors were on ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. We had checks which were issued, which might be 
 used for that purpose ; but I think they were never adopted. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Bellows.} You say pot until recently. How recently? 
 
 A. Not until the spring of 1866. 
 
 Q. (By Mr George.} Then prior to 1^66 the money paid in the cars 
 to the conductors, for passengers between local stations, simply appeared 
 on the way-bill, and not by a ticket in addition ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Is there anything further in regard to the ticket system ? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} I should like to know at this time how 
 minutely the way-bills were filled up ? 
 
 Mr. George. I am coming to the way-bills, which will show for them 
 selves. 
 
 Q. (By Mr George.} Have you the way-bills here ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
59 
 
 Q. Won t you show them? [Way-bills shown and explained to the 
 referees.] 
 
 Q. The prices are all printed in, with ten cents additional for the 
 amounts taken in the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough used to go from Concord to Nashua, and return one 
 of these way-bills to you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley ) If he went two trips on the same day there 
 would be two way-bills ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Well, Mr. Sanborn, I will ask you, in order 
 that it may appear what the rule was in regard to the terms in the cars ; 
 that is, how much was required to be paid in the cars more than for 
 tickets sold in the office ; and how much at various times ? 
 
 A. The first advance from the regular fare must have been as much 
 as seventeen years ago; and the next was about 1857. the spring of 
 1857, perhaps in January, 1857, an addition of five cents more, which 
 made ten cents 
 
 Q. Then, originally, five cents more were added, and after 1857 ten 
 cents more, and that was the rule of the road V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And the way-bills were printed with this addition . 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q You may state, if you know, the object of this additional charge ? 
 
 A. The object was to induce passengers to buy their tickets at the 
 office. That is, so far as 1 know as to the object. 
 
 Q Now, you spoke of a further change in the matter of the tickets ; 
 won t you just tell what that further change was, and when it went into 
 operation V 
 
 A. The change was principally in the numbering of the tickets con 
 secutively, so that we might know the number. 
 
 Q. When was that done ? 
 
 A. October, l -66. 
 
 Q. Now. won t you explain. Where were these tickets printed? 
 
 A. They were primed in New York. 
 
 Q. Supposing you sent on for a hundred thousand tickets, we will 
 say between the various stations on the Concord road won t you explain 
 how these tickets are printed ? 
 
 A. They commenced with a cypher, and so on, one and two. 
 
 Q. There would be no two tickets of the same number ? 
 
 A. No. Those tickets are kept in the office. 
 
 Q. The only difference, then, as I understand you you may state 
 
 if there is any particular difference now, except the mere numlfering jrf 
 the tickets. 
 
 A. There is no difference, only in the effect of the system. The 
 effect of it is that we are better able to understand about the number of 
 tickets that are out. For instance, if the number 99 is out, we know 
 that that particular ticket is gone, and whenever that ticket comes in 
 we know who brings it in ; we know on which train it is missing, and 
 who brings it in. 
 
 Q. How do you know on which train ? 
 
 A. Every conductor s checks, as they are brought in, are examined, 
 and we know if there is a missing one. 
 
60 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} There is one thing 1 do not understand ; 
 and that is how you know, if you do know, what tickets are sold for 
 each train ? 
 
 A. Tickets are sold for the numbers as they come along. That is 
 the duty of the ticket seller, to sell them in order. 
 
 Q. And he keeps the sale on record ? 
 
 A. When the conductors bring them, we know the highest and low 
 est number ; and it the middle one is gone, the inference is that it 
 is gone on his train. 
 
 Q. You say that applies to all the stations on the road ? 
 
 A. That applies to all except "Kobinson s Ferry;" and they don t 
 sell enough there to make it an object. 
 
 Q. I want to know how the two thousand tickets are numbered ? 
 
 A. They are numbered just alike ; the difference is the station 
 where they are. 
 
 Q. Then the number of the tickets commences new from each partic 
 ular station ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Supposing it coming out to one month, then do you begin again ? 
 
 A. If we come up to 999 in June, we commence in July with 1000. 
 
 Q. Have you any stop until you get to the end ? 
 
 A. We have not. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.) That is to say, you get a certain number of 
 tickets printed, and you go on until these are all used up ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Supposing, Mr. Sanborn, that 1 should buy 
 a ticket at the Concord ticket office to day, and should not use it for a 
 week ; won t you explain how any numbering or dating, or anything 
 else, would show on what train that was ? 
 
 A. There would be nothing to show any further than this : if the 
 number was within the first and last number which that particular con 
 ductor had, it would be charged to him. If it was previous or after 
 for instance, if the first ticket was sold, the next date that the conduct 
 or brought, it would not be charged, but when it was brought in it would 
 be known. 
 
 Q. Supposing I buy a ticket to-day, and on going to the train find 
 a friend, and don t go ; how does any number show when that was used ? 
 
 A. It does not tell us where the ticket is ; but the ticket itself, if 
 it is stamped as it should be when it comes in, of course we know the 
 train it comes on. As to the stations, the Boston tickets we do not col 
 lect. 
 
 Q. All the tickets are stamped on the day they are sold ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 Q. *Then the stamp shows the date of their sale ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, Is there any way if there is you may state it by which you 
 can tell by the stamping of the ticket, or in any other way, when it is 
 used ? I simply want to ask this question : 1 will suppose that a 
 man buys tickets from Concord to Nashua on the first day of the 
 month ; I will suppose that the conductor on the road takes that ticket, 
 and does not return it ; and he sells that ticket over and over again : 
 and that it is used every day of the month, and he returns it at the 
 end of the month ; 1 want to know if there is any way of telling that 
 that ticket has not been used over and over again ? 
 
61 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) That is an answer applicable to both your 
 systems ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, I want you to describe, if you will, Mr. Sanborn, the 
 ticket system if it is applicable to the joint ticket. I want you to 
 explain, clearly as you can, to the referees, the ticket system as appli 
 cable to joint tickets from the upper and from ther lower roads. We 
 will first take the Northern road. Will that illustrate the whole system ? 
 
 A. I should think so. 
 
 Q. Take that for example, and explain the general ticket system of 
 passengers coming from the other roads. 
 
 A. Every ticket that is sold by the Northern road to come on to any 
 part of the Concord road has a coupon which is left on our road ; that is 
 taken up and carried into the general ticket office. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Have you any specimens of full coupon 
 tickets V 
 
 A. I have not ; but I can get them. 
 
 Q. Now, won t you go on, exactly and minutely, and explain the 
 ticket system in reference to joint tickets what checks there are, to 
 start with ? 
 
 A. The tickets brought into our office by the conductors are credited 
 to the Northern road. 
 
 Q. You mean by the Northern road ? 
 
 A. Only so far as they are to be used as a check. 
 
 Q. That is, you keep an account of them ? 
 
 A. We keep an account of them ; and when they report the num 
 bers sold we put these opposite and compare them. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Tappan.) The tickets returned by the conductors are 
 put opposite the tickets sold ? When the Northern road reports at the 
 end of the month when they report the number of tickets then what 
 do you put opposite ? 
 
 A. The collection. 
 
 Q. Have you a tabular sheet that will show the return for one month ? 
 
 A. I have nothing except the whole book. 
 
 Q. Now if you will explain from your book how this is done : first, 
 in regard to the upper roads, and then the others and all of them. 
 
 A. For instance, on the Northern road, in black is what is given out ; 
 in red is what we collect of them. To Manchester 56^ 255, 257. 
 Those are the number of the tickets. 
 
 Q. How do you account for that little discrepancy ? 
 
 A. Oh, they stop over. Generally take it for six months they 
 will very generally agree. But the collections never exceed the sales. 
 I never knew them to in the whole six months. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) You don t absolutely expect that the check 
 will come back on the same day that it is sold ? What is there to pre 
 vent its being used several times ? 
 
 A. There is nothing. 
 
 Q (By Mr. George.) We will say the tickets are sold on the 30th 
 day of June, and they may not be used until the first of July ; and, 
 therefore, of course the returns for June would not show it. 
 
 A. No, sir ; but perhaps at the end of six months or a year. I 
 never have known but one instance where the collections have exceeded 
 the sales. 
 
62 
 
 Q. 1 want to ask you a question that is perhaps involved in the 
 other, but 1 want it perfectly clear. 1 understand that the collections 
 of coupon tickets from the Northern road, or any other road, as returned 
 by the conductors, are entered in the book, and then at the end of the 
 month the Northern Eailroad makes a record of the sales. Now sup 
 posing on the first day ot the month a ticket is sold from Fisherville to 
 Boston ; what is there, if anything, to prevent the conductor, if he 
 chooses, from retaining that coupon until the end of the month, and 
 using it every day, over and over again, and selling it? 
 
 A. There is nothing in our power. 
 
 Q. Suppose the conductor should, in the case I have cited, take up 
 a coupon ticket on the first day of the month and use it every day dur 
 ing the month ; and that the last day of the month he returned it, why 
 then your account would agree with the account shown by the Northern 
 Railroad exactly, would it not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, will you be kind enough to take, for instance, the Boston 
 and Lowell Eailroad. How is it ? 
 
 A. The system is the same with that, precisely, only that they make 
 their report earlier in the month than the Northern Eailroad. The col 
 lections are the same, and the system is the same, except that it is 
 earlier in the month. 
 
 Q. You mean by earlier in the month that they report earlier than 
 the Northern Eailroad ? 
 
 A. Y"es, sir. 
 
 Q. Supposing the ticket was sold over the Boston & Lowell road 
 from Boston to Concord, or from Boston to any other station, and the 
 conductor should take up that ticket, and not return it until the end of 
 the month, what is there to show that use ? 
 
 A. There is nothing to do it. 
 
 Q. It rests entirely upon the honesty of the conductor ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Supposing the conductor should take a local ticket take any of 
 those tickets that are furnished to him to sell in the cars, for example, 
 or any other tickets that are sold at the ticket office ; and supposing it 
 is sold on the first of the month, and he continued to use it over and 
 over again, what is there to show that he used them more than once ? 
 
 A. The tickets that are furnished him he could not use so. 
 
 Q. You may give all the reasons, if you please, in reference to that 
 and the others ? 
 
 A. The reason why he could not use these is because when they are 
 once used they go on to another road. He don t use these except to go 
 on another road ; and without collusion with passengers he could not ; 
 and even if that was so, he could not, because they go on to the road. 
 
 Q. Supposing a ticket was sold in the cars by the conductor to go 
 from Manchester to Lowell ; and supposing the conductor on the Con 
 cord road should neglect to punch it, and the conductor on the Nashua 
 and Lowell road should neglect to punch it, what is there to prevent 
 that ticket being used over and over again ? 
 
 A. Nothing to prevent it. 
 
 Q. Supposing a man gets in the cars at Concord and pays in the 
 cars to Nashua, and the conductor fails to return upon his way-bill, or 
 in any other way, the amount paid, what is there in the rules and regu 
 lations of the road, or what is there in any way to make that fact 
 apparent ? 
 
63 
 
 
 
 A. There is nothing to prevent it. 
 
 Q. You may state the entire evidence that the road has, or has had, 
 of the amount received by conductors in the cars ; upon what the entire 
 evidence rests. State the whole evidence. 
 
 A. There is none at all, only their report, their way-bill. 
 
 Q. You have spoken of the return of tickets to you, and the return 
 of money paid in the cars. What further report, if any, are the con 
 ductors required to make to you, and have they been always ? 
 
 A. For the last seven or eight years seven years, I should think 
 they have been required to report the number of free passes. I think 
 that is all in addition. 
 
 Q. And how are these reports made ? 
 
 A. These are on a sheet by itself, 
 
 Q. Will you state how that report was made ? I mean the contents 
 of the report? 
 
 A. Just the man s name, and where from and to, and by whose au 
 thority he was passed. I believe that is the order in which the report 
 is made. Those lists we do not use. It has been several years that 
 way. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. ffaile.) No account made of annual passes? 
 
 A. There has been at times, and at times not; there is no account 
 made to me. There was a record made by the superintendent at his 
 own office. 
 
 Q. But does the conductor report that a gentleman having an annual 
 pass that he passes ? 
 
 A. They have at some times, and some times not. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You spoke of furnishing a certain number 
 of tickets to the ticket seller, and then at the end of the month taking 
 his report of the number of tickets sold, and then supplying enough to 
 make his number. At that time do you require him to return the tick 
 ets that he has left to return ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What check have you upon the ticket-seller ? How do you know 
 that he may not sell the tickets that he has and not return ? 
 
 A. We have a list which shows that the collection is in excess ; that 
 is, that he had a number to go around, and counting up their; tickets 
 will show if they hold out. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, having explained the manner in which busi 
 ness is done, I want you to give before the referees the receipts from 
 passengers on the Concord Eailroad, as far back, say, as 1857. Have 
 you condensed a table ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; we have not as far back as that. I think the reports we 
 have here, if that is what you refer to the reports from 1860 we have 
 each year, from 1860 to 1868 inclusive. 
 
 Q. Now you may give the receipts from passengers. That is what 
 we want. 
 
64 
 
 A. For the year ending 1860, commencing * 
 
 April, 1859, $11,73806 October, 
 
 May, 11,69367 November, 
 
 June, 11,888 70 December, 
 
 July, 15,235 21 January, 1860, 
 
 August, 19,343 00 February, 
 
 September, 23,113 45 March, 
 
 For the year, 
 
 April, 1860, 
 
 May, 
 
 June, 
 
 July, 
 
 August, 
 
 September, 
 
 For the year, 
 
 April, 1861, 
 
 May, 
 
 June, 
 
 July, 
 
 August, 
 
 September, 
 
 For the year, 
 
 April, 1862, 
 
 May, 
 
 June, 
 
 July,, 
 
 August, 
 
 September, 
 
 For the year, 
 
 April, 1863, 
 
 May, 
 
 June, 
 
 July, 
 
 August, 
 
 September, 
 
 For the year, 
 
 April, 1864, 
 
 May, 
 
 June, 
 
 July, 
 
 August, 
 
 September, 
 
 $12,691 00 
 12,011 30 
 14,367 50 
 16,032 18 
 20,782 91 
 20,830 99 
 
 $13,588 62 
 12,814 42 
 12,340 32 
 13,820 33 
 23,090 79 
 18,458 96 
 
 $9,113 50 
 
 9,817 03 
 
 11,376 26 
 
 16,193 56 
 
 20,461 50 
 23,390 70 
 
 $12,881 44 
 12,711 04 
 16,224 01 
 20,005 60 
 23,664 56 
 24,875 34 
 
 66,442 01 
 20,940 76 
 25,498 15 
 34,197 33 
 51,770 10 
 44,943 20 
 
 October, 
 
 November, 
 
 December, 
 
 January, 1861, 
 
 February, 
 
 March, 
 
 October, 
 
 November, 
 
 December, 
 
 January, 1862, 
 
 February, 
 
 March, 
 
 October, 
 
 November, 
 
 December, 
 
 January, 1863, 
 
 February, 
 
 March, 
 
 October, 
 
 November, 
 
 December, 
 
 January, 1864, 
 
 February, 
 
 March, 
 
 October, 
 
 November, 
 
 December, 
 
 January, 1865, 
 
 February, 
 
 March, 
 
 For the year, 
 
 14,564 74 
 
 12,246 41 
 
 9,442 76 
 
 9,935 64 
 
 8,371 27 
 
 12,361 78 
 
 $160,573 42 
 
 20,285 80 
 13,976 39 
 11,932 83 
 10,360 49 
 9,633 92 
 12,468 20 
 
 $175,144 42 
 
 14,560 91 
 
 11,924 39 
 
 10,434 97 
 
 8,717 91 
 
 6,240 25 
 
 11,411 53 
 
 $155,065 43 
 
 17,574 S3 
 16,345 37 
 11,736 40 
 10,758 16 
 9,474 84 
 12,549 97 
 
 $167,794 32 
 
 24,701 05 
 20,498 63 
 15,823 76 
 13,342 33 
 
 10.512 43 
 10.660 04 
 
 $223,900 24 
 
 33,813 36 
 29,857 71 
 25,337 95 
 22,797 09 
 
 23.513 79 
 25,128 97 
 
 $361,442 94 
 
65 
 
 April, 1865, 
 
 May, 
 
 June 
 
 July, 
 
 August, 
 
 September, 
 
 821,746 75 October, 
 
 For the year, 
 
 April, 1866, 
 
 May, 
 
 June, 
 
 July, 
 
 August, 
 
 September, 
 
 23,539 19 
 33,443 49 
 37,077 26 
 46,306 62 
 45,512 50 
 
 829,924 47 
 28,890 03 
 33,476 69 
 36,748 41 
 46,206 58 
 40,632 64 
 
 November, 
 December, 
 January, 1866, 
 February, 
 March, 
 
 Oc tober, 
 
 November, 
 
 December, 
 
 January, 1867, 
 
 February, 
 
 March, 
 
 For the year, 
 
 April, 1867, $30,573 99J | October, 
 
 May, 27,159 65^ "^ ;J November, 
 
 June, 31,160 1 7- ~, 1 December, 
 
 July, 39,764 53 J r| ^ January, 1868, 
 
 August, 37,726 27- ^ " February, 
 
 September, 33,819,05g 1 ~ March, 
 
 28,763 07 
 23,652 84 
 29,596 96 
 21,704 08 
 23,091 30 
 30,056 21 
 
 $362,490 27 
 
 37.159 22 
 31,008 24 
 25,648 83 
 23,224 67 
 23,229 60 
 26,525 04 
 
 8381,726 82 
 
 27,270 57 
 23,252 45 
 18,447 20 
 16,210 45 
 14,834 80 
 19,019 56 
 
 For the year, 8319,238 99 
 
 From Manchester to Lawrence to be added to last amount, 47,653 79 
 
 That goes with the last year, 1868. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Now, I want you to give the referees the 
 rates of fare ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. And now I want you to produce, at the same time, 
 the receipts from all the ticket offices on your line of road, from 1861 
 to 1868, as distinguished from the amount received for tickets. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I want to ask you the rates of fare on the 
 Concord Eailroad, say from 1848 to 1868. Is this abstract the same 
 that you have drawn ? 
 
 A. This is the abstract that I made of the rates of fare. 
 
 Q. Now, I want you to read that, and I want the referees to take 
 down the prominent parts of it. And, Mr. Sanborn, while they are 
 reading, I wish you to make out the per centage and decrease of fares 
 between the highest fares and the present fares. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Now, when that is offered, we have something to say ; 
 at least until some further statistics are put in. This runs from 1848 
 to 1865 ; and I want the per centage made between these two times. 
 We want the receipts of the road put in from 1848 to 1868. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. You shall have them. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Now then, won t you make the average 
 between 1861 to 1868? 
 
66 
 
 
 Manchester.| | 
 
 Nashua. 
 
 Lowell. 
 
 Boston. 
 
 Lawrence. 
 
 From Concord, 1848 to 1850, 
 
 35 
 
 70 
 
 1 00 
 
 1 50 
 
 1 00 
 
 From Manchester, - ... 
 
 
 35 
 
 65 
 
 1 15 
 
 65 
 
 From Concord, 1850 to 1851, - 
 
 40 
 
 80 
 
 1 10 
 
 1 50 
 
 1 00 
 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 
 40 
 
 75 
 
 1 15 
 
 65 
 
 From Concord, 1851 to 1854, - 
 
 45 
 
 90 
 
 1 25 
 
 1 75 
 
 1 25 
 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 
 45 
 
 80 
 
 1 30 
 
 80 
 
 From Concord, 1854 to 1857, - 
 
 50 
 
 1 10 
 
 1 50 
 
 2 00 
 
 1 50 
 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 
 45 
 
 80 
 
 1 30 
 
 80 
 
 From Concord, 1857 to 1862, - 
 
 GO 
 
 1 20 
 
 1 50 
 
 2 25 
 
 1 50 
 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 
 60 
 
 1 00 
 
 1 75 
 
 1 00 
 
 From Concord, 1862 to 1864, - 
 
 66 
 
 1 25 
 
 1 55 
 
 2 35 
 
 1 55 
 
 From Manchester,^ - 
 
 
 65 
 
 1 05 
 
 1 85 
 
 1 05 
 
 From Concord, 1864 to 1865, - 
 
 80 
 
 1 60 
 
 2 10 
 
 2 90 
 
 2 10 
 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 
 90 
 
 1 40 
 
 2 25 
 
 1 45 
 
 From Concord, 1865 to 1866, - 
 
 75 
 
 1 50 
 
 2 00 
 
 2 75 
 
 2 00 
 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 
 75 
 
 L 25 
 
 2 00 
 
 1 25 
 
 From Concord, 1866 to 1867, - 
 
 70 
 
 1 40 
 
 1 85 
 
 2 60 
 
 1 85 
 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 
 70 
 
 1 15 
 
 1 90 
 
 1 15 
 
 From Concord, 1867 to 1868, - 
 
 05 
 
 1 30 
 
 1 75 
 
 2 50 
 
 1 65 
 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 
 65 
 
 1 10 
 
 1 85 
 
 1 00 
 
 ~FVnTn Pnnpnvrl 1 Mfi 1 ^ to 
 
 nr } 
 
 i in 
 
 i A.X> 
 
 o on 
 
 1 4.^ 
 
 JL rom i_^ououru, iouo uu , 
 From Manchester, - 
 
 O O 
 
 I 1 U 
 
 55 
 
 L TTc) 
 
 90 
 
 a A\J 
 
 1 65 
 
 1 TC O 
 
 90 
 
 [FIFTH DAY. Tuesday, July 28th, 1868.] 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 
 MR. SANBORN S TESTIMONY CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Does this contain all the returns made by 
 Mr. Clough? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is the number of passengers carried. 
 
 Q. You made it in the manner that I requested ? You made up all 
 the tickets? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. George. Now my point is this ; that we propose to show that Mr. 
 Clough carried on the trains run by him more than the returns on all 
 the trains. 
 
 The Chairman. If I recollect right it was thought when Mr. Biddle 
 was testifying, that we would -suspend this a while to show the conduct 
 of the road. I understand that it is not laid aside yet. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I wish to inquire of Mr. Sanborn if there is any way 
 of getting at the number of passengers each day ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Sanborn, you have examined this state 
 ment, haven t you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I suppose that is right. 
 
 Q. You examined that at the time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You may look at them again, if you please. I want to know 
 whether these are genuine tickets or otherwise ? 
 
67 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 1 should say these were genuine. 
 
 Q. These are genuine tickets of the road, are they ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. I want to know if these tickets show any indications, and if so 
 what, that they have been through your office, and also other ticket 
 offices of the road ? 
 
 A. They have a stamp on them which was put on them in my office. 
 That is so far as we had gone. There are some of them old tickets 
 before we had begun to use these. And these are dated, showing that 
 they have been through the ticket offices. Sometimes in the rush they 
 would get out without being stamped ; but they have the stamp of the 
 general ticket office. 
 
 Q. You spoke of having examined these before. When were they 
 examined by you before ? 
 
 A. i think it was in February, 1866. 
 
 Q. At the time of their being found on Whitcher V 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I think sometime between the 15th and 23d. I have 
 somewhere a list. 
 Q. Of the tickets found on Whitcher? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. ^ 
 
 Q. Who gave you this? 
 
 A. Mr. Crane brought them into my office. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, have you made an abstract of the amounts 
 returned by Mr. Glough from the way-bills, returned as taken in the 
 cars by him, from the way-bills ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And from what time to what time ? 
 
 A. From 1857, I think; December 1st, 1857. 
 
 Mr. George. I propose to put in the amounts returned by Mr. Clough 
 from December 1st, 1857, until the time when he left the road. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Why can t you go behind that? 
 
 Mr. George. The books are all burned up ; burned in 1859. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The records that were burned were back of 1857. 
 
 Mr. George. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You said you had been connected with the 
 road how long ? 
 
 A. Twenty years nearly twenty years. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough went on the road in 1842 ? 
 
 A. That is about the time. 
 
 Q. What train did Mr. Clough run ? and how many conductors were 
 then upon the road ? 
 
 A. Mr. Clough generally ran the train that left Concord Monday at 
 half past ten. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} What period does this cover ? 
 
 A. Since I have been on the road ? 
 
 Q. How long is that ? 
 
 A. About twenty years nineteen years. I think the rule has gen 
 erally been that he has run one train on Monday and two Tuesday. 
 
 Q. Going down one day and back the next ? 
 
 A. That has been the rule ; there might have been exceptions for a 
 month or two perhaps. 
 
 Q. What time did the three trains leave Concord, and what time 
 did they return ? 
 
 A. The first train left at half past five (the same as they do now), 
 
IP 
 
 68 
 
 quarter past ten, ,aa^ Jiaj^ <pa$jt 
 ten, three and eigttt 
 
 Q.. Now, , |p,r JIQW long .a, .period,,of ; time r wer;e 7 these the pnlj thr.ee 
 trains ; thai is, these three ... trains down and three^ back ? -You H 
 state the date. ; -~ 
 
 Ay FEOEL November, 1859, there was an express .tr^in put on 
 run for months. 
 
 -?>rfi- -\ -V Vl"i" i- - iii ^ W*- 3>ft -.ClCC 
 
 , QT A fourth tram you mean ? .<&$fa &z cj ~i~^ i i^ri 
 _J]L "A, fourth train run by Mr. Jonesw \ 
 tjr Then up to 1859, how many trains had the r^gftft ?:/.; 
 
 A. Three trains. 
 
 Q. ^.nd how many conductors V. 
 
 A. Two. 
 
 Q. Now you may go on and state how the trams^av^ run from tl^at 
 time to this. 
 
 A. There has ( been- part of the time, for six /months, but three 
 trains, and then again they commenced with four, and then they had^hree, 
 trains. Up to January 31, 1860, for four months they ran four trains, 
 and from November 1 to January 31, 1959 and 60. 
 
 Q. What time of day did that go? That went down in the even 
 ing ; that is, it was an extra train down and not an extra train up ?}., 
 
 A. Yes, sir. Then for September and October of the same year, 
 1860, four trains were run. . 
 
 Q. Well, then go on to the next. 
 
 A. Then next April, 1861, they ran six months, four trains. Then 
 they commenced with January, 18,62, and ran a fourth train regularly, 
 ,and it has run ever since. | -.-,,; .,, 34 ~ 
 
 t,. , (^y.Jiidg^J3ellows.^ r A.i what time 4oes that run? 
 ! Thai left at -.half past seven in the morning. :? ;T 
 runs separate now. That is still another train. 
 
 Q. When was the<~teain put on.^hat goes from here at ei 
 In the ^vain V) in connection witE the Montreal r ex|rress 
 A. That was put on in January, 1865, according to 
 
 is. what as np f w,,c.a-lle,d j&e " express. ; r - K .r y I^V-K^ .tVk 
 <$. &. Sariborn, which is the heaviest train on the road V 
 A. Half past three in the ; .afternoon, < 
 
 train now. 
 
 Q. Has it been for twenty years ? 
 tip, in the afternoon, * 
 
 lOTJBifflwl TTOOoWnw JjRdJ /iioJ WvLian TU^ia 
 A. The evening tram, up. The naif past five ti 
 
 is always the Ufl^^ite^^oi f 
 
 3Ir. Clough s way-bills were 
 from December, 1857, to December, 1865, inclu$i&fe. 
 
1858. 
 
 186Qj 
 
 1861. 
 
 <T#miary, 
 
 February, . . .,-. . :v?.-i?*i .. 
 
 -March, > .,-i. . 
 
 ^ipril" ..V:i... ..: 
 
 May, 
 
 S^::::;:::::!::;:::: 
 
 : August, . 
 
 September, 
 
 October, ....... i ., 
 
 November, 
 
 December, ....... 
 
 74 oa 
 
 THTBO 
 
 .139 2Q 
 98 35 
 73-80 
 
 85 50 
 138 90 
 111 60 
 
 86 95 
 138 10 
 134 75 
 108 85 
 
 -1.15 .-8 5 
 
 ^2,Q25 
 120 35 
 
 -144 m 
 
 . 11-8 30 
 138-25 
 15810 
 231 55 
 181 40 
 133 95 
 96 00 
 
 108 40 
 - 81 551 
 1117.Q 
 113 25 
 10870 
 10$) 80 
 158 30 
 ISO 55 
 302 60 
 344 40 
 223 15 
 210 55 
 
 240 20 
 212 97 
 : 228 13 
 209 50 
 202 85- 
 174 95 
 164 75 
 347 35 
 193 25 
 351 40 
 252 20 
 245 25 
 
 2Q7 
 ,411 ,75 
 
 209 66 
 223 05 
 21S 95 
 1204 95 
 193 60 
 
 395 20 
 393 15 
 
 ;.246:55 
 
 "322 20 
 
 247 30 
 
 369 95 
 
 276 75 
 334 30 
 355 60 
 251 95 
 244 60 
 344 60 
 
 ..2IF35 
 
 "225"90 
 
 ;J263 60 
 
 252,30 
 
 267 10 
 274 45 
 414 2& 
 
 ,42,2 25 
 
 130060 168115 2058 95 ; 2882,82 259320 275085 388170 351115 
 
 tf*M 
 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) What time did Mr. Clough leave the road ? 
 
 A. Left in January, 1866, 1 think. 
 
 Q. Do you remember what day of January ? 
 
 A. I think about the middle of the month. 
 
 Q. (^yMrRolfe.} The fourteenth ? 
 
 A. I could tell if I were at the office. 
 
 __ _ _. -_ TT V T * 1 C 1 
 
 Q. (^y J/r. George.) Have you a computation how much 
 ave^age^per^train for Mr. Clough ? 
 
 Q. Won t you be ready with "that in. the morning, and exactly the 
 day "Mr. Glough left, and the , amount which he returned for the four,tli 
 ^iay of January ? ^ ^ 
 
 [>IXTH I>AY.: Wecln^sdayv-Fuly^.l^f,^ _ .; . .; siltMta .} 
 
 The hearing was continued at at nine o clock, A. M., and the 
 ination of lliv Sauborn resumerl;. after putting in the^ foll^w-mg ^^ "Docu 
 mentary revidEircB : -jq t?ilJ s T :,tiil rf**j 
 
 CO^CDRI), jfecH^^TI^^k : /IWREN;CE, CONCORD "^ I ORTS^IOUTII "AND 
 
 NO" 
 
 hereinafter provfdeti, r ^i|l be all owdd td pass* over ^ 
 -without : a ticket or : pass signed : by th=e ^preisideiit, supcnatehcl 
 sistant superintejident of the Qonaord, Manchester ^ Zlawre 
 roM, in their oWn hand- writing. : 
 
 : 1- : Pass 1 presidents, managing 1 a gcnt f, ^up^rintendeiits and pass^Si 
 prs ^ j faHroa(i^iiainel Tn-tirticle 4. 
 
 ^$s^ne ;I Mlowing : persotrs : connected with^ M^^dncWra^^^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 . Chester Lawrence. Eailro,a^r^^ectors, clerk, 
 ^ 
 
 r^^^^ klfypi wood agctit, fcMiiir^e^t^con- 
 ductprs, depot mSpr^Wn^^^ 
 
 ttie ^6n^br^/MaTic;*sterr&" Ljtwreirce^roUd; Stricmyn "Msin 
 
 *tir^m^l$h^ 
 
 "^pteyed in their respective - dcpartitrcnts, yiz f-^Mi"^ter vt of Oi t] 
 
 ffon" %6neral : :; tic^et : a^cnt. cashtcr; ^perin^ga Ws: Jl cldrir; d 
 
 ,.;.:.,;; sfflTtol Iflfltw ua&hfti z ;i<,* 
 
70 
 
 repairs in iron shop, overseer of repairs in wood shop, road master, 
 wood agent, and station agents at Manchester and Nashua, good for one 
 trip only over the C., M. & L. road, and must be taken up every trip by 
 the conductor and returned to the ticket master. 
 
 4th- Conductors will receive written passes signed by the president, 
 superintendent, agent, or managing agent, in their own hand-writing, of 
 the following roads : Boston & Maine, Eastern, Boston & Lowell and 
 Nashua & Lowell, AVorcester & Nashua, Northern, Passumpsic, Boston, 
 Concord & Montreal, Providence & Worcester, Cheshire, Vermont Cen 
 tral, Ogdensburgh, Concord & Claremont, Contoocook Eiver. Concord & 
 Portsmouth, and Norwich & Worcester Railroads. Also, agent Norwich 
 & Worcester Steamboat Company. Such passes will be limited to one 
 trip each way over the road. 
 
 5th The conductors will mark all free passes given by the Concord. 
 Manchester & Lawrence road, or by a connecting road, over the Con 
 cord, Manchester & Lawrence road, by punching a hole through them 
 when presented, each way over the road, that they may know they have 
 been used ; and after they have been so marked, the conductor will 
 allow no person to ride on them. 
 
 6th In cases of manifest poverty or inability to pay, conductors can 
 exercise their discretion in allowing a free pass ; and whenever such a 
 free pass is granted, the name of the person passed, and the attending 
 circumstances, will be noted by the conductor, which, with the names 
 of all persons having passes from connecting roads, will be reported 
 every trip to the ticket master. 
 
 7th. The ticket master will give free passes in cases of evident ina 
 bility to pay ; but in all such cases the pass will be given for one trip 
 only, and the name of the person passed, and the word " charity " 
 must be written plain across the pass, and it will not extend over con 
 necting roads. 
 
 Sth. All free passes over the Concord, Manchester & Lawrence road 
 will be taken up by the conductor and returned to the ticket master 
 every trip, excepting those given by and extending to and from con 
 necting roads, which will be marked and reported as provided by arti 
 cles 5th and 6th. 
 
 9th. In all cases, conductors will demand and collect of the passen 
 gers ten cents more for tickets sold or fares taken in the cars than when 
 purchased at the ticket office. All money so taken must be entered at 
 the time on a way-bill, and a return made thereof, with all tickets col 
 lected, each trip, to the general ticket master. 
 
 10th. All outstanding passes, dated prior to January 1, 1864, will 
 be collected by the conductors, and returned to the superintendent, ex 
 cept the regular season tickets paid for by the holders. 
 
 llth All tickets over the Concord, Manchester & Lawrence Railroad 
 shall be dated on the day of sale ; said tickets shall only entitle the 
 holder thereof to a passage on the day of their date, provided that joint 
 tickets shall be good for such further time as may be necessary to ena 
 ble the holders, by the regular trains, of the road to reach the stations 
 to which such tickets are sold. 
 
 ] 2th Conductors, when on duty, will wear the badge prescribed by 
 the company, and must be at their head station at least fifteen minutes 
 prior to the departure of the train, attending to the business of the 
 train and accommodation of the passengers, and remain after the arrival 
 of the train a suitable time for this purpose. 
 
71 
 
 13th The conductors are required to punch all coupons and tickets 
 in the up and down trains between Concord and Manchester, and Man 
 chester and Nashua. Also, between Manchester and Deny, and Derry 
 and Lawrence. Between Manchester and Candia, Epping and New 
 Market, and New Market and Portsmouth, tickets, coupons and passes 
 required to be punched are to be punched when they are presented by the 
 holders, in the holders presence, so as to be seen by them. 
 
 14th Tickets or coupons of other roads shall not be sold, used or re 
 tained by the conductors, and they shall report the names of any per 
 sons using them or offering them, when they believe or the date indicates 
 that they were not received in the regular course of business. No 
 tickets or checks shall be sold, used or retained by the conductors, ex 
 cept those received by them from the general ticket agent at Concord, 
 and charged to them in account. 
 
 By order of the Directors of) N. G. UPHAM, Pres t. 
 
 the Concord Eailroad, j J. A. GILMORE, Sup t. 
 
 JOHN H. GEORGE, Clerk. 
 
 MR. SANBORN S TESTIMONY CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I asked you last night to state the largest 
 amounts returned by Mr. Clough at any one train, with the date. 
 Have you the list? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is the list. 
 
 Q. Here is the date and amounts returned by George Clough ex 
 ceeding fifteen dollars a trip ? A trip is from here to Nashua and back ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Tappan inquired the purpose of the proposed statement. 
 
 Mr. George. We propose to show and that we have already what 
 he received on the trains during these years. The amounts shown here 
 are on individual trains. All that he returned, except in these indi 
 vidual instances, simply shows that he did not return the amounts re 
 ceived in the cars. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. Those commenced when ? 
 
 Mr. George. In 1862. We have no list farther back than that. 
 
 The 
 
 following statement 
 
 was then 
 
 read ; 
 
 1862. 
 
 June 19, 
 
 $83 25 
 
 1864. 
 
 
 October 25, 
 
 65 00 
 
 1865. 
 
 
 December 27, 
 
 20 95 
 
 
 1863. 
 
 October 16, 
 
 15 10 
 
 
 
 October 19, 
 
 18 05 
 
 
 
 December 19, 
 
 17 65 
 
 
 
 December 22, 
 
 17 00 
 
 
 
 December 29, 
 
 15 90 
 
 
 1864. 
 
 March 29, 
 
 16 05 
 
 
 
 April 9, 
 
 15 05 
 
 
 
 April 19, 
 
 20 95 
 
 
 
 May 30, 
 
 22 80 
 
 
 
 May 31, 
 
 16 85 
 
 
 
 June 1, 
 
 16 45 
 
 
 
 July 30, 
 
 36 05 
 
 
 
 August 31, 
 
 18 90 
 
 
 
 November 30, 
 
 16 75 
 
 
 
 December 29, 
 
 21 10 
 
 
 December 31, 
 June 3, 
 June 12, 
 June 31, 
 April 29, 
 June 30, 
 July 31, 
 August 14, 
 September 4, 
 October 25, 
 October 26, 
 November 9, 
 November 14, 
 November 18, 
 November 21, 
 November 22, 
 November 23, 
 November 24, 
 
 $23 40 
 
 16 90 
 15 60 
 19 65 
 
 17 00 
 
 29 40 
 24 80 
 17 35 
 15 40 
 17 40 
 17 50 
 
 19 35 
 28 25 
 
 20 25 
 15 70 
 15 95 
 
 30 40 
 15 90 
 
72 
 
 1865. November 25, 
 December 2, 
 December 6, 
 December 11, 
 December 18, 
 December 22, 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} 
 
 $25 10 1865. December 23, 16 55 
 
 16 45 December 27, 16 20 
 
 17 65 December 28, 15 85 
 21 25 1866. January 4, 15 40 
 
 18 65 January 6, 18 65 
 
 19 10 January 13, 16 10 
 Mr. Sanborn, will you now be kind enough 
 
 to show how much Mr. Clough s returns show on the average ? 
 
 Average amounts returned by George Clough each trip and each 
 train, from 1858 to January 15, 1866: 
 
 YEAR. 
 
 1858 
 1859 
 1860 
 1861 
 1862 
 1863 
 1864 
 1865 
 -1866 
 
 TRIP. 
 
 2 77 
 
 3 58 
 439 
 6 00 
 5 53 
 5 85 
 8 27 
 747 
 8 78 
 
 TRAIN. 
 
 1 38J 
 
 1 79 
 
 2 19 
 
 3 00 
 2 76 
 
 2 92 
 
 4 13 
 
 3 73 
 
 4 39 
 
 ^January, including half month by Mr. Le Bosquet. 
 
 Average for the whole trip $5 46 ; for the train, $2 73. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Have you any average made at any time 
 when the fares were the same ? 
 
 Mr. George. I propose to have that prepared. 
 From 1857 to 1862 the prices were all the same. 
 
 Manchester. 
 
 1857-62 
 
 60 
 
 1862-64 
 
 65 
 
 1864-65 
 
 80 
 
 1865-66 
 
 75 
 
 1866-67 
 
 70 
 
 PARES FROM CONCORD. 
 
 Nashua. 
 
 20 
 25 
 60 
 50 
 40 
 
 Lowell. 
 1 50 
 
 1 55 
 
 2 10 
 2 00 
 
 1 85 
 
 Boston. 
 
 2 25 
 2 35 
 2 90 
 2 75 
 2 60 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} The rules and regulations require a return 
 of the free passes to you. Were these returned to you by Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. They were returned by him. 
 
 Q. And did Mr. Clough make his returns ? 
 
 A. The free passes as they were collected were turned in to the 
 office, and will show, at least for the last few years of his returns, where 
 it was required that the report should be made of all the free passes, 
 except annual passes, of which there was no return made ; unless it 
 might have been the last few months that he returned. 
 
 Q. In what did he make the return ? 
 
 A. On a blank sheet for that purpose. Another exception too, was 
 the passes given to workmen on the road, by the overseers of the differ 
 ent departments. These were not reported. I believe these they didn t 
 require, and also the annual passes. 
 
 Q. They were not made on the same sheet of paper as the way-bill ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What became of these returns ? 
 
 A. Destroyed as waste paper ; no account made of them after mak- 
 
73 
 
 ing the annual report. There had to be an annual report to the Legis 
 lature. 
 
 Q. How many free passes did Mr. Clough return ? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell ; no idea except general estimation of the returns ; 
 should judge all the way from one to half a dozen on a train. 
 
 Q. What do you mean ? A train ? 
 
 A. I mean one trip. There would be times, perhaps in June, during 
 the Legislature, when there would be more passes returned. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Mr. Sanborn, did I understand you that 
 the superintendent undertook to abrogate these rules ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say what he said to the conductors ; I know it was by 
 his consent that some of these things were done. 
 
 Q. Of course I only ask from what you know, whether you gave you 
 instructions ? 
 
 A. I have asked him myself whether such were to be returned, and 
 he said that it was all right, and need not be done. The matter of an 
 nual passes was spoken of, and I found that the conductors did not re 
 port them ; and I was required to report any deviation. And he said 
 that he had seen the conductors. 
 
 Q. That was at the time that the rule was to return all of them ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Those are the annual passes and the passes 
 of the workmen that you refer to ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And no others ? 
 
 A. No others. 
 
 Q. I want you to tell the referees, on these long western tickets, 
 what the proportion to the road was. For instance, take a ticket to 
 Chicago, from Boston, west. How much did the Concord road receive 
 from a passenger ? 
 
 A. These tickets were reported to us from the Vermont Central. 
 We got, I think, the lowest was twenty-eight cents, and from that up to 
 the regular rates, fifty-two cents. 
 
 Q. How much was the Concord Eailroad s proportion of the fare of 
 passengers on these western through tickets ? 
 
 A. All the way from twenty-eight cents up to the regular price, 
 which was fifty-two cents at that time. 
 
 Q. The regular price on the Concord Eailroad, from Concord to 
 Nashua, was $1.20. Supposing a man purchased a ticket on the North 
 ern Kailroad for Nashua, how much did the Concord Eailroad receive ? 
 
 A. Fifty-two cents. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, supposing you bought a ticket from Concord to Boston, 
 that would take you from Concord over the Nashua and Lowell and the 
 Boston and Lowell Eailroad take it in 1857, for example when the 
 fare was $2.25, how much did the Concord road receive of that $2.25 ? 
 That is, what did they pay out to the lower roads ? 
 
 A. They paid out sixty-eight cents and received one dollar and fifty- 
 seven cents. 
 
 Q. Which was thirty-seven cents more than their local fare. Now 
 we take it in 1864. The fare to Boston was $2.90. How much did the 
 Concord Eailroad receive of that $2.90? 
 
 A. Two dollars and twelve cents ; they then paid seventy-eight 
 cents. 
 
 Q. And their local fare was at that time ? 
 
74 
 
 A. A dollar and sixty. 
 
 Q. Then they received fifty-two. With regard to 1864, on these 
 western tickets, how much did you receive ? 
 
 A. The average was about the same. There has been no change in 
 these, because it has always been settled. 
 
 Q. Now, what was the average amount received by the Concord 
 Railroad on these western tickets ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I could say. 
 
 Q. State as near as you can. 
 
 A. Perhaps it might have been forty-five cents. There have been 
 cases, as I said before, that we have got more when they were divided 
 pro rata. 
 
 Q. Now, supposing a man substituted one of these western tickets 
 for the regular ticket from Concord to Boston. Out of how much would 
 the Concord Railroad be defrauded? Take it in 1864. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Sanborn, then you may, if you please, 
 state what the difference would be to the Concord Railroad in the first 
 place, and we will take it between Concord and Boston for the local 
 ticket. Take it from 1864 to 1865 for example. The fare was to 
 Boston $2.90, and the local ticket that you would receive would be how 
 much? 
 
 A. Two dollars and twelve cents. 
 
 Q. On one of these western coupons, how much did they receive, 
 calling it 52 at the ordinary price $1.66. How much would they lose 
 at the highest price ? 
 
 A. One dollar and sixty cents. 
 
 Q. How much would they lose at the lowest rate, 28 cents ? 
 
 A. One dollar and eighty-four cents. 
 
 Q. How much would they lose on the average? 
 
 A. One dollar and sixty-seven cents. 
 
 Q. You say these settlements were made with the Vermont Central 
 road ; were they made from the sales, or from tickets taken up in the 
 cars? 
 
 A. From the sales. 
 
 Q. During the fall, when a regiment of soldiers was sent on. how 
 did it go, on the regular trains, or special ? 
 
 A. . The special trains, almost invariably ; 1 do not recollect a single 
 instance where they went on the regular trains ; it might have been. 
 
 Q. Generally, how many did they carry ? 
 
 A. Generally as many as three or four hundred ; they had on special 
 trains. 
 
 Q. How was an account kept of those ? 
 
 A. There was an order given by the quartermaster for their trans 
 portation. 
 
 Q. And were tickets issued ? 
 
 A. No tickets issued for it. That order was presented to the gov 
 ernment for payment. 
 
 Q. How was it, were there any tickets taken with reference to the 
 government transportation ? 
 
 A. If a small squad of men, they were sent, and a general order 
 used to come down to the ticket office for tickets. 
 
 Q. State what peculiarity they had ? 
 
 A. These tickets were marked "military tickets," and were not 
 good for a citizen to use. 
 
75 
 
 Q. {By the Chairman.} A man could not use them without brass 
 buttons on his clothes? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.} Did I understand that a small squad went 
 on a regular train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; the small squads generally went on the regular trains. 
 
 Q. To whom were those tickets returned ? 
 
 A. Keturned the same as any regular tickets, by the conductors. 
 
 Q. And how were these vouched for? 
 
 A. By the ticket for transportation which they left at the office. 
 
 Q. Supposing soldiers came home on government transportation ; if 
 there were such cases, explain that. Explain the tickets, if any ? 
 
 A. They usually had orders if they came home either in squads or 
 single individuals. They had an order from the government from 
 Washington to New York, and beyond there they exchanged their 
 orders. We had a coupon of such tickets to take up on this road. 
 Such tickets were marked "military tickets." 
 
 Q. And those were returned to you ? 
 
 A. Y^es, sir. 
 
 Q. For how long a time were these sold through New York, and 
 from what stations ? 
 
 A. From Concord to Manchester only. 
 
 Q. For how long a period of time when did you sell to New York 
 again ? 
 
 A. I don t know as 1 could state exactly. I should say 1859 or 
 1860, and then, perhaps for two years they were cut off, and would not 
 sell. They have always sold here both ways, both by rail and by boat, 
 but we have not sold on these all the time. 
 
 Q. You commenced in l.^oli, or 1>60, and sold for two years? 
 
 A. I should think so. 
 
 Q. How long a time was that sale discontinued? 
 
 A. I should not think more than a year. 
 
 Q. Have you means of getting exactly the date? 
 
 A. I might probably. 
 
 Q. I wish you to state to the referees you say you will get all the 
 exact dates at the office ? 
 
 A. I will do so if I can. 
 
 Q. How has it generally been after that ? 
 
 A. After that we commenced again to New York by boat, but by 
 rail I think it was not commenced until about a year ago ? I think not 
 until last fall. 
 
 Q Then from 1860, till 1861, there was no connection, and no sale 
 of tickets over the Concord Railroad to New York by rail, until since 
 Mr. Clough s discharge ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I want you to state, from what other points on the road, the 
 Worcester and Nashua roads, to and beyond there, was any sale of 
 tickets, and to what extent it continued ? 
 
 A. At the same time we commenced with New York, we commenced 
 with Springfield and Albany. 
 
 Q. This last time ? 
 
 A. No, the first time ; they were discontinued the same time they 
 were at New York. 
 
 4. And have they ever been resumed ? 
 
76 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Then during the war you had no business connection with those? 
 
 A. No, sir, only military tickets ; those were to anywhere. 
 
 Q. Have you now mentioned all the points between which there 
 have been sales of tickets, between Worcester and Nashua and the 
 points beyond? 
 
 A. G-roton Junction, this side of Worcester, and from Groton Junc 
 tion to Keene and Bellows Falls. To Keene and Bellows Falls we sell 
 now. They all commenced at the same time in the first place, and 
 after being discontinued they were renewed again. 
 
 Q. When were they renewed ? 
 
 A. Perhaps a year and a half; it may be more. 
 
 Q. Were they discontinued at the time you discontinued the New 
 York tickets ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And those to Keene and Bellows Falls were renewed at the same 
 time ? 
 
 A. Those to Keene and Bellows Falls were renewed the same time 
 that those by boat were. Groton Junction has never been renewed. 
 . Q. How was it with Worcester ? 
 
 A. Worcester has always been so. 
 
 Q. That commenced in 1859 or 1860 ? 
 
 A. Whenever it did commence. 
 
 Q. And have you now stated all the points to which you take tickets 
 from passengers on that line ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How were the settlements made with these roads ? That is, how 
 was the settlement made with the Worcester and Nashua road ? 
 
 A. We reported everything to the Worcester and Nashua roads, de 
 ducting our proportion, and paid the whole over to the Worcester and 
 Nashua road. 
 
 Q. Was the Worcester and Nashua road the intermediate rood that 
 settled with the roads beyond ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When you say that the account was with the Worcester and 
 Nashua road, upon what basis was the account made up ? 
 
 A. Made up on sales. 
 
 Q. Sales made by the Concord road, do you mean ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How did you settle, supposing the tickets came the other way V 
 
 A. It was settled by their sales. 
 
 Q. Made mutual returns ; you to them and they to you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Supposing the conductor on the Concord road sold ten tickets 
 from Concord to New York, we will say ; supposing he took that money 
 and put it into his pocket, and did not make any returns whatever, and 
 you settled by the amount of sales ; won t you tell me 
 
 A. He had no such tickets to sell. 
 
 Q. Did he have any tickets to sell on other roads ? 
 
 A. He did to Boston and Lowell and Lawrence. 
 
 Q. That is all ? He didn t have any on the Worcester road / 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did the conductor have tickets from Concord to Boston V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. % 
 
77 
 
 Q. Supposing the conductor sold ten tickets from Concord to Boston ; 
 and supposing, having sold ten tickets from Concord to Boston, and put 
 the money in his pocket, and did not make any return to the road, of 
 money; and the next day he took up ten tickets on the road, and did 
 not punch them, and used them over again, and returned these, I want 
 to know what means you had of knowing it ? 
 
 A. He could not take up ten Boston tickets without collusion with 
 the conductor befow. 
 
 Q. I want you to explain this whole matter fully, just what could 
 be found out, and what could not be found out. Mr. Sanborn, suppos 
 ing the conductor took out five tickets a day, out of the amount col 
 lected ; and supposing there were five hundred passengers, and he took 
 out five tickets a train, and did not return them, and used those tickets 
 over and over again, until he had got out five hundred tickets ; is there 
 any method of discovering it ? 
 
 A. If he took that five hundred in one month, I think it would be 
 noticeable, but if he was five months or a year, I do not think it would 
 be noticed particularly. Still, we should notice the difference between the 
 sales and returns, and we should expect to look to the following months to 
 see it come in. For instance, the months of July, August and September 
 are large months, in which the sales usually exceed the collections ; / mean 
 on through tickets ; and as the sales are greater than the number of tickets 
 returned, there are many sales, reports of which do not come in until suc 
 ceeding months. 
 
 Q. Supposing a conductor should take two tickets a train, and he 
 ran three trains a day (there would be six tickets a day), and he took 
 them out every day for a month (there would be one hundred and odd 
 tickets), and they were used over and over again, and they were returned 
 next month ; that is, he returned them gradually, as they were taken. 
 Won t you tell me if there is any way of discovering it ? 
 
 A. No way of discovering them by ordinary notice. 
 
 Q. Well, sir, after {-he conductor had taken these tickets supposing 
 the conductor chose to keep those as his stock in trade is there any 
 thing to show that will prevent his using them over, at the rate of one 
 hundred a day. Take the case of the tickets found upon Mr. AVhitcher, 
 and sold elsewhere, was there a discovery of that fact until the tickets 
 were found? 
 
 A. No, sir; there was not. 
 
 Q. Mr. Sanborn, are you able to state what Mr. Clough s salary was ? 
 
 A. I should not be able to state with any accuracy. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Mr. Clough commenced with five hundred dollars a 
 year, and along at the last of his service he had seventy dollars a month, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Sanborn, did you ever make any per 
 -cent, of the sales returned of these western coupon tickets ? 
 
 .A. Yes, sir ; when the tickets first began to sell, perhaps the first 
 few years, at any rate as early as 1856 or 1857, the collections overrun 
 the sales very heavily. It was in the fall of the year they first began 
 to overrun so heavily. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} That, you say, was when the system first 
 began? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} At the very beginning of it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; for the first two or three years, until the matter was 
 investigated. 
 
78 
 
 Q. Where were these tickets sold ?, 
 
 A. At all points west, wherever they sold any tickets to Boston. 
 
 Q. Were they sold by agents ? 
 
 A. By agents principally, I should judge. 
 
 Q. To what extent did the collections overrun the sales ? 
 
 A. Being a long time ago I should not recollect, but I should judge 
 from fifteen hundred to twenty-five hundred in one year. 
 
 Q. When was that leak stopped ? 
 
 A. When the matter was investigated. That was, I think, in the 
 summer of 1857. It was inquired into, and I know I made out the 
 figures for the sales and collections for one year. I was requested to 
 inquire into it, and I did so. 
 
 Q. What was the result as to the defrauding of the road ? [Object 
 ed to.] 
 
 The Chairman. If the counsel had been permitted to put in, with 
 out any objection, the fact that from fifteen hundred to twenty-five 
 hundred tickets had been returned more than were sold, it seems to me 
 that it does not make much difference whether you get a man to state 
 what the result is, or whether you let the witness make the calculation, 
 or leave the referees to do it. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Now, Mr. Sanborn, was or was not the road 
 defrauded ? [Objected to and ruled out.] 
 
 A. I inquired in regard to every collection of tickets ; comparing 
 with them where the tickets were sold at a less price than what they 
 should have been, many of them at various prices ; and they didn t 
 wish to make any report on account of the contract then existing. They 
 didn t wish to make any report, and for that reason lumped the amount 
 and divided them into tickets at the regular price. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Who were they ? 
 
 A. The interest of the Vermont Central road. 
 
 Q. The effect of that was what, upon the number of tickets ? 
 
 A. To reduce the number of sales, in some cases, one-half; or 
 they went for twenty-eight cents when we should have received fifty- 
 two. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You carried more passengers than 
 
 A. Than we had made sales. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} How long did that go on before you invest 
 igated it ? 
 
 A. It went on a year before it was changed. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} When did this state of things cease ? 
 
 A. In the season of 1857. 
 
 Q. Then what was the condition of things ? 
 
 A. It was required of them to report the rates received, and settle 
 pro rata. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} What do you mean byp-o rata? 
 
 A. The distance ; the whole distance is taken and divided into so 
 many miles for each. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} I should like to make one inquiry of Mr. 
 Sanborn ; and I limit my inquiry to his own knowledge, but I should 
 like to inquire of Mr. Sanborn whether or not the Vermont Central had 
 any authority from the Concord Railroad to sell tickets under the regu 
 lar price, and then allow a pro rata ? 
 
 A. So far as my knowledge went, they had no right to sell, though 
 they reported to us at less rates than that. That was only so far as I 
 was told by the superintendent ; that is all. 
 
79 
 
 The, Chairman. I don t think that would be competent. 
 
 Q (By Mr. George.} The result was that they afterwards did so 
 return ? 
 
 A. They returned them pro rota after that. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Well, in that case, Mr. Sanborn, did they 
 return, or allow any returns, that came within your knowledge, where 
 the tickets were sold under price ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is common, almost invariable, in western tickets. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I desire to raise a little objection, although the referees 
 asked the question. And 1 do it for the purpose of making a sugges 
 tion to the referees that at that time the object was to get the travel 
 over this road; and the Concord Kailroad was just as much interested 
 in getting the travel ; and that the upper roads did not violate any un 
 derstanding ; but the difficulty was in reporting wrong, so as to deceive 
 the lower road. 
 
 The Chairman. It is difficult, so far as the difference between the 
 collection and sales is concerned, to say that there was any fault about 
 that. 
 
 Mr. George. The result of the matter was this : It was understood 
 that the Vermont Central line might sell these tickets for a price as low 
 as that, but not below a given sum. The Vermont Central road did sell 
 in violation of that understanding ; and then, instead of returning the 
 actual number of tickets sold, they simply took the actual amount re 
 ceived and divided it by the full price. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} And how has the western ticket business 
 continued from that time on ? 
 
 A. They have sold at reduced rates ever since. I mean by reduced 
 rates, by less than local rates. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by local rates ? Does the Concord road get 
 over fifty-two cents on any western ticket ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, they have done so. 
 
 Q. Well, I want you to give the 
 
 A. I could not state instances, but I know I have figured it up, and 
 it gives more pro rata to us, and I have, from curiosity, figured it up, 
 and in some cases we have got as high as ninety cents, when our propo 
 sition is only seventy. 
 
 Q. How many instances of that kind are there ? 
 
 A. I do not know ; not many. It is not often that I figure them. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} If I understand you, the ticket is sold for 
 so much, and you get so much for the distance of your road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. George. Deducting rent and risk. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Do you know what the fare is from Boston to 
 Montreal ? 
 
 A. My idea is, ten dollars and a half. 
 
 Q. Did they sell at all sorts of prices ? 
 
 A. They did in the summer season. 
 
 Q. Is that the regular fixed price, or do they sell just as they run ? 
 
 A. That is the regular price. 
 
 Q. How much of that comes to the Concord road ? 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Will you ascertain ? 
 
 A. I will ascertain. 
 
 Q. And also from Boston to Chicago, and how much the pro rata is ? 
 
80 
 
 A. I do not know as I could do that, because I did not have the 
 distances. That is done by the Northern road, and I should not know 
 what the car risk is. 
 
 The Chairman. What is the length of the Concord road ? 
 
 Mr George. It is between thirty-four and thirty-five miles. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} I understood you to say that when regi 
 ments left Concord for the seat of war, they ordinarily went in trains, 
 furnished by the road, by themselves, and the transportation was 
 charged to the government ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. But that when they were sent oif in squads or companies they 
 went in the regular trains. Supposing, Mr. Sanborn, that a squad of 
 soldiers numbering fifty, recruited here to be sent to the different regi. 
 ments, was sent on some particular morning, were they not put into a 
 separate car which was in connection with the regular train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Supposing that a squad of a hundred were recruited here, to 
 make up regiments that had been cut up in the field, were they not put 
 iri a car ordinarily and run out with the regular train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever, during the war, furnish special trains, to take 
 soldiers away from Concord, unless a regiment went at a time. And 
 did you not invariably run them with the regular trains ? 
 
 A. My impression is that we did once or twice, but I cannot now be 
 definite. When a regiment, or perhaps two or three hundred, or per 
 haps three or four hundred, there has been a special train run. 
 
 Q. Did you, as a general rule, send out a special train, unless it was 
 to take away a full regiment? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not as a general rule. 
 
 Q. A full regiment of soldiers was one thousand men, was it not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 <Q. How many cars did it take to send a full regiment from Concord? 
 
 A. About twenty or twenty-four. 
 
 Q. Now, then, every time you sent a full regiment, you sent them 
 by a train of from twenty to twenty-four cars, which made up a full 
 train by itself; did you not, sir? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many cars would it take to send out a squad of two hund 
 red men? 
 
 A. About four cars. 
 
 Q. About fifty in a car ? 
 
 A. That is about what they calculate. 
 
 Q. But where you had a squad, you annexed them to the regular 
 train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many times did that occur? We will take squads number 
 ing all the way from twenty-five to two hundred men. 
 
 A. The number from twenty-five to fifty is common. 
 
 Q. But it was very seldom that you had one that would reach the 
 amount of two hundred ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect of any such case where there was as many as 
 that 
 
81 
 
 Q. I would put in squads of from fifty to one hundred men ? 
 
 A. That was quite common. 
 
 Q. Do you remember the fact that in the early part of the war the 
 soldiers refused to pay their fare, and were left this side of Manchester? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Were you there? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Didn t it occur almost every week that 
 squads of soldiers, numbering from twenty-five to a hundred, were sent 
 off? 
 
 A. No, I should think not, sir. 
 
 Q. Wasn t it as often as every week ? 
 
 A. It is my impression that it was not. 
 
 Q. Now, these soldiers had military tickets, had they not ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. I want you, sir, this afternoon, to take the two hundred or three 
 hundred Whitcher tickets, and the schedule that you have prepared 
 here, look them all over and be able to state to the referees, how many 
 of these tickets could possibly have got into the hands of George 
 Clough in the regular course of business. 
 
 A. It won t need any preparation, because I shall know every 
 ticket. [Intermission.] 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Mr. Sanborn, I was inquiring of you in 
 regard to soldiers riding in the cars. Let me ask you whether they 
 were in the habit of riding more or less when they were not sent off in 
 squads. Was there a large number of soldiers going home ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now then, where regiments came here to Concord, and were dis 
 charged here, did not the soldiers go over the road a great deal ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. Were there not many who came here to vote? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were they not constantly going back and forward from their 
 rendezvous ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And there was continual travel back and forward during the 
 time of the war, was there not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 . Q. Now, while they weue rendezvousing here preparatory to being 
 sent off, were they not riding backwards and forwards constantly ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. From here to their home and backward again. And was there a 
 day passed but what there was any number passing over the road in 
 this way ? 
 
 A. I could not state as to that, but I think there might possi 
 bly not have been a day, that is, I mean during the active part of the 
 war. 
 
 Q. How many passengers does an ordinary passenger car contain ? 
 
 A. They hold fifty I believe, but the cars they make now hold sixty; 
 fifty I suppose would be the average. 
 
 Q. Supposing you take the coupon tickets returned by the conductor 
 to the general ticket office ; add to them the local tickets sold here at 
 the stations ; add to that amount the fares returned by conductors as 
 paid in the cars ; and divide that number by fifty, will it not show the 
 
82 
 
 number of cars that made up the trains here ordinarily ? 1 mean the 
 regular ordinary travel on the road ? 
 
 A. I cannot say as to that ; I never reckoned. 
 
 Q. Let us see now. You take the number of coupon tickets return 
 ed by the conductor, that would show the number of passengers that 
 came from the Northern road, would it not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now then, take the tickets sold here at this station ? 
 
 A. The tickets that were sold at this station you could not reckon 
 on that day from the returns of the conductor, because a ticket sold 
 from here to Boston has a single coupon, and that is punched on this 
 road, and goes through, 
 
 Q. There is a record kept, here of the tickets sold at this station? 
 
 A. Monthly ; yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Take the number of tickets returned for a month ; then take the 
 local tickets sold at this station for a month ; and the fares returned by 
 the conductors in the trains for a month ; add them up ; then calculate 
 the number of passengers to a car ; and can you, with those facts, get 
 at the number of cars which made up a train that left the city of Con 
 cord each day ? 
 
 A. You get the number it was necessary to carry. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that the soldiers travel was represented 
 by a peculiar kind of ticket, marked as a military ticket, which they 
 had of you directly, and which they did not receive from the local ticket 
 office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Did you intend to have it understood that 
 in all cases where the soldiers traveled singly, where they had a fur 
 lough, for instance; they had to use these military tickets ? 
 
 A. They did in the latter part of the war; at first they were 
 obliged to pay. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} That was the rule? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, I want you to prepare these statistics, during 1862 to 1865. 
 Take the number of coupon tickets taken within the month ; the num 
 ber of tickets sold at the local stations here ; the number of fares re 
 turned by conductors, as sold in the cars ; and upon the basis of fifty 
 persons to a car, calculate the number of cars that left Concord during 
 the years 1861, 62, 63, 64 and 65. 
 
 A. [Schedule shown.] 
 
 Q. That is not what I want. I want the number of cars that made 
 up the train here ? 
 
 A. The number of cars that made up the trains I cannot give you. 
 If I understand you, you want the number of cars that would have 
 been necessary. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, I desire you to take the tickets found at the 
 house, and upon the person of Mr. Whitcher, and ascertain the number 
 of tickets found at each place, that could, according to the regular 
 course of business, by any possibility, come into the possession of 
 George Clough. 
 
 A. Of those found at his house, eighteen. 
 
 Q. And how many of those found on his person ? 
 
 A. Those found on his person, as returned to me, one hundred and 
 fifty-one. 
 
83 
 
 Q. They would come through his hands, in the ordinary course of 
 business V 
 
 A. They might have. 
 
 Q. Now, I want you to give the list. What are they. First, those 
 found at his house ? 
 
 A. Concord to Manchester, 4 ; Manchester to Concord, 2 ; Manches 
 ter to Concord (again), 1 ; New Market Junction to Concord, 2; Man 
 chester to Concord (again) , 4 ; M anchester to Suncook, 1 ; Suncook to 
 Concord, 1 ; Concord to Lawrence, 1. 
 
 Q. Wouldn t he have had to part with that? 
 
 A. Being in his hands 
 
 Q. 1 mean that he could have retained V 
 
 A. Then that would have to be left according to that. That would 
 be all on that then. 
 
 Q. Now give me those found on his person ? 
 
 A Concord to Manchester, 7 ; Manchester to Concord, 9 ; Lawrence 
 to Concord, 2.; Manchester to Nashua, 14 ; the same package (one 
 more), 1; Manchester to Hooksett, 7; Manchester to Suncook, 1; 
 Nashua to Manchester, 10; Hooksett to Manchester, 6; Suncook to 
 Manchester, 1 ; Goff s to Manchester, 1 ; Kobinson s to Manchester, 1 ; 
 Thornton s to Nashua, 3 ; Concord to Manchester, 3 ; Manchester to 
 Nashua, 6 ; Concord to Nashua, 14; Manchester to Concord (again), 1 ; 
 Nashua to Manchester, 19; Manchester to Concord (again), 1; Man 
 chester to Concord (again) , 8 ; Concord to Suncook, 2 ; Concord to 
 Nashua, 3 ; Concord to Manchester (again) , 4 ; Concord to Manchester 
 (again), 8; Concord to Nashua (again), 4; Manchester to Nashua, 3 , 
 Concord to Hooksett, 1. Total, 143. 
 
 Q. Speaking of the age of these tickets I want you to look them 
 over and see how long some of those have been on the road, those that 
 he might have retained. I want to show the age of the tickets ; how 
 long they had been out of use, and the number of those that are the 
 most ancient. 
 
 A. There seems to be forty-eight of these. 
 
 Q. Now those have been in use how long a time ? 
 
 A. There are some of them marked 1865 ; can t always tell. They 
 were in use, perhaps, all the way from 1860. 
 
 Q. Now give us the most remote date of these forty-eight tickets ; 
 and then the most recent date. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Is it your statement that that style of 
 tickets has been in use ten years ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; this style. I think 64 and 65 are the only two years ; 
 and there is one Feb. 66 that which is stamped. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) When you spoke of 1864 and 65, you 
 spoke of the time it was printed ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Tell when it was sold. 
 
 A. Well, that tells on the back here. 
 
 Q. Well, give us the most remote date. 
 
 A. The dates are very indistinct. 
 
 Judge Bellows.. How long prior to the seizure of these tickets did 
 Mr. Clough leave ? 
 
 Mr. Georye. He left the road January 14th, I think, 1866; and 
 these tickets were seized February 10th. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} We want you to go over these tickets one 
 
84 
 
 by one, and find the date of these tickets, of all the tickets that Mr. 
 Clough could have used. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether you have ever known Joseph A. Gilmore, 
 the superintendent of the Concord Eailroad, to direct Mr. Clough to 
 pay back money for fares that he had collected in the cars ; and if so, 
 in how many instances ? 
 
 A. 1 haven t known any such cases. 
 
 Q. Understand the question. When Mr. Clough has come in and 
 made returns of money for tickets sold in the cars, if you have known 
 Gilmore to direct him to pay back the fares that he has collected ; and 
 in how many instances you have known that to occur? 
 
 A. 1 have known him to come in while he as well as others were 
 there, and direct him to pay back money to a gentleman that he had 
 with him ; but I wouldn t know who the gentleman was. 
 
 Q. The gentleman that Gilmore had with him ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That person would be a person that rode to Concord with Clough 
 in his train ; and Clough had collected his fare in the cars, did he not ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; I should judge so. 
 
 Q. And after Mr. Clough had taken his fare, Gilmore would come 
 with that person and direct Mr. Clough to pay him back his fare, col 
 lected in the cars. Now 1 want to ask you, Mr. Sanborn, in how many 
 instances you have known that to occur, in the case of George Clough 
 alone V 
 
 A. Perhaps three or four times. 
 
 Q. Have you stated to Mr. Clough that you have known it to occur 
 " times without number," using just these terms? 
 
 A. 1 don t think I have. 
 
 Q. Have you stated that you have known it to occur a great many 
 times ? 
 
 A. I shouldn t think that I ever made any such statement. 
 
 Q. Have you known that to occur a great many times ? 
 
 A. I should think not a great many times, if I understand your 
 question. 
 
 Q. Well, the question is simply: haven t you known Mr. Gilmore to 
 come in with a person and direct Mr, Clough to pay him back his fare ; 
 haven t you known it to occur a great many times ? 
 
 A, No, I have not. 
 
 Q. Who were these men? 
 
 A. I don t know any of their names. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Clough hasn t frequently paid money 
 to you, that Mr. Gilmore has ordered you to pay back to the man ? 
 
 A. There may have been cases of that kind, when Mr. Clough had 
 passed out, and he came in to see, and if Mr. Clough was there he got 
 it, but if Mr. Clough wasn t there, he didn t. 
 
 Q. Have you done that ? 
 
 A. I have done that ; I should think I had with him. 
 
 Q, Under the order of Gilmore ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you, sir, when Mr. Gilmore was a candidate for the 
 office of governor, how it was about persons being passed over the road 
 by his direction, without anything whatever to show, and in large num- 
 bera? 
 
85 
 
 A. I couldn t tell about that. 
 
 Q. Haven t any positive knowledge on that point ? 
 
 A. No positive knowledge ; because 1 never ran as conductor. 
 
 Q. Whether you ever knew anything about the issuing of tickets by 
 Mr. Spalding, of Nashua ? 
 
 A. You said "without anything to show." 
 
 Q. Let me ask you about his passing persons over the road, when he 
 was candidate for senator, without having the regular tickets at the 
 office ? I mean tickets that would not be represented at all in the gen 
 eral office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was that his custom ? 
 
 A. There was considerable done of that kind, 1 should think. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see a ticket like that, Mr. Sanborn [showing ticket 
 to witness] ? 
 
 A. I should think I had. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if the tickets of that kind had any representa 
 tion in the accounts of the Concord Kailroad ? 
 
 A. Not on the accounts, 
 
 Q. Whether any tickets (I mean on account of any other person 
 save Isaac Spalding) were in circulation, or in use on the road, save 
 that? 
 
 A. Fred. Smyth had a lot of them for two or three years, while he 
 was governor. 
 
 Q. How many did Fred. Smyth have ? 
 
 A. I should think I sent fifty or sixty in one day, and took them up 
 on special trains. That was to come up on special trains, election day, 
 I think. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} By running on a special train, you mean a 
 train specially to bring them up ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Whether you sent to Mr. Smyth on other 
 occasions ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether 1 ever did, or not. 
 
 Q. Was he governor at that time V 
 
 A. It might have been when he was to be inaugurated. I presume 
 that was the case. 
 
 Q. In the case of Mr. Gilmore, to what extent did he send tickets to 
 voters to come home and vote for him ? 
 
 A. If you mean for the purpose of election, 1 can t tell. 
 
 Q. How is it ? 
 
 A. I know he ordered a good many tickets to send out ; at least, got 
 them of me at different times. 
 
 Q. While he was a candidate for office V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did they find any representation in your office ? 
 
 A. They did not. 
 
 Q. How many tickets, while Mr. Gilmore was a candidate for any 
 office, or while he was in office, did he procure from you, to send off for 
 political purposes ? 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Won t you give your best estimate ? 
 
 A. Oh, there might have been, perhaps, in one year, three or four 
 hundred. 
 
86 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if there were not more than twenty-five hund 
 red tickets passed by you to Joseph A. Gilmore, to be used for political 
 purposes, that never found any representation in your office ? 
 
 A. I shouldn t want to make that statement without the figures. 
 
 Q. Have you any sort of statistics, any memoranda of any kind, to 
 enable you to state any correct number of tickets sent out from that 
 office, for political purposes, through Joseph A. Gilmore alone, that 
 found no representation in your office ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you recollect the time when Gov. Hurriman 
 was nominated as a third candidate ? 
 
 A. I remember the time. 
 
 Q. How many were there sent out from your office on that particular 
 day? 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Were there not three hundred and fifty V 
 
 A. I should not want to state ; I have no recollection of any partic 
 ular day. I know that he would come into the office and want so many 
 tickets to such a place ; and I was requested to keep no account of it. 
 
 Q. When Mr. Gilmore came to your office to get tickets for political 
 purposes in this way, what direction did he give you in reference to 
 ..those tickets ? 
 
 A. Not to make any account of them. 
 
 Q. Did he direct you to make no account of them ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And did you obey those directions? 
 
 A. L tried to. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Haile.} Did he do this all the time ? 
 
 A. He did at first ; afterwards there were special tickets for politi 
 cal purposes. 
 
 Q. What year was this ? 
 
 A. For that matter it has always been so, more or less. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Mugridge.} Will you state, from the best information 
 that you have got on that subject, that Mr. Gilmore hasn t taken from 
 the general ticket office, to be used for political purposes (as you have 
 said) . two thousand tickets ? 
 
 A. 1 shouldn t want to state. 
 
 Q. How many will you state as your best recollection ? 
 
 A. It would be a pretty hard matter. I shouldn t want to state, be 
 cause I should be afraid that it wouldn t be very near. 
 
 Q. While Mr. Gilmore was candidate for office have you any sort 
 of an idea that you can give that can be reliable on that subject? 
 
 A. I should think that one year there might have been from three 
 to four hundred, and other years they were smaller. My impression is 
 that 1864 was the time that I got the most. The other years it was a 
 great deal smaller. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if that wasn t one year when Harriman was run 
 for governor if there wasn t three hundred of these taken from your 
 office at that time, or about that number ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I couldn t say that I do recollect. Perhaps some facts 
 connected with it might refresh my mind the individual that got them, 
 if he got them. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect the time when Mr. Gilmore and Mr. Harriman 
 were run as candidates for governor ? 
 
87 
 
 A. I recollect that. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect, in connection with that time, of any large num 
 ber of tickets being taken out of the office ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect that there was two or three hundred taken out 
 in that year, if I understand you, by Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Q. You say that Mr. Gilmore used to come and get these tickets. 
 Let me ask you if he used to send men for them ? 
 
 A. It wasn t a common thing. If there was an arrangement made 
 with parties to come for special tickets, they would come with written 
 orders. 
 
 Q. From the republican headquarters ? 
 
 A. Yes ; and the democratic. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if Joseph A. Gilmore while he was a candidate 
 for governor, gave you instructions to answer orders of persons who 
 came? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And did you obey these orders ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Did he give you instructions to keep these tickets secret ? 
 
 A. The special tickets were represented to a certain extent ; but 
 the regular tickets were not represented at all. 
 
 Q. And did you keep these secret, under his instruction ? 
 
 A. I think I did ; I always endeavored to, at any rate. 
 
 Q. Did Jim Whitcher ever come there and get tickets ? 
 
 A. Not for that purpose. 
 
 Q. For any purpose ? 
 
 A. I don t think he ever did. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that he never came there to get tickets for 
 any purpose ? 
 
 A. He had regular season tickets. 
 
 Q. Did he ever come and get tickets for political purposes ? 
 
 A. Yes, I think he did ; it comes to my mind ; I think he did. 
 
 Q. Don t it come to your recollection that he came two or three 
 times ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t recollect of his coming there but once ; and 
 that was when he said he came to see Mr. Gilmore, and he told me the 
 story (for Mr. Gilmore had gone away,) that he had so many men that 
 he had got at Hooksett, and that he was going to keep there until town- 
 meeting day. . . 
 
 Q. I want to ask you how many men Whitcher had there at Hook- 
 sett, and how many he expected there for which he wanted tickets ? 
 
 A. If I recollect right, he said he had three or four there, and he 
 was going to have three or four more there ; at any rate he was going to 
 get ten or fifteen there. 
 
 Q. Did you keep them a secret ! 
 
 A. Just the same as I did any of them. 1 have told you all I know 
 about it. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you have ever known of his sending tickets 
 to Whitcher? 
 
 A. He never told me what he wanted them for. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if Natt. Head, who lives in Hooksett, used to 
 come up to get tickets for political purposes ? 
 
 A. He did ; that is, he said they were for that. 
 
 Q. How many tickets did Natt Head get there for political purposes ? 
 
A. I can t tell how many he has had for political purposes. He has 
 had them almost every year when Gilmore was candidate for governor ; 
 and I think one year when Natt. Head was candidate for some office. 
 
 Q. Did Natt. Head get them there in large numbers ? 
 
 A. Oh, not many ; perhaps twenty-five. 
 
 Q. Twenty-five at a time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; sometimes half-a-dozen and sometimes twenty-five. 
 
 Q. How many times did he get them ? 
 
 A. Perhaps three or four times during these years. 
 
 Q. Do you know Jesse Gault, of Hooksett, sir ? 
 
 A. I think I do, sir. 
 
 Q. Was he a candidate for railroad commissioner at the same time 
 Grilmore was candidate for governor ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect about that ; I didn t know him then. | 
 
 Q. He lives in Hooksett ? 
 
 A. I think so ; I did not know him until recently. 
 
 Q. Did he ever come there to get tickets for political purposes? 
 
 A. I can t say that he did, for I didn t know him. 
 
 Q. Did ever Mr. Gilmore come in with him ? 
 
 A. I say I couldn t tell, because I didn t know the man until after 
 that. 
 
 Q. Do you know Joseph Goss, of Hooksett? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did he ever come there to get tickets ? 
 
 A. I can t say that he did. 
 
 Q Let me ask you if you will state that you have given them to Mr. 
 
 Goss, of Hooksett? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. He was one of Jim Whitcher s neighbors ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I believe so. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if he did not come there and get tickets for po 
 litical purposes ? 
 
 A. I shouldn t want to take my oath to that. 
 
 Q. Would you take your oath that he didn t ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Who is the station agent at Hooksett ? 
 
 A. Marshall. 
 
 Q. Did he ever come there and get tickets for political purposes ? 
 
 A. I don t think he ever did. 
 
 Q. Will you say that he did not ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know Thomas Wattles ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Tom Wattles come there and get tickets ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I should think he had ; I shouldn t want to take my 
 
 oath, but I think he did. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you how many tickets Wattles had ? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. How many times did he ever come ? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell that. 
 
 Q. Mr. Jim Whitcher lives in the town of Hooksett? 
 
 A. I think he does. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if particular men came from Pembroke, from the 
 city of Manchester, and from other places, to get tickets, aside from 
 
89 
 
 those that Mr. Gilmore got, regular tickets ? 1 am not speaking of the 
 tickets dealt out by the republican state committee, but did particular 
 men from Manchester, and Portsmouth, and Nashua, and Pembroke, 
 from all the large towns, come there to get tickets to be used for politi 
 cal purposes ? 
 
 A. I recollect of a man coming there from Manchester. 
 
 Q. Who was he ? 
 
 A. His name was Harrington. 
 
 Q. How many did he have ? 
 
 A. He had twenty-five, I think. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Were these special tickets? 
 
 A. No ; those were not. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Did Jim Cheney ever come up there for 
 any? 
 
 A. I think he was there at the same time with Harrington ; and I 
 think Harrington took the tickets. 
 
 Q. How many did Harrington take ? 
 
 A. Twenty-five. 
 
 Q. How many times did Harrington ever come there for tickets ? 
 
 A. I think that was the only time that he got them. 
 
 Q. Did ever you hear or see men ask Gilmore for any ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Jim Cheney ever come there except then ? 
 
 A. I don t think he did. I should be very much inclined to say 
 that I don t think he did. 
 
 Q. Did men come there from Nashua and Portsmouth that you didn t 
 know, with orders from Gilmore for tickets ? * 
 
 A. Come with him? 
 
 Q. Yes, come with him for tickets for political purposes ? 
 
 A. That was nt a very common thing, however, beyond what you 
 have said. 
 
 Q. Did instances of that kind happen where men came there with 
 Gilmore, and he would say, " Mr. Sanborn, let us have so many tick 
 ets " ; and take them and carry them off? 
 
 A. There was a few such cases. 
 
 Q. While Gilmore was candidate for office we will say four weeks 
 before election, each year, for the four years was there scarcely a day 
 but what men came, either with Gilmore, or under orders from Gilmore, 
 for tickets ? 
 
 A. That would be a hard question to answer. 
 
 Q. What is your impression ? 
 
 A. I should think there might be a good many days, perhaps. 
 
 Q. Were not the days when they didn t come exceptional days ? 
 
 A. I should think that they were, rather. 
 
 Q. You think they were rather exceptional days ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, when these men come in this way, were you not accustomed 
 to deal out the tickets from the general stock of tickets in your posses 
 sion, all the way from five to two hundred ? 
 
 A. I should think two hundred was very high. 
 
 Q. Well, I will put it in that way. 
 
 A. I should like to alter that statement. 
 
 Q. Well, you may. 
 
 A. From one to a dozen. 
 
90 
 
 Q. I ask you, sir, if, when these men came for tickets, you didn t 
 deal them out in numbers ranging from five to two hundred ? 
 
 A. I should say from one. 
 
 Q. From one? 
 
 A. I don t recollect any case of two hundred. 
 
 Q. Have you not known one hundred tickets to be sent out at a 
 time? 
 
 A. You mean regular tickets, do you ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. I don t recollect any particular occasion. I recollect once of 
 giving Mr. Gilmore fifty tickets at one time. 
 
 Q. Is your recollection so clear that you will state, positively, that 
 you haven t dealt out a hundred ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You won t state that? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I suppose you don t know whether any of these tickets got into 
 Tim Whitcher s hands, do you? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I suppose you wouldn t be able to say whether any of these tick 
 ets were taken there by Mr. Whitcher ? 
 
 A. Those tickets that I dealt out to Mr. Gilmore had no stamp of 
 the ticket seller at all ; they had no mark, except, may be, the date. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if there has been a single year that Joseph A. 
 Gilmore has been superintendent of the Concord Kailroad, but what he 
 has been in the habit of going to your office and getting tickets to send 
 away, more or less each year ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say as to the first part of the time. 
 
 Q. Well, what do you mean by the first part of the time ? 
 
 A. The first two or three years that I was there ; I could not say as 
 to that because it was sometime ago. 
 
 Q. Now, has there been a year since that time that Mr. Gilmore has 
 not been there to get tickets, either to give to persons or to send off? 
 
 A. There was a time when he gave them to individuals just as they 
 were going down on the train. That was a common thing. 
 
 Q. It was a common thing ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} And these tickets, you say, were not dated ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Didn t have any seller s mark upon them ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge,} Now I want to ask you, Mr. Sanborn, in 
 how large numbers (I will lay his political career entirely out of ac 
 count) Gilmore has been in the habit during these other years, of 
 taking tickets . from you, at any one time, for the purpose of sending 
 away ? 
 
 A. I recollect, one time, of carrying twenty-five into his office, be 
 tween Manchester and Nashua, twenty-five regular tickets ; or twenty- 
 four, perhaps the number was. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} These were not stamped with the mark of 
 the seller? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. These were between Manchester and Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; one-half up and the other half down. 
 
91 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge. ) Were you directed by Mr. Gilmore to keep 
 the fact that you gave them to him, a secret ? 
 
 A. Not in so many words ; I was directed to make no account of it. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Mr. Sanborn, did you, as general ticket 
 agent, ever see any of these tickets again ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; tickets unstamped came in. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Now, you say you recollect giving him, at 
 one time, twenty-four or twenty-five tickets? Did you, on other oc 
 casions, give him a less number ? 
 
 A. It was a very common thing for him to come in and get tickets 
 for persons going down. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Haile.} 1 understand you to say that was while he was 
 not in political office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Before or after ? 
 
 A. Both. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Well now, sir, let me ask you if it was 
 not a common thing for him, and if there was hardly a day passed over 
 his head but what he came to your office and wanted one or more tickets 
 to be sent away under the circumstances you have described ? 
 
 A. Perhaps it would average two or three times a week, that he 
 would take tickets for so and so to Boston. 
 
 Q. During all the time . 
 
 A. Well, it was a common thing ; I could not designate. 
 
 Q. When the weeks occurred that these facts did not occur, were 
 they not exceptional ones ? 
 
 A. L think they were. 
 
 Q. Now I want to ask you sir, where these tickets went that he took? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell in all cases. 
 
 Q. Did they go in all directions ? 
 
 A. Generally they would go to individuals that were there present. 
 
 Q. Did some go to Boston and Portsmouth, and some over the Bos 
 ton and Lawrence road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. To all stations to Boston and this side of Boston ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, did you ever see any of these tickets back 
 .again ? 
 
 A. I think I did, 
 
 Q, What did you do with them ? 
 
 A. Threw them out of the account. 
 
 Q. What did you do with them ? 
 
 A. Turned them out the same as I did the other tickets. 
 
 Q. You took them and turned them out, and never made any return 
 of them whatever ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q,., Did Mr. Gilmore ever ask you if you were destroying those 
 tickets ? 
 
 A. I don t know as -he did. He kept repeating to me to do so ; not 
 always when he got the tickets, understand, but only occasionally. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear Mr. Gilmore give Mr. Clough verbal orders to 
 pass men over the road, without giving a written pass ? 
 
 A. I should think I had, some of the conductors ; I couldn t say 
 that it was Mr. Clough. 
 
92 
 
 Q. You couldn t say that it was not Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When that party to whom that order was given got into the cars, 
 he didn t have anything to represent his passage ? [Objected to unless 
 the witness knew.] 
 
 The Chairman. I do not understand that this objection is well-ta 
 ken, because he has described the course of business. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} I want to ask you this : taking the course 
 or usages of business as it was done there, with which you are familiar, 
 I understand : supposing Mr. Gilmore met Mr. Clough on the platform, 
 and says, "Here, pass this man to Manchester;" and he did; was hi& 
 passage represented in any return that the conductor could make to the 
 office ? 
 
 A. Not necessarily. Perhaps I should say, though, when the rules 
 were adopted for the conductor to report all free passes, it would 
 come in. 
 
 Q. Now, let me ask you, how many instances, how frequently did 
 you see Gilmore give instructions of that kind to Clough ? 
 
 A. Not but a very few times. 
 
 Q. Do you know how many times ? 
 
 A. No, sir, for the reason that I wasn t there. 
 
 Q. And you do not know how many instances of that kind occurred 
 in Mr. Clough s case ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear Gilmore tell Clough to disregard the instruc 
 tions of the road with reference to making a return of free passes ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to inquire with regard to trip passes. Did Mr. Gil- 
 more frequently issue trip passes ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now it was the duty of the conductor to return these to the gen 
 eral ticket office. 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, if these came into the office and you destroyed 
 them ? 
 
 A. They were all returned to me every month. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if there were occasions when there was no 
 record taken of annual passes ? 
 
 A. There was one time that the conductors were required to return 
 every free pass to the superintendent : they didn t come into my office 
 at all. 
 
 Q. What year was that? 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. As near as you can ? 
 
 A. I wouldn t undertake ; 1 should think it was as far as 1863. 
 
 Q. Now, then, by the usage of the road, the conductors for a time 
 in 1863 were required to return every free pass to the superintendent ; 
 and they did not come into the general ticket office at all ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now for how long a time did that practice or usage of the road 
 prevail ? 
 
 A. I think only two or three months. 
 
 Q. Was Gilmore a candidate for office at that time? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
93 
 
 Q. Now you say that you think in 1863, if that was the right year, 
 when that was the usage of the road, was there any possible way for 
 the number of free passes that were issued by Gilmore to be detected 
 by any general account kept at your ticket offices ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now when the trip passes were, under the usage of the road, to 
 be sent to your office, let me ask you if Gilmore didn t come to your 
 office and take these passes away before they were reckoned in the 
 accounts of the road, and destroyed ? 
 
 A. As I told you before, the passes were all returned to me at the 
 end of the month. 
 
 Q. When they we re returned to you at the end of the month, they 
 ought to have been put into the account? 
 
 A. Reckoned in the list of free passes. 
 
 Q. Now, before they were entered on the list of free passes, hasn t 
 he come to your office and taken them, and destroyed them ? 
 
 A. Not frequently. 
 
 Q. Hasn t he ever done it? 
 
 A. 1 couldn t say that he had. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect on one occasion after he was governor, of his 
 coming to your office and calling for the free passes ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect now. 
 
 Q. Will you say that he didn t do it ? 
 
 A. I wouldn t say that he didn t do it ; I might have forgotten. It 
 wouldn t be just according to my recollection. I should rather say 
 that he didn t until they had been counted up. 
 
 Q. Has he ever given you directions to modify them in any way ? 
 
 A. I don t think he has. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state the number of free trips that were made 
 upon passes used by Gilmore the last year that he was superintendent 
 .of the Concord Eailroad ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I have no means of knowing. 
 
 Q. Did you see an article, made up and published in the Concord 
 Monitor? 
 
 A. I read it ; but that was annual passes. 
 
 Q. I want to know, sir, if you know, as general ticket agent of the 
 Ooncord Eailroad, how many free trips were made over the Concord 
 Eailroad, upon passes issued by Gilmore the last year he was superin 
 tendent ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see a record of it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think I have. 
 
 Q. What did that record show ? 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. What statement did ever you see, I mean such annual passes as 
 given by Mr. Gilmore for that year ? 
 
 A. I could nt tell : it was quite a number of thousands. 
 
 Q. Were there ten thousand ? 
 
 A. I couldn t state. 
 
 Q. Was there five thousand ? 
 
 A. I should judge there might have been three or four pages of 
 names ; I don t know how many names one page would come to ; per 
 haps forty or fifty ; perhaps more ; that is the list that I saw. 
 
 Q. How large a book was it? 
 
94 
 
 A. As large again as that [referring to book on table]. Mr. Nutter 
 always kept that book. It was a book that I never had occasion to go 
 to. 
 
 Q. Do you know Seth Eastman ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Seth Eastman have free passes ? 
 
 A. I couldn t swear to that. 
 
 Q. Do you know his son ? 
 
 A. 1 couldn t swear. 
 
 Q. Do you know Samuel G. Eastman ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did he have them ? ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say as to that. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman,} What do you mean by annual passes? 
 
 A. Passes given for a year, or to end with the year. 
 
 Q. Mr. Sanborn, did you see the article published in the Daily Mon 
 itor ? 
 
 A. I might. 
 
 Q. Did you, shortly before that, see a record made up at the Con 
 cord Railroad office ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you know who did make it up ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did anybody come to your office for information ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. You don t know who did it ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I did not. 
 
 Q. You saw the article ? 
 
 A. I think I saw the article. 
 
 Q. Do- you know that the statistics that went into that article were 
 prepared at the Concord Railroad office ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, I want to turn your attention to another mat 
 ter here, that I want to go over briefly. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Hoik,} Will you allow me to ask one question; you 
 said that at one time Mr. Gilmore called upon you for tickets, and you 
 distributed twenty-four or twenty-five between Concord and Manches 
 ter. I ask you if there was any unusual circumstance for that ? 
 
 A. No. sir ; only there was a -person there which I understood from 
 the conversation was to receive the tickets. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Muyridge.} Who was that person ? 
 
 A. It was a woman. 
 
 Q. Do you know Starkey s sister ? 
 
 A. I don t think I do. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see the sister of Martin T. Starkey ? 
 
 A. I have had such a person pointed out to me. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if you ever saw tickets given to her. 
 
 A. That person wasn t the person pointed out to me. 
 
 Q. Who was the woman that was there ? 
 
 A. I don t know now, sir. 
 
 Q. What kind of a looking woman ? 
 
 A. She was a shortish, medium-sized, good looking lady. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see her in Gilmore s company? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
95 
 
 Q. Do you know where she lived ? 
 
 A. My impression was that she lived at Manchester. 
 
 Q. Did she live at Hooksett? 
 
 A. I don t know, only I know she used to go to Manchester. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see her with Jim Whitcher? 
 
 A. I don t know as I have. 
 
 Q. Won t you say ? 
 
 A. No ; I couldn t say that. 
 
 Q. Do you know of his giving tickets to Jim Whitcher besides this 
 time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many times has Gilmore given tickets to females in that 
 office? 
 
 A. I couldn t state that. 
 
 Q. How many times has Gilmore given tickets to females ? 
 
 A. I should think the males would predominate. 
 
 Q. How many times has he given tickets to females ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Has he many and many a time ? 
 
 A. Well, that is a little too strong. 
 
 Q. Well, I ask you the question. I want to ask you how many times 
 you have known Gilmore to give tickets to females in that office ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Will you say that he has done so fifty times ? 
 
 A. I don t believe that he has. 
 
 Q. Twenty-five ? 
 
 A. He may have done that twenty-five times. 
 
 Q. How large a number at a time ? 
 
 A. Generally two, but oftener perhaps not but one. 
 
 Q. Did you ever know Jim Whitcher to come with a female to get 
 tickets ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you know of Jim Whitcher being in Gilmore s office with a 
 female ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Was Whitcher frequently at Gilmore s office? 
 
 A. I don t think he was, 
 
 Q. Was he ever ? 
 
 A. I wouldn t say that he was. 
 
 Q. Has he ever been around your office ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Was he around the office of the Concord Eailroad ? was he oc 
 casionally there, sir ? 
 
 A. Occasionally ; saw him in the depot. 
 
 Q. Did you ever ride on the cars between Concord and Hooksett, 
 and not see him ? 
 
 A. Oh yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did ever you see Mr. Whitcher with any of these women to 
 
 whom Gilmore has given tickets ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I have. 
 
 Q. Can you say that you never have ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; that I don t know. 
 
 Q. Did you use to see females in there ? 
 
 A. Once in a while. 
 
96 
 
 Q. Pretty often ? 
 
 A. Perhaps some might call it often. 
 
 Q. How were they dressed ? 
 
 A. Generally pretty well. 
 
 Q. Young ladies, ordinarily ? 
 
 A. All ages. 
 
 Q. Do you know Starkey s sister? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell her ; I have had her pointed out to me. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see her in there with Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. 1 can t say that I ever did. 
 
 Q. Did Gilmore ever get you to issue passes, and sign his, Gilmore s. 
 name to them? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sign Gilmore s name to a pass? 
 
 A. I might have done so, once or twice. He used to give passes, by 
 his order, in my name. 
 
 Q. How many did you give? 
 
 A. I could not tell, sir; a great many. 
 
 Q. Has it been your practice, while Gilmore was there, to issue 
 
 passes in that way ? 
 
 A. While he was there ; the last four years ; certainly. 
 
 Q. And you did it under specific directions from Gilmore ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Whether he gave you specific instructions to keep those passes 
 
 secret ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t know that he did. 
 
 Q. Did you keep any account ? 
 
 A. In the report of free passes, I did. 
 
 Q. To what persons were they given ? 
 
 A. To individuals put down here, and people who came up on the 
 train. 
 
 Q. Who were some of them, sir ? 
 
 A. There was Seth Eastman, Sam. Eastman and Edson Eastman. 
 
 Q. And their wives ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who else, Mr. Sanborn? 
 
 A. Benjamin Grover. 
 
 Q. All the members of the firm of Barron, Dodge & Co. ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I think I have ; not much to them. 
 
 Q. Colonel Grover s family? 
 
 A. I think I have to Colonel Grover and his wife. 
 
 Q. Give us another? 
 
 A. Mr. Hart. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see Mr. Gilmore give Christopher Hart s daughters 
 
 passes ? 
 
 A. No, I don t think I have. 
 
 Q. Tom, his son ? 
 
 A. Tom ? I guess they never gave to him. 
 
 Q. Who else ? 
 
 A. I don t know, I m sure ; most everybody ; I could not designate. 
 
 Q. Is there a bank president or bank director of any company in 
 the County of Merrimack that didn t have a pass over the road ? 
 
 A. I think the cashier ot the Warner Bank did. 
 
 Q. Did George Jones have one ? , 
 
97 
 
 A. I don t recollect as he did. 
 
 Q. Franklin Simonds ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Dr. Ames, of Bradford ? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. Kuel Dirkey ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; 1 think occasionally ; not very often for him. 
 
 Q. Take the State Capital Bank here for instance ; Hall & Roberts 
 did you give to them? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. To Mr. Samuel Butterfield ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect that he ever did. 
 
 Q. Abraham Bean? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Enos Blake ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Theodore French ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. His family? 
 
 A. I don t recollect of ever giving his family one. 
 
 Q. Now take the Union Bank ; A. C. Pierce ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. John H. Pearson? 
 
 A. 1 don t recollect about him. 
 
 Q. Didn t he have annual passes ? 
 
 A. I think he did. 
 
 Q. Woodbridge Odlin ? 
 
 A. I think I have, once or twice. 
 
 Q. Isaac Elwell ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. His son and family? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Jacob C. Dunklee ? 
 
 A. I think I never gave him any. 
 
 Q. Benjamin Dunklee ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. John Kimball ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Frank Dunklee and John Dunklee ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. S. Dumas and family? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I should think I had. 
 
 Q. B. F. Martin and family, of Manchester? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I presume so. 
 
 Q. Joe Goss ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. E. A. Straw ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Asa Fuller, wife and daughter and two boys ? 
 
 A. I could not tell about that. 
 
 Q. How was it about passing his entire family ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say that I have ever given anything more than self 
 and wife, perhaps. 
 
 Q. Don t you recollect of giving the boys a pass ? 
 
 7 
 
98 
 
 A. 1 don t recollect that 1 have. 
 
 Q. Colonel Norton, of the army ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Lieutenant Graham ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Colonel Graham ? 
 
 A. I could not say as to him. 
 
 Q. Think the thing over by days, and say how many you gave in 
 this way, during the last four years of Gilmore s stay on the road ? 
 
 A. Perhaps it would average three a week ; sometimes it was more 
 than three in a day, and then some days there wouldn t be any. 
 
 Q. Now 1 want to ask you if Mr. Gilmore didn t ask you to keep 
 that sly ? 
 
 A. No, sir, 1 don t recollect as he ever did ; for I always turned 
 them in, the same as I would any one s else. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, there was a considerable rumpus, if you will allow that 
 expression, raised about these free passes shortly before Gilmore left ; 
 and before George Clough left the road. Now let me ask you whether 
 there were orders given by Gilmore to cut off these passes after that ? 
 
 A. There was an order not to issue any of our own issue. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman. ) What do you mean by your own issue ? 
 
 A. My own signature. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) When did you say that was ? 
 
 A. 1 could not say. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Was it a short time before George Clough 
 left the road ? 
 
 A. It might have been a year previous. 
 
 Q. You observed that order, did you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether, after the annual passes expired J anuary 
 1st, 1866, any annual passes were issued? 
 
 A. I had nothing to do with the annual passes. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to refer for a minute to another subject. Suppose 
 a man buys a ticket at Franklin, on the line of the Northern road, to 
 go to Boston. Is that ticket that he buys at Franklin charged to the 
 Concord Kailroad at the Franklin office ? 
 
 A. There is an account of it made. 
 
 Q. Now, then, that passenger going from Franklin to Boston, should 
 leave a coupon ticket upon the Concord road, which should be returned 
 to your office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, is the settlement between the Northern Eailroad and the 
 Concord Eailroad made by that charge and by that coupon ? 
 
 A Yes, sir; by the charge. The coupon does not go into the 
 account. 
 
 Q. The coupon should properly, if the business is regularly done on 
 the Concord road, tally with the charge at Franklin ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now an account is taken of this charge at Franklin ; and this is 
 kept regularly for the month, is it, sir? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And there should be an exact correspondence between the charges 
 and the coupons ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
Q. Now, sir, if any great number of coupons were abstracted bjr 
 the conductor during that month, and not returned, would not that fact 
 inevitably be noted at the time of the monthly return ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, the fact of that deficiency would. 
 
 Q. Now, supposing that some coupons were not returned that months. 
 Supposing that the sales exceeded the collections, ana it ran along into 
 the next month. Supposing there was a great deficiency the second 
 month, would not that be noticed V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, is there a chance, Mr. Sanborn, I do not speak now of 
 individual instances is there a chance for a conductor to appropriate 
 any considerable number of tickets from the upper road without its 
 being discovered, from the first or second or third month s settlement? 
 
 A. If he keept them out entirely, it would be discovered that there- 
 was a deficiency. 
 
 Q. If he kept them, it would be discovered and noted at the end of 
 the month in the settlement. 
 
 A. It would be noted ? 
 
 Q. Can the conductor keep back those tickets in that way, to any 
 considerable amount, without the fact being detected if there is any 
 amount of them ? 
 
 A. You mean a considerable number? 
 
 Q. I mean twenty, or thirty, or forty. 
 
 A. If it was that number we should inquire into it at once. 
 
 Q. Now then, sir, that is the way the business is done in connection* 
 with the upper roads. That I think isn t clear as the matter stands 
 now, We will take a case of the sale of tickets at the Concord office, 
 for instance. Is it possible for the conductor to abstract tickets sold at 
 the Concord office, going to Boston ? 
 
 A. Not by himself "alone. 
 
 Q. I want to put this question to you : Supposing the ticket mastear 
 should sell tickets here at the Concord office, to me, for instance, and I 
 get on board the train to go to Boston. Is there any possible way that 
 George Clough alone, without colluding with the conductor on the Bos 
 ton & Lowell road, can abstract that ticket ? 
 
 A. Not without an arrangement with you or the conductor. 
 
 Q. He has got to have an arrangement with me, and also with the* 
 conductor ? 
 
 A. Either one or the other. 
 
 Q. Hasn t he got to collude with the conductor below here, to sell 
 it, for instance ? 
 
 A. I should think so; if I understand the whole question. Thcs 
 only point I see where he might get it is, if he had some other tickets 
 that he might give you. 
 
 Q. And if I were to collude with him ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. He might give you a check. 
 
 Q. Now, then, in order to pass a western ticket, he has got to col 
 lude with the conductor below Nashua? 
 
 A. If the ticket is good, he has not. 
 
 Q. Supposing I go and buy a ticket, to-day, to Boston. Now that 
 ticket has to go over the Boston & Lowell and Lowell & Nashua roads ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now how is it possible for Mr. Clough, unless he colludes with 
 the conductors of the two roads, to get possession of the ticket ? 
 
100 
 
 A. I do not know as he could. I spoke of his keeping a ticket that 
 he took honestly. 
 
 Q. Is there a possible chance ? That ticket is finally taken up by 
 the conductor on the Boston & Lowell road, is it not ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now then, he knows what kind of a ticket is sold over the Con 
 cord road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. The conductor, also, on the Nashua & Lowell road understands 
 what ticket I ought to have ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Suppose I should present a ticket different from that sold by the 
 Concord office, to the conductor over the Boston & Lowell road ; wouldn t 
 he notice it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. If he was an honest man he wouldn t pass me ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, in order to keep that ticket without discovery, has there 
 not got to be collusion between him and the other conductors ? 
 
 A. I say if he has one of these western tickets which were good 
 from here to Boston. 
 
 Q. Was there ever a ticket issued by a western railroad which 
 would pass a man from Concord to Boston ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; there has been such. 
 
 Q. How long ago ? 
 
 A. it was several years ago. It was a mistake, however. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if all these western ticket coupons are not taken 
 off at each road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Kow for a man to go out of the City of Concord with a western 
 ticket, he has got to have a ticket made up of three coupons ? 
 
 A. Two. 
 
 Q. Two coupons ; one of which is taken on the Concord and Nashua, 
 and one on the Boston and Lowell road each to be taken up ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough would take up the first coupon ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, when he gets to the Boston and Lowell road, the other 
 would be taken up? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When a man buys a ticket here regularly from the City of Con 
 cord to Boston, he gets one ticket, does he not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And that ticket is known by Mr. Clough ? It is known to the 
 conductor on the Nashua and Lowell road, and to the conductor on the 
 Boston and Lowell road ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. It is a kind of ticket which, whenever it is presented on either 
 of the lower roads, is detected at once ? 
 
 A. It might be. 
 
 Q. Now, when a man buys a western ticket which would take him, 
 we will say to Boston, from any point west of here, that western ticket 
 is a long one ordinarily a long ticket ? 
 
 A. It has only two coupons when it come here. 
 
101 
 
 Q. And one takes the passenger from Concord to Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And the other from Nashua to Boston ?- 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When he gets on the cars, it is the duty of Mr. Clough to take 
 up his coupon? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And that is an entirely different one from the one presented be 
 low Nashua ? 
 
 A. So far as regards printing ? 
 
 Q. So there is no sort of similarity between the coupons ? 
 
 A. No further than the color of the ticket. 
 
 Q. Now, I want you to show how it is possible for a man to get into 
 the cars here with a western coupon ticket, and go to Boston on it, 
 without the ticket being taken up in just the way I have stated, Can 
 it be done ? 
 
 A. I should think not. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Gushing.) Suppose that the conductor should have in 
 his hands coupons of the western road, that he had obtained from some 
 body that had gone as far as Concord ; and that their time has not ex 
 pired;, so that they are good for some number of days. Supposing a 
 passenger gets in at Concord and buys a ticket there ; and the conductor 
 takes up the passengers check which he gives him, and substitutes 
 another for it. Is there any difficulty in that ? 
 
 A. That is the point that I have been trying to make. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mtigridge.) Now you say if Mr. Clough should take up 
 that ticket and give him a coupon, that he might ride on that coupon 
 ticket through to Boston ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that was my idea. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, I want to ask you whether these western tick 
 ets are sold in the coupon shape now ? 
 
 You mean from the west to Boston ? 
 
 Yes. 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; we receive them constantly. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you if the Boston tickets are all charged to 
 George Clough ? 
 
 A. What Boston tickets ? 
 
 Q. Is it George Clough s duty to return any of the Boston tickets 
 that are sold at this office ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; he don t return any of them ; they are punched. 
 
 Q. Does the Lowell conductor return them ? 
 
 A. He returns to the Boston & Lowell office. 
 
 Q. In the monthly settlement they are returned and taken into the 
 account here at Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now then, shouldn t the returns from that road agree with the 
 sales here at the City of Concord ? 
 
 A. They should. 
 
 Q. Now, supposing that any large number of tickets were abstract- 
 ed in that way each month, by the conductor, wouldn t they inevitably 
 be discovered ? 
 
 A. Y"es, I think they would. The discrepancy would be discovered. 
 
 Q. Supposing that twenty or thirty tickets a month were taken and 
 abstracted in that way, or even fifteen ? 
 
102 
 
 A. It would be noticed. 
 
 Q. That is so in regard to all the stations this side of Boston ? 
 
 A. That is the general rule. 
 
 Q. That is so in regard to stations this side of Nashua ? 
 
 A. All the stations : that is, so far as returns are made. 
 
 Q. If, for instance, a man should buy a ticket here over the road to 
 .Nashua, there is. an account made of it, not returned here but a t 
 .Nashua? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. And that is returned to the general ticket office V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, then, that applies to tickets sold here at the general office. 
 Now we will take tickets put into the hands of the conductors to *di in 
 the cars. Isn t every single ticket given to him to sell in the cars 
 charged to him as so much money? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And hasn t he got to account for it as so much money V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, supposing there is put into George Clough s hands here, by 
 you, ten tickets from Concord to Boston ; they are charged to Mr. C lough 
 as so much in tickets ; and if he does not account to you for them, they 
 are charged to him ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. The tickets are not from Concord to Boston ; he can 
 ticket from any station to Boston. 
 
 Q. Well, now is there any chance for a conductor to steal by these 
 tickets, without cheating himself ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir ; there is a chance for him to steal with these tickets. 
 
 Q. How is it? 
 
 A. If a man gets in at Concord, and the fare is $2.20, while from 
 Thornton s it is $1.30 or $1.20 ; and he reports that a ticket is sold 
 from Thornton s to Boston instead of from Concord to Boston ; in that 
 case he makes a dollar, while he gets his check back. 
 
 Q. But he cannot sell the full ticket ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Wouldn t there be any way to discover by the monthly returns? 
 
 A. No, sir: because if he put it on his way-bill as from Thornton s, 
 it would be charged so on my account. That is, all I should know 
 would be what he would return. 
 
 Q. But still, is there any great opportunity for a man to abstract 
 money in that way ? 
 
 A. I don t see how he could very much. 
 
 Q. Haven t you such checks against him as to prevent a very ex 
 travagant use of tickets in that way ? 
 
 A. As regards checks, I don t think there are many, except that he 
 has so many tickets, and can have these sold. Our present conductors 
 four report, perhaps, sixty or seventy in a month, from all parts of 
 the month. They used to report in the same proportion perhaps 
 twenty apie*ce. 
 
 Q. Is there a chance for a man to abstract much ? 
 
 A. Not any further than that. 
 
 Q. Is there any chance for a man to do a large wholesale business in 
 stealing, by the use of tickets over the lower roads, tickets sold from 
 the local stations? Haven t you such checks and can t you make such 
 checks as to be able to discover it ? 
 

 103 
 
 A. I don t know as 1 could. Yes, I should think, taking your state 
 ment, that 1 might. 
 
 Q. I mean a hundred or a hundred and fifty thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Since 1842? Do you think a man could steal half a million 
 of money by the use of these tickets without its being discovered ? 
 
 A. I should think he would have to be pretty shrewd. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} In this matter of tickets which are sold at 
 the office, which at some time or other should be returned to you, is it 
 practicable for the ticket to be used several times over, and then re 
 turned within the month ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Suppose, from the* ticket office there are sold, a certain number of 
 tickets in one day, and suppose that a proportion of them are retained. 
 There may be a portion of them retained several times, and returned 
 within the month ? 
 
 A. Under the old system. 
 
 Q. If that is done, what means have you of discovering ? 
 
 A. We have none. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Let me ask you if twenty tickets could be 
 discovered ? 
 
 A. If they were all returned within the month they would not be 
 discovered. 
 
 Q. Can they be abstracted and kept back entirely by the conductor ? 
 If there was any considerable number of them, you would be sure to 
 notice them ? 
 
 A. It would call our attention to them. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Bellows.} These tickets that you deliver to the con 
 ductors to sell on the road, are they tickets from Concord to Nashua 
 Concord to Boston, rather ? 
 
 A. Over the Concord road to Boston. 
 
 Q. Not as from Concord? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. ffaile.) They are different from what you sell regu 
 larly ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Supposing an individual should get into the cars, and the con 
 ductor should not have any of these tickets, could he not take pay 
 through to Boston, and take a check ? 
 
 A. These are checks. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley ) The question is, if he didn t have any of 
 these tickets ? 
 
 A. I presume that no conductor would refuse to take his pass on 
 that account. But it is understood that sometimes he writes on a piece 
 of paper, explaining to the conductor, who keeps it until he comes back 
 and gives him the check. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Sanborn, is it the practice of the con 
 ductors, where they take fare on the cars, to give out a local ticket ? 
 
 A. There has been a time ; it has not all the time. 
 
 Q. Has it been so in six or eight years ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; in the commencement of 1866, I think, we had a sys 
 tem of checks for every station. Every single fare that was taken, the 
 conductor was supposed to take one. 
 Q. What became of that system ? 
 
104 
 
 A. That was as long as the conductors would do it. ; 
 
 Q. You sell a ticket, a local ticket from here to Nashua. Now, 
 Judge Gushing asked you the question whether that might not be taken 
 up and used over and over again ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, what occasion has the conductor to take that, so long as he 
 never gives any tickets to persons in the cars, when, if he used the 
 tickets, he exposed himself to detection ? 
 
 A. If 1 understand you I spoke of using a ticket over there is 
 no necessity of that. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} How is it about the tickets that these gen 
 tlemen from Manchester testify that they have sold ? 
 
 A. They might be done in that way. . 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} How was it with the old conductors taking 
 fares from here to Nashua ? Were they accustomed to give out a ticket 
 for that fare ? 
 
 A. There was times when they did. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. I could not tell without looking ; but I think the general prac 
 tice was to let them get along without anything. There were no tickets 
 except these checks ; they could give them or not. 
 
 Q. Now, aside from this particular time, did they have anything 
 furnished them that they could give ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Could they give out anything as a representation of the fares ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, can you see any occasion, suppose a man wished to steal, 
 can you see any object that he would have in using a coupon ticket over 
 and over again, when he made a sale, and thereby exposing himself to 
 the risk of detection, when he might just as well take the fare of the 
 passenger and put it into his pocket at once ? 
 
 A, So far as that is concerned, there is no need of it. 
 
 Q, Supposing Mr. Clough wanted to steal a fare from Hooksett to 
 Nashua, does this giving of a check furnish him any aid in doing it ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, don t he take one chance of detection if he does this ? 
 
 A, Yes, sir ; I should think he would. 
 
 Q. Wouldn t it be much easier, if he wanted to steal, to take the 
 fare itself at once ? 
 
 A. Y"es, sir ; 1 should think it would. 
 
 [The further examination of Mr. Sanborn was deferred for the time 
 being, at the request of Mr. Mugridge.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF HENKY P. LANE. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Lane, where do you live? 
 
 A. Worcester, Mass. 
 
 Q. Who is your father? Where did you formerly live ? 
 
 A. Manchester. 
 
 Q. Son of whom ? 
 
 A. Warren Lane. 
 
 Q. Were you engaged in the substitute business at Concord, and if 
 so, at what time ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. About how long in all ? 
 
105 
 
 A. Six or nine months ; seven months I think here. 
 
 Q. Will you state what your business was ? 
 
 A. My business was to start from here and goto Worcester, and 
 take the first train from Worcester in the morning, and fetch arounii 
 substitutes, brokers, etc. 
 
 Q. What time would you arrive at Concord ? 
 
 A. Half-past nine or ten 1 don t know- half-past ten, I think. 
 
 Q. Eide by the morning train ? 
 
 A. The morning train ; the first. 
 
 Q. Will you state how many substitutes, brokers, etc., you brought 
 on during the seven or nine months that you were engaged, nearly as 
 you are able to state ? 
 
 A. Perhaps from seven, to nine thousand. 
 
 Q. That is the number in the aggregate ? 
 
 A. I cannot state the number exactly ; it was a number of thousand. 
 
 Q. Will you state now who paid the fares of these substitutes ; how 
 they were paid, and by whom they were paid, on the Concord Eailroad? 
 
 A. Why, from Nashua to Concord we always paid the conductors 
 inside fare, in the cars, invariably. We never bought a ticket, as I can 
 recollect. And when I didn t have the direct charge, the brokers who 
 had charge of them paid in the cars. 
 
 Q. With what conductor did you usually ride, and to what con 
 ductor did you pay ? 
 
 A. Well, I rode with Mr. Clough. 1 always paid Mr. Clough when 
 I rode with him, and the other ones. He was always on this early 
 train. I paid him. 
 
 Q. How much have you ever paid? How many did you pay for? 
 Give the best idea you can to the board of referees how many you paid 
 for on the train ; from what number to what number, and how much it 
 would amount to. 
 
 A. I could not state exactly ; about from five to thirty-five. Well, 
 there might have been sometimes more or less. 
 
 Q. You mean the number of substitutes, or the amount of money ? 
 
 A. The money I could not tell. 
 
 Q. How many times a week did you go from here to Worcester ? 
 
 A. Every day, when I was able. Probably didn t miss but very 
 few days in the seven months. 
 
 Q. You spoke of paying in the cars. From what point to what 
 point did you pay in the cars ? 
 
 A. From Nashua. 
 
 Q. Do you remember what the fare was from Concord to Nashua at 
 that time ; do you recollect ? 
 
 A. I have forgot ; I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. Mr. Lane, how were the cars? How many cars ran on the train - 
 at that time from Nashua up, and how were they loaded ? 
 
 A. Oh, there were extra long trains in those days 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} During the eight or nine months that you 
 were engaged in the substitute business, won t you describe the trains 
 on which you rode ? You may describe the number of cars, and how 
 many passengers there were. Give the best description you can during 
 the period that you were running upon them every day. 
 
 A. I used to go from here to Worcester, to i&eet the boat train from 
 New York ; and from there to Nashua. 
 
 Q. I am talking about the cars of the Concord Eailroad, from here 
 to Nashua. How many cars ran on a train ? 
 
106 
 
 A. I couldn t tell, exactly ; but I have seen, perhaps, eleven to 
 .Jifteen cars. 
 
 (J. Describe the ordinary trains ; about hoyr many ran, and how full 
 t they were. Just give the best account you can. 
 
 A. They was always very full, what cars there were. They used to 
 be very large trains ; eleven to fifteen cars. 
 
 Q. How was it with regard to the seats of cars accommodating pas 
 sengers ? Give just as fully as you can how full the cars were. 
 
 A. They was always very full, so that we used to stand upon the 
 platforms. There wasn t seats enough, very often, for the passengers. 
 
 Q. Were there any other substitute brokers, or runners, as they were 
 called ? You called them runners ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were there others besides yourself? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. About how many? How large a number? 
 
 A. Sometimes three to five used to run on the train which came from 
 New York, clear through to Concord. 
 
 Mr. George. Mr. Tappan, do you make any question that Concord 
 - was the rendezvous, or head-quarters ? 
 
 Mr. Tappan. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Assuming that Concord was the rendezvous of the central dis 
 trict of the state, will you state whether you have reason to know how 
 it is, having seen money paid to Mr. Clough, and to what extent besides 
 money paid yourself? 
 
 A. I could not tell exactly to what extent I have seen paying. 
 
 Q. Have you seen any paid, in the first place ? 
 
 A. I have, sir. 
 
 Q. Now give the best idea that you can in reference to how much a 
 train. 
 
 A. I could not state the amount exactly. I have seen from fifteen 
 to twenty ; fifteen, five, ten, all along to thirty-five. 
 
 Q. What do you mean, fares or dollars ? 
 
 A. Fares. 
 
 Q. Have you seen him have money in his hand in the cars ; and if 
 so, in what form and to what extent ? 
 
 A. I have seen him carrying money in his hands, the same as every 
 conductor. 
 
 Q. To what extent ? 
 
 A. I could not say to what amount; fives, ones, twos, threes, &c., 
 &c., tens, &c. 
 
 Q. How large a bundle of money did you ever see him have in his 
 hand ? 
 
 A. I have seen him have a handful ; what 1 call a handful. 
 
 Q. When you paid Mr. Clough, for instance, supposing you had 
 twenty-five substitutes in the cars who paid in the cars on coming up, 
 how was the practice ? 
 
 A. I never paid for twenty-five myself. 1 would make an arrange 
 ment with the brokers for them. 
 
 Q. Did the conductor go and count them, or did you tell him ? 
 
 A. He would go and count them himself; such men sat in these 
 seats and all through the cars. 
 
 The Chairman. Do I understand that Mr. Lane is talking about any 
 particular conductor. 
 
107 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Who were you speaking of V 
 
 A. I am speaking now of when that Mr. Clough was on. That IB 
 the only one that I suppose I am speaking about at all. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Where do you live now, air? 
 
 A. Worcester. 
 
 Q. What is your business, Mr. Lane ? 
 
 A. The liquor business. 
 
 Q. Do you keep a liquor saloon ? 
 
 A. I stop in a saloon. 
 
 Q. Whose saloon is it ? 
 
 A. It is No. 1.7 Exchange street. 
 
 Q. Do you keep it yourself? 
 
 A. I stop there ? 
 
 Q. Do you keep it ? 
 
 A. I don t own it. 
 
 Q. What is your business there ? 
 
 A. Liquor business. 
 
 Q. Do you sell liquor in the saloon yourself ? 
 
 A. We sell there occasionally in the place. 
 
 Q. Have you an interest in the sale ? 
 
 A 1 have an interest in the business there myself. 
 
 Q. Are you a partner ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, what interest have you ? 
 
 A. 1 have an interest because I am hired there. 
 
 Q. Do you work ou hire as clerk there ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What other business is doiK there besides the liquor business ? 
 Anything ? 
 
 A. Well a little. 
 
 Q. Any playing *;ard.s . 
 
 A. I couldn t *ay. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say there are no cards played there ? 
 
 A. There miirht occasionally be card playing. 
 
 Q. Any gambling done there ? 
 
 A. If you call that gambling, there may be. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether there is any gambling done there? 
 
 A. Be I obliged to answer that question ? 
 
 Q. No, sir ; you can do just as you please. Let me ask you if the sa 
 loon where you stay is a gambling saloon ? 
 
 A. It is not. 
 
 Q. Is there any gambling done there in the saloon ? 
 
 A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that you do not know that there is any gam* 
 bling done in that saloon at Worcester ? 
 
 A. I don t gamble myself. 
 
 Q. The question I ask you is if there is any gambling done in the 
 saloon at Worcester, where you are employed ? Do you mean to say to 
 the referees that you do not know whether there is any gambling done 
 there, or not, sir ? 
 
 A. Well, there might be some going on there. 
 
 Q. Well, is there, or is there not ? 
 
108 
 
 A. 0, I have seen playing there. 
 
 Q. How many times have you seen any playing there for the last 
 year? 
 
 A. I don t know as I am obliged to answer these questions. 
 
 Mr. George. You need not answer them unless you choose if you 
 decline. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge,,} How many times have you seen playing 
 there for the last year ? 
 
 A. I might have seen it twenty-five times, and I might have seen it 
 twice. 
 
 Q. How long have you been connected with this place ? 
 
 A. I have been connected with the saloon about ten weeks. 
 
 Q. Do you keep a house where Clark was murdered, in Worcester? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not within two or three houses from there. 
 
 Q. Is your place similar to the one where Clark was ? 
 
 A. I never saw his place. 
 
 Q. Were you never in Clark s place ? 
 
 A. I never was. 
 
 Q. What kind of a place did he keep ? 
 
 A. I understood he kept a room for playing for gambling. 
 
 Q. And yours is in the same block ? 
 
 A. I am on Exchange street, and he was on Main. 
 
 Q. You say you have been at this place ten weeks. What was your 
 business before going there ? 
 
 A. I have always been in the liquor business. 
 
 Q. Whereabouts was you before you were connected with this place ? 
 
 A. I was in Manchester. 
 
 Q. With whom were you connected, and what was your principal 
 business ? 
 
 A. My business has always been the liquor business agent for sell 
 ing, and carrying on the liquor business. 
 
 Q. How old are you ? 
 
 A. Thirty-eight years old. 
 
 Q. Will you state what business you have been employed in since 
 you were eighteen years old, and where you were employed ? 
 
 A. I have been in a number of businesses. 
 
 Q. Will you state what you did first after you were eighteen years 
 old? 
 
 A. I worked in a machine shop three years. 
 
 Q. From what time to what time ? 
 
 A. From the time I was eighteen until I was twenty-one ? 
 
 Q. What was your business after you left the machine shop ? 
 
 A. I tended bar. 
 
 Q. For whom ? 
 
 A. For Henry Nichols ? 
 
 Q. What was his business ? 
 
 A. He kept a saloon and a stable. 
 
 Q. Any gambling done in that saloon ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Where did you go from Nichols s ? 
 
 A. I could not tell every place that I have tended bar in t 
 
 Q. You worked for Nichols how long? 
 
 A. A few months. 
 
 Q. How many months did you work for Nichols ? 
 
109 
 
 A. Probably seven or eight months. , 
 
 Q. In whose employ did you go then ? 
 
 A. I worked at gas work making gas fixtures. 
 
 Q. How long did you work at gas work ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say ; three or four months, may be. 
 
 Q. What did you do then ? 
 
 A. I went into the liquor business again. 
 
 Q. Into whose employ did you go then ? 
 
 A. Well, I have worked in Boston. 
 
 Q. What place did you work at in Boston V 
 
 A. Harvard street. 
 
 Q. Whose place ? 
 
 A. His name was Allen. 
 
 Q. What kind of a place did he keep ? 
 
 A. A saloon. 
 
 ^. Any gambling done there ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long were you in Allen s employ ? 
 
 A. Four or five months. 
 
 Q. Were you employed by anybody else in Boston ? 
 
 A. No ; I don t know that I was. 
 
 Q. Then you returned from Boston to Manchester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Into whose employ did you go then ? 
 
 A. The Island Pond House. 
 
 Q. That is down to Massabesic ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Any gambling done there ? 
 
 A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to state that there was no gambling done at that 
 
 place ? 
 
 A. I mean to say that he didn t allow it. 
 
 Q. How many months were you there ? 
 
 A. Three or four months. 
 
 Q. What did you do after you left the Island Pond House ? 
 
 A. I went to 1 have forgot where I did go to. 
 
 Q. Go to New York ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. Ever been in business in New York ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How long have you stayed in New York at any one time ? 
 
 A. From two to four weeks. 
 
 Q. Where have you put up ? 
 
 A. Lovejoy s Hotel. 
 
 Q. What has been your business there ? 
 
 A. Substitute business. 
 
 Q. Have you ever been there at any other time ? 
 
 A. I have not, but once. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. Three or four years ago. 
 
 -Q. Where did you stay ? 
 
 A. Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Q. Who have you been employed for in Manchester, besides those 
 yon have stated ? 
 
110 
 
 A. 1 have worked for Collis. 
 
 Q. What does he do ? 
 
 A. Keeps a liquor place. 
 
 Q. Any gambling there ? 
 
 A. 1 didn t know of any. 
 
 Q. You don t mean to say that there wasn t any ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How long were you there at a time ? 
 
 A. A week at a time, and sometimes more. 
 
 Q. Who else have you worked for in Manchester ? 
 
 A. I have worked for different people there. 
 
 Q. Give us the names of the different persons you have worked for. 
 Is this Collis that you worked for " Hod Collis " ? 
 
 A. That s the man. 
 
 Q. W T ho else did you work for beside Hod Collis ? 
 
 A. For J. C. Kicker. 
 
 Q. What does he do ? 
 
 A. Works in a machine shop. 
 
 Q. What other persons have you worked for ? 
 
 A. I can t think of many that are there now. 
 
 Q. Mention another person that you have worked for there V 
 
 A. I have worked for Mr. Lang. 
 
 Q. How long ? 
 
 A. Some little time. 
 
 Q. Tend bar ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; took charge of the house. 
 
 Q. Well, sir ; have you been in the employ of any one man, since 
 you were twenty-one years of age, more than three months at a time ? 
 
 A 0, yes. 
 
 Q. Well, give us the name of any man in whose employ you have 
 been for three months since you were twenty-one years of age ? 
 
 A. 0, I have been in the employ of men a good while. 
 
 Q. (live us a name ? 
 
 A. Bancroft. 
 
 Q. What did he do for a living ? 
 
 A. Kept an eating house. 
 
 Q. Ale room? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Any gambling done at his place ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. None at all ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; he wouldn t allow it. 
 
 Q. How long were you in Bancroft s place ? 
 
 A. Probably there most a year. 
 
 Q. Have you been in the employ of any one man more than a year 
 at a time ? 
 
 A. I guess not. 
 
 Q. Think. 
 
 A. I couldn t say that I have. 
 
 Q. More than eight months ? 
 
 A. I can t say that I have. 
 
 Q. Have you lived in any other places than Manchester and Wor 
 cester since you were twenty-one years old? 
 
 A, YCB, sir. 
 
Ill 
 
 Q. Where? 
 
 A. In Boston. 
 
 Q. How long have you lived in Boston at any one time ? 
 
 A. 0, a year, may be. 
 
 Q. What did you do ? 
 
 A. Part of the time sick at the beach. 
 
 Q. What beach were you at? 
 
 A. Cohasset and Squanturn 
 
 Q. How long did you stay there ? 
 
 A. Two months. 
 
 Q. What was your difficulty ? 
 
 A. Eheumatism. 
 
 Q. What was your business in Boston ? 
 
 A. I was in the liquor business ; selling on commission, and such 
 things. 
 
 Q. For whom were you selling on commission ? 
 
 A. Edwards & Co. 
 
 Q. The persons were resident in Boston you were selling for? 
 
 A. Outside folks, in Manchester, etc. 
 
 Q. What was the smallest part of your business? 
 
 A. That was about the amount of business that I attended to. 
 
 Q. What did you mean to say, in reply to my question, that that 
 was the biggest part of your business ? It there was any other kind of 
 business what was it ? 
 
 A. There might have been a number of other. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that ? 
 
 A. That was my main business. 
 
 Q. If you had any collateral branches of business what were they? 
 
 A. Well, I can t tell. 
 
 Q. Haven t you any sort of an idea ? 
 
 A. I can t tell, sir, anything particular. 
 
 Q. Did you play any there, sir ? 
 
 A. Once in a while. 
 
 Q. How much of the time did you spend in gambling, sir, that you 
 were in Boston ? 
 
 A. Not a great deal. 
 
 Q. Will you state how much time, how many days, for the last seven 
 teen years, have passed over your head without your being engaged in 
 gambling ? 
 
 A. I could not tell the number of days. 
 
 Q. Will you state how many days a week, upon an average, for the 
 last sixteen years that have passed over your head, without your being 
 engaged in gambling ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Has there been a day a week? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Has there been two days? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Has there been three days ? 
 
 A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that there have been three days a week that 
 you have not been engaged in gambling, during the last sixteen years ? 
 
 A. There has been six months that I have not seen a card. There: 
 has been times that I have been sick. 
 
112 
 
 Q. When you were up and about your business lias, there been a day ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many? 
 
 A. I could not tell how many days ; quite a number though. 
 
 Q. Isn t the main business upon which you rely for a living, that of 
 gambling ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you got any other honest occupation, or way of earning 
 your living, and have you had for the last ten years ? And if so, please 
 
 name it? 
 
 A. Oh, yes ; I have worked for a living. 
 
 Q. You have stated the way in which you have worked. Now if 
 you have had any other business please name it. 
 
 A. No other business but the liquor business. 
 
 Q. Have you won large sums in gambling ? 
 
 A. No large amounts. 
 
 Q. How large an amount at any one time ? 
 
 A. 1 cannot recollect. 
 
 Q. Have you won a hundred dollars? 
 
 A. It seems to me I may. 
 
 Q. Have you won a thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. [ cannot say that I have or haven t won a thousand dollars. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that you cannot tell whether you have or 
 not ? 
 
 A. Betting on horse races, perhaps I have. 
 
 Q. Do you go fco all the horse races that are got up ? 
 
 A. Most always. 
 
 Q. Do you always bet ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. As a general rule, don t you always bet on horse races ? 
 
 A. Well, it is according to how they are trotting. 
 
 Q. Do you go there for the purpose of betting ? 
 
 A. Sometimes. 
 
 Q. Don t you attend the state fairs, etc., for that purpose? 
 
 A. J try to see them. 
 
 Q. For what purpose? 
 
 A. To see what is going on ; for seeing the people. 
 
 Q. Do you go there to gamble ? 
 
 A. 1 might do a little. 
 
 Q. Isn t your purpose in attending these places to gamble? 
 
 A. Sometimes 1 try to bet, and sometimes I do. 
 
 Q. isn t that the main object? 
 
 A. Xo, sir. 
 
 Q. What else do you go for ? 
 
 A. To see the cattle and horsen. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you if you haven t got your living, for the last 
 seventeen years, as a gambler ? 
 
 A. Ko ? sir. 
 
 Q. How much money have you eurned, put it all together, for the 
 last seventeen years, by tending saloons in the manner you have de 
 scribed V 
 
 A. 1 could not .say. 
 
 Q. I ; pon the average ? 
 
 A. 1 cow-Id not say. 
 
113 
 
 Q. Have you earned enough to buy your salt ? 
 
 A. I think likely I could have bought my salt. 
 
 Q. Have you earned enough in tending bars in this way to pay your 
 board ? 
 
 A. Well, I can t tell exactly. 
 
 Q. For a hundredth part of the time ? 
 
 A. Perhaps so. 
 
 Q. Your expenses are considerable ? 
 
 A. Not very heavy. 
 
 Q Well, you live tolerably fast, generally ? 
 
 A. Well, I live as well as I can. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you i the bulk of the money you get, you don t 
 get from gaming in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and New York ? 
 
 A. 1 can t tell. 
 
 Q. You are not able to say how that is, upon your oath ? 
 
 A. I don t know, hardly. 
 
 Q. Upon your oath, are you able to say that the bulk of the money 
 you have earned or got for the last seventeen years you have not got by 
 gambling or gaming ? 
 
 A. I can t tell how much I have got. 
 
 Q. Isn t the bulk of it? I mean the most of it? 
 
 A. Well, probably it is ; the biggest part of it. 
 
 Q. Now, don t you regard yourself as a professional gambler? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Don t you make gambling your profession ? and are not your as 
 sociates gamblers ? and have not they been for the last seventeen years ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not exactly. There might have been men that gam 
 bled, and attended horse races, etc. 
 
 Q. Now, havn t your associates for the last seventeen years been 
 mainly gamblers ? Haven t they been gamblers and their associates ? 
 
 A. Well, 1 wouldn t wonder if they did play once in a while. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if some of the houses that you frequent in 
 Manchester and Worcester and New York are not of the vilest and most 
 infamous kind ? 
 
 A. I cannot say, sir. 
 
 Q. Won t you say, sir ? 
 
 A. I cannot say, sir. 
 
 Q. I put the question, if the houses you frequent in Manchester and 
 Worcester and New York are not of the vilest and most infamous kind ? 
 
 A. I cannot say, sir? 
 
 Q. Will you say that they are not ? 
 
 A. I cannot say that they are 
 
 Q. Will you say that they are not? 
 
 A. I say they are not. 
 
 Q. Will you name a respectable place in Boston that you have 
 stopped at a night for the last seventeen years ? 
 
 A. Kevere House. 
 
 Q. How many times ? 
 
 A. A number of times. 
 
 Q. Where do you ordinarily put up in Boston ? 
 
 A. One place and another. I have put up at the American House. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if your associates have not been of the vilest 
 and most infamous character ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether they are or not. 
 
114 
 
 Q. Will you say that the men with whom you have associated are 
 not of that character ? 
 
 A. I will say that they are not. 
 
 Q. Haven t the men with whom you have associated intimately 
 your confidential friends for the last seventeen years, all been gam 
 blers and the associates of gamblers ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Wasn t it a custom, when substitutes were passed through from 
 New York, to ticket them to Concord, because the fare was half a dol 
 lar less ? 
 
 A. It was sometimes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, couldn t you in these times save a half a dollar on the 
 fare by buying a ticket right through to Concord ? 
 
 A. I never did the thing ; I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. Didn t you know that the ticket was half a dollar less ? 
 
 A. I never bought one through to Concord. 
 
 Q. So you didn t know ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Didn t you ever ticket a man through from New York to Con 
 cord, as a substitute, in your life ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Didn t know anything about that ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, when you met substitutes at Worcester that you 
 designed to take to the Concord market, you did not close your transac 
 tions with the brokers, but you let it remain open until they were taken 
 to Concord, and until it was seen whether they passed ? 
 
 A. I used to make a bargain for these men at the depot, and take 
 their names. 
 
 Q. You met the broker at Worcester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, you didn t take the man from the broker there. You made 
 an arrangement there with the broker, and the conductor simply took 
 fare through from Worcester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now then, sir, you had no responsibility connected with the men 
 until they arrived at Concord ? Or. in other words, they remained in 
 the hands of the broker until they were actually delivered here in Con 
 cord? 
 
 A. Sometimes. 
 
 Q. Wasn t that ordinarily the case ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, ordinarily. 
 
 Q, You took and delivered the men from the broker here at Concord? 
 
 A. Aboard the cars at Concord. 
 
 Q. And the broker had the charge and entire responsibility of the 
 men until you did take them at Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, generally. 
 
 Q. The broker paid the fare of the men, didn t he ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Generally ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, if they had money enough. 
 
 Q. Well, ordinarily when the substitute broker came on with his 
 men, you noted the men and then the broker came on with them, and 
 paid the fare himself; and you came here to Concord and took the men 
 here? 
 
115 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You say the fare was paid by the broker, if he had monej 
 enough ? If he didn t you would advance the money to him, and have 
 the money allowed on your account for your men ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Lane, as a general thing, had you anything to do with 
 the fare of the substitutes from Worcester to Concord ? 
 
 A. Not always ; no. 
 
 Q. I mean as a general thing, as a rule, the broker took charge of 
 the substitute and paid his fare to Concord. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Exactly; and you had nothing to do with it? Now, sir, so far 
 as getting the men, the business that you did in the substitute line was 
 done in the way that you have last described ? 
 
 A. What? In regard to the 
 
 Q. The manner of taking them ? 
 
 A. Well, I have taken a good many myself. 
 
 Q. But the principal part was with the brokers ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. But when through the brokers, you have done it in the way you 
 have described ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, let me ask you, how many you ever took on yourself with 
 out the intervention of the brokers, direct from New York to Worcester: 
 and Concord ? 
 
 A. I never took any from New York. 
 
 Q. How many did you ever take on yourself, more or less, indepen 
 dent of any connection with any broker ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. I mean independently ; yourself. How many did you ever take 
 
 on 
 
 A. I could not say. You mean where I took charge of the men ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir ; when you came on with them yourself ; when you paid 
 their fare ? 
 
 A. I could not say ; took along a good many. 
 
 Q. How many? 
 
 A. I could not tell the number. 
 
 Q. How many do you think? 
 
 A. Two or three hundred that I would have charge of. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you, when you took these men, starting from 
 Worcester, did you buy a ticket from Worcester*to Concord ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you pay their fares from Worcester to Nashua ? 
 
 A. Sometimes in the cars. 
 
 Q. Did you usually buy a ticket for them to Nashua ? 
 
 A. We generally used to in Worcester, because they came, early in 
 the morning. 
 
 Q. Have you ever bought tickets from Worcester to Concord ? 
 
 A. I never have, that I know of. 
 
 Q. Could you, at the Worcester office, buy a ticket from Worcester 
 to Concord ? 
 
 A. I never have. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether you could or not, and make a saving of 
 half a dollar on the fare ? 
 
116 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you how many you have paid fares for to 
 George Glough ? How many men have you paid fares for to him ? 
 
 A. Every time that I ever went over the train. 
 
 Q. How many times, will you state, that you have paid fares to 
 George Clough ? 
 
 A. I could not state. 
 
 Q. Will you state that you ever paid the fares for ten men ? 
 
 A. Certainly, sir. 
 
 Q. 1 mean, taking G-eorge Clough alone. How many will you state 
 that you paid fares for to George Clough alone. 
 
 A. A good many times. I always paid for myself whenever I went 
 over the road. 
 
 Q. How many men ? 
 
 A. I could not name the number of men. 
 
 Q. Give us some idea. 
 
 A. I couldn t tell you. It might be two or three or four or a dozen. 
 
 Q. Give us some sort of an idea ? 
 
 A. 1 do not know how to give you any idea of it. 
 
 Q. Haven t you any impression whether it is one or five hundred ? 
 
 A. Well, it might have been less ; might have been more. I don t 
 "know. I couldn t tell anything about it. 
 
 Q. Haven t you any sort of an idea of the number of men that you 
 paid fares for to George Clough at all ? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell ; a good many. 
 
 Q. Haven t you any sort of an idea as to the number ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Won t you fix it within some limits? 
 
 A. I couldn t. 
 
 Q. Will you set some limits within which it was ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I couldn t say. 
 
 Q. Can you give some sort of an impression or idea to the referees 
 as to the number ? 
 
 A. I could not. 
 
 Q. Who did you get these men of, at Worcester, that you took 
 through yourself ? 
 
 A. New York men. 
 
 Q. Other brokers ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who were the brokers ? 
 
 A. I can name them in New York, some of them. 
 
 Q. I mean that you obtained the men of yourself ? 
 
 A. Oh, I can name a good many of them. 
 
 Q. Were these same men in the habit of taking men through them 
 selves ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. Sometimes they would not come through themselves. 
 
 Q. Was it your invariable practice to pay your fare rather than to 
 "buy a ticket ? 
 
 A. I always paid in the cars. It may be once in a long time that I 
 would buy a ticket. 
 
 Q. I am talking with regard to the taking of substitutes. 
 
 A. I could not say how that was. 
 
 Q. You do not mean that it was your invariable practice, when you 
 took substitutes, to pay in the cars ? Or did you sometimes buy tickets 
 in the cars? 
 
117 
 
 A. Perhaps I did. 
 
 Q. Didn t you ? 
 
 A. Think likely I did. 
 
 Q. Didn t you have any trouble with Mr. Clough about passing your 
 substitutes ? 
 
 A. I don t think that I did 
 
 Q. Did you ever have any trouble with Mr. Clough about passing 
 your substitutes ? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever have. 
 
 Q. You have no recollection of any ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When you took these men on yourself, how many did you ordi 
 narily take on at a time ; when you personally took them on ? 
 
 A. I have had a car-load. 
 
 Q. Were they under your charge ? 
 
 A. Under my charge. 
 
 Q. Without the broker ? 
 
 A. Oh, no. 
 
 Q. When you came through without the broker, how many did you 
 take yourself? 
 
 A. I never had more than four or five myself. 
 
 Q. Did you ever, Mr. Lane, take on at any one time more than four 
 or five, when you came on and took them yourself? 
 
 A. With my own men that I had charge of myself ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. I have had charge of a car myself. 
 
 Q. I mean taking them without a broker. 
 
 A. No, I never had more than five or six men of my own. 
 
 Q. Did you sometimes come .on with one or two ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, was there the slightest difficulty in your buying the 
 tickets at the Nashua office for these one or two or three or four men ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Not the slightest in the world ? 
 
 A. No, sir. Sometimes there might be a little rush ; ordinarily had 
 plenty of time if I had wanted to. 
 
 Q. You knew the advertisement was that the ticket was ten cents 
 less than fare in the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. It was your motive to get the men on here as cheap as you could ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q 4 Now, one question further, if you please. You didn t always 
 when you came on yourself, on your own hook, bring these men always 
 on Mr. Clough s train ? 
 
 A. Not always. 
 
 Q. You could have come only every other day ? 
 
 A. In the morning I used to. 
 
 Q. Did you, in fact, come on Mr. Clough s train from Nashua here, 
 but one-half of the time ? Would it come to that? 
 
 A. Oh, yes ; more. 
 
 Q. When you came on in the afternoon, it would not be ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not in the afternoon. 
 
 Q. So, for a portion of the time, you came in on somebody s else 
 train? 
 
118 ^ 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You didn t always eome oa his train in the morning ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Give us the names of the brokers in New York of whom you had 
 substitutes ? 
 
 A. William Kelly. 
 
 Q. Where does he live ? 
 
 A. Lives in New York. 
 
 Q. What is his business ? 
 
 A. Keeps a . 
 
 Q. Who else ? 
 
 A. Mr. Hicks. 
 
 Q. What is his given name ? r 
 
 A. Bill William. 
 
 Q. You know him personally ? 
 
 A. Y r es, I have seen him a number of times. 
 
 Q. Who else ? 
 
 A. Stephen Kowen. 
 
 Q. Who else ? 
 
 A. Mr. McReady. 
 
 Q. What is his Christian name ? 
 
 A. Flory Florence, I guess they call him. 
 
 Q. Can you name any more, sir? 
 
 A. Well, I can t think of a number of the men now. 
 
 Q. Can you think of a few more ? 
 
 A. There were probably five hundred in the business. 
 
 Q. Can t you think of more ? 
 
 A. I can t think of many more. Lekay. Smith James Smith. 
 
 Q. Who were the principal ones? 
 
 A. I used to have a great many of Mr. Kelly. 
 
 Q. Is he living in New York now ? 
 
 A. I don t know, sir. 
 
 Q. Was he the last you knew of him ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Give us the names of some more. 
 
 A. I can t tell the names of some I bought of. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} What proportion should you judge that these 
 substitutes that were brought on were accepted ? That is, a great many 
 were brought on that were accepted; what proportion were rejected? 
 
 A. I should think two-thirds of them. 
 
 Q. What was done with the rest? 
 
 A. Carried to different points. 
 
 Q. Where did you carry them ? 
 
 A. Some to Portland and Boston and White Eiver Junction, and all 
 
 about the country. 
 
 Q. You wanted to head them off? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Some of them started for Boston? 
 
 A. We would meet them on the way to Boston. If they were going 
 to Boston, we would buy these tickets. 
 
 Q. How large a number could you take through to Boston in that 
 way? 
 
119 
 
 A. Oh, I have seen a great many. 
 
 Q. And you just shifted them, and then saved the tickets to be used 
 between Boston and Worcester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now was there any objection to giving the substitute tickets ; 
 that is, on the score of his escape ? 
 
 A. Oh, yes, sir. 
 
 Q. A man would sit with them ; and the objection to their having 
 their tickets was that they were afraid that they would take advantage 
 of their tickets and run away? 
 
 A. Yes, and run away. 
 
 Q. You spoke of the cars and the crowded condition of the cars. 
 State how that was during the whole time you were running ; whether 
 it extended over the entire period ? 
 
 A. 1 have seen cars with none but substitutes in the cars, where it 
 was very crowded. I have been delayed in Nashua over a train, where 
 the cars were crowded with brokers and substitutes. 
 
 Q. I asked you with regard to the trains run during this period, how 
 many cars were run, and how full they ran. Was your answer intended 
 to apply to the entire period or otherwise ? Whether it was spasmodic 
 or uniform? 
 
 A. There was a great many cars, and all of them generally full 
 eleven to fifteen or sixteen cars, all along ; I don t know exactly how 
 many. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION resumed. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Do you mean that all the time you ran 
 substitutes, that there were eleven to fifteen cars ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I don t intend to state so. I have seen them so. 
 
 Q. Well, were these exceptional cases ? 
 
 A. I should think it was a pretty big train, fifteen cars. 
 
 Q. Wasn t it a pretty big train when there was eleven to fifteen cars? 
 
 A. Well, fifteen cars I call a pretty big train. 
 
 Q. Wasn t eleven cars ? 
 
 A. Well, it was for any time except these times. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to give these referees to understand that during 
 most of this time from eleven to fifteen cars ran on these trains as a 
 general thing? 
 
 A. No, I don t know as there was as many as that. There might be 
 from eleven to fifteen cars. I have seen good long trains. 
 
 Q. When you brought these men from New York ? 
 
 A. I never brought any from New York. 
 
 Q. Well, they came from New York ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. These were in a car by themselves ? 
 
 A. Not always. Some men would take their men and get them away 
 from the others. As a general thing they would take one car if they 
 could. 
 
 Q. Ordinarily they kept them by themselves ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; occasionally there were men going who were afraid to 
 lose them. 
 
 Q. That was an exceptional case ? 
 
 A. I have seen them. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Won t you please to repeat that? 
 
 A. They would fetch their men some would fetch their men and 
 
120 
 
 take them by themselves and get off into a car together, and get them 
 away from the others ; and sometimes twenty in one car and ten in 
 another; and sometimes a whole car-load all together. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Haile.} You are speaking of the Concord and Nashua? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, or of the other road either. When they got to Nashua 
 they would be put together in the first car they could get. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} How many cars have you seen put on at 
 Nashua ? 
 
 A. Three or four or five cars. 
 
 Q. In addition to the ordinary train that came through from Boston? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I have seen a number put on in addition. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see any cars put on at any station this side of 
 Nashua ? 
 
 A, I can t recollect that I ever did. 
 
 Q. These cars put on at Nashua were put on to the train at Nashua? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is, all that I noticed. 
 
 Q. And there were from three to five ? 
 
 A. I don t know the number exactly, but that is about the number. 
 
 Q. I understand you to say that when the substitutes came on from 
 New York to Boston, they were headed off and turned this way ? 
 
 A. That was the idea. 
 
 Q. Now who kept these coupon tickets ? 
 
 A. I don t know who did. 
 
 Q. Where a ticket was purchased for Boston, and the man was 
 turned off, going a different direction, who kept the ticket ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Did the broker keep it ? 
 
 A. I think likely. 
 
 Q. Did the broker keep it ? 
 
 A. I shouldn t wonder if he did. 
 
 Q. Now were there many instances of these coupons, where these 
 men were headed off? 
 
 A. There were a good many. 
 
 Q. Now let we ask you if occasionally cases did not arise where a 
 substitute was ticketed from New York to Concord, and where he was 
 headed off and went to Boston ? 
 
 A. There might have been. 
 
 Q. Were there many cases of that kind ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say ; my business was this way. 
 
 Q. Do you know what became of the coupon tickets that were to be 
 used between Worcester and Concord ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any reason to suppose that they were not retained by 
 the broker? 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you who requested you to come here to testify about 
 this? 
 
 A. Mr. Stanley. 
 
 Q. When did you first have a conversation with Mr. Stanley on this 
 subject ? 
 
 A. Yesterday. 
 
 Q. Did he send for you to come and see him ? 
 
 A. I was telegraphed to come from Worcester to Manchester. I 
 didn t know what it was. 
 
121 
 
 Q. Then you went right to his office ? 
 
 A. No, I never was in his office. 
 
 Q. Where did you see him ? 
 
 A. He came into Mr. Collis s to see me. 
 
 Q. Did you have a talk there with Hod Collis and Mr. Stanley-dp^ 
 relation to this ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I had an interview with Mr. Stanley. 
 
 Q. Was anybody else present ? 
 
 A. Colonel George. 
 
 Q. Colonel George ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q.- When was it? 
 
 A. Yesterday. 
 
 Q. Monday? 
 
 A. I think it was. 
 
 Q. What time in the day was it ? 
 
 A. I can t say, 
 
 Q. Can t you tell what time it was ? 
 
 A. I don t think I could tell. 
 
 Q. Was it in the morning or afternoon ? 
 
 A. I think it was in the forenoon. 
 
 Q. What time of day ? 
 
 A. I think it was in the afternoon, between three and five. 
 
 Q. Did you say whether it was in the forenoon or afternoon ? 
 
 A. In the afternoon. 
 
 Q. You are positive of that ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who else was present ? 
 
 A. Mr. Curtis. 
 
 Q. Sam. Curtis ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Anybody else ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Where does Mr. Curtis live ? 
 
 A. I don t know where he lives. 
 
 Q. Does he live in Manchester? 
 
 A. I don t know that he does. I dont t see him often. 
 
 Q. How long did you stay ? 
 
 A. A few minutes. 
 
 Q. Where was you ? 
 
 A. I was in the place no ; I was in the street, and they sent. 
 
 for me. 
 
 Q. Whereabouts ? 
 
 A. On the sidewalk. 
 
 Q. Whereabouts in relation to Hod Collis s saloon : 
 
 A. 0, within a few steps of Hod Collis s, I was. 
 
 Q. They sent for you to come into the saloon ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; they sent for me there. 
 
 Q. Who did they send after you ? 
 
 A. Well, I don t know but what Mr. Stanley came himself- 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Stanley come himself and want you to come. 
 
 A. I think Mr. Stanley came himself. 
 
 Q. How long did you stay there ? 
 
 A. Half an hour. 
 
122 
 
 Q. Were you there two hours ? 
 
 A. 0, no. 
 
 Q. Were you there an hour ? 
 
 A. Might have been. 
 
 Q. Anybody else there save Sam. Custis ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect anybody else. 
 
 Q. Were you together, by yourselves. 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; Sam. Curtis and I were by ourselves. 
 
 Q. You were not where people ordinarily came in ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; we were in a separate place. 
 
 Q. How long were you there ? 
 
 A. About half an hour. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did Mr. Stanley send a despatch to you at 
 Worcester ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. At the time you came to Manchester did you have any idea what 
 you were coming for ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you first learn the purpose for which you were sent ? 
 I don t care about that. Do you know whether I came up in the after- 
 moon train and stopped over for the purpose of seeing you ? 
 
 A. I think you did. 
 
 Q. When were you summoned ? 
 
 .A. I was summoned this morning, by Mr. Stanley. 
 
 Q. To come here ? 
 
 A. I was. I told him I wouldn t come. 
 
 Q. Who telegraphed you at Worcester ? 
 
 A. Col. Cheney. He telegraphed me to come on business ; and I 
 --should not have come for any other name. 
 
 Col. Jim Cheney telegraphed you to come to Manchester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. He didn t state the purpose for which you were to come ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How long had you been in town ? 
 
 A. I went to Hod Collis s saloon the first thing when 1 got there. 
 
 Q. Did you go to Jim Cheney ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; and asked what the business was. 
 
 Q. What did he tell you ? 
 
 A. That Mr. Stanley wanted to see me. 
 
 Q. Did you talk the matter over with Jim Cheney there ? 
 
 A. He talked it over some. 
 
 Q. Did you talk it over with Jim ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; some. He said it was about the business. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL P. CUKTIS. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Will you state whether you were employed 
 here in 1865 and 1866? 
 
 A. I was employed 1 came here in 1864, to work for this New 
 
 England Volunteer Company. 
 
 Q. For how long ? 
 
 A. I stayed until the following 65. I went away the following 
 April, from here. I came here to run on the train. I don t think I 
 , came here until the year cameiin. 
 
 Q. You was here how long? 
 
123 
 
 A. I was here some sixteen or seventeen months. That is I was 
 here more than while I was employed by them ; but this time I was em 
 ployed so. 
 
 Q. Won t you state what your business was in connection with that ? 
 
 A. My business was to run between here and Nashua ; sometimes no 
 further than Nashua, and sometimes to Boston, to engage men for this 
 business. That was my business. 
 
 Q. Now won t you, Mr. Curtis, state how you went and what you 
 did. State what your business was, and what train you took from here ?" 
 
 A- I took the afternoon train, and returned on the one in the morn 
 ing. 
 
 Q. What time did the afternoon train go down ? 
 
 A. Some twenty minutes past three, I think. Sometimes I would 
 go to Manchester and wait until the express went down. 
 
 Q. Then you would come back the next morning ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; as many as four mornings in the week, unless I went 
 on further. Sometimes I went to Lebanon. 
 
 Q. How many have you had with you ? 
 
 - A, I have had as many as thirty-five in Manchester, and sometimes 
 three, or four, or five, left with me to be put there. 
 
 Q. Well, now, how were the tares of these men that you had charge 
 of how and where were these fares paid ? 
 
 A. Oh, well, I never bought any tickets. These men always, most 
 generally these men pretty much all paid in the cars. There used to 
 be men that used to keep pretty close to their men, and didn t want 
 them to take their tickets, and paid their fare in the cars. 
 
 Q. To the conductors? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. With what conductors did you usually ride? 
 
 A. I have rode with Mr Clouzh a <--rcat deal a great deal. His 
 train, I always used to pay my fare through, during this time. I did 
 have a three months pass from Mr. Giimore. |Mr. Perkins got it for me. 
 I was here some six months, that I was going every day, and I had this 
 three months pass. 
 
 Q. 1 want you to state how it was. when you came on with substi 
 tutes and brokers, how it was about paying the conductor ; whether you 
 paid the conductor in the cars 
 
 A. It was customary. They did pay in the cars. That was rule- 
 able ; they always did. 1 always did, and what I had for, except this 
 three months ; but I have seen a great many others, too. 
 
 Q. Then you didn t take these substitutes V 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How many fares did you ever see paid to Mr. Clough at one time ? 
 
 A. I never paid a great many myself, although I have seen a great 
 many. I never have paid a great many myself. I have paid more go 
 ing the other way to the conductor ; a great many ; to Manchester to 
 stay over Sunday, and keep them and bring them back Monday. 
 
 Q. Pay in the cars in these cases ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. To whom did you pay? 
 
 A. Well, sometimes to Mr. Clough. When he was on the train I 
 paid to him ; and when Mr. Noyes and some of the others, I paid to 
 them. I rode a great deal on Mr. Clough s train ; more than on the 
 rest of them. 
 
124 
 
 Q. How many fares did you ever see paid to Mr. Clough at any one 
 time? 
 
 A. Oh, well, nothing that I could 1 couldn t tell ; couldn t give 
 
 any number. 
 
 Q. Give the best number that you can. 
 
 A. Quite a number. 
 
 Q. Well, how many ? 
 
 A. Well, I should judge I had seen on a train- I should judge I had 
 seen twenty-five, as near as I can calculate. The cars have been mostly 
 full. I have had quite a number and had them pay. They have come 
 through by the way of Boston. We have took em there and put them 
 aboard a train. 
 
 Q. In all your running over this road, if you ever bought a ticket 
 at the ticket-office, for yourself or for your substitutes, state how that 
 was? 
 
 A. I don t recollect that I bought a ticket to this station. I used 
 to get on the cars and not know whether I was going through or not; if 
 there was any men, I would go. 
 
 Q. You always paid for yourself ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I did, and for my men. 
 
 Q. How was it about the brokers ? Did they pay in the cars ? 
 
 A. They did. 
 
 Q. Do you know of anybody who bought tickets in the brokers and 
 substitute business? 
 
 A. Oh, yes, there has been those. There has been those that have 
 had their tickets. There was a great many who would start with their 
 men, and when they left they didn t know whether they was to go to 
 Boston, Portsmouth, or here. 
 
 Q. How many men did you bring to Concord ? 
 
 A. There must have been a great lot. 
 
 Q. How many ? 
 
 A. Twenty-five hundred ; I don t know but more. Quite a lot, I 
 know. We did most of the business here when we were in it. 
 
 Q. You spoke of paying to Mr. Clough. I want to know how it is 
 about seeing money in his hands, large or small notes, as the case may 
 be? 
 
 A. I have seen some of the other conductors with a hand full of bills; 
 I don t know whether there was one or five hundred. 
 
 Q. State as near as you can. 
 
 A. Well, I don t know ; quite a number. I don t know whether he 
 took it to make change, or took it on the train. 
 
 Q. How much money in dollars have you ever seen George Clough 
 take on the train ? [Objected to.] 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Now I want you to state as near as you can how many you ever 
 saw him receive on the train ? [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. The distinction is one that has been alluded to 
 often in the courts. If the witness has a recollection he can state. 
 
 Q. How much money have you seen Mr. Clough receive on the train? 
 I don t mean to a cent, but according to your best recollection. 
 
 A. I couldn t tell ; perhaps he might have took forty dollars ; per 
 haps might not so much ; perhaps he got more ; I couldn t tell ; that 
 wasn t my business. I knew what I did myself ; I couldn t count Mr. 
 Clough s money ; I couldn t tell what he had taken. Perhaps there was 
 
125 
 
 twenty-five paid fares, probably, from Nashua here. As regards the 
 money he took I couldn t say. 
 
 Q. I am speaking about the money you saw him take. 
 
 A. Oh, no. I have seen him take fares; I have paid him myself; 
 how much I couldn t say. I have seen him have money in his hands, 
 but how much or how little I couldn t say. 
 
 Q, How many substitutes did you say you had brought up yourself 
 in connection with a broker or alone ? How many at any one time ? 
 
 A. I think thirty-five was the biggest one day that the runners did 
 for us. 
 
 Q. Where did they come from ? 
 
 A. New York and Philadelphia and Baltimore. 
 
 Q. Where were their fares paid ? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell you. Some of these men paid in the cars. They 
 had laid over in the cars. Some of this party had stopped on the way. 
 I know they had paid their fare in the cars. 
 
 Q. They did pay their fare in the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect the conductors that they paid ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who was it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; Mr. Clough was aboard that train. 
 
 Q. He was the conductor of that train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Where do you stay, Mr. Curtis ? 
 
 A. I stop at the Eiverside Park. 
 
 Q. What was your business before you went there ? 
 
 A. Hack driver ; have been in the liquor business. 
 
 Q. Are you, sir, and have you not been, sir, for the last ten years, a 
 professional gambler? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Hasn t gambling been your business for nine-tenths of the time ? 
 
 A. No, sir. . 
 
 Q. Have you ever earned an honest dollar for the last ten years ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where? 
 
 A. At home. 
 
 Q. Where is your home ? 
 
 A. At 107 Court street. 
 
 Q. Where do you work now? 
 
 A. I tend gate at the Kiverside Park. 
 
 Q. On what occasions ? 
 
 A. When there are trots. 
 
 Q. What other business have you been in ? 
 
 A. I have been in the horse business. 
 
 Q. Where ? 
 
 A. In Boston. 
 
 Q. How long have you been in the horse business ? 
 
 A. More or less for ten or fifteen years. 
 
 Q. Who have you been with ? 
 
 A. Mr. Sam. Perkins. 
 
 Q. Do you mean that gambling hasn t been a portion of your 
 business ? 
 
126 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are you not under the influence of liquor at this time ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How many drinks have you had since dinner ? 
 
 A. Two. 
 
 Q. What did you drink ? 
 
 A. Whiskey. 
 
 Q. Have you had a dinner ? 
 
 A. Had a dinner ? 
 
 Q. Have you had anything to eat in Concord ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How many times have you drank since you came into Concord 
 this morning? 
 
 A. Oh, two or three times, 
 
 Q. Haven t you drank a dozen times ? 
 
 A. ISo, sir. 
 
 Q. Where did you drink the last time ? 
 
 A. I think Mr. Clark and I went down and took a drink. 
 
 Q. How long before you took the stand ? 
 
 A. About half an hour. 
 
 Q. How long after the other ? 
 
 A. An hour. 
 
 Q How many times have you drank since you came into Concord ? 
 
 A, I couldn t tell how many times I drank ; perhaps three and per 
 haps four, 
 
 Q. Haven t you five ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you haven t drank half-a-dozen times ? 
 
 A. I couldn t state. 
 
 Q. Will you state that you haven t drank half-a-dozen times ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 
 
 Q. How much did you take ? 
 
 A. Oh, I drink light. 
 
 Q. As a general thing don t you take liquor every day ? 
 
 A. As a general thing I take a drink or two. 
 
 Q. Are you at the present time under the influence of liquor ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You are not ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if this man Lane is an associate and friend of 
 
 yours ? 
 
 A. We don t live anywhere near each other. 
 
 Q. Isn t he a friend and acquaintance of yours? 
 
 A. He is an acquaintance a friend, I presume. 
 
 Q. Didn t you know Mr. Lane formerly ? 
 
 A. I used to work with him in a machine shop. 
 
 Q. Where do you go in Manchester ? 
 
 A. To one place and other. 
 
 Q. Gamble in these saloons ? 
 
 A. I never gambled three times in my life. I don t go there for that 
 purpose, sir. 
 
 Q. Is there a week that passes over your head but what you are en 
 gaged in gambling ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
127 
 
 Q. Isn t gambling your business ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I want to know if you have ever earned an honest dollar ? 
 
 A. I don t know what you call an honest dollar. 
 
 Q. If you have ever earned a dollar in any legitimate business, wha.tr 
 it is ? 
 
 A. I have told you, sir ; keeping gate. 
 
 Q. Do you bet on races ? 
 
 A. Oh yes, sometimes. 
 
 Q. Who asked you to come here and testify ? 
 
 A. 1 came here by the request of Mr. Stanley, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you telegraphed to come to Manchester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where were you ? 
 
 A. I was in Boston. 
 
 Q. Who telegraphed to you ? 
 
 A. Mr, Cheney, I was going to take the next train ; but he aaid 
 Mr. Stanley wished to see me. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You were summoned here? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you know before you came to Manchester for what purpose 
 they wanted to see you ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I wanted to go back this morning. 
 
 Q. When was the purpose first made known to you ? 
 
 A, Saturday afternoon, 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Clark come in and askyou to take a drink ? 
 
 A, I went down with Mr, Clark. 
 
 Q. The same gentleman that came and spoke to Mr, Clough ? 
 
 A, Cooper Clark, 
 
 TESTIMONY OF ELIPHAZ W, UPHAM. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. tlpham, where do you live ? 
 
 A, Nashua. 
 
 Q. Will you state what connection you had with the Concord Rail 
 road, when it commenced and when it ceased ? 
 
 A, I could not tell when it commenced ; I was very nearly eight 
 years, 
 
 Q. Where? 
 
 A, At Nashua, It will be two years since last November since 
 my connection ceased. I think it was two years, 
 
 Q. What was your business ? 
 
 A. Station agent, 
 
 Q. You were station agent ? What charge did you have at Nashua ? 
 
 A, Well, I occasionally was called upon to run as conductor, 
 
 Q, What charge did you have at Nashua ? 
 
 A, I had the whole charge freight, tickets and wood, everything 
 there was there. 
 
 Q. You had the entire charge ? 
 
 A, The entire charge, except the road department, 
 
 Q. Does the Nashua and Worcester road unite at Nashua with the 
 Concord road ? 
 
 A. They do, 
 
 Q, One runs up on one side of the depot and the other th e other ? 
 
128 J 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You said you sold tickets at Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. To what stations ? 
 
 A, I sold for all stations about all, unless some of the little way- 
 stations, I sold on the Concord road, on the Concord and Claremont, 
 Contoocook Valley, Northern, Passumpsic, Vermont Central, and Ogdens- 
 burgh on the Ogdensburgh road, and the Boston, Concord and Montreal 
 road. I sold local tickets and joint tickets on all these roads. Some 
 stations there was no tickets, where it was too small, 
 
 Q. You sold to Ogdensburgh ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think Ogdensburgh was the only station that I sold 
 to on that road. 
 
 Q. How did the cars of the Worcester and Nashua road that 
 
 road leads to New York ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Connects with the Western road ? 
 
 A. Western and boat. 
 
 Q. When the cars arrived from Boston, on the Nashua and Lowell 
 road, coming up to Concord, with what did they connect at Nashua ? 
 
 A. With the Worcester. That would be the New York travel and 
 the western travel on that line. 
 
 Q. Where did the travel from New York where did they take the 
 cars on the Concord road ? 
 
 A. At Nashua ; except those that went to Boston. 
 
 Q. I mean those that took that line. 
 
 A. At Nashua. 
 
 Q. How did these trains run ? Which got into Nashua first, usually ; 
 and how did they run ? 
 
 A. At the same time ; but perhaps it was more particularly confined 
 to a portion of the year. There was a time when the Worcester timed 
 in ahead a little. Then they used to get in in season for the train 
 that is, for Manchester but when they were timed in, you see, from 
 Boston, they would not stop for anybody, but in Worcester they would 
 want to. When they were timed on time, as in that case, the Worces 
 ter and Nashua got in first. 
 
 Q. When did this happen, that the Worcester train found the Nashua 
 train waiting there to go to Concord ? 
 
 A. Well, I speak only from recollection, but it seems to me that it 
 was in the summer when they were in about our time ; I think in the 
 summer time. It might be reversed. That came in consequence of the 
 Worcester road hardly ever changing their time, 
 
 Q. Take it during the time of the war, what proportion of the time 
 was the Worcester train in late, keeping the Concord Eailroad train 
 waiting for it ? 
 
 A. I don t know as it makes any difference about the war ; the time 
 that they would be running on would be the occasion. I should think 
 there might be a third of the time that they would be liable to be late. 
 
 Q. Now when the Worcester train was late, and the Concord train 
 was waiting, what was the practice at your office ? 
 
 A. If the Worcester train was late, they would hurry across, and 
 many of them would not buy tickets. 
 
 Q. They would hurry across from where ? 
 
 .A. From the Worcester to the Concord. When they got in on time, 
 
129 
 
 there was no need of hurrying ; but when they were late, they would 
 be hurried. 
 
 Q. How was it about buying tickets at the ticket-office ? 
 
 A. In such cases as that, there wouldn t be many that would buy. 
 There would be some come in, but not many. 
 
 Q. How many cars, and how many passengers, as nearly as you are 
 able to state, how many would be brought in the cars on the Worcester 
 road to take the cars on the Concord Eailroad ? 
 
 A. Well, there would be from three to four ; they generally ran 
 either three or four ; sometimes three and sometimes four. That road 
 is short of cars, and they economize. 
 
 Q. Now I will suppose that a train of cars from the Worcester road 
 of four cars loaded, came into the Nashua station take a period during 
 the war loaded with passengers for the Concord road. I will suppose 
 that the Concord and Nashua train was late, and waited for them to get 
 aboard. How many tickets would be purchased at the ticket-office ? 
 
 [Objection to hypothetical cases.] 
 
 A. Speaking of the number of cars, I could not tell the number of 
 passengers ; I should have to judge from the people in the train that 
 went over when the cars came in. 
 
 Q. You saw the passengers go across V 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I could form some opinion, of course, if I had been 
 paying attention to it, from the increase of people that were there. 
 
 Mr. George stated the question to which objection was made. 
 
 The Chairman. Now the witness has already stated that generally 
 speaking there did not hardly anybody buy very few ; now can you 
 come any closer than that ? 
 
 Mr. George. Very well ; I am satisfied with that. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. George.} Mr, Clough was one of the conductors while 
 you were at Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And the train which he ran has already been testified to, I want 
 to know how many cars during the war, when the substitute business 
 was going on how many cars (and in what manner they were filled) 
 started from Nashua ? 
 
 A. As near as my memory serves me, the general amount of cars was 
 about five, I think. I think it was five cars ; we always kept one at 
 Nashua, 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} About five cars ? 
 
 A. This would be in the height ot travel. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Now go on, sir, if you please. 
 
 A. I say, we generally kept one car there. If the orders was to 
 hitch that car on, it was hitched on. Frequently there would be one or 
 two in it. Sometimes it was all filled up. But there was no particular 
 regularity about it. 
 
 Q. How much of the time having three or four ? 
 
 A. There was times when a crowd would be brought down. Some 
 times they had two might have had three left there. It was a very 
 common thing for these squads of soldiers to be brought down ; and in 
 fact, I believe, invariably there was I don t recollect now that there was 
 a train ran extra unless there was a whole regiment. These cars would 
 be set off ; not put into our car-house, but these would be taken on to 
 wait the order of Mr. Biddle. 
 
130 
 
 Q. Supposing there was more than there could be accommodated in 
 the cars? 
 
 A. Well, if we hadn t cars enough, we have done such a thing as to 
 borrow a car of the Worcester road to go to Manchester, and promise to 
 pay the break. 
 
 Q. How was it about there being brokers, and substitutes, and run 
 ners ? 
 
 A. There was substitutes come through from Worcester. 1 said 
 "substitutes"; I supposed they were substitutes. 
 
 Q. How many ? 
 
 A. Sometimes five or six ; sometimes a dozen. Perhaps as many as 
 a dozen. They generally came in the night trains. There might have 
 been some times when there might have been twenty, supposed to be 
 substitutes. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, so far as you have any recollection, will you state how 
 it was about your selling any brokers or substitutes tickets at your 
 office, at Nashua. Have you ever sold a broker or a substitute a ticket ? 
 
 A. 1 don t recollect of selling any going over that road. I have 
 sold some on other roads. I do not say that 1 have not sold to them. 
 All the way that I can tell a substitute would be by a man that had the 
 management of them. 
 
 Q. You knew the brokers ? 
 
 A. No, 1 did not. I got acquainted with some of them, running up 
 one day and back one night. I thought I came off pretty well. 1 
 shouldn t want to know them. It would only be a matter of opinion 
 with me who was- a broker, or broker s dealer. I wasn t acquainted 
 with any of them, with the exception of that time, as I say ; I had 
 enough then. 
 
 Q. In the height of travel, how many passengers not cars, but how 
 many passengers would come from the Nashua and Worcester road on to 
 the Concord road ? Will you go on and tell, as near as you can, in the 
 height of travel, how many passengers would be brought over Nashua 
 to Worcester to take the cars on the Concord road ? 
 
 Mr. Tappan. Has he any direct knowledge of this ? 
 
 A. I could not tell anything only a matter of opinion about it. I 
 could tell whether there was a few or a great many. In the height of 
 travel, I could state I don t know as it is of any service but in the 
 height of travel, the most of it was New York ; beyond Worcester, you 
 know. The travel on the Worcester and Nashua increased but very lit 
 tle in the height of travel. It is the travel that came in from New 
 York and Albany and in through that way Springfield that are going 
 to the White Mountains and such places. It increases with that kind 
 of travel, but not with the local travel on the Worcester road. 
 
 Q. You cannot give any better idea than you have ? 
 
 A. I could not nothing more than what I have said with regard 
 to the amount. 
 
 Q. Did you say that you had run as conductor for a period of time ? 
 
 A. I did some. 
 
 Q. What time? 
 
 A. I could not state. The first time, I ran on Mr. Coming s train, 
 while he was gone out west. 
 
 Q. Did you run with Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you return the way-bills ? 
 
131 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You signed your name to the way-bills "*? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 ^. (By the Chairman.} What time ? 
 
 A. It was about a week, or such a matter ; only a short time. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Did you run as conductor during the war,, 
 while the substitute business was being carried on. 
 
 A. 1 did considerably. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if some of the substitutes sometimes went with. 
 you on the train up to Concord ? 
 
 A. 1 should think they might 
 
 Q. How was it about their having tickets through to Concord in those 
 cases V 
 
 A. I think they had their tickets ; I don t recollect of having any 
 trouble with them. If I had taken money, I should remember, 1 think. 
 1 mean those that came in over the road. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect one that came from the Worcester road as, a 
 ^substitute, that didn t have a ticket ? 
 
 A. No, sir; no means of knowing only when 1 was conductor. 
 
 Q. I mean when you was conductor. 
 
 A You see, unless they wanted to run their faces, it was a good deal 
 cheaper to buy through tickets. 
 
 Q. Do you remember instances, Mr. Upham, when you were con 
 ductor, when a broker came on with a -batch of substitutes, when that 
 broker paid for their passage in the cars ? 
 
 A. I do not know ; I shouldn t want to swear. I think they bought 
 their tickets through. I am speaking now of the substitutes that came 
 in from that road. I have no recollection of having taken any money 
 of any that came in from that way. 
 
 Q. Now take the through passengers. You have been inquired of 
 as to the Ijhrough passengers that came in from over that road from New 
 York. Didn t they buy their tickets, as far as your knowledge extends ? 
 Didn t they, if they started from New Y^ork to go to Concord, buy a 
 through ticket at New York to Worcester and right through ? 
 
 A. Of course they would ; that would be the natural course for 
 them. 
 
 Q. What was the diiference in fare, say, from New York to Concord, 
 if they bought through, or if they bought to Nashua, and then from 
 Nashua to Concord ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Was there a difference ? 
 
 A. I shouldn t be surprised if there wasn t any difference. It is? 
 generally the case at competing points. I should not be at all surprised 
 if it was just as cheap. 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 
 [SEVENTH DAY. Thursday, July 30, 1868.] 
 
 ME. G. G. SANBORN, re-caUed. 
 
 The hearing was continued at half-past eight o clock, A. M., the 
 cross-examination of Mr, Sanborn being resumed by Mr. Mugridge. 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Have you reckoned the number of cars 
 
132 
 
 required, reckoning fifty passengers to a car, by the returns made by 
 the conductors ? 
 
 A. From two or three to four ; four is the highest number, and two 
 the smallest number required to carry the average, from April, 1862, to 
 March, 1866. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.} Can you give it each year? 
 
 A. Suppose I give it each month. 
 
 vQ. That will do. 
 
 A. April 1862, 2 cars; the number required to carry the passengers 
 returned. 
 
 Q. Are the " dead-heads " included in that? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Couldn t you include the " dead-heads? " 
 
 A. No, sir ; it does not include free passes. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge,} Now commence, Mr. Sanborn. 
 
 A. April, LS59, 3; May, 3; June, 3; July, 3; August, 3; Septem 
 ber, 4; October, 3; November, 3; December, 2. January, 1860, 2; 
 February, 2 ; March, 3 ; April, 3 ; May, 3 ; June, 3 : July, 3 ; August, 
 4 ; September, 4 ; October, 4 ; November, 3 ; December, 2 ; January, 1861, 
 .3 ; February, 3 ; March, 3 ; April, 3 ; May, 2 ; June, 3 ; July 3 ; August, 
 4; September, 4 ; October, 3 ; November, 2; December, 2. January, 
 ilb62, 2; February, 2; March, 2; April, 2; May, 2; June, 2; July. 
 .3 ; August, 3 ; September, 4 ; October, 4 : November, 3 ; December, 2. 
 -January, 1^63, 3; February, 3; March, 3; April, 3; May, 2; June, 
 .3 ; July, 3 ; August, 3 ; September, 3 ; October, 3 ; November, 3 ; De 
 cember, 2. January, 1864, 2; February, 3 ; March, 3 ; April, 3 ; May, 
 3; June, 3; July, 3; August, 4; September, 6; October, 3; Novem 
 ber, 2; December, 2. January, 1865, 2; February, 2; March, 2; 
 April, 2 ; May, 2 ; June, 3 ; July, 3 ; August, 4 ; September, 3 ; Oc 
 tober, 3; November, 3; December, 2. January, 1866, 2; February, 2; 
 March, 3. That is all I have. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} I want to ask you one question. Did you 
 *ever know of Mr. Gilmore s receiving money for the transportation of 
 passengers, that he did not return, but appropriated to his own use, 
 imaking no account of to the transportation office ? 
 
 A. You mean in any manner? 
 
 -Q. In any manner? 
 
 A. There was money paid over to him that I never knew of being 
 returned to the road. 
 
 Q. How much ? 
 
 A. At one time there was thirty-four hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows. ) Was that for transportation ? 
 
 A. Transportation of soldiers. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge,} What year was that? 
 
 A. I should think that was in 1864. I have a paper at my office 
 from which I could tell. I think it was in 1864. 
 
 Q, (By the Chairman.} Was it any matter of your business? 
 
 _A. No, sir. 
 
 <Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Let me ask you if any other money at any 
 other time was received by him for transpoitation which he did not re 
 turn, and made no account of at the transportation office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; 1 think that year or the year following I am not cer 
 tain which there was an amount of five hundred and odd dollars, I 
 think, for political tickets. 
 
133 
 
 Q. Was he at that time candidate for office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was that the sum of five hundred and thirty-one dollars ? 
 
 A. That was the sum, I guess, in the hands of the Republican com 
 mittee. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} It was not accounted for that you recollect? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Now let me ask you if these bills for trans 
 portation were in your office, and taken from your office by Gilmore? 
 
 A. You mean vouchers ? 
 
 Q. Yes. Where were they kept ? 
 
 A. They were kept at my office. 
 
 Q. And you say that Gilmore called for the bill, and you gave it to 
 him? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You properly should have received that money ? 
 
 A. Properly either the cashier or myself. 
 
 Q. It should not have been Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, you have spoken of those two instances where the amount 
 was considerable. Were there instances where the sums were consider 
 ably smaller where Gilmore has appropriated money in this way ? 
 
 A. I do not know as I could state with any degree of certainty, 
 because I have not investigated the matter far. There was one instance 
 where I paid, which 1 never knew whether it was paid or not. The 
 whole facts, if I may state, were that there were tickets sold from Man 
 chester representing to be " Squog," serving to carry at the inaug 
 uration. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley ) To Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. The tickets were actually sold in Manchester. The 
 tickets were represented to be sold over the North Weare road. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You may as well state the object of that 
 dodge. 
 
 A. I was under orders of Mr. Gilmore to arrange the matter in that 
 way. 
 
 Q. For what purpose ? 
 
 A. J know of nothing only that he wanted the funds from these par 
 ticular tickets. 
 
 Q. Wasn t it the purpose to keep an account separate from the Con- 
 cord % Railroad account at all ? 
 
 A. I do not know what the object was. 
 
 Q. Can you conceive of any other object than to keep the account 
 away from your general ticket office ? 
 
 A. It was plain enough that the tickets were sold at Manchester, 
 and sold from "Squog." 
 
 Q. Was there any cheat in this ? 
 
 A. It was not accounted for in the general form. 
 
 Q. Now you may go on and state what the order was and how many 
 tickets were issued. 
 
 A. I do not now recollect the number of tickets sold to make that. 
 I think it was three hundred and twenty-five dollars, or in that vicinity ; 
 that was the amount of money which was paid to him. He might have 
 turned it in to the cashier. 1 never like making such a statement with 
 out being able to swear. 
 
134 
 
 Q. Can you conceive of any reason why tTiis should have been done, 
 if his purpose had been honest ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. State whether there were any other occasions where Gilmore ap 
 propriated the prices of transportation over the Concord Kailroad, save 
 those you have spoken of. 
 
 A. No, sir; none other that I recollect of. 
 
 Q. (By tfte Chairman.) Were those North Weare ticket* issued 
 .from your office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were they returned there V 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 <Q. Well, why were they not matters of record ? 
 
 A. Because he requested me to keep them out or" the account V 
 
 Q. Was there any reason why he could not have had the tickets sold 
 at Manchester and kept them ? 
 
 A. No; only he would have had them returned. 
 
 Q. The question I make is this : at the very time that you issued 
 these tickets on the North Weare road, why couldn t you just as well 
 have given him the same number of tickets from Manchester to Con 
 cord ? 
 
 A. I could, only I would have had to alter the Manchester account; 
 because 1 received a report from them stating the number that were 
 sold from that particular station ; and I have got to alter the account, 
 or else there would be a discrepancy in the account. 
 
 Q. If they were sold from Manchester they would go into the Man 
 chester account. Now where were these tickets sold ? 
 
 A. They were sold, really, at Manchester, by the same man who 
 made the other sales. 
 
 Q. Why didn t he report them ? 
 
 A. He did, but he reported them separate. 
 
 Q Wouldn t it have been just as easy for him to have got a lot of 
 real Manchester tickets and ordered him to keep them out. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then, if I understand the matter, if the ticket-master would 
 obey his orders, it was just as easy for him to have done that with the 
 Manchester tickets, as it would have been with North Weare tickets ? 
 
 A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. At what price were these North Weare tickets sold for ? 
 
 A. At the same price as the Manchester tickets. For instance, I 
 issued five hundred special tickets from Manchester to Concord, and at 
 the same time I issued tickets from other points on the same occasion. 
 Mr. Gilmore ordered me to issue so many tickets, and he wished them 
 to come in from the Concord road account. That money he wished me to 
 give to him and nobody else. 
 
 Q. Was there any difference in the fare from Piscataquog or Man 
 chester? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. The North W r eare road was under the control of the Concord 
 road? 
 
 A. Tt was operated by them, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Haile.} If I understand these Piscataquog tickets, 
 there was no record, or return, or anything else ; but if it had been at 
 Manchester, you must have changed the record of the Manchester re 
 turn? 
 
135 
 
 A. Yes, sir. ... ,., 
 
 Q. You say that the North Weare road was at that time run by the 
 Concord road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. They sold the tickets and took the proceeds ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. If these tickets had been duly accounted for, or made part of 
 the record, could it have made any difference to the receipts of the 
 Concord road, whether they had been reported as from the North Weare 
 road, or from the Concord road would it have made any difference in 
 the receipts of the Concord? 
 
 A. I am not able to state exactly the manner of settlement between 
 the North Weare and the Concord road. 
 
 Q. There was, then, a settlement ? 
 
 A. There was a settlement between the two roads. 
 
 Q. And in that settlement it would make some difference whether 
 these were Manchester tickets or North Weare V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Who had the proceeds of the North Weare 
 road ? 
 
 A. As I said, there was a settlement between them, and I am not 
 able to state the manner of settlement. My impression is they paid so 
 much for the use of the road. 
 
 Q. That depended upon the amount of the receipts ? 
 
 A. I could not pretend to say. I never saw the contract, and I 
 could not say as to that. I never was familiar with that. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Well, now, I want to ask you if there 
 have been other transactions of this kind ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect ; that is, if you mean of any amount. 
 
 Q. Have there been transactions involving two hundred dollars ? 
 
 A. 1 don t recollect of any now. 
 
 Q. [Showing tickets.] Was there ever any return of these tickets 
 made at your office at all ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I mean of any like this? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, without going into the large transactions of that kind, let 
 me ask if Gilmore was not in the habit of receiving money in smaller 
 amounts as the price of transportation over the Concord Kailroad ? 
 
 A. I. don t recollect of paying anything over to him of any conse 
 quence. 
 
 Q. Have you any recollection of paying smaller amounts of money 
 to him? 
 
 A. I do not recollect the occasion now. 
 
 Q. Did he ever come to your office after money, as the price of trans 
 portation, in other instances ? 
 
 A. I cannot recollect. 
 
 Q. Have you examined these tickets with reference to their dates ? 
 
 A, No, sir. ?, \ 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to do so ? 
 
 A. I will. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I want to begin with this transaction of Mr. 
 Gilmore. When was it that you first received any instruction, and who 
 applied to you with regard to furnishing any tickets ? 
 
136 
 
 A. The first intimation that I had was from Judge Upham. Ac 
 cording to my recollection, it was not far from October or November, 
 1865. I think, perhaps, it was the first of October. 
 
 Q. Judge Upham was then President of the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was it before or after the directors had passed a vote directing 
 the investigation? 
 
 A. I didn t know anything about the order for the investigation. 
 He said there had been an investigation ordered. 
 
 Q. What did he say ? 
 
 A. He said Mr. Gilmore would give me instructions what to do, 
 and he represented them about as Gilmore did afterwards. 
 
 Q. What were you required to do ? 
 
 A. I was to go to the office of Col. George. [Objected to testimony 
 as to the instructions to Mr. Sanborn.] 
 
 ME. E. W. UPHAM, re-catted. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You spoke of cars being left at Nashua 
 as the train went down. On which train of cars were these left, the 
 3 1-2 train or the 10 1-2 train? Which train from Concord left the 
 cars at Nashua ? 
 
 A. The first train in the morning, out of Concord. 
 
 Q. Was it the first train in the morning, or the 31-2 train, that 
 usually took the extra car ? 
 
 A. The one that comes up the next on that particular day leaves an 
 extra car, 
 
 Q. Which was the later train, the 3 1-2 or the 10 1-2? 
 
 A. The 101-2 was the latest train. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you ever heard Clough instruct a brakeman to 
 get passengers out at Nashua to buy their tickets, rather than have them 
 pay their fare in the cars ? 
 
 A. I never did see him, 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear of his brakeman coming into your ofiice to get 
 tickets for passengers in the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he has. 
 
 Q. How many? 
 
 A. I could state any more definitely than that it was no uncommon 
 thing. I think there was one that came in oftener than the other. He 
 would pay me the next day ; I got my money ; they were perfectly 
 good, 
 
 Q. You say this was no uncommon thing. Won t you indicate how 
 frequently this was done ? 
 
 A. .1 could not tell ; I could not say any further than that. 
 
 Q. Give us some sort of an idea ; the best you can, 
 
 A. Well, in the height of travel it was more common than when 
 there was less travel. 
 
 Q. Was it every other day ? 
 
 A. It might be every day for a week ; and then there might be 
 days when he might not be in at all. As I said, it* was no uncommon 
 thing ; it was rather common. 
 
 Q. Now, in how large numbers would these tickets be purchased, 
 and to what stations, when they would be purchased ? 
 
 A. I could not say about the stations, 
 
 Q. In how large numbers did you sell ? 
 
137 
 
 A. I don t think it was very often that 1 sold more than three at one 
 time ; not more than three at one time at one call. There may have 
 been more than three, but that seems to be my impression. 
 
 Q. Who were the brakemen who made these purchases ? 
 
 A. Well, Thayer got them ; I think Thayer got more than any other 
 one. 
 
 Q. What is his given name ? 
 
 A. I could not say. He is conductor on the Nashua, Lowell and 
 Boston. 
 
 Q. Thayer was brakeman ? Didn t he go up in the morning ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that was his train up ; that was one. 
 
 Q. Who was the other one, sir ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I can call his name ; he is on the Northern road, 
 If I should hear his name, I should know ; I don t know as 1 should be 
 able to tell his name. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if you knew Starkey ? 
 
 A. I did, 
 
 Q. You occasionally ran up on the train when Starkey was aboard ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What was his practice as beginning at the rear of the trains and 
 meeting the conductor, taking the tickets up as he went along ? 
 
 A. I have known him to do such a thing, 
 
 Q. How frequently have you known him to do it ? 
 
 A. Well, it was very apt to be the case. The first time I knew it r 
 it was when I was doing it myself; and when I was half or two-thirds 
 through, I met him with some tickets. And I felt a little kind of 
 doubtful about it, not knowing what the custom was. But still I said 
 nothing anyway, and took the tickets. I learned, by what 1 thought 
 proper authority, that it was common practice with him, and I didn t 
 make any opposition ; but I always chose to take my own tickets if it 
 was possible to get through. There is one thing I would state : it was 
 a very common thing for Starkey, or any other brakeman, if he thought 
 that the conductors had not got to the car, and there was a stop where 
 the passengers were to get out, it was his custom to take their fare. 
 
 Q. You spoke, yesterday, of five cars making up a train which left 
 Nashua and went to Boston ? 
 
 A. I spoke, I guess, of its coming up that ran up from Nashua, 
 
 Q. Now you state that five cars made up the train which left Nashua, 
 coming up. Which train was that ? 
 
 A. That would be the morning train. 
 
 Q. Now how many cars made up the train which came up at night 
 the evening train ? 
 
 A. Well, I couldn t say definitely ; sometimes there was three, but 
 generally a less number ; because all of the Northern north of Concord 
 cars would be off. 
 
 Q. Now the five cars, or the three cars that you spoke of, made up 
 the whole train ? 
 
 A. That would be two long trains. I should not want to be under 
 stood to say definitely. The morning train is more distinctly in my 
 mind. 
 
 Q. Supposing a party was going to Concord from New York state,- 
 how was it about their baggage ? Was it checked to Nashua, for in 
 stance, and could their baggage be checked without showing their tick 
 ets? 
 
138 
 
 A. There was an order come to us that the baggage . should not be 
 .checked until they showed their tickets. I endeavored to carry it out. 
 I instructed my baggage master ; I endeavored to carry it out as rigidly 
 as I could, but it was not done in all cases. 
 
 Q. If a party took the cars at Worcester, and was going through to 
 < Concord, he had his baggage checked from Worcester to Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, then, he could not get his baggage checked from Nashua to 
 Concord, until he presented his ticket to the baggage master at the sta 
 tion? 
 
 A. That was the order given me, and what I gave to the baggage 
 master, and enforced it as strictly as I could. 
 
 Q. Mr. Upham, as a general thing, sir, how many cars came into 
 Nashua from the Worcester road at this time we are speaking of? 
 What was the number of cars ordinarily constituting a train then, in 
 1865? 
 
 A. I answered that question, I believe, yesterday. It was from 
 three to four. 
 
 Q. That was in the height of travel ? 
 
 A. I should think it was. I am pretty sure I answered that ques 
 tion. 
 
 Q. Was the fourth one on very often ? Wasn t it an exception ? 
 
 A. Well, it was not an unfrequent thing that they brought but three 
 in. 
 
 Q. Was it an ordinary thing that they did not bring in the fourth 
 car? 
 
 A. I should not want to make a decision. 
 
 Q. W T as one of these a baggage car ? 
 
 A, I spoke only of passenger cars. 
 
 Q. Have you ever known, as a general rule, of the running of more 
 than the three or four cars you speak of? 
 
 A. Oh no, sir ; that is my impression strong. I think they as often 
 ran three as they did four. 
 
 Q, Let me ask you if your attention was ever called by Mr, Clough 
 to ,ihe fact that he had a load of nothing but dead heads in his train ? 
 
 .A. It is my impression that 1 heard him come in jawing about it. 
 He would find a good deal of fault about it. and scold about, and some 
 times talk pretty rough about it. 
 
 Q. Give us your best impression as to the number of times you have 
 known that done V 
 
 A. Well, I couldn t say. 
 
 Q. Give us your best impression. 
 
 A. Well, it was quite a number of times. 
 
 Q. Whether Gilmore ever gave you personal directions to pass peo 
 ple over the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; he has. 
 
 Q. How many times has be done so ? 
 
 A. Oh, I could not tell ; it was no uncommon thing. 
 
 Q. Have you known of Mr. Gilmore s appropriating money that was 
 the price of transportation ? 
 
 A. Not a red cent that I have had myself. 
 
 Q. How many persons have you known Gilmore to have passed by 
 you ? 
 
 A. Oh, I don t know. 
 
131) 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) Was that when you were conductor? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) If, on any occasion of that kind you would 
 have anything to return to the road as a representation of the passage 
 of that man, would you have anything to indicate it on your way-bill? 
 
 A. Not upon the bill. 
 
 Q. Did you have anything ? 
 
 A. After some time there was a rule that you had to give the name 
 of the person you passed, and where from and where to. In those cases 
 I always got as many as I could of them. 
 
 Q . That was where they; had a paper pass, was it not ? 
 
 A. I should rather think it was, but 1 couldn t say it definitely. 
 
 Q. Now, supposing Mr. (rilmore came in and says, "Pass that man, 
 and that man, and that man," did you do it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. In that case, did you have anything to show on your returns ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. If you were, as a matter of fact, when running a train of cars, 
 to do all the rest of your business, and then attempt to return the "dead 
 heads " that ran on the road, could it be done? [Objected to as involv 
 ing an inquiry as to how fast Mr. Upham was, and what his capacity 
 was ; and as having no connection with Mr. Clough s train whatever.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. 1 will modify my question. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Now, Mr, Upham, will you be kind enough 
 to state to the referees, in your own way, when you ran a train, 
 what attempts you made at collecting the tickets and returning the 
 41 dead-heads," in accordance with the instructions that you received 
 from the road, and how you succeeded in both directions ; and what you 
 were able to perform in this direction, and how you came out in endeav 
 oring to discharge your obligations to the road in those particulars ? 
 
 A. Well, I can state the course I took. It would depend something 
 altogether upon the size of the train ; that is, the passengers in the 
 train, and the number of "dead-heads." My first object was to get all 
 the money that belonged to me, to take my tickets, and at the same 
 time to carry these "dead-heads" along on my way-bill. A blank was 
 furnished. If I got into a large snarl, when I found it was going to 
 cut me short of time, I had rather let them go than let the money and 
 tickets go. My system of keeping it was, if I had time, to put down 
 a full statement of names, where from and where to, and by whose order 
 passed ; but if 1 hadn t time, if I got drove up close, in order to get 
 the most of them. I would put down -man and lady" man and wife, 
 I suppose; "order J. A. Dodge s pass." For instance, I take that as 
 an instance ; from Concord, Nashua or Manchester, wherever it might 
 be. In that way I would give the particulars. In some instances 1 
 could fill my blank all up, and had no space to put on more, 
 
 Q. You mean that there would be so many dead heads that you 
 would fill up your blank. How large was it ? As long as my hand ? 
 
 A. I speak from recollection. It would be about that long [indi 
 cating] ; rather fine ruled. 
 
 Q. Wasn t it as broad as that? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. How many times did you get that filled with " dead heads " ? 
 
 A. Not a great many times. 
 
 Q. How many do you think it would hold ? 
 
 
140 
 
 A. It would be nothing but a mere matter of opinion 
 
 Q. Twenty ? 
 
 A. Well, I should think it might. 
 
 Q. Thirty? 
 
 A. Well, I should rather doubt it. 
 
 Q, How many times do you think it happened that you filled your 
 way-bill full of dead heads," and hadn t room enough to put down all 
 the "dead heads"? 
 
 A. 1 couldn t say. I suppose not a great many times. 
 
 Q. How many times, as near as you can say. 
 
 A. I shouldn t want to say. 
 
 Q. Can you give the number of times ? 
 
 A. 1 should give a safe number. 
 
 Q. Should you not say ten times ? 
 
 A. 1 should think not. 
 
 Q. How many times did it happen that you were not able to take 
 them all ? 
 
 A. That would be nothing but a matter of opinion. 
 
 Q. Give us your best opinion. 
 
 A. Well, there have been times that I could not get them all. 
 
 Q. How many do you think ? 
 
 A. Oh, well, it might happen once out of four trains, perhaps not 
 trips, but trains. 
 
 Q. You may state whether there was more or less " dead heads " on 
 every train ? 
 
 A. I don t know as ever I ran a train but that there was. 1 would 
 say as it has been intimated that I was slow I would say that I am 
 perfectly willing that my balance should be compared with other con 
 ductors. 
 
 Q. Have you known a train to pass over the road where three-fourths 
 of the passengers were " dead heads " ? 
 
 A. I think I haven t found so many up as I have down. 
 
 Q. Have you known of some trains down where three-fourths of the 
 passengers were " dead heads " ? 
 
 A. I should think not, 
 
 Q. Half of them ? 
 
 A. I shouldn t want to go that. 
 
 Q. A quarter of them ? 
 
 A. Well, I will tell you what, 1 have been into a car where about 
 half of them were " dead heads " " dead heads " are apt to flock to 
 gether I speak now of those that had passes. 
 
 Q. How many times has that occurred ? 
 
 A. About as frequently as those leading men had relatives come to 
 see them, and sent them away free. 
 
 Q. Was it very frequently that this happened ? 
 
 A. Well, I don t know as very frequently. " Dead heads " that are 
 acquainted with each other are apt to be together. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see a case where every single person in the smoking 
 car was a " dead-head " ? 
 
 A. I never ran much since the smoking car was put on. 
 
 Q. Can you remember a case ? 
 
 A. One night I recollect, I think, that I never took a fare of a per 
 son in the smoking car. They either were ticketed or had passes. 
 
 Q. What number had tickets, so far as your rec ollection extends ? 
 
141 
 
 A. That is a thing that I never noticed sufficiently. 1 generally 
 found out who I was authorized to give, without " pitching into them/ 
 as the term is. 
 
 Q. You have spoken of the number of cars that make up the trains 
 going out. Now you may state how many made up the train as it passed 
 from Nashua to go down ; take the train as it left the Nashua depot. 
 
 A. Both mail trains ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. Well, I could not say ; I never noticed them as much as I did 
 the other trains ; but I should say that these same cars that went 
 through in the morning, if they went down at night, we would have a 
 car left. 
 
 Q. . Left at Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; that would be the rule to leave one, but sometimes 
 there would be two left. 
 
 Q. Then if there were passengers in these cars ? 
 
 A. They would go forward into the other car. 
 
 Q. So that the number of cars that went up in the morning train 
 would be pretty much the same as in the night train before ? 
 
 A. Pretty much. Generally the conductor would order the passen 
 gers out of the car that was going to be cut off. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} On what road was Mr. Thayer conductor ? 
 
 A. On the Montreal. 
 
 Q. And from what place to what place did he run ? 
 
 A. I think he would go up as far as Plymouth. He would go up 
 until he met the down train. 
 
 Q. Now when Mr. Thayer bought tickets at your office, to what road 
 did he buy them ? 
 
 A. Generally bought them over their own road. I think he has 
 bought some local tickets in the night. He bought them for the ac 
 commodation of the passengers. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by saying his own road ? 
 
 A. On the Montreal road ; to some stations where they were going. 
 
 Q. You stated that he was now employed as conductor on the Boston 
 and Lowell road ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. You spoke of the number of cars on the train. Do you mean the 
 ordinary regular train ? Or what do you mean ? Won t you explain ? 
 
 A. What I wish to be understood to say is, that that was the com 
 mon number of cars that came in, until along in the fall. 
 
 Q. When you spoke of the five cars, did you mean to include or ex 
 clude the baggage cars ? In other words, does the five include the pas 
 senger cars only, or the baggage cars ? 
 
 A. The passenger cars. 
 
 Q. How many baggage cars were run on the same trains ? 
 
 A. I think there were passed Nashua, two I think. 
 
 Q. You make the ordinary train of seven cars, including two bag 
 gage cars ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir ; I think there was two. 
 
 Q. Now I want to ask you what was the effect of the war, or the 
 draft, upon the Concord Railroad, upon the amount of travel? 
 
 A. You mean the rate of increase ? 
 
1.40 
 
 Q. What was the actual effect upon the amount of travel over the 
 Concord Eailroad ? 
 
 A. The effect was an increase of travel, people passing, moving, on 
 the motion. 
 
 Q. But of what did this extra travel consist? Won t you name 
 what was the extra travel brought into existence by that condition of 
 things during that period of time ? 
 
 A. All that 1 could say with regard to that is, that soon after the 
 war commenced business started up very brisk, and they began to 
 travel. People traveled to do business, and gave a good deal of busi 
 ness to be done. And the military business, direct or remote, that is, 
 everything that was moved by the military was the cause of an increase 
 of travel, as I understood it, or understand it. Any one can se.e at 
 once. A son is coming up to Concord to be examined ; and the father 
 wa^nts to come with him. And perhaps they would get up here to camp. 
 And of course they would want to come up and see them. Cause must 
 produce the effect. I know of no cause of business starting up, but 
 directly the war. 
 
 Q. Mr. Upham, do you recollect when the order not to put baggage 
 in the cars, without showing the tickets, was made ? 
 
 A. 1 could not tell. 
 
 Q. About what time ? 
 
 A. I think I could not tell. 
 
 Q. How long was that in force, either actually or nominally in force? 
 
 A. Well, it was put in force, that is, the order was given to me. and 
 then it seemed to rather die away for a year, or such a matter, and then 
 was revived again. I could not state. I don t know but what it was 
 before. 
 
 Q. Supposing the Concord Eailroad train got into Nashua first. 
 Take the case that you have stated as occurring, and gave the number 
 of times that it occurred, and the proportion of times of the Concord 
 Kailroad trains getting into Nashua first, and waiting for the Nashua 
 and Worcester train to come and the passengers to get into the cars ; 
 how was it then with Tegard to any enforcement of this regulation ? 
 
 A. Could not carry it out with any regularity then. 
 
 Q. How was it with the baggage man carrying it out ? 
 
 A. The baggage master would commence the enforcement of the 
 rule, and if it came on him too hard, and the train was likely to go off 
 and leave somebody, they did the best they could with the time they 
 had. [Eeturns authenticated.] 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION resumed. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Now, couldn t Thayer buy a ticket to 
 Concord at Nashua ? 
 
 A. He wouldn t buy it of me, because I couldn t sell it myself. He 
 would buy it for persons in the cars, 
 
 Q. If there was anybody in his train that hadn t a ticket ? 
 
 A. If it was a person taking the cars at Nashua, he would not ; but 
 if it was somebody in the cars, he would come to me. Boston sold 
 through, and Lowell sold through. Probably all these way-stations are 
 prohibited from selling through. Consequently people taking the cars 
 at these stations could be ticketed only to Nashua. Coming up, Thayer 
 and the northern brakeman probably felt it their duty I don t know 
 whether they were requested or not--to accommodate them. 
 
143 
 
 Q. Now, then, the tickets for the passengers that 1 hayer purchased 
 were for persons who had no ticket over the road north of Nashua ? 
 
 A. Further north than Nashua. 
 
 Q. He would purchase a ticket for some person in the cars who- 
 wanted to go north of Nashua, and had no ticket ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now 1 want to know if there was anything to prevent Mr. Clough. 
 from taking the fare of that man, and passing him to Concord himself, 
 and then that person buy a ticket here at Concord for the Montreal road? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Didn t he sometimes buy local tickets from Nashua to Manches 
 ter and to Concord ? 
 
 A. He did ; not so common. 
 
 Q. 1 understand it ; but occasionally ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Wasn t the fare higher? if two tickets were bought from 
 Nashua up to Concord, we will take it ? 
 
 A. If they took it from Nashua to Concord, and from Concord to 
 Plymouth or Franklin, it would cost them more, likely, than one joined. 
 The joint ticket would come cheaper. It ain t always the case; but in 
 this instance, it was the case. 
 
 Q. Now was there anything to prevent Mr. Clough taking the fare 
 of that passenger to Concord, leaving the passenger to buy his ticket 
 from Concord to Plymouth ? 
 
 A. I don t know anything. 
 
 Q. If the disposition was there, the opportunity was open to- him ? 
 
 A. I don t know of anything to prevent. There was one; of the 
 trains that had another brakeman on. 
 
 Q. Who was that ? 
 
 A. Kelly ran there a good deal. 
 
 Q. Did he buy tickets ? 
 
 A. He bought some. 
 
 Q. Did he run on Clough s train? 
 
 A. Oh, I don t know, hardly, he was on somebody s train. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Upham, did Mr. Clough rua below 
 Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where did you go to ? 
 
 A. Nashua. 
 
 Q. Where did Thayer? 
 
 A. He ran through to Boston. 
 
 Q. Now supposing anybody got on below Nashua. Mr. Thayer was 
 obliged to buy a ticket to Nashua, and then from Nashua on? Now 
 how was Mr. Clough to know anything about these passengers being on 
 that train ? 
 
 A. He would not know. 
 
 Q. Now what would Mr, Thayer do ? 
 
 A. He would get out of the cars and go in and say he wanted tick 
 ets. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Clough would take these tickets ? What opportunity 
 would he have to take anything ? 
 
 A. He could not have any, unless it was a standing request of his- 
 with these individuals. That is all the way I can see any way. 
 
H4 
 
 Q. Now would Mr. Clough have anything to do with, or any 
 knowledge of these passengers, when they go to Nashua ? 
 
 A. Of course he could not. 
 
 Q. Now, supposing a ticket from Nashua to Plymouth was bought, 
 what was the effect of that on the Montreal road, so far as the difference 
 of fare was concerned ? 
 
 A. They would get the percentage. 
 
 Q. How much would the Concord and Nashua road get ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Do you know how much the fare of passengers going over the 
 .road is ? 
 
 A. All the experience I had in it was that they used to get about 
 two shillings we used to get about two shillings on the ticket. I 
 ought not to say. I inquired of a person, the proper authorities ; and 
 ,,they told me so. 
 
 Q. Do you know how it was with regard to the upper roads giving 
 instructions to their conductors to see that passengers had joint tickets 
 : ;to their roads ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. With what roads did the trains connect ? 
 
 A. With three trains, morning, noon and night three trains each 
 .day. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Clough buy tickets at your office ? 
 
 A. He did. 
 
 Q. How many ? 
 
 A. Oh, I could not say ; it was no uncommon thing for him to come 
 in there and ask for tickets, and tell who he was. 
 
 Q. I want to know to what extent? 
 
 A. I could not tell, for I never made any record of it. I never ex 
 pected to be called upon in the world. All I can say was that it was 
 rno uncommon thing. 
 
 Q. How many do you think ? 
 
 A. I should think, as a matter of opinion, that he never bought 
 more than two or three at once. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION, continued. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Muyridge.} You have been inquired of how Mr, 
 Clough could have known of the passengers going north. Suppose 
 his brakeinan told him, that would be one very good way for him to find 
 out? 
 
 A. Of course. 
 
 Q. That would be an easy way ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And he had an opportunity to tell him? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 
 [EIGHTH D.YV. Friday, July 81st, 1808.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DAVID PERKINS. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Will you please state where you live ? 
 A. I live at Manchester. 
 
 Q. If you were engaged in the procuration of substitutes during 
 -the war, will you state where your headquarters were, with whom you 
 
145 
 
 were associated in business, and the extent of your business as far at* 
 you may? 
 
 A. My headquarters were principally at Concord ; I was connected 
 with what was called the New England Volunteer Company ; there were 
 six members of it. 
 
 Q. Give the names of those who formed this company or association? 
 
 A. Nathaniel Perkins, Manasseh Perkins, myself, A. M. Peck. Chas. 
 H. Branch and Luther M. Underbill. 
 
 Q. Now give a statement of the extent of your operations ? 
 
 A. Well, we procured substitutes for individuals who were drafted, 
 and furnished town quotas. We done a very extensive business ; that 
 is, in the parts of the state where our headquarters were, Portsmouth, 
 Lebanon, and here ; we had some of the time an office in Boston which 
 lasted some months. In 1864, I think it was putting in recruits for 
 Massachusetts. 
 
 Q. State how it was with regard to your company taking contracts 
 with towns. If so, to what extent? 
 
 A. We furnished a great many towns, the town of Hopkinton, Bow, 
 Hooksett, city of Concord, Manchester and Nashua, and other large 
 towns a great many of the large towns. 
 
 Q. You spoke of your headquarters being at Concord. Will you 
 state what time what portion of the time you spent at Concord. 1 
 mean what years ? 
 
 A. I came here in the latter part of 1863 and stayed until April, 
 1865, with the exception of a part of the time, when I was in Boston. 
 
 Q. Will you state the modus operand!, very briefly, by which these 
 substitutes were procured and brought here for examination ? Just state 
 briefly, so that the referees will understand ? 
 
 A. They were mostly sailors that came from New York and Boston, 
 and we had a great many recruits from the west, by persons promising 
 them bounties, and a great many came from Canada. They were 
 brought here by what were called the principals, as they called them. 
 
 Q. And then what arrangement did you make with the brokers ? 
 
 A. We had contracts with certain towns to furnish recruits, and 
 then we paid the brokers a certain amount for the men, and they made 
 arrangements to suit themselves with the men they brought. 
 
 Q. You mean made arrangements with regard to the pay, the amount 
 received ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; the amount received. 
 
 Q. Now how was it with regard to the men you called runners ? 
 How many were there ? 
 
 A. Well, we had perhaps in all places, a dozen. 
 
 Q. What did these men do ? 
 
 A. It was their business to travel on the train in which the runners 
 were. When we wanted them here, instead of at Portsmouth, we would 
 send our men to Boston and Worcester and stop them, and have them 
 come up this way. 
 
 Q. Supposing a number of men were bound from New York to Bos 
 ton, and you wanted them to come to Concord ? 
 
 A. Sometimes the men met them at Worcester, if they could. We 
 had a man at Worcester and a man at Boston. They used to go to Boa- 
 ton for the purpose of going down east, to Augusta. 
 
 Q. In the case, I suppose, of any number of men starting from New 
 
 10.- 
 
146 
 
 York for Boston, and you wanted to send them up here, what did you 
 do? 
 
 A. 1 went to Worcester for the purpose of sending the men this way, 
 rather than going east. 
 
 Q. What road would they take ? 
 
 A. The Worcester and Nashua road to Nashua, and then the Con 
 cord road to Concord. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Perkins, won t you state generally or, during this 
 period, where was your home, your family ? 
 
 A. At Manchester always my home. 
 
 Q. Can you give the referees a general idea of the number of the 
 men (1 mean the aggregate) who were brought to you in this period, in 
 the way suggested ? 
 
 A. I have no means of ascertaining the number over the Concord 
 road. We have had men from all parts, and the majority of them came 
 over the Concord road, of course. We had some considerable number 
 of men from Canada, and in some instances they would come from 
 Buffalo. 
 
 Q. Can you state somewhere near the number ? 
 
 A. I should think it was some thousands that were offered and re 
 cruited. 
 
 Q. What proportion that you offered or that were offered were re 
 cruited, and what proportion rejected ? Give an estimate. 
 
 A. I could not estimate them correctly, as I know of. The old 
 gentleman used to have strange freaks. Sometimes a great many. I 
 should judge he might have accepted a third, and perhaps not quite as 
 many. 
 
 Q. Then two-thirds would be rejected, of course? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What was done supposing a man was put in here at the office and 
 rejected ? What next was done with him ? 
 
 A. Well, the men rejected by Caswell were usually taken at Lebanon, 
 and in some instances at Portsmouth and Portland. 
 
 Q. How was it about his being accepted ? 
 
 A. I never knew a man that was rejected here but what was ac 
 cepted somewhere. 
 
 Q. Mr. Perkins, how often during this period of 1863-4 did you use 
 to pass over the Concord road ? 
 
 A. I used to go home two or three times a week. 
 
 Q. By your home you mean Manchester ? 
 
 A. I mean Manchester yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And over what other portions of the road did you pass, and how 
 often? 
 
 A. 1 used occasionally to go to Boston. I think, during the time I 
 was recruiting, I went to New York twice, I think ; once in a great 
 while to Portsmouth. 
 
 Q. Mr. Perkins, we were speaking of runners how was it with re 
 gard to the runners supplying the brokers with money to pay the fares 
 of substitutes? 
 
 A. When they hadn t money themselves we used to advance it. 
 Some of them had money of their own rather an expensive class of 
 fellows, free hearted when they had on hand an amount of money. 
 
 Q. State what the practice was, as far as your personal knowledge 
 goes, in regard to the payment of the fares of substitutes by the run 
 ners in the cars. [Objected to.] 
 
147 
 
 Q. So far as you know state the course of business. 
 
 A. 1 can tell you what our instructions were to our men. [Object 
 ed to.J 
 
 Mr. George. My proposition is to show first, that such instructions 
 were given to the runners, and second, that these instructions were car 
 ried out to Mr. Perkins personal knowledge. 
 
 TJie Chairman. We think, if the objection is insisted upon, that it 
 is immaterial. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Well, so far as your personal knowledge 
 goes, what was the practice in regard to the payment in the cars by 
 substitute brokers and runners of themselves, of their own fares and 
 their substitutes ? 
 
 A. \\eli, sir what came under my personal knowledge i never 
 used to pay a fare for the reason that I had a pass ; but our runners al 
 ways paid in the cars. 
 
 Q. For whom did they pay in the cars? 
 
 A. For themselves and for whoever they might have with them, of 
 course. 
 
 Q. Mr. Perkins, on which train did most of the substitutes and run 
 ners come ? 
 
 A. They came in on your up train, the train which goes up through. 
 
 Q (By Mr. Stanley.) The morning train? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Arrived here when? 
 
 A. About half past ten or eleven; the ten o clock train from Man 
 chester, up. 
 
 Q. What train did you usually return to Concord on ? 
 
 A. The half past three train, and on the late express. 
 
 Q. These are the trains you went on ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And on what train did you return ? 
 
 A. On the ten o clock train. I used, ordinarily, to make it a prac 
 tice to come on the train that had the most men on. 
 
 Q. You mean by the most men, the most substitutes ? 
 
 A. 1 mean the most men that we could use, the most substitutes or 
 recruits. 
 
 Q. Mr. Perkins, during the war, won t you state to the referees, as 
 nearly as you can. the condition of the trains, as to the number of peo 
 ple riding, and the number of cars drawn, upon the Concord Railroad 
 the trains run by Mr. Clough ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. Now you may describe the trains from Concord, over the Concord 
 Railroad, during the war during the draft the number of cars, the 
 filling of the trains, during the time you were stationed at Concord and 
 passing over the road. Describe the three trains run by Mr. Clough or 
 Mr. Noyes, as to the number of cars and the filling of the trains, dur 
 ing the period you were engaged here in Concord, engaged in the 
 business of furnishing soldiers. Go on and state as fully as you may. 
 
 A. The trains that I usually went down on were in the afternoon, 
 the half past three train from here, and the late train. The half past 
 three train was generally very long. I have counted the cars when 
 there were sixteen or seventeen cars, including the baggage cars. 
 
 Q. Now describe the other state now with regard to the filling of 
 the cars ? 
 
 A. Generally about full ; pretty well filled up. 
 
us 
 
 Q. State how it was ; and how often, if at all, with regard to peo 
 ple being obliged to stand ? 
 
 A. .1 never noticed very particularly about that as I know of. 1 
 noticed the cars were pretty full. 1 have frequently stood myself, be 
 cause I didn t feel I had a right to crowd in ahead of others, being a 
 <tead head. 
 
 Q. Now describe the others of the three trains, so far as your ob 
 servation extends. Take the quarter past ten o clock train, down. 
 
 A. I scarcely ever was at the train at the time of the departure of 
 the morning train from here. When I went home some three or four 
 times a week, I was on that train that was a quarter of an hour before 
 the half past ten train. 
 
 Q. How was it about your going through the trains ? 
 
 A. My business used to take me through the cars, but I had some 
 difficulty until a gentleman gave me a key. so I could go through the 
 ladies car. 
 
 Q. What was your object in going through the train ? 
 A. There were generally men who came up on the train. 
 <Q. How many on the half past ten o clock train? 
 
 A . I don t think I could tell. I never counted them in the morning 
 strain ; the reason why I counted those going down, was because it was 
 .j-in extra long train a very long train. 
 
 Q. How many times did you count them, according to your recol 
 lection ? 
 
 A. Well, 1 really can t tell : I counted them very frequently. 
 
 Q. (iive the best recollection which you have take the half past 
 ten and the half past three train with regard to the number of cars 
 run V [Objected to. j 
 
 Q. State the best recollection you have with regard to the number of 
 ttars, that during this period were run on the half past three and the 
 half past ten o clock train, for example ? 
 
 A. As I told you before, I had occasion to notice the half past three 
 tfcrain ; I have noticed it very often as having sixteen or seventeen cars, 
 Voecause I never recollect seeing anywhere trains of that length. 
 
 Q. How many cars usually compose that train? 
 
 A. Well, I noticed only when I counted. 
 
 Q. Unable to state ? 
 
 A. Unable to state, sir except when I counted. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You say you were led to count these caw 
 because you noticed that they were extra trains ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I didn t say that they were extra trains, but very long 
 .trains. I usually counted them going round a bend. 
 
 Q. Do you remember how many baggage cars there were upon these 
 trains ? 
 
 A. No, sir; L could not say. 
 
 Q. Gould you be able to say whether there were three, or four, or 
 five? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You cannot say that on the trains you counted, there were not 
 ix baggage cars ? 
 
 A. Not positively ; no, sir. 
 
 jQ.. Mr. Perkins, let me ask you whether there were a large number 
 
149 
 
 of soldiers upon these trains a great many soldiers going back and 
 forward ? 
 
 A. You mean going two and fro ? 
 
 Q. I mean squads of soldiers mixed up with the other passengers o- 
 the trains. 
 
 A. I never noticed the soldiers particularly. 1 never noticed whilst 
 going down on the trains, and not when I was in the trains. 
 
 Q. You mean those set apart for the soldiers, of course ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you if there were not soldiers mixed up with the 
 passengers on the regular trains ? 
 
 A. Before the elections, generally, 1 noticed a great many soldier.? 
 in the trains. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state the number of soldiers on a train at any 
 time you counted ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I could not do it. 
 
 Q. Would you be able to say as to the number of passengers who 
 passedjfree upon these trains when you went down ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I suppose a train as made up at Concord separated at Manches 
 ter ; one portion going over the Portsmouth road, one over the North 
 Weare road, and one over the Nashua and Lowell road 
 
 A. I know nothing about the North Weare road. There was a train 
 made up at Manchester. A portion didn t go through. 
 
 Q. And the passengers had to change cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did the Portsmouth road run a through car "? 
 
 A. 1 don t know. There was a time when they ran through here 
 a portion of the time when they ran through here. 1 don t know the 
 time, 
 
 Q. You don t mean to state that you counted these sixteen cars all 
 packed full ? 
 
 A. 1 don t recollect noticing particularly on those days, 1 noticed 
 generally that they were filled up, 
 
 Q. You were passed free ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. For how long a time did you have a pass ? 
 
 A. 1 got it from Gov. Gilmore ; .1 think it commenced early in 1864. 
 
 Q. Do you know of any other men who had free passes, connected 
 with your business. 
 
 A. There was a short time that Mr. Curtis had one. 
 
 Q. Did he have one from Gilmore ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect any one else, that you came in contact with, 
 that had one V 
 
 A. No, sir ; not that I think of now. 
 
 Q. How was it about your brothers ? 
 
 A. My brothers had passes over the Manchester and Lawrence and 
 on the Portsmouth road, from Manchester. 
 
 Q. Who issued that pass to them V 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Q. Do you know of other persons that had passes from Manchester? 
 
 A. No, sir. The whole of our company was on this general 
 and each had a copy. 
 
150 
 
 *Q. The pass was good for anybody ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. it was a season ticket, and it had the names of each 
 -written on it. 
 
 Q. Then it was good for each of you *? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You didn t pay anything yourselves? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Then none of you had to pay fare V 
 
 A. I don t think Air. Peck or Mr. Branch ever had occasion to use it, 
 
 ty. How many times did you pay fare to (ieorge C- lough V 
 
 A. I don t know that 1 recollect of any particular instances of pay 
 ing to Mr. Olough. 
 
 Q. Did you know men living in Manchester, any of your associates, 
 that were in the habit of passing over the road without paying fare". 
 
 A. No, I think not. 
 
 Q. You never had your attention called to anything of that kind? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When substitutes were brought here to Concord brought here 
 and rejected, where did they go to as a general thing, Mr. Perkins ? 
 
 A, Sometimes to Lebanon, or to Portsmouth. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that ordinarily brokers came through 
 with their men from Worcester and New York ; that is, if a man started 
 from New York with a lot of men, he usually came through with them 
 to get his pay for them here ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; ordinarily. 
 
 <Q. Now you wouldn t go through with him, ordinarily? 
 
 A No ; that was the business of the runners. 
 
 Q. That wasn t a part of your business ? 
 
 A. Not as a rule. 
 
 Q. i speak of it as a rule. Now of course you don t know of your 
 own personal knowledge, whether these persons had tickets or paid 
 through ? 
 
 A. Not when they came to me here. 
 
 Q. When the brokers got the men here you paid for them, took them 
 off their hands and put them in to supply these quotas ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was it your business to pay the fares of these men, or did they 
 pay them ? 
 
 A. We had nothing to do with that ; the men were turned over to 
 us. 
 
 Q. You say, Mr. Perkins, that you advanced money to your runners. 
 Now you don t know whether they spent the money in paying fares, or 
 whether they spent it in purchasing tickets in the cars ? 
 
 A. E know from the amounts returned what it was. 
 
 Q. You haven t any personal knowledge of the fact? 
 
 A. We ordinarily have no other means of knowing, than what they 
 stated to me. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You spoke of the extravagance of your run 
 ners, won t you explain that ? 
 
 A. Expensive. I said. 
 
 Q. What did you mean ? 
 
 A. That is what I was telling, our instructions as to what they were 
 to do. 
 
151 
 
 Q. Mr. Perkins, 1 would ask you how many substitutes have you 
 known to go up to Concord on a single train ? 
 
 A. I have known many instances, when coming from Boston, that 
 there were very near two cars, and a greater part of the men were sub 
 stitutes or volunteers, as the case might be. 
 
 Q. How were the fares of these substitutes paid in the cases you 
 refer to ? 
 
 A. They were paid to the conductor. 
 
 Q. Mr. Perkins, you spoke of 
 
 Mr. Tappan (interrupting). I object to this testimony unless they 
 shew that it is paid to Mr. Clough. 
 
 Mr. George. Quite a late time to object now. 
 
 Q. Mr, Perkins, during the war, at any time when you were stationed 
 at Concord, won t you explain how it was about this being a district, or 
 about this being a general rendezvous ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That has all been admitted once. 
 
 Mr George. I don t understand that it has. 
 
 A. There was a general recruiting office opened here, for volunteers 
 for any town in the state, or any district. 
 
 Q. Who had charge of that recruiting office ? 
 
 A. Col. Carr, sixth New Hampshire regiment. 
 
 Q*. And for how long a period of time was that general recruiting 
 office kept open here, according to your recollection ? 
 
 A. As near as I can recollect, it was opened sometime in the early 
 part of the fall and kept open until the following spring ; I think it was 
 the fall of 1864, sir; I would not be positive. 
 
 Q. They recruited for all the towns in the state ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; a general recruiting office. 
 
 Q. Mr. Perkins, now I want you to state, if you can, what regiment* 
 were encamped or rendezvoused at Concord during the war ? 
 
 A. The first, third, fifth, ninth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, 
 fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth regiments, I believe ; I would not 
 be positive as to my own recollection of it. 
 
 Q. Now how was it about New Hampshire cavalry ? 
 
 A. There was a company, I believe, the first New Hampshire com 
 pany ; that might have been stationed here ; I didn t think of that. 
 
 Q. How was it with regard to recruiting for the heavy artillery, in 
 Concord ? 
 
 A. Kecruits were accepted, at Concord, for any regiment ; but as 
 regards recruiting for the heavy artillery, I think the men had their 
 choice in the branches of the service, except the navy. 
 
 Q. How was it with regard to Concord being a general rendezvous. 
 You may describe that. Describe how it was with regard to Concord 
 being a general rendezvous ? 
 
 A. Concord was considered the general headquarters for the state, 
 particularly after the general recruiting offices were open. That is, as 
 the main part of the regiments were here, it was so considered. 
 
 Q. Who had charge of that camp ? 
 
 A. There were different individuals, Maj. Whittlesy and others. 
 
 Q. General Hinks ? 
 
 A. He was assistant provost marshal, I think. 
 
 Q. State how it was that at the time the regiments were stationed 
 here that you have remarked, with regard to the number of persons 
 passing backwards and forwards on the cars, particularly at these 
 times ? 
 
152 
 
 A. I should think it would have a tendency to increase the travel 
 [Objected to.] My recollection of the actual fact is that there were 
 more people when the recruiting was going on briskly than there were 
 before or after. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} 1 suppose you don t mean to state that 
 these two car loads of substitutes paid their fare to George Clough ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Do you know to whom they did pay? 
 
 A. Well, sir, I don t know the gentleman by name ; but I know 
 him. 
 
 Q. Did you, at that time, know Mr. Clough by name? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Magridge.) And you knew that the conductor to whom 
 they paid their fares, was not Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was it either of the trains run by him ? 
 
 A. I think it was the early train that came out of Boston ; the ex 
 press train. 
 
 Q. You spoke, Mr. Perkins, of the number of regiments rendezvous ^ 
 here at Concord. I suppose these regiments were not made up of sub 
 stitutes ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. There were a great many volunteers ? 
 
 A. Some of the early ones were. 
 
 Q. Will you please answer my question, and tell me if many of the 
 other regiments were not made up of volunteers, drafted men and sub 
 stitutes ? 
 
 A. All the regiments were originally made up of native volunteers, 
 but the ranks were thinned, after disease and battle took them away, 
 and they were filled up with substitutes and volunteers, with the ex 
 ception of the cavalry, which were made up of recruits from abroad, 
 
 Q. They were filled up the same way ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When you got a squad of fifty or one hundred men, were they 
 not sent off to the regiments ? 
 
 A. They were sent off very early. 
 
 Q. And when they were sent off they were sent off on the ordinary 
 trains that went out from Concord ? 
 
 A. I don t remember about that. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that they would charter an extra train to 
 send them off on ? 
 
 A. I mean to say that 1 don t know anything about it. 
 
 Q. So far as you know they left on the regular trains ? 
 
 A. 1 don t know how they went. 
 
 Q. Now when a full regiment went away from Concord, an extra 
 train was sent with them ? 
 
 A. W^ell, sir, I think so ; I think I have seen extra trains go out 
 from here with a regiment. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you how many men made up the smallest squad 
 that you ever saw sent from Concord ? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell how many. 
 
 Q. Don t you know that where an urgent call for men was made, 
 they were recruited and sent off as soon as they were recruited ; that is, 
 when there was a great urgency ? 
 
153 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; and that is at the time when recruiting was the most 
 brisk at Concord. 
 
 Qf: Now when the call was very urgent and recruiting was brisk, 
 they were sent off in small squads ? 
 
 A. I don t know how small a number; sometimes we sent on a great 
 many ; sometimes a hundred men a day. 
 
 Q. And then sent them right off? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I don t know as they sent them right away ; they sent 
 them to camp. 
 
 Q. Well, they did not keep them here very long ? 
 
 A. It is something that I had no means of knowing, except as 1 
 saw them march through with the guard. 
 
 Q. Have not you seen a small squad going off? 
 
 A. I have no recollection about it. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION resumed. 
 
 Q. By Mr. Tappan.} Mr. Perkins, 1 understand you to say that 
 you had your recruits and your substitutes, mostly from New York ? 
 
 A. Perhaps the greater part came from New York. 
 
 Q. Well, where are the next greater part, Mr. Perkins ? 
 
 A. Well, we got them from everywhere from as far west as Detroit 
 and Chicago, and some from Washington. 
 
 Q. Now, from New York, what were the brokers names ? 
 
 A. 1 can tell you some of the most prominent ones. 
 
 Q. W r ell, I should like to have you. 
 
 A. Mr. Kelley, two men by the name of Churchill, a man by the 
 name of Greene ; those were our particular customers. And then there 
 were a great many others that sold to us. 
 
 Q. Did these men come through with their men and deliver them ? 
 
 A. Sometimes they did. 
 
 Q. Was that a general thing ? 
 
 A. As a general rule, they did. 
 
 Q. And you took and delivered the men here, at Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was it any part of your business to pay the fares of men, or 
 purchase tickets for them, or get them along in any way? [Objected 
 to as being a repetition.] 
 
 Q. Was it any part of your business to see to the transportation of 
 men, and purchase their tickets, or pay their fares, or anything of that 
 kind ? 
 
 A. It was a part of our business to see that the men got here safely 
 That was the object of the runners. 
 
 Q. Was it part of your business to pay their fares ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not when they brought their own men. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF NATHANIEL WHITE. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} . You live at Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. * 
 
 Q. What is your business ? 
 
 A. General express business. 
 
 Q. Where is the express-office, and where has it been for the last 
 ten years ? 
 
 A. In the north-west end of the passenger depot. 
 
154 
 
 Q. During the war, during the draft, during the timea when the 
 draft was going on, I want to ask you if you had made any obserrations 
 of the number of cars on the two main trains on the 10.30 and the half- 
 past three trains ? 
 
 A. I had at one time my attention called by General Peaslee, I 
 think in regard to the railroad, and a statement was made to the super 
 intendent and the directors. It was during the war these trains were 
 run, the time there was recruiting of substitutes and everything going on. 
 
 Q. Now I want you to state, sir, how many cars ran on to Concord 
 on the 10.15 train at that time ? 
 
 A. Well, they were the trains that 1 was speaking of, that I was 
 speaking to General Peaslee about, and he went to Governor Gilmore, 
 and he sent for me then to come to his office. [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. I want to know what the fact was. 
 
 A. Sixteen cars is what I represented. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Is that including the baggage cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that includes the whole train. 
 
 -Q. I want you to state as to this time, and as to that being an extra 
 ordinary thing. 
 
 A. In July, August and September, it was my judgment that they 
 ran about the same number of cars ; perhaps the same number of cars. 
 The first two weeks of September it was, perhaps, about the same. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Jfaile.) Can you tell the year? 
 
 A. 1 cannot tell the year, because 1 never thought of it. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Was it while Mr. Clough was on the road? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I recollect the conductors who were all on. 
 
 Q. You say you had an interview with Mr. Gilmore : I don t ask 
 you the details of that interview at all, because that is not competent 
 evidence, but I want to ask you if Mr. Biddle s record of the number 
 of ears was sent for ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it was sent for. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Biddle bring his record ? 
 
 A. T don t know as the record was brought, but he stated 
 
 [Objected to and ruled out.] 
 
 Q. Mr. White, t will simply ask you if Mr. Biddle was sent for? I 
 will leave it right there. 
 
 A. He was, sir. 
 
 Q. I want you to describe now us well as you can, during this period 
 that you noticed the trains, how much travel there was on them? 
 
 A. I could not certify to the filling of the cars. 
 
 Q. Give the best idea you can to the referees. 
 
 A. I can only judge from the number of the cars, that they wouldn t 
 run them unless they had passengers for them. [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. Mr. White, during the war, during the recruiting, how was the 
 amount of travel on the Concord Railroad upon the three main trains of 
 the road, according to your observation ? 1 mean as to the amount, and 
 the filling, and all about it. 
 
 A. The two what we called main trains was the first train up, and 
 the half-past three train. 
 
 Q. Will you state how these trains ran during the war as to the 
 amount of passengers, according to your observation and recollection- 
 how it was during the substitute time of the war, and when the regi 
 ments were stationed here? 
 
 A. I couldn t state that the cars were full, you know, all of them. 
 
155 
 
 Q. State whatever recollection you have. 
 
 A. [ should think as a general thing they ran pretty well filled, and 
 that really of course 1 could not tell. I could not say whether they 
 were crowded, or half that, but I should say they were pretty well filled. 
 I didn t notice them to think of any such thing. 
 
 Q. Did you notice the travel on the occasion that I have spoken of, 
 so that you can state from recollection what the travel was then com 
 pared with what it was prior to the war ? 
 
 A. I should judge that it was a great deal more. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Gevrge.) Mr. White, how was the travel in 1857-8 
 9-60 in these main trains about how many cars ? 
 
 A. 1 should think they would average more than two-thirds the 
 number of cars. 
 
 Q. The number of passengers is what we want. 
 
 Q. (By. Mr. Ctishing.} What is the actual number of cars, as you 
 -remember it ? 
 
 A. I should think, on the three main trains, the Northern road 
 usually ran one baggage car and three passenger cars ; and then the 
 Montreal road about two passenger and one baggage ; I should judge 
 that would be about seven cars. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Muyridge.} Then the Concord road V 
 
 A. Unless they had something extra, L don t think there were any 
 Concord cars. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.) What period will this cover ? 
 
 A. Well, he said before the war they might occasionally take on a 
 Concord car, but I don t think it was regular. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} There is the Portsmouth road you have 
 not got in, 
 
 A. They didn t at that time, 1 guess. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. White, before the war did not the Portsmouth road 
 run out of Concord separate from the Concord road ? 
 
 A. They did until they went to Manchester. 
 
 Q. How many cars did the Portsmouth road run out of Concord be 
 fore the war? 
 
 A They ran one baggage car and one passenger car, usually, 
 
 Q. Now the Portsmouth trains are run out of Concord, in connection 
 with the Concord trains ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is, the afternoon trains are. 
 
 Q. Then there would be two more cars that would enter into the 
 computation ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; on that train. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. White, you have spoken of the train as made up or 
 dinarily before the war. You say three cars and a baggage car on the 
 Northern road. Now didn t the Northern road sometimes run as many 
 as six cars ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t know of any such occasion, not without it was 
 some excursion. 
 
 Q. Now there were four there. Then didn t the Montreal road 
 sometimes run four cars, in the height of travel V 
 
 A. I should think sometimes they might. 
 
 Q. Did nt the Portsmouth road sometimes, in the height of travel, 
 run with three cars ? 
 
156 
 
 A. Oh yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then there would be sometimes eleven cars that would run out 
 over the road before the war. Now let me ask you, Mr. White, if 
 sometimes, in the height of travel, the Concord road didn t put a car 
 on from here to Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; they did on some days. 
 
 Q. And didn t they sometimes, in the height of travel, put on two 
 cars ? 
 
 A. 1 think they have. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. White, 1 understood you to say, in reply to a question 
 put to you by Col. George, that from July to September you counted, 
 sometimes, sixteen cars on a train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you how that was ? 
 
 A. 1 was asked that question I could not specify the year I 
 should think it was some two years before Mr. Gilmore gave up. 
 
 Q. Then it would be in 1864 or 65 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you if, when these trains were running out, there 
 was a lively recruiting business being done here at Concord ? 
 
 A. I should think there was. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, wasn t it also at a season of the year when the travel is 
 ordinarily the highest ? 
 
 A. That is what I stated, 1 believe. 
 
 Q. Then there was recruiting business in Concord, and it was also a 
 season when the ordinary travel is the greatest, that is to say, in July, 
 August and September ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, I expect most folks travel in those two mouths. 
 
 Q. Mr. White, let me ask you, sir, if you did not know what the 
 practice was here, when this recruiting was going on in the city of Con- 
 cord, after the regiments had gone on to the field, and the regiments 
 were cut up by battle, and their ranks thinned by death, if as fast as 
 the soldiers were recruited here they were marched immediately to their 
 regiments in the field ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. Sent off to Charlestown or down to Boston. Just 
 about half of them got away down there. 
 
 Q. The battle of Gettysburg occurred on the 4th of July, 1864? 
 
 A. 1 believe that is the time. 
 
 Q. Now, then, from the time when these cars went out from the de 
 pot or, let me ask you if there was any period of the war when men 
 were urged forward so fast as they were just after the large fights ? 
 
 A. I think they would usually send along after any battle as fast as 
 they could. 
 
 Q. Then when the recruiting was most rapid, the men were sent off 
 most frequently in squads from Concord. Was not that so ? 
 
 A. I should think so ; f know they used to send off as often as they 
 could get fifty or a hundred, T should think. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. White, when a squad of fifty or seventy-five men were 
 recruited, they were marched down in squads from the camp and run on 
 the regular trains? 
 
 A. They would not be likely to run extra trains for that number. 
 
 Q. Did they put on extra trains only when regiments were sent off ? 
 
 A. I only know that they put on extra trains for regiments. 
 
157 
 
 Q. Do you recollect of any cases where extra trains were put on the 
 road to take soldiers, save when an entire regiment was to be taken 
 away V 
 
 A. I do not recollect of any such thing ; there might have been. I 
 did not charge my memory. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. White, supposing there was a squad of one hundred 
 and fifty men carried from Concord upon and in the 10.15 train, how 
 many cars would the Concord road put on naturally to accommodate 
 them ? 
 
 A. They would put on three cars. 
 
 Q. They would naturally crowd them ? 
 
 A. Well, they would generally march a company into a car. 
 
 Q. And they would put on at the rate of a car for every fifty that 
 went away ? 
 
 A. They could not do much less than that. They used to stow them 
 in a little thicker than that sometimes when they were short of cars. 
 
 Q. 1 want to ask you something about the dead-heads. How long 
 have you been connected with the Concord Railroad ? 
 
 A. About twenty-seven years. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you have occasion frequently to ride in the 
 trains ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. Have you frequently seen Mr. Gilmore tell Mr. Clough, for in 
 stance, to pass men in the cars ? 
 
 A. I have heard such things, and seen such things, I believe. 
 
 Q, Would not he direct him to pass them without their having & 
 written pass ? Would not it be his verbal order ? 
 
 A. Well, occasionally, when they got ready to start, I have seen 
 him go to all of the conductors and say, pass this man. 
 
 Q. And in that case he would get into the cars without anything in 
 the shape of a written pass ? 
 
 A. In that way he would. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, Mr. White, if you ever went down over the road 
 when one-half of the passengers of the particular car that you might 
 be in were dead-heads ? 
 
 A. Well, 1 had no knowledge of aiiy such operation. 
 
 Q. Did you ever remark to anybody that you had been down over 
 that road at times when in some of the cars one-half were dead-heads ? 
 
 A, I do not recollect ever my making any such remark. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you have ever taken passage down over the 
 road when from a quarter to a half didn t pay fare ? 
 
 A. I suppose there might be a quarter ; there is a train on Monday 
 morning and there are more or less persons going down. That is the 
 train 1 generally go on. 
 
 Q. Have you ever been in the car when from a quarter to a half 
 were dead heads V 
 
 A. 1 think, as 1 say, on M.onday, because I have been in when there 
 would be but a small number, and that would be those that had dead 
 head or special tickets ; L do not know what it was. 
 
 Q. Have you ever been down in the smoking car on the road, when 
 every single man in the car was a dead head ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; i do not very often ride there. 
 
 Q. Have you never been in the smoking car? 
 
 A. I have been in, but I did not stop there, because I do not smoke ; 
 1 did not choose to stay there. 
 
16.8 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about the extent to which (rilinore use<I 
 to issue free passes ? 
 
 A. 1 do not, to my own knowledge. 
 
 Q. Have you frequently seen instances where persons were passed 
 over the road by Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. I have seen persons that presented his pass. 
 
 Q. Have you frequently seen that ? 
 
 A. Well, 1 should think I had. 
 
 Q. Have you ever known, sir, of Gilmore s distributing tickets 1 
 mean the regular ticket of the road to any persons who wanted a pass ? 
 
 A. No, 1 have never known of that. 
 
 Q. Have you ever known of his giving away free tickets, for politi 
 cal purposes V 
 
 A. It was passes you were speaking of. 
 
 Q. Did you ever know of his giving away passes, for political pur 
 poses V 
 
 A. 1 have no knowledge, except hearsay. 
 
 Q. Did you ever talk with Gilmore on the subject ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; 1 never did, 
 
 Q. Did you know of his using the Spalding passes, at the time when 
 he was candidate for counsellor V 
 
 A. I never knew of it ; I have heard of it. 
 
 Q. Have you known an entire family that has been passed down over 
 the road, on Gilmore s pass? 
 
 A. I have no particular knowledge of such things. 
 
 Q. Have you obtained passes from him ? 
 
 A. 1 have, occasionally. I did not use to go to him more than once 
 or twice. I generally calculated to pay my fare one way. I might oc 
 casionally go and ask him for one for some person who was poor and had 
 not got any money, and he would give me a pass. Mr. Clough used, 
 sometimes, to pass me down, but 1 used, generally, to calculate to pay 
 fare one way, 
 
 Q. Did you ever go to Mr. Clough and ask him to pass people down 
 over the road ? 
 
 A. 1 think likely 1 have. 
 
 Q. What has he said ? 
 
 A. He has taken them, sometimes. 1 have told him that they were 
 poor and needed it. I never have asked him except when they were 
 poor. 
 
 Q. Have you frequently asked him to do this ? 
 
 A. Yes, occasionally, when there was not time to go to headquarters. 
 I have done that on all the roads, and I have been to all the roads and 
 they have always done it. 
 
 Q. Would there be anything to show for that ? 
 
 A No, sir. 
 
 Q. When your family had occasion to ride with Mr. Clough, did not 
 .you always buy tickets ? 
 
 A. I calculated, as a general rule, to pay fare one way to pay the 
 fare up or down. My wife does not go to Boston more than onc^ a year. 
 
 Q. How was it about your children? 
 
 A. They did not ride but very little. 
 
 Q. How was the fact? 
 
 A. It was as I say : I generally calculate to pay the fare one way. 
 Sometimes I did not, but that is what I generally calculated- 
 
159 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} In 1864 you took the quarter past ten train 
 from Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, When were you giving the number of cars ? 
 
 A. That was on the three and a half train. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, during that time how many cars were there, ordinarily, 
 that went down on the quarter past ten o clock train say in 1857-8-9 
 and 1860? 
 
 A. There was one north from here. 1 believe that started from here, 
 but the passengers were all changed. 
 
 Q. How many cars ran down on that train ? 
 
 A. I should think about seven or eight cars perhaps, on both roads. 
 There were two baggage cars, and the Lawrence road at that time ran 
 the most. 1 should think likely there might be five cars. As a general 
 thing I suppose they would run about eight cars. In the height of 
 travel, there might have been more than that. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Now, in the height of travel let us see if 
 they did not run more than that. How many cars started here that 
 went over the Manchester and Lawrence road in the height of travel ? 
 I am speaking of the ten o clock train, 
 
 A. I should think some three cars, besides the baggage cars. 
 
 Q. Now how many cars left Concord on that train and went by 
 Nashua and Lowell in the height of travel ? 
 
 A. They might run perhaps as many as they did the other way, 
 
 Q. Now there is the Portsmouth road ? 
 
 A. The Portsmouth road did not run at that time. 
 
 Q. But the Portsmouth road ran separately ? 
 
 A. Not at that hour. 
 
 Q. If they did not go at that hour ? 
 
 A. They went in the morning. 
 
 Q. There were two trains in the day? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; they went down at seven and at half-past three. 
 
 [Mr. Stanley objected to introducing testimony in regard to the Ports 
 mouth train, inasmuch as the plaintiff s counsel had not been allowed 
 to put evidence as to that road.] 
 
 The Chairman. It is difficult for me to see what the Portsmouth road 
 has to do with it. The Portsmouth road was a separate affair, but pas 
 sengers that went there went in connection with the other train. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Now let me ask you if five cars, many 
 times in the height of travel, have not left Concord to go to Boston by 
 either road ? 
 
 A. I should think there had been days that there had. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you how many baggage cars would be required ordi 
 narily to accommodate five full passenger cars ? 
 
 A. Two, usually, but they used to occasionally put on an extra bag 
 gage car. 
 
 Q. Now, then, I want to ask you if five cars have not started from 
 Concord to go by the way of Lawrence ? 
 
 A. 1 should think there had. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if five cars, in the height of travel, have not left 
 Concord to go by the Nashua and Lowell road ? 
 
 A. Oh, yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then, to accommodate these passengers, of course there would 
 be required sometimes two and sometimes three baggage cars, and while 
 
160 
 
 there were two, that would make a train where there would be fourteen 
 cars ? 
 
 A. There would be some days. 
 
 Q. You said that oftentimes in the height of travel fourteen cars 
 would leave on the three and a half train. 1 want to know if you have 
 known a time when eighteen cars have left here in a period before the 
 war? 
 
 A. Well, I do not know that 1 could say. 
 
 Q. Now let us see : in the height of travel, Mr. White, how many 
 cars have you ever known to leave Concord in the height of travel, I 
 mean to leave Concord for Portsmouth ? 
 
 A. Without some special occasion, two cars is all they ran. 
 
 Q. In the height of travel ? 
 
 A. Yes, I understand. 
 
 Q. When they were going to the beaches, let me ask you if the 
 Portsmouth road has not run three and sometimes four cars ? 
 
 A. They have sometimes had six cars. 
 
 Q. I do not mean excursions. But take the ordinary amount of 
 travel going toward the beach. Has not the time been frequently when 
 the Portsmouth road has run three or four cars? 
 
 A. 1 should think not. 
 
 Q. Have they not run three ? 
 
 A. I should think two would be the number as a general thing. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that they have not run three ? 
 
 A. No, I do not say that, but I should say that two was the general 
 thing. 
 
 Q. Now there would be three. How many have you known brought 
 over the Northern line which went through to Boston ? 
 
 A. Well, I could not say I am sure about that as a general thing 
 three cars. 
 
 Q. Have not you frequently known four or five cars come down over 
 the Northern road ? 
 
 A. If they did they were generally shifted off. 
 
 Q. How many have you known to come down on the Montreal road ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, they used to run three cars generally, besides baggage 
 cars. 
 
 Q. How many baggage cars? 
 
 A. There would be two baggage cars. 
 
 Q. Now how many cars have the Concord road put on to accommo 
 date the travel that took passage at Concord, including the travel from 
 the stages at Pittsfield and Alton, and the other stages that come here ? 
 
 A. Well, they would not hit the ten o clock train. 
 
 Q. How many cars have you known the Concord road to put on, in 
 dependent of the cars that came down over the other roads ? 
 
 A. I could not state ; 1 know they put on some. 
 
 Q. Have they not put on four or five ? 
 
 A. It may be so. 
 
 Q. Well, we will call it four. How many baggage cars? 
 
 A. They would put on one baggage car. 
 
 Q. Would they not put on two ? 
 
 A. No ; not as a general thing more than one. 
 
 Q. That makes sixteen cars. Now have you not known, of such a 
 case frequently? 
 
 A. There may have been : I did not happen to notice it. 
 
161 
 
 Q. What would be a fair statement of the number of cars run be 
 fore the war ? 
 
 A. I should think I had made a fair statement of the running of 
 the cars before the war. 
 
 Q. Do not you think the statement you have given me a fair state 
 ment of the travel, in the height of travel, before the war ? 
 
 A. I should think there were extra days when more folks got in. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) When northern trains came down and there 
 were more than could be accommodated 
 
 A. They put on other cars. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) There is one affair that perhaps this wit 
 ness knows : whether it was the custom of the trains that came from 
 the upper roads, each to take its own baggage car along ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How would it be with the Portsmouth train, if it started from 
 here at half past three ? 
 
 A. They would furnish their own baggage car. 
 
 Q. Then the Concord road put on some cars ? 
 
 A. They always run a baggage car with that train, to Portsmouth. 
 
 Q. How was it with the Concord road, did they put on one ? 
 
 A. Not as a general thing they didn t. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) But used the northern baggage cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Whether it was occasionally so, that they 
 had to put on their own baggage car? 
 
 A. I stated that they did, I believe. 
 
 Mr. George then read from the deposition of Mr. George Clough, in 
 terrogatories 126 to 136, inclusive; also, interrogatories 185 and 186. 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 
 [NINTH DAr. Tuesday, August 4th, l.] 
 
 ME. G. G. SANBOEN RE-CALLED. 
 
 Mr. George. I desire to show now, Mr. Gilmore s endeavors to 
 squelch this investigation. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We do not, of course, desire to shun any investiga 
 tion of this subject, if the referees think it is of any particular value, 
 and that it has any legitimate tendency to show whether there is any 
 money in the hands of Mr. Clough. If you think it proper we don t 
 object at all. 
 
 The Chairman. I believe we have ruled in regard to that, that the 
 testimony was inadmissible unless made so by evidence that showed 
 collusion. 
 
 Mr. George read from the deposition some of the interrogatories for 
 the purpose of showing the particular testimony in regard to collusion. 
 
 Mr. George. These suits were commenced on the 10th of February, 
 1866, on the property of this defendant and sundry of the other con 
 ductors. The annual meeting of the corporation was held on the Tues 
 day preceding the last Wednesday the 29th day of May. Mr. Gil- 
 more was, part of that time, the superintendent and executive officer of 
 the road. I do not think that my brother can claim that the evidence 
 that I have read from Mr. Clough s deposition does not show that imme 
 diately after the commencement of these suits, though these suits, as it 
 appears, were commenced on the same day of the discovery of the 
 11 
 
162 
 
 tickets at Whitcher s, I think my brother cannot claim that the evi 
 dence does not show that immediately Mr. Gilmore went into a consul 
 tation with the conductors who were sued for embezzling the funds of 
 the corporation went immediately into consultation, and combined 
 with Mr. Clough and the other conductors of the road to turn out the 
 old board of directors, who commenced these proceedings. Now then, 
 there is the first thing. It shows that they went into a combination to 
 purchase stock. Mr. Clough, I grant, says in the course of his depo 
 sition, in reply to a question as to whether there was any understand 
 ing: "I cannot remember." In reply to another question, he says: 
 "I cannot remember in particular." But this board of referees, I 
 think, cannot fail to see that this testimony has a legitimate tendency 
 to show a combination. Let me ask, if these conductors went to work 
 and bought this stock in 1867, bought a thousand shares, and pocketed 
 the loss between 1867 and 1861, gave bonds to Mr. Hill and Mr. 
 Johnson, gave their notes for the loss let me ask if that does not show 
 that there was some object ? Now, what was that object ? It was to 
 cut off these suits. Mr. Clough admits that they sustained from two to 
 three hundred dollars loss. JS ow then, if I am correct, that immediate 
 ly upon the commencement of these suits, Mr. Clough went into a com 
 bination with Mr. Grilmore, then I have a right to show what Mr. Gil- 
 more, in pursuance of that combination, did ; and to show that he did 
 everything he could to prevent the investigation of this matter. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I respectfully submit that there is not a particle of 
 evidence that has been read from this deposition, or elsewhere, that 
 goes to show that there was any combination or collusion made by Mr. 
 Clough and anybody else for the purpose of suppressing these suits. 
 And there never was a moment of time when Mr. Clough or Mr. Eaton 
 I speak of these particularly would have consented to have had these 
 suits go by without a full and fair investigation. The testimony does 
 show that there was a purpose of turning out all the old oflicers. If 
 that is the case, nobody has suffered anything by the change. We 
 have no objection that the evidence should be gone into. All the evi 
 dence the statements of the counsel on the other side show is this : that 
 at the outset, when this excitement first began to arise in regard to the 
 management of the old board of directors and the officers of this road 
 when it first began to be bruited abroad of the peculations of the su 
 perintendent to some extent all along, Mr. Gilmore, it appears, ordered 
 these suits to be instituted, for the purpose, as we say, of diverting 
 public attention from the real parties to those who were innocent. 
 And it appears that unless something was done to stop the proceedings 
 in some way, it appears that Mr. Gilmore was willing to turn about and 
 curry the favor of the conductors, and with the design of saving him 
 self, failing in the outset to turn public attention from himself to the 
 conductors. And whatever combination or collusion they made was to 
 turn out that old board and purge this thing. And it has been purged ; 
 and nobody has suffered anything by it. What I have said has been 
 merely for the purpose of setting things right in regard to this charge 
 of combination or collusion for the suppression of these suits. But if, 
 after having said this much, the referees think that this at all pertains 
 to the case, or will facilitate the investigation of the case, and show 
 that there is one dollar, or one cent, in the hands of Mr. Clough, then 
 we say let it go in. But if they do not, we shall claim the privilege. 
 
163 
 
 The Chairman, if we understand the matter correctly, the propo 
 sition is to show now some unlawful acts and some frauuuicnt acts of 
 Mr. Joseph A. Gilmore. And we understand that the inference intend 
 ed to be made is, that because Mr. Gilmore was doing these uniawiul 
 acts, Mr. Gilmore and Mr. Olough were combining together to smother 
 this suit ; and to infer from that, that there was something for Mr. 
 Clough s interest to get smothered. Now, we think, if 1 understand 
 the matter right, that the evidence so iar simply goes to show a com 
 bination on the part of Mr. Gilmore and Mr. uiough and others, by 
 lawful means, by the means which they have, the means to prevent the 
 legal right to pursue the investigation. Now it may possibly be that 
 some inference may be drawn from that, from the fact that Mr. Clough 
 was desirous of having the board of direction changed. But we think 
 that the fact that Mr. Clough and Air. Gilmore and other* had formed a 
 combination, in a legal way, to buy stock and effect changes in the 
 board of direction doesn t tend to show that Mr. Olough formed that 
 combination with Mr. Gilmore to do fraudulent acts for the purpose of 
 smothering this suit. And we think, therefore, that, as it now stands, 
 it does not tend to show that kind ot collusion between Mr. Olough and 
 Mr. Gilmore that would make the evidence admissible, or that would, 
 bind Mr. Olough by Mr. Gilmore s acts. 
 
 Mr. George, it is clear that Mr. Gilmore and Mr. Clough, at the 
 time these suits were brought, thought they were all wrong, a great 
 outrage, and ought never to have been commenced, etc. Now 1 propose 
 to show that at that very time Mr. Gilmore was endeavoring to prevent 
 any possible development with regard to the conductors, as J claim, by 
 combination with Mr. Clough. And I say that the evidence tends to- 
 show it, and that Mr. Clough was part and parcel with this arrange 
 ment, with Mr. Gilmore to prevent any development of the facts, which 
 were the basis of this suit. 
 
 The Chairman. The precise ruling of the referees, as I understand 
 it, is that we do not find here any evidence tending to show a fraudulent 
 collusion between Mr. Clough and Mr. Gilmore ; any evidence in any 
 way tending to show a fraudulent collusion as would justify us in im 
 plicating Mr Clough in Mr. Gilmore s frauds. That is the precise 
 view that I think the referees entertain now about the matter. And I 
 think we are all of one mind about it. This evidence, as 1 have already 
 suggested, this fact that Mr. Clough was desirous to change this board 
 of directors, and willing to spend money for the purpose of changing 
 the board of directors (taken in connection with some other evidence) , 
 to operate upon the suits to get them adjusted and arranged that they 
 may have some tendency to show that here were some suits that it was 
 for his interest to get out of the way. But that does not show that 
 there was any fraudulent collusion. That is the precise point that we 
 rule. We think there is no foundation now such as would make that 
 evidence against Mr. Clough. That is our view of the thing as a mat 
 ter of fact. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Mr. Sanborn, you have spoken here with re 
 gard to Mr. Gilmore s directing you to collect some $3400 or $3500 
 of the quartermaster of the United States, and that you now hold that- 
 money. Did you so say ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect what I said, but I believe that is the fact. 
 
 Q. You collected the money ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
164 
 
 Q. Whose receipt did you give ? 
 
 A. I did not give any receipt. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Tappan.} How much waa it ? 
 
 A. Thirty-four hundred or thirty-five hundred dollars ; I do not re 
 collect. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Won t you state the facts in regard to that? 
 
 A. I made out the orders for transportation the same as I would any 
 .other for the Government, and presented them to the quartermaster, by 
 ^direction of Mr. Gilmore. He looked the orders over and saw the 
 -.amount of them and handed me the money, and I passed the orders out 
 and he said, "No matter about those we don t care for them," and I 
 took the orders and returned them to the office. 
 
 Q. Returned the money to Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. Returned the money to Mr. Gilmore ; I kept the orders myself. 
 
 Q. So far as you know, who first brought that matter to public no 
 tice ? By whom and when was that matter first made public ? [Ob 
 jected to and withdrawn,] 
 
 Q. With regard to the $ ;400 for political tickets those tickets to 
 .whom were they delivered and sold, and with whom was the settlement 
 made ? 
 
 A. The tickets, I believe, were delivered to Mr. Chandler, and the 
 money was presented 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Gilmore ever account for this $3400 ? 
 
 A, No, sir. 
 
 Mr George. For the purposes of this trial, I will agree that it is a 
 straight theft. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Who developed that fraud, sir? 
 
 A. 1 believe it came from Mr. KimbalL John Kimball. 
 
 Q. Who took Mr. Kimball s deposition? 
 
 A. Well, sir, I don t know ; I don t know anything about those de 
 positions at all. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Kimball s deposition was taken? 
 
 A. I don t know at all. 
 
 Q. You spoke, sir, about the tickets which were taken by Mr. Gil- 
 rnore. [Objected to,] 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, won t you state when, by whom, and how, as 
 bo the development of this $3500, so far as you know ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect as to the date, but I think it was February, 
 1866, that yourself came into the offiqe to inquire if I had paid Mr. 
 Oilmore any money, and that I was not aware at that time that it was 
 known beyond one individual that I had consulted in regard to some of 
 my matters, as he was a bondsman of mine and I had told him of some 
 ,of these facts. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.} What did he ask you? 
 
 .A. If I had paid Mr. Gilmore any money at different times, or at 
 ;any time, to the amount, or very near the amount which I have given 
 ,$3400. I told him that I had paid him that amount, and gave him the 
 -exact figures. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} What direction was then given you, if any, 
 to examine the books and see if that was accounted for? 
 
 A. I then was desired to examine the books and see if any such 
 amount was entered upon the cashier s books. I did so and made in 
 quiries of the cashier and found that no such item had been entered. 
 
 Q. Who was your bondsman, the only man to whom you had men 
 tioned this? 
 
165 
 
 A. William Parker. 
 
 Q. Then superintendent of the Northern road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And inquiries were made of you by whom in regard to these po 
 litical tickets ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect the particular circumstances about that ; but I 
 think it was a short time after that that the matter of those political 
 tickets was brought up ; but I don t recollect distinctly the conversatioo^ 
 which was had at that time, only the general facts. 
 
 Q. By whom was the inquiry made ? 
 
 A. That I don t recollect. I think it was yourself; but I don t 
 recollect the circumstances, the place nor the time. 
 
 Q. At the time the investigation was going on in regard to these 
 suits, what instructions did Mr. Gilmore give you ? 
 
 [Objected to and withdrawn.] 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.] I want to inquire of you whether or not 
 the presenting of these bills to the quartermaster was any part of your 
 official duty ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. In fact, was there any person whose duty it was to take these 
 bills and present that money ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it was the duty of the cashier, I suppose. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did Mr. Gilmore give you instructions upon 
 the subject in regard to information to me ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now you may state what those instructions were ? 
 
 A. He told me to give no one information in regard to the affairs of 
 the road in any shape, the conductors or any one else without his 
 permission ; and particularly not to give you any information at all un 
 less it was in writing, and that writing to be prosented to himself, and 
 then the answer to be made in writing and go through his own hands. 
 
 Q. Had you, prior to this time, been instructed in regard to afford 
 ing me facilities for investigation ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. By whom ? 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore and Judge Upham, both. 
 
 Q. And how long after this direction of Mr. Gilmore and Judge 
 Upham before it was countermanded in the manner stated ? 
 
 A. 1 am not able to state in that respect, but it was not a great 
 while after the investigation commenced before I was required to in 
 form him of any inquiries which might be made of me. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Gilmore say in regard to the investigation at that 
 time with regard to its being permitted to go on ? 
 
 A. When he gave me the first instructions he said very little about 
 it. I mean when he first instructed me to inform him of such in 
 quiries. When he first gave me instructions there was nothing said in 
 regard to the propriety of it, or anything else ; no remarks made, or 
 anything about it. But soon after it commenced he required me to in 
 form him of any questions that might be asked. A short time after 
 that I should think after the investigation had been going on three 
 weeks he instructed me not to give information except an order came- 
 in writing, and the answer was made in writing. 
 
 Q. What did he say then, if anything ? 
 
 A. I don t know as he said anything about the investigation then 
 
166 
 
 Agoing on ; but be said this much : that it was evidently the design of 
 Colonel George to rip the whole of us out of office, and get us all turned 
 out. I can t word it just as he dia, but he used that expression : "rip 
 vthe whole thing out." 
 
 Q. 1 want to know if he discharged you ? 
 
 .A. I understood that he did, and 1 went to him to ascertain the 
 ifact, and he said that he did intend to, but was going to talk with me 
 about it iirst. 
 
 Q. On what ground was he going to discharge you ? Did he tell you ; 
 ^ A. He told me that 1 had given information that 1 was not autho 
 rized to do, and mentioned these facts in regard to tin. money. 
 
 Q. At what time was this that you heard he had ui iicd you off. and 
 .you went down to see V 
 
 A. I could not tell the date, but it was clu last day of the month. 
 I could not tell whether it was February or Aiaruh. 
 
 Q. It was after the investigation commenced ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I should think it was as late as Aiarch. 1 saw him at 
 his house. 
 
 Q. Whether or not you informed me of this what the result was so 
 Afar as my connection was concerned, and so far as you were concerned / 
 
 A. When you came to me for information, I. told you 1 could not 
 : give it .to you without you presented an order in writing, and requested 
 ."you to do so, or else I could not give the information. 
 
 Q. 1 will ask you how it was with regard to my sending, as soon as 
 this information was communicated to me about the $3400 worth of 
 tickets how it was with regard to sending for Judge Uphain and Mr. 
 Peaslee, and having an interview with them ? 
 
 A. I recollect your sending for me once when Mr. Peaslee was pres 
 ent. My impression is that Judge Upham was not present ; but I was 
 sent for and desired to state in regard to this $3400 ; and I told you I 
 could not make a statement because I was required not to, and did not, 
 but I believe you stated to Gen. Peaslee yourself the facts, and I was 
 present and assented to it as far as 
 
 *Q. Did not deny it? 
 
 .A. I did not deny it. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect whether Judge Upham was sent for to come in? 
 
 A. 1 do not recollect it ; it has gone from my mind. 
 
 Q. Mr. Sanborn, since the adjournment of the court on Friday, 
 ~ won t you state whether you have gone over carefully with the tables of 
 the number of passengers carried over the Concord Eailroad, including 
 -the soldiers carried in squads and represented in any way by tickets ; 
 including all persons returned by the conductors as having paid in the 
 cars, and all persons having tickets either from the upper road or from 
 the Concord road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now I want you to state what is the total, what it includes and 
 what is not included. 
 
 A. It includes everything, military and civil, except regiments as 
 they went away. 
 
 Q. Full regiments ? 
 
 A. Full regiments went away in special trains. The special trains 
 only came into Concord, as for instance, at an inauguration. Where 
 they ran large trains, those trains are not in ; but everything that came 
 sin on the regular trains, including all these small fares. Only it possi- 
 
167 
 
 bly may be some passengers on the Portsmouth road it has occurred 
 to me since coming that some of these might have been left out. 
 
 Q, Everybody carried on the regular trains without exception ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; except this exception that I have spoken of. 
 
 Q. I want to see whether it includes soldiers transportation by the 
 regular trains on the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it does. 
 
 Q. Won t you state how carefully you have been over it ? 
 
 A. I have been over with it entirely from 1859 to 1866. 
 
 Q. In the other table which was submitted to the referees and 
 copied by them, what were the numbers, trains or trips ? 
 
 A. Those were trains. But perhaps it is due to say that these ta 
 bles were not designed to show every passenger, but to show the per 
 cent, between one time and another. This has been got up with a view 
 of including everything that passed over the regular trains. 
 
 Q. And the other was trips, while these are trains ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Now I desire to put this in. 
 
168 
 
 to to t-i to to to co co to to to to: 
 
 Whole No. of Passengers. 
 
 No. of Trains. 
 
 Average No. of Passengers per train 
 No. of Cars, at 50 per Car. 
 
 tototototowtocototobsto: 
 
 Whole No. of Passengers. 
 
 No. of Trains. 
 
 Average No. of Passengers per train 
 No. of Cars, at 50 per Car. 
 
 toi- i- fcotoioiotototototo: 
 
 Whole ^No. of Passengers. 
 
 No. of Trains. 
 
 Average No. of Passengers per train 
 No. of Cars, at 50 per Car. 
 
 tototobObot-stooototototo: 
 
 Whole No. of Passengers. 
 
 No. of Trains. 
 
 Average No. of Passengers per train 
 No of Cars, at 50 per Car. 
 
 to to K) to to to t* cc to to to: 
 
 Whole No. of Passengers. 
 
 No. of Trains. 
 
 Average No. of Passengers per train 
 No. of Cars, at 50 per Car. 
 
 totOK>tototocoi^cocctoto : 
 
 Whole No. of Passengers. 
 
 No. of Trains. 
 
 Average No. of Passengers per train. 
 No. of Cars, at 50 per Car. 
 
 Whole No. of Passengers. 
 
 No. of Trains. 
 
 Average No. of Passengers per train 
 No. of Cars, at 50 per Car. 
 
169 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George-} Mr. Sanborn, I want you to state to the- 
 referees how many seats there are in the ordinary passenger cars of the 
 Concord Kailroad ; how many they will carry ? You have reckoned 
 these at fifty. What is the ordinary number of seats on a side ? 
 
 A. They have made some cars that were sixty, and I don t know but 
 there are some made so now. As they were originally counted they 
 were fifty to the car, but the cars they make are larger now. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to go and look at the latest cars that 
 run on the Concord road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, there has been some testimony in regard to Mr, Upham s 
 running trains over the Concord road. Have you way-bills or statistics 
 of way-bills of such trains run by Mr. Upham, so that you can show the 
 returns that he made ? [Objection to.] 
 
 Mr George. It appeared that Mr. Upham ran trains. On the cross- 
 examination Mr. Upham was asked whether substitutes ever paid him 
 in the cars. Now I propose to show just what Mr. Upham did return. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The only objection to that would be that the return, 
 was made in such a way that Mr. Upham running both trains, the trains 
 of Mr. Noyes and Mr. Clough, makes his return in such a way that the 
 returns of one train cannot be distinguished from the returns of an 
 other train. Now, then, we suppose it is improper here for him to show 
 returns of other conductors and attempt to judge us by those returns. 
 
 Mr. Georye. I propose to introduce simply the trains upon which 
 Mr. Upham testified, on cross-examination, as to receiving money from; 
 substitutes and the details of the way that trains were run. [Handing: 
 a paper to witness.] [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. It seems to us that without touching this question, 
 of per cent, at all, that in this particular instance the inquiries that 
 have been made in cross-examination on one side entitle the other party 
 to complete the examination, as it were, by showing the actual returns 
 that were made by that conductor. We do not, by that, mean to say 
 that the conclusions can be drawn from that for per cent., only it seems 
 to us to be the ordinary course of practice to allow one party to com 
 plete the cross-examination commenced by the other. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Will the referees be kind enough to indicate the part 
 of the cross-examination ? 
 
 The Chairman, We think the witness was examined in reference to 
 the number of cars, the number in the cars, and also as to the returns- 
 which he made, and the number of free passes which he returned, or 
 endeavored to return. And this he went into, in point of fact, pretty 
 fully. And as to the witness recollections of what he states in these 
 tables. [Defendant s counsel excepted to the ruling of the referees.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We make the farther exception that this paper can 
 not be introduced by this witness. 
 
 Mr. George stated that he proposed to show the amount of money re 
 turned by Mr. Upham, as returned upon the train upon which he has 
 testified in the cross-examination by the other side. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We object to any compilations that have been made 
 from any way-bills that they assume to have been used. We desire- 
 them to prove them. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Have you the original way-bills of 65 ? 
 
 A. I think I have. 
 
 The Chairman. Now, if I understand right, the objection is that the 
 cross-examination did not open this inquiry ? 
 
170 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. And secondly, that there are no such way-bills from 
 which he can prove ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We object that it is a question of per cent. 
 
 The Chairman. The purpose for which the testimony is offered, per 
 haps, does not effect the question of its accuracy. The point that seems 
 .addressed to the referees is, whatever may be the effect of evidence 
 tending to show the facts being put in, whether the other side have not 
 the right to go forward and extend the inquiries in the same direction, 
 to limit it, or test it, or put in evidence which tends to show how far it 
 is completed. That is the only view which the referees have taken, 
 .and that without reference to what particular train it was on. The 
 referees cannot, of course, anticipate all the possible uses that can be 
 made of testimony. We can only consider whether for any use it is 
 competent. 
 
 [Testimony ruled in on the ground of its being an extension of the 
 in [uiry as to the same matters that were opened on the cross-examina 
 tion. All the documents shown objected to until proved.] 
 
 Q. By Mr. Tappan.} Mr. Upham returned these papers, did he? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is, I don t recollect of Mr. Upham s coming there 
 at that particular time coming there and leaving way-bills. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Do you know Mi. Upham s hand-writing? 
 
 A. I don t think I could swear to it, but I should think that was 
 his hand-writing. 
 
 Q. How was it about Mr. Upham s returning you way-bills when he 
 returned on the trains ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Do you recollect of these particular way 
 bills being handed in to you ? 
 
 A. No, I do not. 
 
 Q. Do you know that that is his hand- writing ? 
 
 A. I should say it was, but could not swear. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see him write ? Will you state here, unqualifiedly, 
 :hat he wrote those way-bills ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. ( By Mr. George. } You have seen him write ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt that that is his handwriting? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I have none at all. 
 
 The Chairman. Is there any other objection to these way-bills ex- 
 eept that they are not sufficiently identified ? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Is there a word or a figure that you will 
 state is Mr. Upham s handwriting? 
 
 A. I should say that that is his signature, I could not swear to 
 anybody. 
 
 Q. Will you undertake to say that you have any knowledge at all as 
 ^bo its being Mr. Upham s way-bill, or of either one of them being his ? 
 
 A. I have no doubt it is his, but as 1 have said before I wouldn t 
 swear. 
 
 Q. How came they in your office ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect of his rendering them at that particular time. 
 I don t recollect the date that he ran. 
 
 Q. And you cannot swear that a single figure contained in those 
 way-bills was made by him? 
 
171 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, take the word October? 
 
 A. That is written in my own hand, J think. 
 
 Q. Now take October 24th ; in whose handwriting is that ? 
 
 A. I should say that it is his. 
 
 Q. Would you swear that it is ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I would not. 
 
 Q. Now, is your knowledge derived from the fact that Mr. Upham 
 made returns to your office, and that you saw these there and concluded 
 that they were his ? 
 
 A. I have a memorandum of every conductor ; at that time I enter 
 ed against every one E. W. U., showing that he ran the train. 
 
 Q. You do not know that he returned them to the office? 
 
 A. Only from that indication. 
 
 Q. And you would not swear to a mark or scratch on them as his ? 
 
 A. No, sir. [Objection renewed.] 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Hailed} When did you write the word October on that? 
 
 A. On the day that it was brought in. Sometimes conductors neg 
 lected to put on the month, and when they did 1 put it on myself. 
 
 The Chairman. I suppose there is evidence here competent to be 
 considered, tending to show that these are the way-bills that were re 
 turned by Mr. Upham. If that is all the objection that is made, that 
 they are not sufficiently identified as Mr. Upham s way-bills 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Won t you look on this way bill and see 
 what the words George Noyes mean ? 
 
 A. It means that these were printed for his particular use. 
 
 Q. Does it indicate that these were used by Mr. Upham V 
 
 A. Mr, Upham s indicate that. 
 
 Q. Then it indicates that the returns were all made on Noyes s 
 train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Now then we object that if evidence at all it is evi 
 dence only as to what was returned on Noyes s train, and that not a 
 single one of Clough s trains were being run by him at that time. The 
 question as it arose before the referees covered the way-bills returned 
 on both trains the trains run by Noyes or Clough and I understood 
 the referees to rule that to be incompetent. They now offer way-bills 
 that indicate on their face that they are way-bills of Mr. Upham, who 
 ran Mr. Noyes s train alone, and do not relate to a train which was ever 
 run by Mr. Clough at all. 
 
 Mr. George. Here are the other way-bills about which inquiries were 
 made, and I propose to have all these returns put in. The evidence 
 already before this tribunal is that one conductor ran two trains on 
 one day and another the next. 
 
 The Chairman. I understand that it is put a little different from 
 that. I understand that they propose to offer all the way-bills. 
 
 Mr. George. All that the road has in possession. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We now object to these bills because they are not 
 returns on Mr. Clough s trains. 
 
 The Chairman. It does not appear to us, from the view we have 
 taken in the case, that this makes any difference, because we understand 
 that the evidence tends to show that these are some of the way-bills 
 that Mr. Upham testified about, the purpose for which we have deemed 
 this admissible being simply to further the examination in regard to th e 
 
172 
 
 same matters cross-examined upon, and it appearing to the referees that 
 these way-bills do relate to this, and that they are admissible simply on 
 that ground. [Defendant s counsel objects.] 
 
 Mr. George then read the first three way-bills, from Oct. 24, 1865. 
 
 October 24, 1865. First train, by E. W. Upham. Amount returned 
 as taken in the cars : Three from Concord to Suncook at 45 cents each ; 
 three from Concord to Manchester at 85 cents; carried out, $3.90. One 
 from Suncook to Manchester, 65 cents ; carried out, 65 cents ; making 
 the whole of that way bill $4.55. The next is dated October 24. Third 
 train, by E. W. Upham. From Concord to Suncook, 45 cents ; three 
 from Concord to Manchester, 85 cents; one from Concord to Nashua, 
 $1.60; one from Concord to Boston, $2.85. These are all carried out 
 $8.00. Then there is one from Suncook to Hooksett, 25 cents; three 
 from Suncook to Manchester, 65 cents ; two from Suncook to Boston, 
 $2.75. These are all carried out $7.70. Then there were two from 
 Manchester to Nashua, 85 cents $1.70; making the entire way-bill 
 $17.40. The next, October 24, second train Mr. Sanborn, how should 
 that be.? 
 
 A. That is a mistake in making out the date. 
 
 Q. What should it be ? 
 
 A. It should be the 25th. 
 
 Then the second train by E. W. Upham, October 25th : Three from 
 Concord to Manchester, 85 cents ; one from Concord to Nashua, 60 
 cents $5.15. Two from Hooksett to Nashua, $1.35 $2.70 ; one from 
 Manchester to Nashua, 85 cents; making the entire way-bill $8.70. 
 
 The next is October 26 the 10.15 train by E. W. Upham: One 
 from Concord to Suncook, 45 cents ; three from Concord to Martins , 
 70 cents $2.10; two from Concord to Manchester, 85 cents $1.70; 
 three from Concord to Nashua, $1.60 $4.80 ; one from Concord to Bos 
 ton, $2.85 ; carried out $11.90. One from Suncook to Nashua, $1.40; 
 one from Manchester to Eeed s, 50 cents ; five from Manchester to 
 Nashua, 85 cents $4.25. Whole amount of way bill, $18.05. 
 
 The next is first train, October 27. Two from Concord to Manches 
 ter, 85 cents $1.70 ; one from Concord to Nashua, $1.60 ; one from 
 Concord to Boston, -2.85 ; carried out $6.15. One from Suncook to 
 Manchester, 65 cents ; one from Manchester to Nashua, 85 cents. 
 Making the entire way-bill, $7.65. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Sanborn, will you please state whether 
 or not there are not other way-bills of Mr. Upham s in your possession ? 
 
 A. Not that I have a memorandum of. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Mr. Sanborn, these are marked trains, but 
 I see that the heading of these tables is " local, down and up." 
 
 A. That is what we generally term a trip. 
 
 Q. Then each of these papers indicates a trip? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Haile.} The conductor then uses it down and back ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} That is understood as being what techni 
 cally you call a trip ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, now, the first of these bills, Mr. Sanborn the first one 
 that was offered here was October 24th, the first train, and October 
 24th the third train. W T ould those be the alternate trains ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
173 
 
 Q. For instance, if the first train there was Mr. Noyes s train in 
 the regular course of business, what would the third train be ? 
 
 A. It would be Mr. Noyes s, 
 
 Q. Then on the 25th, which would be the second train the next 
 day up ? 
 
 A, Mr. Noyes s. 
 
 Q. Then October 26th, the next day, whose was the second train ? 
 
 A. Mr. Clough s. 
 
 Q. Is the 10:15 train the second train? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And whose train would that be ? 
 
 A. That should be Mr. Clough s. 
 
 Q. I see that Mr. Clough s name has been erased there. Does that 
 indicate anything? 
 
 A. That is supposed to indicate that Mr. Upham did that when he 
 used the way-bill. 
 
 Q. Whose would the first train down be on the 27th, if the second 
 train was Mr. Clough s on the 26th? 
 
 A. It should be Mr. Clough s. 
 
 Q. I understood you, or somebody, to say that in the regular course 
 of business the conductors alternated in that way ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is the regular course. 
 
 Q. I was looking to see what the indications would be here for in 
 stance, on the first that was put in I see October 24th ; there was the 
 first train which was run by him. Now if the first train was his the 
 third would be ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And the second on the 25th would be Noyes ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are you able to tell, from the course of business, whose those 
 were ? 
 
 A. I cannot say whether Mr. Clough changed off with Mr. Noyes 
 and ran the second train, as they sometimes do. 
 
 Q. I wish, then, to inquire how these way-bills would be in the reg 
 ular course of business ? 
 
 A. I go by the lists as to the ordinary time they went. My recol 
 lection of these way-bills I should not go by, except as they agreed with 
 my memorandum, 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} I understand that conductors do change ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Would your list enable you to determine ? 
 
 A. It would enable me to determine more accurately. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Sanborn, I want to ask you how these 
 way-bills are printed. For instance, the fare printed in here is 85 
 what was the ticket-office fare ? 
 
 A. Seventy-five. 
 
 Q. After the rule was adopted requiring an extra charge of ten 
 cents, where tickets were purchased in the cars, how were the way-bills 
 printed in regard to that additional ten cents ? 
 
 A. They were always printed in. 
 
 Q. What was the fare from Concord to Suncook ? 
 
 A. Twenty-five cents. 
 
 Q. How was it about their being printed in on the way-bills at that 
 time? 
 
174 
 
 A. That was always the case from the time that the rule was 
 adopted. 
 
 Q. I will ask you how it was in regard to Mr. Clough ? Whenever 
 Mr. Clough returned money for tickets purchased in the cars what re 
 turn did he make, and was it variable or otherwise ? 
 
 A. He made a return by the rates which are printed there, gen 
 erally, 
 
 Q. You mean including ten cents paid in the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You were asked, when you were on the stand before, when the 
 system of ticketing to the Worcester road and beyond when that sys 
 tem was adopted, and when it was renewed. I want you to state, if 
 you can, accurately, when that ticket system to New York commenced 
 and when it ceased, and when the interregnum was, if any ? 
 
 A. It commenced in October, 1857. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley.) In 1S57 you ticketed from where ? 
 
 A. From Concord to Manchester. 
 
 Q. (By Mir. George.} To what points ? 
 
 A. Groton Junction, Keene, Bellows Falls, Clinton, Worcester, 
 Springfield and Albany, New York (by boat), New York (by rail), and 
 Providence. 
 
 Q, (By Judge Bellows.} What time did you say that was ? 
 
 A. October, 18f>7. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley } Providence, via Worcester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. The sales from Manchester to Worcester were discon 
 tinued in November. 1862 resumed June, 1864. The sales to New 
 York, by railroad, were discontinued December, 1863 resumed Decem 
 ber, 1867. Sales to New York, by boat, discontinued March, 1864 
 resumed June, 1.^64. Sales to Groton Junction discontinued January, 
 1862; to Springfield, October, 1*62; to Albany, October, 1862; Clin 
 ton, May, 1863; Providence, July, 1860. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Not resumed ? 
 
 A No. sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Sanborn, you were asked the other day 
 to give the number of passengers and the number of cars required to 
 carry the passengers up to and including March, 1866. I want you to 
 give" the amount returned, as money taken in the cars, on Mr. Clough s 
 train, in January, February and March, the same three months. 
 
 Mr. George. Now I propose to offer to show the amounts returned by 
 Mr. Clough during the three months of which you have put in statistics. 
 
 The proposal of Mr. George was objected to, and discussed, pending 
 which the hearing was adjourned, 
 
 [TENTH DAY. Wednesday, August 5th, 18( 8.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF MR. SANBOEN (Continued}. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You stated, yesterday, the number of pas 
 sengers carried. Will you state clearly what that embraces ? What 
 does the paper that I put in yesterday what does that embrace ? [Ob 
 jected to.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It seems to me that this evidence is admitted upon 
 premises that are not exactly correct, so far as the evidence is concerned. 
 The referees seemed to proceed upon the admission that we have made 
 inquiries as to all the passengers that passed over this road. Now we 
 
175 
 
 have made no such inquiry at all. We have not asked for anything ot 
 that kind ; but the referees seem to have assumed it. 
 
 The Chairman. I thought 1 had stated just as distinctly as a man, 
 could, that this was to be confined to just the matter which you had in 
 quired about. 
 
 At the request of Mr. Tappan, the ruling of the referees was put in 
 writing, as follows : 
 
 " The defendants having introduced in cross-examination, evidence of 
 the number of cars required to carry passengers on the Concord road, as 
 shown by the conductors returns of tickets and fares paid in the cars, 
 and not including free passes or soldiers who did not have tickets, the 
 ruling is- that the plaintiff may inquire about the particulars and data 
 from which those results were derived." 
 
 To this ruling the counsel for the defendant excepted. 
 
 The, Chairman. Now here is a paper which was used yesterday, and 
 which after being used was placed in the hands of the referees. I be 
 lieve that the witness testifying from this paper which he had drawn up 
 himself, gave certain evidence ; this being used as a sort of memorandum 
 from which he testified. And if Judge Bellows will be good enough to 
 look and see what he said when he testified here in regard to it what 
 he said it was. 
 
 Judge Bellows [reading]. " Includes everything save military, in 
 the regular trains, and in special trains. It includes soldiers trans 
 portation in regular trains." 
 
 That was the way in which this was put in ; and my impression is 
 that it was not objected to. Now if the witness has any explanation to 
 offer ; that is, if he stated that any different from what it was, I sup 
 pose he has a right to correct it. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George,} What result did you mean to give yesterday 
 as contained in that paper ? 
 
 A. I meant to give that it contained everything which is upon the 
 ticket book of the Concord road, and 1 suppose the reason that 1 did 
 not say anything about free passes is that the free passes are not on my 
 books. I hadn t thought of it before. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.} Does it embrace small squads of soldiers ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; such as went off on the regular trains. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Supposing a squad went on a regular train,, 
 without a government order and without tickets, does it embrace those ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; those were put in ; that is according to the memorandum 1 
 on my book, which I made at the time. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} What is the difference between that paper 
 and that one there ? 
 
 A. That was got up for the purpose of showing the per cent, be 
 tween the years, It was made two years ago and I do not recollect 
 what it embraced, but my impression is that it was to embrace every 
 thing that went over the Concord road from the lower roads. The bus 
 iness done here don t embrace a good deal of the business that is done 
 by the Northern roads, 
 
 Q. Now the question that I asked did not cover any of the travel 
 over the upper roads ? 
 
 A. I think it did not. 
 
 Q. You know what paper you had before you when you were in 
 quired of. Do you know what it contains ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I said it was made two years ago, and I do not know 
 except according to my recollection. 
 
176 
 
 Q. You did not know what you were saying as to the number of cars 
 here ? 
 
 A, Well, sir, I supposed 1 knew. 
 
 Q. I ask you, sir, if you are able to state what that paper contains? 
 
 A. The testimony from my books. I could figure it up. 
 
 Q. Do you know ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. In reply to my question did you know what basis you were fig 
 uring upon? 
 
 A. 1 supposed that I knew. I have found since then that that basis 
 -was not what I supposed it was. 
 
 Q. Have you not found out since that the figures that you gave 
 were not upon the basis that I assumed ? 
 
 A. I think it is so. 
 
 ^ Q. Now I want to ask you, sir, if you gave me a reply to the ques 
 tion that I put to you when you gave off these figures to me ? 
 
 A. Well, just as I said before, I supposed that the figures that I 
 was giving you were correct, but I found that they did not contain what 
 I supposed they did. 
 
 Q, Did you give in answer to the question I put to you any accu 
 rate, truthful account? 
 
 A. If that word truthful means - 
 
 Q, I do not mean to imply any falsehood on your part. I ask you, 
 did you in fact give me any correct account as to the question I asked 
 you ? 
 
 A, I think they were not, now. 
 
 Mr. George objected that the further continuation of the examination 
 -was a little irregular. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge stated that he desired to show exactly what was before 
 the referees upon which the counsel asked to extend this inquiry. 
 
 The Chairman. Well, the witness, as I understand when he was tes 
 tifying was testifying for the purpose of correcting a misapprehension 
 which he thought might have been derived from what he said yesterday. 
 He wanted to have the court understand exactly what was embraced in 
 "his testimony yesterday. And he has stated that exactly, so that we 
 now know ; and it appears that there was a misapprehension about it. 
 Then you desired to make some inquiries as to the other paper. The 
 counsel assented ; and you went on with your inquiries, and, as I under 
 stood the matter, were really making inquiries into the very matter that 
 you objected to having an inquiry made into ; that is into the figures to 
 which you objected. 
 
 [This question was the subject of some further discussion between 
 counsel, after which a question was proposed to the referees by Mr. 
 Mugridge.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Supposing I ask the witness a question as to an 
 unswer that he made yesterday, and he says that the table is made up 
 of returns from the Concord and Montreal road ; that the passengers 
 returned by them enter into that computation. Now if I push the 
 inquiry in that way, do the referees rule that it permits Mr, George to 
 put in the number of passengers that passed over that road. 
 
 The Chairman. What the referees have ruled is this: that the 
 plaintiff may inquire as to the particulars and data from which these 
 results are derived. Mr. Sanborn having stated that at a certain time, 
 for instance, it would take two cars to carry the passengers, we rule 
 

 177 
 
 that the other side may go on and ascertain the particulars and data 
 from which he reached these results. If that should lead to the show 
 ing of the amount of money that was paid in, in a legitimate way, then 
 that will appear. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That is just the point that I wanted to understand. 
 I do not propose to ask any more questions at present. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I was going to inquire, in a word, about the question 
 of fare paid to the conductors on the Concord and Portsmouth road, if 
 it should lead to the amount paid to the conductors on the Concord and 
 Montreal road. I do not know how far this goes. 
 
 The Chairman. We suppose it does follow from this ruling that the 
 plaintiff may inquire into the number of passengers and the points be 
 tween which they have traveled. And 1 believe the evidence of the 
 price is already before the court. It is mere calculation after that, to 
 show how much they paid. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I want to have you state further how it is 
 about that paper s embracing every passenger, or otherwise. 
 
 The Chairman. I think, Colonel George, you should confine your 
 inquiry to what he has testified. 
 
 Q. I want to know how it is about that paper s embracing the pas 
 sengers. 
 
 A. Aftrr the question was brought up in regard to the Concord and 
 Portsmouth road, it occurred to me that for that road we had an account 
 separate, so far as books were concerned, and the other road at the time 
 was changed over ; that it would still be the Concord and Portsmouth 
 road, and there was still a separate book, in taking off these figures I 
 used that book, and everything that came into the Concord road, as is 
 commonly done. That is the impression that I had, and I looked over 
 the books this morning to see, 
 
 Q. Suppose a man bought a ticket from Concord to Portsmouth. 
 Does that appear? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think it does not. As I understood, I think when 
 that was brought up, the Portsmouth book was not referred to. If it 
 would be proper for me to make an explanation, I should like to, in or 
 der to clear the matter up a little. The explanation I wish to make is 
 this: that the paper referred to was originally made for another purpose, 
 as I understood for the purpose of per cent, made some two years ago, 
 and when the tickets were called for I found on looking for the record 
 of that report I found some report, and I supposed that to be just what 
 I wanted and I copied it and brought it here. Now when the question 
 was brought up as to including the whole number of passengers and 
 soldiers, I went through it and found that it was not a full report. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You found you were in error and corrected 
 yourself in this ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that was my design, but I did not include the Concord 
 and Portsmouth road. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} What was it you found you were mistaken in ? 
 
 A. I found they did not contain all the books which should have 
 come in. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} And this does contain them? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And this does not contain passengers over the Portsmouth road, 
 nor free passes, nor soldiers transportation on the special trains ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
178 
 
 Q. Does it include tickets sold from any points on the Concord 
 road to the Manchester and Lawrence road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} That is your last one ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Now, Mr. Sanborn, will you state the amounts 
 returned for passengers paying in the cars by the conductors from 1859 
 to January, Ib66, and take the trains embraced in your reply to the 
 question proposed by the counsel for the defendant which has been the 
 subject of the preceding ruling ? 
 
 The Chairman. We have riot ruled in that question yet. We have 
 ruled that the counsel might inquire as to the particulars and data from 
 which Mr. Sauborn gave his answers in cross-examination. But he has 
 expressly stated, as i understand, these were not the particulars and 
 data. It is proposed now, that the witness having yesterday given us 
 some testimony as to the number of passengers that went on certain 
 trains I do not know as I could state exactly what you said about it 
 won t* you be good enough to give it from your memory? 
 
 Witness. The number of cars required to carry the passengers on 
 the Concord Railroad ? 
 
 The Chairman. What you gave yesterday. What you said was con 
 tained in that paper you was inquired of yesterday. 
 
 Witness. The paper put in contained everything that was on the 
 books of the Concord Kailroad. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Will you state the number of passengers who 
 paid in the cars to the conductors on the Concord Eailroad every month 
 during the years embraced in your answer to the counsel for the defend 
 ant, as to the number of cars required to carry said passengers? ("As 
 appears from the same source from which your answers were derived," 
 added by the chairman.) 
 
 Mr. Mugridge took exception to the question, on the ground (1) that 
 it was a matter of record ; (2) that the defendants had made no inqui 
 ries as assumed in the questions put by plaintiff s counsel ; and (3) that 
 the evidence would be generally incompetent. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, can you state the number of free passes ? 
 Have you the statistics that enabled you to state the number of passen 
 gers that paid their fares to the conductors during this period of time ? 
 
 A, The only statement, I think, is the record which I have on my 
 books. I kept accounts up to 1864, I think. 
 
 Q. What is the source from which you answered the questions as to 
 the number of cars. 
 
 A. The record of the books. 
 
 Q. Now, from that same source, can you state the number of pas 
 sengers who paid in the cars, embraced in the same period ? 
 
 A. The books will show what is returned on the way-bills. [The 
 books were procured at the request of the examining counsel.] 
 
 The Chairman. We are trying to limit the inquiry to the particulars 
 and data from which the witness derived his answer. Well, now, if it 
 should so happen that the particulars and data from which the witness 
 derived his answer, connected with what has already been put in, should 
 lead to the amounts, why, they would be in there. But it would be one 
 of those things which results from the position the evidence is in. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, will you state from what source did you derive the in 
 formation on which your answer to the inquiry, as to the number of cars 
 
179 
 
 that would be required, propounded to you by the counsel for the de 
 fendant ? 
 
 A. From those books. 
 
 Q, Now, sir, will you state the number of passengers who paid in 
 the cars from the same source of information that you made your reply 
 from, as to the number of cars that would be required. Just begin with 
 January, 1859. 
 
 A. They are scattered all through the book. [Books explained.] 
 
 Q. Then, Mr. Sanborn, I want you to prepare a schedule from 1 59 
 to January, ^66, of the persons and of the stations between which 
 sales were made in the cars. I want to ask you a question or two, how 
 ever, i have put in some printed instructions which I have understood 
 were admitted. I want to know whether these printed instructions 
 were given to the conductors ? 
 
 A. ihey wore. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman ) Are these the ones that he referred to? 
 
 A. They are. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} They were furnished to Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; this one with his signature to it shows that it is one. 
 They were left in my office ; that is, so far as my recollection goes. 
 Every one of that kind. I recollect distinctly about the instructions being 
 left there for being left with the conductors, except this one that his 
 signature is on. 
 
 Q. After this investigation was ordered, you may state anything that 
 Mr. Grilmore did, any marking upon the instructions, and what in 
 structions were given to the conductors. 
 
 A. The old issue of instructions was sent to them again, and under 
 scored with red ink certain instructions ; I do not recollect the exact 
 items which were underscored, to be given to the conductors at that 
 time, 
 
 Q, Have you a copy that was underscored in this way ? 
 
 A. I have one that was underscored, some of it ; 1 could not ident 
 ify it as being the one underscored at that particular time. 
 
 Q. Who gave you those particular instructions ? 
 
 A. Mr. Nutter. 
 
 Q. Who was Mr. Nutter ? 
 
 A. Mr. (lilmore s clerk. 
 
 Q. Were they underscored by you? 
 
 A. No. sir. 
 
 Q. Mr. Sanborn, you have spoken about tickets which Mr. Gilmore 
 used to get through you. and make you throw out of the account. I 
 want you to state to the referees, just as near as you are able to, how 
 many of such tickets Mr. Gilmore got in the course of the year just as 
 near as you are able to. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} What years? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George. } In all the years right straight along. I want 
 him to state how many such tickets there were, and what was the reason 
 Mr. Grilmore asked for these tickets. 
 
 A. The tickets were given in small numbers ; likely one or two at a 
 time. He would sometimes remark that he did not wish to give a pass 
 and he would ticket the individual the ticket was designed for. And I 
 should think, perhaps, an average number for each year might be one 
 hundred and fifty ; possibly more, but I should say as much as that. 
 
 Q. Is that as near an estimate as you are able to make of the num 
 ber he had taken ? 
 
180 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now take these political tickets and all the other tickets he ever 
 ;ot. I want you to make the best estimate you are able to of the num- 
 jr he got. These political . tickets were when Mr. Grilmore was Gfov- 
 ernor, in 1863 and 1864 ; I suppose that is a public fact. 
 
 A, There was but very few tickets given out for that purpose, until 
 he was candidate. I do not recollect the year he was candidate. After 
 .he was, it would be almost impossible for me to give the number of 
 tickets given by his order. I think they would go up into thousands, 
 i do not mean regular tickets ; I mean all kinds, political tickets, used 
 for political purposes. 
 
 Q. The political tickets, used for political purposes by both parties, 
 were paid for, were they not? I want to know the fact pf these being 
 accounted for. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe Will it appear that this witness knows ? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I want to know about the tickets furnished 
 legitimately, if 1 may so call it, to the two parties. 
 
 A. i think that previous to 1866 there was but a few of the politi 
 cal tickets which really brought any funds in to the road. That is my 
 impression, so far as my knowledge went. 
 
 Q. Did you do the settling, for instance ? You had more or less ac 
 counts with the democratic state committee and the republican state 
 .committee. 
 
 A. Very little with the democratic ; mostly with the republican. 
 Q. Did the democratic state committee pay their bills? 
 
 .A. 1 think they did not. 
 
 Q. Now at what time were these political tickets obtained? 
 
 A. What time of the year ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. The winter season: January, February and March, mostly. 
 
 Q. Mr. Sanborn, how long have you been acquainted with Mr. 
 dough ? 
 
 A. I think it is nearly twenty years ; about nineteen. 
 
 Q. How far have you lived from him ? 
 
 A. Lived up here in the same ward. 
 
 Q. And you were on the road together until since he was removed ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. I want to know whether he has had any ostensible business ; 
 whether he has had any business apart from his conductorship on the 
 Concord road ; and if so, what ? 
 
 [Objected to on the ground that the plaintiff had not brought them 
 under the rule in the case of the Worcester Railroad v. Dana ; and that 
 they had not shown any loss by the railroad, so far as Mr, Clough was 
 concerned ; that they had not shown that Mr. Clough had any of the 
 company s money ; that they had not laid the foundation, therefore, for 
 .making this inquiry.] 
 
 The Chairman. My impression was that that was not the exact point 
 -ruled in the case of Dean v. Farmer. But without undertaking now to 
 rule this in, it does occur to us that it would be well to postpone it at 
 this time until pretty much all the evidence that the plaintiff is to put 
 in shall be in. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. That we do not object to. 
 
 The Chairman. When we have before us the whole of the evidence 
 that is offered, or likely to be offered, we shall be very glad to rule. 
 
181 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION RESUMED. 
 
 (By Mr. Mugridge.} You were inquired of in regard to the returns 
 made by Mr, Upham, and you have put in the returns in October, 1868 ? 
 
 A. 1 think so. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if at the time Mr. Upham was running this 
 train Carney was upon the road, paying out, as it was understood, large 
 sums of money fourteen, or seventeen, or eighteen hundred dollars ? 
 Did you know of that ? 
 
 A. Will you repeat the question ? 
 
 Q. Did you know that at this time, covered by these way-bills, 
 Carney was running on the trains as a detective, and paying out large 
 sums of money ? 
 
 The Chairman. You mean way-bills of Upham ? 
 
 Mr, Mugridge. Yes, sir, 
 
 A. I think it was the first of October that Mr. Carney commenced. 
 
 Q. How long did he run ? 
 
 A. I could not say as to that. 
 
 Q Wasn t he there at the time covered by these way-bills ? 
 
 A. I should think he was. 
 
 Q. Will you take the way-bills returned by George Clough during 
 the months of October and November, and put them in here for each day,- 
 and the amount returned by him. You have these way-bills ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you give them ? 
 
 A. The first day of October, I think, was Sunday. October 2cT,. 
 second train, $9.75, 
 
 Oct. 2, 
 
 ist Trail 
 
 l. 2d J 
 
 9 
 
 ram. 
 
 75 
 
 ad Tl 
 
 am. 
 
 Nov. 1, 
 
 let 
 
 Trail). 
 
 JUJJ 
 
 5 
 
 Yam. 
 95 
 
 3d Train. 
 
 3, 
 
 5 30 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 15 2, 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 7 45 
 
 4, 
 
 
 10 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 3, 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 00 
 
 
 5, 
 
 4 70 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 50 
 
 4, 
 
 3 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 5 45> 
 
 6, 
 
 
 5 
 
 70 
 
 
 
 6, 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 40 
 
 
 7. 
 
 4 75 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 50 
 
 7, 
 
 5 
 
 85 
 
 
 
 8 30 
 
 9, 
 
 
 9 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 8, 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 60 
 
 
 10, 
 
 4 80 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 80 
 
 9, 
 
 19 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 10 40 
 
 11, 
 
 
 7 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 10, 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 30 
 
 
 12, 
 
 2 80 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 30 
 
 11, 
 
 5 
 
 55 
 
 
 
 12 95 
 
 13. 
 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 13, 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 50 
 
 
 H, 
 
 3 95 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 00 
 
 14, 
 
 2 
 
 95 
 
 
 
 28 25 
 
 16, 
 
 
 8 
 
 05 
 
 
 
 15. 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 55 
 
 
 17, 
 
 5 50 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 15 
 
 16, 
 
 2 
 
 55 
 
 
 
 5 75 
 
 18, 
 
 
 7 
 
 75 
 
 
 
 17, 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 00 
 
 
 19, 
 
 6 95 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 80 
 
 18, 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 20 25 
 
 20, 
 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 20, 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 25 
 
 
 21, 
 
 4 30 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 35 
 
 21, 
 
 14 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 15 70 
 
 23, 
 
 
 8 
 
 45 
 
 
 
 22, 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 95 
 
 
 24, 
 
 4 70 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 20 
 
 23, 
 
 11 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 30 40 
 
 25, 
 
 
 17 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 24, 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 90 
 
 
 26, 
 
 4 65 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 50 
 
 25, 
 
 5 
 
 60 
 
 
 
 15 10 
 
 27, 
 
 
 4 
 
 45 
 
 
 
 27, 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 65 
 
 
 28, 
 
 85 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 80 
 
 28, 
 
 7 
 
 05 
 
 
 
 7 68 
 
 30, 
 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 29, 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 20 
 
 
 31, 
 
 5 15 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 95 
 
 30, 
 
 3 
 
 80 
 
 
 
 8 65- 
 
1S2 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Mr. Sanboru, you have produced here five 
 way-bills returned to your office by him. These would show five trips 
 over the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if, shortly before and after that time, he made 
 other trips on the road save these five ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And there should be way-bills indicating these returns at vour 
 office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now if you vail search and see if you have these way-bills ; 
 
 A. [ here is one of them here. 
 
 Q. Have you read that? 
 
 A. I read that, not as one of dough s train : November - >0th, first 
 train, 
 
 Q. Are there any other way-bills which \verc made iy Air. I pham, 
 which you have been able to find . 
 
 A. i have not looked through the way-bills for that purpose. 1 can 
 only say that the memorandum that 1 have kept don t milk-ate that 
 there are. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt that he did? 
 
 A. Oh. yes; he ran at other times. 
 
 * .,. There was an inquiry made by Mr. George as to the number of 
 seats in a car. Won t the way-bills themselves show the trains that 
 Mr, Tpham run, signed with his name on the back of the bill ? 
 
 A. That was the usual way they did. 
 
 Q. ! would like to have you search your office, and find the way 
 bills returned by Mr. Tphani. How would the amount of travel on the 
 road from l;-47 up to 1850 compare with the amount of travel from 1850 
 up to 1860? 
 
 A. 1 know very little of it previous to 1*57, or in that vicinity. I 
 knew but very little about the travel. 
 
 Q. Then you have no information antecedent to 1857 ? 
 
 A. Xo, I do not know. 
 
 Q. How did the travel up to i860 compare with the travel after 
 wards ? 
 
 A. I should think it was not as large as afterwards. 
 
 Q. Wasn t there a very material increase of travel on the road after 
 1860, compared with what existed before? 
 
 A. I should think in 1860, compared with 1861, perhaps there was 
 not so much travel as there was in the subsequent years. That is, I 
 mean by that that the amount of travel seemed to fall off a little in 1860. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if there was, at one time, such an arrangement 
 on the road that Mr. Clough and Mr. Corning remained in Boston over 
 night ? 
 
 A, There was an arrangement, when there were three conductors, 
 when one of them stayed in Boston when Mr. Wright was running. 
 
 Q. You do not remember the arrangement made by Mr. Gilmore, by 
 which either Mr. Corning or Mr. Clough remained in Boston over night ? 
 
 A. I do not remember that. 
 
 Q. Take it from 1860 up, what proportion of the travel upon the 
 road should you think went on the two main trains of the road that is, 
 the ten o clock and the three o clock trains up to the time they left 
 the road? 
 
183 
 
 A. I should think a large portion. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to indicate what portion went over the 
 road in the two main trains from 1860 down to the present time ? You 
 say a large proportion ; now, what proportion do you think ? 
 
 A. It would vary in different times. Perhaps before this half-past 
 seven train was put on 1 should state it a little different from what 1 
 should after. 
 
 Q. When was that put on ? 
 
 A. It was put on permanently, I think, in 63. 
 
 Q. Then I will confine my inquiry to from 60 to 6*. What pro 
 portion of the entire travel on the road went in the two main trains ? 
 
 A. The down travel I could state more clearly. The down travel I 
 should think twenty-nine thirtieths of it went on these two trains. 
 
 Q. From 60 to 63? 
 
 A. I should think so. 
 
 Q. Now, after the half-past seven train was put on take the trains 
 as they run : the ten and a half, the three and a half, and the seven 
 and a half train from 63 up to January, 66, will you be kind enough 
 to state what proportion of the travel went on these two trains ? 
 
 A. I should say fifteen-sixteenths. 
 
 Q. We want you to make a little statement in regard to that, and 
 hand in this afternoon. You were inquired of by Col. George as to 
 when the Concord Eailroad began to ticket toward New York, and 
 toward stations in that direction, and you replied. Let me ask you, 
 sir, if they haven t always ticketed from New York, and from other sta 
 tions, to Concord, over the Concord road ? 
 
 A. They have to that time. 
 
 Q. You designated certain times when the road used to ticket to 
 New York and stations lying in that direction, and you said there were 
 times when they did not so ticket. Now, let me ask you if, during all 
 the time, they have not ticketed from New York to .Concord, right 
 through ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Before I go on to another branch of the examination, I want to 
 ask you about these coupon tickets. Has it been the habit of the offi 
 cers of the road, and persons connected with the corporation, to deal in 
 coupon tickets, with the full knowledge of the officers to buy and sell 
 them, and take to themselves the profits of such sales? 
 
 A. I don t know to what extent that has been carried on. 
 
 Q. Have you known of any cases ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I know exactly what you mean. 
 
 Q. Have you ever known of any of the officers buying these coupon 
 tickets, and turning them over and taking the money for them ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect. 
 
 Q. Have you done that thing ? 
 
 A. I don t think I have* but I do on some tickets from the Vermont 
 Central and Passumpsic road. They were tickets which were sold by way 
 of Lowell and went by way of Lawrence. These tickets were taken up. 
 
 Q. These were coupon tickets, were they ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What happened with regard to these tickets ? 
 
 A. These tickets were returned by the conductor. 
 
 Q. Where ? 
 
 A. And put into the record. 
 
184 
 
 Q. Where were they returned ? 
 
 A. To the general ticket office, 
 
 Q. To you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I think some of them were returned by the Nashua 
 and Lowell road, or by the Manchester and Lawrence. 
 
 Q. They came to you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. These tickets I put into the office at Manchester to be 
 sold. 
 
 Q. What became of the money ? 
 
 A. I could tell you if I could find my memorandum. My impres 
 sion is that he gave me an equal number of tickets to Boston the way 
 that they should go. 
 
 Q. Mr, Henry Hurlburt? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now did you personally realize any advantage from that transac 
 tion ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Y ou mean to say that you never put into other ticket offices, 
 tickets that have been sold and you be benefitted by that transaction ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect anything of that kind ; not on selling tickets ; 
 tickets were exchanged. Por instance, that was when the Concord and 
 Portsmouth road was in existence from Concord, that once in a while 
 there would be a person who happened to wish to change his ticket, and 
 would give up his ticket to Boston for a ticket to Portsmouth ? 
 
 Q. What did you do with that ticket ? 
 
 A. I sold it. 
 
 Q. What did you do with the money ? 
 
 A. I kept it myself. 
 
 Q. Won t you just be kind enough to repeat that ? 
 
 A. Once in a while, in the summer season, (while there is through 
 travel, of course) the passengers would come from the west with tickets 
 to Boston and wish to go to Portsmouth. I made that exchange. 
 
 Q. You took their ticket and sold it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And put the money into your pocket ? 
 
 A. Of course I had to pay for a ticket to Newmarket Junction, 
 whatever the difference was. 
 
 Q. How much was it ? 
 
 A. I think it was half a dollar at that time, or something of that 
 kind. 
 
 Q. You at that time were acting in the capacity of ticket seller at 
 the Concord station? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many such instances occurred where you have done this 
 thing, and to what extent did you traffic in that way in these tickets ? 
 
 A. I should think there was some half dozen such cases. 
 
 Q. Won t you refresh your recollection between this and the after 
 noon? 
 
 Q. Mr. Sanborn, I was inquiring of you at the time of the adjourn 
 ment as to your transactions in these coupon tickets. Let me ask you 
 now, having refreshed your recollection, if you are able to say whether 
 you have dealt in these coupon tickets from western roads, to any ex 
 tent? 
 
185 
 
 A. I do not think that I have ; I do not know that I have. I would- 
 like to make one further statement in regard to those which I spoke of. 
 I went and took my books at the depot, and I found a record of what I 
 wanted to show: three instances where I carried tickets to Mr. Hurl- 
 burt. That was by understanding. 
 
 Q. You say there were three instances where you took tickets to 
 Mr. Hurlburt at Manchester, and you took the money ? 
 
 A. The money I don t recollect about that, but my impression is 
 that I took tickets. My first impression was that I took tickets in 
 return. 
 
 Q. Will you say, Mr. Sanborn, that Mr. Hurlburt didn t pay you 
 money ? 
 
 A. No, sir; I couldn t swear now. 
 
 Q. Did you ever put these tickets into the Concord office to be sold 
 for yourself ? ,t 
 
 A. I don t recollect that I ever did. 
 
 Q. Didn t Mr. Whipple sell any of them ? 
 
 A. I don t think he did. 
 
 Q. While you were ticket-master how many did you put in ? 
 
 A. I know it was all done in one season. I think it may have been 
 half-a-dozen times. It was very seldom. It was when A. C. Pierce 
 was one of the directors of the road. People would come and want to 
 change their tickets, and I would decline to do it. Perhaps in half-a- 
 dozen instances I did so. And then there was a doubt in my mind 
 about it ; and I asked Mr. Pierce. My impression now is that Mr. Up- 
 ham was away ; and my recollection is that I asked Mr. Pierce whether 
 I had better do so, and talked the matter over ; and I don t know that 
 I ever did so afterwards. 
 
 Q. You are quite confident you have not done it since ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect. 
 
 Q. You are quite confident that you haven t done done it since Mr. 
 Pierce went out ? 
 
 A. I am not positive, because I may have forgotten. 
 
 Q. Did these coupon tickets come into your possession very often ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect except these three instances that I mentioned. 
 
 Q. Never any others ? 
 
 A. Well, I won t be positive about that. These are transactions- 
 that occurred a number of years ago. There was so many and so great 
 a variety of transactions that I cannot now remember. I remember of 
 receiving from the other road. The business was changed from the 
 Boston & Lowell to the Manchester & Lawrence, and when this happen 
 ed it caused the tickets to go a contrary way from which they were sold. 
 I could not recollect with any degree of certainty about it. 
 
 Q. What became of this accumulation of tickets ? 
 
 A. I sent them to the roads where they were. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell these tickets ? 
 
 A. No, not except those instances that I have spoken of. 
 
 Q. You spoke of instances where you sent to Manchester. How 
 many did you send the first time ? 
 
 A. The first time I sent down one hundred and seventy-one tickets. 
 
 Q. How much did you receive net yourself from the sale of that one* 
 hundred and seventy-one ? 
 
 A. I did not receive anything. 
 
 Q. Nothing at all ? 
 
186 
 
 A. So, sir; that was an open transaction which was a matter that 
 was talked up and known by the superintendent. 
 
 Q. Where is your return ? Have you any account of it ? 
 
 A. Nothing only what is on the book. This is a memorandum taken 
 off from my book, ticket-book for 1865. 
 
 Q. What is the next instance ? 
 
 A. One hundred and thirty-nine and a half. 
 
 Q. Did you realize anything from that? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you from any? 
 
 A. No, sir ; that is, I don t know why 1 should ; I have no recol 
 lection of it. 
 
 Q. Didn t you receive the difference between the cost of the tickets? 
 
 A. I don t know any further than this : it was a person who came 
 from the west, In the first place they .wanted to go to Portsmouth ; 
 and they came here and exchanged with me. The fare, I think, was 
 $1.50 to Portsmouth, and I think it was $1. 75 to Boston. That is my 
 r collection. 
 
 Q. And whatever it was you kept the difference ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. How many instances of the kind you have last described have 
 happened since your connection with the Concord Railroad ? 
 
 A. I should think there was some half a dozen ; it might be more 
 and it might be less ; there was very few instances. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman^ Did you say that was all under the direct 
 orship of one man ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. My recollection was that it was all in one season two 
 or three months, 1 think it was. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Did Mr. Gilniore know of that transaction? 
 
 A Oh, that was before he was superintendent of the road. I think. 
 
 Q. Who was superintendent ? 
 
 A. Judge l T pham. 
 
 Q. Did Judge Upham know of it ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it was talked with him after that. 
 
 Q. Before you made the sale ? 
 
 A. No. afterwards. L know J made the sales and the question came 
 up in my mind, and I asked him. 
 
 Q. Now give me the third instance. 
 
 A. One hundred and eighty-eight. 
 
 Q. Now these tickets -the 171, 13!> 1-2 and ls> were put into 
 Mr. Henry Hurlburt s hands ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I either sent them or carried them down. 
 
 Q. They were tickets to different stations on the Concord road? 
 
 A. They were either to Lawrence or Boston ; 1 think now there 
 might have been some to both. 
 
 Q. Let me ask if these tickets, the 171. the 139 1-2 and 1SS, were 
 put into your general ticket account? That is, if you charged these 
 tickets to Henry Hurlburt the same as you charged to others? 
 
 A. No ; an exchange was made. 1 think, with a separate account. 
 
 Q. Did you charge those tickets to Henry Hurlburt s office in the 
 same way as you charged the tickets to his office, ordinarily, that he 
 had? 
 
 A. I did in one sense : that is. 1 charged them to him. I don t 
 think I entered them on with the regular memorandum. That is, at 
 
187 
 
 that time he was furnished with a regular number of tickets. As I re 
 collect this, he either paid me money or tickets. My impression is that 
 it was tickets, but I am not certain. Whenever those tickets were 
 given up to me, they were offset by those. 
 
 Q. Why did you carry them to Manchester ? 
 
 A, I don t know why it was, unless because some tickets were sold 
 from that station, and they would get sooner sold from there. 
 
 Q. Who directed that way ? 
 
 A, Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Q. He knew you had those tickets ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And he directed you to carry them to Hurlburt to be sold ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Hurlburt make a return of those tickets in money or in tick 
 ets ? 
 
 A. I could not swear, but my impression is that it was in tickets, 
 but it might have been part of it in money. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state, positively, whether he made a return of 
 these tickets to you in tickets to Boston, or in other tickets, or in money? 
 
 A. My impression is that it was in tickets. 
 
 Q. Have you got any sort of account anywhere in your office to show 
 tlie returns that he made to you of these tickets v 
 
 A. Nothing but what I have got written off on my books. 
 
 Q. Did you, whenever a return was made by Mr. Hurlburt, put it 
 down as so much money received ? 
 
 A. I should do so. 
 
 Q. Can you tell any reason why you should not have made the same 
 rreturn in regard to this that you should make of the tickets together? 
 
 A. I should, I suppose ; that is, so far as the money came into my 
 liands. 
 
 Q. If you have got any return on your books that shows that it was 
 returned in money, won t you produce it 1 ? 
 
 A. I know I have not. 
 
 Q. Now, if he made that return in tickets, should you have made 
 a return showing that it was returned ? 
 
 A. No. sir ; only among collections. 
 
 Q. Not returned by the conductors ? 
 
 A. No, sir. If he gave me tickets the conductors didn t have them 
 at all. The account balanced itself when he handed these tickets to me. 
 
 Q. You made charges to him when you put these tickets into his 
 hands ? 
 
 A. I charged them unless he gave me the tickets at the time. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that you made no record of it ? 
 
 A. There would be no need of it. 
 
 Q. Supposing you put the tickets into his hands, and then received 
 something in compensation for them. Nothing appears upon your book 
 to indicate that transaction anyway ? 
 
 A. The system of selling tickets the way that we did often was 
 to charge a man for a thousand tickets. Those that he failed to pro 
 duce he was to account for and pay for. He was to report them at the 
 end of the month. If he put them in correctly, his sales and my col 
 lections would agree then. 
 
 Q. Supposing you put a dozen into Mr. Hurlburt s hands, you charged 
 liim for them? 
 
188 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then he is chargeable for the balance ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. I understand you to say that these tickets did not go into the 
 general account ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if there is any record of these New York 
 tickets ? I mean where you charge them to him, and where you credit 
 him with anything you received from him ? 
 
 A. As I said before, there is no necessity for any charge or credit. 
 
 Q. What did you do with the tickets you received from him ? 
 
 A. All the tickets were returned, I suppose. If the tickets were 
 from Manchester to Lawrence or to Boston if they were tickets from 
 Manchester to Lawrence, I will say if he gave me 171, I took these 
 tickets and put them into the drawer among the tickets that the con 
 ductors returned to me daily. At the end of the month he returned all 
 the other numbers. Now, 171 of that 500 was of that, and the con 
 ductors should make up the difference. 
 
 Q. Where did you get these ? 
 
 A. Got them from the Nashua and Lowell road. 
 
 Q. Who gave them to you ? 
 
 A. They were sent up by the general ticket agent. 
 
 Q. What kind of tickets were they ? 
 
 A. I couldn t describe them any further than that they were upper 
 road tickets. 
 
 Q. What places did they run to or from ? 
 
 A. Prom all points. 
 
 Q. Did he send them up to pay you in any way ? 
 
 A. He sent them up for us to give him credit for that number of 
 tickets from Lowell to Boston. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} How came they into his hands? 
 
 A. The tickets were sold by the way of Lawrence. When the busi 
 ness was changed over, or previous, or perhaps during that time, every 
 thing was sold that could be sold by way of Lawrence ; and for that 
 reason who would have gone by way of Lowell would get tickets the 
 other way ; and when they came to go down, they went the other way. 
 The conductors collected these tickets on the Lowell road, and returned 
 them to me to collect. 
 
 Q. The passengers who kept these coupon tickets were permitted to 
 ride either way, and the conductors took these tickets ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And they were returned by the conductors to the ticket agent at 
 Nashua or somewhere ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And that ticket agent returned them to you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. He requested us to make a transfer of our tickets to 
 Lawrence or Boston, as the case might be. They came from the Nashua 
 and Lowell road. 
 
 Q. That is, they are tickets sold over the Lawrence road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And were taken up over the Nashua and Lowell road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you gave the Nashua and Lowell people credit for the car 
 rying of the amount of these tickets ? 
 
189 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Is that the wayof.it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Haile^ And this was done for the accommodation of 
 passengers, in the first instance ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What object was there to send them to you? 
 
 A. Merely to dispose of them, and have them go where they belong. 
 The coupons belonged to the Boston & Maine road. There were a great 
 many more tickets sold there from Manchester. I don t know who made 
 that suggestion ; but either Mr. Gilrnore or some one else. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} That is, you had paid them for carrying 
 the passengers ; and, meanwhile, the other people had not carried the 
 passengers ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; but had got the money. 
 
 Q. So the object was to sell the tickets again to somebody that 
 would ride over the road, and realize the money again ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now the thing of it was that you let the Manchester agent have 
 a quantity of these tickets, and he gave you some of the tickets that 
 you had already let him have instead of them ; was that the way you 
 did business ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that would balance his account then. 
 
 Q. You took back part of the tickets you let him have to sell ; and 
 gave him these, and considered him as having so many tickets, no more 
 and no less ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And these went back into your general amount of tickets to be 
 used again? 
 
 A. JSTo, sir ; these tickets as they came back I put in with the col 
 lections. 
 
 Q. What was the object of that? 
 
 A. So as to have the calculations agree. We have always made a 
 comparison of sales and collections. 
 
 Q. Did you in that way make him pay you money for these tickets 
 and also for the ones that he had ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; he didn t pay for but one. 
 
 Q. Well, then, in point of fact, who got the money that was realized 
 in the sale of these tickets ? 
 
 A. There was no more realized by anybody, any more than what 
 should be, 
 
 Q. Well, but who got it ? 
 
 A. Each road got their proportion. For instance, if one of these 
 tickets rode from Manchester to Boston by way of Lawrence and was 
 collected by way of Lowell ; and that it was collected at Manchester, 
 Mr. Hurlburt takes that and sells it in place of one of our own tickets. 
 We have reported it, and have got our proportion of it. It merely set 
 tles the affair of the exchange of tickets. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Mr. Sanborn. you were inquired of a little 
 in regard to Colonel George s connection with this investigation. Let 
 me ask you how long Colonel George has been counsel for the Concord 
 Railroad corporation ? 
 
 A. I could not tell you ; I think he was when I came on the road. 
 
 Q. Has he been consulting counsel? 
 
190 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Has he been confidential counsel and adviser of Gilruore and Up- 
 ham for the last ten or fifteen years ? 
 
 A. I know he has been very intimate with them. 
 ^ Q. From what you have understood, and from what you have seen, 
 since you have been on the road, has he been the confidential adviser 
 of Gilniore for the last ten or fifteen years, up to the time a new clerk 
 was put on the road ? 
 
 A. 1 think that my first acquaintance with the management of that 
 direction, Gen. Pierce was a member. 
 
 Q. After Mr. Pierce left ? 
 
 A. I have no means of knowing except as I saw that intimated. 
 
 Q. From what you have seen, 1 make the inquiry, has he been the 
 confidential adviser in the law business, and a considerable portion of 
 the time the clerk ? 
 
 A. I should not want to make that statement with any degree of 
 certainty, because I do not know. 
 
 Q. So far as you know, has there been any other person who has 
 been the confidential adviser of Gilmorc, up to 1S66, except Colonel 
 George V 
 
 A. i cannot state that. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you how it has been about his being called frequently 
 to the office, from day to day and from week to week V 
 
 A. It was a very common thing for him to be sent for. 
 
 Q. Did he ever have anybody else ? 
 
 A. I think Judge Fuller was. 
 
 Q. Were these instances exceptional instances V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. So far as you know, has he attended all the directors meetings ? 
 
 A. I never was at any of the directors meetings, and 1 could not 
 say that he was ever at one of them. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether he has taken an active part in the manage 
 ment of the Concord Railroad for the last ten years V 
 
 A. I could not say as to that. 
 
 Q. Do you know what part he has taken ? 
 
 A No, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether suggestions in regard to the management 
 have come from him ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear Gilmore say anything of that kind ? 
 
 A. No ; I don t think I have. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear Gilmore say anything tending in that direc 
 tion ? 
 
 A. He might have, in some particular cases, perhaps, spoken of 
 things of which Mr. George spoke. 
 
 Q. What were such instances ? 
 
 A. I could not recollect. 
 
 Q. Has he frequently made such statements to you ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t know as he has. 
 
 Q. Hasn t he ever spoken of pieces of policy as emanating from Col. 
 George ? 
 
 A. I could not state that. 
 
 Q. You say that Mr. Gilmore at one time told you to furnish inform 
 ation to Col. George for the discovery of the alleged frauds committed. 
 by the conductors ? He at one time told you to do that, did he ? 
 
191 
 
 A. To give information ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. To furnish him all he wanted ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now you say that after that he came to you and told you not to 
 do it, unless he put it in writing ; and not to answer him unless you 
 put it in writing and furnished it to Gilmore ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did he tell you that the reason was that Col. George would get 
 you into trouble, and get them all into trouble ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect as that last was said. 
 
 Q. Have you heard him say to anybody that he wanted these things 
 down in writing, or he [George] would get you all into trouble ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect just that conversation. But when he told me, 
 he opened on Col. George and said he would get us all turned out there 
 . rip it through." 
 
 Q. Did he say that this was his scheme for getting himself in as 
 counsel for the road with Stark as manager? 
 
 A. J don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Anything like that ? 
 
 A. He said it was Col. George s scheme to get him turned off in the 
 first place, and then the rest of us afterwards. 
 
 Q. Did he state that Col. George had this in view ? 
 
 A. I dont know as he has ; but somebody has. 
 
 Q. Did he say that it was in order to root out the old superintend 
 ent for the purpose of getting himself some particular place of power on 
 the road ? 
 
 A. He may have stated that first part, but I don recollect as he did 
 the last. 
 
 Q. Will you say that Gilmore did not make that statement ? 
 
 A. No, I wouldn t say that he didn t. 
 
 Q. Will you say that at the time he asked you about having this put 
 in writing whether he stated anything else, and what it was ? 
 
 A. It was to that effect, that this was a case that Col. George in 
 stituted for the purpose of getting him out, and that we should all fol 
 low in the same category, 
 
 Q. I want you should give that conversation the substance of it. 
 
 A. The substance of it was that he wanted we should follow him ; 
 that if we wouldn t, we should all go. 
 
 Q. Did he always say to you, after that, that this was started through 
 Col. George s influence ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; after the first instance he intimated to me that that 
 was the case. 
 
 Q. Did he ever direct you to withhold a single fact, but only that 
 the fact should be in writing ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; only in that way. 
 
 Q, Only that they should be put in writing ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, Did he say you ought to do that for your own benefit and your 
 own safety? 
 
 A. I should think very likely he might. It would be very natural 
 for him to. 
 
192 
 
 Q. Now, sir, did ever you see any inclination on the part of Mr. 
 .G-ilmore to withhold from Col. George any information that he desired 
 with reference to this prosecution against the conductors ? 
 
 A. I think his general tenor indicated that he did not wish to have 
 him have information ; that is to say, to judge from his manner. 
 
 Q. I want to know if he ever told you that he wanted any informa 
 tion withheld from Col. George that he desired for the prosecution of 
 these conductors ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. 1 want to ask if you heard Col. George say, at any time, that for 
 ;fche fifteen years last past he had been engaged in covering up the frauds 
 and iniquities of the old board of directors ? 
 
 A. There was a statement made here the other day, during the re 
 cess 
 
 Q. No, sir I do not mean here. Did you attend a committee hear 
 ing before the Legislature when Col. George addressed the committee ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you attend a meeting of a legislative committee in one of 
 the committee rooms, two or three years ago where Col. George ad 
 dressed the committee ? 
 
 A. I don t think I did now ; I don t recollect now. 
 
 Q. You did not hear any statement that he made at that time ? 
 
 A. No, sir; I think not. 
 
 Q. You say there were some tickets furnished republicans and some 
 to democrats did the republicans pay for the tickets they had ? 
 
 A. A part of them I suppose they paid for. 
 
 Q. Were there not a large number of tickets used in the campaign 
 that were never paid for ? 
 
 A. They never were paid for until sometime afterwards. 
 
 Q. How many? 
 
 A, I said I could not tell ; I should think that it would run up to 
 thousands. 
 
 Q. Were there not five thousand ? 
 
 A. There might have been that. 
 
 Q. Will you say that there was not more than five thousand ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; it would not surprise me at all. 
 
 Q. How much would these amount to in dollars ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; I know I figured it up at the time. 
 
 Q. How much should you think ? 
 
 A. Between two and three thousand dollars. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Besides the five hundred and thirty-one ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether that came in or not. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You said you had no record of the number 
 of passes during the last years under the reign of the old board ; you 
 could not tell the number ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I could not tell that. 
 
 Q. You have been through with these tickets, Mr. Sanborn ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, won t you be kind enough to give us the result. I inquire 
 simply as to those which could have come into Mr. Clough s hands. 
 
 A. I gave you a minute of that the other day ; and that I haven t 
 got now. 
 
 Q Let me ask you to say as to those tickets dated after January, 
 1866; I mean those tickets which could have come into his hands in 
 the ordinarv course of business. 
 
193 
 
 A. Thirty-six, I make them, since Mr. Clough left the road. 
 Q. Let me see some that were dated before that. 
 A. There was five that were dated previous to that. 
 Q. Dated previous to January 14 ? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. There is one thing I do not understand about this 
 inquiry. Are you seeking to ascertain this before and after Mr. Clough 
 left the road ? 
 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 What day was this ? 
 January 14th, 1866. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. 
 The Chairman. 
 Mr. Mugridge. 
 A. [Beading ] : 
 1866. February 3. 
 
 6. 
 
 6. 
 
 3. 
 
 2. 
 
 2. 
 
 8. 
 
 3. 
 
 6. 
 
 3. 
 
 6. 
 
 3. 
 
 6. 
 
 6. 
 
 5. 
 
 5. 
 
 2. 
 
 6. 
 
 5. 
 
 3. 
 
 2. 
 
 9. 
 
 6. 
 
 5. 
 
 5. 
 
 5. 
 
 5. 
 
 6. 
 
 5. 
 
 5. 
 
 5. 
 
 5. 
 
 3. 
 
 3. 
 
 9. 
 
 8. 
 
 Nashua to Manchester. 
 
 n 
 
 a 
 
 n 
 
 Manchester to Nashua. 
 
 a 
 
 Nashua to Manchester. 
 
 Manchester to Nashua, 
 
 Lawrence to Concord. 
 Concord to Manchester. 
 
 Concord to Hooksett. 
 Hooksett to Manchester. 
 
 Suncook to Manchester. 
 Manchester to Concord. 
 
 Lawrence to Concord. 
 
 
 
 Concord to Hooksett. 
 
 There has two got in here by mistake ; Pecember, 1865. They should 
 have gone into the other account. There are six of this date previous. 
 I think I said five before. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Does that take off one from the other lot? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
194 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Now, do you say that all the other tickets 
 are dated before January 14th ? 
 
 A. All the others that are dated plain enough so that I can see. 
 
 Q. How many of them are there ? 
 
 A. Seven. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) Are those all the tickets that you say in 
 the course of business would have come into Mr. Clough s hands ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect the number that I said the other day. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) There are thirty-four of these tickets that 
 you have found, that you swear absolutely bear date since January, 
 1866? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, there are seven of them that you swear absolutely bear 
 date prior to that time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, take the other tickets and go through them, and state how 
 many there are that were dated before that time, and how many there 
 are that you can t give the date of? 
 
 A. That is what I want to state here. I have looked them all over. 
 I found fifty-four tickets with full dates. I find thirty-five with the 
 month on them, without stating any year. 
 
 Q. Are you able to say what year those thirty-five tickets bear 
 date in ? 
 
 A. No, sir; 1 could not. There is nothing to indicate at all. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Cushing.) Does it appear that those where the year 
 does not appear is that from a different stamp, without the year upon 
 
 A. Yes, sir. My impression is that most of them came from the 
 Montreal road, and they don t put on the year. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Whether these are precisely the same 
 kind of tickets that were being used in 1866 ? 
 
 A, I should think they were. 
 
 Q. Let me see one of them. That bears no date as to the year ? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if all these have the appearance of being new 
 tickets ? 
 
 A. I should think so. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Gushing.) Are they different from those in use in 
 1865? 
 
 A. I don t know that they have changed them at all for ten years. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) All of these came over the Boston, Con 
 cord and Montreal road, did they not ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think so ; those in that package ? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Just cards or coupons ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Will you produce a package of tickets 
 that bear date since January 14th, 1866, for the purpose of comparison ? 
 
 A. They are not like those. These are some of the Boston, Concord 
 and Montreal road. [Package shown.] 
 
 Q. Have you got coupons from the Concord and Montreal road that 
 bear date up to that time ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You have spoken of thirty-five tickets and of fifty-four tickets. 
 What do you say with regard to the others ? 
 
195 
 
 A. There was twenty that had only the year, I think, without regard 
 to the day or the month either. That is, I was not able to discover it. 
 
 Q. What was the year ? 
 
 A. Various years. 
 
 Q. What were they? 
 
 A. I should have to look them all over. 
 
 Well, look them all over. 
 
 A. I think that none of those that had only the year could have 
 come into his hands. Most of those are entirely separate from the road.. 
 
 Q. Mind you, I do not make any inquiry of any ticket that could 
 not come into his hands in the regular course of business. 
 
 A. These were all of foreign roads. 
 
 Q. And could not have come into his hands ? What was the number 
 that you arrived at ? 
 
 A. 1 made them two hundred and thirty-five. The rest had no* 
 date on them. 
 
 Q. Had no date to indicate whether they were before or after Jan 
 uary 14th, 1866? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Were these tickets coupons that you say 
 could not have come into his hands ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect how many of them could have come into his 
 hands. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Now pick out how many there are without, 
 dates that could possibly have got into his hands. How many of these , 
 do you find ? 
 
 A. One hundred and three and a half. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} That might have come into Mr. Clough s 
 hands ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} What is the half ticket? 
 
 A. A child s ticket. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} What is the appearance of these tickets ? 
 Do they appear like new or like old tickets ? 
 
 A. Most of them appear like new. There is a few that are old, Ji 
 should think ; that is, they look very much worn. 
 
 Q. Is there anything upon these tickets which indicates that they? 
 might not have been dated after January 14, 1866? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. By the Chairman. Is there anything on these numbers that; 
 take the place of the date ? 
 
 A. No sir ; that is the number of the station from where they were 
 sold. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} The only number of tickets that you are 
 able to testify to as bearing date prior to that is seven ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. In making your examination of those tickets, did you undertake 
 to ascertain how many came down from the northern roads ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How many of these one hundred and forty-three I don t in 
 quire of any other are there that might have come into Mr. dough s- 
 hands from the northern roads and branches ? 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman interrupting.) Mr. Sanborn, what do you. 
 say that means? [Indicating upon the ticket.] 
 
196 
 
 A. That is the year that it was printed. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} What is the whole number you say that 
 could have gone into his hands? 
 
 A. One hundred and forty-three, I think, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You may count them now, 
 
 A. I made them fifty- two. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You say fifty-two came over the northern 
 .roads? 
 
 A. The Northern and Claremont and the Montreal. 
 
 vQ. (By Mr. Mugridge.} The rest were over the lower roads ? 
 
 .A. Local and lower roads. 
 
 t Q. What do you mean by the lower roads ? 
 
 A. The Lowell, and the Boston and Maine. Here is one from the 
 Worcester road. 
 
 Q. Whether there are any from Lawrence to Boston ? 
 
 A. I have not reckoned those in at all, because you said not to put 
 an those. 
 
 Q. There is one question more that occurs to me. In what propor 
 tion did the soldiers increase the travel over the Concord Railroad, as 
 diearly as you can state it, sir ? 
 .A. I could not tell. 
 ,Q. What would be your idea of it ? 
 
 A. You mean the passage of the soldiers themselves, or the friends 
 t:hey brought? 
 
 Q. I will take the soldiers alone, first. 
 
 Mr. George. You mean substitutes and soldiers ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. Well, I couldn t tell. I couldn t give any sort of an idea ; be- 
 r.?ause they came from all directions. A good many came from the north 
 sias -well as the south. I could not tell you what proportion. 
 
 Q. Can t you give some sort of an estimate, Mr. Sanborn ? 
 
 A. I don t know how I could, I am sure. 
 
 Q. Was it largely increased ? 
 
 A. Certainly it was. 
 
 Q. Mr. Sanborn, were you familiar with the tickets that the western 
 itroads used to sell, where the passengers came down over the Concord 
 isroad, in 1860-1-2-3-4-5 and along there? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether they were marked upon them, "good for 
 days." 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; some of them were thirty, and then they reduced it to 
 twenty days, and fifteen, and sometimes to ten days. I guess ten days 
 ^was the lowest. 
 
 Q. Did the time range all the way from ten to thirty days that the 
 tickets were good for ? 
 
 .A. Yes, sir. 
 
 * Q. You say you think mostly they were for fifteen days ? 
 
 A4.. No, sir ; mostly above that. I think there were some of them 
 good for ten days only, but the most from fifteen above. I should say 
 that twenty days would be what my recollection would be. 
 
 Q. The average ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did any of them extend higher than thirty days ? 
 
 _A. I don t recollect. 
 
197 
 
 Q. In regard to the tickets sold over the Grand Trunk road. 
 there any limitation ? 
 
 A. There was some of these tickets that there was no limitation o 
 time upon them. 
 
 Q. Good for any time, so far as anything on the ticket shows ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You say some of these, or all, were on thc-- v 
 Grand Trunk road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think on the Grand Trunk road there was some tha *& 
 had no time at all. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Were not a great proportion ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I should think most of them were limited. 
 
 Q. I am speaking about the Grand Trunk, 
 
 A. I am not able to separate them. 
 
 Q. Do you know a portion of them were unlimited as to time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was there anything upon the tickets to prevent their transfer 
 from one person to another ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect of ever seeing that. 
 
 Q. Was there anything like this: " not transferable " ? 
 
 A. I have seen tickets of that kind ; but they were special tickets?, 
 
 Q. Was there anything that limited their use to the person who 
 bought them ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think not. 
 
 Q. What is that, sir [showing a ticket] ? Is that a coupon ticket 
 sold over the Grand Trunk road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it purports to be that. 
 
 Q. Now, so far as you have observed, is that the ticket that was 
 usually sold ? 
 
 A. I think it was on the Grand Trunk road. 
 
 Q. Now take that particular ticket and say when the date indicates 
 that that was sold ? 
 
 A. November 15th, 1865. It is not perfectly clear the year. It 
 is a half ticket. 
 
 Q. Is there anything upon that ticket which limits its use to the 
 particular person who purchased it ? Or is there anything which limits 
 its use as to time ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t see anything. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You have been asked what Mr. Gilmore has 
 said about the matter, whether I have been the confidential and legal 
 adviser. If you have any knowledge of either good or bad advice 
 yourself, I want you to state it. [Objected to and question withdrawn.}, 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} There is one matter that I want you to ex 
 plain to us. You have got here, by a paper put in by Mr. George, the- 
 number of cars that it took to accommodate the passengers that passed 
 over the road, from 1859 up to 1866. You have testified, before, that 
 the travel in 1857-8-9 was light upon the road; and that it was very 
 much increased in 1865. 
 
 A. In 1860 and 61, I think it was, according to my recollection.. 
 
 Q. Was it light in 1859? 
 
198 
 
 &.. -I don t recollect about that; I recollect it being a very common 
 ^remark in 1860. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, the travel was very essentially increased after that, 
 wasn t it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now will you be kind enough to explain to the referees how it is, 
 where the travel is so very much increased as you say it was during the 
 war that it takes only two cars still to accommodate the passengers ? 
 
 Q. The estimate I make of these cars for instance, if a car holds 
 .fifty, if it was fifty-sis passengers you want two cars, or, if it was 
 ninety-nine, you call it two cars. 
 
 Q. And if it is a hundred and four you call it three cars? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; I have in some instances. 
 
 Q. {By the, Chairman} What passengers Joes that show? Those 
 accounted for or those not accounted for ? 
 
 A. Those accounted for. That is what I designed to have. So that 
 -ninety-nine passengers would take no more curs than fifty-five. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Do you mean to say, Mr. Sanborn. that 
 there was not increase of travel enough to bring the cars up beyond the 
 general average of two, that it had required for years before to accom- 
 .modate the passengers? 
 
 A. Well, 1 thought my statement was correct here, according to 
 Vchese figures. 
 
 Q. I put this question to you : Up to the time of the war the num 
 ber of passenger cars required was two, upon the average ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. Xow I mean to ask you if you can say that the increase of travel 
 on the road was not sufficient to raise that above that general average, 
 as it existed before the war ? 
 
 A. I suppose it did not. 
 
 Q. Look and see if it did, in a single instance, save one. 
 
 A. This is per train, as I understand it. Before the war, in 1859, 
 there was three trains; while in 1864 there were five, I think four or 
 five trains. That would make a difference, wouldn t it, in the number 
 .of passengers ? 
 
 Q. You have put in here a statement that it required two cars, upon 
 the average, to accommodate the passengers over the road, up to the 
 war the passengers returned each train. Now I want you to explain 
 why it is, with the large amount of increased travel returned, that you 
 have not been able during the war to get these cars up beyond that gen- 
 . eral average of two ? 
 
 The Chairman, Do you understand that there is a large increase in 
 the amount of travel returned? 
 
 Mr. Mwgridge. Yes, sir. [Eeads from the statement to show the in 
 creased number of passengers returned,] 
 
 Q. Now we will take it here: in October, 1863, there were 21,970 
 returned, and only two cars to accommodate these passengers when it 
 was so many ; in June, 1859, 10,163, and there were only two cars. 
 
 A. Well, 1 should explain it in the way I did before. In April, 
 "1859, we ran three trains. In 1865 
 
 Q. What time in the day? 
 
 A. Half past five in the morning ; quarter past ten ; and three-thirty 
 P. M. 
 
 ,Q. Now take 1865. 
 
199 
 
 A. In 1865 we ran five trains: half past five in the morning; half 
 past seven ; quarter past ten ; three-thirty, and eight P. M. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Sanborn, take the cars which made up the three trains, 
 as run in 1859, and the cars that made up the five trains ; how many 
 more cars did you run in 1865 than you ran in 1859 ? 
 
 A. You want me to figure out the calculation ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. Take the entire number of cars run on the three trains, 
 in 1859, and the entire number of cars run on the five trains, in 1865, 
 and be prepared to tell me how many more cars you ran in a day in 
 1865 than you ran in 1859. Do you see the point? 
 
 Mr. Georye. According to that calculation ? 
 
 Mr, Mugridge. Yes, sir ; according to that calculation, 
 
 A. Do you want me to figure it out now ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir ; and we will put that in by another one. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION resumed. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Mr. Sanborn, if you ran five trains in 1865, 
 and three trains in 1859, you would run three-fifths as many in one 
 case as the other ? That is palpable ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, if you ran two cars on an average in 1859, and three trains 
 down and three up, that would make twelve cars a day ? And if you 
 ran five trains down and five up, it would be twenty, wouldn t it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) When did you commence this change from 
 three to five trains ? 
 
 A. It was gradual, sir: up to August, 1863, I think is the first one. 
 
 Q. That is 208 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. It goes from 150 to 208 ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Stanley offered in evidence the income returns of Mr. Clough for 
 the year 1868. [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I claim that the basis is what his property cost him, 
 and not its worth now. The railroad has nothing to do with what his 
 property is worth to-day. It may have something to do, perhaps, with 
 what his property cost him. And therefore his income returns do not 
 have any bearing here. 
 
 The Chairman. In that point of view, perhaps as much as could be 
 expected would be to show how much is in his hands, and leave him to 
 show how much it cost him. The referees are of the opinion that this 
 evidence is subsidiary, and would more properly come in as subsidiary 
 evidence, after the other. 
 
 Mr. George. I put it in now for the reason that we have testimony 
 that will take up the whole of the forenoon, and we wanted to put in 
 documentary evidence now. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Mr. Sanborn. you put in the average paid 
 Mr. Clough per trip, and the various changes of tariff, and the returns 
 as paid in the cars, in 1858-62; average amount per train, $2.09 (I 
 call it from the commencement of the year wherever a change is made); 
 from 1862 to 1864, $2.84 ; from 1864 to 1865, $4.13; from 1865 to 
 1866, $3.74. Let me ask you how you made that up ? 
 
 A. I took the number of trains, and who ran the train, for the day. 
 
 Q. You mean trip for the day. 
 
200 
 
 A. Yes, sir. And then the days in the year. Then I took the 
 whole amount which he returned in the year, and divided that by it. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman..) Then you got the whole number of trains 
 run in the year, and then who took each train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) And you called it a trip for a day? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) And three trains a day ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Mugridge.) And that is the basis that runs through 
 the entire calculation ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 [ELEVENTH DAT. Thursday, August 6th, 1868.] 
 
 Judge Bellows. This deposition of Mr. Colby has been examined ; 
 and we have come to the conclusion that it is admissible, and upon this 
 ground : that it furnishes evidence competent for a jury to consider 
 on the question whether Mr. Clough had not received pay for these 
 tickets. It, of course, is not conclusive in the matter, but it is evi 
 dence tending that way. Unless the referees should find, in point of 
 fact, that Mr. Colby had received pay for these, of course this could 
 not be connected. We think it is proper evidence to submit to a jury 
 as tending to show that it is not necessary that the evidence offered, in 
 order to be competent, should show an issue, but have a tendency to 
 show. It does not appear from this deposition that he did or did not 
 receive compensation for these tickets. The question is not upon that. 
 We understand that it is upon the ground that he had workmen who, 
 while this work was going on, received tickets to their homes. It is 
 not negatived in any form ; and therefore it is not in conflict with the 
 rulings that have been made before. We bave ruled heretofore that 
 where it appears that they were furnished as goods this was not evidence 
 to be received in this count for money had and received. 
 
 Mr. Stanley then read from the deposition of Mr. Colby, omitting 
 interrogatories 4, 6, 8, and 9, and cross-interrogatory 13. 
 
 Mr. Stanley then offered the deposition of Herman Straus as evi 
 dence, admissible upon two grounds: (1,) as upon the ground already 
 ruled upon, and (2,) as showing Mr. Clough s dealing in the coupons 
 of the other road. 
 
 Defendant s counsel objected to that part of the deposition relating 
 to free passes. 
 
 The chairman stated that as far as the deposition tended to show 
 that it was the practice to use the coupons referred to, it would be ad 
 missible. 
 
 Defendant s counsel stated that there was no objection upon their 
 part to that portion of the deposition. 
 
 Mr. Stanley thereupon read a portion of the deposition of Mr, Straus, 
 
 The deposition of Jacob F. Smith was offered in evidence by plain 
 tiff s counsel and read.* 
 
 * The Depositions will be found on the closing pages of this work. 
 
201 
 i 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEOKGE J. CAKNEY. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Won t you please state your residence, your 
 age, and your present occupation, Mr, Carney ? 
 
 A. Lowell, Mass. ; age, 33 ; my present occupation is treasurer s 
 clerk of the Merrimack Manufacturing Company, in Lowell. 
 
 Q. Who is the treasurer ? 
 
 A. Francis D. Crowninshield, of Boston. 
 
 Q. Where does the treasurer have his office ? 
 
 A The treasurer s office proper is at Lowell. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether you were employed at any time to make 
 an examination as to the matters of the Concord Kailroad ? If so, by 
 whom, and the circumstances under which you were employed ? 
 
 A. I was employed to make an examination by yourself and Gen. 
 Butler, associate counsel of the Concord road, in, I think, October, 1865, 
 
 Q, State who first spoke to you on the subject ? 
 
 A. Gen. Butler. 
 
 Q. State how it was. After Gen. Butler spoke to you, when did 
 you see me first ; and whether, prior to that time, you had any acquain^ 
 tance or communication with me whatever ? 
 
 A. Gen. Butler spoke to me, I think, one afternoon, about two 
 o clock, and gave me a letter to you, and I came up in the train which 
 left, I think, at six o clock, and I came directly to see you. I think I 
 saw you the same evening, and delivered my introductory letter to you. 
 I don t remember exactly the conversation, but I think you engaged 
 me to undertake an investigation, and I commenced at once. 
 
 Q. State how it was prior to that time about your having any ac 
 quaintance either with the conductors of the road or myself. 
 
 A. I think I had never seen you before. 
 
 Q. The conductors ? 
 
 A. I didn t even know them by name. 
 
 Q. Now you may state how it was with regard to your keeping a 
 journal of your transactions? 
 
 A. I did keep a memorandum of everything that I did or caused to 
 be done, I think. 
 
 Q. Will you turn to your journal, or memorandum, of November 10, 
 1865 or, first, I will ask you whether you have any recollection, apart 
 from your memorandum, so that you can testify apart from it ; and 
 whether that memorandum was made at or. about the time, and whether 
 it was true ? [Memorandum shown.] You may read the whole or a 
 portion, just as you desire. 
 
 A. [Beads,] Friday, November 10, 65. Saw Gen. Butler this- 
 morning, and, after talking with him about my business, I took the one 
 o clock to Nashua ; paid 60 cents for ticket to Nashua, At Nashua 
 took cars for Concord ; paid Clough $1.50 for ticket to Concord, and 
 he gave me no ticket." 
 
 Q. Now, November 11? 
 
 [Defendant s counsel objected to the reading of anything from the 
 memorandum except as to what the witness did.] 
 
 Q. Please read what you did. 
 
 A. [Beads.] " Saturday, Nov. 11. 1865. Took the 3.30 train from 
 Concord. Clough, conductor. Draper came down with me as far a& 
 Nashua. I paid Clough $4.25 for my fare to Boston and Draper s to> 
 Nashua." 
 
202 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You mean to say that the $4,25 covered 
 .both I 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. George. The next relates to his instructions to Draper. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That we object to. 
 
 [Witness continues to read, omitting the portion objected to.] "Clough 
 gave me a ticket to Boston which is marked No. 6, issued by stamp in 
 ink on the back, at, I believe, East Concord, on Oct, 2, -86-." 
 
 Q. Is that the ticket ? 
 
 A. That is the ticket. 
 
 Q. What is the endorsement on that ticket ? 
 
 A. "Nov. 11, 1865. No. 6. G. J. C." 
 
 Q. Is that the only ticket you were given from East Concord to 
 Boston? 
 
 A. Y"es, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, you may turn to November 14th. 
 
 [Objected to on the ground that the conversation in the memorandum 
 was between the parties.] 
 
 Q. Go on and read the last part of November llth. I thought it 
 was November 14th. 
 
 A. Reads.] " At Manchester, or below it, rather, Clough came 
 around for the tickets. Two men behind me had tickets which Clough 
 told them were good only on the freight trains, and therefore he wanted 
 fare from them." 
 
 Q. Do you know whether the next remarlf was made in presence of 
 Mr. Clough? 
 
 A. I think it was not. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect the fare paid between them between what 
 points ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection at all. 
 
 Q. Do you know how far they rode ? 
 
 A. No, I don t know at all, unless there is something here about it. 
 I should trust entirely to this, and not to my memory. 
 
 Q. Won t you see if there is anything there that shows how far 
 they rode ? Read the whole. 
 
 A. I don t know how far they rode ; but I have a minute here which 
 says. I can state that I overheard one of the men state what he paid ; 
 and I made a minute of it at the time. 
 
 Q. Won t you go on and- say what you were going to say, without 
 developing the fact you were going to allude to? 
 
 A. Shall I be allowed to state the facts as they are here ? 
 
 Q. Any conversation not in the presence of Mr. Clough you will not 
 state. 
 
 A. [Reads.] " There were men behind me of whom Clough wanted 
 fare, and one of the men stated, after Clough had passed, what he had 
 asked, Whether they paid it or not, of course I could not tell." 
 
 The Chairman. Have you any recollection of noticing when they 
 left the cars? 
 
 A. I have no notice, I merely heard the remark. I did not see the 
 fare paid. 
 
 Q. Now you may take the next. 
 
 A. [Reads.] "Clough also collected the fare from a gentleman 
 with a small reticule or leather bag slung over his shoulder. This per 
 son was on the train from Manchester to Nashua, and here I left the 
 
203 
 
 train to give Draper some directions, and then entered another car, 
 Gave Draper some directions. The two men above mentioned were 
 aboard i.n the cars at Concord when 1 got aboard. Mr. Clough gave me 
 no check for Draper to Nashua." 
 
 Q. Now you may turn to the 14th Tuesday, November 14th. 
 
 [Defendant s counsel objected to testimony in regard to any collusion 
 between Mr. Kendrick and Mr. Clough.] 
 
 The Chairman. We think that the point is well taken here ; that 
 this evidence as we understand it does not tend to show any money in 
 the hands of Mr. Clough. Even if it did tend to show irregularity, it 
 does not tend to show that he got any money by it ; and therefore that 
 testimony is, we think, incompetent on that ground. 
 
 [Plaintiif s counsel submitted in writing what the evidence was which 
 was offered.] 
 
 The Chairman. We consider that the testimony proposed here is in 
 admissible, as it does not show that any of the money was received by 
 Mr. Clough. The proposition is to show that Mr. Kendrick, after seven 
 dollars issued, issued to Major Carney four tickets used by Mr. Clough, 
 and thereby the Concord road was defrauded to that extent. But there 
 is no evidence to show that any of that money went into the hands of 
 Mr. Clough. We are inclined, now, without absolutely ruling out the 
 testimony, to hold that there shall be some evidence tending to show 
 that Mr. Clough and Mr. Kendrick divided the proceeds in this matter 
 in some way some evidence tending to show that Mr, Clough had some 
 pecuniary benefit from it before putting in the other evidence. It is 
 a mere matter, I suppose, in the discretion of the court, the order in 
 which the evidence should go in. 
 
 Mr. George. There is no other evidence except as to the circum 
 stances under which the transaction occurred. We propose to show that 
 Mr. Carney came up on Mr. Keridrick s trains ; he ran trains from 
 Portsmouth ; that he purchased of him four fares, and paid him seven 
 dollars, which was a dollar short of the regular fare made a * knock 
 down" of a dollar; (that is, instead of taking the regular amount, he 
 charged him seven dollars instead of eight ; ) that he then gave him 
 these irregular tickets ; that then Mr. Carney was in the ears of the 
 Portsmouth road, separated by a baggage car ; and that Mr, Clough 
 came in at Manchester and took up these irregular tickets which he had 
 no right to do, from the circumstances of the case ; and that the road 
 was defrauded out of seven dollars. 
 
 The Chairman. If I understand you right that is the substance of 
 the evidence ? 
 
 Mr. George. That is the substance of the evidence. 
 
 The Chairman. I believe we are all of the opinion that the testi 
 mony, being substantially what you state, is not competent. It does 
 not tend to show money into the hands of Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Well, now ; the 14th, the same day ; you may 
 go on. 
 
 A. This afternoon, the 14th, I took the 3.30 train for Nashua; 
 and had only three men with me ; but intended at first to give to 
 Clough [Objected to ; and objection withdrawn.] 
 
 Q. You may go on and read the whole. 
 
 A. I intended, at first, to give to Clough just seven dollars and a 
 half, the fare of us to Nashua 3, and to Boston 1, thus: 3 at $1.50 
 $4.50; 1 at $3.00 making $7.50. But as there were a number of 
 
204 
 
 soldiers aboard, I determined to try a little game of my own ; and ac 
 cordingly, when Clough came around, I told him I wanted to pay for 
 six to Nashua and one to Boston, thinking, that if required to identify 
 my men, 1 could do so for three of them, but hoped to allay suspicion, 
 by stating that very possibly they went down to Lawrence by mistake, 
 I gave into George Clough s hand, thirteen dollars one ten dollar, one 
 two and one one dollar bill ; thirteen dollars total. After we left Man 
 chester, he came along and asked how many I paid for. I answered 
 six. He then said he would be back to see me soon, and I became very 
 nervous. I took a book, to appear unconcerned ; and Clough passed me 
 twice, whether for scrutiny or not, I know not. Then he approached 
 me from behind and thrust something into my hand, and immediately 
 went back. On examination it proved to be fifty-five cents. He made 
 no remark, and I supposed he intended it as a present. Not being a 
 multiple of six or seven, I am not able to state how he arrived at this 
 result. Clough gave me a ticket for Boston which is marked "No. 7." 
 The fifty-five cents I have retained, and may be found in envelope 
 marked 55 cents, in figures, [Ticket shown.] 
 
 Mr. George. It is marked, "No. 7, November 14, 1865, from Con 
 cord, Manchester and Lawrence road check ; tickets are sold ten cents 
 cheaper at the office than in the cars ; passengers are requested to keep 
 their tickets in sight. G-, G. Sanborn, T. M." It is punched througb 
 the word Manchester. 
 
 The Chairman. Is there any objection to the reception of evidence- 
 that Major Carney delivered to Mr. Clough any of these tickets that we 
 talked about this forenoon, You remember, Mr. Mugridge, that Major 
 Carney has testified to having obtained some tickets from Mr. Kendrick ; 
 and the question was as to the admissibility of that testimony ; and 
 after Col. George stated here what he proposed to offer, he has finally 
 reduced it to writing. It is a simple statement of what he proposes to- 
 prove by Major Carney ; and one part of it is what you, I suppose, un 
 derstood, that Major Carney had four tickets on which he rode from 
 Manchester to Concord ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I did not know of that fact before. 
 
 The Chairman. I want to know if that is not true, that he had these 
 tickets and rode on them to Concord, and gave them to Mr. Clough ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. No. 
 
 The Chairman. The other I don t think can be admitted unless by 
 showing that here was a fraudulent irregularity of which Mr. Clougla 
 was knowing. 
 
 Mr. George. We can only show it by the circumstances of that case. 
 We have no further testimony. 
 
 The Chairman. Simply offered by itself, I think that must be the 
 ruling. 
 
 The ruling was excepted to by plaintiff s counsel. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Describe the tickets. 
 
 A. First, a ticket with a pentagonal, five sided punched hole in it r 
 purporting to be to Sanbornton Bridge from Lowell, signed in printing, 
 "B. F. Kendrick"; large figure 2 on the left end. Second, a yellow 
 ticket, C. M. & L. R. R., Lowell to Concord, 1864; punch stamp like a 
 horse shoe, thus [indicating] ; inked stamp on back, May 20, 1865, C. 
 M. & L. R R. Third, green ticket on one side, white on the other ; to> 
 Concord ; horse shoe stamp. Fourth, white on one side, red on the 
 other ; issued by Boston and Maine ; no punch and no ink stamp. 
 
205 . 
 
 Q. Have you any recollection or record with regard to between 
 what stations that was ? 
 
 A. No. These tickets I gave personally into the hands of George 
 lough, conductor from Manchester to Concord, and he made no objection 
 nor remark. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you, simply, when you rode from Portsmouth to 
 Concord, what train was it ? 
 
 A. The first train from Portsmouth ; 5.30 A. M. train from Ports 
 mouth. Saturday, November 25th, took 3.30 train for Lowell ; paid 
 Clough $1.60; Batchelder on the same train ; see his report of to-day. 
 Draper paid to 
 
 ^Objected to unless witness saw Mr. Draper pay.] 
 
 Q. Have you any recollection apart from what is on your minutes 
 .at all ? 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q. Won t you state what you wanted to state in regard to that ; 
 what the fact is ? 
 
 A. The fact is, I cannot remember whether I saw Draper pay or not, 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Are you able to state that you did or did 
 aot make a record from your personal knowledge of the fact ? 
 
 A. I cannot say, because I do not remember. I may have seen him 
 pay, but I don t remember. 
 
 Certainly that is not within the rule ; not that part of it. [Ruled out.] 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) I want you to take your report of Novem 
 ber 24, 1865. 
 
 A. " Took 10.15 train for Boston. Paid Clough $1.60 to Nashua." 
 
 Q. Now, sir, I want to commence right here, and take Mr. Clough s 
 way-bills. On the 10 15 train you paid George Clough a fare to 
 Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. He has returned three, has he not ? 
 
 A. I suppose that is what he means. 
 
 The Chairman. That is November 24 ? 
 
 Mr. Mugrigde. The same day All my inquiries will relate to this 
 now. 
 
 Q. I will ask you next as to November 25th, on Saturday. You 
 paid Mr. Clough one fare to Nashua, $1.60, on that day. Now will you 
 be kind enough to take the way-bill for November 25th, on the 3.30 
 -train, and see if there is a fare returned to Nashua ? 
 
 A. I think there are five returned. 
 
 Q. The last one you paid was under date of Nov. 14. You say you 
 |>aid to him six fares to Nashua and one to Boston that day, on the 3.30 
 train ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, take the way-bill of Nov. 14, the 3.30 train, and see if 
 he has returned any fares ro Nashua and Boston ; and, if so, how many ? 
 
 A. Nashua, there appears to be ten ; Boston, via Lowell, two. 
 
 Q. The next paid before that was on November 1 1th, Saturday, on 
 the 3. 30 train. You say you paid Mr. Clough $4.25 for your fare to 
 Boston and Draper to Nashua ; that is, one ticket to Boston and one to 
 Nashua. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
206 
 
 Q. Now, sir, I will pass you the way-bill of George Clough, on the 
 3.30 train, and ask you if he has made any return of fares to Nashua 
 and to Boston ? 
 
 A. There appears to be three to Nashua and one to Boston, via 
 Lowell. 
 
 Q. The first one that you presented was dated November 10, on 
 Friday. " Saw Gen. Butler this morning, and after talking with him 
 about my business, took one o clock train for Nashua ; paid sixty cents- 
 for ticket to Nashua." You paid that on the Nashua and Lowell road, 
 didn t you ? That wouldn t be returned to Concord ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. " At Nashua I took the cars to Concord ; paid Clough $1.50 for 
 a ticket to Concord, and he gave me no ticket." That is under date of 
 November 10th. Now, sir, look at the 10.15 train of Mr. Clough s re 
 turns, and see whether he has returned any fare from Nashua or not? 
 
 A. There appears to be two between Nashua and Concord. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, I want to ask you how many men were in your employ 
 to conduct this system of espionage that you carried on against the con 
 ductors of the railroad ? 
 
 A. I had Mr. Draper, a man named King, a man named Vally, DT, 
 Carney, and others ; although they are not under pay. 
 
 Q. Is Dr. Carney your brother ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. He lives in Boston ? 
 
 A. In Boston. 
 
 Q. How many physicians did he have with him ? 
 
 A. I can tell by looking at his report. 
 
 Q. Won t you be kind enough to tell how many he had, who were 
 not under pay as you say? Haven t you the facts in your mind with 
 out looking your documents all over? Do you know whether he had 
 one or fifty ? 
 
 A. I know he had one ; I think he had two or three more. 
 
 The Cfiairman. I understood the witness to state that by looking at 
 the report he can refresh his memory. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea, sir, outside of your report ? 
 
 A. I have not. I purchased tickets for five persons [looking at 
 report] [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. What does it state ? 
 
 A. It does not say. 
 
 Q. Then your report comes to nothing ? 
 
 A. I don t know, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you see anything there that indicates the names of the men ? 
 
 A. It shows the purchase of tickets for the five persons ; that is all. 
 
 Q. You are the man that this matter was entrusted to ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who employed your services in this direction ? 
 
 A. Colonel George and General Butler. 
 
 Q. Was it one or both ? 
 
 A. I suppose they were together. 
 
 Q. Were they together at the time they employed your services ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now who was the man who contracted with you ? Col. George 
 or Gen. Butler ? 
 
 A. I should think Col. George more than Gen. Butler. 
 
207 
 
 Q. Did General Butler employ you a little ? 
 
 A. I don t know what you mean. 
 
 Q. What do you mean, that Col. George employed you rather more ? 
 
 A. I think, the matter was placed in Gen. Butler s hands to deter 
 mine ; and after that he gave me his note to Col. George. 
 
 Q. Who was the man who employed you to carry on these opera 
 tions ? Col. George or Gen. Butler ? 
 
 A. Col. George, I think. 
 
 Q. Altogether, didn t he ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say certain. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you what compensation you were to receive and 
 were promised for these operations that you were to carry on ? 
 
 A. I was promised no definite sum. 
 
 Q. Will you state what inducements, in the line of compensation, 
 were held out to you by the person who employed you, as consideration 
 for your services ? 
 
 A. I think no inducement was held out at at all. I was told that if 
 
 I came up here 1 think the conversation was with Gen. Butler that 
 
 afternoon before I came ; I asked him what would be a fair price to 
 charge, if I came up and was engaged by the road, and was not suc 
 cessful at-all, basing it upon the fact that I might be engaged in the 
 investigation two months ; and I think he said it would be about five 
 hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. I want to know if you made up your mind, before commencing, 
 as to what your pay ought to be ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you stated that you had made up your mind to charge 
 twenty-five thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. Not that I remember. 
 
 Q. I want to know if you have stated anywhere, that since you got 
 through with the operation you have concluded what your compensation 
 would be ; and that it would be a sum from twenty to twenty-five 
 thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. I have not said it in those words. 
 
 Q. What have you stated ? 
 
 A. I have stated I was told, I think, by Col. George, that the 
 revenues of the road were increased fifty thousand dollars a year by my 
 services. I took the first ten years of the benefit that would accrue to 
 the road, and cast upon that five per cent., which would be a proper 
 commission. 
 
 Q. How much would that be ? 
 
 A. That would be twenty-five thousand dollars. I think I stated 
 that I did not think that it would be fair to claim that I had a life lien. 
 
 Q. You say you reckoned five per cent, on that as a fair commis 
 sion ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That would amount to twenty-five thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now you say you made up your mind that you ought to receive 
 a commission on the revenue how long ? 
 
 A. I didn t make up my mind that I should; I think I was told so 
 by Gen. Butler. 
 
 Q. For how long a time did he tell you ? 
 
 A. He didn t limit it at all. 
 
208 
 
 Q. Have you limited it at all, as being your own idea of propriety 
 in the matter? 
 
 A. No more than what I have told you. 
 
 Q. You have given a deposition in this case ? 
 
 A. Part of two. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if you have stated anywhere as to the length 
 *>f time that you ought to have twenty-five thousand dollars a year, for 
 .services rendered by you in your system of espionage ? 
 
 A. No, sir; I think I never have made any such statement. 
 
 Q. Are you confident? 
 
 A. I don t remember any such statement. 
 
 Q. Have you stated what, in the aggregate, would be a fair sum to 
 compensate you ? 
 
 A. I think I have expressed an opinion that twenty-five thousand 
 dollars would be satisfactory. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you regard twenty-five thousand dollars, to 
 day, to be a fair compensation for your services ? 
 
 A. I should decline to answer the question, because that would 
 bring up what my services were. 
 
 Q. What is your idea on that subject? 
 
 A. My idea is that if I was offered twenty-four thousand nine hun 
 dred and ninety-nine dollars, I should not take it. 
 
 Q. Do you make a claim against the Concord Kailroad for the ser 
 vices rendered by you and for your operations against the conductors? 
 
 A. I have not decided what to do. I should take the advice of 
 counsel for the road Col. George and Gen. Butler. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if you do not mean to say here that, in your 
 judgment, a fair compensation for the services rendered by you to the 
 Concord Railroad, would be twenty. five thousand dollars ; and if it-is 
 not your present intention to claim that? 
 
 A. In my opinion, twenty-five thousand dollars would be a fair com^ 
 pensation. 
 
 Q. And isn t it your present intention to claim that sum ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I may increase it, or may decrease it. 
 
 Q. It is your present intention to present a claim for twenty-five 
 thousand dollars? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; at this minute. 
 
 Q. How long were you employed in this system of espionage ? 
 
 A. About six weeks. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you have already presented a bill for services ; 
 and if so, what is the amount of that bill ? 
 
 A- I think they have a bill from me for two thousand dollars ? 
 
 Q. When was that bill presented? 
 
 A. That I don t know. 
 
 Q. Shortly after you rendered your services ? 
 
 A. I think so ; I don t know. 
 
 Q. Has that bill been paid, sir? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Now will you be kind enough to state any reason that you have 
 assigned why that bill has not been paid by the Concord Railroad ? If 
 you have assigned a reason, what reason have you assigned ? 
 
 A. The only reason I have assigned, was one given me by Mr. Weld, 
 who said that the directors would decline to do anything with any claim 
 that I might have, until after I had given my testimony. 
 
209 
 
 Q. Did you ever say that a bill had been presented to the Concord 
 Bailroad; that they never objected to it; but that they thought it bet 
 ter for you to appear here unrewarded ; that your testimony would then 
 carry more weight ? 
 
 A. I think, as a matter of recollection, that your words express the 
 idea of the matter. I do not recollect exactly that I ever made such a 
 statement ; that is, exactly as you express it. 
 Q. How did you express it ? 
 
 A. That I don t remember. I think it is somewhere in one of my 
 depositions. 
 
 Q. Have you testified substantially to this ? Will you look at your 
 .deposition and see ? 
 A. Here it is ; 117. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you one thing. When this deposition was taken, 
 did you take every single question down, and then did you write your 
 answer down, and read it off, before the magistrate wrote it down? 
 A. I think I did. 
 
 Q. And then, after having done that, the magistrate wrote it down ? 
 A, I don t know ; my impression is that I did do so ; although pro 
 bably some of them wrote while I wrote. 
 
 INT. Do you know that a committee has been appointed by 
 the board of directors to consider the justice of your claim, and have 
 reported, upon advice of counsel, that it is very much too large a sum 
 for the services rendered ? ANS. No, sir ; I do not. 
 
 INT. Have you rendered an account for your services as detective ? 
 ANS. Yes. 
 
 INT. Has it been paid ? ANS. It has not. 
 INT, Has any part of it been paid ? ANS. No. 
 INT. Do you know why ? ANS. My impression is that the directors 
 think my evidence would go further with a jury if I went into court 
 unrewarded. 
 
 Mr. Mvgridge. I want it distinctly understood that I do not put in 
 this deposition at all. 
 
 Q. And the reason, as you understand it, that your bill is not paid, 
 is that the directors have an impression that you would stand better 
 unrewarded ? 
 
 A. That is the impression that I have. I don t recollect where I 
 obtained it. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect whether Gen. Butler ever made that suggestion 
 to you V 
 
 A. That I could not say. 
 
 Q. Have you had any conversation with him as to whether you 
 would stand better ? 
 
 A. That I do not remember. 
 
 Q. Have you and the general had frequent conversations as to your 
 compensation, and what he thought would be proper and just in regard 
 . to the matter ? 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you have got a pass on the Concord road ? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long have you rode on a free pass over the Concord road ? 
 A. Whenever I came to Concord, since early in 1866. I won t say 
 all the time, because when I had that deposition I think I paid fare to 
 come up. 
 
210 
 
 Q. You stated that it was jour present intention to charge the Con 
 cord Railroad twenty-five thousand dollars for services rendered. When 
 you went into this matter, was your compensation regulated or fixed in 
 any way by the amount that you should discover as the peculations of 
 the conductors ? 
 
 A. My idea was that the amount of compensation that I should re 
 ceive would be regulated to a certain extent by the benefit received, as 
 it might be shown by a tabular statement. I think Col. George has 
 stated to me, in general terms, I should say, at least half-a-dozen times, 
 that he had purposely abstained from mentioning any amount. 
 
 Q. Did you call it that you were entitled to a good round sum ? 
 
 A. I should say so. He never indicated any sum. 
 
 Q. He has heard you state before this, at the time you gave your 
 deposition, that twenty-five thousand dollars was your price ? 
 
 A. I never stated that it was my price. 
 
 Q. Did he ever indicate to you, after that, that it was too much ? 
 
 A. He never indicated any idea about any specified sum. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, your idea is this : if you were an instrument in discov 
 ering half a million dollars of frauds, you would receive more money 
 than if you had not discovered more than ten thousand dollars worth ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is my impression. 
 
 Q. That is the way you went into it ? 
 
 A. I think I have stated in my deposition somewhere that I should 
 receive a given sum whatever was the result of the suit. 
 
 Q. But you expected to receive more if you discovered large frauds? 
 
 A. The greater the result, the greater the reward. 
 
 Q. If you detected half a million, and the road saved that amount, 
 your idea was that you would receive more than if you detected only 
 ten thousand dollars worth ? 
 
 A. Perhaps I don t make myself fully understood. I have stated in 
 one of my depositions that the amount of compensation did not depend 
 upon whatever might be recovered from the conductors, but it would 
 depend in a great measure upon what might be deemed to be the benefit 
 coming to the road. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt, sir, but what you will receive the sum of 
 twenty-five thousand dollars, if this suit is decided in favor of the road? 
 
 A. I do not know ; I wish I could tell you. 
 
 Q. Have you ever made a statement on that subject? Has that 
 question been put to you, and have you made a reply to it ? 
 
 A. I think not ; not a definite question and answer. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if this question was put " Have you any doubt 
 but that you will receive said amount twenty-five thousand dollars 
 provided said suits are successfully prosecuted by the Concord Kail- 
 road?" And was your reply "I think I shall obtain this amount 
 whether it is decided in favor of the road or not?" 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think I stated somewhere that I did not mean to 
 charge any specific sum ; because I did not know what to charge. 
 
 Q. Did you make that specific answer ? 
 
 A. I did; yes, sir. But I would not be understood as confining 
 myself to twenty-five thousand or two hundred and fifty thousand dol 
 lars ; because that is a matter that you will have to settle for me at 
 some other time. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you have a direct pecuniary interest in the 
 result of the suit of the Concord Railroad against George Clough ? 
 
211 
 
 A. I think I have a pecuniary interest. 
 
 Q. A direct pecuniary interest in -the result of the suit? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; that is, George Clough s suit and all the suits; hi 
 proportion of the whole of them. 
 
 Q. Have you not a direct pecuniary interest that the verdict in the 
 suit against George Clough shall be swelled to as large an amount as 
 possible? 
 
 A. I think I am disinterested in that. 
 
 Q. Has that question been asked you ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Will you turn to your deposition, interrogatory 62, and read the 
 question and answer? 
 
 A. [Heading.] " Have you not a direct pecuniary interest that the 
 verdict in the suit against him shall be swelled as large as possible ? 
 A. 1 believe [ have." That was merely my opinion then; and that 
 has changed. 
 
 Q. But your opinion has changed ? 
 
 A As the question comes to me now ; as my thoughts come to me. 
 
 Q. Was it your opinion then, when the question was asked ? Was- 
 that your opinion ? 
 
 A. That was my answer then. 
 
 Witness. I should like to ask the referees whether I have not the 
 right to amend my answers so that the deposition shall be a whole one.. 
 Neither of the depositions have been signed or finished. 
 
 The Chairman. I should understand this : that in this cross-exam 
 ination the counsel have a right to ask you if at any other time you 
 have made certain statements ; and I suppose that you are to answer 
 whether you made these statements or not ; and I suppose, also, that 
 you have a right to make any explanation that you see fit to make. 
 
 Q. I put you this question. Have you not the motive of a direct 
 personal pecuniary interest to do all you can toward the procurement of 
 a large verdict against George Clough, in this suit ? Will you answer 
 that question without referring to your minutes ? 
 
 A. I don t think I have. I think the amount to be recovered from 
 Mr. Clough I am disinterested about. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, when you gave your deposition was that same question 
 put to you ? You may look now at your deposition, interrogatory 63 r 
 and read the question and the answer to it. 
 
 A. [Beading.] " Have you not the motive of a direct personal pe 
 cuniary interest to do all you can towards the procurement of a large 
 verdict against George Clough, in this suit? A. I believe I have." 
 
 Q. That was the answer given by you at that time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I have the word "additional" added on my notes. 
 I read this deposition after I got back to Lowell ; and I put on the word 
 " additional." 
 
 Q. Have you not, from the , moment you set out as a detective, per 
 formed your duty and rendered the services you have rendered, under 
 the stimulus of a direct personal interest in all you have done ? 
 
 A. My opinion now would be that I had done so. I don t know 
 how I answered then. 
 
 Q. Have you done any act, or made any movement, for the discovery 
 of the alleged frauds upon the part of the conductors, that has not been 
 done and made by you under the stimulus of a direct personal and pe 
 cuniary interest? 
 
212 
 
 A. I think everything I have done has been done with the hope of 
 reward. 
 
 Q. Have you done any act for the discovery of the alleged frauds 
 that has not been done by you under the stimulus of a direct personal, 
 pecuniary interest ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think every act that I have done has been done for 
 the purpose of obtaining the pay for it. 
 
 Q. And under that stimulus ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; daily bread. 
 
 Q. Do you know, or have you understood by conversation with the 
 officers of the road, that you were the principal witness relied upon in 
 the suit against George Clough ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. Do you know, or have you been informed by the officers of the 
 road, that without your testimony they had no suit against George 
 Clough ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I propose to show the inducements that were made, 
 and the understanding he has had as to the importance of his testi 
 mony, and the inducements under which he testifies in giving that tes 
 timony. 
 
 The Chairman. It does not appear to me that, at this time, the 
 plaintiif can be bound here by anything so general as a statement of 
 the officers of the road. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It is showing the motive ; it is not to bind the offi 
 cers of the road. 
 
 The Chairman. We think that, in a general way, he may be asked 
 if he understood that he was a material and important witness. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.^ 1 desire to put this question: Have you 
 ever been informed by the officers of the road, or any of them, and if so, 
 by whom, that your testimony would be very material to them in the 
 trial of this case, and that without it they have no case against George 
 Clough 1 ? And is that your present understanding ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. George. The objection is, that supposing the officers of the road 
 did or did not say so, it is an entirely immaterial matter. It is put in 
 here for a purpose ; and I suggest that it is not competent for any pur 
 pose. All the purpose with which it is offered is to get a confession 
 from the officers of the road, who cannot make a confession for the road. 
 
 Mr, Mugridge. All I have to say is, that may be true or it may not 
 be true. There is a strong inducement for him to come into court. And 
 I have to say that there is a very strong inducement, as is apparent 
 from his own testimony, for a man to make up a record. But suppos 
 ing it was made three years ago, he gives his testimony as of to-day ; 
 and it is to be considered a record as of to-day. And we say it is 
 proper for us to show all the interests which surround the witness at 
 the time he gives his testimony. 
 
 The Chairman. I do not think the question is admissible quite in 
 this general form. We suppose that if any of the managing agents of 
 the road have made any statements from which the witness could infer 
 the great importance of his testimony, he might presume upon the stand 
 to know about the situation of the case that might be put in. We do 
 not think that generally the question can be put as to whether any of 
 the officers people who might or might not have anything to do with a 
 competent cause stated to him as to the importance of his testimony. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Is it your present understanding, and has 
 it been, that without your testimony the Concord road have got no case 
 here against Mr. Clough? 
 
213 
 
 A. I think now it would be my impression that they have a case 
 against him. 
 
 Q. How did you testify as to that when you gave your deposition ? 
 Look at interrogatory 67. 
 
 A. Because I supposed when I made my report that that was all the 
 evidence. I am no lawyer. 
 
 Q. Your understanding is that now they have a case ? Now I want 
 you to read that interrogatory 67. 
 
 A. [Reading.] "Have you been informed by them that without 
 your testimony they have no case against the conductors or either of 
 them ? And is that your understanding ? " 
 
 Mr. George. I understand that the question of the deposition has 
 now been ruled incompetent. Now they propose to show what answer 
 he gave to an incompetent question ; and put that in. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The question is made up of two parts ; first, as to 
 what the officers of the road informed him, and second, as to his under 
 standing. I do not propose to put in the first part. 
 
 Q. Read the interrogatory and answer. 
 
 A. [Reading.] " Have you been informed by them that without 
 your testimony they have no case against the conductors, or either of 
 them? A. I have not been so informed; and I believe, myself, that 
 without my testimony and evidence there will be no case." 
 
 Q. Have you ever been informed by the officers of the road, its 
 managing agents, in relation to these suits, that your testimony was of 
 a very material character in relation to them ? 
 
 A. I cannot say that they have informed me so. I have believed 
 so. I believe that no one has ever expressed the opinion. 
 
 Q. Any of the managing agents of the road ? Have the attorneys 
 of the road? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q, You say they have not, or either of them ? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. Has not Gen. Butler told you so ? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. But it has been your impression? Did you testify, when you 
 gave your deposition, that you believed yourself that, without your tes 
 timony in evidence, there would be no case against the conductors ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you testify to that ? 
 
 A. Y^es, sir ; I supposed then that my record was evidence. 
 
 Q. Do you understand and know that upon your testimony made in 
 this case, depends the fact as to whether you receive or do not receive 
 a considerable sum of money ? 
 
 A. I think it does not depend on my testimony. That is, you are 
 asking my present opinion ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. Do you understand and know that upon your testimony 
 given in this case, depends the fact as to whether you receive or do -not 
 receive a considerable sum of money ? 
 
 A. Well, I understand that what I believed to be testimony and 
 evidence cannot be used by me ; and that the result of the case depends 
 upon whether witnesses will be brought in to substantiate what I have 
 here ; and that upon them depends the result of this suit. I do not be 
 lieve that what I shall get from the road depends upon the result of it 
 
214 
 
 Q. Will you answer my question now ? Do you understand and 
 know that upon your testimony in this case depends the fact as to 
 whether you receive or do not receive a considerable sum of money ? 
 
 Mr. George. I think the witness first answer was a proper and di 
 rect one. And I submit to the referees that the counsel has no right to 
 ^direct the witness how he shall answer ; and if he shall answer properly, 
 he shall not dictate any particular manner. 
 
 The Chairman. 1 think the court generally holds that if a question 
 is put in a form such as to require yes or no for an answer, he must an 
 swer yes or no ; but he may put in an explanation. 
 
 Q. Now I mean to put this question : Do you understand and know 
 ~that upon your testimony given in this case, depeii ls the fact as to 
 -whether you receive or do not receive a considerable amount of money ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; 1 do not believe it does. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, was this question put to you in your deposition, and 
 did you make this answer to it: " Do you understand that upon your 
 testimony given in this case depends the fact as to whether you receive 
 or do not receive a considerable sum of money? A. Yes, sir." 
 
 A. If this case should fall through, I should say the evidence in 
 my possession, in any suit, that there might a case be brought against 
 ?the Ooncord Railroad for services rendered. 
 
 Q. So far as you know or understand, in all your operations as de 
 tective, and, further, in this case, are you not subject to the same feel 
 ings and interests and biases of a party who has a direct personal, pe 
 cuniary interest in the suit ? 
 
 A. I am. 
 
 Q. Have you not a strong personal feeling that the plaintiff should 
 prevail in this suit? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are not your feelings and your actions influenced by your desire, 
 to a certain extent ? 
 
 A. Undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt that your conduct and operations heretofore, 
 in connection with this case, may have been influenced to a certain ex- 
 .tent by such a desire ? 
 
 A. I have no doubt of it. 
 
 -Q. But what they may have been ? 
 
 A. No. sir. 
 
 Q. Do you regard yourself, in your actions in this case, as in the 
 attitude of a disinterested person ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} In putting down your account here of the 
 transactions of Tuesday, November 14th. you got something like this as 
 I have taken it down: "After we left Manchester, he came along and 
 asked how many I had paid for." Then you go on and tell him how 
 many you had paid for. " Clough soon came back to me, and I became 
 very nervous, and took up a book to appear unconcerned ; and Clough 
 passed me twice ; whether for scrutiny or not, I know not ; then he 
 thrust something into my hand from the back ; on examination it proved 
 to be fifty-five cents ; he made no remark, and I supposed he intended 
 it as a present, not being a multiple of six or seven." Now, sir, you 
 say here, and swear that you supposed Mr. Clough intended the fifty- 
 five cents as a present to you ? 
 
215 
 
 A. Yes, air; I was under a misapprehension then as to the amount. 
 My examination of the latter part of this testimony shows that this is 
 exactly the right amount that he should have returned. 
 
 Q. What do you mean, sir, by recording there in that report and 
 swearing to the fact that at that time you thought that Mr. Clough gave 
 you fifty-five cents as a present? 
 
 A. Because, as I recollect it, my impression is that the price he 
 should have given me was not the correct amount, until Mr. Sanborn 
 had given me some information. I found after writing that down that 
 Mr. Clough had made the right amount. 
 
 Q. Why didn t you, when you put in your testimony, make this ex 
 planation ? 
 
 A. I was willing to put in the whole book. 
 
 Q. Didn t you put in that testimony this forenoon, swearing to it 
 exactly as you recorded it ? 
 
 A. The testimony that I have put in I have sworn to. 
 
 Q. Then didn t you know that that testimony was false when you 
 were putting it in ? 
 
 A. 1 knew just this : I had to read according to your instructions. 
 
 Q. Did you know you were testifying to what was not true when you 
 were putting that in ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I don t know as it was hardly to be called false testi 
 mony ; because the whole testimony was not put in. 
 
 Q. Have you, until the inquiry was put to you, suggested any expla 
 nation of that testimony that you unqualifiedly gave this morning ? 
 
 A. Nothing except what I have suggested. 
 
 Q. Nothing except in reply to my question ? 
 
 A. Nothing before you said you were coming to it. 
 
 Q. Did you offer to explain until I commenced to cross-examine as 
 to what you put in this morning ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think not. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, didn t you know and understand, as well as you know 
 and understand anything, when you put in that testimony this morning 
 that you were giving the referees a false impression ? 
 
 A. It was not my intention. 
 
 Q. If it wasn t your intention, why didn t you accompany the fact 
 with an explanation ? 
 
 A. I really cannot tell. I read whatever the other side consented 
 that I should read. Whatever was read then was the recollection I had 
 in the matter. 
 
 Q. Is that your reason for not accompanying that fact with an ex 
 planation ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, did you, this morning, in giving your testimony, know 
 ingly give to these referees an erroneous and false impression in regard 
 to what you regarded as a material fact ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I did not, 
 
 Q. Didn t you know of this explanation at the time you gave this 
 testimony ? 
 
 A. I wanted to put in the whole testimony. 
 
 Q. Didn t you know of this explanation at the time you gave this 
 testimony ? Do you mean that you didn t have it ? 
 
 A. I do. 
 
216 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, sir, if you didn t mean this morning, when you 
 gave this testimony to these referees, to give them to understand that 
 George Clough had given you a present of fifty-five cents ? 
 
 A. I knew that he didn t. I didn t mean that they should under- 
 stand anything about it. 
 
 Q. Didn t you mean to have these referees understand just what you 
 testified to, as being true, this morning ? 
 
 A. Well, there comes up the matter that I believe I have stated two 
 or three times. All I know about this case consists in these records 
 that were made by me at the time. I am willing to put the whole in, 
 This morning I thought that the whole that were excepted were those 
 that the other side objected to. I have no desire to tell any untruth 
 here, and I believe I have not. 
 
 Q. I want to ask if you meant to give these referees to understand, 
 when you testified, that you understood that George Clough gave you 
 fifty-five cents ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Why didn t you accompany that with an explanation ? 
 
 A. I cannot give any other season than that it escaped my mind at 
 the time. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, you mean to intimate here, that one of the reasons why 
 
 u did not give that explanation is because you were not allowed to put 
 in your entire records ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You do ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you if there is a single word in that record that 
 explains this transaction ? 
 
 A. I think there is. 
 
 Q. Will you find it ? 
 
 A. Shall I read it ? 
 
 Q. You may read. 
 
 A. I think it is that entire page, It is merely accounting for the 
 thirteen dollars. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that there is a word of explanation on that 
 page with regard to this testimony ? 
 
 A. I think there is. 
 
 Q. Were you not conscious this morning of the existence of this ? 
 
 A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. You didn t ? 
 
 A. I knew that it existed, 
 
 Q. Then why didn t you accompany it with an explanation ? 
 
 A. You have asked me that three or four times. 
 
 Q. Well, can you explain it, sir ? 
 
 A. I cannot. 
 
 Q. Now I want to ask you, sir, if George Clough, when he returned 
 you this fifty-five cents, didn t return the exact change that he should 
 have returned you from the thirteen dollars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. He did ? 
 
 A. Yes, 4 sir. 
 
 Q. Do you see, sir, with all the facts that are before you to-day - 
 
 do you see or know of the slightest irregularity connected with the act 
 of George Clough in giving back that fifty-five cents ? 
 
 A. Not the slightest. [Adjourned.] 
 
217 
 [TWELFTH DAY. Friday, August 7th, 1868.] 
 
 The hearing was resumed, the cross-examination of Mr. George J. 
 Carney being continued by Mr. Mugridge. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEOKGE J. CAENEY continued. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} I understand you to say when Mr. Clough 
 paid you the fifty-five cents he approached you from behind and thrust 
 something into your hand, and immediately went back. Do you mean 
 by that that he acted slyly and stealthily ? 
 
 A. I meant so at the time. I supposed that he did. A that time I 
 supposed that he approached me stealthily. 
 
 Q. And slyly ? You meant to indicate that in your testimony ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, at the time. 
 
 Q. Now, as it turned out, doesn t it appear that that was a good 
 deal imagination? 
 
 A. Well, in the ordinary way, I should say not. 
 
 Q. Do you see any occasion, as the fact turned out, for Mr, Clough 
 to have approached you stealthily or slyly ? 
 
 A. Well, I should have to explain myself on that matter. I think 
 the ordinary way of business would be to approach a passenger in front 
 instead of passing the money over his shoulde^. , 
 
 Q. Then you think there was something extraordinary, out of the 
 usual course, in this ? 
 
 A. My impression about it is that his manner was not that of an 
 ordinary conductor; that is, the manner of an ordinary conductor doing 
 his business. 
 
 Q. Won t you please to describe what there was so extraordinary Mi 
 nis conduct? 
 
 A. Nothing except the mere fact that he approached me from behind, 
 and passed me the money over my shoulder. 
 
 Q. And that was the important fact in your mind ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it is now. 
 
 Q. You attach a good deal of significance to that fact? 
 
 A. No more than the fact warrants. 
 
 Q. Well, do you attach importance to that fact that he approached 
 you from behind? 
 
 A. I do, 
 
 Q. From your view of the case, this is a matter that you think is 
 entitled to especial consideration and note ? 
 
 A. If I was called upon to judge of Mr. Clough s action, and had 
 only that, it would have an influence upon my decision. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, I want to ask you how much money the Concord Kail- 
 road put into your hands to carry on this operation ? 
 
 A. I think I have received I see by my memorandum received 
 from the Concord Kailroad thirteen or fourteen hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. That amount of money was paid into your hands to conduct this 
 eperation that you were carrying on ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you have expended it, sir, almost entirely ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think there is nothing due the Concord Kailroad. 
 
 Q. That is, you have paid it all out ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. But let me explain that matter. I think when I fin 
 ishedthis report was dated, I think, in December, 1865 I think it 
 
218 
 
 was all expended except somewhere between forty and fifty dollars. 
 
 Q. That you have given the road credit for ? 
 
 A. That I have given the road credit for ; and I think there are 
 charges since that. 
 
 Q. What are those charges ? 
 
 A. I have had to pay hack hire and postage ; I don t recollect what 
 now.. 
 
 Q. Have you attended the annual meetings of the Concord Railroad 
 corporation ? 
 
 A, All of the last ones. In 66 was the first one ; 66, 67 and 68. 
 
 Q. At whose request did you appear ? 
 
 A. General Butler s ; and, I think, Colonel George s ; I am sure the 
 first one was by Gen. Butler. 
 
 Q. Did you make any charge against the Concord Eailroad for this ? 
 
 A. I think I charged hack hire from the station in Lowell to the 
 meeting, in 1867 ; I think that is the only one that I remember. 
 
 Q. Make a charge for your per diem? 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q. Have you made a minute of it ? 
 
 A. I have made a minute of it. 
 
 Q. Have you intimated what you proposed to charge? 
 
 A. I think I have stated I don t remember exactly what I have 
 stated I think it was something in this fashion : If the question came 
 to be settled upon per diem charges, I should charge twenty-five dol 
 lars a day. I had decided to charge in that. But I should like to 
 state this, as I believe I have stated before : that I do not wish to be 
 r understood, in making my testimony, anything binding myself to any 
 price. 
 
 Q. Don t wish to be bound to any price ? 
 
 A. I don t wish to put any price. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you do not think, in a certain event, your fees 
 might amount to a great deal more than twenty-five thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. That I cannot say. 
 
 Q. Haven t you the impression that in a certain event your fees 
 might amount to very much more than twenty-five thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it may amount to more than twenty- 
 five thousand dollars. And that event, of course, would be a decision 
 favorable by the board of referees. 
 
 Q. Without saying anything about any decision that the board of 
 referees may be called upon to make, 1 ask you if it is not your own 
 impression to-day that in a certain event your fees may amount to a 
 great deal more than twenty-five thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. If you will give what the event is, 1 can tell you. 
 
 Q. Supposing the result of your developments is that the conduct 
 ors should be charged with peculations and defalcations, we will say, to 
 the amount of five or six hundred thousand dollars, don t you think, in 
 that event, you might get a little more than twenty-five thousand dol 
 lars ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, I suppose if the road was benefitted by my services 
 two millions, that I should charge them somewhere between two and 
 five per cent, on the amount. 
 
 Q. You think that would be a fair charge ? 
 
 A. Fair and ordinary brokerage. 
 
 Q. Has Gen. Butler ever told you that that would be a fair charge ? 
 
fre 
 
 A. Yes, sir; that is my impression, that I was entitled to a per 
 centage on whatever the road was benefitted. 
 
 Q. Did you and Gen. Butler ever talk that over ? 
 
 A. My impression is that I did. I would not say certainly that I 
 did ; but my impression is that there was something said. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if there was any conversation between you that 
 there was to be a divi in any event ? 
 
 A. Not one particle. 
 
 Q. Who was the man from whose brain the plan that you subse 
 quently followed in making your discoveries originated ? 
 
 The mode of operation ? 
 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 A. I did, myself. 
 
 Q. Now, did not Butler help you ? 
 
 A. Incidentally. 
 
 Q. Do you remember from whom the original proposition sprung ? 
 
 A. I think it was from myself. 
 
 Q. Do you remember whether you made the original suggestion of 
 this plan, or whether Butler did ? 
 
 A. I did, I think. 
 
 Q. Did you suggest it to Butler ? 
 
 A. No ; 1 thought of it myself. 
 
 Q. You afterwards communicated it to Gen. Butler ? 
 
 Am 1 to answer generally ? 
 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 A. 1 think that when I first came to Concord we were talking about 
 my living here ; and 1 said that if I lived here I must have some os 
 tensible business ; and it was suggested that I had better take some 
 general business buy some kerosene lamps. 
 
 Q. Then Gen. Butler proposed to put you on "your kerosene " at 
 once, did he not ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not exactly. 
 
 Q. I should like to know now whether Butler suggested the kerosene 
 business, or whether you .suggested it ? 
 
 A. There was no suggestion made at all. 
 
 Q. How is that. Mr. Carney? 
 
 A. I said that 1 should have to have some ostensible purpose an 
 apparent purpose for being here in Concord. As I remember now, there 
 was something said about a patent right to some oil lamp. 
 
 Q. Was it kerosene ? 
 
 A. I have forgotten. 
 
 Q. Didn t you say a moment ago that it was in connection with 
 kerosene ? 
 
 A. I supposed, from the term, that is was in connection with kero 
 sene. 
 
 Q. Did the kerosene oil business commend itself to your judgment ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; it did not. 
 
 Q. Very well, sir ; you took umbrage at that ? 
 
 A. I believe the general was not offended at my manner. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you how much time you and Gen. Butler consumed 
 in this ? 
 
 A. I think Friday afternoon I went to nis office at two o clock. I 
 waited there until about 21-2 o clock. It was a stormy day, and the 
 
220 
 
 general was in his front office ; and I remember I had my cavalry boots 
 on, already to march. Sometime, I think, after half past two. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.) What Friday was that? 
 
 A. I think it was the last Friday in October, 1865. I would not 
 be positive. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) You had on your cavalry boots ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you have your sword on at that time ? 
 
 A. Not much. 
 
 Q. Was the general in uniform? 
 
 A. He had his clothes on. 
 
 Q. How long did you talk this thing over ? 
 
 A. I think I was there less than half an hour. 
 
 Q. Were you closeted by yourselves ? 
 
 A. The key was in the door ; the door was not locked. He wrote a 
 note to Col. George, and I brought it up ; and before I saw the general 
 again I had decided upon the business. 
 
 Q. Then he submitted the matter to you untrammelled ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you decided to appear as a license agent? 
 
 A. As a claim agent. 
 
 Q. Well, sir, what did you do next ? Did you tell Butler what you 
 had concluded upon ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I suppose I did. 
 
 Q. How did it seem to meet his views ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect any expression of disapproval. 
 
 Q, Did he still insist on the kerosene business ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think not. 
 
 Q, What did you do after you came up to Concord ? 
 
 A. Well, I don t know whether I carried the letter that night to 
 Col. George ; but I think it was that night. 
 
 Q. What did you do when you came here? 
 
 A. I came here as a claim agent. 
 
 Q. Did you advertise as a claim agent ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. With whom did you do business, ostensibly ? 
 
 A. L. D. Stevens. 
 
 Q. Did you advertise pretty extensively? 
 
 A. As extensively as the business would warrant. 
 
 Q. What did you pay for a license ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; it is marked on the license, I think. 
 
 Q. Five dollars and eighty-three cents ? 
 
 A. Whatever is paid is there. 
 
 Q. Did you advertise in the newspapers of the state ? 
 
 A. Some, I think. 
 
 Q. But you did not do that business at all, did you ? 
 
 A. I wrote one or two letters to friends of mine, who wrote and sent 
 me claims to collect, and told them they had better send to others. 
 
 Q. Then you put yourself forward in the cars as a claim agent ? 
 
 A. That is what was announced. 
 
 Q. How old are you ? 
 
 A. Thirty-three years old, I think I said. 
 
 Q. What business have you been engaged in since you were twenty- 
 one years old, sir ? 
 
221 
 
 A. I have been engaged in merchandizing, 
 
 Q. Where ? 
 
 A. In the city of Boston. 
 
 Q. What else? 
 
 A. Banking, 
 
 Q. What position did you hold in the banking business ? 
 
 A. Assistant treasurer for the " Lowell Institution for Savings." I 
 am still holding that position. 
 
 Q. Are you on the retired list now ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I am under bonds ; and am officially on duty, though I 
 am not under pay. 
 
 Q. How long has it been since you held that office, and have not re 
 ceived any pay ? 
 
 A. Since December, 1862. 
 
 Q. Then it is practically nothing but a title ? 
 
 A. It is nothing but a title. If my father should be sick, I should 
 step in and take it. 
 
 Q. You hold that title under bonds ? Have you any other titles ? 
 
 A. I was going on. 
 
 Q. Go on in your own way. 
 
 A. I have been in the service of the United States, in the army ; 
 then as a civil officer. Then as an employe of the American Manu fact- 
 ing Company. 
 
 Q. What capacity ? 
 
 A. As treasurer s clerk. 
 
 Q. Who is the treasurer ? 
 
 A. Mr. Crowninshield. 
 
 Q. Do you get any pay from this office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You do now? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long have you held that office ? 
 
 A. Since the third of June, this last year. I am temporarily filling 
 a place there as clerk. 
 
 Q. Any other office ? 
 
 A. And 1 am, I suppose, managing director of the Haverhill Gas 
 Light Company. That office I have held since July since last month. 
 
 Q. Any other titles of office that you have ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; officer in the Massachusetts militia lieut. colonel. 
 
 Q. Do you get any pay for your connection with the Gas Light 
 Company ? 
 
 A. I won t be certain ; but I think the directors passed a vote giv 
 ing them a dollar apiece. 
 
 Q. Any other offices that you hold ? 
 
 A. Not that I remember of yes, sir, I am justice of the peace. 
 
 Q. And quorum ? 
 
 A. That I don t remember whether the quorum is hitched on or 
 not. 
 
 Q. Were you connected with the Army of the James ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. Major general Butler was, at that same time ? 
 
 A. Yes, most of the time ; he succeeded Gen. Ord and Terry. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you what titles you held there ? 
 
222 
 
 A. Captain, assistant quartermaster,, a^nd after wards major and 
 quartermaster. I believe the general appended A. D. C ; but I don t 
 know whether he had the right to or not. 
 
 Q. You say you were captain ? 
 
 A. Captain and assistant quartermaster, and then major and quarter 
 master. 
 
 Q. And the general appointed you A. D. C. did he ? 
 
 A. A. D. C. 
 
 Q. \Vhat does A. D. C. mean? 
 
 A. Aide-de-camp. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you, sir, were you in the Army of the James dur 
 ing all its campaigns ? 
 
 A. I was attached to it ; I was not in the field. 
 
 Q. You were attached to it was it an honorary position ? 
 
 A. It was an honorary commission. 
 
 Q. You were with the Army of the James in all its campaigns and 
 sieges ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; although not in the field. 
 
 Q. Were you at the Dutch Gap canal ? 
 
 A. I have had the honor of being in the bottom of the Dutch Gap 
 canal, and was very glad when I got out of it. 
 
 Q. Were you at Fort Fisher ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I was at Newbern at that time. 
 
 Q. What title did you hold at the time of the Fort Fisher affair ? 
 
 A. I was major. 
 
 Q. After you got out of the army what did you do? 
 
 A. The first thing was to make this oflice up here ; I was treasurer 
 of the Revere Woollen Mill, Ipswich, Mass. 
 
 Q. Were you active in the discharge of the duties of this office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I run it into the ground. 
 
 Q. While you were holding the office, was it run into the ground ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. While you held office as treasurer of this woollen mill, did the 
 thing run into the ground ? 
 
 A. Well, I am unable to tell you, unless I tell you the full partic 
 ulars. 
 
 Q. Did you say a few moments ago that you were treasurer of that 
 mill, and run the thing into the ground ? 
 
 A. I may have said so, but I did not mean to say so. 
 
 Q. Now you may explain. 
 
 A. Four persons were associated. John W. Hill, Mr. Wright, 
 Dwight Foster and myself purchased the mill property and appointed 
 me treasurer. Mr. Hill was thrown from his wagon and killed. We 
 had a large stock of goods on hand, the market falling ; but as we had 
 enough money to carry it, we did not sell. And then on the death of 
 Mr, Hill, Mr. Wright retired, and Judge Foster agreed to purchase the 
 property with me. Then the property was sold at auction. Foster held 
 half the stock, and I a quarter ; it was knocked off to us for five hund 
 red dollars. 
 
 Q. In fact did the thing run out ? 
 
 A. The thing has not run out. The thing of it was Judge Foster 
 would not sign the deed. I am still treasurer; and the mill has been 
 taken by Francis Skinner & Co. 
 
 Q. Have you any funds in your hands ? 
 

 223 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I have. 
 
 Q. How much ? 
 
 A. I wouldn t say certain ; I think between one and two hutodred^ 
 dollars. 
 
 Q. Have you been in any way connected with the United States 
 service ? 
 
 A. I have been revenue inspector. 
 
 Q. When did you hold that office ? 
 
 A. I think I held it from sometime in 1866 until, I think, Novem 
 ber, 1867, when I was dismissed. 
 
 Q. Who dismissed you ? 
 
 A. Hon. E. A. Rollins. I think, Commissioner of Internal Kevenue. 
 
 Q. For what reason ? 
 
 A. The letter dismissing me said, " very improper conduct." 
 
 Q. Very improper conduct on your part ? 
 
 A, Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you charged, sir, with receiving a bribe of a thousand dol 
 lars in the discharge of the duties of your office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man by the name of John Leighton, of Boston? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. Y^ou do ? While you were in the employ of the United States as 
 inspector of revenue, were you instructed to investigate charges against 
 Leighton for making a false return of his income ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you instructed by C. C. Estey to make some investigation? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you make that investigation ? 
 
 A. I did, sir. 
 
 Q. How long were you engaged in it ? 
 
 A. I think somewhere about thirty days. 
 
 Q. How much were you paid a day for your time ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it was four dollars. 
 
 Q. During this investigation, did you make an appointment with 
 Estey to have an interview with Leighton and Estey, for the purpose of 
 examining the books. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. For the purpose indicated ? Did you both keep that engage 
 ment, sir ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think we did, finally ; all three, in fact. I think 
 Mr. Leighton appointed one time and was taken sick, and could not 
 come. 
 
 Q. Then the first time you did not keep it ? 
 
 A. My impression is that the first time we did not. This appoint 
 ment was to be at Framingham, where Mr. Estey s office is. * 
 
 Q. Did you write a letter to Mr. Estey, saying that Mr. Leighton 
 was unwell, and could not keep the engagement, and that you yourself 
 were obliged to go in another direction ? 
 
 A. My impression is that I did ; it is merely a matter of impression. 
 
 Q. Did you and Estey together ever examine Leighton s books ? 
 
 Do you mean whether we both examined separately, or jointly ? 
 
 Whether you examined jointly ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I examined them, and Mr. Estey did too. That is my 
 impression. 
 
224 
 Q. Will you state here, sir, that Mr. Estey ever examined these 
 
 A. I will swear this : that Mr. Leighton carried his books oiit to 
 his office, and I saw Mr. Estey looking them over. So far as I noticed, 
 he was examining them.. 
 
 Q. Did you make a report, sir, in the John Leighton case, so called ? 
 
 A. I did, sir. 
 
 Q Was it approved by Estey ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether he approved it or no. I should like to 
 state to the referees that this case of John Leighton s was a matter 
 which came up before (1 think) Mr. Chase ; and I declined to answer 
 the questions after they had gone to a certain extent ; and for this 
 reason : that after I was dismissed from my official position, I learned 
 that District Attorney Hyde proposed to proceed against me criminally. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Is there any occasion for this? 
 
 Mr. George. I think the witness has a right to make an explana 
 tion, 
 
 The Chairman. We all think that the witness cannot be denied the 
 right to make any explanation, which he desires to make, of the testi 
 mony which he gives. The witness is asked to answer a question. If 
 it is insisted that he shall give a direct answer, he has a right to give 
 any explanation which he sees fit to give to it. I do not know as the 
 rule of practice goes any further than that ; and if the witness feels, 
 after the answer which he has already given, that he should make an 
 explanation, I think the referees ought to hear it. If it turns out that 
 the explanation does not bear upon the preceding examination, then the 
 referees may decline to hear it. But we think the witness has a right 
 to any explanation in regard to the testimony he has given. 
 
 A. Well, then, for the reasons given, I declined to answer the in 
 terrogatory about the John Leighton matter, after they had gone to a 
 certain extent, on the ground that if they proceeded against me Mr. 
 Chase advised me that I should not furnish any evidence that might be 
 used against me. But this morning I am in a different position, alto 
 gether. I propose to tell all I know about the John Leighton matter. 
 
 Q. Will you allow me to take my own course in your examination ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I ought to add that I did not, at the time, and do not 
 now believe that I had done anything wrong. 
 
 Q. Did you make two reports, sir, as the result of your investigV 
 tions ; one to Mr. Estey and one to the department? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; those were my instructions in all cases. 
 
 Q. Did they both bear date of Oct. 5th, 1866 ? 
 
 A. Well, I could not say. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt but what they did ? 
 
 A. I do not know that they did. 
 
 Q. Were they in the month of October ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you, sir, if they were mailed from Lowell these 
 reports ? And dated in Lowell ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think so. That is, I may have dropped them in the 
 Boston office ; because I was visiting in Boston. I think they were 
 mailed in Lowell ; it was my usual custom to mail most of my letters 
 there. 
 
 Q. Did the report that you made to the department exonerate Leigh- 
 ton from all intentional frauds? 
 
225 
 
 A. 1 think my report covered the year [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you if after you made the report, Leighton 
 paid you any sum of money ? 
 
 A. I think my impression is, that Mr. Leighton, Mr. Estey and 
 myself were at Framingham ; I won t say what day, but I will suppose 
 it to be Wednesday ; I think on Friday Mr. Leighton gave me a check 
 for a thousand dollars, which I kept. That was before the letters were 
 sent from Lowell, although the report was all finished, and submitted 
 to Mr. Estey, and he had dismissed the case. That which Mr. Eolfe 
 obtained in Boston I think a little was done after Mr. Leighton sent the 
 thousand dollar check. 
 
 Q. Did you receive a thousand dollars from Mr. Leighton before 
 your report was sent away ? 
 
 A. The report was received. 
 
 Q. Will you answer the question directly ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. The examination was made, I think in June, 1866 
 June or July but it was made from Mr. Leighton s books, I had 
 better give you the whole case. [Objected to.] 
 
 A. You told me I might make any explanation I please. 
 
 Q. Mr. Carney, had you as lief let me ask you one more question 
 before you give your explanation ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was the thousand dollar check enclosed in this letter ? 
 
 A. 1 think it was. 
 
 Q. [Reading letter.] "26 KILBY ST., BOSTON, Sept. 27, 1866. 
 
 My Dear Major: The gentlemanly manner in which you have per 
 formed what I know must have been a disagreeable duty, entitles you 
 to my respect and esteem. The time employed in the investigation nec 
 essary to perform that duty, I wish to compensate you for. And I feel 
 that I can do so now, without the imputation of a desire to influence 
 your action. Please accept enclosed check, and believe me, with a 
 desire to know you better. Truly your friend, 
 
 JOHN LEIGHTON. 
 
 To Maj. George J. Carney, present." 
 
 Q, Now, did you receive a thousand dollar check in that letter ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And the date that the letter bears is September 27, 1866 ? 
 
 A. That I could not say. It is my impression it was that day. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you know that letter ? 
 
 A. I think that letter was brought to me in the office of Lawrence, 
 Reed & Co., Federal street, Boston, where my desk was when I was 
 treasurer of the manufacturing company, by one of Mr. Leighton s boys. 
 
 Q. Was that check on Elliot & Co., for a thousand dollars? And 
 did you endorse it and get the money ? 
 
 A. 1 don t know what company it was. I did endorse it, and did 
 get the thousand dollars. 
 
 Q. Were you dismissed from the treasurer s department on account 
 of this transaction ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, sir, if, before you were dismissed, your conduct 
 was investigated by the department, fully, by Mr. Legrow, of Koches- 
 ter? 
 
 A. Mr. Legrow came to Lowell and I gave him the facts in my pos 
 session. I am not sure that I gave a copy of the report ; 1 gave him a 
 
 15 
 
226 
 
 copy of the original letter. 
 
 Q. Is Mr. Legrow a detective ? 
 
 A. That is not his title. 
 
 Q. Is that his business ? 
 
 A. His title is " revenue agent," 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if he was on your track for any length of time? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I was not aware of it. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that he was not on your track for some time ? 
 
 A. Mr. Legrow had instructions from Washington, asking him to 
 come and see me and ascertain whether 1 had received a thousand dol 
 lars from Mr. Leighton ; and he came directly to me. 
 
 Q. Do you not think Legrow was on your track for a long time, as a 
 detective, before he came to you ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did he not trace the check of Leighton s back to you ? 
 
 A. If he was employed weeks and weeks, he ought to be dismissed. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to assert that you did not discover that he had 
 been on your track weeks and weeks ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I do say so, I didn t care anything about Mr. Legrow. 
 
 Q. Were you arrested by him ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you ever in his custody ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; and never got out a writ to Legrow to be released. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that you were not arrested, and that Gen, 
 Butler was not retained as counsel? Was the general retained as 
 counsel ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Was he consulted by you ? 
 
 A. He was. 
 
 Q. How long after Legrow met you at Lowell before this was done ? 
 
 A. I think I wrote to Gen. Butler as soon as Mr, Legrow left. I 
 think it was immediately. 
 
 Q. Did you retain him ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you had frequent consultations ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Has Gen. Butler interfered to protect you, and succeeded in ad 
 justing the prosecution with which you were arrested ? 
 
 A. Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that Gen. Butler has not operated to stifle it ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; Gen. Butler told me at the beginning there was nothing 
 criminal whatever ; and it was by his advice that I declined to answer 
 the questions of the deposition in regard to this matter. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that it was under advice of Gen. Butler that 
 you acted ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where was he at the time this deposition was given ? 
 
 A. Gen. Butler was in Washington, I think. 
 
 Q. Do you know that Gen. Butler went to the secretary of treasury 
 in Washington, and told him that if George J. Carney was indicted for 
 taking a bribe, that Mr. Jordan was also to be indicted with him? 
 
 A. I never knew that he said it. It would be very proper for him 
 to say. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear that Gen. Butler held such intimations over 
 the department? 
 

 227 
 
 A. No, sir : 1 never did. 
 
 Q. Was any such thing ever alluded to ? 
 
 A. Gen. Butler told me. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear of that ? 
 
 A. 1 heard of Jordan receiving a present in the case of J. D. Wil- 
 liams s suit. Allow me to say that Secretary McCulloch said i had 
 done perfectly right. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear such a suggestion by anybody else, that if 
 George J. Carney was indicted Jordan was to be ? * v 
 
 A. No, sir ; I never heard the names of George J. Carney and 
 Jordan mentioned together until you have mentioned them. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you knew of Hyde, the assistant district at 
 torney, sending to Washington for instructions in regard to prosecuting 
 you, sir ? 
 
 A. J think I did. I think I have copies of everything all the doc 
 uments in the matter. 1 think there is one to Judge Hallett. 
 
 Q. You say Gen. Butler told you not to answer these questions. 
 Was he present at the time the deposition was taken ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you consult him ? 
 
 A. I think Gen. Butler wrote a note, saying: " Say nothing until 1 
 see you." 
 
 Q. On what ground did Gen. Butler instruct you to decline answer 
 ing such questions ? 
 
 A. He gave me no grounds at all. I will give you a copy of the 
 letter if you desire it. He said: " Say nothing about it until I see 
 you." I cannot recollect the conversation, but when I saw him next 
 when he came north the next time, I met him, and told him as my honor 
 and reputation was impugned, I was desirous to have the matter inves 
 tigated. The general said that in the event of a case being made out 
 against me, it would be for the purpose of tormenting and making 
 trouble and perplexing. He said that no judge would entertain it for 
 a minute. He said there was really no corruption whatever ; but he 
 said that I had better, for prudential reasons, not talk about it. 
 
 Q. Did you decline on the ground that it was criminating yourself ? 
 
 A. I declined to answer on the ground of instructions of Mr. Chase. 
 
 Q. State whether you declined to answer on the ground that it 
 might criminate yourself? 
 
 A. That would be used against me. 1 think I stated in the answer 
 before that I was not bound to furnish anything whatever. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear it assigned as a reason why you were not pros 
 ecuted, that Mr. Hyde sent to the commissioner of internal revenue that 
 a gentleman had been there and stated that if you were prosecuted Gen. 
 Jordan would also be prosecuted ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I never did. 
 
 Q. Since you gave your deposition, have any of your friends been to 
 intercede with Mr, Hyde ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I do. 
 
 Q. Did you employ anybody to do that thing ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have any of your friends employed anybody ? 
 
 A. Not that I am aware of. There was no occasion for them to. 
 
228 
 
 Q. You say there have been no movements made to stifle this threat 
 ened prosecution ? 
 
 A. I believe nothing has been done whatever. 
 
 Q. And that you swear to ? 
 
 A. That I cannot say ; but I do not know of any. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that no efforts have been made by your 
 friends in that direction? 
 
 A. 1 don t remember that any have been made. 
 
 Q. And you swear positively that there have not? 
 
 A. I cannot swear positively ; but if they have been made, I have 
 not known of them. I know that if G-en. Butler was in power I should 
 be reinstated at once. 
 
 Q. Now you may go on with your explanation. 
 
 A. Mr. Leighton had a clerk named Nickerson. Leighton s busi 
 ness was that of a stock broker, a man who had got up corners, and who 
 had built himself quite a name in the city, I had heard of him ; never 
 had seen him, personally, until one day Mr. Estey said that he had a 
 broker who bad made very incorrect returns of his income ; and that he 
 should like to have me examine the case. I had taken the office of 
 revenue inspector, after this investigation here, because Mr. John Nes- 
 mith thought it would be well to have some competent person ; but I 
 found, afterwards, that Mr. Nesmith proposed to use me for his own in 
 terest, and I declined. After I undertook the Leighton matter, I found 
 that in Worcester and New York and Boston he had been in the habit 
 of buying these gambling stocks and then going into the market and 
 .-selling the papers, and making transfer of certificates ; and I found in 
 Ms trunk, I don t know how many certificates of these, This clerk, 
 Nickerson, when he looked over this income return, says: "I don t 
 believe that Mr. Leighton has made correct returns." And upon ex 
 amination, and refreshing his memory of the sales, he found that Mr. 
 Leighton had made false returns ; probably, 1 think, as high as four 
 hundred thousand dollars. And upon that, charges were preferred 
 .against him. Arid being in my district, I examined the case. I went 
 through Mr. Leighton s books, throughout ; and wrote to Washington 
 for instructions as to how I should settle the case. I suggested that the 
 -fairest way to settle would be that if he bought these stocks and held 
 them for a year and then sold them for fifteen, he should pay on that 
 fifteen. I wrote, I don t know how many times, to Kollins ; and I got a 
 letter to this effect, that profits could not be estimated until the stocks 
 were sold. I think it was a wise decision. At the time Leighton was 
 carrying on this corner, I found that Mr. Nickerson, and the companions 
 of Leighton, tried to obtain information from me in regard to Leighton s 
 matter, and I declined to communicate with them. After an examina 
 tion of the books, he said that he believed he had made fifty thousand 
 dollars ; and he was willing to pay on fifty. The commissioner asked if 
 fee would swear that that was exact. He said that he would. He finally 
 made about thirteen hundred dollars more. After the books had been 
 examined, for thirty days, Mr. Leighton took his accounts out to Mr. 
 Estey ; and they were examined over, and Mr. Estey said that under 
 the instructions I had received in regard to the matter, Mr. Leighton 
 was not liable for taxation upon these sums, as asserted in the charges. 
 Two days after that had been done, Mr. Leighton sent me a check for a 
 thousand dollars ; and I kept it. Then Mr. Legrow came to see me ; 
 and I supposed the matter had passed by. I was doing no business as 
 
229 
 
 revenue inspector. I kept away. I told Mr. Nesmith that I would take 
 it with this understanding, that 1 was not to take such a specialty. 
 After they supposed they had dismissed me from office, I received in 
 structions in regard to the distillers business ; and I wrote to Mr. Nes 
 mith. They wrote to Washington and I received this letter; and I 
 think they wrote to Boston, to Judge Hallet. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if just as soon as you were set back, Gen. Butler 
 was retained as your counsel ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think Gen. Butler was retained as counsel ; and then 
 I think John Andrew was retained. 
 
 Q. The question was whether, just as soon as you were back, Gen. 
 Butler was retained as counsel ? 
 
 A, Oh, he was retained ; but whether it was just as soon as I got 
 back 1 don t know. 
 
 Q. Was it before your report was made ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think it was. I ought to add, here, that there was 
 an attempt to bribe me in that case ; but it was on the other side. 
 
 Q. Well, you may state that, if you please. 
 
 A. Mr. Nickerson came to me. He came to Lowell, and we seated 
 at a table in the Savings Bank; and he says: " Major Carney, I have 
 found out that I am entitled to a reward as an informer in this case ; 
 and whatever I get I will make right with you. That was all the money 
 matter on the other side. 
 
 Q. That you understood to be an attempt to bribe you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you ever been approached by other men to bribe you ? 
 
 A. In this matter ? 
 
 Q. In any other transaction ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many times have men attempted to bribe you ? 
 
 A. I don t know how many ; I guess they have tried it a good many. 
 
 Q. Were they men who were acquainted with you, who knew your 
 character ? 
 
 A. No ; I think they were not. 
 
 Q. Were you ever approached for a bribe by a man who did not 
 know you intimately ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who and when ? 
 
 A. After Gen. Butler left Virginia, in 1865, after he was relieved 
 from duty, the collector of the port came to me with Mr. Jones, I think 
 it was ; and at that time I was commissioner of negro affairs. I had 
 the states of Virginia and North Carolina. 
 
 Q. What was your title then ? Commissioner of negro affairs ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; commissioner of negro affairs. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. ffaile.} Freedman s bureau ? 
 
 A. That was the beginning of it. There was no head to the freed- 
 man s bureau at that time ? I had on the Taylor farm, opposite For 
 tress Monroe I had a nice saw-mill there ; and there was a large 
 quantity of fine lumber. These two men came in and said they saw 
 ome fine timber down there, and if I would sell them some sticks of 
 timber they would share. I said if they would reduce their proposition 
 to writing, I would consider it. They never did. 
 
 Q. How many times can you recollect now, where attempts have 
 been made to bribe you ? 
 
230 
 
 A. Do you want me to swear to a definite number ? 
 Q. Would you say that you have been approached a hundred times? 
 A. I would not say that I haven t been approached five hundred 
 times ? 
 
 Q. Will you say that you haven t been approached a hundred times? 
 
 A. L couldn t say anything about it, 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether in many of the instances where you 
 were approached with bribes, the men who approached you were ac 
 quainted with you ? 
 
 A. I think they were not in most of the oases. 
 
 Q. In any of the cases ? 
 
 A. In some of the cases 1 think they claimed acquaintance. 
 
 Q. Did they live in Lowell, where you iiv<; . 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did they live in Boston, where you lived 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did they live anywhere where you lived . 
 
 A. Not that I think of now. 
 
 Q. Have you been approached with propositions involving bribes by 
 men in the neighborhood of where you lived ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I think not.. 1 never have been approached by Gen. 
 Butler. 
 
 Q. You never received one ? 
 
 A. I never received a bribe of any description. 
 
 Q. In these two or three cases that you have been approached, have 
 you always sternly refused ? 
 
 A. There was one case where it turned out to be a bribe that I 
 accepted. 
 
 Q. Money did you get? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What was it? 
 
 A. The Sisters of Charity in Norfolk, Virginia, wanted their hospi 
 tal repaired. I had charge of pretty much everything in that line ; so 
 1 repaired their buildings, and in came their basket a basket of fresh 
 fish and flowers. As they were ladies, 1 did not send it back. In a 
 short time there came an application to me for the hay oif the farm. 
 And I declined to send it. Afterwards they said my reward would not 
 be in heaven. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Have you had any interview with General 
 Butler in regard to this matter? 
 
 A. I have had an interview, but not in regard to this. 1 had an 
 interview for the purpose of having him present here. 
 
 Q. What did you want him here for ? 
 
 A. Col. George met me one day in Lowell. He said, the other side 
 will attempt to show that you were very corrupt in your army life, and 
 I want you, if possible, to get Gen. Butler to come to Concord and stay 
 while you are giving your testimony ; so that he, having been on the 
 spot, and having given you orders, may be able by his personal presence 
 and personal words to perhaps convince the referees that Major Carney 
 is not as bad as he is painted. And I went to Gloucester for that pur 
 pose. I told him that he could come here and take no part. 
 
 Q. Did you think his presence here would intimidate anybody ? 
 
 A. I think I told Mr. Mugridge that I would give him notice so that 
 he could run if he wanted to. I think that after the conversation which 
 
231 
 
 you had with me, you said you would see whether General Butler ruled 
 New Hampshire. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Won t you look at your journal of November 
 10th, and the way-bill of November 10th. What train did you take 
 and how much did you pay to Mr. Clough on the 9th ? 
 
 A. November 10th I paid $1.60 for two tickets to Nashua, and 
 $1.50 for a ticket to Concord ; and he gave me no ticket. 
 
 Q. Won t you examine that way-bill, and see if he returned two 
 tickets to Nashua? 
 
 A. There are two between Nashua and Concord, $1.60, as it appears 
 on this way-bill. 
 
 Q. Is there any return there of a fare between Concord and Nashua? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now will you take the llth? 
 
 A. Took the 3. 30 train to Concord, Clough conductor ; I paid Clough 
 $4.25 for my fare to Boston and Draper s to Nashua. ; 
 
 Q. How much was that to Nashua, and how much to Boston ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Well, sir, won t you figure it up and see ? 
 
 A. I don t know what the fares are at all. 
 
 ,Q.. You paid $4,25 for the two? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That would be $1.50 and $2.75? Won t you look at the way 
 bill for that day, and see whether any fare is returned at $1.50 between 
 Concord and Nashua, on that way-bill, or any fares between Concord 
 and Boston at $2.75? 
 
 A. No, sir ; there appear to be none. 
 
 Q. Y"ou have given testimony all the time covering Mr. dough s 
 being on the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Whether this included the time that you paid fare to Mr. Clough? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I believe it did. 
 
 Q. Now, there was something said yesterday with regard to your 
 giving an untruthful statement with regard to reading from your jour 
 nal. Will you state what you read from, and what you did read ? 
 
 A. I read the whole account, I believe, of Tuesday, November 14th, 
 in regard to having paid Mr. Clough $12.45, and his giving me back 
 fifty-five cents. On November 16th, the next day, I find an entry ex 
 plaining that. The first portion of the record of November 14th was 
 admitted, I believe, by the counsel ; and if I had turned the page over 
 I knew that it was here, and if 1 had turned over 
 
 Q. Did you read just what the counsel told you ? 
 
 A. I read just what the counsel agreed to jointly. 
 
 Q. I will ask you if you knew what was legal evidence and what not? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I did not. 
 
 Q. Did you suppose 
 
 A. I supposed that my whole report was evidence. My report was 
 made up at the time, and I think the conductors were turned off on the 
 strength of my report. 
 
 Q. Did you know what was legal evidence, as to whether you could 
 put in what your subordinates did ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I supposed it would be something like martial law. 
 
 Q. Won t you read that explanation ? 
 
232 
 
 A. " Thursday evening, Nov. 16th, 1865. Since writing what I have 
 in the previous pages, that the fare to Boston is $2.85, and to make up the 
 amount paid Clough, I can account for it only by supposing that his sus 
 picions were aroused, and that he charged me ten cents more than the reg 
 ular fare, as required by rule of the road ; but if he charged ten cents 
 more on the fares to Nashua, why did he not charge ten cents more on 
 the fare to Boston, thus : one to Boston, $2.85 ; six to Nashua, at $1.60, 
 $9.60; making $12.45; 55 cents added makes $13." This does not 
 account for the money, and I jotted these notes down merely to show 
 that I noticed them at the time. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION RESUMED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Mugridge.} You say you paid Mr. Clough six fares in 
 the cars to Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. They should have been $1.60 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And he charged you that, did he ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That makes $9.60 in all ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. He charged you just that, and you paid him just that ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. He should have charged you $2.85 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Didn t he doit? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, $2.85 and $9.60 makes $12.45 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And he gave you 55 cents, and he should have given you 55 cents ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Is there anything wrong about that ? 
 
 A. No, sir; the fare from Concord to Boston is $2.85, and thus I 
 can account for all the money I gave Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. You paid Clough $1.50 on November 10th ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And he returned $1.60? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You don t know whether he made a mistake or not in this ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Y ou don t know whether he returned your tickets or somebody 
 
 else s ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t know anything about it. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF WESLEY E. BATCHELDER. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Will you please state your age, where you 
 live, what your business is ? 
 
 A. My age is 24 ; residence, Lowell ; business, manufacturing hard 
 ware. 
 
 Q. Will you please state, sir, whether in 1865 and, if so, at what 
 time you were in the employment of Major Carney in the investiga 
 tion on the Concord Kailroad ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. What time did you go on ? Can you remember ? 
 
233 
 
 A, I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Have you a journal ? 
 
 A. I have minutes that I gave to him at that time. 
 
 Q. Won t you look at your minutes and see when you were employ 
 ed ? I mean when you first went on to the road ? How long did you 
 continue ? Can you state from your recollection ? 
 
 A. Nothing, only from this. 
 
 Q. Was it five years, or three months, or three weeks ? 
 
 A. It was less than three months, I should judge. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, won t you turn to your minutes. Have you any recol 
 lection apart from your minutes ? 
 
 A. Nothing connectedly ; although there might be some little items 
 that I might remember at the time. 
 
 Q. Were these minutes made up at the time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; they were made up every evening. 
 
 Q. Were they true ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Would you have sworn to them at the time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you look at your minutes of November 21st? 
 
 A. Tuesday. 
 
 Q. Now read your minutes so far as they relate to Mr. Clough. 
 
 A. This starts from Lowell. " Took the 8 o clock train from Lowell 
 for Nashua. Above Nashua paid Conductor Clough fare to Concord ; 
 no ticket." Nothing more that day that relates to Mr. Clough, 
 
 Q. You may turn to Nov. 23d. Just read what relates to Mr. 
 Clough. 
 
 A. "I went to Concord at 10.30 in the morning. At 3.30 P. M. I 
 sent him down with two others ; bought tickets there to Boston of Con 
 ductor Clough, $8.55 ; tickets numbered 7 and 8. Also, paid con 
 ductor." 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Is that Clough ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it must be. One fare to Nashua. Man left train at 
 Manchester. 
 
 Q. Did you say how much that ticket cost ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; $1.50; ticket No. 9. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George) Won t you produce those tickets ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; 7, 8 and 9. 
 
 Q. That ticket was purchased from Concord to Nashua [showing 
 ticket] ? 
 
 A. That was ticket No. 9. 
 
 Q. These are the two Boston tickets just referred to ? 
 
 A. Tickets 7 and 8. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} I want to know whether these tickets were 
 punched when you took them, or whether afterwards ? 
 
 A. My impression is that the tickets were not punched when I bought 
 them, though I am not willing to swear. 
 
 Q. How far did you ride on them ? 
 
 A. I rode on them to Lowell. I came through on that ticket No. 
 6. [Showing.] 
 
 Q. And all these punches you think were made while they were in 
 your possession ? 
 
 A. While they were in my possession while I was in the cars 
 jcs, sir. 
 
234 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did you make your minutes on the books at 
 tnat time ? 
 
 A. I made them after my arrival home ; when I made this report 
 and wrote it out. 
 
 Q. Now you may go on and read the balance, sir. 
 
 A. At Manchester, met one of yesterday s companions with a ticket 
 to Boston, bought of the agent at Concord. Not having sufficient funds 
 with me to procure another, came through on that ticket to Lowell. No. 
 6. [Ticket No. 6 produced.] November 25th, Saturday, 3.30 P. M., 
 left Concord for Lowell with two companions ; paid three fares to 
 Nashua, $4.80 ; no tickets. For change from $5, Conductor Clough 
 gave me $1.20; and it was not until I called his attention to this 
 seemingly a mistake that he took the surplus change with a thank 
 you." 
 
 Q. That when you paid him in the cars he charged you $2.80 in 
 stead of $3.80? 
 
 A. I paid for three fares to Nashua, $4.80, and for change from a 
 $~>.00 bill he gave me $1.20, a dollar too much, and I called his atten 
 tion to it, and he took it and thanked me for it. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, will you turn and see if you went on the 27th, or the 
 28th, or the 29th? 
 
 A. My record does not show whether it was Clough s train, or whose 
 it was. I left Manchester at two o clock, and returned at eleven o clock ; 
 this is dated the 27th. Left train at Manchester, and returned at eleven 
 o clock to Lowell; paid two fares to conductor to Nashua, $1.50; no 
 tickets. 
 
 Q. Now read right on. 
 
 A. The 28th, sir, one-half ticket, Nashua to Concord. 
 
 Q. You started from Lowell at what time ? 
 
 A. At 3.30 P. M. Left Concord, paying conductor one fare, $1.50. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Fare to where ? 
 
 A. To Nashua. No ticket ; see memorandum. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Now, sir, look at the 29th. You stopped on 
 -the 30th going on Mr. Clough s train ? 
 
 A. I don t remember. 
 
 Q. Well, just look and see whether you ever went on Mr. Clough s 
 train after that ? 
 
 A. Wednesday, the 13th day of December, Left Manchester for 
 Concord at 2.20 P. M., paying Conductor Clough two fares to Concord, 
 85 cents each, $1.70; no tickets. 
 
 Q. Is that the last time you went on Clough s train? 
 
 A. Friday, December 15th, at 1 1 o clock, left Manchester for Nashua ; 
 paid fares for self and lady and girl to Nashua, $1.70. 
 
 Q. How old was the girl ? 
 
 A. Well, 1 don t remember of ever having any child on the train 
 with me, except a niece of mine at Manchester; I think she must have 
 been about eight years old. 
 
 Q. 1865, Saturday, December 16th? 
 
 A. Left Concord at 3.30 P. M. ; paid fares to Nashua, $3.20; no 
 tickets. There I have a pencil mark I have written: "see memo 
 randum." Memorandum says to procure no tickets to Worcester. 
 Monday, December 25th, paid Conductor Clough fare to Concord. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Mugridge.} Where from? 
 
 A. This must have been from Nashua. Paid Conductor Clough fare 
 to. Concord, $1.60; no tickets. 
 
235 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Batchelder, will you state whether you 
 at any time were appointed conductor on the Concord road ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. Do you remember when ? 
 
 A. I don t remember; it was in the spring of 1866, or the last of 
 the winter ; I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Following this investigation ? 
 
 * A. Yes, sir ; as my recollection serves me. Now I remember, it was 
 in February. 
 
 Q. Where did you run ? What route ? 
 
 A. Well, I had charge of the train from Manchester to Lawrence. 
 Occasionally, I think, between here and Manchester. That was very 
 seldom. 
 
 Q. You ran all the train and part of the Manchester train? 
 
 A. Three trains down and three trains up, and came to Concord 
 every night. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Well, sir, when were you discharged as 
 conductor, and by whom? [Objected to on the ground that it was pro 
 posed to show that the witness was discharged by Mr. Gilmore on ac 
 count of having conducted this investigation.] 
 
 Mr. George. There has been evidence put in here in regard to Mr. 
 Oilmore s action in stifling this investigation. I propose to show that 
 on the very night preceding the annual meeting, without preceding no 
 tice, Mr. Gilmore discharged Mr. Batchelder. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We don t make any objection to that fact as you state 
 it. 
 
 Q. You may state when and under what circumstances you were dis 
 charged, and by whom. 
 
 A. I was discharged by a letter from Mr. Gilmore, as superintend 
 ent, on the evening (immediately upon the arrival of my train in) of 
 the annual meeting of the stockholders, for the year 1866. After my 
 discharge, I wrote Mr. Gilmore, asking him the cause of my dismissal, 
 whether from direliction of duty, or because of a change in the direc 
 tion of the road. Either he or his clerk he signed it, so it must have 
 been he he wrote me a letter. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Produce the letter. 
 
 Q. Have you the letter ? 
 
 A. I have it ; but I neglected to bring it, because it slipped my 
 mind. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge. ) Let me ask you who employed you to carry 
 on this investigation that you did carry on against Mr. Clough upon the 
 <jars ? 
 
 A. Mr. Carney. 
 
 Q. Were you an acquaintance or friend of his before that time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you acquainted with Gen Butler before that ? 
 
 A. If you will allow me, I will state the circumstances. 
 
 Q. All I want is, did you or did you not know him ? 
 
 A. I did know him. 
 
 Q. Were you in his employ ? 
 
 A. I was one of his confidential clerks, during his connection with 
 the Army of the James. 
 
 Q. Were you with him in New Orleans ? 
 
236 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you with him at Fort Fisher ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How long a time did you remain in the capacity of confidential 
 clerk of Gen. Butler, sir, while he was commander of the Army of the 
 James ? 
 
 A. From February up to the time of his removal. 
 
 Q. How many months ? 
 
 A. ] should judge it was about eleven months, to the best of my re 
 collection. 
 
 Q. Were you a chum of Major Carney s ? 
 
 A. Major Carney was at North Carolina, and I was at Fortress Mon 
 roe. 
 
 Q. Did you have communication with Gen. Butler before you went 
 on the cars as a spy ? 
 
 A. I did 
 
 Q. Before you went on to the Concord Kailroad, as a spy, did you 
 talk with Butler as regards your going on ? 
 
 A. I talked with him yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was it the understanding that, if you went on the road as a spy, 
 and succeeded in discerning peculations and frauds on the part of Mr. 
 ClOugh, the old conductors would be turned off from the road, and then 
 you would be put on ? 
 
 A. There was no such understanding at the time, at all. 
 
 Q. Was it the talk between you and Gen. Butler, or anybody else, 
 that if you went on the Concord road and conducted operations which 
 resulted in the discovery of frauds and peculations on the part of the 
 conductors, they would be removed ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not until after I got all through my investigation, then 
 1 proposed the subject myself. 
 
 Q. Did you have the thing in mind before you got through ? 
 
 A. Not in the least. 
 
 Q. Then it occurred to you suddenly? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it occured to me that, if the matter turned out as I 
 supposed it would, if I could have the appointment, I would ask for it 
 and have it. 
 
 Q. Will you please state, sir, how long it was after you concluded 
 your operations, before the idea occurred to you that it would be desir 
 able for you to have a position on the road as conductor? 
 
 A. I. think it was in the next two weeks afterwards. 
 
 Q. And the idea never crept into your mind before ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Butler never suggested it to you ? 
 
 A. Not until afterwards. 
 
 Q. And Carney never intimated it to you ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You never thought of it until two weeks afterwards ? 
 
 A. Until within two weeks. 
 
 Q. You state that, do you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; to the best of my recollection and belief. 
 
 Q. When that idea came into your mind, who did you communicate 
 fco ? Or, first, let me ask you who procured you the appointment ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. I made application to Mr. Upharn. I made ap 
 plication for Mr. Clough s train. 
 
237 
 
 Q. You had your eye on Mr. Clough s train, had you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That is the train you had your eye on ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You didn t ask to go on Noyes s train, or Jones s train ? 
 
 A. I asked for Clough s train. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, let me ask you if you went to Mr. Butler to get him to 
 engineer your desires through ? 
 
 A. After I had thought of it, and come to the conclusion myself 
 that it would be desirable, I made known my wishes to the general. 
 
 Q. General Butler ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. And asked him if he would aid me to get the position. 
 He said he would as far as he could. 
 
 Q. Did he aid you, sir ? 
 
 A. I think he did, although I am not able to state at the present 
 time. It does not occur to me in what manner ; but I know I always 
 alleged it to his influerrce or through the kindness of Mr. Upham. 
 
 Q. Did you make an application to Colonel George for aid in that 
 direction ? 
 
 A. I cannot state whether I did or not. I know I saw Col. George. 
 I was just thinking I could not tell whether I saw Col. George until 
 after my apppointment. It does not occur to me clearly whether I saw 
 him or not. 
 
 Q. Wasn t it put upon the ground of the services you had rendered 
 the road ? 
 
 A. Not in the least, that I know of. 
 
 Q. It was upon grounds entirely independent of that? 
 
 A. As I understand it. 
 
 Q And you don t connect your position as conductor with your op 
 erations as spy at all ? 
 
 A. I never have made any connection in that way. I have often 
 thought that whether I had any connection with the road prior to that, 
 it might have been the same result by my applying. 
 
 Q. Did you ever have any agreement of this kind with them ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not until after I got through. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, what was your business before you were connected with 
 the Army of the James ? 
 
 A. I was clerk of the register of deeds in Lowell, about nine 
 months, I think, before I went to Fortress Monroe. 
 
 Q. How long were you employed in this business of spying out the 
 doings of the conductors ? 
 
 A. I don t know that I could tell how long I was, directly and indi 
 rectly* It was less than three months. 
 
 Q. What compensation did you receive for the services you rendered ? 
 
 A. That I am unable to state positively. 
 
 Q. Won t you be kind enough to state approximately if you cannot 
 positively ? 
 
 A. I don t think it was over a hundred dollars ? 
 
 Q. For the entire three months ? 
 
 A. For the whole time. 
 
 Q. Have you got anything in expectation ? 
 
 A. Not in the least. 
 
 Q. Have you got any arrangement that you are to have part of the 
 twenty-five thousand dollars ? 
 
238 
 
 A. No sir ; I have no claim against the Concord road whatever, 
 
 Q. And that hundred dollars liquidates your claim ? 
 
 A. Yes, so far as at present. 
 
 Q. Are you here swearing by the day ? 
 
 A. No, sir? 
 
 Q. Have you been summoned here ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you understood that you are to be paid for it ? 
 
 A. Not in the least. 
 
 Q. What do you come here for, then ? 
 
 A. Well, 1 suppose that the laws of New Hampshire provide for 
 necessary expenses. 
 
 Q. Do you come here on a pass ? 
 
 A. I come here on a pass of the Boston and Lowell Eailroad. 
 
 Q. Whose pass is it ? 
 
 A. John D. Winslow s. 
 
 Q. Did you ask for it ? , 
 
 A. I believe Col. George gave it to me. 
 
 Q. Been riding back and forth on that pass ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you had any money advanced to you to pay your fees ? 
 
 A. Not a dollar ; merely came up at the request of the parties. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, will you be kind enough to turn to your first record of 
 November 21st. You say on that day you paid fare to George Clough 
 from Nashua, in the cars. Will you be kind enough to take his way 
 bill and see if he has not returned a fare as paid in the cars from 
 Nashua to Concord on that day? 
 
 A. He has returned two fares from Concord to Nashua. May I be 
 allowed to state further ? 
 
 Yes, sir ; anything you please. 
 
 As the regulations were when I was on the road, as I came from 
 Nashua to Concord, these marks should have been at the top instead of 
 the bottom. Fares up should be marked from the top down, and fares 
 down from the bottom up. These were my instructions. 
 
 Q. Did Clough return fares from Concord to Nashua ? 
 
 A. He has returned two fares between Concord and Nashua. 
 
 Q, Now, sir, the next day is the 23d, I understand you to say that 
 upon that occasion you bought three tickets to Boston, and you paid 
 one fare to Nashua. Will you be kind enough to take the return of Mr. 
 Clough on that day, and see if he hasn t returned fares to Boston and 
 also to Nashua ? See how many he has returned to Boston and how 
 many he has returned to Nashua ? 
 
 A. He returned eight fares to Boston by way of Lowell, and two 
 fares over the road between Nashua and Concord. 
 
 Q. That is where you paid your fare ? 
 
 A. It may be. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Is that a case where you used a ticket ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. A ticket over the Vermont Central road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} The next time you make a return is Nov. 
 25th ; paid three fares to Nashua. Will you be pleased to take the 
 way-bill of the 3.30 train on the 25th, and see if Mr. Clough has re 
 turned any fares between Concord and Nashua on that cUy, and if so, 
 how many ? 
 
239 
 
 A. Clough has returned, as I read, five fares between Nashua and 
 Concord. There are four down and one across it. I don t know 
 whether it is to erase it or to make it five ; it is one of the two. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} What did you say you paid for these three 
 tickets ? 
 
 A. Bought three tickets to Boston, and paid $8.55. 
 
 Q. No ; these tickets from Concord to Nashua ? 
 
 A. November 25th, paid fares to Nashua, $4.80. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Muyridge.) That would be $1.60 a fare ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, now, you have seen fit to note the fact, and put it in here, 
 that you gave him a five dollar bill, and he gave you $1.20; and that 
 you called his attention to it, and that he thanked you. That is all there 
 is of the transaction ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You saw the mistake and handed it back. That is all there is 
 to that ? 
 
 A. That is all there is, so far as I know. 
 
 Q. Let us take the next record that you have, which is under date 
 of November 27th. On the 10.15 train you say you left Manchester; 
 paid two fares to Nashua, $1.70; no tickets. How would that be? 
 
 A. From Manchester to Nashua. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, will you be kind enough to take Mr. Clough s way 
 bill, and see if he does not return two fares ? 
 
 A. There are two fares returned over the road from Manchester to 
 Nashua. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) What price ? 
 
 A. Eighty-five cents, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Now the next one is under date of Novem 
 ber 28th, on the 3.30 train. You say you left Concord, paying the con 
 ductor one fare to Nashua ; no ticket. Will you be kind enough to 
 take the way-bill of November 28th, and see if Mr. Clough has returned 
 a fare, and if so, how many? 
 
 A. Between Concord and Nashua ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A Between Nashua and Concord one fare. 
 
 Q. Just one fare ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, the next is December 13th, Wednesday. You left 
 Manchester, you say, at 2.20 P. M. ; paying Mr. Clough two fares be 
 tween Manchester and Concord, 85 cents each ; and that is the fare, as 
 returned upon the way-bill 85 cents. Now, see if Mr. Clough has 
 returned it ? 
 
 [Mr. George objected, stating that he did not like to have statements 
 made by counsel as to what the witness had said, when it was stated in 
 correctly.] 
 
 Q. You have returned, under date of December 13tb, two fares 
 from Concord to Manchester, $1.60? 
 
 A. Y T es, sir. 
 
 Q. Eighty-five cents each ? 
 
 A. I have put in pencil; " Eighty-five cents each/ and after that 
 "$1.60." 
 
 Q. Now, will you look at the way-bill between Manchester and Con 
 cord? 
 
240 
 
 A. Either six or seven. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, the next record you notice is under date of December 
 15th, Friday. At 11 o clock left Manchester for Nashua; paid for 
 self, lady and girl. That is just two fares ; and he didn t take fare 
 for the little girl ? 
 
 A. My memorandum merely shows that there was a little girl. 
 
 Q. Was it the custom then to take fare for a little girl ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to take the way-bill and see if Mr. 
 Clough has made any return of fares between Manchester and Nashua ? 
 
 A. Between Manchester and Nashua, four fares. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, the next is December 16, Saturday. Left Concord in 
 the 3.30. How many fares did you pay, making up $3.20 ? 
 
 A. I will state to the best of my recollection and belief ; it is six. 
 I came up with one companion to Concord. When I went back I paid 
 .him $3.20. It must have been that the companion went back with me. 
 
 Q. Then that should have been how many fares ? 
 
 A. Two fares. 
 
 Q. Each way ? 
 
 A. No ; only one way. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, will you be kind enough to look at his way-bills of 
 December 16th, and see if he has returned any fares between Nashua 
 and Concord ? 
 
 A. Between Nashua and Concord, four fares. 
 
 Q. Now, the next is under date of December 25th, Monday. Paid 
 Clough a fare from Concord to Nashua, $1.60. That would be exactly 
 right, would it not, sir ? 
 
 A. I don t know, sir. 
 
 Q. Just look at that and see what the fare was from Nashua to Con 
 cord ? 
 
 A. Fare from Nashua to Concord, $1.60 That is just what I paid 
 Mm. 
 
 Q. See if it is returned in the fares ? 
 
 A. Two fares, $1.60. 
 
 Q. That is the entire record you have got against Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. That is the entire record from which I have made the memoran 
 dum against Mr. Clough, so far as I know. I have not seen these 
 records for about three years. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} When you had completed your record, what 
 did you do with it ? 
 
 A. I made them out day after day, and sent them to Major Carney. 
 
 Q. And you haven t seen them from that day to this ? 
 
 A. From that day until day before yesterday. 
 
 Q. Was a man by the name of Draper on the cars ? 
 
 A. I think I did see a person who was pointed out to me by the 
 name of Draper. There was a man by the name of Draper the major 
 told me after I got through who was running at the same time. He 
 was pointed out to me as being Mr. Draper. 
 
 Q. Do you know where he is ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you made any inquiry ? 
 
24.1 
 
 A. I went yesterday where he used to be, and asked the young man 
 &here if Draper was there. He said he was not ; he had been gone 
 about three weeks. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Did he tell you the circumstances under 
 which Draper left town ? 
 
 A. He said the last he saw of him he was going down street, and he 
 said something afterwards about two men after him. 
 
 Q. Did he tell you whether they had badges on their right shoulder ? 
 
 A. I think he said afterwards that two policemen Avere after him. 
 
 Q. And Draper hasn t been seen since ? 
 
 A. No, sir. [Adjourned.] 
 
 [TmnTi ENTir l\vv. Thursday, I>eceinlH r ITti i, ISBS.J 
 
 This day was entirely devoted to the discussion, by the counsel, of the 
 exception taken to the evidence offered by the .plaintiff. 
 
 [FouUTKK.vnt DAY. Fiiday, December lytli, JSfis.] 
 
 The hearing was resumed at 10 o clock, A. M. 
 
 RULINGS. 
 
 The chairman announced the decision of the referees on the ques 
 tions submitted : 
 
 First. As to the comparison between the returns of trains on the 
 Concord road : Held, that such comparisons may be made by proper 
 testimony, reserving the question as to comparisons between other roads, 
 though the opinion of the board is not against receiving such testimony. 
 
 Second. On the motion for a non-suit, the referees rule that there is 
 evidence for them to consider. 
 
 INCOME KETUKXS. 
 
 Mr. George read to the referees, and offered in evidence, the returns 
 income made by George Clough to the assessor of internal revenue 
 during the years 1864, 1865, 1866 and 1867, as follows: For the year 
 ommencing January 1, and ending December 31, 1864. (Statement 
 sworn to. May 16, 1865, before W. Odlin, assistant assessor of 7th 
 division, 2d district, New Hampshire.) 
 
 RECEIPTS. 
 
 From rent of buildings, $2522.30 
 
 from interest on notes,, bonds, mortgages, or other personal 
 
 securities, 
 From interest or dividends on stock, capital or deposits in 
 
 any bank, trust company, savings institution, insurance, 
 
 railroad, canal, turnpike or, slack water company. 1600.00 
 
 From dividends of any incorporated company, other than 
 
 those abo>ve mentioned, 13.00 
 
 From salary, other than as officer or employee of the I nited 
 
 States. 840.00 
 
 Gross income, $5560.74 
 
 .DEDUCTIONS. 
 
 Interest paid out or falling due within the year, $75.00 
 National, state and local taxes paid within the year, 882.08 
 Amount actually paid for insurance on homestead, 100.00 $1057.08 
 
 Net income, $4503.66 
 
 16 
 
242 
 
 TAX. 
 
 Exempt by law, $600.00 
 
 Amount in excess of $600, and not exceeding $5000, 
 
 subject to 5 per cent, 3904.00 
 
 Total tax, 
 Deduct amount of tax withheld by institutions under sec, 
 
 120 and 122, 
 
 Amount of tax due, 
 
 TAXABLE ARTICLES. 
 
 One carriage valued at $50, and not exceeding $100, in 
 cluding harness used thereon, 
 
 One carriage valued at $100, and not exceeding $200, 
 
 One carriage valued at $200, and not exceeding $300, 
 
 Two gold watches valued at $100, or less, 
 
 One gold watch valued at above $100, 
 
 One piano forte, valued at not less than $100, and not above 
 $200, 
 
 (Sixty-two ozs. plate of silver, kept for use, per oz. troy ex 
 ceeding 40 ozs. used by one family, 
 
 $1,04 
 
 3.06 
 2.06 
 2. OH 
 
 4.08 
 
 3.10 
 
 $17.10 
 
 For the year commencing Jan. 1, and ending Dec. 31, 1865. (State 
 ment sworn to May 17, 1S66, before W Odlin, assistant assessor.) 
 
 RECEIPTS. 
 
 From rents of lauds, $250.06 
 
 Prom rents of buildings, $2769.17 
 
 PROPER DEDUCTIONS. 
 
 Repairs, $577.66 
 
 Insurance, 80.99 658.65 
 
 From interest or dividends on stock, capital or deposits, &c. 
 From dividends of any incorporated company, other than 
 
 those above mentioned, 
 
 From interest on United States bonds and treasury notes, 
 From interest on notes, bonds, mortgages or securities, other 
 
 than those above enumerated, 
 From salary, other than as officer or employee of the United 
 
 States, 
 
 G-ross income, 
 
 DEDUCTIONS. 
 
 Interest paid out or falling due within the year, $512.27 
 National, state and local taxes paid within the year, 1016.25 
 
 Net income, 
 
 $2110.52 
 
 1684.21 
 
 12.50 
 483,00 
 
 562.5S 
 900.00 
 
 $6002.81 
 
 1528.52 
 $4474.29 
 
 TAX. 
 
 Exempt by law, $600.00 
 
 Amount in excess of $600, and not exceeding $5000, 
 
 subject to 5 per cent., 3874.70 
 
 Deduct amount of tax withheld by institutions enumerated 
 
 in paragraphs 6 and 7, 
 
243 
 
 TAXABLE ARTICLES. 
 
 Que carriage valued at above $100, and not above $200, $2.00 
 
 Two carriages valued at above $200, and not above $300, 6.00 
 
 Two gold watches valued at $100 or less, 2.00 
 
 One gold watch valued at above $100, 2.00 
 
 One piano forte valued at above $200, and not above S-UH), 4.00 
 
 Sixty-two ounces silver plate, exceeding 40 ounces, 3.10 
 
 For the year commencing January 1, and ending December 31, 1866. 
 
 (Statement sworn to May 14, 1867, before John Kimball, collector.) 
 
 RECEIPTS. 
 
 From rents, 82019,10 
 
 From profits realized by sales of real estate purchased since 
 
 December 31, 1 863, 120.00 
 
 From interest on any bonds, or other evidence of indebt 
 edness, &c., IsOO.OO 
 
 From interest on notes, bonds, mortgages, or other securi 
 ties other than those enumerated above, 
 
 Gross income, $.5496.68 
 
 DEDUCTIONS. 
 
 Exempt by law. $1000.00 
 
 National, state, county, or municipal taxes paid 
 
 within the year, 760.14 
 
 Amount actually paid for water and land rents, 101.00 
 
 Amount paid for repairs, 475.04 
 
 Interest paid out or falling due within the year, 701.71 
 
 Interest on dividends from corporations, 1*00.00 $4907.79 
 
 Taxable income, $588.84 
 
 Amount of tax at 5 per cent., $29.45 
 
 TAXABLE ARTICLES. 
 
 1 gold watch valued at $100, or less, $1.00 
 3 gold watches valued at above $100, 6.00> 
 
 02 oz. silver plate, exceeding 40 oz. , 3,10 
 For the year commencing January 1, and ending December 31, 1867. 
 
 (Statement sworn to April 1, 1868, before AY. Odlin, assistant assessor.) 
 
 RECEIPTS. 
 
 From rents, $2832.00 
 
 From interest on bonds, or other evidences of indebtedness, &e.. 4810.00 
 From interest on notes, bonds, mortgages or securities, other 
 than those enumerated above, 
 
 Gross income, 
 
 DEDUCTIONS. 
 
 Exempt by law, 
 National, state, county and municipal taxes with 
 in the year, 815.11 
 Amount actually paid for water and land rent, 101.00 
 Amount paid for repairs, 291.14 
 Interest paid out or falling due within the year, I OOs. 32 
 Interest on dividends from corporations enumerat 
 ed above in paragraph 6, -a 10. 00 
 
 Taxable income, 
 
244 
 
 TAXABLE ARTICLES. 
 
 1 gold watch valued at $100, or less, $1.00 
 
 3 gold watches valued at above $100, 6.00 
 
 62 oz. silver plate, exceeding 40 oz., 3.10 
 
 Mr. George called the attention of the referees to the fact that in 
 neither of the four statements was there any return made of receipts 
 from farming operations ; or value of live stock ; or profits on sale of 
 gold or stocks. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF PETER DUDLEY. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} State where you live, and your occupation. 
 
 A. 1 live in Concord; I keep a livery stable. 
 
 Q. When did you first become acquainted with Mr. George Clough, 
 and for how long have you known him? 
 
 A. I have known him for thirty years, or more. 
 
 Q. What was Mr. dough s occupation when you first knew him. and 
 where was he engaged in business ? 
 
 A. When I first knew him he was driving stage into Lowell, for a 
 man by the name of Osgood. He was driving on what I think was called 
 the Dover and Lowell route. I know that he went into Lowell, but 
 what was his stopping point at the other end, I cannot say. 
 
 Q. Was it the route from Dover through Pittsfield ? 
 
 A. No ; from Dover through Windham and Derry. 
 
 Q. In what year was that ? 
 
 A. 1 should think it was four or five years before the railroad was 
 opened, which was in 1842. 
 
 Q. How long did he continue to drive stage for Osgood ? 
 
 A. He drove there until he came on to the Mammoth road, and 
 fbought some property of me. 
 
 Q. What was the "Mammoth road?" 
 
 A. It is the road leading from here to Lowell by way of Hooksett, 
 Londonderry, Windham, &c. 
 
 Q. At that time, who owned the staging on the Mammoth road from 
 Ibere to Lowell ? 
 
 A. There were different interests. I owned half of one line to Low 
 ell, and a man by the name of Newell owned the other half. We owned 
 the line down on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. On the opposite 
 days, Mr. Walker and Mr, Wood owned a stage line on the same road. 
 
 Q. When you speak of "line, "you mean one day down and the 
 next day back ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many horses were required ? 
 
 A. I worked twenty-four horses from here to Lowell ; twelve were 
 mine, and twelve were Newell s. Twenty-four horses constituted the 
 line. 
 
 Q. You say that you sold some property to Mr. Clough. AVhat did 
 you sell him ; and when, and for how much did you sell him ? 
 
 A. I had twelve horses on the road, I think ; I am not certain 
 whether it was ten or twelve ; I sold him two teams, but whether it was 
 ten or twelve horses I cannot say. 
 
 Q. You sold him your interest in one-half of the line ? 
 
 A. Y r es. 
 
 Q. What did he pay you for that interest ? 
 
 A. He paid me two thousand dollars. 
 
245 
 
 Q. What did the purchase embrace besides the two teams ? 
 
 A. It embraced the coach, harness, blankets, &c. 
 
 Q. State as nearly as you can the time when you sold this property 
 to him ? 
 
 A. I do not think that I could state the year. As near as my recol 
 lection serves me, it might have been three years before the railroad 
 cars ran into Concord, which was in the fall of 1842. .It was three 
 years before that, which would probably make it sometime in the year 
 1839. 
 
 Q. How and when did he pay you that two thousand dollars ? 
 
 A. He paid one thousand dollars at the time that we made the trade; 
 and he gave me a note for one thousand more. I do not recollect when, 
 he paid the note ; at any rate he paid it before I asked him for it ; it 
 might have been five or six months. 
 
 Q. What did he do after you sold him one-half of that line ? 
 
 A. He took the property and drove it, and took care of it. 
 
 Q. How long did he continue to run that property ? 
 
 A. He ran it up to the time that he was appointed conductor on the 
 Concord road, and still longer than that, for he .hired a man to drive. 
 
 Q. He ran it after the cars ran to Manchester, and before they ran 
 to Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Which end of the line did he run ? 
 
 A. He ran from Manchester here until the cars came here ; and I 
 think that he ran for a while from Manchester to Lowell, after the cars 
 ran up as far as Manchester. 
 
 Q. How long was it after the cars ran to Concord before he disposed 
 of the stage property ? Did he run any stages after the cars caine into 
 Concord ? 
 
 A. I am not certain, but I think that he did. 
 
 Q. Wliere ? 
 
 A. It occurs to me that he might have run from Manchester to Hop- 
 kinton, but I would not say that he did or did not. 
 
 Q. At the time that Mr. Clough was appointed conductor on the 
 Concord Railroad, what property had he, as far as you know ? 
 
 A. I do not know what he had. I know that he bought this proper 
 ty of me, and paid me for it, and that he owned a house. 
 
 Q. Where was the house ? 
 
 A. On South street. 
 
 Q. How large a house was it? 
 
 A. It was a two-story house. 
 
 Q. Did he have any other property? 
 
 A. I do not know of any other property. 
 
 Q. Did you own any interest in the stage line after you sold to Mr. 
 Clough ? 
 
 A. Not in that line ; I owned an interest on the same road on oppo 
 site days. 
 
 Q. You ran one day, and Mr. Clough the next ? 
 
 A. Yes ; on the day I went down, he came up. 
 
 Mr. Mugridye. Mr. Dudley is a witness that we propose to call here 
 after, and we do not care to examine him until then. 
 
 Mr. George offered in evidence and read the following deposition of 
 Ira Foster, sworn to on the 24th day of November, 1868. 
 
246 
 
 DEPOSITION 01- IRA FOSTER. 
 
 IST [XT. Where do you reside, and how long have you known Geo. 
 dough? Axs. 1 reside in Concord, and knew Mr. Clough as much a> 
 three years before the Concord Railroad started. 
 
 2n IXT. In what business were you engaged, and was he engaged, 
 from the time you first knew him, up to the time of the opening of the 
 Concord Railroad to Concord? Axs. We were both engaged in "staging. 
 I run from Concord to Xashua, and he from Concord to Lowell, over the 
 Mammoth road, according to the best of my knowledge. I think he run 
 opposite days from me. generally. 
 
 OD IXT. Who were the first conductors on the Concord Railroad from 
 Nashua to Concord? Axs. Myself and Mr. Clough. 
 
 4TH TXT. State what property Mr. Clough owned when he first com 
 menced to run on the Concord road, and your means of knowledge, 
 whether from what he said to you or otherwise. State fully. Axs. 1 
 have no means of knowing whether he had property or not, or how much, 
 otherwise than that he had a line of stages from Concord to Lowell, that 
 I suppose he owned, but I do not know how much of it. I recollect one 
 time of being in the cars with him, and he told me that he had subscribed, 
 or took, in the Northern road, 1 think, fifty shares. This talk, I think, 
 was about the time they commenced on the Northern road. 
 
 DTK IXT. Of what did the line of stages from Concord to Lowell 
 consist? Axs. 1 suppose it would consist of about twenty horses, and 
 harnesses sufficient for them, and one or two coaches I don t know 
 whether he had one or two and stage-sleighs, blankets, &c. 
 
 GTH IXT. Have you any knowledge or information that George Clough 
 had any other property at the time when he commenced to run as con 
 ductor, except the line of stages, and property, as specified in the pre 
 ceding answer? Axs, I have not. 
 
 ZTH INT. State whether or not Mr. Clough ever said anything to you 
 about the amount of property he was worth at the time that he went ou 
 to the road as conductor. Axs. Never. 
 
 STH IXT. Have you or not any knowledge whether Mr. Clough owned 
 that line of stages ? Axs. No positive knowledge. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION, BY If. I . ROLFE, ESQ. 
 
 IST INT. Did not Mr. Clough, at the time he went on to the Concord 
 road as conductor, own a house and land on South street, in Concord, 
 and don t you recollect of his putting his team up there, and taking- 
 care of it himself, and being his own hostler, for a year or two before 
 he went on to the Concord road ? Axs. 1 suppose he did own a house 
 there. He lived there, and I suppose he owned it. I have no doubt in 
 my mind that he owned it, but I had forgotten it. [ do not recollect 
 about his putting his team up there. As he ran on opposite days to me 
 I suppose that I should not know it. 
 
 2o IXT. Has not Mr. Clough, while you have known him, been a re 
 markably energetic and industrious man? Axs. I do not know as 
 there is anything remarkable about it ; but he has always been an en 
 ergetic and industrious man, the same as all good business men are. 
 
 MAIN EXAMINATION, RESUMED. 
 
 9Tii IXT. Will you describe the house that Mr. Clough owned, on 
 South street, referred to by you? Axs. It was a two-story, white 
 house, about 24x32 feet, and an L part, and barn. It was on a largo 
 lot ; if my memory serves me. [ think it was nearly an acre, maybe not 
 over three quarters. 
 
247 
 
 lO rif Lvr. Do you or not know whether he owned it free and clear 
 > debt, or whether it was mortgaged or encumbered at the time he went. 
 MI to the road? [Objected to.] ANS. I could not tell. 
 
 HTH INT. Do you or not know how long Mr. Clough had owned that 
 iouse and lot at the time he went on to the road, and what he paid for 
 it ? Axs. I should think he lived therefor a number of years; I 
 wouldn t tell for how long. I do not know what he paid for it. 
 
 I2Tii INT. Do you or not know of any other property which Mr. 
 Clough owned, or which he had in his possession, at the time he went 
 m said railroad as conductor ? If so, what was it ? ANS. I do not 
 .feeollect any. 
 
 [Signed] IB A FOSTER. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. We propose to put in evidence the first paragraph of 
 fefee answer to the 14th interrogatory in Mr. Clough s deposition, which 
 .& as follows : The first eight or ten years that I ran through to Bos- 
 &a I used to carry produce down buying here and selling in Boston. 
 I used to bring up stuff at the same time." 
 
 The Chairman. Is there anything that shows in what capacity he 
 was then acting ? 
 
 Mr. Stanley. He was running as conductor ; he n^ver run in any other 
 capacity. 
 
 Mr, Mugridge. What is the object of this testimony V 
 
 Mr. George. Mr. Clough claims in his deposition that he made a 
 yam of money carrying produce on the cars. If he did, we say that he 
 ssade it without right, and that the money that he received belongs to 
 llse railroad. 
 
 Mr. Mvgridge. We object to the testimony. 
 
 Mr. George. We propose to show that he made money in this way 
 Jast as he made money on the coupons ; we propose to show further that 
 Se made money by putting a boy on the cars to sell peanuts ; and we 
 daim that all the money he made in these several ways, he made con 
 trary to law, and that it belongs to the corporation. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We suppose that this evidence stands upon the same 
 footing as the evidence with regard to free passes. 
 
 Mr. George. Not at all. We put it precisely upon the same ground 
 ,B* the ruling that has been already made with regard to the two thous 
 and dollars profit on the coupon tickets. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That ruling does not cover this point ; that is a 
 double ruling, 
 
 Mr. George. What do you mean by " double ruling " ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We will show you by and by. There is no claim 
 made for this in the specification. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. Yes there is. 
 
 Mr. Mugrigde. Where ? 
 
 Mr. Stanley. The specification will show it. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. If this evidence is offered with a view of showing 
 Mr. Clough s property, or the method and manner in which he accumu 
 lated that property, then we do not object to it ; but if it is put in for 
 the purpose of showing that Mr. Clough is specifically chargeable, then 
 "we do object to it. 
 
 The Chairman. This evidence is perhaps competent enough in certain 
 respects ; but whether the referees will hold that money made in such 
 a way as is just indicated belongs to the corporation, is a matter that we 
 
248 
 
 do not propose to settle at this time. In other respects the evidence 
 may be competent enough, and we do not think therefore that we ca 
 exclude it. 
 
 Mr. Muyridge. We do not wish to be understood as objecting to it as 
 showing the manner in which Mr, Clough accumulated his property; but 
 if it is put in for the purpose of charging us in this action, we do object- 
 to it. 
 
 The Chairman. Is that in the specification ? 
 
 Mr. Mug ridge. We claim that the specification does not cover it; 
 the specification is "for" moneys the defendant received for the plain 
 tiff, and has not returned the same in pursuance of his duties as con 
 ductor." 
 
 The Chairman. Whether the money that he might make in that 
 way by carrying on a business which at present it appears is not a 
 part of the business of a railroad corporation could be recovered in 
 this form of action, and under this specification, is a question that will 
 have to be considered hereafter, I suppose. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. If it is more agreeable to have the evidence go ii^ 
 with our exception, which may be considered at some time agreeable te 
 the referees, it may ]pe received in that way. 
 
 The Chairman. The evidence may go in if competent for any pur 
 pose ; whether it is competent for the purpose it is claimed, is yet to be 
 shown. 
 
 Mr. Stanley (Continuing the deposition.) " The first eight or tea 
 years that I ran through to Boston I used to carry produce down, buy 
 ing here and selling in Boston, I used to bring up stuff at the same 
 time. That is what I used to do when I ran on the cars. On the stuff 
 that I used to carry down and bring up I made more than my salary, 
 considerable, I think. 
 
 Now turn to the oOGth, cross interrogatory : 
 
 "Q. You have heretofore stated, in your direct examination, that 
 when you were first on the Concord .Railroad you carried produce from 
 here to Boston, and speculated in it. Will you state the articles in 
 which you dealt from here to Boston and from Boston back, and alse 
 from Franklin to Boston and from Boston fyack ? ANS. 1 used to carrj 
 chickens and turkeys and geese, butter and eggs, apples, cranberries, 
 chestnuts and berries. I used to send potatoes down by the freight. 
 train. I .used to carry carcasses of veal and mutton from Franklin to 
 Lowell and Boston, and the same articles back, that I brought to Concord." 
 
 The 307th cross interrogatory : 
 
 " Q. State, if you are able, the financial results of said operations, 
 the length of time you were engaged in them, when you stopped, and 
 the occasion of your stopping the business. ANS. 1 kept an account 
 for a year or two of my speculations of that kind, and I think I made 
 from five to eight hundred dollars per year. I stopped, I think, in 
 1849 or 1850. Isaac Spaulding was the president of the road at that 
 time, and told me that he did not want me to carry any more. He said 
 that if I carried stuff, the others might want to. He said that he did 
 not care anything about what I had carried, but he did not want that I 
 should carry any more ; and I have carried nothing since." 
 
 The next question enquires whether he has any memorandum ; add 
 the answer is: "I have not;. 1 cannot find it; it must have been 
 burned when my house was burned." 
 
249 
 
 I read now from the 407th direct interrogatory : 
 
 " Please state the amount you claim to have made in the business 
 transactions you have spoken of, ANS. On the chicken and produce 
 trade.. $5200." 
 
 I will next read the 372d cross interrogatory: 
 
 " Q. Did you, during the time that you run on the cars, employ a 
 boy, or boys, to peddle sweetmeats, &c., in the cars? If so, with what 
 pecuniary result to you, giving the length of time that you were so en 
 gaged? ANS. I did employ a boy some seven or eight years, to peddle 
 fruit and nuts. I used to pay him from fifty to seventy-five cents per 
 day ; and he used to take from a dollar to five and six dollars per day. 
 I think the profits would amount to something over a dollar and a half 
 per day. 
 
 THE DEFENDANTS CASE. 
 
 MR. EOLFE, in opening the case for the defendants, said : 
 May it please you, gentlemen of this Honorable Board of Referees : 
 
 This action, it appears, was brought against Mr. Clough by the Con 
 cord Railroad Company, with the intention, undoubtedly, when the ac 
 tion was brought, (as there are various counts in the declaration) to 
 charge Mr. Clough not only with money, or money s worth, that he col 
 lected for the plaintiif corporation, but also for injuries done to the 
 Concord Railroad by reason of his allowing persons to pass free over the 
 road. 
 
 The referees, as we understand, have very properly excluded any 
 proof, except as to the money that he has had and received in behalf of 
 the Concord Railroad, and for money s worth. So that this action, as 
 it is now before you, is substantially for money which George Clough, 
 as a conductor upon the Concord Railroad, has received, arid has dis 
 honestly and fruduleritly withheld from the railroad, which money be 
 longed to the Concord Railroad. 
 
 This case has a very cxtented history at the present time. Allow me 
 to say, in behalf of Mr. Clough, that upon the day when the directors 
 voted that he should be dismissed from the road, he supposed that no 
 man had a better reputation as an honest man, or had better deserved 
 it, or had more faithfully earned it than he. He knew full well of the 
 customs, and of the corruptions of the Concord Railroad, and of its 
 officers ; but in the midst of these corruptions he had tried to steer 
 clear of any infamy that might rest upon them, and to save his good 
 name and reputation. For twenty-four years he had served the road, 
 as he supposed, faithfully, promptly and efficiently ; having never, dur 
 ing twenty-four years, missed a train ; and being at the time that he 
 was discharged, and for years previous, a large stockholder in the road, 
 he had endeavored to do the duties of a conductor for the Concord Rail 
 road as he would do them for himself. 
 
 The counsel for the plaintiff, in opening his case, stated, somewhat 
 at length, what he expected to prove, and what he hoped to show. But 
 alas ! how frail and uncertain are all human hopes, and all human ex 
 pectations. During the time that we have been engaged in this hear 
 ing (as I wish to suggest to you now, and as my brother, when he 
 makes his closing argument, will undoubtedly argue to you.) more than 
 nine-tenths of all that has been put in here as evidence have been sug 
 gestions and inuendos and incompetent testimony, put in with the idea 
 that they were going to connect it in some way with something else, and 
 make it competent. In this they have signally and entirely failed. 
 
250 
 
 i ought to say that I am obliged to Col. George for the memorandum 
 he has furnished me, of the positions taken. 1 propose, in the outset, 
 to analyze these positions : and wherein they are false 1 propose to 
 show that they are so : and wherein they are true I propose to admit 
 the truth. . 
 
 First, he says that tickets which had been once used were re-sold at 
 stores in Manchester to the extent of several hundred dollars. Now, 
 gentlemen, that may be, or it may not be. Tickets that may have been 
 used and re-sold, but with which George Clough had no connection, nor 
 any knowledge of whatever, have nothing to do with this case. This po 
 sition, I admit, must have referred to the tickets of Mr. White and the 
 tickets of Mr, Weston. neither of whom testify that they ever had a 
 ticket of George Clough, or that they had any knowledge, or idea, that 
 any of the tickets that they had ever came from Mr. Clough. There is 
 no imimdo, even, in their testimony, that they did come from Mr. 
 Clough. When this testimony was put in, it was proposed to connect 
 it. in some way, with Mr. Clough. it was proposed to show that George 
 Clough let James Whitcher have the tickets, and that James Whitcher 
 let the two witnesses, White and Weston, have them ; or that he let 
 Mr. S turkey have them, and that Mr. Starkey let the two witnesses have 
 them. There might be considerable pertinency in my asking at this 
 time, in respect to this testimony, where u James Whitcher? Is he 
 living, or is he dead ? I simply ask that question ; and if James 
 Whitcher is not produced before the referees before the close of this 
 ttrial, my brother, when he comes to place this matter before you, will. 
 I think, do ample justice to James Whitcher, and to the two gentlemen 
 who went down to arrest James Whitcher, and who brought him here 
 and kept him here over Sunday under arrest. 
 
 The second position taken by the plaintiff is, that Mr. Clough sold 
 tickets and passages, for boots and shoes, to John Grier; and that h^ 
 improperly passed his tenants, workmen, and others, for his own private 
 benefit. As to the charge that he passed his tenants, workmen, or 
 others, for his private benefit, I submit that there is not one particle of 
 proof that we are called to answer, except it is in the single instance 
 where Mr. Colby testifies that he went down to Boston on Mr. dough s 
 ,pass, to look at a heating apparatus; and when Mr. Clough comes upon 
 ithe stand I think he will explain that to your entire satisfaction. As 
 to the charge that Mr. Clough sold tickets or passages for boots and 
 shoes, to John Grier, I assert that it is not true ; and Mr. Clough will 
 come before you and state that it is not true ; he will state to you that 
 Mr. Grier came to him and said that he was so poor that he was not 
 able to earn bread for his wife and children during the six days of the 
 week, but had to work on Sundays ; he will state that because of Mr. 
 Grier s poverty, he never in his life took of him one cent s consideration 
 for riding over the railroad ; that he paid him for all the work that he 
 ever did (and he charged very high prices), to the last dollar, and to 
 the last cent; and that he has receipted bills to show for it. 
 
 1 have heard one of the counsel on the other side, before public meet 
 ings, and on other occasions, before Mr. Clough ever had an opportunity 
 to reply to this charge, state that one of the conductors of the Concord 
 Railroad had been furnished, for two or three years, with boots and 
 - shoes in exchange for free rides over the railroad. I have to say, in 
 reply to this charge, that it is a part and parcel of a continual stream 
 of tirade and slander on the part of that counsel and his friends, of 
 
v*jreorgc Clougii, which has lasted for more than three years. In the 
 /ears, in his office, on the street, and at the hotels, his mouth has been 
 ,an open sepulchre, to prejudice everybody against the defendant, i 
 was about to say, although it may not be proper for me to say it. that 
 because of the froth and foam that the newspapers have stirred up 
 Against the conductors of this road, it was hardly to be expected that 
 xh.Q three honorable gentlemen who compose this board of referees could 
 <eem.e here and sit down to the fair and candid trial of this cause, with 
 out being, in some degree, prejudiced against Mr. Clough. It has been 
 extremely hard for Mr. Clough to set quietly by for the space of three 
 3 T ears and maintain any sort of good nature, knowing how outrageously 
 lie was being wronged. But 1 have said to him, "Be quiet, and wait. 
 Time will at last bring all things right. If Mr. Carney, nor anybody 
 else, has found you retaining money belonging to the Concord Railroad, 
 you axe all right ; and no matter what powerful array of counsel there 
 may be against you, time, and the judgment of fair and disinterested 
 men, which is the tribunal before which we hope sometime to have this 
 case heard, will set this matter all right." And now, gentlemen, we 
 -are here before you, three disinterested gentlemen of learning, of can- 
 -rlor, and of intelligence ; and we are satisfied that there can be nothing, 
 o far as the law is concerned, that can escape your scrutiny in relation 
 to George Clough. We can now hope that you will see substantial justice 
 dkme between George Clough and the Concord Eailroad. If Mr. Clough 
 Jaas retained but the ten thousandth part of a cent of the funds which 
 belong to the Concord Eailroad, he will answer for it in your judgment; 
 and t*9 such a tribunal as you constitute, we have confided our whole 
 *age ; and whatever that judgment may be, everybody in this commu 
 nity, ithe Concord Eailroad and Mr. Clough, the counsel upon the other 
 side and the counsel on this side, is bound to be satisfied with, because 
 it will be the judgment of the tribunal before which, by mutual agree- 
 HLcnt, our case has been presented. 
 
 We shall show to you that this Mr. Grier was a poor man, a shoe- 
 saaker by trade ; that he did business for George Clough ; that he oc 
 casionally 7 passed over the road, and that Mr. Clough passed him free, 
 taking no money from him, and receiving no favors of any kind in 
 ffettirn. During all the time that Mr. Clough drove a stage, when he 
 was the proprietor, and when he was not, he never left a man by the 
 wad-side because he had no money with which to pay for a ride : he 
 never put a man out of the cars because he had no money ; and he never 
 ^accepted a pecuniary favor of any kind, or in any way. from a man so 
 poor as John Grier ; and no man can truthfully say that he has. It is 
 asi imputation upon Mr. Clough s character, by anyone who has known 
 lum. to say that he ever accepted anything from so poor a man as John 
 drier, supposing that he had offered it to him. We wish to suggest ti 
 you tli is : here was a great "hullabaloo " about Mr. Clough ; the coun 
 sel spon the other side were " blowreating " (if I may be permitted to 
 3ie an expression more expressive than elegant,) everywhere about the 
 *mductors, and the immense amount of money that was stolen. / have 
 iitffc heard the counsel upon the other side say that George Clough was 
 wrth two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, and that he had stolen all 
 fait fifty thousand dollars from the railroad, but 1 have heard a great 
 many persons say that the counsel has said so. What L wish to suggest 
 i., f that Mr. Grier, hearing these charges, might have supposed that 
 %-. .too, was coming to grief, for having ever ridden free over the road, 
 
and thought perhaps that if he could show that he had paid for 
 passage, he could go free of blame, and so gave the testimoney that W 
 did. Mr. Grier was not perhaps sane at the time ; at any rate, a few- 
 months afterward he went down to the river in this city and committed" 
 suicide, leaving, I believe, an account against Mr. Clough, which he has? 
 since paid. Mr. Clough will state to you all about his transactions 
 with John Grier, and you will be able to form a correct judgment; 
 whether or not his deposition is true. 
 
 As to the charge that Mr. Clough did not punch the tickets as they 
 were taken up, thus rendering them susceptible to a second use, 1 have- 
 to say that there is no evidence here as to the truth of that position. I 
 understand what the charge refers to. Mr. Eoby testifies that he and- 
 his wife were riding in the cars, that he handed his tickets to Mr. 
 Clough, and that Mr. Clough slipped his punch so far past the ticket 
 that it was not punched. The counsel upon the other side charge that 
 Mr." Clough did so designedly, and for the purpose of having the tickets 
 used over again, This is the only instance proved. Mr. Clough will 
 tell you, in the first place, that he never did any such thing ; in the 
 second place, that he never had any occasion to do any such thing ; kfe 
 the third place, you will see at once that he never had any occasion so* 
 to do ; and in the fourth place, a man who knows anything about the 
 duties of a conductor will know at once that there is no necessity for- 
 any such thing. There is not one passenger in a thousand would evei? 
 notice or care whether the conductor did or did not punch his ticket. 
 The counsel upon the other side propose to argue, because they haver, 
 proved in one single instance that Mr. Clough s punch slipped by, aad-~ 
 did not punch the ticket, that it was by design, and done for the pur 
 pose of using the tickets over again. This shows the strait to which 
 he is driven. I shall have occasion to suggest that if such was his- 
 purpose, there was no occasion at all for such a deception. Supposing 
 that everything that is charged upon the other side is true, there is still 
 no occasion for using a local ticket over the road for the purpose of ob 
 taining money out of its use. If a passenger comes into the cars, hav 
 ing a local ticket, the conductor takes up the ticket and puts it into his 
 pocket: if he has no ticket, but pays his fare on the cars, all the con 
 ductor has to do, if he wishes to retain the fare, is to put the money re 
 ceived into his pocket. There is no need, in such a case, that the con 
 ductor should give the passenger a ticket, and thus afford a means of 
 detection. All lie has to do, if dishonestly disposed, is to take the? 
 money and put it in his pocket, and that is the end of it. Not only, in 
 the first place, was there no necessity for punching a local ticket, but*.. 
 in the second place, unless a passenger stopped over at a station for; 
 another train, the practice never obtained of giving a passenger a ticket 
 in the cars. If, in a single instance, the conductor gave a passenger a 1 
 local ticket, on his paying his fare, while a thousand people rode in the 
 cars without ever receiving a ticket, there might be some very keen- 
 eyed, inquisitive gentleman in the cars, who should enquire " Wliat 7 
 does the conductor give that man a ticket for ? All the rest of ws have* 
 no tickets." If the punch, in this particular instance, did slip by the" 
 ticket without punching it, as the witness says, it proves nothing ; it 
 might occur very frequently ; and instead of proving anything, it shows 
 simply that that accident, or circumstance, occurred once on the Con 
 cord Jiailroad during the twenty-four years that Mr. Clough ran as 
 conductor, and proves nothing at all. It simply shows the ridiculous- 
 

 253 
 
 mess of the suspicions that the counsel for the plaintiff entertains as to 
 rtlie way in which the conductors discharge their duties. 
 
 The third charge is " the finding of three hundred and forty-three 
 .tickets, most of which had been once used, on the person and at the 
 , foe-use of James Whitcher, at substantially one time." The counsel 
 might have omitted " substantially " ; it was at one time. Let me say 
 ..b.ere, in my view (and I think it will be yours,) that had not Mr. Gilniore 
 .tmd Mr, George gone down there at that time, and found those tickets on 
 .-the person of James Whitcher, and in the possession of Mr. Weston and 
 Mr. White, you never would have been called as referees to hear and decide 
 this controversy ; this suit would never have been brought; the dis 
 tinguished gentleman who appears as counsel for the plaintiff would 
 aever have earned an immortality of fame in this case ; and George 
 Ck>ugh would have been freed from the expense, the annoyance, and the 
 mortification that he has been subjected to in this suit. Let us see 
 fiow frail is this evidence in support of this charge. If these tickets 
 ..curae t James Whitcher from George Olough, why uot prove it. In the 
 nfeire absence of proof, they say that George Clough admits that he 
 was in the habit of supplying tickets to James Whitcher, to a greater 
 ur less extent, for more than fifteen years. That position is not true ; 
 it is false. Mr. Clough admits, in his deposition, that he has let Mr. 
 Whitcher have tickets, one or two at a time, to give to poor people, as 
 r lte said. When he comes upon the stand he will testify further, that 
 .^luring times of high political excitement, he was requested, as Mr. 
 Sanborn was, to furnish Mr. Whitcher with a few tickets. But Mr. 
 "dough will testify that never in his life, of his own motion, did he let 
 Mr. Whitcher have as many as twenty tickets, (not including those that 
 Mr. Gilrnore directed him to let him have,) and also all that he let him 
 ftave for other persons. Mr. Whitcher wanted them to give to poor 
 people. It is said that Mr. Whitcher was once a Shaker ; and his home 
 kas been a rendezvous for people who have once lived with the Shakers. 
 Mr. Whitcher used to go to Mr. Clough and say, "There are two ladies 
 rho wish to come up from Nashua, or some other place, and visit me ; 
 .md I want you to give me one or two tickets for them "; and Mr. 
 Clough will tell you that he let Mr. Whitcher have some tickets in mere 
 -charity. The question may be asked, " "Why did not these poor people 
 ride on his train, and so be passed without a ticket ? The reply is 
 iliat they could not know, nor could he know, whether they would ride 
 .on his train. There is therefore no admission on the part of Mr. Clough, 
 .tis is claimed by the plaintiff. The statement made here, that there 
 were three hundred and forty-three tickets found upon the person of 
 Mr. Whitcher, proves too much; because, in the first place, Mr. San- 
 "&orn has testified that two hundred of these tickets never could have 
 come into the hands of George Clough in any of the usual transactions 
 0r arrangements of the road; and of the remaining one hundred and 
 forty- three tickets that were found on James Whitcher, thirty-four were 
 dated January 23, 1866, eleven days after George Clough left the em- 
 fjioy <f the road, and while he was sick in bed ; there were three con 
 ductor s checks, and three only, from Concord to Boston, which checks, 
 $r tickets, if George Clough ever had them, he must have been charged 
 with by the road, and whatever tickets of that kind he ever had in his 
 possession, he must have obtained from the ticket agent, and they were 
 therefore as much his property as any property that you. gentlemen, 
 possess, is yours. 
 
Mr. George. [Referring to one of the thirty-four tickets alluded ti- 
 by Mr. Kolfe as dated January 23, 1866.] This ticket is dated Janu 
 ary 2..I, IbGO instead of 186(3. 
 
 Mr Rolfe. I may have made a mistake in the date of one ticket- 
 
 | Adjourned.} 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 J/r, Rolfe. When the chairman suggested that it was a proper time, 
 to suspend my opening remarks, 1 had just said that 1 might have bcei&. 
 mistaken in the date of a single ticket, it is a mistake of my sight, it 
 it is a mistake at all; and if it will be of any benefit to the other side,. 
 I will waive my statement in respect to that one ticket, and say that ifc 
 may have been dated in 1 860. But in relation to the thirty-three other 
 tickets, of which this was the thirty-fourth, 1 am not mistaken. 1 hold 
 in my hand a ticket which purports to have been found upon the persou, 
 of James Whitcher, which is dated on the back, " February, and on tlie 
 front, 186(5." I hold in my hand, also, six other tickets found on the 
 person of James Whitcher, dated February 9, 1866, more than twenty- 
 two days after Mr. Clough left the road. 1 also hold in my hand an 
 other ticket, which purports to have been found upon the person of 
 James Whitcher, where the date is so plain that it must have come un 
 der the inspection of Mr. Gilmore and Col, George, at the time they ob 
 tained them. 
 
 Gentlemen, let me say that if I had been situated as Mr. Gilmore asui 
 Col. George were, and had found these tickets, which their dates show 
 must have been issued from the ticket office after Mr. Clough left the 
 road, and must have come into the hands of Whitcher after Mr. Clough, 
 ceased to have any connection with the road, and should conceal those 
 facts favorable to Mr. Clough from the public, and should continue to 
 circulate everywhere, as Mr. Gilmore and more particularly Col. Georgf 
 did, the charge that these tickets were nearly all obtained by Whitcher 
 of Mr. Clough. If, i say, I should do all this, when I knew Mr. Clougfe 
 had left the road and was at home on a sick bed at the time these tick 
 ets were sold from the ticket offices ; and should, finally, ha^e the 
 effrontery to bring these tickets in here as proof before the referees of 
 Mr. dough s connection with them, I am sure I should be set down bj 
 every honest, disinterested person as either a great knave or a great 
 fool, it would be a conclusive argument that I was guilty of great dis 
 honesty, or was possessed of immense stupidity. These gentlemen botk 
 knew then, as Col. George cannot fail to see now, that Mr. Clough coaM 
 have had nothing to do with any tickets dated after the 14th day ef 
 January, 186(j, the day on which he ceased to run on the road. 
 
 This ticket, J say, found on the person of James Whitcher, and datefc 
 in February, 1M66, and all their testimony taken in connection with it 
 was taken and hid away and locked up in Gen. Butler s safe, in Lowell, 
 or some other place where nobody could see it, until after the commence 
 ment of this trial. I hold in my hand, also, eight other tickets, datest 
 February 6, 1S66. 1 desire the referees to look at the date on these- 
 tickets. A man can scarcely have his eyes so dimmed by age as not ta- 
 see it without glasses. To hold these tickets, to conceal them from us- 
 until the day of the trial, and then bring them in here and presume to- 
 put them in as evidence against Mr. Clough, when they could have, in, 
 no possible way, any connection with Mr. Clough, was a sort of refining" 
 of that cruelty with which Mr. Gilmore and the clerk of the road com 
 menced and have continued these proceedings against him. I 
 
255 
 
 also, in ray hand, eleven other tickets over the Concord road, dated 
 February oth, 1866 ; the dates upon all of them are very distinct; and^ 
 if those gentlemen who discovered them upon the person of James 
 Whitcher had been possessed of the slightest disposition to treat this 
 defendant fairly and honestly, or even decently, they would never have 
 brought any such testimony in here against him. 1 also hold in my 
 hand ten tickets dated February od, 1866, found on the person of James 
 Whitcher. I also hold in my hand two tickets dated February 2d, 1866. 
 These tickets number in all, not counting the one as to the date of which 
 I may be mistaken, thirty-three. 1 ask you, gentlemen, if it is not per 
 fectly apparent to any one desiring to be just and fair that with these 
 tickets which were found upon the person of James Whitcher, and dated 
 after Mr. Clough left the road, he could have had no connection ; but 
 that the mischief, if any mischief was done, must be laid to the charge 
 of somebody else than Mr. Clough. I do not know but that the intro 
 duction of such evidence might have been an oversight on the part of 
 the counsel for the plaintiff. If so, and if, as they claim, they desire 
 to do justice, and to be no more than fair, 1 can only say that such an 
 oversight argues immense stupidity. In the package found upon the 
 person of James Whitcher, are sixteen other tickets. The date of many 
 of them is apparent, and is " February." On many of them the day of 
 the month and the year is not so apparent. In relation to those tickets 
 I have to say that when you come to examine them you will find that on 
 the end of every one of them there is the date " February," and on a 
 large number of them is the date "February f> "; and we propose to 
 show that they were not dated in 1865, as is claimed. If you will take 
 the trouble to look at an almanac you will find that February 5. 1865, 
 came on a Sunday. It is well known that the ticket offices on the Con 
 cord and other railroads are not open on Sundays. Those tickets could 
 not, therefore, have been issued by the company in that year, as is 
 claimed, but must have been issued February 5, 1866. We shall under 
 take to show you, in relation to the tickets issued by the railroad, that 
 there is a certain publication of tickets, and that the tickets are dated 
 when they are published ; they are then used until the number issued 
 is exhausted, and a new supply, bearing a new date, is published. My 
 suggestion is that these tickets, bearing the date "February 5," must 
 have been issued February 5. 1866, and are therefore in the same cate 
 gory with the others, with which, as I have shown, Mr. Clough could 
 have had no connection. 
 
 1 have still another package of tickets ; it is the package of coupons 
 over the Boston, Concord and Montreal Railroad, found upon the person 
 of James Whitcher, and upon which, as you will recollect, there was the 
 date " February," and the day of the month, but without the year. 
 The dates of the tickets vary from February 2d to February Oth ; three 
 of them are dated February 5, without the year, in relation to which I 
 repeat the suggestion made in reference to the other package, that 
 they could not have been published February 5, 1865, for that would 
 have been on a Sunday, and they must therefore have been issued Mon 
 day, February 5, 1866, which was after Mr. Clough left the road ; he 
 could have had nothing to do with them ; and the inference is that the 
 same hand that purloined those other tickets, purloined these. 
 
 There were also found upon the person of James Whitcher, and at his 
 house, various other tickets ; they are somewhat mixed, but here they 
 are ; and I wish you to examine them. For instance, here are twelve 
 
256 
 
 tickets: one over the Roekport and Boston road, one from Exeter to 
 Dover, one from Exeter to New Market, one from Great Falls to Dover, 
 one from Danville Junction to Lewiston, one from South New Market 
 Junction to New Market, &c., with all of which tickets we submit that 
 Mr. Clough could have nothing more to do than the clerk of the road, 
 the counsel upon the other side, or the referees. These tickets, being 
 found upon the person or in the possession of James Whitcher, go with 
 the others. 
 
 We have here another package of tickets from Great Falls to Salmon 
 Falls, one from Great Falls to Union Village, one over the Great Falls 
 and Conway road, and others, numbering twelve in all, with none of 
 which Air. Clough could have anything to do. 
 
 Here is another package of tickets over the Boston, Concord and 
 Montreal road, most of which are from Lawrence to Manchester, quite 
 a large number of them being clean tickets. They arc tickets with 
 which Mr. Clough could have nothing to do, as they are not tickets over 
 his road. There are in this package nineteen regular tickets and eight 
 package tickets, all of them below Manchester, "l call them ; - regular " 
 tickets in contradistinction from the package tickets that are with them. 
 I have here a Concord. Manchester and Lawrence ticket, marked 
 " White," which I suppose came from Mr. White, the witness ; here is 
 a package ticket from Boston to Lowell ; here is a Boston and Maine 
 ticket to Manchester, on which are the initials of John H. George and 
 Joseph A. Gilmore ; and another of the same kind and having the same 
 initials, making two tickets that have the distinguished autographs of 
 those distinguished gentlemen, one of whom has been said to hare 
 covered up more frauds on the Concord Railroad than any other man in 
 New Hampshire, and the other boasted before a committee of the Senate 
 that he had done more than any other live man to help him do it. 
 
 I have here another package of sixteen tickets, from Boston to Glou 
 cester, Boston to Salem, Salem to Newburyport, Gloucester to Boston, 
 Boston to Newburyport, and Rockport to Boston, all of them being 
 over the Eastern road ; and it is very doubtful if George Clough was 
 ever on the Eastern road in his life, or ever had anything to do with it, 
 or ever held in his hand a ticket over that road. 
 
 I have another package of tickets from Salem to Lawrence. 1 un 
 derstand that those that have " G " on them were found on the person 
 of James Whitcher, and that those that have " G 2 " on them were 
 found at his house. 
 
 I hold another package of eight tickets, from Portsmouth to Suncook, 
 Portsmouth to Concord, Portsmouth to New Market Junction, Concord 
 to Portsmouth, New Market Junction to Dover; all of which are num 
 bered in the one hundred and forty-three that might have come into 
 Mr. Clough s possession. 
 
 The Chairman. When you say they "might" have come into his 
 possession, you mean in the usual course of business ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. They might have come into his hands in the usual course 
 of business. The others, if he came by them at all, he must have come 
 by them dishonestly. 
 
 I hold in my hand eight clean tickets over the Eastern Railroad. 
 They appear to be clean tickets, and they appear also to be coupon 
 tickets. In the regular course of business. George Clough could not 
 have had anything to do with them. 
 
257 
 
 Here are one hundred and eighteen tickets that Mr. Clough might 
 have had to do with. They might have come into his hands in the reg 
 ular course of business. The largest share of them are the Concord 
 local tickets and tickets over the Northern and the Vermont Central 
 roads. Here is a ticket over the Northern Kailroad, but no tickets on 
 that road were dated at the time that Mr. Clough left the Concord 
 Kailroad, nor until some time after. The tickets, prior to their being 
 dated, simply had the number of the station on it. A large number of 
 such tickets were found to be in the possession of James Whitcher, 
 These go to make up the one hundred and forty-three tickets that were 
 testified to, that could in the regular course of business have come into 
 the hands of Mr. Clough. 
 
 Having shown you thus much in respect to these tickets, we shall not 
 stop there. Before we conclude this hearing we shall show you, by the 
 admissions of Mr. Starkey himself, who furnished those tickets to James 
 Whitcher, just where they came from, and how they came there, and 
 thus remove every particle of doubt in respect to them. In respect to 
 the tickets which, as we have suggested, could not have come into Mr. 
 Clough s possession in the ordinary course of business, I submit that 
 there is no need of evidence ; and in respect to those which could have 
 come into his hands, that were found upon the person or in the pos 
 session of James Whitcher, we shall show, to your entire satisfaction, 
 how they came there. Having shown that, we might perhaps be relieved 
 from going any further. Having shown that, I think we might safely 
 argue that there is no evidence, and no probability, of Mr. Clough s 
 having done anything irregular on this road. But we will not stop 
 there ; we will proceed ; and we will proceed with Col. George s analy 
 sis. He states, in the sixth place, that it was perfectly practicable for 
 a conductor, if dishonest, to sell and use tickets " over and over again," 
 without detection, so far as any return was concerned. I have already 
 suggested, in relation to that, that the tickets were nothing but an ob 
 struction. It could be of no benefit to the conductor to retain tickets 
 and sell them over again, except in this way ; and if he desired to re 
 tain tickets and sell them to periods who should ride on some other 
 train than his, for the purpose of putting money into his own pocket, 
 he might do that ; and the suggestion that the counsel makes, that it 
 was perfectly practicable for him to do that, is true to a certain extent, 
 but, as has been testified, to no considerable extent. There has been 
 no proof yet offered that George Clough has ever sold a ticket a second 
 time to anybody. There is proof that he has retained tickets ; that he 
 has not punched them ; and he will testify that he has retained tickets 
 and given them away to poor people to ride upon ; and that be has given 
 them to Mr. Gilmore, at his request, and otherwise. He will state all 
 that there is to be known in connection with these transactions. 
 
 In the seventh place, he says that Mr. Clough did use such tickets, 
 according to his own admissions," which is true. The referees have 
 ruled that that was of no account if he did not use them improperly. 
 
 He says, in the eighth place, that it is perfectly practicable, so far 
 as detection is concerned, for a conductor, if dishonest, to appropriate 
 money taken in the cars. That is true. It was not only true of Mr. 
 Clough, but it is true of every other railroad conductor upon earth, and 
 it always will be true of every other railroad conductor. You can 
 never institute a set of rules you never can hedge the conductors around 
 so but that they can, to some extent, put money into their own pockets;, 
 
258 
 
 and appropriate it to their own use ; and I submit that it was of no use 
 tor the directors of the Concord .Railroad, and Mr. Gilmore and Mr. 
 George, to take a journey down to Boston, and have a sort of revelry at 
 the K.vere House, or at the American House, in order that some 
 scheme might be devised to detect these conductors ; because, I submit 
 to you, gentlemen, that if the officers of the road, during the twenty- 
 four years that Mr. Clough had been acting as conductor, had suspect 
 ed that he did not return what moneys he took in the cars, there were 
 ten thousand good opportunities whereby the president of the road, or 
 the clerk, or the counsel of the road, with his immense acuteness, could 
 have discovered it to the most perfect satisfaction of himself and Mr. 
 Gilmore ; and there was no sort of necessity for their employing this 
 distinguished detective down at Lowell, who on one 28th day of Sep 
 tember, took a thousand dollars, as a reward, to make out a report in 
 favor of a criminal, eight days after. 
 
 Have the counsel for the plaintiff shown that Mr. Clough has received 
 any money due the company that he did not pay to them ? That he 
 could, to some extent, we admit ; but have they shown that he did ? 
 Mr. Clough will state upon the stand that, to his knowledge, he never 
 retained or withheld a single dollar, nor a single cent, of the money 
 that belonged to the Concord Railroad. And up to the day when this 
 charge against him was published in the Boston Journal. 1 submit that 
 there was no man in this community that had, nor any man in this 
 community that may hope to have, a better reputation with all that he 
 has ever dealt with (save the Concord Railroad) for honesty, integ 
 rity, uprightness and truthfulness, than had George Clough ; a reputa 
 tion, gentlemen, that he has been nearly forty years in earning, and 
 that is richly worth to him forty years of honest service He will come 
 before you and state that to his knowledge and intention he never 
 withheld one dollar, nor one cent of the funds belonging to the Concord 
 Railroad. He will come before you and state that, in the midst of the 
 corruptions of the times, from the day when Joseph A. Gilmore was a 
 candidate for senator from the fourth senatorial district, and Col. John 
 H. George was a candidate for congress in the second congressional 
 district, when the prerogatives and the power and the money of the 
 Concord Railroad began to be used for political purposes, up to the time 
 when he was discharged from that road, he has endeavored, fairly and 
 honestly, at all times and under all circumstances, to do his duty, 
 
 In the ninth article of this analysis, Col. George says that " during 
 the war the amount of travel was very largely increased ; for months 
 together the number of cars on the lighter of the two heavy trains from 
 Concord, numbering from fifteen to eighteen cars, were filled with pas 
 sengers." I do not propose to say anything about how that was. You 
 know whatever testimony has been offered to show it ; but if there was 
 any such thing as trains from fifteen to eighteen cars filled with pas 
 sengers, running on the Concord Railroad during the war, and Mr, 
 Clough and the other conductors appropriated what was earned by the 
 road over and above its former earnings, they must have appropriated 
 an enormous amount. But I think we shall be able to show that no 
 such state of facts could have existed. I have this suggestion to make : 
 that Mr. Clough was a large stockholder in the road, and he noticed 
 from time to time the way in which the dead-heads were passed over 
 the road ; and he has stated in his deposition that he thought that the 
 number of dead-heads that were passed over the road was equal to two 
 
259 
 
 per cent, of the capital stock of the Concord Kailroad ; he does not know 
 but that he may be mistaken, but it seemed to him that it was equal to 
 that. If there is any argument to be drawn from that ninth propo 
 sition, this is the suggestion that we have to offer in defence : Mr. Gil- 
 more, from 1859 to 1864, was actively engaged in political matters; he 
 was a candidate for state senator in 1859 and 1860, and was also a 
 candidate in 1860 and 1861, and was elected both years; that during 
 that time it was perfectly notorious that he used the patronage of the 
 Concord .Railroad not only for his own political purposes, but to secure 
 the friendship and the control of the legislature, with a daring and 
 recklessness that was never equalled by any man in New England ; that 
 he gave out his free passes by hundreds, to secure political influence ; 
 and it is in evidence here that on a certain day, when Mr. Harriman was 
 nominated for governor, there were more than four hundred of these ir 
 regular tickets, without the ticket agent s stamp upon them, issued,, 
 that went back into the collections, and of which no account was taken, 
 I might say that Gilmore contributed more than four hundred dollars, 
 in tickets, for political purposes, during the year 18634. I might say 
 that Gilmore went to the conductors and, because he did not want so 
 many free passes issued, ordered them to reserve these tickets and re 
 turn them to him, in order that he might give them away to produce 
 political influence in his favor. I might say to you that all the minis 
 ters rode free ; that all the doctors rode free ; and I was about to say 
 that all tbe lawyers rode free, but I believe they did not ; 1 believe that 
 Judge Bell, and Herman Foster, and George W. Morrison invariably 
 paid their full fare ; I believe that there was no other- member of 
 the bar that did ; I believe that Mr. Stanley and Mr. Clark paid full 
 fare for a time, and that afterwards they were allowed to pay fare one 
 -way, receiving a free ticket back. I might say that all the bank di 
 rectors, north and south, in Boston and about Boston, who had any pe 
 cuniary favors to bestow upon Mr. Gilmore, passed free. I might say 
 that all the hotel keepers and their families passed free. I might say 
 that all the wholesale dealers who had a certain amount of freight over 
 the road passed free. I might say that there were season tickets given 
 out to persons, upon which all the members of their firm could ride free 
 at all times. I might say that all the politicians in the state, who had 
 any influence, had free passes. I might say that every member of the 
 legislature that Mr. Gilmore thought that he could influencefhad a free 
 pass. I might say that public meeting after public meeting was gotten 
 up, not only at the time that Mr. Harriman was nominated, but at other 
 times, and that free tickets were thrown out with a profuseness that 
 Mr. Sanborn has forgotten. I might say that Boston men came up in 
 the trains, and Mr. Clough and the other conductors made them pay 
 their fares, but that the fares were paid back to them again ; and Mr. 
 Clough will tell you when he paid back the fare how he had to get it 
 again. I will suggest to you (what was doubtless observable to you all) 
 that during the war all the southern, and a large share of the northern 
 mountain travel was cut off, so that during the war, in the season when 
 the road was reaping its richest harvest, there was not so much travel 
 to the mountains as there was afterwards. I might suggest, what it SB 
 not necessary to put in proof, that since the war the business of the ros*! 
 has increased. There has been an increase in the population of Man 
 chester, Hookset, Suncook, Concord, and all along the line of the 
 and there has been a corresponding increase in tie travel and 
 
260 
 
 over the railroad. The increase has been so great as to require, within 
 the last year, an increase to double the former capacity of the road, in 
 order to carry freight over the lakes and over the roads below. The 
 simple suggestion of these things is, we think, a sufficient answer to his 
 ninth position. 
 
 He says next, that " the fares during the war were twenty-six and a 
 half per cent, higher than they are now. Suppose they were. I hap 
 pened to be a member of the railroad committee in 1864, and many pe 
 titions were presented asking the legislature to interfere and cut down 
 the fare on the Concord Railroad. The Concord Eailroad has been the 
 only one that the legislature has attempted to put under discipline. 
 What was the answer of the road ? They came into the legislature and 
 showed that in the single article of cotton waste the expense was many, 
 many times higher than before the war. They showed that the wood 
 bill was higher than before the war. They showed great increase in the 
 expense of running to prove that there was an immense increase in the 
 outlay of the road. During the war there were a great many soldiers 
 that passed for soldiers transportation, which was two cents per mile, 
 while the regular fare was three and a half cents per mile ; and a large 
 share of the extra travel was the travel of soldiers at this reduced rate 
 of transportation. The Concord Eailroad would not have received near 
 so much income from this as from the ordinary travel, if they had really 
 got it, but Mr. Sanborn testifies that there were about thirty-four hun 
 dred dollars worth of soldiers transportations that the Concord Railroad 
 never received. I have still another suggestion to make, and it is in 
 dicative of the perfect looseness with which Mr. Gilmore used the pat 
 ronage of the road to accomplish anything and everything that he de 
 sired ; it is this : During the time that Mr. Clough was on the road, 
 there was to be a councillors convention held at Manchester, and men 
 in the interest of the railroad distributed to all the delegates such tick 
 ets as these [handing a package of tickets to the referees]. Mr. Spald- 
 ing, a director of the road, was then a candidate. 1 suggest the absurd 
 ity of a suit in which such a man as Mr. Spalding, a man who has 
 been for many years the president of this road, one of the directors of 
 the road, and a candidate for office, should attempt to have George 
 Clough refund money belonging, as alleged, to the Concord Railroad, 
 when, in all probability, the fares of all the poor and destitute, and of 
 every one else that George Clough ever passed free over the road, would 
 not amount to so much as it cost the Concord Railroad to carry the del 
 egates to that convention and back again on that one day. The tickets 
 that I have shown you are not half of the free passages that Mr. Clough 
 took notice of on that single day. He showed them to me, and I took 
 them out of his hands and put them into my pocket, and when he wanted 
 to return them to the road I told him that he could not have them. 
 That is a sample of the way in which the Concord Railroad was used 
 during the time that Joseph A. Gilmore and Isaac Spalding were can 
 didates for political honors ; and now the suggestion is made to the 
 referees that because there were no more returns made of fares taken 
 from passengers in the cars, that Mr. Clough and the other conductors 
 have stolen the money that accrued from these fifteen to eighteen cars- 
 full of passengers that it is claimed passed over the road. There must 
 have many things transpired in relation to this free pass system, and 
 in relation to people riding free over the road, and from whom no return 
 was made, that neither you nor I can know. It would require perhaps 
 
261 
 
 the diligence that is exercised by the United States in collecting the 
 entire census of the country, to collect the statistics of this free travel ; 
 yet George Clough is now sued for stealing what might have been re 
 ceived had there been no free traveling It is suggested that the num 
 ber of cars required to carry the full travel during the war, would 
 average about two passenger cars per train, containing fifty passengers 
 each. It would have been as well to have stated that just as it was. 
 Let us see how that was. The train that runs from Concord to Nashua 
 in the morning (which, it will be admitted by everybody, runs light,) 
 must carry cars enough to bring the passengers back ; and the train that 
 goes down in the afternoon must carry passenger cars enough, if there 
 was not enough taken down in the morning, to bring the passengers up 
 at night. Thus it is that so many cars go down over the road and so 
 many cars come back over the road, year after year. The cars may be 
 full ; one car may be full, or one car may be only half full. I have 
 known an instance of a train starting out from Concord in the morning 
 with fourteen passengers in one car and none in the other, and every 
 single one of those passengers was a dead-head ; there was not a paying 
 one among them. We shall introduce the testimony of men who have 
 passed over the road on the early morning train, in repeated instances, 
 when there was hardly a paying passenger in the cars. Still, all that 
 train of cars had to move down to Nashua, Testimony in relation to 
 the number of passenger cars on a train has already been given by Mr. 
 Upham, one of their own witnesses. We shall introduce other witnesses 
 to show, and shall show clearly, the actual amount of free passes issued, 
 to account for the small return of income received from so many cars. 
 
 In his twelfth position, Col. George says that the amount now received 
 from passengers is much in excess of what it was while Mr. Clough was 
 on the road, with the travel largely diminished. 
 
 That "largely diminished" is an assumption contrary to the fact; 
 and I do not understand that the referees have allowed any testimony 
 to illustrate that position to be put in, unless by agreement ; and all 
 that we proposed, by putting in that agreement, was to show what Mr, 
 Clough returned during two years of the time that he was conductor, as 
 compared with the returns of two years since. 
 
 The eighteenth proposition is, that Mr. Clough, according to his own 
 admission, bought and sold coupon tickets to such an extent that his 
 profits amounted to two thousand dollars. That is substantially the 
 truth. He admits it, and testifies, according to his best belief and un 
 derstanding, that he sold that amount of coupon tickets. The position 
 is taken that the Concord Railroad was defrauded thereby. I do not 
 understand, if the Concord Eailroad lives up to its contracts, and does 
 what it agrees to do, and carries out its stipulations with other roads, 
 that it can thereby be defrauded, either in law or in fact. I understand 
 that this position is good in law: that if the Concord Railroad does 
 business with the Grand Trunk road, or with any other western road, 
 entering into a contract with it with the express understanding that 
 that contract shall bring passengers over their road, and agreeing to 
 carry them for less than local fare, nothing that is done by anybody 
 within the compass of that contract, can be a fraud upon the road. 
 The Concord Railroad adopted an arrangement with the upper roads, to 
 receive coupon tickets over the Northern road, without reference to 
 their dates. 
 
262 
 
 In the case of Johnson v. The Concord Railroad, Mr. Gilmore testi 
 fies that he bought some of these coupon tickets from some persons 
 going over the road, to show the directors how the road was defrauded. 
 It was not necessary for him to buy those tickets to show the directors 
 how the road was defrauded. The Concord Railroad was doing busi 
 ness ; it had business relations with the upper road, and it must sustain 
 these business relations. The directors wanted to bring the travel over 
 this road, and to compete with other railroads. Tickets were issued 
 without any limitations ; they were to be received at any time ; there 
 was no restriction in relation to their use by third parties ; they were 
 not marked " not transferable," nor "not good after a certain time." 
 These tickets were issued by the roads above ; they were used without 
 limitation ; they were used in the hands of anybody and of everybody, 
 without any objection from the road. I now present to the referees a 
 couple of the tickets such as were then issued. As you will see, they 
 are without limitation. The man who buys the ticket has a right to a 
 passage over the road. As they are not marked " not transferable," 
 they are good in the hands of anybody ; and if a passenger, after riding 
 a part of the way, hands or sells his ticket to another party, it was the 
 invariable custom and practice of the road to receive them from that 
 party. Had the directors made a rule against it, it would have been of 
 no avail. Here are two other tickets, issued in the regular order. I 
 submit that no conductor of a railroad train can tell when they were 
 issued. They are dated, but it is impossible to tell what the date is. 
 Suppose the ticket is transferred, and the person who holds it offers it 
 for fare on the road ; what can the conductor do ? He cannot stop to 
 inquire whether the passenger presenting it was the original buyer of 
 the ticket. The holder of the ticket is entitled to a ride. After a while 
 there was a limitation made. A rule was passed that the tickets should 
 be good only for a certain time perhaps thirty days. The Concord 
 Railroad was instructed to receive them, without any quarrel or row. 
 That was the business arrangement with the upper road, and the rules 
 that were published here did not annul or over-ride the contracts with 
 other roads, or the relations that were sustained to the other roads. Mr. 
 Clough saw these tickets in the hands of other parties ; he knew that 
 other men were buying them and speculating in them ; he knew that 
 although he did not buy them, others would ; he knew that the road 
 would not be defrauded any more if he bought them than it would be if 
 others bought them ; in fact he did not understand that the road would 
 T>e defrauded at all. He went to Mr. Gilmore, the superintendent, and 
 stated to him that other parties were speculating in those tickets, and 
 asked if he could not buy them. Gilmore told him that he had no ob 
 jection to his buying any of the tickets that came over the road from 
 this side of Detroit ; that he might as well make a little money out of 
 them as anybody else, and that he might buy them and sell them ; and 
 Mr. Clough thereafter did buy and sell those tickets, and made by the 
 operation, as he testifies, two thousand dollars. Mr. George, on behalf 
 of the railroad, now claims that two thousand dollars as the property 
 -of the road. Now, admitting for the sake of the argument, that every 
 thing is as the plaintiff claims, and that the law is such that if Mr. 
 Clough bought those tickets he is bound to respond to the Concord road 
 for them even admitting all this, he certainly cannot be called upon 
 to respond for any more than the Concord Railroad s share of those 
 tickets. The Concord Railroad has no right to the tickets over other 
 
263 
 
 roads. The counsel for the plaintiff alleges that the Concord road was 
 defrauded out of one dollar and seventy-five cents on each ticket. If 
 there can be any such close calculation as that, in this transaction, my 
 stupidity prevents ine from seeing it. The fare on the Concord road is 
 only about a dollar and a half. 1 think it was never more than that from 
 Concord to Nashua. The Concord llailroad permitted the Northern Kail- 
 road to issue those tickets. The person who buys one of them is entitled 
 to a passage down over the Concord road. They are not marked "Not 
 transferable," nor are they limited as to time. The Concord road has con 
 tracted to receive these tickets. They contracted to do it for what pur 
 pose ? for the purpose of inducing more travel over this road than passes 
 over the competing road in your section of the country, Mr. Chairman. 
 No matter who buys one of these tickets, if the Concord road is simply 
 called upon to give one passage over the road in exchange for it, nobody 
 is defrauded in law or in fact. The Concord Railroad does only what 
 it has bound itself to do, and cannot be defrauded thereby ; and if Mr. 
 Clough simply buys that ticket by the direction, or by leave of the su 
 perintendent of the road, he is guilty of no fraud, intentionally or 
 otherwise, in law or in fact. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. In 1864 the Concord Eailroad received, on local tick 
 ets, $2.50 on each ticket, and on the western tickets 52 cents, so that 
 they lost on each ticket, and received, in fact, only 28 cents per ticket. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. The Concord Eailroad were entitled to only $1.50 when 
 the fare was the highest, and to $1.10 as the fare is now. If they lose 
 by the transaction $1.84 or $1.75, as they would have it, or if they lose 
 more than their fare, I can simply say that I can t see it. 
 
 Mr. George. The testimony of Mr, Sanborn was that on a local 
 ticket from Concord to Boston, the net profit to the Concord road for 
 the passage, and for the use of the cars, was $2.12, which was a very 
 different thing from the local fare to Nashua. On a local ticket from 
 Concord to Boston they received $2.12 ; on the western tickets the high 
 est rate was 52 cents ; and the average rate, as Mr. Sanborn testifies, 
 on western tickets, was 28 cents, which would be a loss of $1.24; the 
 average rate, he thought, might be 45 cents, which would make $1.67 
 loss. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. No matter how much they lose. They stipulated and 
 arranged to do business with the upper roads in that way. They not 
 only arranged to do that, and if some one buys a ticket and does not 
 use that ticket to go over the road, another person will. Therefore it 
 was that Mr. Gilmore said to Mr. Clough, " If you do not buy the 
 tickets, and save what is to be saved, somebody else will. The road 
 will neither gain nor lose by your buying them." 
 
 The twentieth charge is that Mr. Clough received, and was cognizant 
 of bogus tickets being sold and used by other conductors. There is no 
 evidence of that kind. They may intend to put such evidence in, but 
 there is no such evidence in now. 
 
 Mr. George. The testimony of Major Carney was that he received 
 from 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That is not in. It was ruled out distinctly. 
 
 Mr. George. The testimony of Major Carney was ruled in for the 
 purpose of showing that the tickets came into Clough s hands. The 
 testimony was put in for that purpose, and confined to the purpose of 
 showing that these bogus tickets went into Mr. -Clough s hands. 
 
264 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It was ruled out upon the ground that any tickets 
 that Mr, Carney might have received from Mr. Kendrick was not com 
 petent unless there was collusion shown between him and George 
 Clough, and that in this form of action he could not be held for col 
 lusion. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I understand what the gentleman alludes to. There 
 were some irregular tickets given to Mr. Carney, and Mr. Clough took 
 them up. Let me suggest that if a conductor below has occasion to use 
 several tickets, for instance, if Mr. Clough, starting from Concord 
 here, has six of these conductors tickets, and there are seven men who 
 enter the cars here in Concord, who want to go to Boston, Mr. Clough 
 takes a ticket, or a piece of paper, and writes on it: "Good for this 
 passage to Boston," or, " The conductor will please recognize this as a 
 ticket," or, "The conductor will take this ticket up and return it to 
 me." it is only given as a matter of convenience, and because the 
 conductor does not happen at the time to have tickets enough. Now, 
 in this case, where Mr. Carney came up over the road, the conductor 
 gave him a certain ticket which he happened to have. When he got up 
 to Manchester, Mr. Clough would take charge of the train from there, 
 and would take those tickets up, and so Mr. Kendrick goes to him and 
 says, " If you will recognize those tickets now, when 1 get up home I 
 will redeem them of you." And thereupon Mr. Clough takes up those 
 tickets, and when the conductor comes up to Concord he gets his new 
 supply of tickets, and redeems those tickets of Mr. Clough. 
 
 [Mr. Mugridge read from the stenographer s report of the proceed 
 ings of August 6, 1868 (page 203), the discussion and ruling upon the 
 disputed point.] 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I have now made an explanation of the manner in which 
 such a transaction might occur ordinarily. That Mr. Clough could re 
 ceive any benefit or gain from it, I cannot conceive. The reason Mr. 
 Kendrick did not give him the proper tickets was because he did not 
 have them ; he gave such as he had. They were not bogus tickets, by 
 any manner of means. They were real tickets, and they were good over 
 the Concord road, and Mr. Clough could not help taking them up. no 
 matter in whose hands they were. The probability was that some of 
 these tickets gave the right to a passage beyond Concord, and as the 
 passengers who held them were only coming to Concord, Mr. Kendrick, 
 the conductor, informed Mr. Clough of the fact, and Mr. Clough took 
 the tickets up, and Mr. Kendrick redeemed them. I might say in re 
 lation to this, not perhaps in the language of another, but a little 
 stronger, that " Trifles lighter than air, are, to the suspicious, confirma 
 tion stronger than Holy Writ." No transaction of George dough s that 
 savors the least of irregularity, that the counsel can lay his finger upon, 
 can escape being brought in here with an air and a significance that, as 
 against George Clough, something is wrong. Coming from the source 
 it does, I will say that during a long series of years that the counsel 
 was connected with the Concord Railroad, in the language of the Arab r 
 Joseph A. Gilmore was God. and John H. George was his prophet; and 
 if there was anything in the shape of iniquity anything in the shape 
 of corruption on the part of Gilmore during all that time, that Colonel 
 George did not help him to cover up and conceal, and was not ten times 
 more the counsel of Gilmore than he ever was of the railroad, then the 
 largest share of this community, that I am acquainted with, are greatly 
 mistaken. He might well say before a committee of the senate, that he 
 
265 
 
 had done more to cover up and suppress the frauds and iniquities of 
 the railroad, in. connection with Gilmore, than any other man. I do* 
 not say this upon my own personal recollection alone, but upon the per 
 sonal recollection of my friend and associate counsel, who was present 
 at the time. It is very proper that if these suspicions against Mr, 
 Clough should come in at all, they should come from the source in 
 which they do, for who on God s earth that has had so much to do with 
 Gilmore for eight or nine years would fail to suspect that something was 
 irregular and dishonest about everybody. I have only to suggest fur 
 ther, that the simple fact that Mr. Clough took some tickets that were 
 irregular, is but something that happens every day ; and Mr. Sanborn 
 and Mr. Kendrick testified here the other day that if the conductors- 
 should recommend anything in that way, when they were out of tickets, 
 that they would respect the recommendation on another road, and take 
 the tickets up, and that this was the case here. I can conceive of no 
 way in the world in which George Clough could be benefitted by taking 
 up those tickets ; and there is no evidence that he did receive any ben 
 efit from it. 
 
 The twenty-first proposition is that the buying, selling or using of 
 any tickets not furnished by the ticket agent, was prohibited by the 
 rules of the road, signed by the clerk. It was not any more an imper 
 ative rule because it was signed by the clerk. The rules of the road he 
 was bound to obey. The name of the superintendent of the road is very 
 properly given. The superintendent is the executive officer of the 
 road. In other words, he is the commander-in-chief of the army repre 
 sented by the employees of the road. He is the man to tell when trains- 
 shall run and when they shall not run. He is the man to say to this- 
 employee, "Go," and to that one, "Come;" and they must" go, and 
 they must come. No railroad can be operated safely in any other way. 
 Now* understand me, gentlemen : I do not mean that if Mr. Gilmore, 
 the superintendent, commands Mr. Clough, or any other conductor, to-, 
 pick another man s pocket, that he is bound to do it ; but 1 understand 
 that the superintendent of the railroad has the entire regulation of the 
 affairs of the road. If the superintendent directs, for instance, that a 
 certain person shall have a free pass, that is the end of the law. If the 
 superintendent directs that such and such persons shall ride free, that 
 is the end of the law. If the superintendent directs that the fare shall 
 be so much, that is the end of the law. If the superintendent orders 
 that a certain train shall start at a certain time, the board of directors- 
 cannot come in and say that the train shall start at a different time. 
 The superintendent must be the executive officer of the road, and com 
 mand and direct every employee of the road, and no one else can. It 
 is not proper that the directors should come in and interfere with the 
 superintendent of the road, any more than it is proper for the command 
 er-in-chief of a naval vessel to tell a man under the executive officer of 
 the ship when to touch off a gun, and when not to. The directors car* 
 remove a superintendent and appoint another; they can advise him 
 what to do ; they can order him what to do ; but they cannot go to Mr, 
 Clough, or to any other conductor, and tell him what to do, in contra 
 distinction to what Mr. Gilmore has told him to do, because some single 
 head must have the direction of the affairs of the railroad : and the su 
 perintendent is the man to have the direction of the affairs of the rail 
 road. If an employee of the road goes to Mr. Gilmore, and says to him, 
 " 1 want you to draw me a car-load of wood over the road," and Mf. 
 
Gilmore draws it over the road, and says, " There is no freight to pay 
 upon that ; I give you the freight," that is the end of it- If Mr. Minot, 
 one of the directors of the Northern road, receives a car-load of wood 
 over that road, and Mr. Stearns gives him the freight, that is the end 
 of it. No action for the recovery of freight can be sustained. That is 
 the custom of the road. The employees have certain favors and advan 
 tages ; and this custom is universally recognized and acknowledged. 
 Now then, whatever this superintendent permits one of the employees 
 to do, the railroad cannot turn around and sue the employee for doing. 
 For instance : on ths Concord road the wood is brought down over the 
 Montreal Railroad. In the charge that is made is a charge for car ex 
 pense, because the Montreal road uses a car of the Concord road, and 
 the employee of the road simply pays for the drawing of it. Now, if 
 the doctrine is true, that the conductor is to be governed by what the 
 directors direct, and not by what the superintendent directs and con 
 sents to, then the Concord Railroad, if they see fit, can turn around and 
 sue any employee, during the last six years, for the use of a car to draw 
 their wood on over the Boston, Concord and Montreal Railroad, because 
 he has no right to give such privileges. That is what is said. 
 
 Now, in relation to these tickets, Mr. Clough wanted to trade in 
 them ; he wanted to receive the benefit from the sale of these tickets 
 -that somebody else necessarily would receive if he did not, and which 
 Mr. Gilmore understood and knew that somebody else would receive. 
 Mr. Clough asked Mr. Gilmore if he might trade in them ; Mr, Gilmore 
 consented, and he did trade in them, and made money in that way. 
 Before I was interrupted, I was suggesting that the Concord Railroad 
 would receive so much out of these coupon tickets, and that the rest 
 would belong to the roads below. I think that Mr. Clough will testify 
 that on one occasion a family of seven came to Manchester from the 
 west, and when they got to Manchester they gave their tickets to Mr. 
 Clough, and he sold them. He will testify -that it was frequently the 
 case when men were ticketed through to New York, and did not make 
 the connection at Nashua, and did not want to stop there, and could go 
 on in the Boston train and take the boat and reach New York by the 
 next morning, that they would do so ; and so they would offer their 
 tickets to Mr. Clough and he would buy them, and generally at a large 
 discount ; and he would then sell the ticket to the passenger for New 
 York who had no ticket. Frequently it would happen that persons 
 coming from the north and going to Boston would have a ticket for New 
 Y^ork by Boston, and being unfamiliar with the line of travel, and not 
 knowing that they could go directly on to Norwich, and the conductor 
 ascertaining that they wanted to go by the short route, would say to 
 them, "You can keep right on, and take the boat at 11 o clock to-night, 
 and wake up in the morning in New Y r ork, and not have to go around 
 by way of Boston." Thereupon they would frequently say that they 
 had a coupon ticket to Boston, and would offer it to Mr. Clough, and he 
 would buy such tickets of them. And in these various ways Mr. Clough 
 has made the sum of two thousand dollars; and, as affecting the Con 
 cord road, he did it with a fair understanding and with the perfect 
 knowledge of the superintendent of the railroad ; and the superintendent 
 understood, at the time, as anybody else would, that if Mr. Clough did 
 not buy these tickets somebody else would ; and there is evidence to 
 prove that other persons did buy them, and sold them, and that other 
 persons rode upon them. 
 
267 
 
 His twenty-second item is, that large amounts were paid Mr. Clough 
 personally, by Lane, Perkins and others, which sums were not accounted 
 for. Now, I am not a particular friend of M.r. Perkins, but if I was, 
 I should object to his name being mentioned in connection with Henry 
 P. Lane s and Samuel Curtis , I did expect and hope that if George 
 Clough was to be found to have appropriated the funds of the Concord 
 Kailroad, that the plaintiif would undertake to bring before the referees 
 some decent kind of testimony. Mr. Perkins, I think, testifies in re 
 lation to paying fare on the cars. He does not come up to the mark of 
 Col. George by any manner of means. And in relation to Lane and 
 Curtis, 1 say to you, gentlemen, that if you had dragged the whole 
 length and breadth of the purlieus of hell you could not have found 
 two viler and more despicable men. There is not a decent man on God s 
 earth that would trust them with money; and their testimony, as my 
 friend will suggest 
 
 Mr. Stanley. He can go and borrow a hundred dollars at the bank 
 in Manchester quicker than you can. 
 
 Mr, Rolfe. He may if he applies to the bank where the gentleman is 
 president, and if he goes on the credit of the house of ill fame that he 
 runs in the city of Worcester, or on the credit of the other establish 
 ment in Boston that the other man, Sam. Curtis, runs. 
 
 Now, this Henry Lane rode back and forth in the cars, and Mr. 
 Clough collected the extra ten cents of him when he had not a ticket. 
 He wanted him to pass him for nothing, and he told him that he could 
 not, that he must pay his fare ; and he made him pay his fare ; and he 
 made him pay the extra ten cents ; and after that he didn t pay his fare 
 in the cars, but bought his ticket at the office, and had to pay as other 
 men have to pay ; and that is the reason that Henry P. Lane is brought 
 here ; and of all that vast multitude of substitute brokers, he was not 
 worthy to be dignified by the name of broker. He was nothing but a 
 runner; he only went down to Worcester to "turn the men this way/ 
 We shall show you that the substitutes who came on from New York 
 bought their tickets there, and the substitute brokers came through 
 with them. It was the custom, all through the war, with the men here 
 that took substitutes, to contract for them to be delivered safely in Con 
 cord ; the substitutes did not pay their fares on the way, but the fares 
 were paid by the agent in New York, and the parties here took them 
 out of the agent s hands when they were delivered here. It escaped, in 
 Lane s testimony, that he "had charge of them," and had to see that 
 they did not go to Portsmouth or Boston. 
 
 Now, in relation to Mr. Curtis : He wanted to ride free, and Mr. 
 Clough would not let him. Mr. Perkins wanted to get a free pass for 
 him from Mr. Gilmore. On one occasion he was drunk, noisy and un 
 ruly, and Mr. Clough took him out of the passenger car and put him in 
 the baggage car, and put men over him, and kept him there so that he 
 would not disturb the peace of the other passengers in the car ; and it 
 was for that reason that he appeared here against Mr. Clough. I think, 
 when my brother Tappan comes to argue this matter, that he will con 
 vince the referees, if they are not already entirely satisfied of it, that 
 neither one of those men can tell the truth, unless accidentally. 
 
 We now come to that part of the case which is perhaps more signifi 
 cant than any other. The argument of the counsel upon the other side 
 is, that at the time that Mr. Clough went on to the Concord ro ad he 
 was a man of very moderate means ; that he was possessed of a v ery 
 
268 
 
 few thousand dollars ; and that his expenses must have been quite 
 large must have been in the direction of the expenses of the counsel, 
 of the referees, and of others. Now, gentlemen, in that direction, I do 
 not know what the early expenses of the referees were. I know some 
 thing about the early expenses of the counsel ; and this I have to say, 
 that George Clough, at no time within my knowledge, or within the 
 knowledge of any man, ever run his establishment with two barrels of 
 whisky in his cellar. The difference between Mr. Clough and the coun 
 sel is, that when Mr. Clough was fifteen years of age he was industri 
 ous, and commenced to earn, and commenced to save. I do not say 
 that the counsel are not industrious ; but I say that when George Clough, 
 being industrious, commenced to earn, at that instant he commenced to 
 save, and not to spend. George Clough s life has been one of energy, 
 industry and accumulation. When Mr. Clough went upon the road, 
 as we shall show to you, he was worth somewhere in the vicinity of 
 eleven thousand dollars ; and we shall show you how he got that prop 
 erty. The counsel says that the first we know of Mr. Clough he was a 
 boy tending a livery stable ; that then he drove stage for a time, and 
 then was the proprietor of a stage line until the time when the railroad 
 was opened, and that at that time he was worth but a few thousand 
 dollars. 
 
 George Clough, at the age of fifteen, left his father s home, with all 
 the worldly goods that he then considered his own done up in a cotton 
 handkerchief. He went away and worked until he earned some clothes, 
 with a farmer ; and from there he went to Newburyport, and at New- 
 buryport he stayed and worked in a hotel as a waiter and boot-black, 
 and afterwards rose to the position of hostler in the stable. For two 
 years and upwards he remained there, attending to his business, saving 
 all the time, spending nothing, wearing old shoes and boots, and old 
 clothes, until he had accumulated the sum of three hundred dollars, 
 and was sixteen or seventeen years of age. Two hundred dollars he put 
 in the Newburyport Savings Bank, and with the balance visited his 
 home, gave fifty dollars to his mother, and retained the rest in his 
 pocket. We shall show in the outset, by the secretary of that institu 
 tion, and from the records, the deposits that were made, when they 
 were made and when they were withdrawn. Mr. Clough stayed at 
 home but a few days. During the time that he had been absent from 
 his father s house, a little over two years, he never lost a day, he never 
 s-pent a cent for useless things, nor was he sick. After staying at home 
 a few days he went up to Kaymond, and went into a stable and worked 
 for a man by the name of Osgood, with a promise from him that he 
 should have a chance to drive stage as soon as an opportunity offered. 
 He worked there for a while at twelve dollars per month. In the course 
 of three or four months he went on to the foot-board of the stage coach 
 at the pay of fifteen dollars per month, which was , soon increased to 
 twenty dollars. He drove stage for Mr. Osgood for three or four years, 
 receiving, most of the time, twenty dollars per month and found. He 
 was not off the foot-board but eleven days of that time, and then he was 
 sick with the measles, and Mr. Osgood paid him for that time. During 
 that time he drove stage from Raymond to Pittsfield, and then from 
 Pittsfield to Lowell ; and the proprietor of the stage route gave him all 
 the perquisites that he made. When he was passing back and forth he 
 carried money ; he carried chickens, turkeys, chestnuts, cranberries, 
 and sometimes mutton and veal. This became so notorious that the line 
 
269 
 
 of stages that he drove received the name of the "chicken line." He 
 spent no money uselessly ; and, by the way, gentlemen, he used no ardent 
 spirits, and has used none from the day that he was born to this time. 
 He never spent money for ardent spirits for himself ; he never drank ; 
 he never spent one cent for any ardent spirits for another ; and when 
 he drove stage he was known by the name of the "cold water driver," 
 And this, gentlemen, is a matter of more significance in this case than 
 it would have been to have said, when George Clough was twenty-one 
 years of age, that he had inherited twenty-five thousand dollars. These 
 are his characteristics: sobriety, industry, energy. These character 
 istics have been his all the way through life. To these he has added a 
 keen, ripe judgment; and thus he has been working and accumulating 
 all his life, honestly working and accumulating. He accumulated so 
 much money while he was driving stage from Pittsfield to Lowell that 
 he was enabled to purchase one part of the line from Lowell to Concord, 
 over the Mammoth road, He made a bargain with Mr. Dudley, and 
 paid him two thousand dollars for one half of the line, one thousand 
 dollars of which he paid down. He had the other thousand loaned out 
 to different individuals, and in a very short time he collected it and 
 paid the balance, perhaps in the course of three or four months. So 
 that within two or three months after he bought out that line of stages 
 lie was able to own it, and still have considerable money at interest. 
 He drove that line of stages for a little time, and then Mr. Parker, who 
 then kept a public house in the city of Lowell, because the stages could 
 not put up at his house, proposed to sell out his interest in the stage 
 line to Mr. Clough, and Mr, Clough bought out his half of the line and 
 paid him for it, not paying him all down at the time, but paying him 
 in a very short time, from the earnings of the stage and from the col 
 lections that he made from those who were owing him. He then owned 
 the whole line of stages, that is to say, the whole line up over the road 
 one day and back the next. He then owned, I think, twenty horses, stage 
 coach, sleigh, extra coach, harnesses, blankets, &c., suited to the busi 
 ness. This was about the time that the Concord road was being con 
 structed, and the travel increased immensely. Mr. Clough continued, in 
 his quiet way, to drive his stage and attend to his business. He bought 
 a house here in South street, and put his team in his own stable, thus 
 not only driving his team from Lowell to Concord, but taking care of it 
 after it was here. From the time that he bought the line of stages, and 
 during a period of three years, Mr. Clough lost not a trip over the road, 
 nor was he absent from his foot-board a single day, except when he 
 went to Pittsfield and married the lady who is now his wife. Mr. 
 Clough will testify, what perhaps is known to many here, that many 
 and many a time has he driven into Concord upon the walk, and driven 
 into Lowell upon the walk, with so great a load of passengers that he 
 could not drive faster, and sitting upon the foot-board with his feet 
 hanging down, because the passengers occupied the driver s seat. In 
 that way Mr. Clough saved up about the sum of eleven thousand dol 
 lars. Then he went on the Concord Railroad. He sold a portfon of 
 his staging to a man by the name of Stone for about two thousand dol 
 lars, retaining that portion of the line which ran from Manchester to 
 Concord. He continued to own that line, and during the first year that 
 he owned it he made a certain amount ; the travel increased so that 
 during the next year he made a considerable larger amount ; and dur 
 ing the last year before the Concord Railroad was opened to this place, 
 
270 
 
 he made out of his staging nearly four thousand dollars net. That 
 matter will be substantiated, by the fact that when Mr. Clough went on 
 the road when he could no longer driv^ the stage himself he let a 
 certain part of the staging out to Mr. Charles H. Clifford, who paid all 
 the expenses of running, and paid him four dollars per day for the use 
 of his team besides. He had in the meantime bought a house in South 
 street for six hundred dollars. That was the visible property that he 
 had when he went on to the Concord road. While he was driving stage 
 he had taken out his money from the Newburyport Savings Bank, and 
 had loaned it out in other localities. While he was driving to Lowell, 
 a man by the name of Daniel K. Kimball noticed Mr. Clough as a man 
 of sobriety, industry and integrity, and assisted him in any way that 
 he could, by his advice, in such a way that Mr. Clough looked up to 
 him as to a father ; and whenever Mr. Clough accumulated any small 
 sum of money, he would loan it to Mr, Kimball, and take his note for 
 it ; and by and by, when a large sum had accumulated, he would take 
 up the small notes and give a larger one. Mr. Clough thus made Mr. 
 Kimball a sort of banker ; and Mr. Kimball kept his money for him 
 until some considerable time after Mr. Clough went upon the Concord 
 Railroad. Mr. Clough had the means, and was able at that time, to 
 subscribe for fifty shares, or any larger amount, of the stock of the 
 Northern Kailroad ; and I believe the fact is he did subscribe, and that 
 he was advised to get rid of his subscription, and so he never took the 
 stock. After a time. Mr. Elkins, who .was then in some way connected 
 with the railroad, said to Mr. Clough that if he had some money he 
 could make something in stocks, and Mr. Clough loaned him a certain 
 amount of money, and Mr. Elkins operated in stocks for a time in Bos 
 ton, sharing the profits with Mr. Clough. During the early days of 
 the Boston, Concord and Montreal Railroad, Mr. Clough took several 
 shares of that stock, and made something out of it. He also bought 
 some stocks, at the instigation of Mr. Spalding, in the Old Colony road. 
 Mr. Spalding told him when to sell, and he also made something by 
 that transaction. 
 
 Time would fail me to go through with the biography of Mr. Clough s 
 life. Suffice it to say that inasmuch as it is required, in the testimony 
 that we shall give you, we shall show that from the time that Mr. 
 Clough left his father s house, with all his worldly goods on his body 
 .and in his handkerchief, up to the time when he was sued by the Con 
 cord Railroad for money which, it was alleged, he had appropriated, 
 Mr. Clough has been a man of remarkable industry, of remarkable en 
 ergy, of great sagacity. He has been one of those wonderful men that 
 we occasionally meet. I asked Mr. Foster, in his deposition, if he was 
 not a wonderful man ; he said, No more so than any good business man." 
 It is something wonderful to find a smart, good business man ; especial 
 ly is it wonderful to find a smart, good business man like Mr. Clough, 
 who has had such limited opportunities for an education. The habits, 
 that Mr. Clough acquired during the first few years of his life, while 
 he was at work in the hotel as a porter, boot-black and hostler, have 
 followed him all along through his life ; and it has been one of constant 
 industry, constant sobriety, and constant accumulation, and accumula 
 tion, too, in an honest way. And 1 will say to you, gentlemen, that I 
 will give you, in behalf of Mr. Clough, and to the Concord Railroad, a 
 carte blanche, and 1 will not object to any testimony you may put in 
 here ; and you may summon all the men that Mr. Clough ever did busi- 
 
271 
 
 ness with, and they will testify here that they never knew him to be 
 dishonest, or ever saw in him any disposition to wrong any mortal mail 
 out of the first cent that was honestly due. i have known Mr. dough, 
 in that particular, as well as I have known anybody. For twenty years 
 Mr. Clough has been my tried and cherished friend ; and I have here 
 to say in his behalf, that in all his dealings with men ; in ail his goings 
 in and comings out among men, aside from what has been said of him 
 as a Concord Eailroad conductor, I never yet knew any man to charge 
 him with the first particle of dishonesty. He has been strictly and 
 scrupulously honest to the last cent. He has earned a reputation in 
 that particular which no man can hope to surpass. And yet, gentle 
 men, it is your duty to try him upon the evidence as it is here ; and if 
 there is anything that he- has withheld from the Concord road if he 
 has intentionally and fraudulently done anything by which he has taken 
 the funds of the Concord Eailroad, he ought to return them, and it is 
 not necessary for me to say that you ought to say that he should return 
 them. If he has done nothing more than to be generous with the 
 mea.ns of the Concord Eailroad, in passing poor people, and in passing 
 his friends, if he has done nothing more than, according to his habits 
 of life, to make money as an agent, by carrying this thing and that 
 thing back and forth on the Concord Eailroad, with the consent of the 
 higher officers of the road,- then he has done nothing more than you or 
 I, or anybody would do, and what we should be justified in doing. He- 
 has accumulated what property he has. It is his. He does not want 
 it taken away from him ; he would not object so much to any reasonable 
 amount of money taken from him, but he does not want, nor can he afford 
 to have that good name, which has cost him more than twenty-five years 
 of constant and steady effort, taken from him, and taken from him, as I 
 say, in a manner most cruel and unrelenting. I believe that this 
 whole scheme against Mr. Clough was conceived in sin and pursued in 
 iniquity; and if G-eorge Clough had only continued to sign Joseph A. 
 Gilmore s notes, with all the other efforts he had made to exalt Mr. 
 Gilmore, I do not think that Joseph A, Gilmore, either in his drunken 
 revelries or in his sober moments, would ever have told that Eip Van 
 Winkle board of directors that during the twenty-four years that they 
 had slept, George Clough and his associates had annually been stealing 
 fifty thousand dollars of the revenue of the Concord Eailroad. We 
 have been dragged over the whole course of Mr. Clough s life, during 
 twenty-two days spent in taking his deposition ; we have been sum 
 moned to attend the taking of depositions that included the doings of 
 all the conductors of the Nashua and Worcester road, and of the Lowell, 
 Nashua and Boston road ; we have been required to be present at all 
 these proceedings before you ; we have submitted to it with as g ood a 
 grace, under the circumstances, I think, as any man could do. We in 
 tend to submit with equal grace to whatever other things we may be 
 called upon to submit to in the course of this trial. But, gentlemen, 
 if there is one thing that we have reason to thank God for, it is that he 
 has spared your lives, and given you health and strength to come back 
 here, and give us a reasonable prospect and hope that, at lastv this case 
 shall be decided. 
 
 And let me say, in conclusion, that an intimation has- been thrown 
 out here that George Clough has combined with Joseph A. Gilmore to 
 stifle an investigation into these charges. No man lives who can say 
 that George Clough has ever intimated, or asked or desired, that this 
 
272 
 
 matter should be stifled. When Mr Clough was sued, and his real es 
 tate and other property all attached when, while he was on a sick bed, 
 the sheriff came into his house, and attached all his personal property, 
 (which has never been returned upon the writ), feeble as he was, he 
 said then and there, that as between him and Joseph H. Gilmore and 
 John H. George, and everybody else who wanted to rob him of his prop 
 erty and his fair name : This thing will be pursued to a clean victory 
 or to a clean defeat." Such is our position now ; and at no time, and 
 .under no circumstances, could George Clough afford to have this matter 
 ; squelched. He sent letters to the board of directors* asking permission 
 .to appear before them, and to hear them make what charges they had 
 jagainst him ; but they never gave them ; we never knew them ; they 
 were locked up in the safe of Gen. Butler ; and when we wanted to get 
 them, they were spirited away to the city of Washington ; and when at 
 last we got them here, what were they ? All this noise and confusion, 
 and all this slander and detraction that has gone abroad in this com 
 munity against George Clough, resulted, when the evidence came to be 
 brought before these referees when it came to be unearthed from the 
 vault of Gen. Butler to this : that five times five times only did 
 ^George Clough fail to take the ten cents extra. That, gentlemen, is all 
 :the evidence there is. Things are sometimes done for effect, and I do 
 this for effect. Not only did George J. Carney act as a detective, but 
 he employed his brother, and his brother took a large number of wit 
 nesses with him, and he came up here and paid a visit to the asylum 
 for the insane in this city, and rode back over the Concord road, paid 
 fare up and paid fare back, and he came up over the Portsmouth road, 
 paying fare up and paying fare back paying fare to George Clough ; 
 and Air. Tappan, when he comes to argue the case, will ask, with some 
 degree of significance, where is Dr. Sidney H. Carney, the physician 
 and the brother of this immaculate disciple of Major Gen. Butler "late 
 of the Army of the James? " He has not run away, as Draper has ; he 
 is not nan est, as others are, but he is in the city of Boston, alive and 
 ^well. He has paid large sums of money into the hands of Mr. Clough. 
 If Mr. Clough is dishonest, and has not refunded them, why does he 
 <not appear ? Mr. Tappan will ask where is Dr. Carney, the brother of 
 ihis model detective who took a thousand dollars for making a report 
 four days after he drew the thousand dollar check? 
 This, gentlemen, concludes my opening. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEORGE CLOUGH. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Are you the defendant in this suit? 
 
 A. I am. 
 
 Q. What is your age ? 
 
 A. Fifty-two. 
 
 Q. Were your formerly employed by the Concord Railroad ? If so, 
 in what capacity ? 
 
 A. I was, employed, as a conductor, from July, 1S42, to January, 
 1866. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect the date, in January, 1866, when you left the 
 employ of the road ? 
 
 A. It was January 14th or 15th, I think. 
 
273 
 
 Q. Do you recollect of selling to D. B. Egerly, tickets for half price, 
 or of passing him free over the road, or of giving him a ticket back on 
 his paying fare one way ? 
 
 A. I recollect that. 
 
 Q. State to the referees all the facts connected with that ; and state 
 why and at whose direction you did it, 
 
 A, I was introduced to Mr. Egerly by a man by the name of Gar 
 land, a stage-driver who drove from Pittsfield here. He came to me 
 and wanted that I should pass him. [Mr. George objected to any state 
 ment of what transpired between the witness and Mr. Garland.] 
 
 Mr. Tappan. This is simply introductory. 
 
 The Chairman. Is it a necessary introduction ? 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I think it will be more satisfactory to the referees to 
 "hear this whole transaction. 
 
 Mr. George. This has been ruled out in two instances : once when 
 we offered it, and once when you did. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Did you receive any instructions from Mr. 
 Gilmore in relation to him ? If so, what ? 
 
 A. I did. Mr. Gilmore instructed me to carry him for half fare. 
 
 Q. Go on and state the whole conversation between yourself and 
 Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore teild me to let him have some tickets at half price. 
 
 Mr. George. The referees will understand that our exception to 
 this is for any other purpose than the purpose presented. It might be 
 understood as tending to rebut our proposition. 
 
 The Referees. I suppose that if the testimony is admissible oh one 
 ground, we cannot anticipate any other purpose that may be submitted. 
 
 Mr. George. 1 do not want ii> to go in without that suggestion. 
 Perhaps we had better save an exception to the evidence for any pur 
 pose. We except to it for the purpose of saving any right we may have 
 in the matter. We except to the ruling of the court in admitting it 
 for any purpose. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} W T as anything said to you by Mr. Gilmore as 
 to how you could manage it ? If so, what ? 
 
 A. Yes. He told me to let Mr, Egerly have tickets at half fare and 
 pay the money into the ticket office. 
 
 Q. State whether you paid the money into the ticket office. 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. W T hat, if any thing, did you receive when you paid the money 
 into the ticket office. 
 
 A. I received tickets, 
 
 Q. What did you do with the tickets ? 
 
 A. I purchased them, and put them into my collections, arid deliv 
 ered them up to the special ticket agent. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} You were to take this money, and pay it 
 into the ticket office, and then they gave you the tickets? 
 
 A. Yes ; that is, into the ticket office of the station, and not into 
 the general ticket office. 
 
 Q. That is, under the direction of the superintendent, the ticket 
 seller let you have a ticket at half price, which you let Egerly have ! 
 
 A. No ; I gave the ticket seller the full price ; that is, I bought 
 less tickets ; just half the number of tickets that I let Egerly have. 
 I let Mr. Egerly have tickets at half price ; 1 let him have two tickets 
 
 18 
 
274 
 
 for the price of one, and then I went to the office and bought one ticket, 
 and that made the money all right. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Holfe.) Did you do the same with the others? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And by Mr. Gilmore s directions? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How was it with Mr. Clark and Mr. Stanley ? 
 
 A. It was the same. 
 
 Q. AVho called your attention to their cases ? 
 
 A. Mr. Garland. 
 
 Q. At the time that Mr. Gilmore directed you to let those gentlemen 
 go for half fare, did he, or not, remark to you that Mr. Garland had 
 made application on their behalf? 
 
 [Objected to as leading. Objections sustained. ] 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Gilmore say ? 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore told me to pass Mr. Clark and Mr. Stanley at half 
 price. 
 
 Q. Did he say anything about Mr. Garland to you ? 
 
 A. Yes. He said that Garland came to him and wanted him to 
 pass him. He came to me first and I told him that 1 could not do it ; 
 that he must see Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Q. State how it was in relation to John R. French. 
 
 A. I passed John E. French at the request of Mr. Garland; it wa& 
 a Mr. French, but I do not recollect his given name. 
 
 Q. State whether Mr. Clark, Mr. French and Mr. Egerly all for 
 merly lived at Pittsfield. 
 
 A. 1 understood that they did. . 
 
 Q. State whether, when Mr. French paid his fare in the cars, and 
 rode only over the Concord road, you gave him any ticket. 
 
 A. No local ticket, 1 do not think. If he went below Nashua I 
 gave him a ticket. , 
 
 Q. Persons who rode only over the Concord road on your route from 
 Concord to Nashua, as I understand you, never received a local ticket. 
 
 A. I never gave them any unless they wanted to stop over at Man 
 chester. 
 
 Q. What would you do in case they wanted to stop anywhere? 
 
 A. I should either give them a ticket, or write on a card and give 
 them. 
 
 Q. 4 What kind of tickets do you mean? Y T ou had no local tickets. 
 
 A. No. I sometimes managed in this way: If a man paid fare to 
 Nashua, and wanted to stop at Manchester, I would take a ticket from 
 another passenger that was going to Nashua and give it to the man that 
 wanted to stop over. I used to manage in that way ; but it was very 
 seldom that anybody wanted to stop over. 
 
 Q. In relation to the ticket testified to by Mr Bacheller, that he 
 received from you at Manchester, when he left the train. If he paid 
 you the fare to Nashua, and wanted to stop over, what would you do in 
 that case. 
 
 A. If he paid his fare from Manchester to Nashua and wanted to- 
 stop over I would give him something to pass him. 
 
 Q. Would you be particular about what you gave him ? 
 
 A, I would give him anything that the other conductors would take, 
 and sign my name to it, as " good for one seat to Nashua," or some 
 thing of that kind. 
 
275 
 
 Q. If he had paid his fare and stopped over, in order to ride on he 
 must necessarily have something to show that he had a right to pass>? 
 [Objected to as leading, Objection sustained.] 
 
 Q. Will you- please to state now whether you had business with 
 John Grier, who formerly lived in this place ? 
 
 A. I had. 
 
 Q. What business relations did you have with him ? 
 
 A. He used to make boots for myself and boys. 
 
 Q. Have you passed him over the Concord road ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect how many times ? 
 
 A. Very few. 
 
 Q. Why did you pass him? 
 
 A. He said that he was poor, and was not able to pay full fare ; 
 that he had a large family and found it difficult to support them. 
 
 Q. State whether you ever passed him for any consideration, any 
 pay. 
 
 A. Never. I never received a cent from him, myself. 
 
 Q. Have you bills receipted by him ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. State whether you have the bills. 
 
 Mr. George. What is your object in introducing the bills ? 
 
 Mr. Tappan. To negative your charge. We offer them to show that 
 the charges made against Mr. Clough are false. We say that he paid 
 them in cash. We offer them first, to show his dealings with Mr. Grier, 
 and then we offer them to show how the bills were paid. I do not know 
 how much time they cover, but they are his yearly bills. 
 
 Mr. George. My objection is that they do not prove that fact. 
 
 The Chairman. We think those bills arc admissable in evidence, 
 the purpose being, as we suppose, to contradict Mr. Grier. [Witness 
 produced the bills.] 
 
 Q. (By Mr. JKolfe.) Are those the bills? 
 
 A. Those are the bills ; I paid the money on them. 
 
 Q. State whether or not Mr, Grier ever did any business for you, 
 or furnished you with anything that you did not pay for. 
 
 A. Never, not a cent s worth. 
 
 The following are copi-es of the bills referred to. 
 
 -Concord, N. H., Sept. 1864. 
 MR. GEORGE CLOUGH, 
 
 Bought of JOHN GRIER, 
 
 Boot and Shoe Manufacturer, No, 1, Exchange Building, Concord, N. H. 
 1 pair boots for son Geo., $9 00 
 
 Received payment, JOHN GRIER. 
 
 "Received from George Clough, Esq., the sum of sixteen dollars, 
 being the amount of his bill in full up to this date. 
 
 Concord, May the 1, 1852. JOHN GRIER. 
 
 Concord, February 9, 1863. 
 MR. GEORGE CLOUGH, 
 
 To JOHN GRIER, DR. 
 
 To 1 pair of boots, $8 00 
 
 Received payment, JOHN GRIER. 
 
GEORGE CLOUGH, ESQ. 
 
 To JOHN GRIER, DR. 
 1 pair boots for George, $7 00 
 
 Received payment, 
 
 Concord, July 1, 1864. JOHN GRIER. 
 
 
 
 "Concord, 1ST. H., Dec. 1, 1865, 
 
 " MB. GEO. CLOUGH, 
 
 Bought of JOHN GRIER, 
 
 Boot and Shoe Manufacturer, No. 1, Exchange Building, Concord, N. H. 
 1 pair of boots tapped, heeled and foxed, $2 50 
 
 1 pair of boots tapped and heeled, 1 00 
 
 1 pair of boots tapped, 75 
 
 1 pair of boots to son George, 10 00 
 
 1 pair of boots tapped, heeled and foxed, 2 50 
 
 1 pair of boots tapped and heeled, 1 00 
 
 1 pair of shoes tapped, 75 
 
 $18 50 
 Received payment. 
 
 JOHN GRIER. 
 
 Concord, N. H., July 23, 1865. 
 
 "Ms. CLOUQH, 
 
 Bought of JOHN GRIER, 
 Boot and Shoe Manufacturer, No. 1, Exchange Building, Concord, N. H. 
 
 1 pair of French calf boots, $10 00 
 
 Received Payment. 
 
 JOHN GRIER." 
 
 Q. Do I understand you to say that these bills were paid by you in 
 money ? 
 
 A. Yes ; I paid every one of them in cash. 
 
 Q. State whether Mr. Grier ever did any other work for you that 
 you did not pay him the cash for. 
 
 A. No, sir ; he never did. 
 
 Q. "Concord 1867. Received of George Clough, twenty 
 
 dollars, the same being the amount due the estate of John Grier. 
 B. F. Prescott, Administrator." State about that receipt. 
 
 A. I lost the original bill, and went to Mr. Prescott and got a du 
 plicate of it. Mr. Prescott came to me one day and wanted to know if 
 I was owing Mr. Grier. I told him that I supposed that I was owing 
 him something. He said that he could not find any books, but that his 
 wife told him that I got my work done there ; and I asked my boys (I 
 knew that I had got nothing done there for myself) if they had had 
 anything done there, and they said they had had a pair of boots each, 
 and some mending done. I called it twenty dollars and gave the money 
 to Mr. Prescott. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you, once for all, whether you ever received any 
 consideration from anybody Mr. Grier or from anybody else, during 
 the twenty odd years that you were on the railroad, for passing people 
 over th e road ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I have no recollection of ever receiving a dollar. 
 
 Q. How was it with reference to Mr. Starkey? Did you ever know 
 of his selling any ticket to anybody, until after you left the road? 
 
277 
 
 A. No, sir ; I do not know that I did. 
 
 Q. State whether you ever let him have any tickets. 
 
 A. He used to ask me for tickets occasionally, and I let him have 
 them once in a while, and sometimes I denied him. He would fre 
 quently have somebody in the baggage car with him, that he would. 
 want me to paa^ ftnd a majority of the time I would pass him, but I 
 have refused, and made him pay. He used to have a good many 
 friends. 
 
 Q. During the last year or two that Mr. Starkey ran on the road r 
 was he ever in the habit of taking up a part of the tickets ? 
 
 A. Yes ; he was. 
 
 Q. What was the course of proceeding ? 
 
 A. He used to run up nights from Boston, over Long s road, and we 
 came up altogether from Manchester, both trains came together ; and 
 he used quite often to take up the tickets in the large cars. He used 
 to come along and offer to do it, and I used to allow him to. Some 
 times when I had a large train, 1 let him begin at the rear end, and 
 meet me, so that I could get my tickets all up before I came to the 
 first station. 
 
 Q. State whether you ever let James Whitcher have any tickets, or 
 passed him free. And if you did let him have any tickets, state when, 
 and to what amounts, and under what circumstances. 
 
 A. I have let Mr. Whitcher have some tickets. He wanted them for 
 poor people ; and I let him have some tickets by the order of the su 
 perintendent, Mr. Gilmore. I never let him have but a few tickets 
 myself. 1 never let him. have one except when he represented that he 
 wanted it for a poor person who was not able to pay. 
 
 Q. State who these poor persons were, and what were the circum 
 stances. [Objected to by Mr. George.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We desire to show the circumstances under which 
 these tickets were given, and the representations made at the time, to 
 Mr. Clough, and upon which he acted, to rebut the idea that is advanc 
 ed that they were improperly given by Mr. Clough to Mr. Whitcher. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We want the referees to see whether the tickets were 
 given to him under such circumstances as would justify the giving. 
 
 The Chairman. There was something in the regulations to that 
 tenor, was there not ? 
 
 Mr. George. Yes, sir; but that has been ruled out. We cannot 
 hold him to the regulations. We propose to charge him for all the 
 tickets that went out of his possession, and for which he received a 
 consideration. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. Then this is clearly competent. If he is to be charged 
 for these tickets, we have a right to show that they were given as a 
 matter of charity. 
 
 Mr. George. There is a question of veracity between Mr. Whitcher 
 and Mr. Clough. Mr. Clough says he did not give Mr. Whitcher any 
 tickets for a consideration. If he did not, we cannot recover under 
 this form of action. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Clough says that under the circumstances in 
 which he furnished these tickets, he did not get anything for them. I 
 cannot say that I see any materiality. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. It might have a tendency to show the number of tick 
 ets that Mr. Clough let him have for these parties. 
 
 The Chairman. Is the number material ? 
 
278 
 
 Mr. Tappan. That is all this case was founded upon. If anything 
 is material, I suppose that is. 
 
 The Chairman. Taking the ruling of the court which has been 
 already made, and which we do not at present feel inclined to depart 
 from, that Mr. Clough is not to be charged here for tickets for which he 
 received no consideration, it does not seem to us to be very material 
 what the number was. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The gentleman has said that he proposes to argue 
 that these tickets were received from Mr. Clough for a consideration ; 
 that that was the fact with reference to these tickets. If that is the 
 theory asserted by the plaintiffs, is it not competent for us to proceed as 
 far as we may, and introduce the circumstances attending the giving of 
 the tickets, to combat this theory ? 
 
 Mr. George. I remember that I argued at very considerable length, 
 that when Mr. Clough passed people tree, that is, without receiving a 
 fare, when it was the duty of the conductor to take fares, and when the 
 rules required him to take fares, and expressly prohibited him from 
 passing people without taking fares, I ought to be permitted to intro 
 duce that evidence upon the presumption that he did receive money, or 
 money s worth for the passage. The referees took a different view and 
 ruled it out, and my subsequent impression is that the referees were 
 right in that ruling. The converse or the proposition is now presented. 
 Mr. Clough says that none of these tickets were given for money, or for 
 money s worth. If the referees find that to be the fact, we cannot re 
 cover for the value of those tickets. He swears that he did not ; there 
 fore the question rises, whether Mr. Clough tells the truth or not. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The evidence is material only in the view that these 
 tickets were given by Mr. Clough to Mr. Whitcher ; and it is only in 
 that view that we seek to attach any sort of consequence to tlie testi 
 mony as it is now before the referees. That being so, have we not the 
 right to inquire into all the circumstances connected with the transfer 
 of all tickets which Mr. Clough did actually give to Mr. Whitcher ? 
 
 Judge Bellows. Mr. Clough has already testified that they were given 
 to him for poor people. Now I think it would not make any difference 
 in our opinion if he went one step further, and said that Mr. Whitcher 
 told him so. It is a pretty sharp point, and whether or not it would be 
 admissible, might be open to some little doubt ; perhaps it would be. 
 It strikes me, however, as very sharp, and is altogether, in my judgment, 
 immaterial, and could have no influence on our minds one way or 
 another. 
 
 Mr. George. I will withdraw the objection. It is immaterial whether 
 they were for poor or rich people, but it may be material in another* 
 view of the question. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. To Mr. Clough the suggestion might have been quite 
 important, whether they were rich or poor. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. It may strike me differently from what it does the rest 
 of the counsel. That would seem to be the very reason why it would 
 be proper for Mr. Clough to state whether he believed what was repre 
 sented to him ; and he may himself have had some knowledge that the 
 persons for whom he gave Mr. Whitcher tickets, were poor. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} State who these people were, and why Mr. 
 Whitcher wanted the tickets. 
 
 A. I recollect that he once spoke of some Shakers that were at his* 
 house, and said that he would like me to pass one of these. I do not 
 recollect of anybody else. 
 
279 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Whitcher formerly a Shaker ? 
 
 A. He was. 
 
 Q. Could you not have had them ride on your train ? 
 
 A. I think he said that they were going on another train. 
 
 Q. Those tickets that you gave under the direction of Mr. Gilmore: 
 please state the circumstances under which you gave them. 
 
 A. Those were for political purposes, I believe. They were used to 
 get home voters, and to get them back again. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect the number, or near the number? 
 
 A. No ; there might have been six or eight at a time. 
 
 Q. How many tickets in all, did you give Mr. Whitcher, by the 
 order of Gilmore, or in any other way ? 
 
 A. I used to give him some at state elections, for three or four years. 
 
 Q. How many at a time ? 
 
 A. I should think somewhere from six to ten. 
 
 Q. Besides these, how many tickets did you ever give to Mr, Whitch- 
 er, besides the three or four years that you gave him from six to ten ? 
 
 A. I do not think that I ever gave him, myself, more than a dozen 
 or fifteen. 
 
 Q. Over what time did this extend, for how many years ? 
 
 A. I should think perhaps fifteen or sixteen years ; I do not recol 
 lect exactly. 
 
 Q. State, as near as you can recollect, when you gave him the last 
 one. 
 
 A. I did not give him any tickets for more than six months before I 
 left the road ; I do not think I had given him any for a year ; I should 
 think that it was nearer a year than six months. 
 
 Q. What kind of tickets were they ? 
 
 A. They were local tickets. I could not give any others away 
 without paying for them. Joint tickets were charged to me. 
 
 Q. Joint tickets, when in your pocket, represented so much money ? 
 
 A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. How was it with tickets over the Portsmouth road, and over the 
 Manchester -and Lawrence road ? 
 
 A. It was the same over tbe Portsmouth road, and over the Man 
 chester and Lawrence road ; and all the tickets from Nashua, to Boston, 
 and Lowell, we had charged to us. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Were any local tickets also counted out to 
 you and charged to you ? 
 
 A. All the tickets that went over the Portsmouth road, and the 
 tickets over the Manchester & Lawrence road, and all the tickets from 
 Nashua to Boston and Lowell, were counted out and charged to us. The 
 local tickets were not charged to us. 
 
 The Chairman. I understand Mr. Sanborn that all the tickets were 
 counted out and charged. 
 
 The Witness, The general ticket agent counts out the different tick 
 ets to the different sellers at the different stations, and they are charged 
 to them. 
 
 Q. (By Mt\ Rolfe.} But you have no local tickets charged to you? 
 
 A. No, sir ; the joint tickets were charged to us. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} What were the tickets that you delivered 
 to Mr. Whitcher? 
 
 A. Those were local tickets between Manchester and Nashua. 
 
 Q. How did you get possession of those tickets ? 
 
280 
 
 A. Those I kept out in my collections. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) That is, you took them up and did not punch 
 them ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. So that when they went into the hands of another conductor, he 
 recognized them as tickets that had not been rode upon. 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 
 
 Q. State whether or not Mr. Gilmore ever gave you any instructions 
 in relation to saving out tickets for any purpose. 
 
 A. He did. He frequently told me to save out some tickets for 
 himself. 
 
 Q. Would he state the number? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. George. What is the point of this testimony ? I would like to 
 see the bearing of it. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Rolfe stated in his opening argument, that he 
 takes the position that the superintendent was the supreme arbitrer of 
 this matter ; and that, notwithstanding any rules or regulations, he 
 had the right to make exceptions. Having taken that position, I sup 
 pose that he offers now to show that Mr. Clough was obeying the order 
 of the superintendent. 
 
 Mr. George. Then we object to any testimony upon that point. 
 
 The Chairman. It is now about the usual time for adjournment. 
 Perhaps before we adjourn, it would be well for the gentlemen to state 
 the positions they take. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. My question is : What instructions did Mr. Gilmore 
 give you in relation to saving out tickets for Mr. Whitcher, that had 
 been once used ? That is the point we want to make. 
 
 Mr. George. And to that we object. 
 
 Judge Bellows. Another question may arise : What is the bearing 
 of that? Does it tend to rebut the inference that there was any money 
 derived from the transaction ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. The answer might tend to show that Mr. Clough acted 
 from no motive of his own, but was only governed by the superintendent. 
 
 Mr. George. This question raises the whole doctrine, of what might 
 be denominated in this case, the doctrine of estoppel. We have very 
 decided views upon this subject, which we would be glad to state at 
 reasonable length before the referees. We suppose that the whole of 
 this question might practically be considered under the general doctrine 
 of estoppel. [Adjourned.] 
 
 [FIFTEENTH DAY. Saturday, December wtli, 1808.] 
 
 The hearing was resumed at 10 o clock, A. M. 
 
 The examination of Mr. Clough was suspended by consent, that the 
 plaintiffs might examine H. G. Keyes. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF H. G. KEYS. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} State where you live, and what relation you 
 have had to the New England Fire Insurance Company, of Hartford, 
 Connecticut? 
 
 A. I reside in Concord, and have been the agent of that company 
 since its formation. 
 
281 
 
 Q. [Handing papers to witness.] Look at that policy and these 
 papers, and state whether these are the original papers of insurance of 
 property, in that company, and the statement of loss ? 
 
 A. These are the original papers, 
 
 Q. From whom, and to whom, is the policy issued ? 
 
 A. The policy is issued from the Xew England Company, to Eliza 
 E, dough. 
 
 Q. Who is Eliza E. dough ? 
 
 A. The wife of George Clough. 
 
 Q. The property insured in that company was burned, was it not ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. State whether or not this paper is the statement of loss of the 
 property burned ? 
 
 A. It is. 
 
 Q. In whose handwriting is it? 
 
 A. In mine, 
 
 Q. Who prepared that statement of loss? Who did the business 
 with you as regards making out the claim, and with whom did you ne 
 gotiate ? 
 
 A. With George Clough, all except signature. 
 
 Q. How was the signature obtained ? 
 
 A. It is my impression that I went to his house and obtained her 
 signature. 
 
 Q. At what place was the negotiation with regard to the value of 
 the property, &c., as to the figures there, conducted? 
 
 A. A part of it was arrived at at the house of Eewis Young. I 
 have an impression that there was something that concerned the South 
 Church, but will not be certain. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see Mrs. Clough at all before that ? 
 
 A. I think she was present at the appraisal of some damaged goods* 
 
 Q. Who else was present ? 
 
 A. Gilbert Wolfe. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Clough present? 
 
 A. I could not say whether he was or not ; I do not recollect. 
 
 Q. Was the amount of the insurance received from the company, and 
 paid. 
 
 A. I obtained a check from the New England Company, of Hartford, 
 and delivered it to George Clough. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We except to this testimony. There is no evidence 
 to show that Mr. Clough had anything to do with making out the state 
 ment of loss. The witness says that he does not know whether Mr. 
 Clough was present or not. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Let me ask you if Mr. Eolfe did not pre 
 pare that statement of loss, and if you did not meet him at his house r 
 with Mrs. Clough, Mr. Clough not being there ? 
 
 A. Mr. Eolfe had something to do with it. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to look at that schedule of loss, and 
 state if it was not prepared by Mr. Eolfe, and then copied by yourself 
 from the schedule prepared by him. 
 
 A. I have no knowledge of its being prepared by Mr. Eolfe ; I never 
 saw him at work upon it, and cannot say that it was. 
 
 Q. What did you get that from ? 
 
 A. From a statement. 
 
 Q. Have you the original statement ? 
 
282 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q. In whose handwriting was the original statement? 
 
 A. I have no recollection. 
 
 Q. Was it in the handwriting of Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. 1 have no recollection. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state that Mr. Clough himself had anything to do 
 with preparing that schedule of loss? Was it not prepared by Mrs. 
 Clough and Mr. Eolfe, as far as you remember ? 
 
 A. My impression is that Mr. Clough has as much to do with it as 
 anyone. 
 
 Q. Where did you see him ? 
 
 A. In my office. 
 
 Q. In regard to the preparation of that schedule, where did you see 
 him or have any conversation with him ? 
 
 A. I had repeated conversations with him. 
 
 Q. Where ? 
 
 A. I could not state at what places I saw him, because the thing 
 was a long process, and there were a great many parties to bring 
 together, and during that time I saw him at various times and at differ 
 ent places. 
 
 Q. Was this schedule prepared by Mr. Clough or by Mrs. Clough ? 
 
 A. Mrs. Clough, to my knowledge, had nothing to do with it, with 
 the exception that she was present at the appraisal of the damaged 
 goods, and when they obtained her signature. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Clough present at that time ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect. 
 
 Q. Did you have any communications with Mrs. Clough in regard 
 to the preparation of the schedule ? 
 
 A. Only at that place. 
 
 Q. Did you ever meet her at Mr. Eolfe s house ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect ; I may have met her and I may not. I have 
 no recollection. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you did not ? 
 
 A. I cannot say ; I cannot say where Mr. Eolfe lived at that time. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you did not meet Mrs. Clough at Mr. Eolfe s 
 house with reference to the preparation of this schedule of loss ? 
 
 A. I cannot say ; I have no recollection either way. 
 
 Q. Who put the valuations to the goods lost ? 
 
 A. I am unable to tell you. 
 
 Q. Do you remember that Mr. Clough did it ? 
 
 A. I cannot say whether Mr. Clough did or not. I have no recol- 
 lectioa as to who made these figures. 
 
 Q. You have no recollection that Mr. Clough himself had anything 
 to do with affixing the value of goods lost ? 
 
 A. I would not say that he had or had not anything to do with mak 
 ing the figures. 
 
 Mr. Mvgridge. We submit that there is no evidence here sufficient 
 to show that Mr. Clough had any such knowledge of this schedule, or 
 any connection with it, so far as the value of the goods lost is concerned, 
 as to render this testimony competent. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Who gave that schedule to you. 
 
 A. I am under the impression that George Clough brought it to my 
 office. 
 
The Chairman. The objection that is taken, as far as I understand 
 the gentleman, is, that there is nothing now before the board which 
 makes this testimony evidence against Mr. Clough as to the value of the 
 property. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Mvgridge.) When Mr. Clough s house was burned, 
 was not some of the property taken to the South Church and put in 
 there ? 
 
 A. Some of it was. 
 
 Q. And some to dwelling-houses ? 
 
 A. That is my impression. 
 
 Q. The damage upon that property was estimated by a committee 
 selected by you, as the agent of the company, was it not ? 
 
 A. The damage to the injured property was. 
 
 Q Did not that committee assess the damages to the property in 
 jured? 
 
 A. I will not say that they did it conclusively ; they did it in the 
 main. 
 
 Q. Was it not their duty to affix the damage to the property injured ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did they not do it ? 
 
 A, Yes ; but after having done that, those figures have a right to 
 be altered. 
 
 Q. The question I put to you is, whether they were altered after 
 they were fixed by this committee ? 
 
 A. My impression is that they were. 
 
 Q. Who altered them ? 
 
 A. They were altered by agreement of the parties. 
 
 Q. Who made the agreement? 
 
 A. Jlr. Eolfe and Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to swear that Mr. Clough and Mr. Kolfe, after the 
 committee had affixed the value to this property, altered it ? Do you 
 mean to swear to that? 
 
 A. I swear to this, that as far as we were agreed, some of these 
 figures were changed after the appraisal. 
 
 Q. The point I put to you is this : whether you mean to state that 
 after the committee affixed the damage they altered the figures ? 
 
 A. I do. 
 
 Q. And do you state that you gave the check to Mr. Clough here, 
 and that Mr. Clough carried it up to his house ? 
 
 A, I do not know where he carried it. 
 
 Q. You gave the check to Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. My impression is that I did. 
 
 Q. Did he receipt for it to you ? 
 
 A. My impression is that he did. 
 
 Q. Who do you think receipted for it ? 
 
 A. That paper .shows. 
 
 Q. Who do you think receipted for it? 
 
 A. I should say that Mr. Kolfe receipted, as counsel. 
 
 A. But you gave the check to Mr. Clough, and he carried it to Mrs. 
 Clough? 
 
 A. I cannot say where he carried it ? 
 
 Q. Did you give it to Mr. Kolfe? 
 
 A. I cannot say ; my memory serves me that I gave it to Mr. 
 Clough. 
 
284 
 
 Q. To whom was the check payable ? 
 
 A. I would not swear. 
 
 Q. Did you not give that check to Mr. Rolfe ? and did he not re* 
 ceipt for it, and carry it to Mrs. Glough ? 
 
 ^ A. By this receipt I cannot tell whether or not it was given at the 
 time I received the draft, whether 1 took the receipt at the time I de 
 livered the draft, or not, I cannot say; but I went to Hartford and 
 brought this check back. In some instances I have taken the receipts 
 and sent them on, and had the check sent back ; and in others, I take 
 the receipts when the check is delivered. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to swear that Mr. Clough, personally, had to do 
 with fixing the value of that property ? Didn t you swear a moment 
 ago that you could not swear whether he did or not ? 
 
 A. My memory has been refreshed, and I recollect that he was with 
 me in the South Church. 
 
 Q. Your memory has been refreshed since you first testified ? 
 
 A. It has. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We take the exception still, that there is nothing 
 here to bind Mr. Clough to the value of that property. 
 
 The Chairman. I do not know that any of the referees think that 
 there is anything here to bind Mr. Clough conclusively, but they think 
 that they may consider, as against Mr. Clough, evidence of his belief 
 that that property was in existence, and was of the value stated in that 
 schedule. We do not mean to say that he is estopped from bringing 
 evidence to the contrary. We think that like any other evidence, that 
 may be considered hereafter. We consider that Mr. Keyes testimony 
 is evidence which may be established or contradicted. The ruling is 
 that the evidence of Mr. Keyes now makes a prima facia case for the 
 admission of this testimony for the purpose of showing Mr. Clough s be 
 lief that that property existed, and was of the value stated in the 
 schedule. [Exception to the ruling, by the defendants.] 
 
 The Chairman. What objection is there to the introduction of the 
 policy of insurance ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We have an idea that the obtaining of the policy of 
 insurance was an act between Mrs. Clough and the company, with which 
 Mr. Clough is shown to have had no connection whatever. Mr. Keyes 
 testimony, thus far, has not connected Mr. Clough with the policies at 
 all ; and more than that, the policies themselves show their connection 
 with Mrs. Clough. 
 
 The Chairman. The objection appears to be well taken. I do not 
 remember that there has been any evidence connecting Mr. Clough with 
 the policies. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Who procured that insurance, and who paid 
 the premium ? 
 
 A. George Clough. 
 
 Q. Had you any negotiation whatever with Mrs. Clough, with regard 
 to it, at the time of the negotiation ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Who signed the application ? 
 
 A. I am not certain whether or not we issued an application then. 
 
 The Chairman. I presume this testimony can be held back until you 
 have laid the proper foundation for it. 
 
 Mr. George. The testimony that Mr. Keyes has already given can be 
 considered de bene esse until we have laid the proper foundation. 
 
285 
 
 GEOKGE CLOUGH BE-CALLED. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. In order that we may make a little further examination 
 into the^roper relation which the superintendent sustains to the direct 
 ors of the road, and to the conductors, we will, if the referees please, 
 waive, for the present, the question as to what the superintendent 
 directed Mr. Clough to do in relation to taking out those tickets, but 
 will call his attention to it at another time. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} 1 do not ask you now as to the tickets which 
 you gave by direction of the superintendent, but as to the tickets that 
 you gave Mr. Whitcher when he requested them of you. State, as near 
 as you can recollect, the number that you gave. I want to make a dis 
 tinction between the two. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. That distinction has been already made. 
 
 Mr. George. I do not see the object of this testimony, and 1 will 
 object to it, for it may bring us to a point as to which we are very well 
 prepared to submit our views ; we want to see what the object of this is. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. We have been making a little further examination into 
 the authorities as to the relations existing between the conductors and 
 the superintendent of the road, and as to the scope and extent of the 
 superintendent s power and authority in the matter; but we desire to 
 examine further, and therefore propose to waive any questions which 
 may have a tendency to raise that discussion, until some time in the 
 future, 
 
 Mr. George. The question was in relation to certain transactions be 
 tween this conductor and Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We now waive that question. 
 
 The Chairman. There was evidence offered tending to show a very 
 large number of tickets found in the possession of Mr. James Whitcher. 
 This question appears to me to be directed to showing how those tickets 
 were procured by him. 
 
 Mr. George. That was inquired about yesterday, and answered. 
 
 The Chairman. If the counsel consider that sufficiently answered, 
 we do not desire to go any further. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. As far as concerns the instructions from Mr. Gilmore to 
 Mr. Ciough, we waive the testimony for the present ; and if the ques 
 tion is sufficiently answered in relation to the Whitcher tickets, that is 
 enough, 
 
 Q. State the number of tickets that you gave to Mr. Starkey, the 
 time when you gave them, and the circumstances under which you gave 
 them. 
 
 A. I never gave Mr. Starkey any tickets for a year and a half before 
 I left the road. Mr. Starkey used to come to me, just before the train 
 started, and tell me that he had a friend in the car that he wanted me 
 to give him a ticket for, and I occasionally gave him a ticket in that 
 way. The tickets generally were given for the train that I ran. Some 
 times I gave him a ticket, and sometimes a card, so that I should know 
 the person. Sometimes Mr. Starkey would have a person in the bag 
 gage car with him, that he would want me to pass. I have passed some 
 that way, and some I refused to pass, and made them pay their fare. 
 
 Q. State whether you ever received any consideration for any of 
 those free passes, either from Mr. Starkey, or from any of the individ 
 uals that were passed. 
 
 A. No, sir ; never a cent. 
 
286 
 
 Q. State as to whether you ever gave Mr. Starkey any tickets for 
 any purpose except to be used by persons about going down on the train. 
 
 A. No, sir ; never. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. For the purpose of contradicting Mr. Starkey we 
 have a right to put leading questions, 
 
 Witness. I do not think that I ever gave Starkey a ticket except it 
 was to be used on the train that I ran myself. I often gave him a card, 
 or something of that kind, so that I should know the person when I 
 went through the cars to take up the tickets. 
 
 Q. State how it was to substitute brokers, and substitutes paying 
 fare in the cars over the Concord road, on the trains on which you run. 
 
 A. On the trains that I ran, it was very seldom that a substitute 
 broker paid in the cars. I will not say but that there have been 
 instances of that kind, but they were very rare ; I refer to substitute 
 brokers and their men. 
 
 Q. What was the practice. 
 
 A. They had tickets, These that came from New York and that 
 way, had tickets through to Concord. The fare was less by paying 
 through, than it would have been by paying twice, or by paying for a 
 part of the way, and then paying again. 
 
 Q. Are you acquainted with Henry P. Lane ? 
 
 A. I cannot say that I am acquainted with him. I know him by 
 sight, and think I have known him by sight for as many as eight or ten 
 years. 
 
 Q. Did he frequently ride with you ? 
 
 A. He did. He used to go down occasionally. 
 
 Q. State the fact as to his paying fare in the cars. 
 
 A. Mr. Lane paid me a few times in the cars two or three times, 
 and then he wanted that I should pass him. and said that as there were 
 other brokers that rode free, he wanted the same privilege, He wanted 
 to know if I could not pass him. I told him that I had no authority to 
 do so, and that he must see Mr. Grilmore. I recollect that on one occa 
 sion I had considerable trouble in getting his fare ; he was not willing 
 to pay ; and hindered me in collecting my tickets on the train. Finally 
 I got his fare, and after that he got his ticket at the office. He has 
 never spoken to me since, that I recollect of. 
 
 Q. State the fact as to his paying fares for substitutes in the cars. 
 
 A. He never paid me a fare for a substitute in his life. Those sub 
 stitutes had tickets through to Concord. 
 
 Q. What did you do with the fares that he did pay you in the cars ? 
 Did you take the extra ten cents of him ? 
 
 A. I did ; and put it into the way bill. 
 
 Q. Did you hear Mr. Lane testify ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You saw him illustrate the manner in which you took money ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. State whether you ever put the money in between your fingers 
 in the way he stated ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Or in your hand in any way ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What did you do with it ? 
 
 A. When I took money I doubled it up and put it in my vest pocket, 
 The only man on the road that I ever knew to carry money in that way 
 was Levi P. Wright. 
 
287 
 
 Q. State whether Mr. Samuel P. Curtis rode with you 
 the cars. 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he did. 
 
 Q. State your business transactions on the road with him. 
 
 A. He used to pay me in the cars when he first began to rides and 
 then he wanted me to pass him the same as Mr, Lane did. 1 told him 
 that 1 could not; that he must see Mr. Gilniore. He saw him, or> some 
 body else did for him, and he got a pass ; I think the pass wa& for two 
 or three months. 
 
 Q. Pid you ever have any difficulty with Mr. Curtis ? 
 
 A. Mr. Curtis went down one night when he was intoxicated and 
 noisy, and made trouble in the cars, and the passengers entered com 
 plaint. I think that when the train stopped at Hooksett I went- to Mr. 
 Curtis and told him that I wanted to see him. He walked out, and I 
 went into the baggage car and he followed me, and I told him that he 
 must ride there the rest of the way. He swore that he would not, and 
 I put the brakeman over him, and kept him there until I got to Man 
 chester, and then set him ashore. I reported him to Mr. Gilmore and 
 my impression is that Mr. Gilmore revoked the pass ; or, as it had 
 nearly expired, perhaps he let it run its time. He did not get any 
 oth er pass after that. 
 
 Q. When Mr. Curtis paid fare in the cars, as you have testified, 
 before he got his pass, how was it as to your collecting the extra ten 
 cents. 
 
 A. I charged him the extra ten cents. 
 
 Q. What did you do with it? 
 
 A. I put it into the way bill. 
 
 Q. How many fares in all 1 , according to your recollection, did Curtis 
 pay you ? 
 
 A. I do not remember exactly. I think not more than two or three. 
 He paid for no one but himself. 
 
 Q. How was it after the pass expired ? 
 
 A. He bought tickets after that. 
 
 Q. How was it as to substitutes. Did he ever pay any fare for sub 
 stitutes? 
 
 A. He never paid any fare for substitutes to me. 
 
 Q. State whether he was in charge of substitutes sometimes. 
 
 A. He was a sort of ".striker" for some of the rest of them They 
 sent him down to secure men. 
 
 Q. How was it with those men not the men that he was " striking " 
 for, but the men that were struck as to paying fare ? 
 
 A. They had a man with them that paid the fares, and held the 
 tickets. He had nothing to do with them. 
 
 Q. How was it with the man that held the tickets. Did he point 
 the substitutes out to you ? 
 
 A. Yes ; he would show me his tickets, and count them, and point 
 the men out to me. He would go along through the car with me and 
 show me which they were 
 
 Q. Was Lane s business the same? 
 
 A. Yes ; the same. 
 
 Q. State your instructions about purchasing tickets to the brake 
 man below Nashua, and also the practice. 
 
 [Objected to by Mr3 George.] 
 
288 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. If the referees please, I intend to ask Mr. Clough 
 whether it was his instructions to the brakeman, as they came up over 
 the Nashua and Lowell road, to get the passengers who hadn t tickets 
 above, out at Nashua, and let them buy tickets ; and what the practice 
 in that respect was. 
 
 [Objected to. Objection overruled, and exception taken by plaintiff. 
 
 A. I gave the brakemen and baggage master instructions, when pas- 
 .sengers came up on the lower roads, to get them out at Nashua to buy 
 their tickets. I gave these instructions to Mr. Thayer and to Mr. 
 Favre. The instructions were either to get the passengers who had no 
 tickets, out to get them, or else to get their tickets tor them." Mr. 
 Thayer is running as conductor on the lower road now ; I do not know 
 where Mr. Favre is now running. The fare was higher than now, and 
 if I took the extra ten cents it would make it still higher. I think it 
 was some twenty-five or thirty cents higher where a passenger paid 
 twice between Boston and Concord than it was when they paid their, 
 fare through ; as the conductors below could not take the fare any fur 
 ther than Nashua. The passengers that got in at the way stations 
 without tickets on the lower roads, the conductors only took their pay to 
 Nashua. If they got in between Lowell and Boston, those station agents 
 or ticket masters at those stations had no tickets any further than 
 Nashua. All passengers that got in without tickets at Boston or Low 
 ell, and all those that did buy tickets at the local stations, had to buy 
 again at Nashua, if they went above Nashua. 
 
 Q. What was the practice ? 
 
 A. Mr. Favre and Mr. Thayer both obeyed my instructions and 
 orders in regard to getting passengers out to buy their tickets, or get 
 ting tickets for them. 
 
 Q. State what your practice was, when you had time, of delaying 
 the trains for the purpose of giving passengers an opportunity to buy 
 tickets. 
 
 A. When my trains were on time, passengers would come to me and 
 ask if they had time to get tickets ; I would say " yes," and would wait 
 a minute or two until they got tickets. That was my practice. When 
 the trains from below were on time, the passengers had less time to get 
 their tickets, and were sometimes without them ; if the trains were late 
 they had more time. 
 
 Q. What was the fact as to large and heavy trains about more or 
 less passengers being obliged to pay their fares in the cars ? 
 
 A. I have taken less money on large trains than I have on small 
 trains. 
 
 Q. Give the reason why that was. 
 
 A. If I had a heavy train we were generally late starting. For 
 instance, if the northern trains were late we would seldom get away on 
 time. If we had a heavy train, and were late in starting from here, 
 for instance, the passengers would have a better opportunity of getting 
 their tickets ; and if we started late we were generally about the same 
 length of time late at the other stations, as we could not make any head 
 time. It would be the same at all the stations between here and Nashua 
 as it was in starting from here. 
 
 Q. State whether you made any suggestions to Mr. Gilmore. or any 
 efforts to induce him to make arrangements for preventing persons get 
 ting into the cars at this station without buying tickets. 
 
289 
 
 A. I did. I tried to have Mr. Gilmore have the clerks come down 
 and lock one end of the car and stand at the other end and make the 
 passengers show their tickets as they got in. In war times the soldiers 
 would sometimes get in without paying, and when they had once got in 
 it was pretty hard getting anything out of them. I went to Mr. Gil- 
 more several times about it, or at least two or three times I do not 
 recollect just how many. He used to promise to make such an arrange 
 ment, but never did, until the soldiers used to get in by car-loads and 
 refuse to pay, and we could not get anything out of them, and then he 
 established a guard to go on th-^ train for a while for three or six 
 months, 1 should think. He used to send six or eight soldiers down on 
 guard. They rode on the trains backward and forward, and stood at 
 the end of the cars, and if anybody offered to get in without a ticket 
 they would send them to the office. 
 
 Q. Do you mean anybody but soldiers ? 
 
 A. No ; they had to do only with soldiers. They would not let them 
 in unless they had tickets or transportation. Most of the soldiers had 
 transportation^ two cents per mile. 
 
 Q. Did you make this suggestion with reference to other passengers 
 as well as soldiers? the suggestion to Mr. Gilmore about the clerks 
 coming down ? 
 
 A. Yes. I said I suggested that he have the clerks come down and 
 see that all the passengers had tickets. 
 
 Q. When was this? How long before you left the road? 
 
 A. I think it was in 1863. 
 
 Q. And from that time forward ? 
 
 A. Yes. The guard did not go all the time. 
 
 Q. What I meant to inquire was, when you first made this sugges 
 tion to Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. That was about 186 j. 
 
 Q, How was it at Nashua ? What were the regulations there as to 
 persons who had baggage, who came in the New York trains ? How 
 was it about their getting their baggage on the cars without showing 
 their tickets ? 
 
 A. They could not get their baggage without showing their tickets, 
 W T hen they did not have tickets they had to go to the office and get them 
 before they got their baggage. 
 . Q. Persons that had no baggage come across and get in the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. State now with reference to the rule requiring you to take ten 
 cents extra of all persons who got into the cars without tickets, how far 
 you enforced that rule ; and if you did not enforce it, state at what 
 times, and to what extent you did not enforce it, and why. If there 
 were any difficulties about it, state them? 
 
 A. It was always difficult to get the ten cents extra. Passengers 
 would sometimes hand me just the change, and would refuse to pay any 
 nipre. 
 
 Mr. George. We might as well raise the question of estoppel here at 
 this point. We are prepared to discuss that question now. 
 
 The Chairman. I understand that the testimony now going in, is 
 offered with a view of rebutting the suggestion of an arrangement on 
 the part of the defendant to induce passengers to pay in the cars. I 
 understand that Mr. Piolfe is putting this testimony in with a view of 
 showing the efforts that were made to induce people to purchase tickets 
 It 
 
290 
 
 before getting into the cars. Enforcing the payment of the ten cents 
 extra would of course tend to make passengers purchase tickets. If he 
 did not enforce that payment, of course there should be some reason 
 shown. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. That is my object. I do not care now to touch upon Air. 
 (jrihnore s instructions with regard to that rule. 
 
 The Chairman. I understand that whenever the proposition shall be 
 made to put in the directions of the superintendent, as an explanation 
 or justification of any particular course that was taken, that then it is 
 desired upon both sides that there should be some discusssion of the 
 point. 
 
 Mr. Rolfc. We have some few suggestions to make upon that point. 
 
 The Chairman. I do not/ know as it is material to the referees when 
 that discussion is had, but it does not appear to be needed now. 
 
 Mr. Clark. Will the referees allow me to make a single suggestion, 
 I do not understand the matter to refer entirely to instructions that 
 may have been received from the superintendent of the road, but that 
 the ground of our objection goes further, and raises this question: 
 whether or not, Mr. Clough, holding the position of conductor upon the 
 "Concord road, can be allowed, for any purpose, to offer this evidence, 
 even for the purpose of rebutting the presumption referred to that he 
 received money for the purpose of inducing passengers to pay in the 
 cars. Our position goes to that extent. 
 
 The Chairman. You excepted to that testimony when this class of 
 testimony was introduced. 
 
 Mr. Clark. It all goes in subject to that exception. 
 
 The Chairman. The exception was taken particularly to the ruling 
 in of the instructions. That was all that I understood the exception 
 applied to. The testimony having gone in in this way, the point is 
 now made that Mr. Clough cannot now bring in evidence here in any 
 view, cither with a view to rebut this point, or in any other view ; that 
 he cannot bring in evidence as to his reasons in permitting, at anytime, 
 passengers to pass without taking the extra ten cents. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. Suppose we could show that it was physically impos 
 sible for him to collect it ; would that evidence be excluded ! 
 
 The Chairman. The referees are all agreed that this evidence is 
 admissible in the same connection. Permitting passengers to pay their 
 fares in the cars without taking the ten cents extra, would certainly 
 remove one of the difficulties in the way of buying in the cars, and 
 there would then be some inducement to buy in the cars. It certainly 
 rebuts any evidence as to Mr. Clough s making arrangements to induce 
 passengers to purchase in the cars. In any instances where he did not 
 take the ten cents extra, it is certainly admissible to show why he did 
 not take it, or that he could not take it. 
 
 [Exceptions to the ruling, by the plaintiff.] 
 
 The Witness, Sometimes passengers would make just the change to 
 me, and would refuse to pay any more than the ticket office fare, and 
 rather than have trouble with them I used to take it. It was a rule 
 that we could not enforce without a great deal of trouble. If they 
 handed me just enough, and I could not get any more, I used to let 
 them pass rather than have any trouble. 
 
 Q. State the difficulty, if you were behind time, or had long trains, 
 in respect to stopping to take the ten cents, or to trouble yourself about 
 the passengers. 
 
291 
 
 A. When I had heavy trains, and any passengers refused to pay the 
 ten cents extra, 1 did not have any controversy with them. 1 had not 
 time to do so and attend to the rest of my business. 
 
 Q. What would have been the effect if you had attempted to col 
 lect it ? 
 
 A. The effect would be, that I should probably lose a great deal 
 more than 1 gained, in some other way. It 1 did not get through the 
 train before 1 got to the next station, the way passengers would step 
 out, and go off with their tickets. 1 used to endeavor to hurry through 
 the trains before I got to the first station, so as to get up all the tickets 
 of passengers that got out at that station. 
 
 Q. How was it with the heavy trains ? If you had to stop and make 
 the change for any considerable number of passengers, what would be 
 the effect in your getting through the train ? 
 
 A It would be difficult for me to get through the train. I could 
 not get through as many cars before I got to the first station. 
 
 Q. In case you did not take the extra ten cents in the cars, in what 
 way did you make your return to the ticket office on your way bills, 
 and in what way did you settle with the road ? 
 
 The Chairman. This question, as to what way Mr, Clough settled 
 with the road if that is considered as subject to the exception that 
 has been made perhaps would hardly be admissible testimony, as that 
 raises the question of estoppel. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The proposition is to show how he arranged with 
 respect to fares taken in the cars. 
 
 The Chairman. (After consultation.) I believe, gentlemen, that the 
 conclusion of the referees is, that they would like to hear from the 
 other side what they may say in answer to the arguments of the coun 
 sel for the plaintiff, before they undertake to rule upon this point. We 
 should like to have the matter more fully considered by both sides 
 before we make a final ruling upon the question of estoppel. 
 
 Judge Bellows. \i may be well to state the point before the referees. 
 If I understand the matter correctly, it is proposed to show that cer 
 tain tickets, which were purchased by Mr. Clough, which were punched 
 and returned to the proper officer of the corporation, did not represent 
 tickets sold in the usual way, and did not in point of fact, represent 
 money which was taken in the cars. That, I understand to be the gen 
 eral view of the matter. Now the point would be, whether when Mr. 
 Clough returned tickets of this kind, representing them to be of that 
 character the very return of them would represent perhaps that they 
 were of that character and they were received by the corporation as 
 such, and his way-bills made no mention of them at all the point 
 would be whether the corporation would be regarded as having changed 
 its position in consequence, so as to bring it within the doctrine of 
 estoppel. Whether the corporation received this return as true, and 
 passed his account in that form, when they might have acted in some 
 other way when they might have called him to account for the money 
 actually received in the cars in some other form, or required him to 
 account for the ten cents extra, or taken some other steps in relation to 
 it; whether they can be considered to have changed their position in 
 bringing this out ; whether they brought this suit upon the assumption 
 that all the money that he took in the cars was represented in the way 
 bill ; and whether that would be acting upon any representations that 
 he made, so as to be a change of position on their part these are all 
 
292 
 
 questions under consideration ; but the main question perhaps is, 
 whether this brings it within the definition of estoppel or not. 
 
 Mr. George. That was the exact point 1 intended to raise. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That is the point we desire to be heard upon ; but 
 we think we could not examine it sufficiently to present our views this 
 afternoon. [Adjourned.] 
 
 [SIXTEENTH DAV. Monday, December 21st, 1868.] 
 
 The hearing was resumed at 10 o clock, A. M., and the discussion 
 continued. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Since the adjournment on Saturday we have been 
 able to give some attention to this point. I do not propose to argue, 
 at length, the question involved, but simply to state, briefly, the 
 position which we propose to take in answer to those taken by counsel 
 upon the other side, and the authorities bearing upon those positions. 
 The proposition of the plaintiff, as I understand it, is this: The rules 
 of the road required the conductor to return the money taken in the 
 cars for fare, upon his way-bills; that because Mr. Clough, in instances 
 where it was impossible for him to take the extra ten cents from the 
 passenger who had no ticket, took from him the actual fare, in money, 
 paid it into the hands of a ticket seller of the road, receiving therefor 
 a ticket which he mutilated and returned that he is by that act 
 estopped from saying that the road received that money in payment of 
 the fares of the passengers. In this action, wherein he is charged only 
 for money which he has received and actually retained he is to be placed, 
 in a position where he is to be held for money which he has received, 
 none of which he has retained, but all of which he has faithfully paid over 
 to the road. 
 
 In order to consider our position and theirs, fully, it becomes neces 
 sary for me to call your attention to a further proposition which we 
 expect to establish by evidence. In connection with the evidence 
 already offered by Mr. Clough, as to the manner in which he did his 
 business, we propose to show that this course of business, upon the part 
 of Mr. Clough, was directly authorized by Mr. Gilmore, the superin 
 tendent of the road ; that it had been practiced by Mr. Clough for a 
 long time ; was fully known and understood by the ticket sellers on the 
 line ; and was never objected to by any person in behalf of the com 
 pany. There is one further proposition that we have to make in regard 
 to the rules. We propose to show that these rules, which are presented 
 here by the gentlemen upon the other side, and which they claim bind 
 us, as being the rules of the directors of the road, were wilfully vio 
 lated by three or four of those same directors, by express directions 
 and suggestions made by them to Mr. Clough, which directions he fol 
 lowed, under their authoritv ; and which directions and suggestions 
 were in direct contravention to the rules themselves ; and that having 
 themselves violated these rules, they are in no position to undertake 
 now to enforce them as against others. 
 
 As I said before, I do not propose to argue these points, but to state 
 them as briefly as I can. 
 
 We say that the acts complained of upon the part of the plaintiff, do 
 not constitute an estoppel ; that none of the elements that enter into 
 and create an estoppel, are found here. I propose to consider what 
 some of the essentials are which give to an act the force and character 
 of an estoppel. 
 
293 
 
 First. It must be made to appear that the act or declaration com 
 plained of has in some way directly influenced the conduct of the party 
 by whom the estoppel is to be enforced. (2, Smith s Leading Cases, 644 
 646). It must be made to appear that the act or declaration complained 
 of, has in some way, directly influenced the estoppel sought to be 
 enforced. That influence must be shown to have been direct and 
 immediate. Watkins v. Peck, (13, N. H., 360) ; Dazdl v. Odell, (3 
 Hill, 219). In Tufts v. Hayes, (5 N. H , 452,) the doctrine asserted is, 
 that it must appear that the act of the party was one intended to influ 
 ence others, or to gain some advantage to himself, to constitute an 
 estoppel. 
 
 Upon these authorities we submit that the plaintiffs are bouud, in the 
 first place to make it appear, by affirmative proof, that their action has 
 in some way been influenced by the acts of Mr. Clough, of which they 
 complain. In other words, it must be shown that they have in some 
 way been called upon by the acts of Mr. Clough, as taken in the prem 
 ises, to change their position and to do something which they otherwise 
 would not have done. That fact they must show here affirmatively, and 
 the matter cannot be left to inference, or deduction, or suggestion, but 
 must have its foundation somewhere in proof. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you mean to say that the rule of law is different, 
 in regard to that, from what it is in regard to proof of any other fact ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I mean to say this doctrine of estoppel is one which 
 the law does not favor ; and the facts relied upon must be proved and 
 substantiated. 
 
 Second. It must clearly appear that the injurious influence exercised 
 by the acts or declarations which constitute the estoppel, if not intend 
 ed, might have been at least forseen by the party, and understood by 
 him. That is, that, at the time he did the act complained of, if he did 
 not intend injurious consequences, he must have been placed in a posi 
 tion where he might clearly have forseen,. and understood the conse 
 quences. Morton v. Hodgen, (22, Maine, 137) ; Otis v. Sill, (5, Barb., 
 182) ; Cartwright v. Gardiner, (5, Cush., 273) ; Cambridge Inst.v. Lit- 
 tlefleld, (6, Caven, 216) ; Watkins v. Peck, (13, N. H., 360). Without 
 arguing the point that I make here, I want to suggest that Mr. Clough, 
 in this instance, intended no wrong to the Concord Railroad by any act 
 of his ; nor could he nor anyone else have understood or forseen any 
 injury to have resulted to the road from his conduct. 
 
 Third. No estoppel can arise, without proof that a wrong is done 
 intentionally, on one side, and an injury suffered on the other; nor 
 unless the injury be so closely connected with the wrong, that it might 
 and ought to have been forseen by the guilty party. On that point I 
 refer the referees to the following cases : Copeland v. Copeland, (28, 
 Maine, 525) ; Abel v. Fitch, (20, Conn., 90) ; Whittaker v. Williams, 
 (20, Conn., 98) ; Dyer v. Cady, (20, Conn., 563) ; Martin v. Angell, (7, 
 Barb!, 407) ; Barker v. Brown, (15, N. H., 176) ; Wallis v. Truesdak, 
 (6, Pick., 456) ; Davis v. Sanders, (11, N. H., 259) ; Guernsey v. Ed 
 wards, (26, id., 224). 
 
 In Smith s Leading Cases, (II., 646), the doctrine is stated as follows : 
 " In order to raise an act by a party, from the rank of evidence to 
 the dignity of an estoppel it must not only be shown that the retraction 
 will be injurious to the other, but that the injury results from a course 
 of action induced by the act. There will be no estoppel unless the 
 injury be the direct and immediate result of the wrong. There must 
 
294 
 
 unquestionably be an injury coupled with a wrong. Where no injury 
 results, the discussion belongs to the forum of morals and not to judic-. 
 ial tribunals." 
 
 In this connection I wish also to refer to the following cases : , Norris 
 v. Monison, (45, N. H., 490) ; Austin v. Thompson,^, N. H., 113) ; 
 Carpenter v. Cummings, (40, id., 158-169). 
 
 The point we make here in this case is : that by the act of Mr. 
 Clough, in returning these tickets in the way he did there has been no 
 wrong shown to have happened to the Concord Railroad Company, 
 none whatever, not a dollar have they lost; but on the contrary, every 
 single dollar of money that they were entitled to, was received by them, 
 and found its way into the treasury of the company. No actual or 
 theoretical wrong can be shown by the plaintiff to have been suffered by 
 reason of Mr. dough s making the return of tickets in the way he did. 
 
 The Concord Railroad received every single mill that it was entitled 
 to for the fare of passengers. We claim, in the first place, that it is 
 incumbent upon the company to show a wrongful act upon the part of 
 Mr. Clough by which the company has suffered some pecuniary injury, 
 and been in -some way, substantially damaged. 
 
 An estoppel will never be carried further, in any case, than is neces 
 sary to prevent one party from being injured by reliance upon the acts 
 and declarations of the others. 1 will refer the court to the following 
 cases, where this proposition is very strongly and broadly discussed, 
 and in a way, I think, that entitles it to a very strong practical appli 
 cation to this case : 2 Smith s Leading Cases, 644 ; Johns v. Church, 
 (12 Pick. 307) ; Kinney v. Farnsivorth, (17 Conn. 345.) 
 
 My suggestion is, that the estoppel will be limited to what is neces 
 sary to put the parties in the same relative position which they would 
 have occupied had the act complained of not have taken place. 
 
 The doctrine of estoppel is arbitrary and severe. As the effect of an 
 estoppel is to prevent the assertion of rights which are unquestionably 
 valid,, or to preclude defence which would otherwise be good, justice 
 requires that it should not be enforced unless substantiated in every 
 material particular. Carpenter v. Hillcock, (12 Barb. 128.) 
 
 It cannot arise against a party for an act done, or an omission made 
 in good faith, and under the influence of a mistaken impression as to 
 the nature or extent of his rights either in law or in fact. Whittaker 
 v. Williams, (20 Conn. 98 ;) Mackay v. Holland, (4 Met. 69 ;) Eoyston 
 v. Howie (15 Ala. 309 ;) Telghmanv. West, (8 Iredell, 83.) 
 
 The particular application that I wish to make of these authorities, 
 to this case is, that Mr. Clough, as we shall satisfy you by our evidence, 
 acted in perfect good faith towards this corporation, in doing what he 
 did ; that he supposed that his every act in the particular complained 
 of was justified by the authority of the superintendent of the road ; 
 and if it should appear that he acted under a misapprehension, either 
 in law, or in fact ; if we still show that he acted in perfect good faith 
 towards the company, he is not to be punished here for that act. I 
 think we shall have clearly satisfied you of that when the evidence is 
 all presented. 
 
 We claim, also, in this case, that if there is an estoppel against Mr. 
 Clough, we have an offset which sets the entire matter at large. The 
 proposition I make is this : that the course of conduct of Mr. 
 Clough in the matter complained of, must have been and was under 
 stood and sanctioned by the officers of the road. And that we shall 
 
295 
 
 argue to you that this knowledge brought home to the superintendent of 
 the road, and also to the ticket sellers, (but particularly to the super 
 intendent,) binds the road ; and on this point we have authorities which 
 to us, seem clear and satisfactory. The course of Mr. dough in this 
 regard must have been and was understood and sanctioned by the offi 
 cers of the road ; at least Air Clough so understood it and acted upon 
 that idea. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you mean to be understood as saying that he 
 was led into that belief by the fault of the officers of the road ? 
 
 Mr. M-ugridge. Yes, sir; 1 take this general position, and claim 
 that lor the plaintiff now to deny the propriety of this action, under 
 the circumstances, would inflict a wrong and outrage of a gross and 
 monstrous character, upon Mr. Clough. It seems to me that it is not 
 necessary to enlarge upon that point, that the suggestion is sufficient. 
 
 We have another point to which we ask your attention, and which 
 we claim is perfectly conclusive as to this matter, viz : The Concord 
 Kailroad Company, so far as Mr. Clough is concerned, are estopped from 
 denying the authority of Gilmore to give the particular directions 
 alluded to, and under which Mr. Clough acted in making the returns 
 in the manner he did. At this point, 1 wish you to consider for a mo 
 ment the position that Mr. Gilmore occupied and sustained toward Mr. 
 Clough. He was the superintendent of the Concord Kailroad ; he was 
 the executive officer of that road ; he was the man who in the usage of 
 business, had the management of all the employees of the road, and was 
 the active man in running the road; he was the man from whom Mr. 
 Clough took his directions ; he was the man from whom all the employees 
 took their directions ; he was the man who hired the conductors, and 
 who turned them off; and was the only medium through which Mr. 
 Clough knew of the board of directors, and he had no knowledge of the 
 action of the board of directors except through the superintendent of 
 the road. There was no other way for him to know them or to become 
 acquainted with their action, save through the superintendent as their 
 mouth-piece. He was only bound by the directions of that board as thus 
 communicated. Mr. Clough therefore had a right, by virtue of the 
 relation which he sustained to him, to assume that the acts of Mr. Gil- 
 more were authorized ; and he was in a position where he could act 
 upon no other assumption. For the counsel for the plaintiff to claim 
 that the board of directors of the Concord Eailroad Company were the 
 parties who had the active management and control of the affairs of 
 the road, seems to me to be a practical and legal absurdity. We shall 
 not deny but that the general management of the affairs of the railway 
 was in the hands of the directors, but what we do say is that the prac 
 tical and every day management, as far as its general conduct was con 
 cerned, was, by the board of directors, .put into the hands of the super 
 intendent as their executive officer. 
 
 Suppose that .as Mr. Clough \vas leaving on the cars, Mr. Gilmore, 
 the superintendent, should come to him and give him a direction, which 
 was known and understood by him to be in conflict with a regulation > or 
 rule of the road, must Mr. Clough disregard that instruction? To illus 
 trate, suppose that with the superintendent there were five men who 
 had no ticket, and the superintendent should say to Mr. Clough, "I want 
 you to pass these men over the road." and Mr. Clough should say, " 1 
 have instructions, in writing, from the board of directors, not to pass 
 those men, and I cannot do it." Would Mr. Clough be in a position to 
 
296 
 
 say that ? Is not the superintendent, by virtue of his office, in a posi 
 tion to ask him to pass those men? If the superintendent gives Mr, 
 Clough some material directions with regard to the running of his trains, 
 is he not to obey those directions ? Or, must he call together the board 
 of directors, and get their sanction to the instructions before he can 
 heed them. Can the conductor refuse to obey the directions of the 
 superintendent on the theory that he is to be governed only by the 
 president and board of directors of the company ? In some particular 
 and isolated cases, that may be true ; but suppose the superintendent 
 makes a suggestion as to an every-day occurrence connected with the 
 practical management of the affairs of the road. i,s Mr. Clough to repu 
 diate that authority, and refuse to listen to the suggestions, under the 
 idea that Mr. Gilmore has no control or direction of his conduct, and 
 that he is only the creature and agent of the board of directors ? We 
 say not. We say then, that the Concord Kailroad Company, so far as 
 Mr. Clough is concerned, is estopped from denying the authority of Mr. 
 Gilmore to give the particular directions under which we have acted, 
 and under which we justify. 
 
 We take the further position, that the open and public acts of Gil- 
 more as superintendent, in managing matters connected with the running 
 of trains, &c., were sufficient, in law, in warranting Mr. Clough to be 
 governed by his authority, to act upon his directions, and to rely upon 
 his assent to a particular course proposed. Wendell v. Abbott, (45 N, 
 H., 349) ; Kentv. Tyson, (20 N. H., 125,) 
 
 I wish now to say a single word with regard to the right of Mr. 
 Gilmore to give these directions. In the first place, whether he had 
 any right or not, I say that the plaintiff is estopped, by reason of the 
 relations he sustained to the road, from denying his authority ; but we 
 claim that he had authority and right to give these particular instruc 
 tions. Assuming, if you please, that the general management and 
 direction of the affairs of the Concord Railroad Company, as well as the 
 affairs of all other corporations of a similar character, is in the hands 
 of the board of directors ; if Gilmore sustained any particular relation 
 to the road which is known to the law, it was that of agent of the board 
 by which he was appointed ; he is the executive officer of that board ; 
 he has his existence from them, and he represents them in the manage 
 ment of the affairs of the road ; he is put there by the board of directors 
 for a specific purpose, and that specific purpose is to run the railroad. 
 We claim that his position carries with it impliedlyan authority to him, 
 from the board of directors, to use such means and measures as are 
 necessary and appropriate to accomplish this object. Backnmn v. 
 Charlestown, (42 N. H., 131) ; Story s Agency, sec. 58, and cases cited. 
 
 To give my proposition a practical application in this case, I will put 
 it in this way : The superintendent had a right to give special direc 
 tions to the conductors, to relieve them from the operation of a rule, the 
 enforcement of which in his judgment was found to be impossible, or at 
 least impracticable, and inconsistent with the interests of the road. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you take the ground that this question of what 
 arc the necessary and appropriate means, is a question of fact, or a 
 question of law? 
 
 Mr. Mugrldge. My idea is, that as matter of law he has a right to 
 use the means necessary to carry out the purposes of his appointment ; 
 and if it was found necessary by him to give directions to Mr. Clough 
 to relieve him from the difficulties which he was every day encounter- 
 
297 
 
 ing, and from the operation of a rule which it was found impossible for 
 him to enforce, he had the authority to do so. 
 
 1 take the further legal position that where an act complained of was 
 authorized to be done by the superintendent of the road, the plaintiff 
 cannot insist upon that act as an estoppel. 
 
 Having shown that the superintendent of the road gave these instruc 
 tions, the plaintiff cannot now avail itself of the acts done in accord 
 ance therewith, as an estoppel. Pecker v. Holt, (15 N. H. 143 ; ) Davis 
 v. Sanders, (11 N. H. 263;) 1 Greenleaf on Evidence, 275. 
 
 As I have read from the books, the doctrine of estoppel is regarded 
 by the law as a harsh, arbitrary and severe one. It is only recognized 
 by the courts to prevent fraud ; and the court will never allow the doc 
 trine to be enforced so as to become an instrument of fraud. It will 
 only allow the doctrine to be set up where, by its assertion and estab 
 lishment, a great wrong, or a great fraud is to be averted, 
 
 As the effect of an estoppel is to prevent the assertion of rights which 
 are unquestionably valid, or to preclude defences which would other 
 wise be good, justice requires that it should not be enforced unless sub 
 stantiated in every material particular. Carpenter v. Hilcock (12 Barb. 
 128.) 
 
 All that I mean to be understood to say upon that point is, that 
 everything that is essential to be made to appear with reference to the 
 enforcement or establishment of the doctrine of estoppel, shall clearly 
 appear. All the material facts shall be made out. There shall be 
 nothing left to surmise, suspicion, or improper inference. The court 
 shall be satisfied, under the ordinary rules of evidence; they shall 
 not go a great ways to imagine. 
 
 I do not wish to discuss further the practical effects of this doctrine 
 here. My idea is, that the proposition of the plaintiff to enforce it in 
 this case, coming in the way it does, and in connection with the facts 
 that appear here, is perfectly infamous. I do not propose to be heard 
 further upon the question at the present time. I have stated as clearly 
 as I can, without arguing at length, the different positions I take, in 
 connection with the case. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEORGE OLOUGH CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} I was inquiring, at the time the discussion of 
 these points commenced, as to your practice when you did not take the 
 extra ten cents ; and you went on to state what your practice was. Will 
 you now state what your practice was, when it was not practicable or 
 possible for you to take the extra ten cents on fares collected in the 
 cars ? State how you managed to square your accounts with the road ? 
 
 A. When I did not take the ten cents extra, I bought tickets at the 
 ticket office. There were a great many times when it was next to im 
 possible to collect the ten cents extra ; and if we had attempted to 
 enforce the rule we would have had a fuss in the cars every day. As a 
 general thing I took the ten cents extra when I made change or got 
 money enough into my hands to keep it back. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} W T here did you buy those tickets? 
 
 A. I bought them at Concord, Manchester, and at Nashua. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Rolfe.} State whether anything was said by you or 
 by the ticket sellers, so as to bring the knowledge home to them as to 
 what you were buying tickets for? [Objected to.] 
 
Tfw Chairman. We think the testimony is inadmissible. 
 
 Mr. Tajjpan. The referees will please note our exception. 
 
 g. (Jjy Mr. Rolfe.} State how long you have been in the habit of 
 accounting for the extra ten cents in this way in cases where you did 
 not take it in the cars ? 
 
 A. Since sometime in 18f>9. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect when Mr. Corning left the road ? 
 
 A. Either in l<Sf>8 or lSo!J. 
 
 Q. State whether Mr. Gilinore, the superintendent, had knowledge 
 or information in relation to your not taking the extra ten cents, and 
 the way in which you accounted for it ? 
 
 Mr. George. \Ye object to this upon two grounds : first, we object 
 to the question itself: and secondly, we object to its form. We object 
 to the form of the question, even if the matter inquired about were 
 competent. 
 
 The Chairman. Perhaps the proper way would be to show any com 
 munication tending to bring this knowledge to Mr. Giimore. 
 
 g. (By Mr. Rolf a.} State whether you had an interview a^t any 
 time, (and if so when was the first time) with Mr. Giimore in relation 
 to this matter of the difficulty of collecting the extra ten cents? 
 
 A. At first the rule was that five cents extra should be collected ; 
 that was before Mr. Giimore went on to the road; after Mr. Giimore 
 went on to the road there was an addition of five cents put on, making 
 ten cents extra. We tried to act according to that rule for a while, and 
 then 1 had a talk with Mr. Giimore and told him it was very difficult 
 to carry the rule out. He said that he supposed it was ; but he wanted 
 that I should do the best that 1 could. 
 
 Q. What did you do ? 
 
 A. 1 did the best that I could. 
 
 Q. Will you state what the practice has been since you have been on 
 the road in relation to the directors and their families passing free over 
 the road. [Objected to by Mr. George.] 
 
 The Chairman. What is the purpose of this testimony? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. We propose to show by Mr. Clough that he was never 
 required strictly to carry out this rule of the Concord Eailroad Com 
 pany, by any officer of the road above him ; that he was instructed and 
 required only to do his duty as he best could under the circumstances ; 
 and we propose to show that he did, as to all the rules and orders of 
 the corporation, do the best that he could. We propose to show that at 
 least five of the board of directors repeatedly requested him to violate 
 these rules in various particulars. The superintendent himself so 
 requested him to violate them, Mr. Clough is here to acknowledge that 
 in repeated instances the clerk of the road has requested him to pass 
 one and another free over the road, and he has done so, in violation of 
 the rules, on the supposition that the director had the right so to request 
 Mr. Clough to pass a person free over the road, and Mr. Clough did 
 not understand that he was violating the rules of the road in any par 
 ticular by so acting upon the request of the director. 
 
 The Chairman. We think, now, that the evidence must be confined 
 to showing the obsoleteness of the particular rule or rules which you 
 allege as have been violated. We do not think that evidence tending 
 to show that the directors and their families rode over the road free, is 
 evidence tending to show that the particular rule that is complained of 
 being violated here has become obsolete. 
 
Mr. Rolfe. Here is a series of instructions which the conductor is 
 supposed to be required to live up to; and if these instructions say 
 that no person shall pass over the road without a written pass, and one 
 director after another comes and asks to have their families passed, 
 until finally the president arid a majority of the board of directors have 
 required the same thing of the conductor over and over again, we claim, 
 that then, such action of the directors tends to nullity the series of 
 rules. 
 
 The Chairman. We do not so understand it. The disregard of one 
 of those rules is not evidence of the practical disregard or obsoleteness 
 of another one. We may hereafter think the testimony admissible, 
 but we do not think so now. 
 
 Judge Bellows. The mere fact that somebody else had violated this 
 particular rule would amount to nothing if it stopped there ; but if it 
 be shown that the rule is practically abrogated by all the parties con 
 cerned, it would then be a different matter. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. If it should turn out in relation to the date of the tickets, 
 first in relation to the passes and then in relation to receiving the tick 
 ets without date that the instructions of the directors of the road 
 changed entirely, so that no regard was required to be paid to the date 
 of the tickets that being on this batch of instructions how many of 
 those rules would we have to show to be abrogated to affect this one ? 
 
 The Chairman. You will have to abrogate this particular one. That 
 is exactly our ruling. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I suppose then that this testimony may be put in at 
 another time, and for another purpose, we do not propose putting it in 
 now. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Rolfe.} State to the referees what Mr. Gilmore said 
 to you in relation to the enforcement of this ten cent rule, when you 
 had your first interview with him with respect to it. State whether the 
 matter was talked over between you and Gilmore, as to how you should 
 make your returns ; and if any instructions or suggestions were made 
 by the superintendent, state them also ? 
 
 Mr, George. Our exception covers this same question, I suppose. 
 
 The Chairman. This testimony may be relevant, at least in one point 
 of view on the question of estoppel, and as to the misleading of the 
 corporation. The question whether the corporation had notice of this 
 rule being violated, would probably be material ; and we are inclined 
 to think, now, that the superintendent must be considered as so far 
 agent of the corporation, that notice to the superintendent would be 
 notice to the corporation ; and in that view we think the testimony is 
 admissible. [Exception by counsel for plaintiff.] 
 
 A. Our first talk was in 1858 or I SOU. 1 have had several talks 
 with him since. 1 told him the difficulty of enforcing the ten cent rule, 
 and he replied to me that he supposed that it was difficult ; but he said 
 that he wanted that 1 should do the best I could. That was very soon 
 after the regulations were passed requiring the extra ten cents to be 
 collected. After that, about every time those regulations came out, 1 
 had a talk with him about them, but more particularly in 1864. 
 
 Q. I asked whether at the time you had your first interview with 
 Mr. Gilmore, soon after the rules came out requiring the collection of 
 the extra ten cents, you received from him any directions or suggestions 
 in relation to how you could make your return ; if so, state them ? 
 
 A. I asked Mr. Gilmore how I should manage with regard to tlie 
 ten cents extra, if I failed to collect. Our way-bills were printed ; the 
 
300 
 
 tan cents extra was added to the regular fare as printed on the way-bill. 
 Such being the fact, 1 could not enter the fare upon my way-bill unless 
 I received the ten cents extra, without losing ten cents myself. He 
 told me to buy tickets at the ticket office, and i did so. 
 
 Q. Did he give you any instructions with reference to what you 
 should do with the tickets ? 
 
 A. He told me to punch them and put them in my collections and 
 return them to the general ticket agents. 
 
 Q. 1 understood you to say that you have had frequent conversa 
 tions with him since then. Do you recollect the time when Mr. Cor 
 ning left the road ? 
 
 A. I do. 
 
 Q. If you had an interview witli Mr. Gilmore at that time, state 
 what occurred at that interview ? 
 
 A. About the time that Mr. Corning left the road (I think it was 
 in 1858 or 1859, but I am not quite certain about that,) I told Mr. 
 Gilmore that I was going to resign. He wanted to know my reasons 
 for resigning and 1 told him that there was some trouble with Mr. 
 Corning, and 1 did not want to stay if they were not perfectly satisfied 
 with me. He said there was nobody dissatisfied but John H. George, 
 the clerk; that he was bound to get rid of Mr. Corning. 
 
 The Chairman. It is pretty difficult to see the relevancy of this. I 
 make the remark because the plaintiff s have made a general exception. 
 
 Witness. He said that the directors were satisfied with me, and that 
 he was satisfied with me and did not want me to leave. 
 
 Q. State what your supposition was as to the superintendent and 
 the directors knowing your style of doing business ? 
 
 Mr. Stanley. Is his supposition competent evidence? 
 
 The Chairman, I think that is hardly admissible. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. jRolfe.) Go on and state when you next had an inter 
 view with Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. The next time I had, was when I talked of leaving in 1861. I 
 bought some shares in a steamboat on Lake Winnipesaukee and I intended 
 to go up there myself. Mr. Gilmore heard of it and came to me and 
 asked me if I was going to leave ? 
 
 The Chairman. It is not obvious how this relates to the matter which 
 you have undertaken to prove that is, Mr. Gilmore s knowledge of 
 this particular proceeding. Is it coming to that? 
 
 Mr. Eolfe. It is. 
 
 Mr. George. Our objections of course covers it all ; and 1 will not 
 interfere with the testimony. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. fiolfe.) State whether you remained on the road. 
 
 A. 1 consented to stay. 
 
 (^. Come now down to the time when these rules were issued in 1864. 
 
 A. In 186-i, when those rules were sent to me for my signature, I 
 at tirst refused to sign them, Mr. Gilmore met me one day afterwards 
 and asked if I had signed them. The rules were handed me by the 
 general ticket agent. After they were handed to me I put them in my 
 pocket, and in a few days Mr. Gilmore asked me if I had signed those 
 regulations, 1 told him that I had not, and was not going to sign them. 
 1 told him that no man could live up to them. He said that he knew 
 they could not. 1 saw him again a day or two afterwards and he said 
 that he wanted that I should sign those regulations. 1 told him that I 
 could not if I was expected to live up to them. He said that he knew 
 
301 
 
 that there was no man that could live up to them ; and that he had 
 told the directors so ; he said that he wanted nie to sign them and do 
 the best that 1 could, and that he would get my salary raised if I would 
 consent to remain ; and it was raised, I think, in 1864. 
 
 Q. State whether there was anything said at either of these last 
 interviews about the ten cents extra ? 
 
 A, There was. 
 
 Q. State what ? 
 
 A. I told him that that was one reason why I would not sign the 
 regulations. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Please state if, after you had signed those 
 rules, Mr, Gilmore said anything to you about seeing the directors ? 
 
 A. He did, before and afterwards, also. 
 
 Q. What did he say afterwards ? 
 
 The Chairman. Having ruled out whatever was said to induce Mr. 
 Clough to sign the regulations, with what view are you now offering 
 testimony as to what took place afterwards ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. With a view to show that Mr. Gilmore said that he had 
 seen the board of directors and that the board of directors expressed 
 themselves as satisfied with him and wished him to go on and do as 
 well as he had done, and that nobody desired to have him leave the road. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge, We propose to show that Mr. Gilmore told Mr. 
 Clough that he would see the directors, and that subsequently he told 
 Mr. Clough that he had seen them, and that they wanted him (Gilmore) 
 to say so and so to him. 
 
 Mr, George. We object to that testimony. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We suppose that if a man undertakes to be an agent 
 for both parties, what he then does and says is competent testimony. 
 
 The Chairman. Our view is that Mr. Clough s statement is not legal 
 evidence of the action of the board of directors in modifying their reg 
 ulations. It takes the form, now, of Mr. Clough s having signed certain 
 regulations and then opened a negotiation with the board of directors, 
 and procured an alteration of the regulations that he had signed. We 
 do not understand that there is any authentic proof of the action of the 
 board of directors in modifying the regulations. [Adjourned.] 
 
 H DAY. Tuesday, December 22d, 1*68. J 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEOHGE CLOUGH CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} After you signed the rules in 1864, please 
 state whether Mr. Gilmore gave you any instructions with regard to 
 taking the extra ten cents in any cases, and if so, state fully what those 
 instructions were. [Objected to by Mr. George,] 
 
 The Chairman. This I believe is the same kind of evidence which 
 has been already admitted for the purpose of showing Mr. Gilmore s 
 knowledge of Mr. Clough s conduct ; it goes in for that purpose. 
 
 [Exception by Mr. George.] 
 
 A. I had frequent talks with Mr. Gilmore as to enforcing the ten 
 cent rule after the regulations of 1864 came out. I told him that i 
 could not enforce that ten cent rule ; that it was impossible to live up 
 to it ; that I did not wish to stay any longer, I wanted to get out of the 
 office. Mr. Gilmore said to me that the directors were satisfied with 
 me and that he was himself satisfied with me. 
 
 Mr, George. This of course goes in with our exceptions. 
 
The Chairman. We have not ruled as to this. This evidence is not 
 competent for the purpose of showing that the directors were satisfied, 
 with Mr. Clough s conduct; but we held that any conversation that he 
 had with Mr. Gilmore, might go in simply as evidence that Air. Gilmore 
 knew what was going on. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. That is exactly what we put it in for. We do not 
 offer it as evidence to prove what the directors did, but simply to show 
 a notice to them. 
 
 Mr. George. If confined to the purpose stated, we do not except 
 to it. 
 
 The Witness, Mr. Gilmore said that the directors were satisfied with 
 me, and that he was himself satisfied with me, and he wanted me to go 
 on and make my returns just as 1 had made them, and be sure that the 
 company got all the money. About that time my pay was raised. 
 
 Q. State how you made your returns of the fares you took in the 
 cars when you did not take the ten cents extra. State whether Mr. 
 Gilmore gave you any directions how you should then make your 
 returns ? 
 
 T/te Chairman. He has just stated that Mr. Gilmore told him to 
 make his returns just as he had been doing before. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Jtolfe.) What were the instructions that he gave to 
 you, if any, with regard to taking the ten cents extra, and where you 
 could not get it, state what he told you to do ? 
 
 A. He told me to pay the money into the ticket office, to buy tickets, 
 punch them arid put them into my collections arid deliver them up to 
 the general ticket agent. 
 
 Q. State what Mr. Gilmore, after you signed the rules in 1864, as 
 you have stated, said to you with regard to the action of the directors 
 in respect to the ten cent rule V 
 
 The Chairman. Has riot that been stated fully, already ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. No, he has not brought out any fact with reference to 
 that as yet, but I will leave the question. 
 
 Q. After you signed the rules, in 1864, what was said between you 
 and Mr. Gilmore with regard to the action of the directors on the ten 
 cent rule. [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. You understand, of course, that if this fact goes in 
 it is not introduced as showing any action on the part of the board of 
 directors. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We do not offer it with that view ; we only wish to 
 show notice to Gilmore and to the company ; I understand the referees 
 to have ruled already that notice to the agent is notice to the company. 
 
 The Chairman. It is only competent to show notice to the agent. 
 This temtimony comes in, if at all, simply for the purpose of showing 
 Mr. Gilrnore s knowledge of the transactions. 
 
 Witness. Mr. Gilmore told me that he talked with the directors and 
 that they said that they did not suppose that those rules and regula 
 tions could be lived up to. 
 
 The Chairman. This is not evidence that Mr. Gilmore did ever talk 
 with the directors, or that they said anything of that sort ; it is merely 
 a part of Mr. Gilmore s talk tending to show that Mr. Gilmore knew 
 what was going on. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe,} In relation to the amount of travel over the 
 road during the hight of travel in 1864 and 1865, state the number of 
 cars run, as you recollect, over the road by the different trains V 
 
303 
 
 A. The 10 o clock train that we ran out of here in the higlit of 
 travel, used to run regularly three passenger cars and a baggage car to 
 Nashua, and a baggage car and two passenger cars to Lawrence, and 
 sometimes three. That was the usual number. They left Concord all 
 in one train and went together as far as Manchester. The train that 
 left here at half-past three ran about four passenger cars and a baggage 
 car to Nashua, and three passenger cars and a baggage car by the way 
 of Lawrence, in the higlit of travel, I think that there was a Torts- 
 mouth baggage car, and one passenger car. 
 
 Q. How was it as to the half-past five o clock train in the morning ? 
 
 A. That was a light train. We ran two passenger cars and a bag 
 gage car to Nashua, and 1 think one passenger car and one baggage car 
 went by way of Lawrence ; and we put on another at Manchester for 
 Lawrence. 
 
 Q. How was it with the up train ? 
 
 A. The up train had about the same number of cars. 
 
 Q, State whether, as a general thing, the same number of cars that 
 went down in the day returned ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; we brought the same number of cars back as went 
 down, whether they were full or not. The orders were to bring back all 
 cars to Nashua, whether they were full or empty. 
 
 Q. State as to how the trains were filled. Take first, for instance,, 
 the morning train? 
 
 A. The morning train at half-past five was a very light train. 
 There were very few passengers by that train. The ten o clock train 
 down, sometimes would be pretty well tilled, and then perhaps the cars 
 would not be more than one-halt full. As to the half-past three o clock 
 train down, that would be the same way. Sometimes the cars would be 
 pretty well tilled, and then there would be fewer passengers. The half- 
 past ten o clock train up, when there was a good deal -of pleasure travel, 
 would be well filled. In July and August, the cars would usually be 4 
 pretty well filled ; and they would be well filled in going down in Sep 
 tember arid October, when the mountain travel was going back. Dur 
 ing other seasons of the year the cars would not be so full, 
 
 Q. How was it with the last train up in the evening what is called 
 the 8 o clock train here? 
 
 A. The last train up would not be very full, as a general thing. - 
 We used to run up on that train from two to three passenger cars, and 
 sent back a car to Nashua, and when they got to Manchester they 
 hitched on the Lawrence train, consisting sometimes of one baggage car 
 and sometimes of two passenger cars. Ihere would be two passenger 
 cars in the hight of travel. 
 
 Q. In the hight of travel, when the people were about leaving for 
 the mountains, for pleasure travel, and were returning, state whether " 
 the trains were not considerably larger ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I have stated that in September and October, when 
 the mountain travel was going on, the trains were heavier. 
 
 Q. State how heavy they were then ? 
 
 A. They used to have four passenger cars down over the Nashua 
 road, arid a baggage car. and sometimes there may have been five pas- - 
 senger cars. The Lawrence train, in the very hight of travel, might 
 have had three passenger cars and a baggage car. 
 
 Q. Were there not., at other times, still larger trains than these run? 
 If so, what were the circumstances, and why were they run? 
 
304 
 
 A. Yes ; when the soldiers were going we used to put on cars es 
 pecially for them. 
 
 Q. How long a train have you ever known to be run on such an oc 
 casion I mean the whole train, including the one to Lawrence ? 
 
 A. There might have been sometimes fourteen or fifteen cars. 
 
 Q. State whether you recollect ever running a train of sixteen cars? 
 
 A. I cannot say. It may have occurred sometimes. 
 
 Q. How often was it done? 
 
 A. It was not a general thing to run so many cars. 
 
 Q. How frequently might or did that happen ? 
 
 A. At the latter part of the war, 1 thing it might have happened 
 often. When they would get a company of soldiers together they would 
 send them on. 
 
 Q. How was it with the soldiers during the war, were they fur 
 nished with tickets, or transportation ? 
 
 A. They were furnished with transportation by the government. 
 
 Q. Do you know at what rate ? 
 
 A. At two cents per mile, 1 think. 
 
 Q. Are you able now to form any estimate that will enable you to 
 give the referees an idea of the amount of soldier transportation ? 
 
 A, There were a great many soldiers passed at that time ; I do not 
 know that 1 could estimate the number. They went off in squads, - 
 sometimes a larger number and sometimes a smaller. 
 
 Q. Did they go in cars-full at a time ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; we had one, two, and three car-loads of them at a 
 time. 
 
 Q. If there were a regiment of soldiers going away, how were they 
 transported ? 
 
 A. They would go in an extra train. 
 
 Q. How would less than a regiment go? 
 A. They would go on the regular trains. 
 
 Q. State whether during the war you have known less than a regi 
 ment to go by a special train ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think not, I do not recollect of such an instance, 
 
 Q. 1 want to ask you in relation to the travel that paid, and that 
 which did not pay ; in other words, who passed free ? 
 
 A. There was a great deal of free riding at that time. 
 
 Q. During what time ? 
 
 A. During the war. 
 
 Q. State whether, during the war, free riding was or was not more 
 frequent than during any other time. 
 
 Mr. George. We object to this question. We say that the doctrine 
 of estoppel applies to this just as well as to any thing else, because this 
 conductor had signed this regulation, that only people should ride ^free 
 in a certain way. We say, therefore, that he can be heard to say that 
 he violated this rule. 
 
 The Chairman We understand that this comes under the ruling of 
 yesterday morning. It is noted that you claim an estoppel. 
 
 Mr. George. 1 do not want to take another exception, but I desire 
 to have my point clearly understood, and then I will not interrupt again. 
 It was the duty, under the rules, of the conductor to charge arid collect 
 fare on all passengers except those who were provided with passes in 
 the manner specified in the rules. Our legal position is, that he cannot 
 be heard to say in defense to this action, and that he is estopped from 
 
305 
 
 Baying, that he did violate these rules, and carry passengers free who 
 fiad not the requisite passes provided for in the rules. 
 
 Mr, Mugridge. If the gentlemen will hear the evidence as it comes 
 in. he will see that there is no force to the objection. We propose to 
 .show that the cars were filled with passengers who had passes, which 
 the conductor, under the rules, was bound to recognize. That is what 
 we undertake to show. 
 
 The Chairman. My understanding of the matter, (and if 1 am 
 -wrong I beg the other referees to correct me,) is as that we suggested 
 yesterday, that our course must be, with regard to this matter of estop 
 pel, to receive the evidence and to determine upon the whole evidence 
 that we had, whether that there was a case of estoppel made out, or 
 not, with regard to any particular evidence, and if there was a case of 
 estoppel made out, the party would not have the benefit of that evidence. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) State, Mr. Clough, all that you can recollect, 
 during the war and up to the time you left the road, who rode free on 
 passes ? 
 
 A. All of the directors families. 
 
 Q. Did they have passes ? 
 
 A. I do not think they had. I was told to pass them. 
 
 Q. Did the directors have passes ? 
 
 A. No ; I do not think they had. All the bank officers, that is, 
 the cashier, the president and most of the directors of the banks I think 
 rode free. 
 
 Q. To what extent did the bank directors ride free ? 
 
 A. My recollection is that pretty much all of them went free. 
 
 Q. Did they have passes ? 
 
 A. I think they had. 
 
 Q. Do you refer now only to the bank officers of Concord ? 
 
 A. No ; but to those of Manchester, Nashua, and up north ; and 
 jabout every politician in the state also had a pass. 
 
 Q. Politicians of all stripes? 
 
 A. No, sir; but there were some of both stripes; they were mostly 
 republicans who rode free. All the army officers, or the most of them, 
 had passes ; and a great many soldiers had passes. 
 
 Q. From the colonel, how far down in the list of army officers rode 
 free ? 
 
 A. Down to the captains ; and there were a great many common 
 soldiers also who had passes. 
 
 Q. How were the soldiers who rode free situated ? 
 
 A. They would be out of money. 
 
 Q. How was it as to soldiers getting in the cars in squads without 
 paying? Were you always able to collect fares under such circum 
 stances. 
 
 The Chairman. He has already testified to the fact that the sol 
 diers got in, and that he found it difficult to collect the fares and that 
 there was a guard stationed at the car door. 
 
 Mr, Rolfe. He testified as to that fact existing, but not as to the 
 .extent of such travel. 
 
 Q. State the extent ? 
 
 A. Sometimes I have had nearly a whole company get in, and I 
 could not get anything out of them at all. I could not do anything 
 with them. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did they have transportation tickets ? 
 
 20 
 
306 
 
 A. No, sir. I recollect several instances where there was perhaps 
 not a full company, but what there was left of them came home ; 
 there might have been thirty or forty ; they came home without any 
 money, they could not get paid off, and they wanted to get home, and 
 in such cases they would get in the cars and I could not get anything 
 out of them. When they came back they would be without money also, 
 and so would pay neither way. The excuse would be that the govern 
 ment owed them so much money, and they could not get it, and had 
 nothing to pay with, and I was obliged to let them go. 
 
 Q. Didn t you have force enough to enforce the rule of the road? 
 
 A. No, sir; I had not. 
 
 Q. How have you managed sometimes when a large number did not 
 pay their fares ? Have you ever unhitched the cars and left them ? 
 
 A. I believe I did that once, down at Hooksett. 
 
 Q. How many were there aboard then ? 
 
 A. Very nearly a car full I think. 
 
 Q. Let me call your recollection to an instance where Mr. Gilinore 
 was aboard when the soldiers refused to pay. Do you recollect of such 
 an occasion ? 
 
 A. There was an occasion of that kind, and he told me to let them 
 go, that we could not do anything with them. 
 
 Q. How many were there then ? 
 
 A. There were some fifty or sixty soldiers, 1 think. I do not know 
 but at that time I set out to unhitch the car, but did not do it ; I think 
 Gilmorc was aboard, and I asked him what 1 should do with them, and 
 he told me to let them go ; and I rather think that I did not unhitch 
 the car then ; but that was done by one of the conductors. Mr. Bid- 
 die, I think, unhitched a car on his train. I recollect that I did un 
 hitch a car at Reed s Perry, once. There was about half a car load of 
 them and they had been drinking; and at Eeed s Ferry, eight miles this 
 side of Nashua, we unhitched the car and left them, they soon got sober 
 and we took them up on the last train. I recollect that distinctly. 
 They were in the hind car and I unhitched it and left them. 
 
 Q. Let me inquire now in detail how it was about the directors and 
 their families, whether they passed free or held written passes? 
 
 A. If the directors were aboard with their wives they would not 
 have any passes ; they would just ask me to pass them. 
 
 Q. They would not have any passes >for whom ? 
 
 A. For their wives. They would just say to me that their wives 
 and families were in the cars, and tell me to pass them along. 
 
 Q. And you did so ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Was that invariably the case, or were there exceptions ? 
 
 A. That was invariably the case. 
 
 Q. How was it with reference to the clerk of the road ? 
 
 A. He had a good many with him passed. 
 
 Q. Did he and his family pass ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you pass persons at his request ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. Can you state the number ? 
 
 A. I cannot. I do not recollect. 
 
 Q. Who were some that you passed ; do you recollect any ? 
 
 A. I think that there was a man by the name of Spofford, that ho 
 asked me to pass. 
 
307 
 
 Q. Where did he live ? 
 
 A. I think he lived in Xewburyport. 
 
 Q. Do you refer to Richard Spofford ? 
 
 A. It is the one that used to stump the state. 
 
 Q. When was this ? 
 
 A. If I recollect rightly it was in 1864 in the fall of 1864, 1 
 think. 
 
 Q. How was it as to the treasurer of the road ? 
 
 A. The treasurer of the road and his family used to pass free. 
 
 Q. The master of transportation, also ? Who was the master of 
 transportation most of the time ? 
 
 A. Mr. Chickering was, and is now. 
 
 Q. How was it about the road master and his family ? 
 
 A. They passed. 
 
 Q. And the ticket master ? 
 
 A. The ticket master and family passed free. 
 
 Q. The overseer of repairs in the iron shop ? 
 
 A. He and his family passed. 
 
 Q. The overseer of repairs in the wood shop ? 
 
 A. He went also. 
 
 Q. And the wood agents ? 
 
 A. Yes ; they and their families passed. 
 
 Q. The freight conductor and depot master also ? 
 
 A. Yes ; they and their families. 
 
 Q. The freight clerk ? 
 
 A. He went free. 
 
 Q. The ticket seller at Concord ? 
 
 A. He went free, and his family. 
 
 Q. The freight agent at Concord? 
 
 A, He went free, I believe. 
 
 Q. How was it with his family ? 
 
 A. The families of those connected with the road went free. 
 
 Q. The station agent at Manchester? 
 
 A. He went free, 
 
 Q. Had he any family ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. The station agent at Nashua ? 
 
 A, He rode free ; and his wife also, when she did go, which was not 
 very often. 
 
 Q. The regular mail agents ? 
 
 A. They all went free. 
 
 Q. Did their families go free ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect about that, 
 
 Q. How was it with the expressmen and their families ? 
 
 A. They usually went free. 
 
 Q. Mr. Stearns? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Sherman ? 
 
 A. Y"es, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Parker ? 
 
 A. Y"es, and his family. 
 
 jQ. Mr. Todd? 
 
 A. Yes, and family. 
 
308 
 
 Q. State how frequently Mr. John E. Lyon, the president of the 
 Montreal road, rode over the Concord Eailroad free, during the last six 
 years you were connected with the road? 
 
 A. I think that he would average twice per week. 
 
 Q. Two trips per week, or only twice over the road ? 
 
 A. Two trips per week he rode four times over the road per week, 
 All the station agents on that line of the road also rode free. 
 
 Q. How was it with the station agents on the Northern Eailroad and 
 the roads above ? 
 
 A. They all had passes and went free. 
 
 Q. How was it with the wholesale dealers in Concord and Manches 
 ter Barren & Co., Casey & Co., and Mr. Hutchins? 
 
 A. They had, I think, yearly tickets free tickets. 
 
 Q. Was that on account of their doing a certain amount of freight 
 business over the road ? 
 
 A. I always supposed so ; I never inquired into it. . 
 
 Q. If Mr. Hutchins, whose firm consisted of himself and two sons, 
 had a season pass, could only one use it, or could all the members of the 
 firm use it ? 
 
 A. My impression is that the whole firm could use it On some of 
 the tickets I think that whole firms could ride. 
 
 Q. How was it with Gust. Walker and David A. Warde ? 
 
 A. Mr. Warde used to have a free pass ; I do not recollect about 
 Mr, Walker. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Warde s a yearly pass ? 
 
 A. I think it was. 
 
 Q. Was his one that either member of the firm could ride upon ? 
 
 A. I am not quite sure how that was. 
 
 Q. How was it with the hotel keepers and their families ? 
 
 A. They went free ; and the barbers went free ; they went on writ 
 ten passes, they were passed by Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Q. What barbers ? 
 
 A. The one that used to be in the Phenix Hotel, Wales ; he used 
 to have Gilmore s pass. 
 
 Q Did Wales clerks ever pass. 
 
 A. I do not recollect about that. 
 
 Q. How was it with Mr. Diamond and family ? 
 
 A. I think they went free. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Thompson and family ? 
 
 A. The same. The keeper of the American House went free. 
 
 Q, How was it with Lindsley of the Eagle Hotel ? 
 
 A. He had a pass. 
 
 Q. Did his family ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect about his family. 
 
 Q. How was it with ministers ? 
 
 A. They went free generally. If they did not go free they only 
 paid half price. 
 
 Q. Did they go with passes ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; they had passes if they went free. There was a rule 
 for a short time that they should pay half fare, but that was the most 
 we ever got out of them, and a good many of them went free. 
 
 Q. Was that by their purchasing a ticket, or by direction of Mr. 
 Gilmore ? Was there any order about their going for half fare ? 
 
309 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore gave me orders that the ministers should go for half 
 price, and if there were any of them in the cars that had no tickets, I 
 was to take but half fare from them. 
 
 Q. How was it with the members of the legislature ? 
 
 A, They went free one way. 
 
 Q. How large a share of the members of the legislature, if any, 
 had passes ? 
 
 A. A great many had passes. If they paid at all, they paid but 
 half price, but a great many went for nothing. 
 
 Q. State whether the cars, during the first and last days of the week, 
 while the legislature was in session, were more or less filled with mem 
 bers of the legislature ? 
 
 A. They usually went home on Fridays and Saturdays and returned 
 Mondays. 
 
 Q. How was it with the stockholders coming to attend the annual 
 meetings ? 
 
 A. They were accustomed to come and go from the annual meeting 
 free. 
 
 Q. What was your direction from Mr. Gilmore about them, if they 
 did not have passes ? 
 
 A. They used to send on that day stockholder s tickets to the differ 
 ent stations, but they did not all get them ; some got them and some 
 did not ; perhaps nearly half of them had not tickets. Gilmore s orders 
 were, if they showed a certificate to pass them ; and I did so. It was 
 the same when the Northern meeting was held. The same orders were 
 given then. 
 
 Q. State whether on those occasions there was a large amount of 
 free riding or otherwise ? 
 
 A. There was a great deal of free riding here during the two years 
 that Mr. Gilmore was senator, and during the two years that he was 
 governor. 
 
 Q. How was it with the legal profession ? 
 
 A. They almost all went free. 
 
 Q. How many of the legal profession, as far as you remember, in 
 the two counties of Merrimac and Hillsboro paid any fare ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect but two that did. 
 
 Q. Who were they ? 
 
 A. George W. Morrison and Mr. Foster of Manchester. 
 
 Q. Were there any that paid you half, fare ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Which were they ? 
 
 A. Mr. Stanley and Mr. Clark. 
 
 Q. How was it with the doctors ? 
 
 A. Dr. Peterson used to go "free always. 
 
 The Chairman. Are these cases that you are now giving cases where 
 they had passes ? 
 
 A. They either had passes or I was instructed by the superintendent 
 to pass them. A majority of them had passes. Dr. Morrill, I think, 
 also rode free. They were both Mr. Gilmore s doctors. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. JRolfe.) How was it with the proprietors of the hotels 
 at the White Mountains, for instance Taft, Coffin, and others. 
 
 A. Taft and family rode free always. In the winter season they 
 lived at Nashua. He had a pass for himself and family, and I think 
 that all those hotel keepers up around the White Mountains had passes. 
 
310 
 
 Q. How was it with hotel keepers at Nashua? 
 
 A. Mr. Wright, who kept the Pearl Street House, had a pass. 
 
 The Chairman. Don t you think it would save time to go the other 
 way, and give evidence as to those who did not have passes ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I should do that, if I thought the referees would not 
 consider such evidence incompetent. 
 
 Witness. The hotel keepers at Boston, of the American House and 
 their clerks went free, I do not say that all the proprietors went free, 
 but Mr. Wright did and his clerks. 
 
 (By Mr. Rolfe.) How was it about families passing back and for 
 ward on the road with passes ? 
 
 A. There were some that had passes. 
 
 Mr. George. Do you mean the wives of the gentlemen you were 
 speaking of. 
 
 Mr, Rolfe. I did not wish to ask the question in that way, for fear 
 it might be ruled out as leading. 
 
 Q. How was it with Mr. Gilmore s men, who worked on his farm, 
 and those who worked for him otherwise ? 
 
 A. They went free generally. He had a lot of Irishmen come up 
 from Manchester some seven or eight who worked on his farm dig 
 ging out the stumps, and improving the land. 
 
 Q. Did he bring them up to work once a week, or every day ? 
 
 A. They would come up the first of the week and go back the latter 
 part. 
 
 Q. State in reference to Mr. Wm. E. Chandler. Did he and his 
 family pass free ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did Judge Fowler ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Durkee go free ? 
 
 A. I think he had a pass. 
 
 Q. How was it generally as to the families of the officers of connect 
 ing roads for instance, the clerk of the Northern Kailroad ? 
 
 A. The directors and clerk of the Northern Railroad, and their 
 families, always went free. 
 
 Q. And the directors and clerks of the other railroads ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Did Judge Perkins and his family go free ? 
 
 A. Yes ; and those connected with the printing offices, went free ; 
 and the insurance agents used to have a pass. 
 
 Q. How was it as to Seth Eastman, and S. C. Eastman ? 
 
 A. They passed free, and their families likewise. 
 
 Q. And Edson Eastman? 
 
 A. I think so ; I am not quite sure of him. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Keyes ? 
 
 A. He used to have a pass for himself and family. 
 
 Q. And J. B Marston the one that kept the restaurant at the 
 depot? 
 
 A. I don t know about his family, but he went free. 
 
 Q. How was it about Mr. Christopher Hart? 
 
 A. He used to go free ; and his daughters went free. There were 
 some more down at Portsmouth that went free. 
 
 Q. How was it with the governor and his honorable council ? Did 
 ^Governor Gilmore s council go free ? 
 

 311 
 
 A. I think they did ; likewise Mr. Noyes, and Mr. Geary, and Mr. 
 Hackett and his son, of Portsmouth, and there were several men there 
 whose names I don t recollect, but 1 should know them by sight. 
 
 Q. How was it with General Hunt ? 
 
 A. He used to have a pass to Nashua. 
 
 Q. Did you ever know General Hunt to pay his fare ? 
 
 A. I never did. 
 
 Q. Was he frequently on the train ? 
 
 A. Yes ; he used to be there quite frequently. He had passes on 
 all the connecting roads. 
 
 Q. How was it with the staff of Governor Gilmore ? 
 
 A. They all went free, as well as I can recollect. 
 
 Q. And how was it with Governor Smyth and his staff? 
 
 A. He had a free pass. I don t recollect about his staff. 
 . , Q. Did Mr. Scripture go free ? 
 
 A. Yes ; he used to have a pass. 
 
 Q. They kept the two hotels in Nashua ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who went free at Manchester ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether the hotel keepers did or not ; 1 know 
 that Mr. Shepherd, who keeps the Manchester House, always paid his 
 fare. Captain Harrington had a pass, and I think Mr. Currier had a 
 pass. Mr. Kidder used to ask me to pass his clerks and his wife. 
 
 Q. Did you ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How frequently ? 
 
 A. One of his clerks went quite often. I supposed he was going 
 through the country to sell his flour and grain. B. F. Martin and 
 family likewise had a pass. 
 
 Q. How was it with E. A. Straw? 
 
 A. He was a director on the Lawrence road and went free. 
 
 Q. Did his family ? 
 
 A. He had no family, I think. 
 
 Q. Of these persons 1 have inquired about, how was it with M r. 
 Straw, was he not frequently on the train ? 
 
 A. He rode frequently. 
 
 Q. How was it with B. F. Martin ? 
 
 A. He and his family rode. He was frequently on the train. 
 
 Q. How was it with Justin Head? 
 
 A. He went free, and his brother likewise. 
 
 Q. How was it as to their being frequently on the train ? 
 
 A. They rode very often. Mrs. Head was on the road a good deal. 
 
 Q. How was it with Joseph T. Goss ? 
 
 A. He used to have a pass, but I am not sure about his family. 
 
 Q. Was he frequently on the train ? 
 
 A. He rode quite often. Waters, of Hooksett, rode free. 
 
 Q. How was it with Geo. Riddle ? 
 
 A. He had a pass, but he did not ride so frequently as some others. 
 
 Q, How was it with the legal profession at Manchester, Nashua and 
 Concord ? did they ride frequently, or otherwise ? 
 
 A. They rode very often. 1 used to see them frequently in the cars. 
 
 Q. State, if it is within your recollection, how many of what are 
 usually termed dead-heads have you seen on a single train ? 
 
 A. I have seen as many as fifty or sixty. 
 
312 
 
 Q. How frequently would that happen ? 
 
 A. That would happen quite often in certain seasons of the year.- 
 
 Q. In what seasons ? 
 
 A. In the summer time, at the hight of travel. 
 
 Q. How would it be in the winter season, before the election ? 
 
 A. There would not be so many then. 
 
 Q. How was it as to the train at all times, ahout there being more 
 or less dead-heads ? 
 
 A. There were more or less on every train. There was scarcely a 
 train on the road but what had more or less dead-heads. 
 
 Q. As near as your recollection serves you now, how, would it aver 
 age ? What would be the more and what would be the less ? 
 
 A. I should think that it might average from fifteen to twenty on a 
 train. 
 
 Q. When you say fifteen or twenty, do you speak in regard to the 
 employees of the road ? 
 
 A. Xo, I do not. I mean besides them. 
 
 Q. In addition to this, state what was the amount of free passes 
 used by the employees of the road ? 
 
 A. There were not a great many of them who passed free. The 
 section hands that worked on the road. It was necessary sometimes 
 for them to go free from one part of the road to another, and sometimes, 
 when a freight train broke down, they had to send a force out to get it 
 off the track. They would all pass free on the passenger train. 
 
 Q. How was it as to persons giving passes below, and persons giving 
 passes above on the roads? 
 
 A, I don t understand you. 
 
 Q. For instance : the superintendent or other officers of the Lowell 
 road, or the agents of the Vermont Central were there any passes 
 from either of these gentlemen ? If so, how frequently ? 
 
 A. A great many passes were given by the agent of the Vermont 
 Central road, and a great many to persons that went up through here 
 to the north. 
 
 Q. Were these persons, or any of them, known to you, or were they 
 strangers ? 
 
 A. A great many of them were strangers; the majority of them 
 were strangers. 
 
 Q. In addition to these, you state that the superintendent, president 
 and the board of directors individually requested you to pass people, 
 do you, and that you did pass them ? State to what extent, and who of 
 the board of directors, if any, thus requested you to pass people. 
 
 A. Mr. Kidder requested me to pass persons without a written pass, 
 This was in 1864. Mr. Beesley asked me to pass others. Mr. Crocker 
 has been up with his family ; 1 recollect that at one time he had six or 
 eight with him going to the White Mountains. 
 
 Q. How was it with the president, Judge Upham. 
 
 A. He has asked me to pass persons, but not a great many. 
 
 Q. Who of the directors did not ask you to pass persons. 
 
 A. I believe Mr. Spalding never asked me to pass anybody, neither 
 did Mr. Stickney of Boston. I don t think either of these gentlemen 
 ever asked me to pass anybody. I never saw Mr. Stickney s pass on the 
 road. I have seen Mr. Spalding s, but very seldom. 
 
 Q. State in relation to the tickets which you took up signed by Mr. 
 Grilmore and countersigned by Mr. Spalding. Do you recollect taking 
 up any ? 
 

 313 
 
 A. Yes. When I spoke of passes from Mr. Spalding, I meant his 
 own individual pass. [Counsel produces package of 28 passes.] 
 
 Q. Do you recollect taking up these ? 
 
 A. Yes, I took them up. 
 
 Q. Were there any others that passed over the road ? 
 
 A. There were other passes that did not come into my hands. 
 
 Q. Where did they go to, and what should you estimate as the num 
 ber that went on your train ? 
 
 A. I think that some went up above Nashua. It strikes me that 
 some went up on the Plymouth road, and that one or two went to Boston. 
 
 Q. How was it about going up over the Concord, Claremont, and 
 Connecticut Valley road ? 
 
 A. I think quite a number went up there. 
 
 Q. There is a great variety of punches on these are they all yours ? 
 
 A. They are different punches they are not all mine. 
 
 Q. Where was the counsellor convention held ? 
 
 A. It was held at Manchester. 
 
 Q. Did any part of those passes come from the Wilton road, round 
 to Manchester and over the Connecticut Valley and to Manchester, and 
 from Claremont to Manchester ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And those going up on the train to the convention would be 
 punched on the other roads, and with a punch different from yours ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect whose punch this is ? [Showing punched ticket.] 
 
 A. I do not. 
 
 Q. Did the men that came to the convention come on your train, 
 and if so, was it not necessary when they passed one way to punch the 
 ticket ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. AVhere were the tickets taken up ? 
 
 A. These were taken up between Manchester and Nashua and 
 between Concord and Manchester. 
 
 Q. These were taken up on the train going down from Manchester to 
 Nashua, and on the return train from Manchester to Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. State at what age you left your father s house ? 
 
 Mr. George. That is beginning pretty early; I suppose the point is 
 to show what he was worth when he was on the Concord Railroad. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We desire to show not only what he was worth when 
 he went on to the Concord Railroad, but we want to show how he 
 obtained it, and we want also to show his careful and industrious habits 
 from his youth up which we claim will be a material element in this 
 case. 
 
 Mr. George. We say, that the only material point is, what he was 
 worth when he was on the Concord Railroad. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you mean to be understood as objecting to the 
 testimony? 
 
 Mr. George. We do. 
 
 The Chairman. We think this testimony is admissible, as it tends 
 to show what Mr. Clough was worth at the time of his connection with 
 the road. [Exception to the ruling by Mr. George.] 
 
 Question repeated. 
 
 A. I left my father s home in 1832. 
 
914 
 
 jQ. Where did you then live ? 
 
 A. In Epping, JS T . H. 
 
 Q. What was the value of your worldly goods then what property 
 -did you have ? 
 
 A. I had nothing but what I had on and a small bundle, probably 
 a couple of dollars would have covered it all. 
 
 Q. What was your age then ? 
 
 A. I was fifteen years old. 
 
 Q. Where did you then go to into what employment? 
 
 A. I went to Newmarket first, and stayed there over night with a 
 brother of mine who was stopping there at that time. 
 
 Q. What did you next do ? 
 
 A. A man came in with an ox team. He lived at Atkins, and had 
 been o Great Falls and was on his return home. His name was Noyes. 
 I don t know how I got introduced to him. At any rate, I jumped into 
 his team and went with him, and stayed with him until the next spring 
 in 1833. 
 
 Q. How long a time was that ? 
 
 A. Six or eight months, as near as 1 can recollect. 
 
 Q. Did you accumulate anything during that six or eight months 
 and if s.o, what? 
 
 A. I don t think I had anything more than my clothes and board 
 If I had, I don t recollect how much. I left there in the spring of 
 1833 and went to Newburyport. I let myself there to work in the 
 hotel. I was in the hotel about a year, and then I went into the stable 
 and worked, and tended to the horses. 
 
 Q. What were you doing in the hotel ? 
 
 A. 1 was chore boy there, and did all that I was called upon to do. 
 I used to bring in the wood, black the boots, scour the knives, wait 
 upon the table, carry baggage and do all that I was called upon to do. 
 I worked in the hotel one year, and then went into the stable, and 
 worked for the same man. His name was Drake. I stayed in the stable 
 a year. 
 
 Q. AVhat pay did you receive there the time you were there ? 
 
 A. In the hotel I commenced with $10 a month, and the perquisites 
 that I used to get would amount to more than my wages. 
 
 Q. After you went into the stable what pay did you receive ? 
 
 A. I believe I got about the same pay in the stable. I think I got 
 .$16 per month. 
 
 Q. Did you make anything besides your monthly pay ? 
 
 A. I got perquisites there. 
 
 Q. In what way ? 
 
 A. The people that put up their horses there used to give me some 
 thing. I used to wash the wagons and clean the harness, &c., for which 
 I received pay in addition to my monthly pay. 
 
 Q. How long a time in all were you engaged with Mr. Drake in the 
 house and in the stable ? 
 
 A. Two years. 
 
 Q. W T hat did you expend for clothes and boots and shoes ? 
 
 A. My expenses for them were very small. The boarders used to 
 give me second-hand clothes. 
 
 Q. How much, during those two years, were you able to lay by and 
 
 ve? 
 
 A. I laid by $300. 
 
315 
 
 Q. Did you invest it, and how ? 
 
 A. I put $200 into one of the Newburyport savings banks. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I desire to ask the counsel upon the other side if they 
 will take a copy of the record of the bank, signed by Mr. Hall, the 
 .secretary of the institution, in proof of the deposit, or whether we shall 
 have to summon him. 
 
 Mr. George. I shall ask you to prove your case, unless you will 
 .agree that any evidence will be received here which the referees believe 
 to be true and as bearing on the case. I cannot consent to waive legal 
 objections on the one side while being held to the strict letter of the 
 law on the other. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We have frequently during the trial admitted fact s to 
 .save you the trouble of proving them. 
 
 Mr. George. I am not aware of it. 1 cannot agree to waive any of 
 jour legal rights except in cases where the referees will consent to hear 
 anything that they may believe to be true. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We offer the record of the deposit made by Mr. 
 Clough in the savings bank, at Newburyport, at that time. 
 
 Mr. George. We object. It is not legal evidence of any fact. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We have the certificate here and desire to put it in. 
 
 The Chairman. The certificate does not appear to be legal evidence 
 <of any fact, 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Rolfe.} You deposited $200 in the savings bank? 
 
 A. 1 did. 
 
 Q. What did you do with the other $100 ? 
 
 A. I left Newburyport and went home. 
 
 Q." When was that? 
 
 A. In the spring of 1835, I think. I then went home and gave $50 
 to my mother and kept the rest in my pocket, 
 
 Q. How long did you stay at home, and where did you next go V 
 
 A. I stayed at home two or three days. In 1835 I went to Ray 
 mond and let myself to Stephen Osgood. I let myself there to Mr. 
 Osgood for $10 per month to attend to his stage and horses, with the 
 understanding that I should have the first chance to drive his stage. I 
 attended to his horses for three or four months, and he then put me to 
 driving on one of his lines. I commenced on the line from Chester to 
 Pittsfield. He had at the same time another stage from Lowell to Dover 
 through Chester. The Pittsfield stage connected with the Lowell and 
 Dover stage. The travel increased, and he was obliged to run two 
 stages to Lowell from Chester, where we connected with the Dover line, 
 and I drove through to Lowell from Pittsfield. 
 
 Q. Was there any variation then in your wages ? 
 
 A. He gave me more pay when I went as driver. When I drove 
 from Chester to Pittsfield he gave me $15 per month, and when I drove 
 through to Lowell he gave me $20 and my board. I drove for Mr. Os 
 good, and was in his employ four years. 
 
 Q. Did you receive any other pay, or have any other source of 
 income, except your monthly pay ? 
 
 A. I did. I used to carry produce down on my coach from Pitts- 
 field, and on the line of the road down through Deerfield and Chester. 
 
 Q. What kind, and what amount ? 
 
 A. I used to carry poultry, butter, eggs, mutton, veal, pears, dried 
 apples and cranberries. I used also to carry up stuff on the return trip. 
 
 Q. What did you carry up ? 
 
316 
 
 A. I carried up fresh fish, 
 
 Q. Who did the express business on the line ? 
 
 A. I did. I used to carry money packages and bundles. 
 
 Q, To whom did that pay belong ? 
 
 A. It belonged to me. 
 
 Q. State whether all the perquisites belonged to the driver ? 
 
 A. They did. 
 
 Q. Were there any other articles except fresh fish that you carried 
 up? 
 
 A. I don t think of any now. 
 
 Q- What did your pay amount to besides your monthly salary ? 
 
 A. What I got in that way amounted to considerably more than my 
 wages. 
 
 Q. During the time that you were at work for Mr. Osgood, how 
 many days were you absent from your duties ? 
 
 A, Ten or twelve days, I think. 
 
 Q. On what occasions ? 
 
 A. I was sick. 
 
 Q. Were you absent on any other days ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I never lost a day for four years except the ten or 
 twelve days when I was sick. 
 
 Q. Did Osgood deduct that from your pay ? 
 
 A. I don t remember. 
 
 Q. During the time you were at Drake s, how much time did you 
 lose? 
 
 A. I don t remember losing a day ; I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. At the time you left Osgood s employ, how much property had 
 you, and what was its value, and how situated ? 
 
 A. I had over $2000 I think, and very near $2500. 
 
 Q. That included all that you made prior to going with Mr. Osgood ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. AVhat did you do when you left Mr. Osgood s employ ? 
 
 A. I bought half a stage line from Lowell here. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. In 1839. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect the season of the year? 
 
 A. I think it was in the spring of 1839. 
 
 Q. How was your property invested ? 
 
 A. I had it in notes at that time. 
 
 Q. Had you withdrawn this from the bank ? 
 
 A. I had. 
 
 Q. What did you do then ? 
 
 A. I bought Peter Dudley s interest in the stage line from Lowell 
 here. He owned the teams on this end of the route, and a man by the 
 name of Rodney Parker owned the teams on the lower end of the route. 
 
 Q. What did Dudley s half consist of? 
 
 A. It consisted of twelve horses, a stage coach, a sleigh and blankets 
 and harnesses. For these and the twelve horses I paid him $1200. 
 
 Q. Did you pay him all that money down ? 
 
 A. I paid him $1000 down, and the rest a very short time after 
 wards. I had money enough to pay him, and more too, but it was out 
 at interest. Mr, Dudley was not particular about all the money, but I 
 called it in, and settled with him very soon after that. * 
 
 Q. What next did you do ? 
 
317 
 
 A. I went on and drove my stage myself. 
 
 Q. Did you drive through ? 
 
 A. I did. Mr. Parker paid me for driving his team, and very soon 
 I bought him out. 
 
 Q. What was your pay from Mr. Parker? 
 
 A. He paid me $1 per day, and kept me at his end of the route, 
 He paid me besides $1 per day for the use of the coach, mak 
 ing my wages two dollars per day. The line ran up one day and back 
 the next. It left Lowell on Mondays and came down on Tuesdays, up 
 Wednesdays, down Thursdays, up Fridays and down Saturdays. 
 
 Q. You say that you bought Parker out. How soon after that ? 
 
 A. I think about six months after I bought into the line. It might 
 have been longer. 
 
 Q. What did you pay him, and what did you have of him ? 
 
 A. I paid him $1500 for his share. He had but eight horses and 
 harnesses and blankets. 
 
 Q. When did you pay Parker ? 
 
 A. I paid him pretty soon after that. I don t think I paid him all 
 down at the time, but 1 paid him very soon after I bought him out. 
 
 Q. How were you employed from that time up to the opening of the 
 Concord Bailroad ? 
 
 A. I drove my stage until I went on the cars, in 1842. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state the amount of money that you made, net, 
 during Jhe first year that you drove over the Mammouth Eoad, or about 
 tho amount? 
 
 A, I think the first year I made about $1500. 
 
 Q. How much the second year ? 
 
 A. About $3000. 
 
 Q. How much the third year ? 
 
 A. I made the last year I was staging about $4500. 
 
 Q. Did you have anything during the third year, by mail contract 
 or otherwise, that you did not have before ? 
 
 A. Yes ; I got $500 per annum on a mail contract. That was in 
 1841 the last year that 1 drove the stage. 
 
 Q. I Want now to ask you how the fact was during the time that you 
 were in the employ of Osgood, whether you spent any money in going 
 to places of amusement, balls, dances, &c. ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I never did. 
 
 Q. State whether at the time you left Osgood s employ, you were 
 indebted to anybody ? 
 
 A. I was not. 
 
 Q. State whether up to the time you left his employ you lost any 
 money, or had made any bad debts ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; never a cent. 
 
 Q. As to the amount of the produce and poultry you carried over 
 Mr. Osgood s line of stages, did the fact of your carrying produce and 
 poultry over that line occasion any remark in relation to the line. 
 
 [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Muyridge. If his line had any particular name, may he not be 
 asked what that name was and what gave rise to it ? 
 
 Tfie Chairman. This particular question is leading ; but of what con 
 sequence is the question ? Mr. Clough has shown us just how he man 
 aged business and how much he was worth. Is it not a waste of time 
 to go any further in that direction ? 
 
318 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It may be, but we want to show that in consequence 
 of the amount of poultry carried over that line, the line was known as- 
 the " chicken line." If the referees think it of no consequence, we do 
 not want to urge it. 
 
 The Chairman. We do not want to take up any more time than is 
 absolutely necessary. 
 
 Q. (J3y Mr. Rolfe.) During the time that you were in Mr. Os- 
 good s employ, did you use any ardent spirits, or have you up to this 
 time ? 
 
 A. I never drank a pint of liquor in my life. 
 
 Q. How is it about purchasing it for others to drink ? 
 
 A. I never bought a cent s worth for anybody else. 
 
 Q. You say that the first year you made $1500, the second year 
 $3000, and the third year $4500. Please describe the travel over the 
 route during those years ? 
 
 A. I used to have all that I could carry. The travel increased 
 right along every year. This Concord Railroad was building at the time r 
 and the travel increased so that I was obliged to put on another stage 
 from Lowell to Manchester. 
 
 Q. During what year was this ? 
 
 A. 1841. 
 
 Q. What was the fare from Lowell to Concord ? 
 
 A. Two dollars. 
 
 Q. If a passenger got in at Lowell to go to Manchester, and stepped 
 out, and another took his place, what was the fare ? 
 
 A. I used to get $2.50. From Lowell to Manchester, the fare was- 
 SI. 50, from Manchester here, $1. 
 
 Q. What was the number that you usually carried on the stage the 
 first year what the second, and what the third ? 
 
 A. I think I could safely say that I averaged about ten or twelve 
 passengers through. Perhaps not quite so many the first year, but I 
 think it would average that during the three years. I mean in the 
 stages that I drove the through line, not the line that I ran from Lowell 
 to Manchester. That is separate. 
 
 Q. I want you to state the relative amount of travel during the 
 three years. You say that it increased. How much did it increase ? 
 
 A. It increased so that I had to put on another stage the last year. 
 
 Q. During the last year, how many passengers were you accustomed 
 to carry on your coach V 
 
 A. I think twenty-four was the most I ever carried. 
 
 Q. How frequently have you carried so large a number, or near that 
 number ? 
 
 A. It used to happen quite often during the last year. 
 
 Q. Who drove your extra stage ? 
 
 A. His name was Edward Sargent. He is the man who now runs- 
 an express from Lowell to Boston. 
 
 Q. What was the extra what was the number of horses ? 
 
 A. I think he drove what we call a spike team, three horses on a 
 team. He had what we call a six passenger coach. There was what 
 we reckon eleven seats six inside and three behind the driver, and one 
 on each side of him. That is what we call a six passenger coach a 
 epike team. 
 
 Q. During that time what did it cost per day for keeping and shoe~ 
 ing the horses ? 
 
319 
 
 A. We used to calculate that sixty cents per day would keep the horses 
 and shoe them. I got my horses shod by the year. I paid from five to 
 six dollars each year. 1 used to get my horses kept in some parts of 
 the road for two and three pence per day. I believe I did not pay fifty 
 cents for the horses with the exception of each end of the road. If I 
 had six horses at a time, I paid three dollars for keeping tkem and my 
 self. If I had but four horses they would charge me two dollars for 
 the team and driver, and three dollars for six horses and the driver. 
 
 Q. During the time you were engaged in staging for yourself, did 
 you lose any horses ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I never lost a horse when I was the owner. 
 
 Q. During the last year or two that you drove the stage, where did 
 you keep your horses and how did you manage them ? 
 
 A. The last year that I drove stage I owned a place in South street. 
 I used to put up my horses there and take care of them myself. 
 
 Q. Were you sick at any time during the three years that you drove 
 stage for yourself ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I was not away from my team more then two days 
 calculating one trip. 
 
 Q. On what occasion was that ? 
 
 A. It was on the occasion of my marriage. I was married on the 
 15th of October, 1840, and I was then away two days. I got a man to 
 drive for me one trip. That is the only time I was away from my 
 teams. 
 
 Q. During the time you were driving your own stage, what income 
 did you receive besides the fares of passengers and the mail money ? 
 
 A. I had more or less packages every day money packages and 
 express matter. 
 
 Q. Can you state the amount you received from all sources daily or 
 monthly ? 
 
 A. I thin it would average $3 per day from $2 to $3. 
 
 Q. What did you do with your money as often as you accumulated 
 any ? In what amounts and for how long ? 
 
 A. When I got $50 or $100 ahead I used to put it out at interest. 
 
 Q. Up to the time when you went into the employ of the Concord 
 Railroad, what bad debts did you make, if any ? 
 
 A. I do not think of any. 
 
 Q. During the time you were staying, what sums of money did you 
 spend for amusements balls, dances, &c. 
 
 A. I paid out $5 for the old annual stage ball in 1839. That was 
 only one year. That was the year before I was married, and I have 
 not been to a ball since I was married. 
 
 Q. Did you save your way-bills ? 
 
 A. I kept my way-bills right along regularly., but they were burnt 
 when my house was burnt. They were packed in a trunk in the attic. 
 
 Q. State now what was the value of what property you had wheu 
 you went on to the Concord Railroad, what was the amount ? 
 
 A. I had somewhere between ten and twelve thousand dollars, 1 
 think about $11,500 
 
 Q. State what that property was? 
 
 A. It was my stage line from here to Lowell, my house on South 
 street and notes at interest 
 
 Q. What did you pay for your house on South street, and- when did 
 you buy it? 
 
320 
 
 A. I paid $600 for it, 
 
 Q. When did you buy it ? 
 
 A. In 1841, 1 think. 
 
 Q. How did you dispose of your stage property, and what did you 
 realize out of it ? 
 
 A. I sold two teams and a coach to a man by the name of Stone, 
 between Manchester and Lowell. He gave me $2000 paying me $500 
 down, and carried the mail contract, and he made the payments as fast 
 as they became due. \ 
 
 Q. What did you do with the rest of it ? 
 
 A. The rest of it I sold after the cars got out. The cars in the 
 first place ran to Manchester, and stopped there for a while, and I let 
 my stage to a man by the name of Clifford, to run from Manchester to 
 Concord until the cars came up here. He paid me $4 per day, and he 
 paid the expenses. 
 
 Q. For how long a time was that ? 
 
 A. The cars came up to Manchester in July, 1842, and they ran in 
 here, I think, in either October or November following. 
 
 Q. State what you did with the balance of your stage and what you 
 got for it V 
 
 A 1 sold one six horse team and harnesses for $600 to a man by the 
 name of Pratt. I had one pair of horses that I wintered over, and sold 
 them next spring with the coach. 
 
 Q. Who had them. 
 
 A. I sold them in Boston to a man by the name of Long. 
 
 Q. What did you get for them ? 
 
 A. I sold them for $600, including the coach and harnesses. 
 
 Q. At the time you went on to the Concord Eailroad, had you made 
 any bad debts or lost any money in any way ? 
 
 A. I don t reinemember that I had. 
 
 The Chair man. I wish to make a remark to the counsel before we 
 adjourn. This case has occupied so much time, and there liave been so 
 many rulings and exceptions, that we think it is very important that 
 before the testimony closes, each party should furnish us with a list of 
 all the exceptions they propose to insist upon ; and we wish it under 
 stood that we shall consider all those exceptions waived which are not 
 furnished to us before the testimony closes. This is with a view to con 
 sider all the ruling and all the exceptions for the purpose of determin 
 ing whether there are any exceptions that can be waived. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe,) Of what did your property consist at the time 
 that you went on the railroad in 1842? I speak in relation to the time 
 when you had sold to Mr. Stone the line below. 
 
 A. My property consisted of my house here in South street. 
 
 [Objected to and allowed.] 
 
 Q. Will you proceed and state, Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. It consisted of a note against Daniel S. Kimball, of about $6000. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Of where? 
 
 A. Lowell. And notes against Samuel Stone and others for $3000, 
 and the upper part of my staging from Manchester up here. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. JRolfe.) For which you realized how much? 
 
 A, Fifteen hundred dollars, 1 think. Sold six horses for $600, and 
 a pair of horses and coach for $600, and sold the other horses, I think, 
 for about $300, if 1 recollect right. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Clough, will you state when you sold the property on 
 South street and what you received for it ? 
 
A. I sold the property for $1500. I don t recollect the dates ex 
 actly. I will tell you in one moment. [ "Examining memoranda 1 
 $1500 
 
 Q. You paid for it how much ? 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Tappan.) When did you sell it? 
 
 A. In 1848. 
 
 Q. For how much ? 
 
 A. Fifteen hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Were there any improvements on it? 
 
 A. No, sir; I think not of any account ; set out some trees. 1 
 paid $600 for it, and sold it for $1500, 
 
 Q. What was the next piece of property that you purchased, and 
 when did y<ki purchase it, and what did you give for it, and when did 
 you sell it, and the price ? 
 
 A. 1 bought the place called the Sanger place in 1846. 
 
 Q. Well, go on. 
 
 A. I gave $300 for it. I sold it in 1847 for $600, bought it back 
 again for $600, kept it awhile and sold it for $800 in 1848. 
 
 Mr. George. I should like to know what the witness is testifying 
 from 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. As I understand it, it is a memorandum that he has 
 made. 
 
 Mr. Mngridge. It is a memorandum made under his direction and 
 certified by him to be correct ; the amounts are put there in that shape 
 as a convenient way of getting at them, that is all. 
 
 Mr. George. I object. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Eolfe, you must show by your witness what 
 kind of a paper you have got there. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Will you state how that paper happened to be 
 made out? 
 
 A. That paper was made from the dates of the deeds when I sold 
 land, the deeds when I bought them those places. 
 
 Q. State whether it was made by your direction ? 
 
 A. It was made by my direction. 
 
 Q. State whether, at the time it was made, you did or not know it 
 to be true ? 
 
 A. I did know it to be true. It is impossible for me to recollect all 
 my transactions. 
 
 Mr. George. I object. It seems that this is a collection from some 
 deeds which should be produced : apart from another objection which 
 I have. 
 
 The Chairman. If I understand, the objection you make is one 
 which is not yet in evidence. Mr. Clough says that the paper was 
 made under his direction, and that when he made it, he knew it was 
 true. 
 
 Mr. George. He says it was made from deeds. 
 
 Witness. It was made from the dates of deeds. 
 
 The Chairman, But he says he knew it to be correct at the time. 
 . Mr. George. If the referees will allow me, perhaps I can obviate the 
 difficulty by asking one or two questions. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} In whose hand-writing, is that paper? 
 A. My nephew s. 
 
 Q. Were you present when he made it? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
Q. Where was it made ? 
 
 A. At my house. . 
 
 Q. From what was it copied ? 
 
 ^ A. From the deeds from the dates of deeds, and from my recollec 
 tion of what 1 had bought and what I had sold it for. 
 
 Q. That is, you didn t take anything from the deeds except the 
 dates ? 
 
 A. Well, they took what I sold them for the price, 
 
 Q, You took the consideration from the deeds, and the dates from 
 the deeds ? 
 
 A. And from my recollection. 
 
 Q. From the deeds and from your recollection ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. From both ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. George. Very well ; now I object. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Because the deeds may be evidence, that docs not 
 exclude the memorandum. 
 
 Mr. George. He says he took the memorandum from the deeds and 
 from his recollection. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That is simply a memorandum made by him of the 
 time when he bought this property, and when he sold it ; made from 
 records and from his recollection ; a memorandum which he knew to be 
 made right at the time, it being made under his direction. He simply 
 put it in that shape that he might testify to it readily, without referring 
 to the deeds which may be produced here, if the gentlemen desires. It 
 is merely to refresh his recollection as to the numerous dates. 
 
 The Chairman. We think that the objection certainly would pre 
 vail, if it is insisted upon. 
 
 Mr. George. If they will agree to hand the papers in, I am willing 
 they should go on. It is not merely a technical objection. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The deeds are entirely at your service. 
 
 The Chairman. You can go on with the examination, it being under 
 stood that the deeds are to be produced before the cross examination. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Go on, Mr. Clough. What outlays did you 
 make upon that ? 
 
 A. Not any that I recollect of. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect what rents you received, if any ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I do not. I think I got $50 a year on the rent. 
 
 Mr. George. I respectfully submit to the referees that Mr. dough s 
 answer to that inquiry shows how improper it is, testifying from a mem 
 orandum of that kind. Mr. Clough s first answer is that he don t rec 
 ollect, that he had made any outlays or received any rents. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The gentleman assumes that he don t read from his 
 memorandum, or at least he represents that he don t. There is the 
 memorandum, subject to their inspection. [Objection overruled.] 
 
 Q. (By Mr, JKolfe.) Now, Mr. Clough, will you proceed and state 
 with reference to the "Morrison house," when you bought it, and all 
 the circumstances connected with it where it is situated ? 
 
 A. The Morrison house I bought a farm and moved the house down 
 to Thompson street I think it was on Thompson street. I bought it 
 for $50, and I paid $50 for moving it, and I paid $75 for the land, and 
 paid out $250 for fitting it up. 
 
 Q. Well, go on as fast as you can, Mr. Clough ? 
 
A I rented it seven years, I think, for $50 a year, I sold it for 
 either $500 or $600. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark.} Rented for how many years ? 
 
 A. Seven, I think. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Sold it for how much? 
 
 A. Either $500 or $600, I don t recollect which. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} That was on Thompson street, in this city? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. At the south end. 
 
 Q. Now as to the Shanks house, when did you buy that? 
 
 A. I bought the Shanks house in 1855. 1 swapped a pair of horses 
 and wagon for that house, which cost $300. I sold it in 1856 for $900, 
 [Subsequently corrected.] 
 
 Q. And what rent did you get out of it? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} How much did you say you sold it for, sir? 
 
 A. Seven hundred dollars. I rented for either $50 or $60 a year ;. 
 I don t recollect which. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} You may state with reference to the house on 
 Thompson street. 
 
 A. The house on Thompson street I bought in 1845), just as it is, a 
 double house, for $1225. That is what it cost me. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} When did you say it was ? 
 
 A. 1849. I rented it from 1849 to 1862 for $100 a year, a tene 
 ment. That makes $200 for the house. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Clough, I simply desire to ask you if the 
 rent of the house is written down on the memorandum that you have ? 
 
 A. It is. 
 
 Q. From what source ? By whom was that written ? 
 
 A. The same man that wrote the rest of it. 
 
 Q. Prom what source was that information derived? 
 
 A. From recollection. 
 
 Q. From whose recollection ? 
 
 A. My own. 
 
 Mr. George. Then I object to his using the memorandum if he 
 swears from recollection. There is no use in using a memorandum for 
 that purpose. 
 
 The Chairman. He says that he made the memorandum from his 
 recollection, when he knew it was true, and I suppose if he is using a 
 memorandum, and he now wishes for it to refresh his recollection, it is 
 perfectly admissible, 1 think. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Clough, aside from your memorandum, as 
 to the house on Thompson street, could you now remember what you. 
 rented that house for ? 
 
 A. I reduced the rents in war time, and put them up again SOOB>. 
 after the latter part of the war, 
 
 Q. Well, now, do you recollect how that is, aside from this memo 
 randum ? 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Can you state now from your recollection 
 as to this matter of rent, without looking at your paper, or do you want 
 that paper ? 
 
 A. I could tell a great deal better. 
 
 You can use it then. 
 
 A. I rented it from 1849 to 1862, for $200, from 1862 to 186.4, at 
 $85 a tenement ; from 1864 up to date, for $200 a year. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Well, you own that now, do you? 
 
324 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, you may proceed in relation to the other property in that 
 vicinity ? 
 
 A. The house on the corner of Thompson and Jefferson streets. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.] That is another one, or the same one? 
 
 A. Another one. I built that house in 1853. Cost me $1050. I 
 reduced the rents the same time and put them up the same time that I 
 did the other house. 
 
 Q. What were they rented for? 
 
 A. Rented from 1853 to 1S62 for $100 a tenement. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Were there two tenements in this house? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. From 1862 to 1864, $85 a tenement. Kent, them now 
 for $125, each tenement. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Any other buildings in that vicinity ? 
 
 A. Next, house on Jefferson street. 
 
 Q. Near by, is it? 
 
 A. Right there, close by ; cost $600. 
 
 Q. Did you build it ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir ; 1 bought it and moved it on to the place ; bought it 
 for $300 of Thomas Pillsbury and moved it. It cost me $200 more to 
 move it, and fit it up. 
 
 Q. Do you own that now ? 
 
 A. I do. 1 rented it in 1862 for $75 a tenement. I think that 
 was in 1853 or 1854. Eented it from 1862 to 1864 for $65 a tenement; 
 since 1864 for $85. 
 
 Q. The next is the Brown house ? 
 
 A. L don t think that is down. 
 
 Q. Well, you may go on and state about the Jamaica Plain prop 
 erty ? 
 
 A. The Jamaica Plain property I bought in 1853. 
 
 Q. In Massachusetts, near Boston? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; three miles out. I bought it in 1853, for $1800. 
 There was about three acres, or 140,000 feet. 
 
 Q. What have you done with it since ? 
 
 A. I have sold up to two years ago, $5381. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mvgridye.) How much have you got left? 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) Where was that property? 
 
 A. It was down near Jamaica Plains. It was upon the Providence 
 and Worcester Kailroad, down by the gas works right by the gas 
 works. 
 
 Q. VYho did you buy it of? 
 
 A. In the first place, I loaned some money ; I loaned the money, 
 $800, to a man by the name of Joseph Palmer. 
 
 That is all ; mere curiosity ; I happened to know the locality, 
 and felt a little curiosity ? 
 
 A. I think I have half of it left. I have sold since February 1866. 
 
 Q. Have you half, or less than half? 
 
 A. About one-half left, I think, 
 
 Q. Give a description of the value ? 
 
 A. It shows here I have the value of about 70,000 feet left. 
 
 Q. Now what is the comparative value of what you have left ? 
 
 [Objected to, and objection waived.] 
 
 A. It is worth more. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) I simply desire you to state whether the land 
 that is left is worth more than that which has been sold ? 
 
325 
 
 A. Yes, it is. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, what has been the outlay on that land ? 
 
 A. Nothing but taxes, and my agent, a man that sold, may have 
 had something. 
 
 Q. What were the taxes for the first five or six years ? 
 
 A. There was only some $4, or $5, That is, it has increased from 
 year to year, until it is $20. The last tax that I have was $30 to $34, 
 $34 seems to me it was, if I recollect right. 
 
 Q. Have I inquired of you about the house on Downing street ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Let me inquire of that ? 
 
 A. That is the Shanks house, I think. 
 
 Q. You mentioned that was on Thompson street. Have you men 
 tioned that ? 
 
 Mr. Clark. You didn t say what street it was. 
 
 A. I think it was on Downing street. It was on the south end of 
 the city. 
 
 Q. Now you may go to the Brown building, if you please ? 
 
 A. The Brown building was built in 185 9. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) By you? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Mugridge.) Cost how much ? 
 
 A. It cost $520, I stated in my deposition that it cost $490; and 
 I find a bill for extra work since then, and I have added it. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) Does that include the land ? 
 
 A. The land I hired. I received $200 a year rent for the same 
 since 1859. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. llolfe.) What have been your outlays, and what rent 
 have you paid for the land ? 
 
 A. I think the first two or three years I paid $25 a year. For the 
 last three years I paid $35 for the land, and $6 a year for the water. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) You say the last year $35 dollars for the 
 land ? 
 
 A. Y^es, sir ; $35 a year. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, you may go on now to the Masonic Temple. State 
 what that cost ? 
 
 A, The Masonic Temple, one-half of it cost $15,500. 
 
 Q. When was it erected ? 
 
 A. In 1858. 
 
 Q. Does that include the Allison property? 
 
 A. No, sir, it does not ; 
 
 Q. What income have you received from the Masonic Temple since 
 it was erected ? 
 
 A. That includes the store where Parker was, and the Allison Block. 
 
 Q. Then you may include them in the cost ? 
 
 A. I bought the Allison building about the same time, about 1858. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) Did you buy one-half of that, or the 
 whole ? 
 
 A. Bought one-half of that ; Corning owned the other half. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolf e.) What did that cost ? 
 
 A. 1 paid, I think, $3800. 
 
 Q. For the whole ? 
 
 A. For the whole ; yes. 
 
 Q. So that your half amounted to $1900? 
 
A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How was it about the Bartlett store ? Was that reckoned in 
 with the $15,500? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, what rent have you received from that ? 
 
 A. I have received between $0000 and 810,000. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} In all? 
 
 A. My half. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} In what year did you say you bought it? 
 
 A. In 1858. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. llolfe.} Do you mean to say that you bought it in 
 1858, or only erected it in 1^58. 
 
 A. Became the owner of it. 
 
 Q. The land you had purchased before ? 
 
 A. We owned the land yes, sir. 
 
 Q Does that include the Allison building, or rents that you 
 .received on the Allison building ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; on the Allison building, and the J>artlett store too, I 
 think. 
 
 Q. N r ow, Mr. Clough, have you any more real property there ? 
 
 A. I have the Page place. 
 
 Q. State about the Page place. 
 
 A. The Page place cost $2000 in 1854. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) Cost you ? 
 
 A. Cost $2000 in 1854. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} What has been the income, and what the out 
 lays? 
 
 A. In the first place it cost me $1800 : and I laid out about $200 
 <OB it ; and I call it that it cost me about $2000. There is about an 
 acre and a half of land. There is a man lives on it, a poor man, and I 
 don t get any rent from it. I get some fruit off from the land, 
 and get some hay. I sold that property once for $3000 ; that is, a man 
 had the refusal of it for that ; and if he did not take it he was to give 
 me $100. He didn t take it. And I don t consider that I get a great 
 deal of income. 
 
 Q. Whether the income of that would pay the interest on what it 
 cost you ? 
 
 A. I should think it might. 
 
 Q. Any other rent ? 
 
 A. I bought some land in Manchester of Capt. Walker, in 1849 or 
 1850, and made some over $500 on my transactions. 
 
 Q. How did you obtain the land where your house now stands on the 
 railroad ground ? 
 
 A. That land I got in the way of trade. It didn t cost me any 
 thing. I swapped, or at least I bargained with a man by the name of 
 Cleaver ; I swapped houses with him, and his wife opposed the trade, 
 and didn t want to move down where I used to live. He said he would 
 give me the back land where Dr. Merrill now lives, on River street. 
 
 Q. Fronting the railroad square ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I built a house there in 1849. The house cost me 
 $2600. I lived there some twelve or thirteen years ; lived there until 
 1861. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Cost you how much? 
 
 A. Twenty-six hundred dollars 
 
327 
 
 Q. And you lived there how many years ? 
 
 A. Twelve or thirteen years ; until 1861. 
 
 Q. Until you moved to your present residence ? 
 
 A, Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Were there two tenements, two houses? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you occupy both? 
 
 A. One. Mr. Elliot occupied the other part. 
 
 Q. How much rent did you receive during that time ? 
 
 A. Not more than $200 or $300. 
 
 Q. During the whole time ? 
 
 A. During the whole time. 
 
 Q. After you moved up to the place where you now live, for what 
 did you rent them. 
 
 A. I rent that house now for $200 a tenement. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark.} That is on "Railroad square ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What was the rent, when you first moved out ? 
 
 A. I. believe it was $175 for a year or two after I moved out; and 
 then 1 put the rent up to $200. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) State as to your Dunbarton farm ? 
 
 A. Bought in 1858; sold in 1866. I have got $275 more than I 
 gave for it. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} When did you sell it ? 
 
 A. I sold it in 1866. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} What did you give for it, arid what did you 
 sell it for ? 
 
 A. Well, I have not got it down here ; I have got a deed for it. I 
 sold it for $2000 ; bought it for $1700 ; $1725 I think it is. 
 
 Q. Now, what outlays did you make on that, and what income did 
 you receive ? 
 
 A. I rented it for six per cent, and taxes ; except one or two years, 
 when I carried it on myself. 
 
 Q. While you carried it on yourself? 
 
 A. I carried it on, but I got at that rate, or more. 
 
 Q. Did you make any outlays on it ? 
 
 A. No, sir; but I bought the land and built the house. It was a 
 small house. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} What year was that ? 
 
 A, The year that I bought it ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. It was in 1858. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} And you built a house on it, and the cost to 
 you was $1725 ? 
 
 A. The land and house, I think, cost $1725. 
 
 Q. Sold it for $2600 ? 
 
 A. Sold it for $2600. 
 
 Q. You may proceed to the next item that you have on your memo 
 randum ? 
 
 A. The Orange farm next. 
 
 Q. Now go on and state in relation to that ? 
 
 A. I bought that for $1000. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark.} When did you buy that ? 
 
 A. Bought in 1859. 
 
328 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Itolfe.) What did you do with it? How long did 
 you own it, and what did you do with it ? 
 
 A 1 owned it until February, 1867, I think. I swapped 1 think it 
 was in February 1867 I swapped it for some real estate here in Con 
 cord, 
 
 Q. What did you receive out of it for the time you had it ? 
 
 A. I let it for six per cent. ; and then I had the pasture land. 
 
 <^. Without paying the taxes ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then you had your pasture besides? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And what else ? Did you get any income besides from your pas 
 ture ? 
 
 A. There was a maple orchard on it. 1 got a barrel of syrup every 
 year. 
 
 <<>. Did you say how much you rented that pasture for ? 
 
 A. i used to take for pasturing used to get "about $75 or $100 a 
 year, perhaps, 
 
 Q. .Proceed to the next, and state what it is? 
 
 A. The Manchester I ririt Works. 
 
 <V. What did you pay for that, and how long did you keep it? 
 
 A. Bought that in 1852, three shares, $750 a share. The* par value 
 was 1000 a share. 
 
 Q. What dividends did you receive on it, and when did you sell it ? 
 
 A. 1 received $1260, dividends. That is the statement from Charles 
 Emory, treasurer $1260 dividend. 
 
 Q. When did you sell it ? 
 
 A. Sold it in 1862, and bought it in 1852. I sold it for $1200 of 
 $1500 a share. I don t exactly remember any further than that. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} In 1862, you say you sold it. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) What was your next transaction, Mr. Clough? 
 
 A. There is the Concord Railroad stock if I have that here. 
 
 Q. Well, proceed to the Concord liailroad stock. How many shares 
 of Concord Railroad stock had you at the time this suit was brought ? 
 
 A. I had four hundred shares. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state when you bought in and what amounts you. 
 paid ? 
 
 A. I have the statement of my railroad stock from 1855 ; but I have 
 owned stock since 1846. But previous to 1855, I cannot find the trans* 
 fer book to get it off. I have got all there was at the office. May 1st, 
 1855, $22.50. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) What is that? 
 
 A. Dividend. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Haile.} How many shares did you own at that time? 
 
 A. Well, let me see, twelve shares that would be ; I didn t give 
 the number of shares, but merely 1 just take these from the treasurer s 
 books. The interest on that amount, up to 1866, to $14.85. 
 
 [Objected to interest and omitted.] 
 
 May 1st, 1855," $22.50; November 8, 1855, $37.50; May 14, 1856, 
 37.50*; November, 1856, $37.50. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr, Clough, what was the par value of that stock ? 
 
 A. Fifty dollars a share. 
 
 Q. Now will you state as near as you can the average cost of thesa 
 four hundred shares of stock ? 
 
A. I bought my stock as low as $33 a share, and from that up to 
 par; and the four hundred shares, I think it averaged about $40 a 
 share. 
 
 Q. "What was the per cent, that you received on your stock, from the 
 time you bought it up to the time this suit was brought? 
 
 A. I received eight per cent, with the exception of one six months, 1 
 think I didn t get but three for these months, at the rate of six per cent, 
 
 Q. How was that paid ? 
 
 A. Four per cent, semi-annual ly ? 
 
 I,). Soon after you went upon the Concord road, did you have any 
 dealings with James M. Elkins? And, if so, what; and state the 
 result ? 
 
 A. In 1843, 1 loaned James N. Elkins $3000. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridye.} He was 
 
 A. He was conductor on the Lowell and Nashua road, and after 
 wards appointed to come up here. I think he was appointed to come on 
 this road in 1843, and ran until he was appointed superintendent of the 
 Montreal road opposite train to me. 
 
 Q. Well, proceed and state about that ? 
 
 A. Mr. Elkins wanted some money to go into a stock speculation 
 stock and other speculations. He said to me that if he had some money 
 he could make some, and he made a trade with me ; he should pay me 
 six per cent, for the money, and give me a quarter of what he made. I 
 think it ran along until 1847 or 1848; he made for me about $5000 r 
 including interest and all on the money that he hired. 
 
 Q. Did you state whether he settled with you from time to time, or 
 how that was ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he settled with me once in two or three months, and 
 gave me his note, for 1 didn t want the money at that time. If I 
 wanted any money to use I used to call on him. 
 
 Q. State as to your transactions in Boston, Concord and Montreal 
 stock ? 
 
 A. I think it was after he left this road, he and I bought a couple 
 of hundred shares, a hundred shares apiece of the Montreal stock. ( 
 think it was the preferred stock. 
 
 Q. When was this ? 
 
 A. In 18481847 or 1848. 
 
 Q. State the result of that transaction ? 
 
 A. We got either fifteen or twenty per cent, in advance on that 
 stock. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You sold it, did you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he sold it for me. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Rolfe,} State as to your transactions in Old Colony, 
 stock? 
 
 A. I bought some Old Colony stock in 1843 or 1844. It was either 
 twenty or forty shares, and I don t recollect which. Got an advance of 
 ten per cent, on that. 
 
 Q. In relation to your steamboat transaction ? 
 
 A. Bought in 1861, one hundred and eighty-three shares of boat 
 stock "Lady of the Lake." 
 
 Q. What did that cost you ? 
 
 A. That cost me $30 a share, and the par valire was $50. % 
 
 Q. How long did you hold it, what did you receive out*of it, 
 for what did you sell it ? 
 
330 
 
 A. I bought in 1861, and sold it in 1863. I sold it for $40 a share. 
 Got $iOO a year out of it; making $300 in all. 
 
 Q. Well, the western tickets ? 
 
 Mr. George. Not with a view of objecting to the testimony proceed 
 ing, I desire to object to this evidence on the ground of estoppel. A 
 rule was adopted that the conductors, after a given time, should not have 
 any business outside of the legitimate business of the road. My idea 
 is that the doctrine of estoppel applies also to that. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Will you proceed to state in reference to the 
 western tickets ? 
 
 A. We sold the western tickets three seasons. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) What do you mean by the western tickets? 
 
 A. For instance, from here to Chicago, which was put into my hands, 
 ::and I got a commission for selling them. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley.) What seasons were those? 
 
 A. 1 have not got tho dates here ; I have got them at home. I think. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} From where to Boston? 
 
 A. From here. 
 
 Q.. Tickets that went over your road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Part way ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Rolfe.} What commission did you receive on these 
 tickets? 
 
 A. I received two dollars. They were tickets that were issued from 
 here, and had coupons for the different roads that they passed on 
 coupons for the Worcester road, and coupons for the Western road, 
 
 Q. Who issued these tickets ? 
 
 A. Well, 1 had some on the Great Western, through Canada, and 
 .some Lake Shore. A man by the name of Allen, I think, furnished 
 them to me. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Do you mean to say that the tickets that 
 passed over the Concord road from here were not issued by the Concord 
 road? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. They were not issued by the Concord road. They 
 were issued by other roads with the permission of the Concord road, I 
 suppose. 
 
 Mr. George. Of course all this evidence goes in under my objection, 
 on the estoppel ground. 1 suppose it is understood all around that this 
 is evidence which is liable to objection on the ground of estoppel ; that 
 it is not necessary for me to take the exception as it goes along ? 
 
 Mr. Mvgridge. I don t suppose it is. There is no harm in it, how- 
 vever. 
 
 Mr. George. In regard to this sale of these western tickets, I claim 
 that Mr. Clough is estopped on two grounds; first, on the ground that 
 he should not use or sell any tickets not received from the general ticket 
 agent ; second, because there was an express rule passed that the con- 
 . ductor should not have business outside of the road. It is only 
 with a view of estoppel. 
 
 TJie Chairman. They are offering this evidence to rebut your testi 
 mony. That is to show, not that he has not got the money of the Con 
 cord Railroad. That is not to show that he has accounted for what they 
 liave got, but simply to show how he got certain money. 
 
 Mr. Ge orge. Now, 1 say that he is estopped from that. 
 
331 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Now, Mr. Clough will you state what amounts 
 you received during these three years from the sale of western tickets ? 
 
 A. 1 got $2 on each ticket, commission. I think I sold about two 
 or three hundred a season. 
 
 Q. Now, what years did you sell these, Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. i have not got the dates here. 
 
 Q. Have you a memorandum ? 
 
 A. 1 have got one at home. 1 think one or two of the years is on 
 my memorandum. 
 
 Mr. George. Mr. Kolfe, for the purpose of this inquiry. I am willing 
 that he should refer to the deposition for this purpose. You may read 
 them to him. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. It is interrogatory 3G7. 
 
 Witness. I had some of these books, but I have lost them. Mrist 
 have been burned at my house, I think. I don t remember. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Do you recollect, Mr. Clough, what years they 
 were besides 1857 V 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} How late did you sell them ? 
 
 A. 1 sold them, 1 think, in 1858; whether it was 1859, I cannot 
 say; or 1856 ; I think I sold them three years. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You think you realized about $1500 ill 
 commissions ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Rolfe.} Now, will you proceed to the matter of cows ? 
 
 A. I kept when 1 lived on Eailroad square I kept sometimes from 
 three to five cows and sold milk. 
 
 Q. How many years did you keep cows ? 
 
 A. I think it was about twelve or thirteen years. 
 
 Q. What kind of cows did you keep, and how much milk did they 
 give, and for how much per quart did you sell the milk ? 
 
 The Chairman. Is it worth the while to go into the details of that? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I should like to have him state so that the referees may 
 infer. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} You may go on and state what you estimate 
 the profits? 
 
 A. I estimate about forty dollars a year on a cow, net profit. 
 
 Q. Taking the number of cows that you kept, how much do you 
 estimate that you made net ? You may refer to your deposition, if there 
 is no objection ? [Objected to.] 
 
 A. I have not got any other figures. 
 
 Q. You may state in relation to deserters ? 
 
 A. I secured seven or eight deserters during the war. 
 
 Q. Well, sir ; what did you receive apiece for securing them ? 
 
 A. Thirty dollars. I got $30 apiece. 
 
 Q. During what years did you receive them? 
 
 A. I think it was in 1864 and 1865 ; 1864, I think, most of them. 
 
 Q. Well now, sir, will you state as to your trade in produce on the 
 cars, and the amount you realized. State first in relation to merchan 
 dize, etc., that you sold in the cars what is termed the " peanut trade," 
 I think ? 
 
 A. When the road first opened, I hired a boy and put him on some 
 seven or eight years. I paid the boy from 50 to 75 cents per day. He 
 took from $1 to $6 per day. I think the profit would be about $1.50 
 per day. 
 
Q. Are you able to state the amount that you estimate that you had ? 
 
 A. A dollar and a half a day, I said. 
 
 Q. Now you may state in reference to the chicken and produce trade. 
 
 A. i^used to carry chickens, turkeys, geese, butter, eggs, apples, 
 cranberries and chesnuts. Sent potatoes down on the cars occasionally. 
 
 Q, 15y freight? 
 
 A. i)y freight trains. Brought back fish fresh fish. The estimate 
 I made, about $500 or $ ^0u per year, 
 
 Q. For how many years how long did that continue, Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. I should think about five or six years. 
 
 Q. Did you make anything in tobacco speculation? If so, what 
 amount, and when ? 
 
 A. 1 loaned George Eaton some money, and he bought some tobacco, 
 My profits were from $800 to $900. He paid the interest on the money, 
 and allowed me for the profits. 
 
 Q. What year was this ? Do you recollect ? 
 
 A. 1 don t recollect it. I had the whole statement here from Mr. 
 Eaton, himself. 1 will find it so as to bring it in to-morrow. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you about the gain you made on what is called the 
 buckskin horses, when you bought them, and when you sold them ? 
 
 A. The buckskin horses, I paid $400 for them in 1865, arid sold 
 them for $450. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Getrye.} When did you sell them? 
 
 A. 1 sold them to the hospital folks; sold them in 1866, I think. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Did you work them? 
 
 A. 1 kept them to work all the time. 
 
 Q. Won t you state as to the gain on the Hutchinson horse, what you 
 bought him for, arid what you sold him for? 
 
 A. I paid $80 in 1858 ; sold him in 1859 ; sold him for $150. 
 
 Q. You may state as to the Silver horse, when you bought him, 
 and when you sold him ? 
 
 A. The Silver horse I paid $125 for in 1850; sold him for $200; 
 sold him in 1850. 
 
 Q. How long did you keep the Silver horse, Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. 1 kept him, I think, about six or eight months. 
 
 Q. Did you work him during the time ? 
 
 A. Worked him yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You may state that in reference to all the horses you ever had ? 
 
 A. 1 kept no horses but what I worked. 
 
 Q. You may state in relation to the John H. Pearsons horse, when 
 you bought him, and when you sold him, and for how much you sold 
 him? 
 
 A. The Pearson horse, $150; bought him in 1853, in the spring, 
 and sold him in two or three months ; sold him for $275. 
 
 Q. What time did you buy the Milford ? For how much did you 
 sell him, and how much did you realize on him ? 
 
 A. A hundred and seventy-five dollars in 1854; sold him for $275, 
 I bought him in the summer of 1854. I think I sold him that fall. 
 
 Q. Now the gain on the D. C. Watson horses, if anything?- "When 
 did you buy them, and when did you sell them ? 
 
 A. The Watson horses 1 gave $400 for in 1856. 
 
 Q. What season of the year ? How long did you keep them ? 
 
 A. 1 bought them, 1 think, in the spring ; sold them along in Sep 
 tember, I think. 
 
333 
 
 Q. What did you get for them ? 
 
 A. Got $600. 
 
 Q. Now the William B. French, when did you buy him? When did 
 you sell him? And what was the result pecuniarily of the transaction? 
 
 A. I bought him in 1852 for $130, and sold him for $300. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley.} Sold him when? 
 
 A. 1 think I kept him through the winter. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) How much did you say you sold him for? 
 
 A. Three hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe:} The Clifford horse ? 
 
 A. The Clifford horse cost $200. 
 
 Q. When ? 
 
 A. In 1850. 
 
 Q. When did you sell him, and what did you get for him? 
 
 A. I kept him through the winter, I think ; sold him for $400 next 
 spring. 
 
 Q. Allison horse, No. 2 ? 
 
 A. I had two horses of Allison. 
 
 Q. The lowest priced one you may state ? 
 
 A. Paid $187 for him in 1853 ; sold him for $350, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Sold him the same year ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; bought him in the summer and sold him the same year. 
 
 Q. Allison horse, No. 1 ? 
 
 A. Allison horse, No. 1 I supposed 1 paid $250 for him, but Mr. 
 Allison says I didn t pay him but $210. The bill was made out $250, 
 but he said that I didn t give him but $210 for him. I did not keep 
 him but a short time ; 1 sold him for $600. 
 
 Q. Who did you sell the Allison horse to ? 
 
 A. I sold him to a Boston man. His name was Pratt. He was a 
 man who used to take down a great many horses, and traded in horses 
 altogether. 
 
 Q, To whom did you sell the Pearson horse? Do you recollect? 
 
 A. I sold him to a Boston man ; I believe he was a West India goods 
 trader there ; I forget his name. 
 
 Q. Was he the one that the law-suit was about ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; he was taken sick and died ; got a cold down there. 
 
 Q. To whom did you sell the D. C. Watson ? 
 
 A. To a couple of persons by the name of Pierce. 
 
 Q. To whom did you sell the Clifford horse ? 
 
 A. The Clifford horse went to New York. I don t recollect his name. 
 He was a large pacing horse. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Did you say he was fast? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. To whom did you sell the Hutchinson horse, if you recollect? 
 
 A. The Hutchinsou horse went over to Dunbarton, 1 think. 
 
 Q. Who had him. 
 
 A. I forget the man s name. 
 
 Q. Who had the Silver horse ? 
 
 A. I don t remember who had. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Silver have it ? 
 
 A. Yes, a man by the name of Silver, here in town. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect who had the Milford horse ? 
 
 A. He went to Nashua the last I heard of him. 
 
 Q. You may state in relation to the Rebel horse ? 
 
 
33-i 
 
 A. The Ptebel horse 1 bought of Plum Whipple, here in Concord, 
 He was a rebel horse and captured, and went out to war again ; he wan 
 taken out there and never got back. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley.) For how much? 
 
 A. One hundred and twenty-five dollars, 1 believe. 
 
 Q. (By l\h. Rolfe.) What did you sell him for, and how long did 
 you keep him ? 
 
 A. 1 sold him for $200. I kept him for six months, 1 think, or 
 thereabouts. 
 
 Q Will you now state the amount you estimate you made on selling 
 coupon tickets ? 
 
 A. 1 believe 1 estimated somewhere about $2000 in my deposition. 
 
 Q. You may state what tickets these were ? 
 
 A. These were tickets from Montreal and from the western part of 
 Xew York. 
 
 Q. From Detroit ? 
 
 A. Might have been some from Detroit, Detroit and west of that. 
 
 Q. Over what roads ? 
 
 A. Ogdensburg road, I think, and Vermont Central and Northern. 
 
 Q. Now you may state about those tickets the circumstances in 
 relation to your selling them ? 
 
 A. When 1 first began to buy them, they wasn t dated at all After 
 a while they dated them good for thirty days. 
 
 Q. State whether you purchased any of these tickets previous to 
 your having an interview with the superintendent in relation to them ? 
 
 A. I found that there was other people on the street here buying 
 them, and 1 got one and carried to Mr. G-ilmore. 
 
 Mr. George. Of course our exception here applies. 
 
 The Chairman. This is one of your cases of estoppel ? 
 
 Mr. George. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. And this conversation with Mr. Gilmore was for the 
 purpose of showing notice to him. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Yes, sir ; showing notice to the road. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfs.) Well, sir; proceed, 
 
 A. 1 carried one of these tickets to Mr. Gilmore, and showed them 
 to him, and told him that they were sold here on the street and bought, 
 and asked him if he had any objections to my buying them when they 
 came along. He said no, not any, but not to take any west of Detroit. 
 
 Q. To what points did these tickets that you bought, most of them, go ? 
 
 A. They went to P>oston, most of them. Some of them went over 
 the Manchester and Lawrence road ; some by the v way of Nashua. 
 
 Q. What share of them, so far as you recollect, went to Boston ? 
 
 A. The biggest half, I should judge. 
 
 Q. From where ? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Miigridge.) From what stations? 
 
 A. Some from here ; some from Manchester, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Any from Nashua ? 
 
 A. No, I think not. They used to have tickets come off from these 
 upper roads, the Northern and Montreal ; sometimes when passengers 
 got off at Nashua. Passengers wanted to go to Worcester and had a 
 Boston ticket, and I would take it of them. 
 
 Q. Did you make anything out of that arrangement ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Did it merely to accommodate the travelling public ? 
 

 - 335 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. For what length of time from what time to what time did 
 deal in these coupon tickets V Can you state ? 
 
 A. As near as I can recollect. 1 sold them until I left the road. I 
 should think it was perhaps five or six years. 
 
 Q. How were the tickets marked that you dealt in during the last 
 part of your being on the road ? 
 
 A. They were marked good for thirty days, 
 
 Q. Have you any such tickets now? 
 
 A. 1 believe L have one. 
 
 [Ticket shown; read by Mr. Rolfe. "Issued by Grand Trunk Bail- 
 way to Boston. Good for one first class passage, for only 30 days from 
 date of issue "J 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. The date of this ticket seems to have been scratched out, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Have you any more, Mr. Clough? 
 
 A. No, 
 
 The Chairman. I do not know any particular object there ean be in 
 presenting these and examining them. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. Simply to show the kind of tickets that he dealt in. 
 
 The Chairman. Do not spend much time then. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We think it is important to show the amount of these 
 sold for thirty days. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Previous to those issued good for thirty days, 
 was there any limitation on the face of the ticket ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; some were not dated at all. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Glough, did you ever buy any tickets that are termed 
 spent tickets ? 
 
 A. No, sir; I never did; never bought one nor sold one, alter the 
 date was run out. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Glough, you may please commence and state your losses. 
 if you can, now. In the first place, if you are able, state the amount 
 of taxes you have paid, up to the time this suit was brought. 
 
 A. [Stated from the deposition.] $3841.17. 
 
 Q. Have you a memorandum so that you can state the expense of 
 living since 1860, up to the time you were sued ? 
 
 A. From what time ? From the time I went on to the road V 
 
 Q. No; from 1862. What amount over and above what your salary 
 was ? 
 
 A. My salary was $70 a month. I think, from 1861 up to the time 
 this suit commenced, it cost me over $2000 $2500 perhaps, 
 
 Q. (By Judge Belloivs.} A year ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. Since 1861. 
 
 Q. (By Mr Rolfe.} You mean since December, 1861, or since? Janu 
 ary ? What date did you place it ? 
 
 A. I think it was in August that I moved up on to the hill. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} From that time you think it would cost 
 you $2500 a year ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley.} In excess of your salary ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Do you know how much you paid for internal 
 revenue ? Or, state the amount first that you lost by Cooper, and whoi> 
 you lost it ? 
 
 A. I lost about $2000 by Cooper, 
 
336 
 
 Q. When do you date the loss ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect exactly, but f think it was perhaps 1864; 
 .fsomewheres thereabouts ; 1 could not tell exactly, 
 
 Q. When was it ? About the time you went into your new house 
 .upon the hill ? 
 
 A. It was after that. 
 
 ^ Q. Let me ask -you if the loss had not accrued at that time at the 
 ilrne you purchased the Cooper house? 
 
 A. Well, I was thinking it was since that ; I am not sure. 
 
 Q. When were the notes signed on which you lost the money? 
 were they not signed as late as 1857 or 1858? 
 
 A. J think they were. 
 
 Q. When do you date the last? When did you have to pay the 
 notes ? 
 
 A. I think it was l,H6u. 
 
 Q. Arc you able to state the amount you lost in the flour specula 
 tion ? 
 
 A. I believe I lost about 1600 or $1700 there. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. That was 1863, I think. 
 
 Q. Can you state the amount you lost by John Gass ? 
 
 A. Two hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. When was that that you let him have that money ? 
 
 A. I should think it was as long ago as 1856 or 1857. 
 
 Q. The amount was just $200 was it ? 
 
 A. Just $200. 
 
 Q. State the amount you lost by George Watson, and what time ? 
 
 A. I believe that was about $400 or $500. I think it must be 1857 
 or 1858. I don t know but it was as late as 1859. 
 
 Q. Did you lose anything in the California speculation ? And if so, 
 riiow much, arid at what time ? 
 
 A. it was either $500 or $1000; 1 forget which. I euess it was 
 41000, 
 
 Q. You lost just what you paid him? When was that? 
 
 A. During the early stages of the California excitement. That was 
 as long ago as 1845, I should think, or 1846. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, will you state as to whether it was about the time of 
 &ke first California excitement ? 
 
 A. It was. I think it was longer ago than that, L think it was 
 when I ran through to Boston. 
 
 <Q. Did you run through to Boston as late as 1848 or 1849 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 1 think "it was 1848 or 1849. 
 
 Q. Let me inquire in relation to the amount you gave away to 0. G. 
 Rogers ? 
 
 A. I gave him $1200. 
 * <^. When was that ? 
 
 A. I should think that was in 1863. 
 
 Q. Did you lose anything by J. M. Duffendorf, and if so, how much, 
 and when? 
 
 A. Lost a couple of hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. That was 1863 or 1864. 
 
 Q. When did you let him have the money ? 
 
 A. That was longer ago than that, I think, that I let him have tjie 
 -33y>ney. It might have been in 1S6 2. 
 
337 
 
 Q. When you gave your deposition, did you estimate the loss on the 
 account of C. L Ham ? 
 
 A. I did. I have reckoned that since. That has recently been paid. 
 
 Q. How recently was it paid ? 
 
 A. Paid a month or six weeks ago. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state, Mr. Clough, the amount you have lost by 
 loss of income on the Milford Springs property, while ^ou owned it? In 
 the first place will you state what you paid for the property ? 
 
 A. It cost me $2500 or $3000. I ain t certain which. 
 
 Q. When did you buy it ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect ; I have got the deed at home. 
 
 Q. What income did" you receive from that ? Or did you receive 
 income enough to pay the interest, 
 
 A. I never received any income from that place. 
 
 Q. That is the way you lost the interest on what you paid ? When 
 did you say you bought it ? 
 
 A. I paid for it I should judge I had owned it seven or eight 
 years. 
 
 Q. At the time you was sued ? 
 
 A. No, from now, I mean. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Have you got it now ? 
 
 A. No, sir; 1 have put it away. 
 
 Q. You had when you were sued ? 
 
 A. I swapped for some other property, some real estate in town. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} W r ereyou owning that as long ago as 1854 ? 
 
 A. I think I owned a quarter of it at that time, and bought another 
 quarter afterwards. 
 
 Q. When did you buy the other quarter ? 
 
 A. I bought the other quarter, I think, perhaps in 1857. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, during the first six years you were on the Concord 
 Railroad, of what did your family consist ? 
 
 A. Myself and wife, until 1846. My oldest boy was born in 1846 ; 
 and my next boy was born in 1850 the second one. 
 
 Q. During the first several years you were on the Concord Eailroad, 
 did your family consist of any one except yourself and wife until your 
 children were born ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you have any domestic in the family ? 
 
 A. I think I didn t until 1850. 
 
 Q. State whether, in the house, a memorandum for the first few 
 years, after you went on the Concord Eailroad, of the amount of your 
 family expenses was kept by any one ? 
 
 A- I think my wife kept it for a year or two. 
 
 Q. State, sir, what was your entire family expenses during several 
 years after you went on to the Concord Kailroad, and for how many 
 years ? 
 
 A. I think my family expenses the first years I was on the road 
 wasn t over $300 a year. 
 
 Q. That is up to 1850 ? For the next ten years, from 1850 to 1860 ? 
 
 A. I think it cost me more. 
 
 Q. Well, what amount, with reference to your salary? 
 
 A. I think that I lived within my salary up to 1861 ; since that it 
 has cost me more, considerably. 
 
338 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} You spoke of your family expenses. Does 
 that include your expenses away from home when you were on the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe,} When you ran through to Boston, or up to 
 1849, as you have testified, did it cost you anything for board at the 
 other end of the road ? 
 
 A. No, sir; they didn t charge me anything at hotels. 
 
 Q, How was it when you ran through to Nashua? 
 
 A. Well, when I stopped at the Pearl Street House, I never paid 
 anything; but I paid at the Indian Head, to Mr. Gillis. 1 insisted 
 upon paying it ; he didn t want to take anything. I insisted upon his 
 taking the money ; and I paid him. When I stopped at the Pearl Street 
 House Mr. Wright s, he charged me nothing. 
 
 Q. You may state, if you have any means by which you can state 
 it, the amount you paid for insurance ? 
 
 Mr. George. Between what times ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. All that he ever had. [Insurance waived.] 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, what are those tickets? [Showing tickets.] 
 
 A. Those tickets seem to be on the Boston and Maine road, most of 
 them Lewiston, Boston and Maine ; South Newmarket to Haverhill } 
 Exeter. 
 
 The Chairman. For what purpose do you want these ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. We want to ask Mr. Clough if he ever had these tickets, 
 
 A. Exeter to Durham, on the Boston and Maine ; Great Fall,s to 
 Dover, and to Lewiston ; Danville Junction to Lewiston ; Exeter to 
 Newmarket: Rockport to Boston; Great Falls to Dover; South New 
 market Junction to Newmarket, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.} How many are there ? 
 
 A. There are ten. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Clough, I want to ask you if you ever had 
 any such tickets in your possession ? 
 
 A. Never did ; no, sir. 
 
 Q. Look at these. [Showing other tickets.] 
 
 A. [Pteads.] Newmarket to Dover; Lowell to Nashua; Boston to 
 Lowell ; Boston to Lowell ; Boston to Lowell ; ( package tickets ) ; Bos 
 ton to Lowell ; (package) ; Boston to Lowell ; Lowell to Nashua ; Low 
 ell to Nashua; Lowell to Nashua; Boston to Lowell; (package); 
 Nashua to Boston ; ( package ) ; Nashua to Boston ; (package) ; Lowell 
 to Nashua ; Nashua to Lowell ; (package tickets). 
 
 Q. Mr, Clough, did you ever have any of these. 
 No, sir. 
 
 Take these tickets. [Showing other tickets.] 
 [Reads.] Boston to Salem; Boston to Salem; Boston to Salem; 
 to Gloucester ; Boston to Salem ; Boston to Salem ; Eastern 
 
 Have any such tickets as these ? 
 
 No, sir. There are six, [continues reading.] Boston to Law- 
 Boston to Lawrence ; (these are package tickets ;) Boston to 
 Lawrence ; Boston to Lawrence ; Boston to Lawrence ; Boston to 
 rence ; Boston to Lawrence ; and all packages. 
 Q. Did you ever have any of these ? 
 A. -No, sir ; none. 
 Q. Look at these, [showing tickets.] 
 
339 
 
 A. [Reads.] Manchester to Lawrence ; Manchester to Lawrence ; 
 Lawrence to Manchester [seven times repeated ;] Lawrence to Derry - r 
 Lawrence to Manchester nineteen. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, Mr. Clough, if these tickets could come into 
 your hands? 
 
 A. No, sir ; they were taken up on the Lawrence road before they 
 got to Manchester. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you ever had anything to do with these ex 
 cept when you run over that branch of the road? 
 
 A. There was some seven or eight years ago no, it is longer thazs 
 that. [Beads again.] Great Falls to Salmon Falls ; Great Falls to 
 Berwick; P. S. & P. to Junction ; Great Falls to South Berwick; Great 
 Falls to Salmon Falls. There are eight. 
 
 Q. Did you ever have any of these ? 
 
 A. No, sir; never. Boston to Salem, two. 
 
 Q. Ever have those ? 
 
 A. No, sir. [Reads again.] Lowell to Lawrence ; Lake Village 
 (package tickets ;) Lowell to Lawrence ; Lowell to Lawrence. There 
 are four. 
 
 Q. Ever have any of those ? 
 
 A. Never. * 
 
 Q. You mean to say that you never had any such tickets in your 
 hands before you had them ? 
 
 A. Never. [Reads.] South Newmarket Junction to Dover two, 
 
 Q. Ever have any such as these ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. Look at these. 
 
 A. [Reads.] Portsmouth to Suncook ; Portsmouth to Suncook ; 
 Concord to Portsmouth ; Concord to Portsmouth ; Concord to Portsmouth ;. 
 Newmarket to Junction ; Concord to Portsmouth. 
 
 Q. How many of these could come into your hands in the regular 
 course of business? 
 
 A. Newmarket Junction these tickets were counted out to us and 
 charged. Concord to Portsmouth I could not have them. Concord to 
 Portsmouth and Portsmouth to Suncook that one, we used to have them 
 counted out to us and charged to u%. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridye.) Where did these go to? 
 
 A. Newmarket Junction we took fare from here to Newmarket 
 Junction, and we gave them a ticket. We gave them a ticket and we 
 had to account for them. There are six Portsmouth tickets that I could. 
 not have. 
 
 Q. Couldn t you have the Suncook ones ? 
 
 A. No, sir; they go from Concord to Portsmouth ; they are collected 
 on the Portsmouth road ; oh, no, there are two Portsmouth to Concord 
 which might come into our hands in the regular course of business. 
 
 Q. How are these two ? 
 
 A. Portsmouth to Concord. That came down off from the Center 
 cook river. There couldn t either of these. Bradford to Concord tat 
 couldn t come into our hands. [Reads.] Boston to Salem, (package;) 
 Boston to Salem, (package.) [Repeated three times again.] Boston to 
 Lynn eleven from Boston to Salem and one from Boston to Lynn. 
 
 Q. Ever have any of these tickets before ? 
 
 A, Never saw one of them before. These are tickets that the con 
 ductors used to carry on the Concord road and sell in the cars. These 
 8J e counted out to us and charged. 
 
340 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.) Was there what was called a conductor s 
 ticket? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Good where ? 
 
 A. Prom here to Boston. 
 
 Q. On any of the stations ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. So that you had these and disposed of them to anybody? You 
 had to pay for them at the ticket office ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. They were collected on the other end, collected below 
 Nashua. 
 
 Q. How many of these were there ? 
 
 A. Three of them. [Reads.] Boston to Gloucester ; Boston to Sa 
 lem, (Eastern R. R. ;) Salem to Newburyport ; Gloucester to Boston ; 
 Boston to Newburyport ; Boston to Newburyport, (Eastern R. R. ;) East 
 ern R. R.; Boston to Newburyport, Eastern R. R.; Boston to Glouces 
 ter. Eastern R. R.; Boston to Newburyport; Boston to Gloucester; Sa 
 lem to Newburyport ; Boston to Gloucester ; Salem to Newburyport ; 
 Boston to Newburyport ; Rockport to Boston. 
 
 Q. How many ? 
 
 A. Sixteen. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see #ny of these before ? 
 
 A. Never saw them before in my life. [Reads.] Boston to Lowell, 
 (package ticket;) Nashua to Lowell ; Manchester to Lawrence. There 
 is one that would come into our hands ; three that could not. 
 
 Q. That is 
 
 A. That is on the Montreal road going to Manchester. 
 
 Q. Marked on the back " White, G." 
 
 A. That is the station that I bought of Mr. White. 
 
 Q. What was that passage for ? 
 
 A. From Boston to Lawrence over the Maine road, 
 
 Q. Won t you describe the tickets as you go along, so that the 
 referees may know what kind of tickets they are ? 
 
 A. That ticket [indicating] goes down over the Lawrence on the 
 Montreal road, Concord, N. H. and Lawrence. 
 
 Q. That is on the Montreal road ? 
 
 A. Over the Montreal road to Lawrence. That [indicating] is over 
 the Montreal road to Manchester ; that [indicating] is over the Mon 
 treal road to Manchester ; that [indicating] is over the Montreal road 
 to Lawrence ; that is over the Montreal Road to Lawrence ; that is over 
 he Montreal road to Manchester ; that is over the Montreal road to 
 Lawrence ; that is over the Montreal road to Lawrence ; that is over the 
 Montreal road to Lawrence ; that is over the Montreal road to Law 
 rence ; that is over the Montreal road to Nashua ; that is over the Mon 
 treal road to Lawrence ; that is over the Montreal road to Nashua , 
 Tickets over the Montreal road to Lawrence : eleven. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.) Tickets that you could have? 
 
 A. That I could not have. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) Those to Manchester and Nashua you could 
 have? 
 
 A. These to Manchester and Nashua I could have. There are two 
 to Nashua and three to Manchester. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) If the referees will pardon me, in my opening 
 I spoke of coupons that came over the Montreal Railroad. There was 
 

 341 
 
 a package that I went out of the room and tried to find. This is the 
 package of which I spoke. I said that they must have been dated in 
 1866, because there were some dated on the 4th of the month, and if 
 they were in 1865, they would have been dated on Sunday. 
 
 The Chairman. These checks bear the date of 1865 on the face of 
 them. 
 
 Witness. These tickets bear no date anywhere. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. There were two of these dated by a man by the name 
 L , dated in 1866. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Clough, 1 don t know whether I have asked 
 you the date on which you left the road and ceased running as con 
 ductor. 
 
 A. The day that I left the the road ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. Left the road January 14th or 15, I believe January, 1866. 
 
 Q. Did you have anything to do with buying tickets after that ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. There is a ticket, Mr. Clough, won t you state what tickets those 
 are ? 
 
 A. Dover to Boston no, sir, I never saw it ; [Eeads] Salem to 
 Lawrence, 4. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see any such tickets as these ? 
 
 A. Never saw them ; this is the first time. 
 
 Q. These go over the Essex road. There is one, [handing ticket.] 
 
 A. Boston to Salem, Eastern B. B., J. Prescott. 
 
 Q, That one, Mr. Clough ? [designating.] 
 
 A. Coupons worthless and detached from this ticket, I never saw 
 that before. To Nashua, P. M. and P. S. I never saw a ticket like 
 that before. 
 
 Q. You say you never saw such a ticket as that before ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. There is a ticket ? [designating.] 
 
 A. Portland District, G. T. B. Please keep in sight. I never saw 
 that before. [Adjourned.] 
 
 EIGHTEENTH DAY. Wednesday, December 23d, 18<;8.] 
 
 The hearing was resumed at 9 o clock P. M., and the testimony of 
 Mr. Clough the defendant, was continued. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEOBGE CLOUGH CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Clough, will you state the amount of 
 taxes that you have paid in Concord, in all ? 
 
 Mr. George. We should prefer that the amount of taxes in Concord 
 should be put in year by year. 
 
 A. I paid-$3,841.17, ever since I owned real estate in Concord. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} To what time? 
 
 A. From 1841 to 1866. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} State the amount of taxes that you paid? 
 
 Mr. George. I should like to know if Mr. Clough has any knowl 
 edge of his own. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. Allow me to say that Mr. Clough has stated this in his- 
 deposition. He took many months to prepare these matters. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Clough testified yesterday from certain papers, 
 which, after some talk, he was permitted to testify from, after objection. 
 
342 
 
 he is going on in the same way. If there is any objection, it will 
 ;probably be shown that it is a paper that he has a right to look at. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Clough, who prepared for you the state 
 ment of your taxes ? Who made the paper ? In whose handwriting is 
 It? 
 
 A. I had my nephew go up to the city clerk s office with me and 
 take the amounts off. 
 
 Q. You had your nephew do it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. And I presume it is correct. 
 
 The Chairman. Of course that, if it is objected to, is not evidence. 
 It is mere hearsay evidence. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Clough, have you paid your taxes all 
 along, since you have been in town ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. Won t you state the amount of taxes and expenses that you paid 
 on the Jamaica Plain property. In the first place state whether you 
 a-re able to state from your recollection aside from any memorandum 
 that you have V 
 
 A. I paid $225 Jamaica Plain taxes. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state, aside from any memorandum, the amount 
 that you paid ? 
 
 A. I could not recollect to the dollar, but iny impression is that it 
 was somewhere between $200 and $300. I think I stated in my deposi 
 tion when they took that, that it was $200. My recollection is, I be 
 lieve, that it was souiewheres between $200 and $300. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, will you state your expense of living over and above 
 your salary from January, 1862 to January, 1866. 
 
 The Chairman. He has stated that. He has stated his expense of 
 living ; and he has stated that his salary was $70 a month. 
 
 Q. Will you state now, Mr. Clough, the cost of what property you 
 owned at the time this suit was brought, as near as you are able to 
 .ascertain ? 
 
 A. It cost me about $91,000, I think. 
 
 Q. State the amount of your indebtedness at the time this suit was 
 Brought? 
 
 A. It was over $19,000. 
 
 Q. \_To the Referees.~\ I asked the question in relation to the amount 
 of interest that he lost on the Milford Springs property, and my recol 
 lection is that he was not able to state. [To the Witness. ] Have you 
 .calculated the amount of interest ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. It was between $1400 and $1500. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} I should like to have Mr. Clough, for my 
 own satisfaction, state how much of the money that he took in the cars 
 give some idea how much money he took in the cars which was rep 
 resented by the tickets which he purchased ? 
 
 A. I made, when my deposition was taken I made an estimate 
 somewhcres from, I think, $50 to $75 a mouth. 
 
 Q. Is that your idea now ? 
 
 A. I think that ain t far out of the way. 
 
 Q. You are speaking now of the money you took in the cars, and 
 that you accounted for by the tickets ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley.} Tickets that you purchased of the ticket 
 sellers ? 
 

 343 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Does that apply to the whole time that you 
 were on the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; this continued from some time in 1859, as long as I 
 remained on the road. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Eolfe.} I would like, Mr. Clough, to have you state 
 how you managed it, that is, when you purchased the tickets, and how 
 the business was done ? 
 
 A. It was done, sir, when I did not take the ten cents extra, 
 
 Q. When and where did you buy them, and how did you keep your 
 Accounts ? 
 
 A. I bought them at the ticket offices in Concord, Manchester, and 
 Nashua. 
 
 Q. When did you buy these, Mr. Clough, in relation to the time you 
 took the money ? 
 
 A. I used to keep a memorandum in my pocket, (one of these,) and 
 when I took a fare that I didn t take the ten cents, I put the amount 
 down, and also a fare that I did take the ten cents extra, and when I 
 got through I transferred on to my way-bill, and if there was any there 
 that I didn t take the ten cents extra, I bought tickets at the office. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, George.} I understood you to state that you were mar- 
 iried in 1840 ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. Had your wife any property ? 
 
 A. Not of any account. She had a small sum left her $300 or 
 $400. 
 
 Q. Has she had any property from that time to this, except what 
 came from yourself? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You have spoken of the expenses of your family between given 
 years. Will you be kind enough to state how much, as part and parcel 
 of this expense, is included in the expense of clothing during these 
 years. Confine yourself frx)m 1861 to 1865? 
 
 A. I made an estimate when my deposition was taken. 
 
 Q. Let me suggest, I am not inquiring about your deposition or any 
 estimate there made. My question is, what do you estimate ? You 
 have testified here that your expenses were $2000. My inquiry is, 
 what do you estimate your clothing during these years when your fam 
 ily expenses were from $2000 to $2500? 
 
 A. It would be a matter of guess-work. I could prepare an esti 
 mate. 
 
 Q. No, sir, I don t want your estimate. 
 
 A. I don t think 1 could make any estimate unless you give me 
 time. When my deposition was taken, I made an estimate. 
 
 Q. You have stated that your expenses were from $2000 to $2500 
 during these four years ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Your clothing and your wife s clothing was a pretty large item 
 in the two thousand dollars ? At any rate it was an item ? 
 
 A. It might not be very large. 
 
 Q. What was it as part and parcel of the $2500 ? 
 
 A. That is what I couldn t tell. 
 
344 
 
 Q. Can t you tell that it was part and parcel of the $2000 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think it was. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt about it ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I have. 
 
 Q. Now, I ask you, what part you estimate that it would cost for 
 yourself, your wife s, and your children s clothing ? 
 
 A. It is impossible for me to tell. 
 
 Q. Make the best estimate you can ? 
 
 A, 1 don t consider my wife a very extravagant woman ; I always 
 got her what she wanted. 
 
 Q. Wasn t your estimate of $2000 to $2500 made up of the various 
 e xpenses of your family : clothing, food, help, and the various items 
 which go to make up the family expenses ? 
 
 A. I suppose it was. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, how could you arrive at this $2000 to $2500 without a 
 basis, or a source from which those expenses are derived ? 
 
 A. I suppose I did at that time, but I don t remember what it was. 
 It was made up two years ago, when my deposition was taken, and I 
 don t remember. 
 
 Q. You swear here now that your family expenses cost you from 
 $2000 to $2500 a year, in your judgment. Now, sir, that was your 
 estimate then, -when you swear to this ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, how much did you estimate your clothing in making that 
 up ? 
 
 A. I put it all together ; I did not separate it ; I didn t know how 
 much it would be. 
 
 Q. State, as near as you can, the best estimate of your clothing, 
 How much do you estimate that item ? 
 
 A. Give me time and I will 
 
 [Objected to as having been already answered.] 
 
 The Cfiairman. 1 don t know as there is any objection to asking the 
 question. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, have you any papers whatever from which you can 
 make an estimate, or have you made any estimate from those papers. 
 Have you got a memorandum from which you made a single estimate 
 you have given. 
 
 A. It is mostly from recollection I made up my real estate opera 
 tions ; and I have the deeds to show. And on my stock, I have got a 
 record of the dividends on my stock taken from the treasurer s books. 
 
 Q. Have you the memorandum anywhere of the cost of a single 
 building that you have testified to, or of the repairs on a single build* 
 ing that you have testified to the original memorandum, I mean ? 
 
 A. i have bills at home for the repairs, I think. 
 
 Q. What repairs? 
 
 A. Why, for repairing houses, whatever was done painting and 
 the natural wear. 
 
 Q. Have you testified at all with regard to a single repair ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether I have or not. 
 
 Q. How many dresses had your wife, sir, at the time of the fire in 
 1865, silk dresses that cost sixty dollars and upwards? 
 
 A. I don t think she had many. 
 
 Q. Do you know ? 
 
345 
 
 A. I don t recollect. The best dress she had was a present to 
 from Eben Sutton, of Danvers. That was the best dress she had, I 
 think, 
 
 Q. Did you estimate in your deposition (and now I will show yom 
 the deposition as far as that inquiry is concerned) , that it cost you $40 
 a year during a certain portion of the time, and $60 during the balance- 
 of the time for your personal clothing ? I will hand you the deposition. 
 Did you swear in your deposition, " I estimate my clothing for fifteen- 
 years at $40 per year, and for the last five years, I estimate it at $60 
 per year ; the clothing of my wife I call $50 a year for twenty years,. 
 The clothing of my oldest son, George, 1 estimate for fifteen years, $20* 
 per year, and for the last five years, $40 per year; clothing forCharles r 
 $25 per year, and one year $40," Did you testify to that? 
 
 A. I think I did. I think that is correct. 
 
 Q. [Beading.] " The clothing of my niece, Eliza Clough, something 
 over two years, something over $75, Spending money I estimate at 
 $25 a year for self and family." Mr. Clough, in whose name was your 
 house and more or less of your personal property insured at th$ time it 
 was burned in 1865? 
 
 A. When I bought that place 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, be kind enough to answer my question which. I asked 
 you ? 
 
 A. In my wife s name. 
 
 Q. What proportion of the furniture and of the articles of persona! 
 property were burned up ? 
 
 A. All the furniture in the second story, all above the first floor was. 
 burned ; in all the chambers, in the parlor, and a portion of it in the 
 parlor chamber, that was taken out and damaged. 
 
 Q. Was there any actual burning on the lower story ? I am not 
 talking of actual damage either by smoke or water. Was- there any 
 actual burning in the lower story ? 
 
 A. I think there was not. All burned above, except 
 
 Q. What room did you and Mrs. Clough occupy,? 
 
 A. Occupied one of the chambers. 
 
 Q. Up stairs ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was that chamber burned ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was the chamber itself burned up ? I don t mean damaged by 
 smoke and water ? 
 
 A. It was burned clear down to the floor the main body of the 
 house. The L, I think, was burned. The main body of the house, or 
 the back part of the main body of the house, was burned clear down to- 
 the chamber floor, and the front was brought down to the first floor 1 
 think. 
 
 Q. What time in the day did the fire occur ? About what time:? 
 
 A. Three o clock. 
 
 Q. Three o clock in the afternoon ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was a large portion of the personal property carried out safe? 
 Was the fire a very slow one ? W T as it in the ceilings ? 
 
 A. No, I believe there wasn t anything very little if anything 
 except on the first floor. We got the furniture out of the parlors, 
 
 Q. Your clothing saved ? 
 
346 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. None of it ? 
 
 A. Nothing only what I had on my back, I think. There might 
 
 &ave been an overcoat in the entry ; I think there was. 
 
 Q. Your wife s clothing saved, any of it? 
 
 A. I think there was some saved. 
 
 Q, How much ? 
 
 -A. I don t remember now. 
 
 Q. Can you give any idea ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I cannot. It was all damaged. 
 
 Q. Did you put in a claim for your clothing under your wife s policy 
 .and receive pay for it ? 
 
 A. I got the insurance on it, 
 
 Q. Did you put in your claim for your clothing and receive pay for 
 
 ":lt . 
 
 A. I don t remember. [Objected to.l 
 
 Q. Will you state whether you put in a claim for your clothing 
 -under your wife s policy, and received pay for it from the insurance 
 company ? . 
 
 A. I don t remember, sir, how that was. 
 
 Q. Can you state whether you did or not ? 
 
 A. I cannot. The policy, I suppose, embraces all the furniture and 
 ^wearing apparel ; I don t recollect how it was. I gave the property to 
 -my wife, the real estate and furniture, and the policy was taken out in 
 her name. 
 
 Q. Won t you tell me whose property this was? one pair black broad 
 cloth pants, $16, &c., [reading list of clothing.] Won t you tell me 
 whose property that was ? 
 
 A. I presume it was mine, a portion of it, and my children s. 
 
 Q. Then, sir, did you, or did you not put in a claim under your 
 wife s policy, and receive money therefor from the insurance company ? 
 
 A. I had nothing to do about making up the claim. There was a 
 man that was appointed to appraise the property. I didn t put in any 
 ^claim myself, that I recollect of, at all. 
 
 Q. Was there a claim put in. to your knowledge, and did you receive 
 -the money for it, under your wife s policy ? 
 
 A. I received the money for the insurance, but I have no recollection 
 of putting in the claim. 
 
 Q. You recollect that a claim was put in for your claim ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect anything. I suppose that the insurance policy 
 covered all the wearing apparel. There were people appointed to ap 
 praise damages, and my wife went up to Mr. Eolfe s and stated as near 
 as she could as to the damages. She was before him two days, I think. 
 I had nothing at all to do with the appraising of the damage ; I wasn t 
 .around with the man at all, when the damage was appraised. 
 
 Mr. George then offered in evidence the policy of insurance, dated 
 August 22d, 1862, issued to Mrs. Eliza Clough. Also the schedule of 
 loss, return and receipt ($5000.) 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, was any of your wife s clothing saved outside of this 
 schedule ? 
 
 A. I think not; I don t think there was. 
 
 Q. Did you buy your wife a fur cloak, sir? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Did -you buy your wife a fur cloak about 1860, or the year 
 
347 
 
 A. I bought her a fur cloak in 1860. 
 
 Q. What did you give for it ? 
 
 A. Three hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. That included in this schedule ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; that was saved. 
 
 Q. Of course Mrs. Clough saved the clothing she had on the day of 
 the fire? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You mean to say that none of her clothing was saved ? 
 
 A. 1 don t recollect that she had anything saved but what was dam 
 aged ; I don t recollect how that was ; very little, 1 think, if any. 
 
 Q. Were the clothing and the articles saved carried down to the 
 South Church? 
 
 A. They were. 
 
 Q. I notice there is nothing put in here for bonnets for Mrs. Clough. 
 There is nothing in the schedule, as I recollect? 
 
 A. I don t know whether there was any saved or not, 
 
 Q. She had bonnets at that time ? 
 
 A. I presume she had. 
 
 Q. Is your experience that Mrs. Clough s bonnets cost money? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Mrs. Clough have a cloak, a winter cloak, one or more ? 
 
 A. I don t remember ; I don t think she had a fur cloak ? whether 
 she had any other or not, I don t remember. 
 
 Q. Mrs. Clough had boots and shoes, as people ordinarily do ? 
 
 A. Y"es, sir. 
 
 Q. Any claim in here for boots and shoes ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect of any ; I don t recollect of hearing any read. 
 
 Q. Y our statement in this application that it is understood that the 
 insurance was to Eliza E. and the personal to George Clough, was with 
 out your knowledge and consent ? 
 
 A. I don t remember how that was. I supposed that the insurance 
 policy made out to either of us embraced the whole of the wearing ap 
 parel for the family. 
 
 Q. My question was whether that clause in the statement of loss was 
 without your knowledge and consent ? 
 
 A. I suppose that I must have known it at the time. I seldom make 
 a policy. I always trust to my insurance agent. 
 
 Q. This was notice to the company under oath of the application of 
 your wife ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of presenting the schedule. 
 
 Q. My question is whether or not the statement of your wife, that it 
 was understood that the insurance on the real estate was to your wife, 
 and the personal property to you ? 
 
 A. I don t seem to remember about that now. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, will you state at the time of the fire how many car 
 riages there were. Will you state how many, at the time of the fire 
 how many horses and how many carriages, and how many harnesses you 
 had? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether I had more than one horse or not. I 
 don t remember whether I had more or not. I had a top buggy I think. 
 I don t know but I had a two-seated covered carriage. I don t recollect ; 
 I had a Concord wagon, I think, at that time. 
 
 Q. I think your return was on May 1st, 1866. There is one 1864. 
 This is merely horses and carriages owned during the year 1864, with- 
 
348 
 
 out designating the time. I will take them both. Did you, sir, in 1864 
 have one carriage valued at not exceeding $100? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. What carriage was it sir ? What kind of a carriage was it ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether it was a buggy or a Concord wagon, 
 I think it was a Concord wagon that I bought at auction about that 
 time. 
 
 Q. Did you have but one carriage valued at $100 and not above 
 8200. 
 
 A. I don t recollect now. 
 
 Q. Will you say whether you have in your internal revenue return, 
 and in which of them? I believe they are running through the same. 
 The same three carriages are, I believe, Mr. Clough, if I am not in error, 
 are returned up to the time of this suit, and the year following. N.OW, 
 won t you state what the carriage was that you call $100 and not over 
 $200 ? 
 
 A. I think it was a buggy without a top. 
 
 Q. Was it a riding, livery stable buggy? 
 
 A. I don t know I was a buggy without a top, I think, 
 
 Q. Was it for other than riding purposes ? 
 
 A. It was a pleasure buggy. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, we will take the third carriage which is valued here 
 at here are two carriages valued at $200 and not above $300. Won t 
 you describe these ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect about the carriages. I usually kept a top bug 
 gy, and one without a top. 
 
 Q. What were the two carriages? [Showing schedule.] 
 
 A- I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. What were these ? [Indicating.] 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Had you a two-horse carriage with two seats ? 
 
 A. I don t think I had one at that time, I don t remember. I 
 wouldn t want to state. 
 
 Q. How many horses did you have ? 
 
 A. I had one or more. I don t know whether I had more than one 
 at that time or not. 
 
 Q. Has there been a time within ten years, a month at a time > 
 
 A. I had a pair of buckskin horses at the time I built my house. 
 
 Q. Has there been a time within ten years prior to the time that 
 your property was attached, that you didn t have three carriages, and, 
 on the average, three horses ? If so, when was it ? 
 
 A. 1 think-.that I haven t had more than one horse. Perhaps, part 
 of that time I have bought and sold horses to work team horses. 
 
 Q. Did you own a pair of little $750 roan horses that Mr. Dumas 
 afterwards owned ? 
 
 A. I had them a short time yes, sir. 
 
 Q., What did you do with them except to ride around? 
 
 A. I didn t keep them but a short time. 
 
 Q. What did you do with them, except to drive them around as 
 fancy horses ? 
 
 A. I didn t use them much. I only had them about a month. 
 
 Q. For how many years did you own the roan horse formerly owned 
 by Plummer Whipple ? 
 
 A. 1 owned her a few days, I guess. 
 
349 
 
 Q. Can you tell for how many years you owned a double, two-horse 
 carriage, valued at between $200 and $300 ? 
 
 A. I bought a double carriage in 1857 or 1858 for $250. I sold 
 that carriage in 1861 or 1862, for $400 ; and I believe I haven t owned 
 a double carriage since. 
 
 Q. Can you tell whether you didn t own these in 1864 and 1865 and 
 1866? 
 
 A. I think they were cheap carriages ; that is my idea now. 
 
 Q. And you put them in between $200 and $300. You call them 
 cheap ? 
 
 A. They .had been used. They were not new carriages. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, what was the number of horses, carriages and harnesses 
 that you had at the time your property was attached in 1866 at the 
 time this suit was commenced ? 
 
 A. I had a pair of buckskin horses and one driving horse. 
 
 Q. Any others ? Any colts ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether I had two or three carriages at that 
 time ; I hadn t any double carriage, since I sold the one I mentioned. 
 I think it was in 1862 I sold it. I haven t had a double carriage I 
 think, since. 
 
 Q. Did you have any colts, any young horses at that time ? 
 
 A. One. 
 
 Q. When your property was attached ? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. Quite positive ? 
 
 A. I don t remember now whether I had. 
 
 Q. Did you give Mr. Gilmore a carriage ? If so, when ? 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore sent up and got a carriage, and I never got it back 
 again. It wan t more than $40. 
 
 Q. A carriage which you had in your hands, Mr. Gilmore sent up 
 and got, and you never claimed it afterwards ? 
 
 A. I said I never got it afterwards. 
 
 Q. Did ever you claim it afterwards ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; told him to bring it back, but he never did. 
 
 Q. Why didn t you go and get it ? 
 
 A. Didn t happen to. 
 
 Q. I want to know why you didn t ? 
 
 A. I let it go until he died, and then I thought I wouldn t claim it. 
 
 Q. When was it ? 
 
 A, When he died ? 
 
 Q. No, no, no ; when you let him have the carriage ? 
 
 A. I think it was in 1865 ; I am not quite sure. 
 
 Q. I will ask you how many shares of Concord Eailroad stock you 
 have to-day, either in your own name or in the name of other people ? 
 
 A. I have between 900 and 1000 shares; I believe the number is 
 074. 
 
 Q. What is the present market value of that stock ? 
 
 A. I believe that the last time I saw a sale it was 72. 
 
 Q, How many of those shares stand in your own name ? 
 
 A. I believe that 400 do. 
 
 Q. Then, if I reckon correctly, you have $71,028 worth of stock of 
 the Concord Eailroad, 400 shares of which is in your own name. In 
 whose name is the rest? 
 
 A. I have 200 shares in the Merrimack River Savings Bank, 
 
350 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} That is, they are standing in the name of 
 that Bank ? 
 
 A. Yes ; pledged there as collateral security for money. I have 
 200 shares at the Amoskeag Savings Bank, also pledged for money. I 
 have 94 shares pledged to Charles H. Carpenter. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Can you state how much they are pledged 
 for in each case, as you go along ? 
 
 A. In the Amoskeag Savings Bank, $6000 ; in the Merrimack Kiver 
 Savings Bank, $10,000; to Mr. Carpenter, $4600; making in all 
 $20,600. I believe the remainder is in my own hands. 150 shares has 
 been pledged to the Union Bank, that has never been transferred back 
 to me, although the debt has been paid. 
 
 Q. You have accounted for 940 shares You stated that you had 
 974 shares. Where are the other shares? 
 
 A. I am not quite sure whether it was 974 shares in all, or not. At 
 any rate, the balance stands in my name, with the exception of what 
 J have mentioned. 
 
 Q. Then there are 580 shares standing in your own name, and in the 
 name of the Union Bank, subject to no liability by pledge? 
 
 A. I do not think that I have so many as that, i can ascertain 
 exactly the amount. 
 
 Q. Have you 100 shares of that stock standing in the name of Henry 
 P. Kolfe ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; none at all. 
 
 Q. Did you buy 100 shares of stock, and was it paid for by you, and 
 the certificate made out to Henry P. Kolfe ? Please answer the ques 
 tion as directly as you can, and then explain ? 
 
 A. Mr. Kolfe had one hundred shares of stock, and I had his note. 
 
 Q. Will you answer my question ? Did you buy 100 shares of stock, 
 and pay for it, and was the stock made out in Mr. Kolfe s name ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 
 
 Q. Now explain if you wish ? 
 
 A. I had some United States bonds ; I pledged them to the Amos 
 keag Savings Bank, of Manchester, and bought that stock and let Mr. 
 Bolfe have it, and he gave me his note and pledged the stock as security* 
 
 Q. When was this ? 
 
 A. This was some two years ago, I think. 
 
 Q. W T as it immediately after this suit was commenced, or within & 
 month or two after ? 
 
 A. It was before the next annual meeting. 
 
 Q. This suit was commenced in March, and the annual meeting was 
 on the 29th of May; was it between those dates? 
 
 A. The suit was commenced in February, and it was not long after 
 that time. 
 
 Q. It was between that time and May ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. You have not said anything about any United States bonds ia 
 accounting for your property, have you ? 
 
 A. I have none now. 
 
 Q Did you mention anything about any United States bonds when 
 you were asked what your property was at the time you left the road ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The question implies that he had some at that time, 
 while the fact is that he had none. 
 
 Mr. George. He has sworn that he had. 
 
351 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. He has not sworn any such thing. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George} Did you have any bonds of the United* Statefr 
 at the time you left the employ of the Concord road? 
 
 A. I had. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. He has not sworn so before. 
 
 Mr. George. He has in his deposition. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. My objection was that you assumed what had not 
 been proven in this case. 
 
 The Chairman. It seems to be now in the case. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It is now ; and there is no objection. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} What was the amount of the United States - 
 bonds that you had when you left the road ? 
 
 A. Ten thousand dollars. When I got my insurance money I put it 
 into United States bonds ; .and when I bought the stock that I let Mr,. 
 Kolfe have, I pledged $6000 of it to the Amoskeak Savings Bank, and 
 with the other $4000 I paid the bills on my house, that I built on the 
 spot where the old house was burned. 
 
 Q. You say that you hired some money at the bank and bought 10O 
 shares of stock, and that the stock was taken out in Mr. Rolfe s name. 
 Did Mr. Rolfe then give you his note for the exact purchase money, o 
 the stock? 
 
 A. He gave me his note for that stock. 
 
 Q. For the exact purchase money of it ? 
 
 A. For what was paid for it, I think. 
 
 Q. Was it for the exact amount that you paid for that 100 shares 
 of stock ? 
 
 A. I think it was at somewhere about 61. 
 
 Q. Have you any means of telling ? 
 
 A. I do not think that I have. 
 
 Q. Where is Mr, Eolfe s note ? 
 
 A. I do not know. I have taken the stock back, and given him his- 
 note, I suppose. 
 
 Q. You have taken the stock back, and given up his note,, and tbat 
 squared it, I suppose? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that stock is included in the 974- shares of stock to whicfe. 
 you have referred ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When was that transaction of giving up the note ? 
 
 A. I think it was about a year ago. 
 
 Q. Had Mr. Eolfe paid you any interest on that note, or had you: 
 collected the dividends on the stock ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect, but I think he paid me the interest on the- 
 note. 
 
 Q. Who collected the dividends on the stock while it stood in Eolfe s 
 name. 
 
 A. I do not know whether he collected them, or 1 did. If I col 
 lected them he gave me an order. 
 
 Q. Can you tell which way it was ? 
 
 A. I think he paid the interest. The bargain that Eolfe and I made 
 was that he should pay me the same interest that I had to pay at the 1 
 bank. 
 
 Q. What interest did you pay at the bank for the money? 
 
 A. I think it was seven and three-tenths per cent, but I .-am. 
 cpite sure of that. 
 
352 
 
 Q. Did you take Mr. Eolfe s note at six per cent, for exactly the 
 Amount ? 
 
 A. I do not know whether I took his note at six per cent., but the 
 .agreement was that he should pay me the same interest that I paid at 
 ke bank. 
 
 Q. What other stock had you ? Did you have stock in the name of 
 oL Tappan? 
 
 A. Yes ; five shares, I think. 
 
 Q. When was that purchased ? 
 
 A. At the same time. 
 
 Q. Did you take Col. Tappan s note ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I charged it to him. 
 
 Q. Where and how did you charge it to him ? 
 
 A. [Producing account book.] I charged it on this book: May 27, 
 paid Tappan $25, retaining fee; March 17, paid him $166; May 27, 
 shares Concord Railroad stock, $353.75. It was at 70 4, I think, per 
 .share. 
 
 Q. What was your object in buying five shares of stock and putting 
 it in Col. Tappan s name ? 
 
 A. I wanted him to attend the meeting. That was one object. 
 
 Q. The annual meeting of the Concord Railroad ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did yo\i wish him to attend the meeting as your counsel? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What other stock, if any, did you buy, that has not been refer 
 red to here ? 
 
 A. I had 83 shares of Judge Minot, or I had the money of him to 
 l>uy it with. 
 
 Q. Did you pay for that ? 
 
 A. I had the money of Judge Minot, and the stock was left in the 
 Jbank as collateral security for the money. 
 
 Q. Do you refer now to what is denominated in your deposition as 
 i,he Shaw stock ? 
 
 A. No ; I think that was separate. 
 
 Q. What became of that 83 shares ? 
 
 A. Judge Minot bought it, subsequent to the annual meeting. 
 
 Q. Did you buy 100 shares of stock which was taken in Mr. Shaw s 
 name? 
 
 A, Shaw and I bought it together, or we signed the note together, 
 and I left the stock as collateral. 
 
 Q. Did you pay for that stock ? 
 
 A. We got the money at Minot s bank. Mr. Shaw was the princi 
 pal on the note, I think, and I signed it with him. After that, Mr. 
 .Shaw paid the note and took the stock. 
 
 Q. Did you not lose on that stock ? 
 
 A. I think I did some. 
 
 Q. How much did you lose ? 
 
 A. I do not remember now. It was somewhere from $200 to $600 
 I think, that is my impression now. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You made that loss yourself, on the Shaw 
 stock. 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Can you not tell nearer than that how much 
 loss was ? 
 
353 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you have anything to do jprith the purchase of any other 
 stock ? 
 
 A. I believe that I once bought 12 or 13 shares here at auction. I 
 forget now what auction it was. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. It was about the same time, I think, before the annual meeting. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay for that stock ? 
 
 A. I do not remember. 
 
 Q. State as nearly as you can ? 
 
 A. I think the stock was selling at that time at from 60 to 65. 
 
 Q. Didn t you pay exactly $70.25 for that stock, and was it not 
 stock that was sold by Mr. L. D. Stephens Administrator? 
 
 A. Yes ; I recollect that it was, 1 think 1 paid 70, or thereabouts. 
 
 Q. In whose name was that stock pledged ? 
 
 A. Mr. Lincoln bid it off. I paid for it, and took Mr. Lincoln s 
 note at that time. 
 
 Q. For how much ? 
 
 A. I do not remember what the note was for. j 
 
 Q. How much did you lose ? and what was the agreement on which 
 it was put into Mr. Lincoln s name, if any ? 
 
 A. I think I did not sell that stock, but kept it. 
 
 Q. What has become of Mr. Lincoln s note ? 
 
 A. He transferred that stock to me, and I gave up his note. 
 
 Q. That stock is included in the 974 shares? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Is there any question about it ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We should like to know the object of this testimony, 
 We do not see its materiality. If it is material we do not object to it. 
 
 Mr. George. The whole object of this testimony is to show the object 
 of Mr. Clough s property at that time ; at least that is a sufficient ob 
 ject. When I say the whole object, I do not mean to preclude myself 
 from any legitimate and proper use of the testimony ; but that is a 
 sufficient object of the showing. 
 
 The Chairman. I do not see why these enquiries are not relevant. 
 They tend to show the amount of property that Mr. Clough had in 
 1866, when he left the road. If the evidence is competent in any point 
 of view, that probably is enough to determine the present ruling. 
 Whether it can logically be made to apply to any other matter, will be 
 for consideration when it shall be so offered. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} W 7 hat has been the lowest price of the stock 
 x>f the Concord Eailroad from 1860 down to the present time? 
 
 A. I do not know as I could state that. 
 
 Q. Has the market value of the Concord Eailroad stock, since 1860 
 been less than $60 per share ? 
 
 A. I do not know whether it has or not. 
 
 Q. State according to your best recollection. You have bought it 
 repeatedly from 1860 to the present time, have you not? 
 
 A. I bought it before 1860, also. 
 
 Q. I am talking of from 1860 down to the present time. During 
 that time has the market value of the Concord Railroad stock varied 
 between $60 per share and $75 per share? 
 
 A. It has been working up. I could not tell the prices from year 
 to year. 
 
 23 
 
354 
 
 Q. My question was whether it had varied between those two prices 
 per share. Has it been below $(?b per share since 1860? 
 
 A. I do not remember. 
 
 Q. Have you any recollection that it has ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. My impression is that it was lower than that as 
 far back as 1860. 
 
 Q. Is there any other stock that you had anything to do with? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I do not think of any other. 
 
 Q. Had you anything to do with giving indemnity to people to buy 
 stock with, or did you make any agreements of that kind ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Had you any correspondence or negotiations with any parties 
 with regard to giving indemnity of any sort against loss or purchases 
 of stock, within three months of the time of the annual meeting ? 
 
 A. I did not indemnify anybody. 
 
 Q. Did you have any conversation with any person to procure indem 
 nity to be given ? 
 
 A. There was a bond executed I believe, and the other conductors 
 signed it. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I think this relates more to the "ring " than to Mr, 
 Clough s property. 
 
 Mr. George. Suppose it relates distinctly to the " ring ; " is it 
 inadmissible upon that account? Suppose it is offered here, as was 
 suggested when the case was opened, with a view to show that after 
 this suit was commenced, there was an attempt to operate upon the 
 board of directors ; is it not admissible ? 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We do not object to anything that they may desire to 
 show with regard to this "ring." 
 
 The Chairman. The question that occurs to us is, whether an inves* 
 tigation as to that matter would not be taking more time than is nee* 
 essary. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. We leave that to the referees, entirely. We rather 
 court investigation as to that matter. 
 
 Mr. George. You shall have it ; we will put in Mr. Clough s depo 
 sition when the proper time comes. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} State whether or not, at the time the other 
 conductors were sued by the Concord Eailroad, and their property 
 attached, you executed bonds of indemnity against loss, to induce peo 
 ple to buy stock ; and if so, at whose suggestion you did it. 
 
 A. There was a bond of that kind executed. . It was suggested by 
 Mr OHlmore. 
 
 Q. Who gave the bond? 
 
 A. George Noyes, Joe Langley, Jim Jones and Jim Eaton signed 
 the bond. 
 
 Q. They were the other conductors ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were they all su%d ? 
 
 A. I believe so. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. If this is to be regarded by the referees as material^ 
 we want the bond itself produced. 
 
 The Chairman. If you make that as an objection, undoubtedly the 
 bond must be produced. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George,} I will now ask you if you had an interview 
 with Mr. Gilmore, with regard to procuring a bond of indemnity. If 
 so, state when it was, and what was said, and where it was ? 
 
355 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore spoke to me, at his house I think, in the spring of 
 1866, after the suits were commenced. 
 
 Q. State what that interview was, and who were present ? 
 
 A. I think he was alone, if 1 recollect rightly. I told him that 
 there were parties who would buy stock, if they could be assured of 
 not losing anything. He wanted to know who they were, and I told 
 him that James W. Johnson would buy some, and that James K. Hill 
 would also buy some. 
 
 Q. Do you mean Mr. Hill, the father-in-law of the son of the con 
 ductor, and the father-in-law of the young man who actually run as 
 conductor on the Lawrence road ? 
 
 A. Yes. There were some 400 or 500 shares bought, 1 believe. 
 
 Q. Tell what Gilmore said to you, arid what you said to him ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect any further conversation at that time with Mr. 
 Oilmore. He said that he would send for those men, or that he wanted 
 that I should see them, and see if they would stand in for any loss. 
 
 Q. What men ? 
 
 A. The conductors. 
 
 Q. Did you see them ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Did they agree to stand in for the loss ? 
 
 A. They did. 
 
 Q. How was that loss adjusted ? How was it paid, and how much 
 was it? 
 
 A. I do not know anything about it. I had nothing to do with the 
 signing of the bond, and do not know how it was settled up. 
 
 Q. Have you once sworn that that loss was adjusted by the conduct 
 ors giving their notes, immediately after the annual meeting? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. If he has sworn to it in his deposition, read that. 
 
 Mr. George read from Mr. dough s deposition, the following: 
 
 " About a week before the annual meeting of the road, Gilmore 
 wanted me to buy 100 shares of stock with him. I refused. He said 
 that Parker of Manchester would let us have money. 1 said I would 
 not buy it with him, but would take 50 shares separate from him. It 
 was bought and fifty were set off to me, but never were transferred, and 
 I never heard anything more from it. I agreed to stand in for the loss 
 on it, and that was all." 
 
 Q. By whom were said shares bought, of whom taken, and in whose 
 name ? 
 
 A. That I do not know. They were bought, I understood, of Parker, 
 who was going to furnish the money. All that they wanted was to have 
 somebody stand in for the loss if the stock should drag after the meeting. 
 
 Q. Who do you mean by "they"? State the names of all refer 
 red to ? 
 
 A. I referred to Parker. 
 
 Q. Didn t Gilmore also want some one to stand in for the loss? and 
 didn t you have frequent consultations with h\m about that time as to 
 the purchase of stock ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q, Did you so swear in your deposition ? 
 
 A. I think I did. I recollect now more distinctly about it. 
 
 Q. How many interviews did you have with Governor Gilmore, be 
 tween the time of the commencement of the suits, and the annual meet 
 ing ; and what was the subject matter of said interviews ? 
 
356 
 
 A. I used to go down to his house occasionally. I believe that I 
 never met him anywhere else. He said that he wanted to turn out 
 enough of the old directors to get rid of J ohn H. George, the clerk ; 
 he was the man that made all the trouble on the road. 
 
 You wanted to do the same thing pretty bad, didn t you ? 
 A. Yes, I did. It would not have hurt my feelings at all to have 
 a hem turn out a man that had abused me for the last seven or 
 *igLfc jears, as you have. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether you were in consultation with Gilmore 
 from that time up to the time that there was an application made to the 
 legislature to investigate the affairs of the Concord road ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I do not think that I had anything to do with Mr. Gil- 
 m&ee :about the legislature. I have no recolection of it now. 
 
 Q. ^ How often were you in consultation with Mr. Gilmore between 
 t/he time these suits were commenced, and the time of the annual meet 
 ing ; and how much stock did you arrange with him to buy to control 
 that meeting ? State how many shares of stock were purchased with a 
 view of controlling the annual meeting, by yourself, in connection with 
 -Mr. Oihaore, and the other conductors? 
 
 A. I think I voted on from six to eight hundred shares ; I do not 
 recollect exactly, 
 
 Q That was what you voted on. How much was there bought by 
 &he combination? 
 
 A. Mr. Johnson had, I think, 250 shares ; James R. Hill, I think, 
 &ad 150; Sam Bell had 100; Messer had 200, I think, or at least I 
 keard that he had ; I do not know the fact ; Mr. Parker, the present 
 treasurer had 200 or 300 shares, I understood. I do not know the fact 
 however, but merely state what I heard that he had at the time the 
 ariEg was formed. 
 
 Q,. Was an application made to the legislature for the appointment 
 <f a committee of investigation with regard to the affairs of the Con 
 cord Eailroad, in the June following? 
 A. I .think there was. 
 
 "Q. Did that application pass the House of Representatives, three 
 hundred te three or four ? 
 
 A. I believe it passed the House and Senate both. 
 Mr. Tv.ppwi. If this*matter is gone into, we should be permitted to 
 &o explain, on our side, just what was done. 
 
 The Chairman. It is not obvious to us how it can be gone into 
 mil ess you permit it. 
 
 Judge jBellows. We have come to the conclusion that as neither party 
 tbjjeels to >the introduction of evidence of this character, we will not, 
 ^m our own motion, undertake to exclude it ; but at the same time, so 
 far as regards any action, before the legislature, we are unable to see 
 &LO.W that has any direct bearing upon this question. So far as regards 
 acnytc^mbination between Mr. Clough and Mr. Gilmore, to stifle this suit 
 agaiiist Mr. Clough, or anything that goes to show any collusion between 
 them in respect to this transaction, we think it would be admissible, 
 legally ; btit we are unable to see anything in the suggestion that evi- 
 desiee about the proceedings before the legislature, would bear upon 
 Sikafc question, at present. We think that an enquiry into the general 
 affairs of the Concord Railroad, before the legislature, would not have 
 such a bearing upon this suit, as would make it a matter of any special 
 Importance or materiality. Although we should not undertake to say 
 
357 
 
 that the counsel might not go into that, and offer evidence in relafea 
 to it, we should expect the inquiry to be confined to matters which dis 
 tinctly show the connection between the defendant here, and Mr. Gil- 
 more, with a view to putting an end to these proceedings, and bearing; 
 directly upon these proceedings ; and we should listen pretty impa 
 tiently, as I think, to any testimony that was confined to the general! 
 subject of the condition of the Concord Eailroad, or the way in which* 
 it has been managed, and that did not bear especially upon this case.. 
 I think that is the general view we have arrived at. It is pretty evi 
 dent to us, from what has been said, that the admission of testimony as; 
 to what has been done in the legislature, opens a pretty wide field, andi 
 would be likely to be entered into by both parties with a good deal. ofT 
 zeal, while it would afford but little, and perhaps no light upon the sub 
 ject before us, as we now understand it. With these suggestions we^ 
 are disposed to allow the counsel to proceed, and offer such evidence ass 
 they may suppose will bear upon the questions more immediately before us*, 
 
 Mr. George desired leave to put in at this time, the testimony of. ceiv- 
 tain witnesses in behalf of the plaintiff, who were present, "Whieh wass 
 objected to as being an interruption of the proceedings. 
 
 Leave was granted by the referees. 
 
 Col. J. S. Kidder was called in behalf of the plaintiff and< duly 
 sworn, and testified as follows : 
 
 TESTIMONY OF J. S. KIDDER, 
 
 Q, (By Mr. George.} Were you one of the directors^ <jf the Con 
 cord road ? If so, what years ? 
 
 A. I think I was elected in 1853 and was a director until 186 
 thirteen years, 
 
 Q. You may tell about how far the directors were knowing to, Mr. 
 dough s practice of taking money from the passenger in* the car andi 
 purchasing a ticket with it, which he returned to the office 
 
 A. 1 have no knowledge myself, or individually, nor of tBe board off 
 directors. 
 
 Q. When was the first time you ever heard of such a thing.? 
 
 A. It was about the time that the prosecution was commenced? 
 against Mr. Clough, I learned that there were tickets. 
 
 Q. When was the first time that you ever heard that this was tEe; 
 way money taken in the cars and returned on the way-bills was accounted! 
 for? 
 
 A Not until to-day. 
 
 Q. How was it with regard to prior to this prosecution, prio* to the 
 discharge of Mr. Clough, about yourself individually or the bc*ard oi 
 directors, so far as you have any knowledge, having any notice that Mr.. 
 Clough or any of the other conductors were selling tickets that had beera 
 once used? 
 
 A. I never had any knowledge of it. 
 
 Q. So far as you knew, how was it with the board of directors-? 
 
 A. So far as 1 knew the board of directors never hoard of its exist 
 ence. 
 
 Q. When was the first time that that fact of tickets being sold that 
 had been once used, was called to your attention ? 
 
 A. It was about the time that the prosecution was commenced 
 against Mr. Clough. 
 
358 
 
 Q. You may state, if you please, the circumstances briefly ? 
 
 A. There was a gentleman informed me [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. From information given you what did you do ? 
 
 A. I employed a man to go to an individual in Manchester, and buy 
 some tickets, a gentleman that was in business, that had nothing to do 
 with the railroad in any manner that I know of. He bought me a 
 ticket over the Concord Kailroad from Manchester to Lawrence. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Will you now state what you did with the 
 ticket of whom it was purchased, and what you did with it? 
 
 A. Of whom it was purchased ? 
 
 Q. Yes. 
 
 A. It was obtained from Mr. Weston. 
 
 Q. Were you there when the ticket was purchased ? 
 
 A. 1 was not. 
 
 Q. Did you put your initial there ? 
 
 A. Yes sir. 
 
 Q. W r hat did you do with the ticket? 
 
 A. I passed it over to Mr. G-ilmore. 
 
 Q. And what time was that with reference to our finding the tickets 
 on Mr. Whitcher? 
 
 A. It was a short time previous? I forget how long. It might have 
 been a week before ; I think it was some days before. It is my impres 
 sion. I do not know as it was more than two or three days. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, I will ask you how it was about you, or the board of 
 directors, so far as you had knowledge, having any knowledge what 
 ever, or information, with regard to the sale of tickets of the Concord 
 Bailroad which had been once used. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I object, so far as any information through other di 
 rectors is concerned. 
 
 The Chairman. I think that it is possible that there might have 
 been a meeting of the board of directors, and this communication might 
 have been made to them in the presence of all of them. When Mr. Kid- ( 
 der is asked of his knowledge, he can say whether he did or not. It is 
 possible that there might have been information or communication to 
 them all together. 
 
 Q. (JBy Mr. George.] Whether prior to this you had any know 
 ledge, or the board of directors, as far as you are aware, had any 
 knowledge that tickets of the Concord Railroad, that had been once 
 used, were sold ? 
 
 A. 1 had no knowledge of it. 
 
 Q. Immediately after this was a meeting called of the board of di 
 rectors? 
 
 A. I think there was. 
 
 Q. Were you present? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. Mr. Kidder, I want to ask you if you had any knowledge, or 
 the board of directors, so far as you are aware, had any knowledge 
 that the conductors were selling coupon tickets over their road ? 
 
 A. I had no knowledge of that fact ; don t know that the directors 
 had any. 
 
 Q. I was speaking of the board, so far as you are aware. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We object on the same ground. 
 
 Q. Was there a suit brought against the Concord Eailroad while 
 Clough was on the road for Mr. Horace Johnson being put off the cars, 
 for using one of these tickets. [Objected to.] 
 
359 
 
 The Chairman. I don t think any more testimony is wanted to 
 prove that. 
 
 Q. Mr, Kidder, were you present at the meeting of the board of 
 directors, held at Boston, October 26th, 1865, when this vote was passed ? 
 I will ask whether when that vote was passed I was present ? What 
 representations were made, and who made them ? 
 
 A. My impression is that you were not present. 
 
 Q. What representation was made ? 
 
 A- The representation was made by Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Q. What was it ? 
 
 A. The conversation ran upon the conductors and their taking mon 
 ey that they did not return as they should have done. And Mr. Gil- 
 more made the statement that there was no doubt that the conductors 
 stole fifty thousand dollars a year or less than that ; more than fifty 
 thousand dollars, I think, was his statement, 
 
 Q. State whether or not that was the occasion for the passage of that 
 vote? 
 
 A. That was. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether he said anything about Mr, Clough partic 
 ularly ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. Now, sir, you say I was not present. When did I reach that 
 meeting ? 
 
 Mr.. Tappan. We don t object to that question. 
 
 A. The train gets into Boston about half-past one, or quarter-past. 
 
 Q. Do you remember how that was about the directors repassing 
 the votes so that I could record them ? 
 
 A. After you got there my impression is that Mr. Spalding was 
 there first, and that the votes were repassed after you got there, so you 
 could record them. 
 
 Q. What did he say about Mr. Clough? [Objected to and objection 
 withdrawn.] 
 
 A. He suggested that Mr. Clough was the ring-leader ; and if he 
 was out of the way the other conductors would probably be more honest. 
 
 Q. I will now ask you the question whether you ever heard him 
 make any representation to the board of directors of the Concord Bail- 
 road prior to the commencement of these proceedings ? 
 
 A. I don t know that I ever did. 
 
 Q. You spoke about the rules, Mr. Kidder. The rules have been 
 already put in evidence, 1865 and 1864, and so on. W T hat was the oc 
 casion of the repassing of these rules, and making them more stringent ? 
 
 A. It was in order to make the conductors more honest, and in order 
 to check them as far as possible from taking money, and in order to 
 liave people buy their tickets at the office, rather than pay in the cans. 
 
 Q. Do you remember the rules which were passed, and that the con 
 ductors were required to sign them on the back of the rules ? 
 
 A. I recollect there was something passed of that kind. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you who presented these rules to the board for 
 adoption at whose suggestion they were adopted, if you recollect? 
 
 A. My impression is that they were presented by Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Q. Mr. Kidder, I want to ask you if you had any knowledge, or, so 
 far as you knew, the board of directors were aware that Mr. Clough 
 fcad ever carried chickens and poultry, etc., over the road ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When was the first time you heard of that ? 
 
360 
 
 A. To-day. 
 
 Q. Whether you knew, or the board of directors knew, so far as yotfc 
 know, that he had a boy on the cars peddling peanuts ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We raise the same objection to this, as to what has 
 been Col. George s connection with the matter. 
 
 Q. 1 want to know, sir, whether you ever knew, or whether the 
 board of directors so far as you know, knew of Mr. Clough s employing" 
 a boy to go on the cars and sell peanuts. 
 
 A, I did not. 
 
 Q. When was the first time you ever heard of that ? 
 
 A. To-day. 
 
 Q. So far as you know, were the rules these rules which I have 
 shown to you, these last rules here, and the other rules proceeding 
 ever annulled, waived or modified, except by the substitution of one 
 rule for another? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Did you understand that these were not 
 infringed upon or broken over by anybody that they were intended to 1 
 apply to ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I believe I did not make that statement. 
 
 Q. Haven t you broken these rules ? 
 
 A. Not often. 
 
 Q. Do these rules forbid you as one of the directors from passing 
 persons upon the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, I think they do ? 
 
 Q. For the last five years that Mr. Clough was upon the road as con 
 ductor, did not you in numberless instances direct him to pass men over 
 the road ? 
 
 A. I think I did not after these rules were passed here. 
 
 Q. Do you mean that Mr. Clough did not after 1864, in numberless- 
 instances pass men ever the Concord road at your suggestion ? 
 
 A. My impression is that he did not, sir. 
 
 Q. Did he not in any instance ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he has. 
 
 Q. Didn t you know, when you gave that direction to Mr. Clough. 
 that you were acting in defiance of a rule that you had helped to make ? 
 
 A. I think that I never passed anybody or asked him to pass any 
 body after these rules were passed. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to state that you did not, after 1864, and before 
 Mr. Clough left the road, order him to pass people in the cars, in defi-- 
 a*nce of the rules ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, that is my impression. 
 
 Q. And you state that in no case after 1864, did you order Mm to? 
 pass any one over the road. 
 
 A. My impression is that I did not. 
 
 Q. Are you quite confident ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you mean to have the referees take that as positive recol 
 lection on your part ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you, sir; before these rules were passed direct Mr. Clough t& 
 pass people over the road ? 
 

 361 
 
 A. I have done it. 
 
 ^ Q. Did you have a right to do it, under any existing rules at that 
 time ? 
 
 A. I supposed I had. I took that liberty- at any rate. 
 
 Q. Didn t you know as director of the Concord Kailroad, whether 
 you had or not ? 
 
 A. I supposed I had the right, and I took that right occasionally. 
 
 Q. Do you mean that it is uncertain in your mind whether you had 
 a right to give these passes or not? 
 
 A, I supposed, when I gave the passes I had a right to do it. 
 
 Q. Didn t you understand at that time whether or not you had a, 
 right? 
 
 A. Well, I supposed I had a right. 
 
 Q. Will you show a rule of the road that gave you that right ? 
 
 A. I don t know that there is. 
 
 Q. Don t you know that ever since you have been a director, there- 
 has been a rule expressly to prohibit that thing, and havn t you your 
 self voted for these rules ? 
 
 A. I presume that I voted for most of the rules that were passed. 
 
 Q, Since you have been a director of the Concord Eailroad, hasn t 
 there always been a rule that prevented directors from passing persons* 
 in the cars? How is that, sir? 
 
 The Chairman. If I understand it, the rules have been put in the- 
 case. The question therefore is not to prove the rules, but whether he 
 remembers or not. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, sir, if you did not understand when director of 
 the Concord Kailroad, that there was a rule in force on the road which 
 prohibited a director from passing a person on the road ? 
 
 A. Well, I could not say previous to this ; 1 could tell by examin 
 ing the rules that were passed. 
 
 Q. You mean to say as illustrative of the knowledge that you have 
 of the rules, that you don t know whether such a rule had been passed 
 or not ? 
 
 A. I don t remember particularly. 
 
 Q. If there was such a rule as that passed did you help make it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Didn t you do it in open violation of the rules? 
 
 A. I guess i did. 
 
 Q, Have you taken your family with you over the Concord Railroad,- 
 and have you been in the habit of doing it ever since you have been a- 
 director ? 
 
 A. I haven t always. 
 
 Q. Have you sometimes ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Had you a right ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where did you get your passes ? 
 
 A. I had a pass over that road I had one of Gilmore and one from 1 
 Stark, and one over the Boston and Maine road and several others. 
 
 Q. Have you ever taken friends to Boston, and passed them by word 
 of mouth ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. Had you a right to do this ? 
 
 A. I supposed I had at that time. 
 
362 
 
 Q. Then your knowledge of the rules of the Concord Kailroad led 
 jon to believe that you had a right to pass persons in that way? 
 
 A. 1 supposed I had, 
 
 Q. You are a flour dealer I believe ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you been accustomed to send your runners, who sell flour, 
 over the Concord Kailroad on your pass? 
 
 A. We don t have any runners. 
 
 Q. Have you ever sent any man in your employ over the Concord 
 Railroad on your pass ? 
 
 A. I think I have. 
 
 Q Did you think you had any right to do that ? 
 
 A. I supposed I had. 
 
 Q. Now, i want you to read from that book of 1S65, and say who 
 ./passed that vote [designating] ? 
 
 A. Well, I don t know that I could tell positively. My impression 
 ;ds that Judge Tpham did. 
 
 Q. Will you state that Judge Upham did do that? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you state that John H George didn t do it? 
 
 A. No, 1 won t. It might have been before the meeting of the 
 -directors. My impression is that it was Judge Upham. 
 
 Q. But still you won t say that George didn t do it? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any positive recollection in regard to it, any way. 
 
 A. With regard to the writing? 
 
 Q. Yes, with regard to the writing. Who wrote that note ? 
 
 A. No, sir, 1 have not. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you if there is anything in that record to indi 
 cate tkat Mr. George was not present from the time the meeting was 
 called, up to the time it was closed ? 
 
 A. 1 don t know that there is. 
 
 Q. I suppose that in his absence, the clerk pro tern, would have 
 made it out? 
 
 A. Sometimes he would and sometimes he would not. 
 
 Q. Wouldn t that appear on the record ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Wouldn t an accurate, truthful representation of the fact appear 
 
 A. Not necessarily. If there was a clerk pro tern, chosen, and be- 
 vfore the meeting dissolved, Col. George came, and the votes repassed, 
 I suppose it would be proper for him in this case. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, you say that Mr. Gilmore made a statement in regard 
 -,<to the conductors stealing $50,000. Did ever Mr. George make that 
 :-$tatemenl to you ? 
 
 A. I don t know about the $50,000. 
 
 Q. Hasn t Mr. George, time and again, represented to you that the 
 -conductors were stealing large sums from the Concord Railroad ? And 
 /-didn t he, about the time that vote was passed ? 
 
 A. I have frequently heard him make the suggestion that he had no 
 loubt the conductors were stealing. 
 
 Q. Have you frequently ? 
 
 &.. Occasionally ; I don t know as frequently, or not. It was talked 
 c&ye? .at our meetings very frequently. 
 
363 
 
 *. Let me ask you if he has not made these representations to the 
 Directors of the Concord road prior to the passage of this vote fre 
 quently ? 
 
 A. I think very likely he may have made that statement, or that the 
 Conductors were taking money that did not belong to them, and did not 
 ^return it. 
 
 Q. And has he represented to the board of directors that these 
 .amounts were large amounts, and that Mr. Clough was the chief thief ? 
 
 A. I don t know that he has. 
 
 Q. Hasn t he discriminated between Mr. Clough and the other con 
 ductors ? 
 
 A. I don t know as he has. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if Mr. George ever used to take pieces of paper 
 <out of his pocket to elucidate the fact that Mr. Clough had taken 
 #200,000 of the funds of the Concord Railroad? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Didn t he ever take pieces of paper, and argue that they showed 
 & certain result, which was that Mr. Clough had stolen $200,000 from 
 <the funds of the Concord Railroad ? 
 
 A. I don t think that he ever did, until after the suits were com 
 menced. 
 
 Q. I am talking about that time. Didn t Mr. George, after the suit 
 was commenced, pull from his pocket slips of paper, and show you cer 
 tain figures upon them, which he said demonstrated conclusively the 
 fact that Mr. Clough had stolen $200,000? 
 
 A. I^don t know that he did. 
 
 Q. Did he ever show you anything at all about that? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of it. 
 
 Q. Will you say that he never showed you anything in regard to 
 phat? 
 
 A. I say i have no recollection, unless he made it to the board of 
 .directors after this thing commenced. 
 
 Q. Now, didn t Mr. George, at the meetings of the board of direc 
 tors, produce certain figures, and certain statistics which he said to the 
 Aboard of directors .demonstrated conclusively the fact that Mr. Clough 
 jhad been stealing $200,000 ? 
 
 A. I don t know as he did. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear him give that statement ? 
 
 A. Not in my hearing. 
 
 Q. What did you mean by saying that he never did, " unless he did 
 it after these suits were brought? " 
 
 A. I don t know but he might have made some representation. I 
 <don t recollect ahout it. 
 
 Q. What statement might he have made in that direction? 
 
 A. Well, I don t recollect myself. 
 
 Q. Will you state, sir, that he did not make such statements ? 
 
 A. I would not say that he did not. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you where the board of directors held their 
 ^meetings in Boston ? 
 
 A. They sometimes held them at a room on Tremont Row, when I 
 first became a member of the board ; and afterwards they held them at 
 the Revere House sometimes, and American House sometimes. 
 
 Q. How much did it cost the old board of directors for liquors drank 
 ,-at the Revere House and other places where they held their meetings 
 daring the last year ? 
 
364 
 
 A.- I have no idea, sir, at all. 
 
 Q. Did it cost them more than $1500 ? 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Will you state that it didn t cost them more than $1500 ? 
 
 A. They must have done a good business. 
 
 Q, How much was thus paid ? 
 
 A. I have no knowledge ; I never saw any of the bills. 
 
 Q. Mr. Kidder, I want your best information as a director of the 
 road, if it didn t cost more than $1500 for rum? I am not talking 
 about the dinners, but for the rum alone, during the last year? 
 
 A. I am not able to swear anything about it. 1 will give you my 
 opinion. My opinion is that it did not. 
 
 Q. How much is your opinion worth ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if the occasion didn t happen many times, when 
 they held a session, that they were four-sevenths of them so drunk that 
 they didn t know what they were about ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, I understand you to say that the object in passing these 
 rules was to keep the conductors honest? Was that so? 
 
 A. I don t -know as I made that statement exactly. It was similar 
 to that ; might have been exactly that. To prevent them from taking 
 the funds that belonged to the road, and appropriating it to their own 
 use ; to induce people to buy their tickets at the office rather than buy 
 them in the cars ? 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, sir, if Mr. Gilmore ever gave you any tickets 
 on the Concord Railroad? 
 
 A. He never did to my knowledge. I don t think he ever gave me 
 a ticket. 
 
 Q. You are quite positive of that? 
 
 A. I am quite positive. 
 
 Q. Did you ever ask Mr. Clough to pass persons ? 
 
 A. I never have, sir, excepting when I have been in the cars. 
 
 Q. Have you in those cases ? 
 
 A. I have, sir. 
 
 Q. That is when you have been aboard a train* and had a friend, 
 and Mr. Clough was conductor, and that friend has had no ticket ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Prior to 1864? 
 
 A. My impression is that I haven t since that vote was passed. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Is your impression so strong that you will 
 swear to it? 
 
 A. That is my impression. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} In how many instances did ever you do it in 
 your life? A few or a good many? Just give the best idea you can 
 to the referees ? 
 
 A. Well, during my directorship I might perhaps have passed a 
 hundred ; perhaps not more than fifty ; perhaps not so many as that. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEOEGE CLOUGH. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION RESUMED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I will ask you if your counsel, Mr. Rolfe, 
 Mr. Mugridge, Col. Tappan, and Mr. Bell, I will ask you if your 
 
365 
 
 three counsel were up to the legislature to prevent an order for investi 
 gation, Mr. Mugridge, and Tappan, and Rolfe, all three present? and 
 yourself ? v 
 
 A. To prevent the passage of what? 
 
 Q. The resolution appointing a committee of investigation ? 
 
 A. I believe they were employed for that purpose by the new direc 
 tors. 
 
 Q. Were they all present ? 
 
 A. They were not my counsel for going before the legislature. 
 
 Q. They were your counsel in this suit at the time ? 
 
 A. They were. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, did you have interviews with Mr. Gilmore, or did your 
 counsel have interviews with Mr. Gilmore, with regard to that matter ? 
 
 A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Have you stated to any one that Mr. Rolfe, your counsel, was 
 employed by Mr. Gilmore, and that he agreed to give him $400 ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Made any statement of that kind to any one ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. At that investigation, at the state house, will you please state 
 whether I read before the committee of the senate, where the hearing 
 was, in your hearing and presence, the returns of conductors on the 
 Portsmouth road, and the Manchester and Lawrence road, and the Con 
 cord road. 
 
 A. I don t think I was present at the hearing before the committee. 
 
 Q. Were you not up in the third story ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I was not in the senate room at all. 
 
 Q. In the room over the senate room, up where the hearing was ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I was not at any of the hearings. 
 
 Q. Were you present that night at the state house ? 
 
 A. I was, but I didn t go into the room where the committee was. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, I want to ask you a question with regard to 50 
 shares of your stock. I want to know if 50 shares of stock is in the 
 name of Charles H. Bartlett? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I was going to correct that, 
 
 Q. Charles H. Bartlett of Manchester ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How happened it to be put in his name ? 
 
 A. I borrowed some money of him. 
 
 Q. That is 50 shares in addition? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What did you pay for that stock ? 
 
 A. That stock I have owned for some time. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay for it? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. State as nearly as you can ? 
 
 A. I can t tell anything about it. 
 
 Q. When did you put it in Bartlett s hands ? 
 
 A. I put it in Bartlett s hands I have got the date here in my 
 pocket. [Befers to memorandum.] This don t make but 974 in all. 
 November 2d, 1868, I borrowed $3000, and pledged 50 shares of Con 
 cord stock. 
 
 Q. What did you do with that stock? 
 
 A. I paid my debts with it. 
 
366 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.} When was that? 
 
 A. . November 2d, 1868. I owed my brother some money, and I 
 him up^$2000 of that that I borrowed of Mr. Bartlett. 
 
 Q. That is all the Concord Eailroad stock you have got in airf 
 body s name ? 
 
 A. 1 think so. 
 
 Q. Don t you know ? 
 
 A, That is all. 
 
 Q. What became of the shares that you put in Col. Tappan s- 
 
 A. 1 have got that charged to him. 
 
 Q. That is not reckoned in the amount ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You have got that charged to him on your book ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir ; on that 974 or 990 shares, as the case may be, I 
 you to put down how much you owe on it how much incumbrance thers? 
 is on it ? 
 
 The Chairman. He has stated that, has he not, already, 
 
 Q. Then so far as that stock is concerned, you own, subject to> & 
 pledge of $23,000. Now, sir, what notes have you got of any persons* 
 or bonds or securities ? 
 
 A. I will furnish you with all my notes, if you will give me 
 I will bring them down this evening or to-morrow morning. 
 
 Q. Haven t you any means of stating the notes, bonds, and 
 ties that you have ? 
 
 A. I have no bonds. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, your house on Warren street, that house is how fa$ 
 from Judge Minot s house? 
 
 A. Just a little ways above. 
 
 Q. Mr. Fletcher lives a little this side ; any house between ? 
 
 A. One house. 
 
 Q. What did your house cost you to build it this new house jusfr 
 the building itself? 
 
 A. I believe it was between $12,000 and $13,000. 
 
 Q. Made any expenditures since ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Haven t you enlarged the house ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I put on some wings. 
 
 Q. Didn t you state in your deposition that it cost you $15,500? 
 
 A. I mean that the furniture and all cost me $15,500. 
 
 Q. Did you keep any account of that? 
 
 A. I had the bills. 
 
 Q. Mr. Kilby built it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Is it the finest house in Concord ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; it suits me very well. 
 
 Q. What did your furniture cost you in your house ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, my furniture, aside from the furniture that I bought i* 
 the first purchase, didn t cost but little. 
 
 Q. You mean the furniture aside from the furniture you saved at 
 the fire ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I mean the furniture that I bought when I made the first 
 purchase of the house that was burned. It was very well furnished- 
 then. 
 
367 
 
 Q. You saved that from the fire didn t you? 
 
 A. Some of it ; not all. 
 
 Q. Take your parlor carpet, what did you give for that ? 
 
 A. That carpet was in the first purchase of the house. The first*"- 
 house, every room in it was carpeted. The parlor was furnished ; the 
 parlor chamber was furnished. That was in the first house. I paid 
 $8000 for that. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} That is the house that was "burned? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did you build on the same place ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Did you save that carpet ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. That is on your present room ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What is the carpet in your library, or reading-room ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. In the library, I believe that was saved ; I 
 think it was. It is a small one. 
 
 Q. Will you state, sir, whether or not at the time your personal 
 property was attached you procured receipters for it to the amount of 
 $9000? 
 
 A. I procured receipters ; I don t know to what amount. 
 
 Q. Wasn t the amount $9000 ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. You don t know whether it was or not, or what it wa&? "Well- 
 you have got a piano ; what did you give for the piano ? 
 
 A. Two hundred and fifty or three hundred dollars. 
 
 Q, You don t know how much, whether $250 or $300? 
 
 A. I don t know which. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, how much did you expend for clothing in the year 
 1865. Take that identical year, how much did you spend for yourself 
 and your family ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. You can tell, when you sold a horse twenty-five years ago, wheth 
 er you sold it for $125 or $150 ; but you can t tell how much you paid 
 for clothing in 1865. [Objected to as argumentative in form, and im 
 proper.] 
 
 The Chairman. I suppose the argument cannot very well be taken, 
 back. 
 
 Q. I want to know if you can give the referees any idea of what it 
 cost you for clothing in 1865 ? 
 
 A. Well, I should think it might be a pretty good bill, that being 
 the year when the house was burned. 
 
 Q. How much do you think it would cost in 1865, as your estimate ? 
 
 A. For myself alone. 
 
 Q. No, sir, for yourself and your family ? 
 
 A. I can make an estimate. It might be $700 or $800, and perhaps 
 
 Q. Perhaps how much more ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Can t you form any idea? Will you state whether or not 
 presented in your deposition $1000 worth as assets not paid ? 
 
 A. It may be so. I am inclined to think that is so. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, do you own the Sherman Hotel ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I have a deed of it. 
 
363 
 
 Q. When did you buy that, and how much did you give for it ? 
 
 A, I swapped a farm up in Orange, and my interest in the Milford 
 springs. 
 
 Q. What did you call the value of the Sherman Hotel at the time 
 jou made the bid ? Bid it off at auction, did you not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How much ? 
 
 A. Eighty-five hundred dollars, I think it was. If I recollect right 
 .that is what it was. And on that I owe $ ->000. 
 
 Q. Then you own one-half the Masonic Temple on Pleasant street ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And one-half of the Allison property on Main street, adjoinin g 
 the Masonic Temple? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And then you own the Masonic Temple, between there and Judge 
 Bellows ? 
 
 A. I own half of it. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, I want to know if ever you kept, or have got anywhere, 
 Ibills of the items of the expense of all these buildings ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; Mr. Corning has, I suppose, at his house. He kept 
 the bills. 
 
 Q. He kept the bills of the cost of those buildings, did he ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you see them ? 
 
 A. I haven t seen them since the time it was built ; I believe not. 
 
 Q. How much did it cost to build the addition to the Masonic Tem 
 ple, on Pleasant street, which was built subsequent to the building of 
 the Temple itself those two stores on Pleasant street ? 
 
 A. It may have cost $6000. I think. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about it? 
 
 A. I took off a statement from my book at the time my deposition 
 was taken. 
 
 Q. What book ? 
 
 A. That Mr. Corning kept kept the rents on. 
 
 Q. Can you produce that book here, sir ? Do you mean to say that 
 that book contains a statement of the cost of these two buildings ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Are you certain that it does ? 
 
 A. [Refers to paper no answer.] 
 
 Q. What did you give for the Allison property ? 
 
 A. Thirty-eight hundred dollars. 
 
 Q What did you do with it ? Did you lay out any expense on it, 
 build a building on it, or alter the building or make any expense on it ? 
 
 A. Made some repairs on it. 
 
 Q. Made some alteration on it? 
 
 A. Y^es, sir, 1 think I did. 
 
 Q. How much did it cost you to alter the building ? 
 
 A. I don t know. Corning had the bills. 
 
 Q. Did you rebuild that building? 
 
 A. No, sir; didn t lay out but very little on it. 
 
 Q. How many stores are there on Pleasant street, towards Judge 
 Bellows . 
 
 A. Both buildings ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. How many stores are there ? 
 
369 
 
 A. Three now, 
 
 Q. How much did you say the three stores cost you ? 
 
 A. That building cost, I believe, $6000. 
 
 Q. Have you any personal knowledge of what that cost ? 
 
 A. I had it taken off of Mr. Coming s books. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay out for the Masonic Temple ? 
 
 A. 1 think we let it out by the job. It cost $12,000 or $13,000. 
 It was built when materials were very cheap. 
 
 Q, Do you know anything about the cost of that ? Have you got 
 .any items of the cost of it ? 
 
 A. I think I have got the specifications of it at home. 
 
 Q. Have you got any items of the cost of that building ? 
 
 A. That would be the cost, the amount to be paid. 
 
 Q. Have you got any items ? 
 
 A. I have the specifications. We made our proposals and the low 
 est bidder took it, and I think the sum was between $12.000 and 
 $13,000, and on the brick store beyond. 
 
 Q, (By the Chairman.} Is that the cost of building the Temple, or 
 the cost of the building and the land ? 
 
 A. The cost of building the Temple. 
 
 Q. Don t you own the land ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Can you bring your contract showing the 
 cost of the Masonic Temple building ? 
 
 A. I will, sir? I believe I have got it. 
 
 Q. You think it was $12,000 or $13,000 ? 
 
 A. That is my impression. 
 
 Q. If the building beyond cost $6000, that would be $18,000 or 
 $19,000? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then if the building this side cost you $3800, that would be 
 .some $23,000? 
 
 A. That is for the whole. 
 
 Q. Then there would be your repairs ; and then there is the land. 
 Now, sir, we will go to the next piece of property." Then you own the 
 * Page place," do you not? 
 
 A- Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That is up by the asylum ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How much land did you say there was there ? 
 
 A. About an acre and a half. 
 
 Q. A small house, was it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. "What did you say you paid for that, and when ? 
 
 A. I bought that in bought a portion of it of Col. Grover, who was 
 executor of the will of Col. Page, and a portion of it of the son of the 
 widow. I think the land and the house cost me $1800; and my im 
 pression is, I laid out some $200. 
 
 Q. And you say that a man lives on that without rent? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I haven t got a cent of rent out of him. He is a poor 
 man. 
 
 Q. Then you own a house on Railroad square ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; a double house there. 
 
 Q. That double house which faces about half way between the bridge ? 
 
370 
 
 A. Between the bridge and the freight depot. I have lived there- 
 twelve years myself. 
 
 Q. What other estate have you ? You have the Jamaica Plain estate- 
 near Boston, to which you have testified ? 
 
 A. I have a house on High street, near the Tom Tandy house, which 
 cost $300. Then I have another small house that cost me $200 a 
 small house with two rooms in it, that I bought a year ago. 
 
 Q. Well, sir? 
 
 A. Then I have got two lots that I bought about two months ago, 
 down on South street. I moved a building on to one of them, the build 
 ing that we call the Brown house, that 1 moved from opposite the brick 
 stores there, opposite the Pettingill house. 
 
 Q. What did you pay for that ? 
 
 A. I paid $200 for one lot, and $250 for the adjoining lot. 
 
 Q. You have moved a building down ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 
 
 Q. And that cost you ? 
 
 A. Three hundred and seventy-five dollars. 
 
 Q. Have you repaired it, and fitted it up ? 
 
 A. I got some men to work on it. 
 
 Q. How much have you laid out on that ? 
 
 A. 1 let the job out for $500. I havn t paid it yet. 
 
 Q. Have you paid any portion of it ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Any other property sir, or real estate ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You have 37,000 feet of land at Jamaica Plain ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You have no other real estate, or any other interest in real estate 
 now? 
 
 A. No, sir, I think not. 
 
 Q. The other bonds and mortgages you will bring ? 
 
 A. The notes I will bring down. There are 75,000 feet of land at 
 Jamaica Plain. 
 
 Q. Have you any stock in any corporation except the Concord Rail 
 road ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I think not. 
 
 .Q. Have you any bank stock ? 
 
 A. Not a dollar. 
 
 Q. Have you any other personal property except the notes, which 
 you are to bring, and the Concord Railroad stock, and your furniture ? 
 If so, specify what. Either in your hands or anybody s else ? 
 
 A. I have got two horses ; I have got a covered buggy, and a bug 
 gy that ain t covered, and a Concord wagon. That is all that I think 
 of now. 
 
 Q. Go now, if you please, to the Dunbarton farm for a few moments. 
 How long did you own that farm, and how large a farm was it, and 
 what did you do with it ? 
 
 A. In the first place, when I bought it, there was no buildings on it. 
 I bought it, I think, for $1200, the land. There were forty acres of 
 land. And I let out the job of building a small house and barn on 
 there. And I took the timber off the land. I think I paid $1000 or 
 $1200 for the land ; I let the building out, and built a small house and 
 barn, and for the house I paid $400, and I took the timber off the land,, 
 and I paid $150 for the barn. 
 
371 
 
 Q. Have you got any memorandum from which you can state what 
 that barn cost ? 
 
 The Chairman. He has just stated that. 
 
 Q. My question now is with regard to the cost of the house and 
 barn. Have you any memorandum showing the cost of it, sir ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I have not, I only state it from recollection. 
 
 Q. Did you state, upon your direct examination, that you could not 
 tell ? 
 
 A. I think 1 did not state so. 
 
 Q. Did you state, upon your direct examination, that you could not 
 tell how much that house and barn cost you ? 
 
 A. I don t remember it, if I did. 1 recollect I let the house out 
 for $400 ; and then I took the lumber olF the land. Arid I think the. 
 barn cost $100 and I let them take the lumber. 
 
 Q. Did you testify upon your direct examination that you paid 
 $1725 for the farm? 
 
 A. That is what it cost me altogether. 
 
 Q. That would be $525 for the house, if you paid $1200 for it? 
 
 A. I think I didn t pay but ten. J think I paid $200 down, as there 
 was a mortgage. 
 
 Q. Now, of whom did you buy the Dunbarton farm ? Was it a 
 cash trade or property exchange ? 
 
 A. It was a cash trade. 
 
 Q. Of whom did you buy the Orange farm ? 
 
 A. Of S. K. Ford. 
 
 Q. Was that a cash or a dicker trade ? 
 
 A. That was a cash trade. I don t recollect whether 1 paid down at 
 the time. 
 
 Q. What I meant was whether you exchanged other -property for it ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, when did you sell the Orange farm and the Dunbartoo 
 farm, and to whom did you sell, and how was the trade ? Was it for a 
 cash or a dicker trade ? 
 
 A. That was a cash trade. The Dunbarton farm was a cash trade. 
 The Orange farm I swapped for the Sherman House, and some of my 
 interest in the Milford springs, and I gave $2000 or $3000 to boot. 
 
 Q. Have you been to any expense for the Sherman House since you 
 bought it ? 
 
 A. I let it to a man who does his own repairing inside. 
 
 Q. Did you build a brick stable ? 
 
 A, Oh, yes, I built a brick stable ; I thought you meant on the 
 house. 
 
 Q. How much did it cost ? 
 
 A. That shed and stable cost about $3000. 
 
 Q. That makes the Sherman House property cost you $11,000 instead 
 of $8000 $11,500? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is so. 
 
 Q. Any other expenditures ? 
 
 A. At that place ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir ; or about that place ? 
 
 A. I don t think of anything. When the house got on fire one tinue, 
 the insurance paid that and made it good. 
 
 Q. So that was no expense to you ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
372 
 
 Q, Have you laid out anything except that? 
 
 A, I think that is all. Mr. Chesley pays the expenses. 
 
 Q. Did you make alterations in the house ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think I did not ; my impression is that Mr. Chesley 
 does his own alterations. 
 
 Q. Can you state whether that is so or not ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, is there any other or we will come to the Orange 
 farm. You sold that farm when ? Won t you fix the date ? 
 
 A. The Orange farm, I swapped it for the Sherman House ; I traded 
 for that it will be, I think, two years I think I took a deed for the 
 Sherman House two years ago this present month, I think. 
 
 Q. That would be in the last part of the year 1866. Now, did you 
 return, in your income returns for 1864-5-6, one dollar of income from 
 either the Orange farm or the Page place ? 
 
 A. There is no income from the Page place. A man lives in the 
 house Mr. Elliot who is not able to pay the rent ; and I let him live 
 there. 
 
 Q. I want to know whether you did return a dollar of income from 
 either of these three places ? 
 
 A. I don t know, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever? 
 
 A. I didn t have an income. 
 
 Q. Did you swear in your income return, that you did not have any 
 income from these two places ? 
 
 A. I could not tell. Those are made out by Mr. Rolfe. I have left 
 the whole thing to him, and told him to make it out. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Eolfe, when you made that return, certify that he was 
 the nearest justice to you, and that he had no connection with the busi 
 ness ? There is a little mistake. 
 
 A. In what? 
 
 Q. When Mr. Eolfe certified? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Doesn t Judge Minot live nearer to you ?, 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Doesn t Mr. Fletcher ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I don t know anything about that; I had no hand 
 in it. 
 
 Q. This property that you returned was yours, not your wife s? 
 
 A. These insurance policies, I seldom look at after I get them out, 
 I let one man do my insurance. And I supposed all the time that the 
 household furniture and wearing apparel was included, and mentioned 
 it was a matter that I didn t pay particular attention to on the policy. 
 
 Q. Then, sir, if you swear in your income returns that you had no 
 profits from farming operations during either of the three years if you 
 swear to that, it was because somebody else made out your income re 
 turns? 
 
 A. That is one thing, and probably it was an offsett to the Milford 
 Springs, where I never got anything. 
 
 Q. Well, was there a loss at the Milford Springs ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; $1400. 
 
 Q, What do you mean by a loss, of $1400? 
 
 A. I lost the interest on what it cost me during the time I had it. 
 
 Q. Did you operate the Milford Spring house ? 
 
373 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you make any loss outside of the question of interest ? 
 
 A. I let that to a man, and I never got anything but the taxes. 
 
 Q. Did you furnish him with any means ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever make any interest out of a lease ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether I did or not ; I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Whether you made an absolute loss besides ? 
 
 A. I can t tell ; I don t remember, 
 
 Q. Make any additions or repairs to the building, or anything of 
 that kind ? 
 
 A. There was an addition put on, I believe, at that time. I owned 
 a quarter of it for a short time, and then I bought another quarter. 
 
 Q. Were there additions made to the building ? 
 
 A. There was an L put on to it. 
 
 Q. How large was the L ? 
 
 A. I had only a quarter interest. 
 
 Q. What was the expense of putting on the L ? It was a tavern 
 
 house, wasn t it? 
 
 A. It was a tavern house ; it was bought at a very low rate, 
 
 Q. How large was the L ? 
 
 A. The L might be thirty feet long, perhaps, and thirty wide, 
 
 Q. How many stories high ? 
 
 A. Only two, I think. 
 
 Q. You paid quarter or half the expense, didn t you ? 
 
 A. I paid, at that time, only quarter ; I owned quarter at that time. 
 
 Q. Who did you buy that of? 
 
 A. I bought of Enos Blake, I think. 
 
 Q. That the original purchase ? 
 
 A. The original purchase was of a man by the name c*f Wallings- 
 
 ford. I believe the original purchase was $2000. I don t fca^w but it 
 is $2500. 
 
 Q. Is the deed here ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether it is or not. 
 
 Q. The original purchase was $2500 or $2000 ? 
 
 A. It strikes me so. 
 
 Q. Have you the means of ascertaining? 
 
 A. I have got the deeds. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Was that for your quarter of $2500 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think so, I only owned a quarter at first, but I can t 
 state what we did give for it at first. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} . Can you state whether this $2000 or 
 
 $2500 was the price of the whole or the price of quarter? 
 
 A. That is my impression price of the whole. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, George.} Then you put on the L while you owned only 
 a quarter? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who owned the other three quarters ? 
 
 A. Mr. Dunklee, Mr. Hoyt, and Mr. Blake. 
 
 Q. Mr, Dunklee, Hoyt, and Blake owned the other three quarters ? 
 
 A, Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What did you pay Mr. Blake for his quarter ? 
 
 A. I think there was $1000 for each quarter, and for the L, and 
 digging the well and cementing it. 
 
374 
 Sow much did you expend for fixing the spring and fixing the 
 
 A. That is all ; we merely dug it and set it in cement stone. 
 
 ^Q. How much did it cost ? 
 
 A. I can t tell. 
 
 <Q. Did you not attempt to run that house for the parties interest 
 who owned it ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. And you say you sold that to the party of whom you bought the 
 Sherman House, and you put that in, and you put in your Orange farm ? 
 
 A. And paid $3000. 
 
 ^Q. And you call the whole $8500 ; that is, you call the Orange farm 
 -and Milford springs $5500; and you call the whole $8500? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, 1 want you to go to the Winnipesaukee steamboat company. 
 Of whom did you buy that stock ? 
 
 A. Captain Walker. 
 
 Q. What did you pay him, cash or property ? 
 
 A. I swapped real estate for it. 
 
 Q. What real estate ? 
 
 A. A piece of land in what is called the " Eleven lots." 
 
 sQ. What did you mean by saying that you paid 30 and sold it for 40? 
 
 A. I paid 30 and sold it for 40. 
 
 <Q. Didn t you make a dicker? 
 
 A. Yes, we made the price of the stock on the real estate. 
 
 .Q. What did you give for that real estate ? And of whom did you 
 Ibuy it? 
 
 A. In the first place, Joe Wyatt bought it, and I bought Wyatt out. 
 
 Q. What did that real estate cost you ? 
 
 A. I think that real estate cost me $2000 ; somewhere from $2000 
 to $25 00, I think. 
 
 Q. Well, do you know ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it is somewhere in that neighborhood. 
 
 Q. Build any buildings on that real estate ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q- What building did you build ? 
 
 A. I built, in the first place, a barn ; and I finished that off into a 
 lipuse, and built another barn. 
 
 "Q. Do you know how much it cost you to build that and finish it 
 tiff into a house. 
 
 A. I think that barn and house cost me about $1200. 
 
 jQ. I want to know if you have any means of knowing any mem 
 oranda by which you can tell what that cost ? 
 
 A. I. have nothing but recollection. 
 
 Q. Did you contract it out, or did you contract it by the day ? 
 
 A . I think that I found the lumber ; I dont know whether by the 
 *day, or contracted it out at that time. 
 
 Q. How many years ago is that ? 
 
 A. I should think it was 10 or 12 years ago, and I don t know but 
 snore. 
 
 Q. * Was it the same barn as Mr. Thomas Stewart owns ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Nice barn. Isn t it one of the best barns there is ? 
 
 A. Oh, no ; it is a very good barn. 
 
375 
 
 Q. If I understand you, you cannot state from any means that you 
 have, what these buildings cost, or what you laid out upon them, except 
 from memory ? 
 
 A. That is all. I state from recollection, as near as I can recollect. 
 
 Q. Have you any memorandum or anything else by which you can 
 state how much that building cost, and how much you paid for work 
 and lumber ? 
 
 A. I bought the lumber ; It was when lumber .was very low ; I 
 could buy it for $6 or $7 a thousand. 
 
 Q. Have you any means by which you can show what that building 
 -cost? 
 
 A. I don t think I have. 
 
 Q. How many acres of land have you there ? 
 
 A. Eleven or twelve. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay for it? 
 
 A. I think it was $100 an acre. 
 
 Q. You bought the land and then put the buildings up ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. The land you called what ? 
 
 A. Twenty-five hundred dollars ; that is what I think I put it in for, 
 
 Q. Did you lay out anything in bringing up that land ? 
 
 A. I put manure on it somewhat. 
 
 Q. Did you improve it lay out money on the land ? 
 
 A. I used to, I believe. 
 
 Q. What else did you pay towards the steamboat stock ? 
 
 A. I paid the rest in money. 
 
 Q. How much money ? 
 
 A. I paid the difference ; I think 1 put the farm in for $2500 ; 1 
 paid the difference in money, what the stock would come to at $30 a 
 share. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) How many shares were there? 
 
 A. One hundred and eighty-three. 
 
 Q. And you paid the rest in money ? 
 
 A. I paid the rest in money, 
 
 Q. To whom did you sell ? 
 
 A, I sold to Capt. Sanborn, the man that is there now. 
 
 Q. How did you get your pay from him ? 
 
 A. I got money. 
 
 Q. After you were burned out, where did you board with your fam- 
 jly for the year following ? 
 
 A. The Eagle hotel. 
 
 Q. How much per week did you pay for your board ? 
 
 A. Thirty-five dollars a week. 
 
 t^. How much for your washing ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; my wife settled that. 
 
 Q. You can t tell how much you paid for washing any more than 
 you can tell how much you paid for your clothes. 
 
 A. Xo, sir ; it is mere matter of estimate. 
 
 Q. Isn t pretty much all this testimony upon matters of estimate ? 
 Can t you estimate the value of your washing about as easily as what 
 your house and barn cost you ? 
 
 A. Part of it is record, I think. My wife usually paid for the 
 washing. 
 
 Q. You gave her the money ? 
 
376 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay for what was your subscription for the 
 minister, when Mr. Parker was here ? 
 
 A. I think one or two years 1 paid $100 a year. My tax com- 
 menced on $6, and it run up. 
 
 Q. How much did you contribute to build the South church ? 
 
 A. I have got one pew that cost me $150. 
 
 A. I want to know now how much you paid for building the new 
 South church. 
 
 A. I subscribed for pews. I subscribed for two pews ; the pews 
 were sold at auction, and bought for choice I got the second choice in 
 the church. I think I paid $10 for the choice ; and I think my pews 
 cost me somewhere about $300, all I put in. 
 
 Q, How much did you pay ? Didn t you subscribe $500 ? 
 
 A. I think I subscribed for pews. My impression is that we bought 
 pews. 
 
 Q. Did you subscribe and then pay for the pews ? 
 
 A. That might be ; I don t recollect ; that might be true. 
 
 Q. Didn t you subscribe $500? And you have got that property 
 now ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, how much did you use to pay out for contributions, 
 
 A. I didn t pay a great deal for contributions. 
 
 Q. Did you state in your deposition that you paid out $1600 ? 
 
 A. I don t know.. I suppose I have in my life-time. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, how much did you contribute for political purposes ? 
 
 A. Well, there was two or three years that 1 paid something. 
 
 Q. How much ? How much is the most that you paid in any one 
 year for political purposes? . 
 
 A. I think I have paid perhaps $50. 
 
 Q, Do you mean to say that you never paid but $50 for political 
 purposes in any one year ? 
 
 A. I wouldn t say that I didn t pay more. 
 
 Q. You mean to say that is all you can say about it? 
 
 A. That is my impression. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you havn t paid $300 a year for political pur 
 poses ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. What is the most that you will be willing to say you have paid a 
 year ? 
 
 A. I may have paid $75. I don t know as I did that. 
 
 Q, What year was it that you paid the most ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. As nearly as you can state that is, when your friend was run 
 ning for Governor ? 
 
 A. I think it was Gilmore at that time. 
 
 Q. Did you subscribe for any purpose for Mr. Gilmore ? Did ever 
 he get you to subscribe to pay money for any of his purposes ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect as I have. What do you mean ? For what ? 
 
 Q. I mean any way that swallowed up money ? 
 
 A. I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Did you contribute to the diamond pin that was given to Gilmore ? 
 
 A. I know there was one. I don t know whether I subscribed or 
 not. I know they came to me for it. 
 
377 
 
 Q. Can you remember whether you paid $100 exactly ? 
 
 A. There was a talk about it, but I can t tell. 
 
 Q. What is your best impression in regard to your giving just $100 ^ 
 
 A. I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. Wasn t there eleven of you who contributed $100? 
 
 A. Stephen Kenrick came to me ; whether I paid anything OB it 1 
 can t tell. 
 
 Q. What is your prevailing impression with regard to your giving? 
 
 A. Well, it may be so. 
 
 Q. Is that your prevailing impression? 
 
 A. Well, I don t hardly think it is ? but still it may be so. I won t 
 swear that I did. 
 
 Q. That was at the time that these awful resolutions were got at ? 
 
 A. I can t say whether it was or not. I didn t state the year r I be 
 lieve, positive. 
 
 Q. Did you make any contributions for volunteers at the time tLe- 
 war first started at the* time it was fashionable to make contributions- 
 in that direction ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether I did or not. 
 
 Q. Did you? 
 
 A. I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state with any more positiveness than that? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, did you use to make contributions towards the support 
 of Mrs. Elliot and her family ? 
 
 A. Mr. Elliot lived in my house ever since 1^49. And I received*, 
 from him, I think, about $200 rent. That is all the rent I ever received 
 from him. He was a man that was sick a great deal, and he was very 
 poor. 
 
 Q. My question was whether you made any contributions towards 
 the support of Mrs. Elliot and her family ? 
 
 A. I have since she died, towards the support of the children. He- 
 lives in my house now. The little girl, I think, I found in clothes soioev 
 
 Q. Did you buy $1000 worth of coal stock of Mr. Gilmore? 
 
 A. I had $1000 worth of coal stock, but it was Mr. Gilmore &. 
 
 Q. It was of his brother-in-law ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What did you do with that coal stock ? Did you put that in?- 
 among your losses ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I believe so. 
 
 Q. Have you made an allusion to coal in the statements of losses 
 that have been put in here ? When did you buy the coal stock ? 
 
 A. I bought some other fancy stock of Whipple. 
 
 Q. How much ? 
 
 A. I believe I had $400. I believe it cost $400, and I swapped withr 
 Mr. Whipple, and gave him $600 to boot. He said that he had bought 
 of a man by the name of Boynton, in Boston. I knew nothing about 
 Gilmore or anybody else at that time. 
 
 Q. It was a Manchester Coal Company in which Mr. Gilmore was 
 connected in selling stock ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I guess so. 
 
 Q. So that you made, in your two operations, a total loss of 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, did you have any copper stocks ? 
 
378 
 
 ,A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. Who did you have your copper stock of, and how much ? 
 
 .A. I had them of Seth Greenleaf. 
 
 Q. How much did you buy ? 
 
 .A. Bought $1000. 
 
 Q. Where was the copper stock? 
 
 A. That was up in Littleton somewhere. 
 
 -Q. That copper stock valueless ? 
 
 A. It is said to be good. 
 
 Q. Have you represented, over and over again, that it is entirely 
 -valueless. 
 
 A. I don t know much about it, only what I hear. 
 
 Q. Have you alleged, over and over again, that it was entirely val 
 ueless ? 
 
 A. I have been oftener told that it was good stock than that it was 
 .bad. 
 
 Q. Then if you have $1000 worth of valuable copper stock, it should 
 3>e added to your assets ? 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} In what mine is it ? 
 
 A. I forget the name of it. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} When did you buy that stock ? 
 
 A. 1 bought that about two years ago, I think. 
 
 Q. Before you went off the road or after? You owned it at the 
 itime you left the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir 
 
 Q. Now, sir, did you have an interest in the sand bank out in Con 
 necticut ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, How much ? 
 
 A. About $1500. 
 
 Q. Who did you buy that of? 
 
 A. A man down in Milford, [Conn]. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay ? 
 
 A. About $1500, and sold it for the same. 
 
 Q. W T hen did you buy it? 
 
 A. I think it was nine or ten years ago. 
 
 Q. When did you sell it ? 
 
 A. I sold it, I think it must be fivo or six years ago. [Adjourned.] 
 
 NINETEENTH DAY. Thursday, December 24th, 1868.] 
 
 The hearing was resumed at 9 o clock A. M., and the cross-examina- 
 tion of MX. C lough, the defendant, was continued. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEOEGE CLOUGH CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} What did you state you paid for the Sanger 
 place ? 
 
 A. Three hundred dollars, I think. 
 
 Q. And you state that your testimony is founded upon your deeds? 
 
 A. And from recollection. 
 
 Mr. George. I will put in the consideration. Among the deeds fur- 
 uished is a deed acknowledged before Franklin Pierce, dated in 1846, 
 ito Abner and Mary Clough. The consideration is $300. Then there is 
 A deed dated 9th. 1847, of the same premises, a quit-claim deed ; 
 
379 
 
 consideration $600. 
 
 Witness. 1 bought it for $300 and solcf it for $600 ; and bought it 
 back for $600 and sold it for $800. I sold it to Nat Baker, I think. 
 
 Q. What did you swear you gave for the Jamaica Plain property? 
 
 A. Eighteen hundred dollars; I think it was between $1700 and 
 $1800 that it cost me. 
 
 Q. What is the condition of the mortgage? [Dated Feb. 6th, 1352.] 
 The annexed assignment of a judgment against Mr. Palmer on which a 
 levy was made for a consideration of $1200. That is dated July 7th, 
 1853. 
 
 The Chairman. W T ho is that deed from ? 
 
 Mr. George. This second deed of assignment is from Amos Binney, 
 to recover judgment from Amos Palmer. 
 
 Q. Have you any explanation to offer with regard to that ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. W T hat is it ? 
 
 A. I loaned Mr. Palmer $800. He reckoned, I think, one year s 
 interest in at the time I took the mortgage. He gave me a mortgage of 
 that land in Jamaica Plain for security of that mortgage. 
 
 Q. That all the explanation you have to offer ? 
 
 A. I found, after I took that mortgage, an attachment on it. I sent 
 Mr. Kolfe to see about it and investigate it. He went to see counsel 
 there and also to examine the matter. He said that the attachment was 
 not good and could not hold ; but it did. He got out an execution. I 
 was going to contest it, and Mr. Kolfe went down and bought the execu 
 tion at a discount. So it made the land cost somewhere between $1700 
 and $1800. I think 1 called it $1800 in my assets. 
 
 Q. Then the statement in the assignment that you paid $1800 for 
 the assignment isn t true ? 
 
 A. It isn t ; I didn t pay that for it. 
 
 Q. What did you pay for that assignment ? 
 
 A. I think it was somewhere over $1000. I don t recollect exactly 
 the sum. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, did you pay Mr. Palmer $100 afterwards to release his 
 interest ? 
 
 A. I did, to get a quit-claim deed from him and his wife. 
 
 Q. In addition to the other ? 
 
 A. In addition to the $800, and in addition to what I paid Mr. Bin- 
 Bey. I paid Mr. Palmer $100 to sign a quit-claim deed. 
 
 Q. Did you know how it happened to be put into the assignment that 
 in consideration of the sum of $1200 paid to me in hand? 
 
 A. No, sir, I don t know how that came in. I know I didn t pay 
 that. You mean Mr. Binney ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. I bought a discount on the execution that was somewhere between 
 $800 and $1000. 
 
 [Deed of Mr. Binney offered in evidence by Mr. George.] 
 
 A. All I paid to Mr. Binney was what I said before. 
 
 Q. Can you tell how the consideration to the amount of $1200 hap 
 pened to be put into the deed as the consideration of the deed to you ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I cannot. 
 
 [Description of the note from Mr. Palmer to Mr. Clough put in evi 
 dence.] 
 
 Q. Have you that note, now ? 
 
380 
 
 A. I don t know whether > have got the note or not. 
 
 Q. If you have, will you produce it ? 
 
 A. I will. 
 
 Q, Now, what did you swear you paid for the Warren street place, 
 
 A. About, $8000, [Deed read, having a consideration of $1200.J 
 
 Q. Any dispute about that being the same premises ? 
 
 A. That is the same premises. 
 
 Q. The consideration of that deed is $1200. Have you any expla 
 nation to offer in regard to that ? 
 
 A. All I paid for it was $8000, 
 
 Q. You cannot explain with regard to the consideration ? 
 
 A. I believe that Mr. Cooper suggested to have the deed made irt 
 that way. I don t quite recollect about that. I know I didn t pay but 
 $8000 for it. 
 
 Q. Now, have you ever stated that you gave $9000 for that house OB. 
 Warren street? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. Never stated that ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You swore in your direct examination, if 1 understood you cor 
 rectly, that you lost $2000 by John D. Cooper? 
 
 A. Y^es, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you ever stated, in any other way, that you lost a different 
 sum by him ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I have. 
 
 Q. Did you swear in your deposition that you lost $2500, 
 
 A. That and the interest, I think, came to $z500. I don t quite v 
 recollect now. 
 
 Q. Won t you state, while I am looking at this deposition, how long" 
 you were making up your statement of property, and with whom you 
 made it? How many months or weeks were you in making up your 
 statement of property, and who assisted you in making it up ? 
 
 A. I think my nephew, Marland B. Clough, and Mr. Eolfe. 
 
 Q. Did you state there [showing deposition] "Lost by John D, 
 Cooper $2500 and $750 interest " ? 
 
 A. That seems to be so now. 
 
 Q. What was your business with John D. Cooper, and what was the 1 
 occasion of the loss ? 
 
 A. No business with him except to sign his note that was not paid. 
 
 Q. You and Mr. Corning signed his notes together, did you ? If sov 
 to what extent ? 
 
 A. I think Mr. Corning signed the note with me, and Mr, Gilmore 
 too. Mr. Gilmore was on with us. 
 
 Q. For how much were you liable for John D. Cooper ? 
 
 A. I think that I was for some $15,000 or $20,000, or more. 
 
 Q. How much of that $15,000 or $20,000 did John D. Cooper pay? 
 
 A. I think it was all paid except one note of $6000, and Mr. Cor 
 ning made up $2000, and I $2000, and Mr. Gilmore $2000. That is- 
 my impression now. 
 
 Q. How many were there in when he failed ? 
 
 A. He didn t fail ; he put his property into our hands to get our payv 
 
 Q. This house which was conveyed to you, was that put into* Mr- 
 Coming s hands by Mr. Cooper? 
 
381 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he and Gilmore took the property and sold it and paid 
 his debts as far as it went. There wasn t enough. There was a $6000 
 note, and the interest on it. 
 
 Q. Wasn t there a large amount outside ?< 
 
 A. There were some debts ; I don t remember how many. 
 
 Q. You took this deed from Mr. Corning as growing out of the 
 transaction ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I bought the house of Mr. Corning. 
 
 Q. And you received the title from Mr. Corning ? Or your wife did ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, have you stated to this tribunal all the real estate you own 
 ;now, or that you have an interest in ? 
 
 A. I don t think of any more now. 
 
 Q. I find a deed here, from Moses Humphrey to Eliza R. Clough, of 
 ^ tract of land situated in Concord, on the southerly side cf Warren 
 street, so called. The deed is dated in 1861. You own that land now ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Nor your wife ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you dispose of that? 
 
 A. I disposed of it very soon after I bought it. 1 bought it some 
 time in 1862, or 1863 perhaps. I don t recollect the time. I bought 
 the place above for the sake of getting more back land. I took off what 
 land I wanted and sold the place. 
 
 Q. I will read the deed, and see if this refreshes your memory [reads 
 the deed]. You mean to say that you don t own that? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Did I understand you that you reserved a 
 strip from this ? 
 
 A. I bought the house and land adjoining me, for the sake of getting 
 more back land of William H. Bailey. Then I took off what I wanted 
 for back land, and sold the remainder to Emery Humphrey. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} This is a deed of land from Humphrey to 
 you, The question is whether you own that back strip ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you paid $300 for it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You say you bought the Bailey house, and you wanted to get 
 some back land. How much back land did you add to your homestead ? 
 
 A, A small strip, that he allowed me $300 for. 
 
 Q. Then you sold the Bailey house ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I gave $3000 for the Bailey lot, and reserved a piece 
 of land that he allowed $300 for. I sold him the place for $2700. 
 
 Q. And you paid $300 for the strip ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, is there a piece of land called the Eolfe land ? 
 
 A. That is on Spring street. 
 
 <Q. Y"ou own that now? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you sell that ? 
 
 A. I sold that about a year ago, I think. 
 
 Q. How much did you sell it for ? 
 
 A. Fifteen hundred dollars. 
 
 Q, (By Judge Bellows.} W T here did you say that was ? 
 
382 
 
 A. On Spring street. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Do you own any land in Dorchester, N. H, 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you sell that ? 
 
 A. Six or seven years ago, I should think, as near as 1 can recollect, 
 
 Q. Do you own that land that you received from William A. Nichols* 
 
 A. That is the Tom Tandy house that I gave in the other day, 1 
 sold it to him and was obliged to take it back. I think it cost me $300. 
 I bought it in the first place for $280, house and land ; and I laid out 
 something on it ; not a great deal. I sold it to Mr. Nichols I think it 
 was $600. He paid me $50 down, and secured the remainder by mort- 
 
 fage. I bought it back in just a year for the same. He paid me $50 
 own, and lived there a year, and i bought it back for the same. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) For six hundred? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) What did you say was the original cost? 
 
 A. I paid $280 for it in the first place, and then I laid out some 
 thing on it. 
 
 Mr. George offered in evidence the deed of Mr. Nichols, the consider 
 ation of the deed being $600. 
 v Q, (By Mr. George.) Do you own any land in Holderness? 
 
 A. 1 used to, but I have sold that. 
 
 Q. When did you sell that ? 
 
 A. I haven t owned any property there for twelve or fifteen years* 
 I don t know as I am correct about the time. 
 
 Mr. George offered in evidence the deed of James P. How and wife, 
 dated May 2d 1861, for a consideration of $400. [Objected to.] 
 
 A. My first impression was that it was a dozen or fifteen years ago* 
 but he says the deed is dated since. The deed is dated in 1861. Well, 
 that is the time 1 sold it, probably. 
 
 Q. That is a deed to you ? 
 
 A. I certainly don t own any land there now. 
 
 Q. Have you sold any land since 1861, there. 
 
 A. I don t remember as I have. I was thinking it was a man by 
 the name of Howe that I sold to. I don t recollect the least thing 
 about that deed not the least thing. 
 
 Q. What was the consideration paid for the land on which the Ma 
 sonic Temple stands ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect ; it was somewheres I think, $4000 or $5000 for 
 the land. 
 
 Q. Who did you buy it of ? 
 
 A. Bought of Mr. Pettingill, I think. 
 
 Q. How much did you buy in the first instance ? 
 
 A . I think I bought a quarter of it the first time. That is my rec 
 ollection about it. 
 
 Q, Won t you tell me how much you paid for the land on which the 
 Masonic Temple stands, and how much you reckoned that amount when 
 you made an estimate of the cost of the property ? 
 
 A. I think it was somewheres in the neighborhood of $4000 or $5000 
 that the land cost then. I can t recollect now. 
 
 Q. What did you call it in your estimate of the cost of one half of 
 the property? 
 
 A. When I made up my estimate I think I called it $2600, or $2500 ; 
 J don t recollect. 
 
383 
 
 Q. How much land did that embrace ? Or, from whom did you re- 
 ceive the title ? 
 
 A. I think I received the title of a portion of it of Mr. Pettengill ; 
 and then I think there was one lot in the rear of the Masonic Temple 
 that came from Wyman. 
 
 Mr. George offered in evidence the deed of H. P. Eolfe, dated 4th 
 December, 1856, for a consideration of $1725, the same being for one- 
 quarter part of the land occupied by the Masonic Temple. 
 
 Q. Was that the amount paid to Mr. Rolfe for a quarter part of the 
 land ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether it was or not. 
 
 Q. What did you pay Mr. Pettengill for the quarter part that you 
 bought of him ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. If you paid $1 725 for one quarter, and $1725 for the other quar 
 ter, that would make $3450 for your half of the land ? 
 
 A. Yes, that would. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether that was all of the land of the Masonic- 
 Temple that you bought? 
 
 A. I think I bought some of Mr. Wyman, in the rear part there. 
 
 Q. What did you pay him ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it was somewhere between $1200 and 
 $1600, but I am not sure. That is my recollection now. 
 
 Q. And you own one half of it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What Wyman was that? 
 
 A. Gard Wyman. 
 
 Q. In making up your estimate of the Masonic Temple property, 
 what did you call that ? 
 
 A. I think it was $15000. 
 
 Q. What did you call this piece of land that you bought of Wyman ? 
 
 A. 1 told you what I recollect I paid. 
 
 Q. What did you call it in your estimate ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect now. 
 
 Q. If you gave $ 1 725 for each of two quarters, that would be $3450 ? 
 That would be rising $4000 instead of $2500 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That makes about $4000 for the whole land ? 
 
 A. I meant the land that the Masonic Temple stands on; I didn t 
 mean the back land, 
 
 Q. Have you said one single word about these stores as distinguished 
 from the Temple. 
 
 A. I have given in the stores, but not the land ; the land that the 
 stores stand on in the rear I entirely forgot. . 
 
 Q. Then you had said nothing about it before ? 
 
 A. I didn t recollect anything about it ; I didn t put that in at the 
 time. 
 
 Q. In your estimate both in your estimate and in your deposition^ 
 of one half of the Masonic Temple, did you include the three stores,, 
 and did you include the land on which they stand, and did you call it 
 $15,500? In your estimate of $15,500 of the cost of the Masonic 
 Temple, did you include the three stores situated on the land bought 
 of Wyman and Pettingell, and the cost of the land itself? 
 
 A. 1 included the stores that are now on there. 
 
384 
 
 Q- Exactly ; you lumped it altogether, and included the three stores 
 ;and the building, the Masonic Temple itself? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think so. 
 
 Q. And had you said one word with regard to the land on which these 
 three stores stood, or made any distinction between these stores and the 
 Temple itself? 
 
 A. I think the land that went to the Masonic Temple and the land 
 that I bought of Wyrnaii includes all the land there. That is my im 
 pression. 
 
 Q. But didn t that land both pieces of land cost somewhere in 
 the neighborhood of $6000? 
 
 A. I included everything, I think, with the exception of that which 
 I bought of Mr. Wyman. 
 
 Q. Aren t these three stores on that? 
 
 A. There are some wooden buildings ; these brick stores were not on 
 there at that time. 
 
 Q. And these brick stores stand on the land that you bought of 
 Wyman ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Didn t the land on which this Masonic Temple stands, and on 
 which these stores stand, cost in the neighborhood of $10,000? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think not. 
 
 Q. Did they buy their land any cheaper than you, or sell it ? 
 
 A. I don t know. I bought of Mr. Pettengill and Mr. Wyman. 
 
 Q. Mr. Corning bought of Mr. Pettengill ? 
 
 A. I think he did. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Corning buy his title originally from the same quarter 
 that you bought of? 
 
 A. I think he did. 
 
 Q. And if he did, and you gave $1725, that would make $3450 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then if you paid from $1200 to $1600 for the other, that would 
 make a little rising $8000 ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Was there any other land ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect now ; it appears to me there was a small strip 
 I bought of Mr. Fellows ; a very small strip. 
 
 Q. Do you know how much it was ? 
 
 A, I don t recollect now. 
 
 Q. Any other? 
 
 A. I don t remember. 
 
 Q. And yet, with that statement, you make an estimate of $15,500? 
 That is the basis ? 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} What do you say is the cost of the Fellows 
 trtp? " 
 
 A. I don t know whether it was the Fellows strip or merely some 
 foot of land ; there was a small strip that we wanted to get. It seems 
 to nie it was t somewhere from $100 to $200 ; but I am not quite sure 
 about it. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George,} Did you have some real estate of H. M. 
 .Robinson ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What did you pay for that? 
 
 A. It cost some $1225. 
 
385 
 
 Q. Wfcat became of it ? 
 
 A. I own it now. 
 
 Q. Hadn t mentioned that before ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that has been put in; put in for $1225. 
 
 Mr. George put in the deed of the same, showing a consideration of 
 11907. 
 
 A. I had a piece of land over on the Plains here, that cost $25 ; and 
 I swapped that land and gave Mr. Eobinson $1200 to boot; and he 
 made the deed out in that way. He didn t want to make out a deed at 
 that price, because it would lessen the value of real estate there. He 
 owned real estate along there. That is the explanation on that; that is 
 clear in my mind ; I have got the deed here now somewhere. [Deed of 
 the land mentioned, read by Mr. Clough, showing a consideration of 
 f 25.] At that time Mr. Eobinson was in want of some money ; and I 
 drove a pretty good trade with him. I gave him the land on Pine 
 Plains and $1200 in money. 
 
 Q. Now, 1 will ask you again if you had any further interest or 
 property in land that you have not stated to this board of referees ? 
 
 A. I don t think there is ; I don t recollect that there is. 
 
 Q. Do you say there is not ? 
 
 A. 1 don t think there is. 
 
 Q. Have you any memorandum of papers showing the cost of the 
 house on Jefferson street or Thompson street, about which you testified 
 in your direct examination ? 
 
 A. The house on the corner of Thompson and Jefferson streets ? 
 
 Q. Have you any memorandum or original papers showing the cost 
 of those houses ? 
 
 A. I don t think I have. I let it out by the job, the one that is on 
 the corner of Jefferson and Thompson streets. 
 
 Q. To whom ? 
 
 A. Mr. Whipple, I think, I think he was the man. 
 
 Q. And you have no papers ? 
 
 A. I had some, but they were burned at my house. 
 
 Q, You own the furniture in the Sherman House ? 
 
 A. I have got a mortgage of it? 
 
 Q. Who bought it and paid for it ? 
 
 A. I own that furniture. 
 
 Q. Who bought it and paid for it ? 
 
 A. I bought that furniture of Mr. Dunklee. 
 
 Q, What did you pay for it ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether I bought there, or whether I got Chesley s 
 tiote and got a mortgage of it. I think Chesley bought it, and I let 
 trim have the money. It was mortgaged to Mr. Dunklee ; and I think 
 that I took Chesley s note, and took a mortgage of the furniture. 
 
 Q. Who paid for that furniture ? 
 
 A. I paid Mr. Dunklee. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay him ? 
 
 A. I can bring the statement. 
 
 Q. I want to know how much you paid for it. I believe there has 
 been no allusion to that ? 
 
 A. I think I have got a claim on the furniture for $1300 or $1400 ; 
 but I cannot say certain. I can bring in the documents this afternoon. 
 
 Q. I asked you to bring in all your deeds and memorandum of sales. 
 
 25 
 
386 
 
 A. I did not bring that for the reason that I bought it when my 
 property was attached. 
 
 (j. Didn t I ask you to bring them of all the property you had at 
 the present time, and haven t we been talking about it ever since ? 
 
 A. I have got a list of the notes. 
 
 Q. Did you leave any other notes at home ? 
 
 A. None that 1 know of ; I have had a schedule in my pocket. 
 
 Q. Did you pay Mr. Dunklee $1300 or $1400 in cash ? 
 
 A. I think I did ; I think I borrowed part of the money of Mr. 
 Nutter, $600. My impression is that I settled with Mr. Dunklee in 
 some way ; I don t recollect now how. 
 
 Q. Have you made additions to that furniture since you bought that 
 property ? 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q. Have you furnished money for the making of additions to that 
 furniture ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Neither directly nor indirectly ? 
 
 A, No, sir, 
 
 Q. Now, have you stated, so far as you know, all your property ? I 
 am talking about the present time ? 
 
 A. I don t think of any more now. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you haven t an interest to the extent of thou 
 sands of dollars in addition to what you have testified ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think so. 
 
 Q. Have you any interest in Mr. Barter s firm here, Barter, Clough r 
 & Pillsbury ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you an interest in that concern ? 
 
 A. Yes, I put in $5000. 
 
 Q. Have you mentioned that before ? 
 
 A. No. sir. That was paid in less than a year ago. 
 
 Q. I expressly stated in my question that I was inquiring about 
 your present property ? 
 
 A. I didn t so understand it at the time. I understood that I was 
 to give an account of property up to the time the attachment was made. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Clough explains that when he made his state* 
 ment on the direct examination that he undertook to give an account of 
 property at the time the suits were commenced ; and he understands 
 now that you are examining him as to the property he has got now. 
 
 Witness. I supposed that the property that I had invested, or had 
 since my property was attached was not going in ; I don t understand 
 it so. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. George informs you that he is inquiring about 
 what you have now. And I believe it is proper. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) What time did you say you invested this 
 $5000. 
 
 A. Last April. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You invested $5000 in cash ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any other interest in that concern ? You understand 
 now that I am inquiring as to your other present property, and others 
 that you have stated to the board of referees. Now, understand me as 
 including your present interest. I am inquiring as to your present 
 property ? 
 
387 
 
 A. Yes. I had an interest in a shoe store ; that is, I aided my 
 nephew in buying out half of a shoe store here. 
 
 Q. How large an interest have you there ? 
 
 A. I think it was about $4000. Mr. Piper and I bought out for my 
 nephew. They owed Mrs. Corning about $4000, and 1 took that note. 
 I was to stand in for that note. I didn t advance any money at that 
 time. 
 
 Q. Have you advanced any since. 
 
 A. I have let my nophew have some money. 
 
 Q. How much ? 
 
 A. I think it is about $1300. 
 
 Q. Paid Mrs. Corning the note, or any part of it ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Thirteen hundred dollars cover your advance to your nephew ? 
 
 A. I think so, yes. I have signed notes with him to raise money. 
 
 Q. You haven t furnished any cash beyond $1300 ? 
 
 A, I think not. 
 
 Q. What other interests have you, sir ? 
 
 A. I have a note from Mr. Noyes, I sold out that concern. I think his 
 note is $4000. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You sold out this shoe business ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. v 
 
 Q. To Mr. Noyes ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} What Noyes ? 
 
 A. George. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Belloivs.} You have his notes for $4000 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Is that in addition to the Corning note that you have assumed ? 
 
 A. Assumed to pay? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. Is that in addition to the Corning note that you have 
 to pay? Are you to pay Mrs. Corning yourself? 
 
 A, Yes, sir ; I am to pay the Corning note. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} The interest and all, I think, is about $4000. 
 Have you any interest in any other property ? 
 
 A. We have finished a couple of stores down here, that cost us some 
 $400 or $500. That belongs to me to pay. I don t think of anything 
 else now. 
 
 Q, Have you any steamboat stock ? 
 
 A. I guess I have one share ; cost me $30. 
 
 Q, Have you any acqueduct stock? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you sell that ? 
 
 A. I sold that about two or three months ago, to Mr. Natt White. 
 
 Q. You spoke of a lot in the cemetery. What did it cost you to fit 
 that up ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it cost me about $300 altogether ; putting 
 the stone around. 
 
 Q. How many watches have you ? 
 
 A. Got one. 
 
 Q. What did you give for that ? 
 
 A. Cost me $200, I believe. 
 
 Q. How many watches have your boys that you got for them ? 
 
 A. One apiece. 
 
388 
 
 What did you pay for them ? 
 A. Those are cheaper watches ; I don t recollect ; 1 think $60 or 
 
 somewhere along there. 
 Q. Are those watches referred to in your return of your inventory 
 
 internal revenue return ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I don t know but they were more than that. 
 Q. Has Mrs. Clough a watch ? 
 ,A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How much did you give for that ? 
 
 .A. I d@n t remember ; perhaps $100 or that matter ; I don t recollect. 
 ^Q. I see you have sixty-two ounces of silver plate returned in addi- 
 
 to the forty ounces exempt by law ? 
 .A. Yes, sir. 
 
 *Q. What did you pay for that ? 
 
 A. I can give you an explanation of that, I think. In 1848 I 
 was running into Boston at that time, and there was a prize offered by 
 fifce Qlive Branch, of a silver tea set, valued at $350, to the person that 
 get the most subscribers in a given time. I went at it, getting 
 with a good many others ; and I happened to be fortunate 
 to get it. I got some two or three hundred subscribers, and I 
 z-eceived the prize. I can give you a list of the articles, with my name 
 engraved on them: " Presented by T. F. Norris, of the Boston Olive 
 .Branch, Feb. 1, 1848." That is on the articles; one silver teapot; one 
 ;~Eigar bowl ; one cream pitcher ; one dozen tea spoons ; one dozen forks ; 
 two table spoons ; two desert spoons ; two sugar spoons ; two salt spoons, 
 is what the set consisted of, my wife had this was solid silver 
 wife had, that her mother left her, ten silver tea spoons ; two table 
 as ; two desert spoons ; one sugar spoon and mustard spoon. That 
 a present from, her father, and was her mother s. We have four 
 goblets that she bought of her own money, and presented one of them 
 &o me and one to each of the children, and kept one herself. That is 
 *t2ke story about the silver. 
 
 Q. There is a hundred ounces of silver you returned. That would 
 ^e eight pounds I suppose. The balance you bought ? 
 
 JL That is all the solid silver I have in my house. We have some 
 ^plated, and some German. 
 
 % You returned ti hundred ounces, did you not, a hundred and 
 
 ounces ? 
 
 JL Mr. Odlin came up and looked it all over. 
 4$. You took an oath that it was true, did you ? 
 .&. The silver was all put out for him to see. 
 *$. Well, I want to know if you took the oath ? 
 JL I suppose I did. 
 tQ. Have you any other interests in property, direct or indirect, at 
 
 present time ? 
 JL I don t think of anything now. If I had understood how this 
 
 was coming in, I could have been prepared. 
 *Q. Can you give me your notes that you have at the present time ? 
 A. I supposed it was the notes that were back of 1866, and I had 
 ;* schedule of them ; and that is what I supposed you wanted. 
 
 Q. Then we will go on to another branch. You have made a state 
 ment of losses. Do you mean to say that those are the only losses you 
 Ikave made. 
 -A. Yes, sir. 
 
389 
 
 Q. You made a statement of losses to Mr. Rolfe. You mean t< sag*- 
 that those are the only losses you made. 
 
 A. I calculated to make it all right up to that time. 
 
 Q. To what time ? 
 
 A. Up previous to Feb. 1st, 1866. 
 
 Q. I want you to state all the losses you have made up to thtfttaue. 
 If you have got any additions to make, make it, if you please, 
 
 A. Yes, sir; 1 will make them up if you will give me time, 
 
 Q. You have stated your losses upon your direct examinationi? 
 
 A I have previous to 1866. 
 
 Q. Can you tell what losses you have made since ? 
 
 A. I could not tell ; I can tell some of them. 
 
 Q. Tell them as far as you know them ? 
 
 A. I lost, I think, about $1300 by my nephew here in trade, 
 
 Q. Well, sir, go on "? 
 
 A. I lost $100 by Mr. Eemick. 
 
 Q. George L. Rernick, you mean ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he is a trader; I don t recollect his given name:;. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) You are speaking now of the time 
 February, 1866. 
 
 A. Yes. sir. He is the man that had a portion of the B0M& 
 and gave me his note ; and he failed since that time. 
 
 Q. Any other, either before or since 1866, that you have 
 in your direct examination ? 
 
 A. I don t remember now whether there is anything more oxr no.iit;; 1 
 don t recollect, 
 
 Q. Did you ever testify before Judge Bellows, one of tie 
 in this case, in regard to losses from John F. Neally. 
 
 A. There was a matter left with Judge Bellows. 
 
 Q. Did you state to Judge Bellows, in that connection,, the 
 had made, and how much it cost? 
 
 A. I don t remember. 
 
 Q. Did you lose anything by John F. Neally ? 
 
 A. It couldn t be a very large sum; I don t remember how 
 now ; it was left with Judge Bellows, and I think I have got his 
 ments ; I will bring them in if you want to see them. 
 
 Q. Did you not testify to what you had furnished John F. 
 and on other occasions that you have said nothing about ? 
 
 A. I recollect testifying before Judge Bellows, but I don t acw? 
 remember what it was. 
 
 Q. Did you testify to what you had lost by John F, Neally. 
 
 A. I think I might have lost a small amount, but I could not tell 
 how much ; I think it was a small amount. 
 
 Q. Did you buy any gold stock of anybody ? If so, of whom, asi? 
 when did you buy it, and how much did you give for it ? 
 
 A. I bought $750 worth of gold stock of Mr. G-ilmore. 
 
 Q. Was it what was called the Messigemet ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That was dead loss wasn t it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that has gone up. 
 
 Q. Was it 1864, about the time you subscribed for the diama*i? 
 pin ? 
 
 A. I don t remember subscribing for a diamond pin ; I didn t saj 
 that I did. 
 
390 
 
 Q. You remember there was such a thing? 
 
 A. 1 recollect there was something said about getting up a diamond 
 pin, but whether I paid anything towards it, 1 can t remember, I 
 might or I might not ; I cant say. 
 
 Q. Did you lose anything by the Pawtuckaway Bank stock V 
 
 A. I believe there was about $250 there. 
 
 Q. When did you lose that? 
 
 A. I think I have got it down here ; I am not certain. I will give 
 you the dates, if I have them. 
 
 Q. I want to know about the date of the Pawtuckaway Bank stock ? 
 
 A. That was sometime ago. That was, I should think it might be 
 along in 1858 or 1859 I should think, but I can t recollect. I have 
 got that down somewhere, the whole of it. 
 
 Q. I will ask you of losses, if any, by Moses Fellows ? 
 
 A. My impression is that I didn t lose much ; I don t recollect how 
 that was. 
 
 Q. How much did you lose, do you think ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect how that was ; 1 think it was small, if anything. 
 
 Q. Moses Fellows owed you at the time of his failure ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I had an interest in a stable there one time ; I think 
 that is the way 1 happened to get his note. I sold out a stable, and 
 took his note in part pay, if 1 recollect right. 
 
 Q. Has that note ever been paid. 
 
 A. I think I got my pay ; I think a man by the name of Haskell 
 paid it, I think he did. 
 
 Q. Did you not lose from $300 to $500 in that transaction. 
 
 A. I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Will you say you did not ? 
 
 A. I can t say that 1 did not, but rny impression is that the loss 
 there was small. I think the note was some $800 ; I ain t quite sure 
 about it, but I was thinking that a man by the name of Haskell paid it 
 
 Q. Did you sue it and get out an execution ? 
 
 A. I don t know how ; it strikes me that I didn t sue it ; I can t 
 tell. 
 
 Q. I was asking you yesterday with regard to the sand bank specu 
 lation. Was that a bank out in Massachusetts or Connecticut that was 
 alleged would make glass ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you buy it of Robert Moore ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Was he. the one who negotiated the trade? 
 
 A. He was the one that told me about it ; I went out there and 
 bought it. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Moore and Mr. Collis, and others have a similar bank, 
 and was it adjoining? 
 
 A. It was in the same town. It was probably less than an acre, 
 right in the town of New Milford. 
 
 Q. You paid $500 for it ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. How many times did you go out there, 
 
 A. Twice. I went out and bought it. This Robert Moore sold it. 
 and forged the deed. I found it out and I arrested Moore. I went 
 out there and the man that bought it of him. Moore took Brad. Cilley 
 out with him to settle the matter ; and it was settled. C-illey, I think, 
 paid ; that is, paid me for the land. 
 
391 
 
 Q. Paid you how much ? 
 
 A I think it was $500. 
 
 Q. You state that was the amount ? 
 
 A. That is my impression. 
 
 Q. Is your impression very distinct ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Won t you say that Mr. Cilley paid you just the amount of your 
 expense ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; no such thing ; I got pay for the land. 
 
 Q. How many years did you own it ? 
 
 A. It might have been perhaps three or four ; something like that ; 
 I cannot tell exactly. 
 
 Q, Wasn t it eight or ten ? 
 
 A. I don t think it was. 
 
 Q. You spoke of the California speculation. Did you send some 
 people out to California in the early gold fever, and find them with 
 money ? 
 
 A- No, sir ; not that I recollect of. 
 
 Q. Say you didn t ? 
 
 A. I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Can you tell whether you did or did not ? 
 
 A. I don t believe I did. 
 
 Q. Can t you tell absolutely? 
 
 A. There was a party of us got out a cargo of stuff and sent it to 
 California, that I had an interest in. 
 
 Q. How much did you put in ? 
 
 A. I think I put in $2000 and got back $1000. Robert Pecker was 
 the man. 
 
 Q. Didn t you furnish people money to go out to California ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Who else went into that California speculation that Pecker had 
 to do with, besides you, here in town, that put money in ? 
 
 A. I think a fellow by the name of Jones. I think they sent him 
 out. Pecker was the man. 
 
 Q. Can you state who were your associates in putting money into 
 this? 
 
 A. I don t remember. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to swear that you got fifty per cent, back ? 
 
 A. I believe I do. 
 
 Q. Are you willing to state that as an absolute fact? 
 
 A. Yes, I think I will. I know I lost $1000; and if I put in 
 $1000, I lost the whole of it; if I put in $2000 I got back half; I 
 know I lost $1000. 
 
 Q. If you put in $4000 how much did you lose ? 
 
 A. I didn t put in as much; I put in $1000 or $2000, and I lost 
 $1000. 
 
 Q. Did you make any memorandum of your loss there ? 
 
 A. I believe not. 
 
 Q. Have you any memorandum of any sort ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I have. 
 
 Q. Have you seen any in the last fifteen years in relation to it? 
 
 A- I don t know as 1 have. 
 
 Q. You have two sons, you have already testified ? 
 
 A, Yes, sir. 
 
392 
 
 Q. Your sons are now 21 and 19 years old ? 
 
 A. One 22, and the other 18. 
 
 Q. You have had these boys away to school, haven t you ? 
 
 A, One of them has been away ; and the youngest has been to Has- 
 over one term ; that is all. 
 
 Q. One is in college ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; he is in the Chandler school. 
 
 Q. How long was one of your boys at St. Johnsbury to school ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect how many terms he was there. 
 
 Q. About how long ? About what period of time ? 
 
 A. I should think perhaps one or two terms ; I don t recollect ; per 
 haps it may be more. 
 
 Q. One of your boys at Burlington to school ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long ? 
 
 A. I think he was there a year. , 
 
 Q. Either of your boys at the Military Institute at Merrimack to 
 school ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long ? 
 
 A. I think one or two terms. 
 
 Q. Can you tell how long ? 
 
 A. 1 don t remember. 
 
 Q. Have either of your boys been in the way of earning anything 
 up to this time ? 
 
 A. Not a great deal. 
 
 Q. You may state it if they have ? 
 
 A. The oldest boy is in a bookstore here ; been there a year and 
 over. 
 
 Q. And with that exception, is that all the earnings ? 
 
 A. Pretty much all, I think ; small, if anything. 
 
 Q. I will ask how much you paid for physicians bills ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; haven t had a great deal of sickness. 
 
 Q. You were sick here, were you not, down on South street ? When 
 jou were down on South street, did you pay Dr. Gage a bill ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Were you not sick down on South street, and attended by Dr. 
 Grage? 
 
 A. I don t recollect that I ever had him. 
 
 Q. You don t recollect Dr. Gage ever attending upon you ? 
 
 A, No, sir. 
 
 Q. Can you state how much you paid for physicians bills ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I can. 
 
 Q. Have you had a large amount of cemented pavement laid about 
 the walks and grounds connected with your house V 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How much was the bill ? t 
 
 A. I think the bill was about $200. 
 
 Q. Will you say it was not $500 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, I think so. 
 
 Q. How much have you paid for legal services ? Have you paid 
 Mr. Kolfe for example ? 
 
 A. I haven t settled with Mr. Rolfe for I don t know as I have fox- 
 five or six years. 
 
393 
 
 Q. Have you paid him any money, and if so how much ? 
 
 A. Yes, 1 have let him have some money, I think. 
 
 Q, How much ? 
 
 A. I don t remember how much. 
 
 Q. State as nearly as you can? 
 
 A. I think I have got his note for what he owes me ; but I don r t 
 recollect how much it is. 
 
 Q. I ask you how much you have paid him for services. He has* 
 stated that you are very intimate, and he has done your business, And- 
 he has been your counsel in lawsuits, has he not ? 
 
 A. He has. 
 
 Q. I want to know how much you hav-e paid him ? 
 
 A. 1 could not tell. 
 
 Q. Give the best statement you can make, how much money you 
 have let Mr. Eolfe have for which you have not got his note, for the last 
 twenty years ? Will you answer^ the question as near as you can ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. I want you to state as near as you can, the amount that you haven t 
 got his notes for to-day ? 
 
 A. I believe I have got a few charges on my book. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, did you understand my question ? If you didn t I 
 will repeat it. How much money have you paid Mr. Eolfe for the last 
 twenty years, that is not represented by notes that you hold against him 
 to-day ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Won t you state as near as you can ? 
 
 A. It would be guess work. It might be $1000; call it that; it 
 will be all guess work. 
 
 Q. Isn t it a much larger sum than that? 
 
 A. I don t think it is. 
 
 Q. Can t you state ? 
 
 A. I can t unless I have the bills. 
 
 Q, Have you never paid him any money apart from bills ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I have no recollection. 
 
 Q. Ever let him have any money made him any presents ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How much have you paid other lawyers? 
 
 A. Paid Mr. Tappan $25. That is all 1 think of now. 
 
 Q. Pay Judge Minot a retainer ? 
 
 A. Haven t paid him anything yet ; I expect there is a bill there". 
 
 Q. I was asking about what you have paid in cash ? 
 
 A, I don t recollect anything else except what I paid Col. Tappa& 
 for retainer. 
 
 Q. Haven t you paid Ayer and Foster money ? 
 
 A. 1 don t know about Mr. Ayer. Foster sold some land down there : 
 I don t know but he had a commission on that. 
 
 Q. Didn t give Foster anything for a settlement by an execution OK. 
 the account of Moses Fellows when Moses Fellows failed ? 
 
 A. I think that Mr. Foster has done some business for me ; but I 
 don t know how much it waa. 
 
 Q. Have you paid Mr. Morrison anything ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect as Mr. Morrison done any business for me at all. 
 
 Q. Didn t Mr. Morrison bring a suit for you on which an execution 
 was recovered in the Tasker and Fellows matter? And didn t Foster 
 subsequently make an adjustment ? 
 
394 
 
 A. Mr. Morrison has done, I think, all iny business that I had to do 
 in Manchester ; but I don t think his bills were very large. 
 
 Q. Did you tell Mr. George W. Morrison when you adjusted that, 
 that you would make it right when he had occasion to pass over the 
 road ? 
 
 A. No, sir; I never told him any such thing ; and he or any other 
 man that states so states false. I understand that Mr. Morrison made 
 that statement ; but it is false. 
 
 Q. I understood you to state that your insurance cost you, for all 
 the time up to the present time, $341 and some cents? 
 
 A. I think when I was making up my property - 
 
 Q. I haven t asked you for any explanation. I am merely asking 
 your attention to this fact. I see in your estimate for 1866, you have 
 stated your insurance that year to be $80.99. 
 
 A. It seems to be so there. 
 
 Q. I want to know how you make out your insurance to be $300, if 
 .the insurance on your property was for one year, $80. This was in 
 J.865, and the return was made in 1866 ? 
 
 Mr. Tappan, How long does that policy run? 
 
 Mr. George. This is a policy paid by the owner. 
 
 Q. How do you make your insurance $341 and some cents and your 
 .return for one year, $80 ? 
 
 A. Those statements were made out, some of them by Mr. Kolfe, 
 .and some of them by my nephew ; and they both know about my mat 
 ters as well as myself; and I always told them to make it up correctly ; 
 and at the time I was making up my business assets, and taking out the 
 interest an,d so on, I went to Mr. Keyes, and got him to take off the 
 statement as near as he could. He done all my insurance. And he 
 made it. I have given it, I think, in making it out, 300 and some 
 -odd dollars 
 
 Q. You mean to say, and take the position, that it was not true, and 
 that you swore it was true ; and that you swore it to be true because 
 j-ou supposed somebody else made it up true ? Which position do you 
 mean to take ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Well, take another item, The next is repairs, repairs of build 
 ings, average paid out, for the preceding five years, including amounts 
 
 id for permanent improvements thereon, $577,66. Was th 
 
 permanent improvements thereon, $577,66. Was that true, 
 sir, or wasn t it true? 
 
 A. I don t know, I am sure. As I said before, these were made out 
 by other men, and 1 supposed it was right. 
 
 Q. Which position do you take now ; whether it was true or was not 
 true ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell, but my intention was to have them right. 
 
 Q. You swore to that return as being true, did you not ? 
 
 A. I suppose I swore to them. 
 
 Q. According to this statement, you paid on the average, the five 
 preceding years, in round numbers, $3000 for ordinary repairs? If 
 this statement is true, which you swore to, you paid for the five preced 
 ing years $3000 in round numbers ? Now, if this statement is true, 
 you paid out for the five preceding years $28,088.30 for ordinary repairs 
 on your buildings ? 
 
 A. I don t think there is that amount paid out ; I don t know how 
 at is. 
 
395 
 
 .Q. You swore that that was so, didn t you ? 
 
 A. I guess so, by that. 
 
 Q. And adding the preceding year, it makes out $34,065.96 for the 
 ordinary building, without improvements. Now, you have put in what 
 jf ou allowed the aggregate amount of taxes you have paid. You have 
 .stated here that the national, state and local taxes paid in a single year 
 were $10,016.25. That is considerably more than a quarter part of 
 what yeu have stated I take it you gave the same statement as in the 
 4eposition you stated that you paid in all the taxes you had ever paid ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I don t think that Mr. Clough has made any such 
 statement. He stated that he paid so much to the city of Concord ; and 
 he certificate shows it. 
 
 Mr. George. I stand corrected. 
 
 Q. What taxes did you pay, apart from the Jamaica Plains land. 
 ; and poll taxes, and the Orange farm, and apart from the taxes on the 
 Page place, except what you paid in Concord. 
 
 A. I don t know that I paid any? 
 
 Q. Now, sir, the taxes on the Jamaica Plains land (according to 
 your statement,) and the taxes on the Orange farm and the Page place, 
 .amounted to how much in a single year"? Take the year 1864. 
 
 A , i think on the Jamaica Plains property in 1864 there was paid 
 $34 or $35, if I recollect right. I have got bills of these taxes, 1 think, 
 .at home. 
 
 Q. About how much? No matter about a dollar or five dollars? 
 
 A. I think it was about $34 or $35 a year on the Jamaica Plains 
 land. 
 
 Q. And how much on the Orange farm, and how much on the Page 
 -place ? 
 
 A. The Orange farm, I rented that for five years. The man paid the 
 staxes and gave me so much. 
 
 Q. Then there are included in the amount of taxes paid by you but 
 $1025 that you swear you paid, are there? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. Is there any doubt that the taxes paid by the ten- 
 rants are just as much a part of the rent as anything else. 
 
 Mr. George. As there is no rent put in here at all as I shall coine 
 {fco in a moment it is perhaps not very material. 
 
 I wish to state the four income returns that we have here of 1864, 
 5865, 1866 and 1867. The amounts are, that he has sworn to as 
 paid taxes: for 1864, $882.08 ; for 1865, $1016.25; for 1866 $769.14; 
 /or 1867, $815.11 ; making $3482.58. 
 
 Q. Your taxes were pretty light for the balance of your life, if the 
 aggregate paid in for these years was $3400 ? 
 
 A. The taxes were taken off from the city clerks book ; and 1 sup 
 pose they were all in. 
 
 Q. I am assuming that your statement is correct. Now, sir, we will 
 <come to another point. In 1864 you have sworn that the amount actu 
 ally paid for insurance of homestead is $100. Have you so sworn there ? 
 
 A. I should think so. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt about it ? 
 
 A. I made oath to these papers, I think. 
 
 Q. It is a paper stating that the actual amount paid for homestead 
 was $100? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
396 
 
 Q Who paid the insurance on your Masonic Temple ? That was 
 insured all the time ? It never has been uninsured ? Has it ever been 
 uninsured ? 
 
 A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. For what sum ? 
 
 A. I believe I got $7500 on my lot. 
 
 Q. What is the rate of insurance that you are to-day paying for that 
 insurance ? 
 
 A. I think it is one per cent. 
 
 Q. You mean one per cent, a year ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That would be $75. How much is the Allison property insured 
 for? 
 
 A. I think my part is insured for $2000. That is my impression. 
 
 Q. What do you pay on that ? 
 
 A. I pay the same. 
 
 Q. Do you pay the same on a wooden building that you do on a 
 brick building ? 
 
 A. it is my impression that it is one per cent., but I may be mis 
 taken. 
 
 Q. Are you certain that it is not one and a half per cent, that you 
 pay for that? There would be $95 a year if you are correct. How 
 much are you paying on your house, and for how much is it insured ? 
 I mean the house that is in Mrs. Clough s name ? 
 
 A. My house and furniture are insured, i think, for $15.000. 
 
 Q. How much on the house, and how much on the furniture ? 
 
 A. I don t know how it is divided. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to bring your insurance policy on your 
 house and furniture when you come down this afternoon ? 
 
 A. I will. 
 
 Q. How much are you paying for that ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it is one per cent, for five years. 
 
 Q. That would be then, if you are correct, $30 a year. Now, will 
 you state how it was that in 1864 you paid $100 on your homestead 
 for what that payment was ? What was the amount of insurance ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; I cannot tell anything about it. 
 
 Q. Are your buildings on Thompson street insured ? 
 
 A. I believe they are. 
 
 If you will put in all your policies as they exist to-day, it will per 
 haps save time. 
 
 I can bring them all in. i have got some in the bank. The Ma 
 sonic Temple is in the bank. 
 
 Q. These are in stock companies your policies ? 
 
 A. I think they are, all of them. 
 
 Q. I will pass the insurance matter, because if Mr. Glough brings 
 his policies, these will show. Mr. Clough, you said in your examina 
 tion, that Mr. James R. Hill bought a lot of stock in the Concord Rail 
 road 150 shares, I understood you upon a bond given to him and 
 signed by the other directors to indemnify him against loss. Will you 
 state whether that stock, after the annual meeting, was transferred to 
 you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I bought it. 
 
 Q. W T hat did you give for it ? 
 
 A. 1 think it was 61. 
 
397 
 
 Q. Do you know ? Have you any memorandum any minutes ? 
 
 A. 1 have not. 
 
 Q. How long after the annual meeting before that stock was trans 
 ferred to you ? 
 
 A. I can tell by the date of the note I have. That stock was bought 
 in November, 1867, I gave my note to the Merrimack River Savings 
 Bank for $10,000. That is the money that bought that stock. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, it is agreed on all hands that the transfer books of 
 the corporation may be used without authentication. I have here a 
 schedule that, May 1st, 1867, James E. Hill conveyed, by certificate 
 No. , 150 shares of stock. How was that paid for? 
 
 A. The May notes that $10,000 that I borrowed at the savings 
 bank, and then six months interest from that time. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) You bought first in May 1st. 
 
 A. I bought it May 1st. I paid six months interest in advance. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) And the loss between what Mr. Hill took it 
 for and the amount you bought it for, how much was that ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; no trad^ of mine, that wasn t. 
 
 Q. Did you state in your deposition that they agreed together to 
 pay the loss ? 
 
 A. I should not know anything about it. I never had a cent s 
 worth of interest in it. I never so stated in my deposition, or anywhere 
 else. I paid the loss on the Shaw stock. 
 
 Q. I understood you to state that Mr. Spalding knew that you were 
 carrying this express matter backward and forward on the train ; and 
 that you had conversation with him in regard to it ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. If the gentleman means to say that Mr. Clough tes 
 tified to that, he is mistaken. 
 
 The Chairman. The recollection of the referees is this : that Mr. 
 Clough thought Mr. Spalding knew of it when he was doing it, and 
 that he afterwards had a talk about it with Mr. Spalding, and he told 
 him he had better stop. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Do you mean to be understood that Mr. 
 Spalding, or either of the board of directors, or the superintendent, 
 knew with regard to your carrying express matter on the train ? 
 
 A. I suppose that Judge Upham knew it at the time, but I don t 
 know that fact. 
 
 Q. Did you pay anything to the road for the privi.ege of doing ex 
 press business over it ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. Mr. Spalding was, at that time, president of the road, was he 
 not? 
 
 A. He was. 
 
 Q. Won t you state the conversation which you allege you had with 
 Mr. Spalding on that subject? 
 
 A. It was one day that it was my train down at ten o clock from 
 here, and Judge Upham says to me that Mr. Spalding was coming up 
 and wanted to see me wished me to stop over a train. In the morn 
 ing, Mr. Spalding came up ; came up in the morning train. I was in 
 Judge Upham s office at the time, when he came in ; and he said that 
 there had been a complaint entered to him that I was carrying express 
 matter and produce, and such stuff. He wished I wouldn t carry any 
 more ; said if I carried the others might want to. He did nt care about 
 I had carried, but wished I wouldn t carry any more. That is 
 
398 
 
 what the conversation was, as near as I can recollect. I never did 
 carry any after that. 
 
 Q. And prior to that time you had carried express matter to the ex 
 tent that you had made $5200, according to your estimate ? Is that sot 
 
 A. I should have to look at my deposition. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} When you speak of express matter, does- 
 that mean stuff that you carried on your own account there ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Or packages you took for other people ? 
 
 A. There were some packages that I took for others, but mostly for 
 myself. 
 
 Q. Stuff that you bought and carried to market? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; stuff that I carried to market. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Including both kinds that that you carried 
 for other people and that that you carried for yourself, but mostly for 
 yourself? That is. correct, is it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. There it is. sir [showing statement] ; chicken and produce trade 
 $5200? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is so. 
 
 Q. Then you mean to be understood I repeat the question that 
 before you allege Mr. Spalding spoke to you, as you have stated, yois 
 had carried these various articles to such an extent that the profit had 
 amounted to $5200, according to your estimation? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; according to what I had estimated at the time. 
 
 Q. I will take the peanut business. As I understand your testimony* 
 you say that you paid a boy or boys upon the cars, and kept that boy 
 upon the cars selling peanuts, and the other articles which you enume 
 rate. And you estimate that your profits from that was $3276 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is the case. 
 
 Q. Won t you explain how that is made up ? 
 
 A. I think I estimated it a $1.50 a day profit. How I came to sug 
 gest that, I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, was there any person connected with the railroad, sc- 
 far as you know, that knew you had a boy on the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who of the directors, or what employee of the road, knew that 
 you had a boy on the cars ? 
 
 A. They always have had a boy on the cars. 
 
 Q. Who knew that you had a boy on the cars ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether they knew it or not. 
 
 Q. Did ever you tell any of the directors or the superintendent of 
 the Concord Railroad that you were hiring a boy. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge inquired what was the object of this testimony? 
 
 Mr. George. I distinctly desire to put it on one ground ; that he is 
 liable to the road for the fare of the boy and the profits. Because if he 
 did this thiug without the knowledge of the directors of the road he \& 
 liable in one way or another for the profits that he received and the fare 
 of the boy. And I put it on the second ground, if it should be held 
 that we cannot recover under this form of action, that this attempt to* 
 account for his property in this way is perfectly absurd and ridiculous, 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. If the counsel puts in on the last ground, I withdraw 
 the objection. But that wasn t the way he stated it before. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Now, Mr. Clough, I want to ask you if there 
 was a single director or officer on the road who had any knowledge, so 
 
399 
 
 far as you arc aware, that you were employing boys to run on the cars- 
 to sell peanuts ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether they knew it or not. 
 
 Q. Did you ever tell anybody so, prior to the commencement of this 
 suit ? 
 
 A, 1 don t know whether I did or not. 
 
 (. Did you pay anything, for having that boy ride backward and 
 forward in the cars, to the corporation ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, you have referred to a number of people with whom 
 you had negotiations ; Mr. Bayrnond Kimball, for one. Is he dead ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. * 
 
 Q. Mr. True Garland. Is he dead ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. Stephen Osgood, Is he dead ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; I think he is. 
 
 Q. Bobert E. Pecker, is he dead ? 
 
 A. Y"es, sir. 
 
 Q. I will ask you, who were those boys that made this $3200 selling; 
 peanuts? 
 
 A. There was one boy, from Manchester, by the name of Clongk,- 
 Then I believe there was a boy by the name of Osgood. 
 
 Q. Where are they? 
 
 A. I don t know where they are. 
 
 Q. How many years since you have seen either of them ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I have seen them since they left. 
 
 Q. How many years since they ran ? 
 
 A. They ran on the road six or seven years for me. 
 
 Q. How long since you have seen either of them? 
 
 A. I don t kuow as I have for ten years. 
 
 Q. Don t know where they are ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Know whether they are living or dead ? 
 
 A. I don t. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, was there a suit brought agaist the Concord Railroad 
 of the fact of which you were aware, by Mr. Noyes putting Mr. Hor 
 ace Johnson off the train for attempting to ride on a ticket that he- 
 bought in Chicago ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The objection is that they cannot prove a suit in that 
 way, and what it is brought for. 
 
 Mr. George. That is not the point at all. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. So far as anything is implied from the question, that 
 is implied, and nothing else. 
 
 The Chairman. We do not think, in this case, it is necessary that 
 the existence of that case should be proved in the first instance, before- 
 inquiries are made about it. The case has been cited, here, perhaps, OB 
 both sides. We do not think it is necessary to prove, by the clerk of 
 the court, the existence of the suit before Mr. Clough can have knowl 
 edge of it. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Clough, were you aware of the suit that 
 was pending between Mr. Noyes and Horace Johnson ? 
 
 A. I heard that there was a suit of that kind. 
 
 Q. You knew of the existence of that suit at the time ? 
 
 A. I heard about it. 
 
400 
 
 Q. Were you present in court at the time that was being tried? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of it. 
 
 Q. Were you not stopping off the train, and were you not up in the 
 morning to see Judge Upham ? 
 
 A. I don t think I was. 
 
 Q. Will you say you was not ? 
 
 A. I don t think I was 
 
 Q. Was the matter of that suit a matter of talk between you^and 
 the officers and directors of the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I suppose we talked about it at the time. 
 
 Q. You knew the fact that the road were taking the ground that Mr. 
 Noyes did right in putting Mr. Johnson from the cars ? 
 
 A. I suppose they were, or else they would not have stood a law 
 suit. 
 
 Q. You had no doubt about that fact at that time? 
 
 A. I supposed they were. 
 
 Q. Y"ou knew that the road were justifying the action of Mr. Noyes 
 in. putting Mr. Johnson off the cars ? 
 
 A. I supposed they thought so. 
 
 Q. That was your supposition at that time ? 
 
 A. I think very likely. I don t know what it was at that time. 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt about it, sir ? 
 
 A. 1 suppose that the company thought they were right or else they 
 wouldn t defend the suit. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to swear that at the same time you with Mr. Gil- 
 inore s assent were buying and selling tickets to people ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. There is no such position taken in the case. 
 
 A. I understood that it was an old ticket, a spent ticket, that Mr. 
 Johnson had. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by spent ticket ? 
 
 A. That the date had run out. 
 
 Q. Did you understand at that time that the road took the position 
 that tinder their rules tickets were only good on the day of their date, 
 and for such further time as would enable the passenger to reach his 
 destination by the continuous trains of the road ? Did you understand 
 that was the ground on which the suit was brought, and Mr. Johnson 
 opposed? Will you look at that. There is the very ticket on which 
 lie rode. Won t you look at that and see what you meant by spent 
 ticket ? 
 
 A. I should suppose that if Mr. Johnson or any other man rode on 
 ihat, on the 18th day of October, it would not be good. 
 
 Q. Why not? 
 
 A. Because it has gone by the date. 
 
 Q. Wtat date ? 
 
 A. The 17th. These are long tickets western tickets. 
 
 -.Q. Go on and explain what you mean ? 
 
 A. I have nothing more to say about it as I know of. 
 
 Q. You say that you should suppose if he attempted to ride on that 
 <tn the 18th day of October, he would have no right to ride on it. Now 
 why not? 
 
 A. Because the date has run out, and it was a western ticket. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by the date s running out? 
 
 A. I mean that if a person rode on that after the 17th that is what 
 I mean. 
 
401 
 
 Q. I do not understand what you mean by that. Won t you explain 
 yourself? 
 
 A. For instance, if a man should have this ticket in his possession 
 after the 17th of October, 1860, it is not supposed it would be good. 
 Q. Why not? 
 
 A. Because the date had run out. 
 
 Q. Why because the date had run out? Do you mean by the date s 
 running out that it was used one day after. Why because of that? 
 Why because the date had run out, sir ? 
 
 A. Because that was the object of dating these long tickets, and to 
 have them ride on them while they were good. 
 
 Q. Can a man come from Chicago to Boston in one day ? 
 
 A. That probably was dated 
 
 The Chairman. You understand by that that the date that is put on 
 there is the date of the ticket, or the date on which it is used ? 
 
 A. These tickets generally said "good for thirty days," but that 
 ticket don t seem to state so. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Was it because there was a rule of the road 
 that you say it would not be good ? 
 
 A. I never saw I don t recollect seeing a ticket dated in that way. 
 
 Q. I am asking now in regard to these tickets. I ask you if it was 
 because there was a rule of the road regulating the tickets that you say 
 it would not be good? 
 
 A. We never paid attention to dates on our local tickets. Probably 
 these tickets were given with the understanding that they should have 
 time to go through on. All the western tickets that ever I saw or had, 
 if there was any date at all, it was dated, "good for thirty days," 
 
 Mr. George. This is the rule that was actually passed, the paper that 
 was served upon Mr, Clough, under the rules of 1860. All tickets 
 over the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence roads, said tickets shall 
 only entitle the passenger to a passage on the day of their date, provided 
 that joint tickets shall be good for such further time as shall enable the 
 passenger to reach his destination by the continuous trains of the road. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Was that rule in force at the time of this 
 suit? 
 
 A. Yes, certainly. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.} Was there any rule at this time in the 
 instructions of 1860 prohibiting the using or selling of these coupon 
 tickets. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The case don t show that it was a rule of 1860. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Won t you look and see if that was the notice 
 served on you ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Tappan. In one word I will just state my position. In the 
 absence of any rule to the contrary, these tickets, I hold were good in 
 the hands of anybody until they had spent their force. 
 
 Mr. George. They had spent their force. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. That is a matter of argument. 
 
 The Chairman. Precisely what is the question put ? 
 
 Q, I want to ask you if you received the original, of which this is 
 a copy, from Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
 A. I think it is. 
 
 Q. Is there any doubt that it is ? 
 
 A- I think there isn t any. 
 
 Mr. George read that the notice was dated Dec. 18th, 1860. 
 
402 
 
 Q. And yet, sir, notwithstanding that paper was served upon you f 
 you mean to testify here, do you, that you continued to buy and sell cou 
 pon tickets up to the time that you left the road ? [Objected to.] 
 
 A. I did, by permission of Mr, Gilmore. 
 
 Q. How long after Mr. Gilmore wrote you that letter, or had that 
 letter served upon you before you received his permission to buy and 
 sell coupon tickets over upper roads ? 
 
 A. 1 had a talk with him, after Ib60; I don t recollect precisely at 
 what time ; and told him that I was selling these tickets. He said that if 
 they were not out of date it was all right ; but not to sell them after 
 the date had run out. 
 
 Q. But the rule required, did it not, sir, that they were to be only 
 good on the day of their date, and on such continuous trains as would 
 enable the passengers to reach his destination ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Is the witness to be called upon to construe this rule ? 
 
 The Chairman. Perhaps you had better state the rule. 
 
 Q. [ After reading the rule.] That is what the rule provided, is 
 it not ? 
 
 A, Well, if the tickets were not dated, or if they were dated good 
 for thirty days, and were used during that time, they were supposed to 
 be good. And I had permission from Mr. Gilmore to buy and sell them, 
 
 Q. Did you understand that the object of that rule, at the time, was 
 to prevent their use for local tickets ? [Objected to on the ground that 
 the question had been directly and properly answered,] 
 
 Q. Did you understand that the object of the rule was to prevent 
 the substitution of through for local tickets ? 
 
 The Chairman. This rule here is in these words: "As soon as 
 practicable all tickets over the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence 
 roads shall be dated on the day of the sale, and only entitle the hold 
 ers, &c.," As soon as practicable after this rule. Now that seems ta 
 recognize that tickets might continue for sometime to be used, and to 
 be good for some particular time ; and it would be the duty of the con 
 ductor to recognize them. And it seems in that view of the case that 
 Mr. Clough has answered the question. It seems to me that the ques 
 tion is answered, Col. George. 
 
 Mr. George. These rules, if it please the referees, went into opera 
 tion on the 1st of January. 
 
 The Chairman. If you want to get at some other matter, why don t 
 you put another question ? 
 
 Mr. George. I want to ask Mr. Clough if he did not understand the 
 object of the rule to be to prevent a person going and buying a through 
 ticket and substituting it for a local fare. 
 
 Q. (By Mr George.} Did you understand the object of the rule 
 was to prevent the substitution of a through ticket for a local fare ? 
 
 A. I did not understand by the rules that we were prohibited 
 taking tickets within the date, 
 
 Q. I don t ask what you understood about other matters. I ask you 
 if you understood one of the objects of the rule was to prevent the 
 substitution T>f a through ticket for a local fare, 
 
 A. I don t think I did understand it so. 
 
 Q. Have you with you now any notes of indebtedness to you ? If 
 BO, please produce them. 
 
 Witness hands to counsel a package of notes of which the following 
 is a list : 
 

 403 
 
 Note of J. P. Eaton; dated March 29, 1866, for $136, with arnraa! 
 interest. Endorsed, "April 9, 1866, received $23.25 on this note. * 
 
 Note of Edward Shanks; dated July 1, 1856, for $100. Several en 
 dorsements of payments. Due, July 29, 1865, $59.12. 
 
 Note of Henry F. Chickering; dated January 2, 1864, for $200, pay 
 able on demand with interest annually. No endorsements. 
 
 Note of J. D. Cooper; dated July 27, 1861, for $30, payable on de 
 mand with interest. No endorsements. 
 
 Note of Eliza A. Morse, Martha Morse, and others ; dated December 
 30, 1863, for $100, payable on demand, with interest annually. 
 
 Note of D. T. Whipple; dated June 28, 1864, for $125, payable ess 
 demand; interest annually, Endorsed March 16, 1866 received in 
 terest up to January 28, 1866. 
 
 Note of D. T. Whipple and Harriet S. Whipple ; dated March 17,. 
 
 1866, for $900, payable two years from date; interest semi-annually . 
 Endorsed Sept. 11, 1866 received on the within note $273; Fek 11* 
 
 1867, received $132, on the within note. 
 
 Note of I. W. Wilmeth and Harriet W. Wilmeth, Bloomington, Ills;, 
 for $500 ; dated Oct. 13, 1862 ; due two years after date ; interest at 
 the rate of ten per cent, from date. Endorsed Oct. 17, received the: 
 interest on the within note to Oct. 13, 1863, being $50; also two other 
 endorsements, receipting interest to Oct. 13, 1865. 
 
 Note of J. H. Wilmeth, Bloomington, Ills.; dated Feb. 26, 1863, for 
 $500 ; interest at ten per cent, endorsements of interest paid to Feb. 20 ? , 
 1866. 
 
 Note of Patrick Glennen ; dated April 1, 1867, for $189.96 ; interest 
 payable semi-annually, at six per cent. Endorsed June 27, received 
 on the within as principal, $40. 
 
 Note of John McDonald; dated April 1, 1867, for $366; payable 
 one year from date with interest semi-annually, at six per cent. 
 
 Note of Minerva B. Fuller and Charles A. Fuller ; dated January 17,, 
 1867, for $837.50, payable $100 annually, with interest. Endorsed 
 Jan. 28, 1868; received $50, on within note; Sept. 5, 1868; received 
 $100 on within note. 
 
 Note of W. B. Hoyt; dated January 17, 1867, for $137.50; payable 
 $25 annually with interest. Endorsed January 18, 1868; received 
 $35 on within note. * 
 
 Note of Michael McDonald; dated April 1. 1867, for $467.25; due 
 one year from date ; interest semi-annually. Endorsed received July 
 23, 1867, on the within note, $100. 
 
 Note of George F. Sewell ; dated Dec. 4, 1868; $307.25, with inter 
 est. 
 
 Note of Mary H, Smart; dated July 17, 1867, for $134; interest, 
 semi-annually. 
 
 Note of David Hurley; dated July 1, 1867, for $352.86; interest 
 semi-annually at six per cent, 
 
 Note of George Noyes for $4000. 
 
 Q. Have you any other notes or evidence of debt, or of moaey 
 owing to you from any person, directly or indirectly besides these ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t think 1 have. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that you had Mr. Kolfe s note. Perfeaps 
 I misunderstood you ? 
 
 A. You did misunderstand me. That note has been paid. 
 
 Q. Did you not state that you had loaned him money and had Ms 
 note ? or did you mean that you had had it, but that it was now 
 
404 
 
 A. I don t think I stated so. I had a note against him for $6000 ; 
 but that has been paid. 
 
 Q. At the time your deposition was taken you stated that you had 
 notes for money loaned, amounting in all, to $15, 205. 39. Are you able 
 to state what those notes were at that time ? 
 
 A. I have a schedule here of all my notes ; but a portion of those 
 notes have been paid since that time, 
 
 Q. Here is a note of John McDonald s, for $915.68, which has not 
 been produced here, nor is it marked paid on this memorandum. Has 
 that been paid ? 
 
 A. I think it has been paid, 
 
 Q. Here is "P. Sweeney $872.24," not marked paid. Why has 
 not that note been produced ? 
 
 A. That may be at home. I supposed I had all my notes here. 
 
 Q. "Thomas McGuire $357.06." 
 
 A. That is one of the Jamaica Plains notes, and I think it must be 
 in another package. 
 
 Q. Here is M. E. Donahoe s note for $571.54. 
 
 A. That must be in the other package. 
 
 Q. Patrick Glennen s note $225.36. Where is that? 
 
 A. That must be in the same package. 
 
 Q. Don t he live in Concord ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; all the notes you have read to me are Jamaica Plains 
 notes. 
 
 Q. John McGrlennan $261,61. Have you that note ? 
 
 A. I think I have all those notes at my house, 
 
 Q. James Munson $916; where is that? 
 
 A. I think it must be at my house. 
 
 Q. Can you tell whether he has paid you that amount of money 
 since your deposition was taken ? 
 
 A. 1 do not think it has been paid. 
 
 Q. D. M, Dearborn $444. Has that n ote been paid or protested ? 
 
 A. That note I paid away for a pair of horses. 
 
 Q. At the time your deposition was taken, hadn t you had those 
 horses for a long time ? and did you not testify about them ? 
 
 A. I. gave a note for a pair of buckskin horses, and I think that was 
 the note. 
 
 Q. My question is, did you not have the horses on hand at the time 
 the deposition was taken and did you not then testify about them ? 
 
 A. I don t remember? 
 
 Q. Do you say now you gave that note for those horses ? 
 
 A. I let Mr. Kolfe have a note ; it was my impression when I spoke 
 about it before, that that was the note. 
 
 Q. You have not produced it here, and it has not been paid, has it ? 
 
 A. I can t tell. 
 
 Q. Has the note of Patrick Baker, for $1280, been paid? 
 
 A. No, sir ; it is in Mr. Eolfe s hands to collect. 
 
 Q. Does anybody owe you anything besides these notes ? 
 
 A. I don t think of any one else who does. 
 
 Q. Does anybody owe you now anything that is not represented by 
 the notes ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any other property besides ? 
 
 A. I don t think that I have any other property besides what I have 
 mentioned. 
 
405 
 
 Q. Neither directly nor indirectly? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Please give your present indebtedness, excluding the notes signed 
 on account of Barter & Co., where you have an interest in the store? 
 
 A. I hired that money and paid it in there. I mortgaged some of 
 my real estate to do it. I mortgaged the Masonic Temple for $7500, 
 and $5000 of it went into the firm of Barter & Co. I have here a list. 
 [Produces paper.] Amoskeag Bank, $6000 ; Keuben Lake, $3000 ; 
 Perley Clough, $2100, 
 
 Q. Did you testify that the money that you hired from Mr. Bartlett 
 went to pay your brother, Perley Clough ? 
 
 A. In part. I did not pay him all, 
 
 Q. What was the original note ? 
 
 A. I think the note, in the first place, was for $6000. I bought one 
 hundred shares of stock with him. 
 
 Q. Did you send some money to pay that note with that you handed 
 to Mr. Bartlett? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. How much ? 
 
 A. Eighteen hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. How much was the note befora you sent the $1800? 
 
 A. My impression is that it was $6000. 
 
 Q. Then that would leave $4200 still due, and the interest ? 
 
 A. I think that is the amount, I paid some before that. 
 
 Q. In whose hand-writing is that memorandum ? 
 
 A. In my nephew s. [Witness reads from memorandum]. $6900 
 was the original amount of the note. I paid, Feb. 15, 1868, $3000 ; 
 Oct. 31, $1800, which would leave due, $4100. 
 
 Q. The next item is the Merrimac Eiver Savings Bank, $10,000. 
 Has any of that been paid ? 
 
 A. Nothing but the interest. 
 
 Q. C. H. Carpenter, $3100; C. H. Capenter, $1500. Have either 
 of these notes been paid, or any portion of them ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; nothing but the interest. 
 
 Q. When was this statement made ? 
 
 A. It was made within a week or two. 
 
 Q. Since this hearing commenced ?. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. First National Savings Bank, $3200 ; First National Savings 
 Bank. $7500. Where did that $3200 go to ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. I think, perhaps I bought some stock with it. 
 
 Q. Did any part of the $7500 go to Barter & Co. ? 
 
 A. Five thousand dollars did. 
 
 Q. C. H. Bartlett, cash $3000. Was that the indebtedness that you 
 pledged 50 shares of stock for ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. W. W. Elkins, $200. What was that for.? 
 
 A. For money. 
 
 Q. H. S. Shattuck, $3360. What was that for? 
 
 A. He had a mortgage on the Sherman House for $1500, at the 
 time I traded for it, and I gave my note to Mr. Dudley for $1500 more, 
 and he bought that note of Mr, Dudley and sold both notes together, 
 and holds both notes against me. 
 
 Q. Mr. Bickford, $150. What is that for? 
 
406 
 
 A. For money. 
 
 Q. H, S. Shattuck, $350, What was that for ? 
 
 A. A note that Shattuck has had on me for some time. I don t 
 recollect the transaction now. He has had the note, I think, four or 
 five years. I don t recollect exactly what the transaction was. 
 
 Q. E. S. Nutter, $672. What was that for? 
 
 A. Borrowed money. 
 
 Q. What did you borrow that for ? 
 
 A. I paid that money on account of the furniture that is in the 
 German House. 
 
 Q. At the time you gave your deposition you had $1700 of money 
 in hand, you stated. How much money on hand have you now ? 
 
 A. I guess that I have got about $50.00. No, I don t think I have 
 -as much as that. 
 
 Q. You mean to say that you have substantially no money on hand, 
 or on deposit,? 
 
 A. I have none in my pocket. 
 
 Q. And none on deposit? 
 
 A. I have none. 
 
 Q. If you have any more liabilities, you may state them and pro 
 duce them ? 
 
 A. That is all, I believe. 
 
 Q. What you have stated then constitutes yonr liabilities ? 
 
 A. I think so, 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that Mr. Elkins, a conductor on the Con 
 cord Kailroad, is dead ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any memorandum or papers of any kind showing your 
 transactions with Mr, Elkins? 
 
 JL I have not. 
 
 Q. Did you swear by anything then besides your mere memory of 
 the matter ? 
 
 A. I have no record. 
 
 Q. Your suggestion was very general. Can you state any facts any 
 more specifically than you have already stated them, in regard to your 
 alleged transactions with Mr. Elkins ? 
 
 A, I can state what they were. 
 
 *Q. Can you state in detail any more specifically than you have ? 
 
 A. I think I can tell all the operations between us. 
 
 Q. Any more specifically than you have ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 <^. Then please do so ? 
 
 A. I loaned Mr. Elkins $3000, in 1843, for the purpose of trading 
 In stocks, or anything else that he wished. 
 
 Q. I do not want you to repeat what you stated before, but I want 
 to know if you can give the details any fuller than you did before ? 
 
 A. I can tell you what the transactions were between us. What 
 anore can I do? 
 
 Q. My question is a plain one. You have made some general state 
 ments with regard to your transactions with Mr. Elkins. I now ask if 
 you can give the details any more specifically than you have already 
 done ? 
 
 A. I will go on and tell you, if you wish me to. I loaned him 
 $3000 in 1843. I think he came on to the Concord Kailroad at that 
 
407 
 
 time. He said that if he had some money he could make something. 
 He knew that I had some, and he came to me for it, and made a pro 
 position that if I would loan him Si 300 he would give me one quarter 
 of the profits and pay interest on the money. I let him have $3000, 
 &nd he was to divide the profits. Sometimes he would do so once a 
 month, and sometimes once in three months. If I did not want the 
 money at the time, he would give me his note. The matter ran along, 
 I think, for five or six years, and then we settled. The amount of 
 money he made for me in that length of time, including interest on the 
 notes, was about $5000. Whether a little more, or a little less than 
 that, I can t say. He had a broker in Boston, by the name of Plum- 
 mer, that did his business. He did not belong to the brokers board, 
 but was a street broker, who made in that time over $20,000. 
 
 Q. My question was whether you could state in detail any more than 
 you do ? 
 
 A. I cannot give any further details. I told it just as it was. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Do you know now what stock was bought 
 and who it was sold to ? 
 
 A. He bought a good deal of Amoskeag stock and sold it in the 
 .country, and sold a good deal in this town. He bought a good deal of 
 Long Island Railroad stock also. I don t know whether he paid me 
 much on the Old Colony stock that he bought or not ; I cannot remem 
 ber. Mr. Plummer, his broker, used to pick up stock for him, and he 
 would sell it. Mr. Elkins ran on the road from Boston here, and would 
 sell it for him. He bought some land in Woburn, I think, where he 
 made something. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, George.) At the time you gave your deposition you 
 stated that you had carriages, carts, &c., costing $600. State whether 
 you have them now ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I have two horses now. I believe I stated my carriages 
 yesterday, 
 
 Q. What became of the sheep you then had ? 
 
 A. I sold them when I sold my farm. 
 
 Q. Were they included in the sale of the farm ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think not. 
 
 Q. Whom did you sell the sheep to? 
 
 A. I let Mr. Dunklee have the sheep. 
 
 Q. What for? 
 
 A. I think I sold him all the stock and the farm for $2500. 
 
 Q. Then you sold the sheep in connection with the farm ? 
 
 A. I think that I did. 
 
 Q. What other property did you sell on the farm in connection 
 with it ? 
 
 A. I think that was all. I think there were 100 sheep. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether you sold any other personal property or 
 stock there ? 
 
 A. I believe there was no other stock . 
 
 Q. Did you have stock upon your Orange farm ? 
 
 A. That is the one I am speaking of. 
 
 Q. Did you have any other stock beside sheep ? 
 
 A. No, I think not, 
 - Q. Do you know Martin V. B. Edgerly ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, Did you ever sell him tickets on the Concord road by $3 or $5 
 worth at a time ? 
 
408 
 
 A. Yes, I sold him tickets at half price. I don t remember the 
 amount. 
 
 Q. Have you sold him from $3 to. $5 worth at a time? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever sold him more than $3 worth at a time. 
 
 Q. What tickets did you sell him ? 
 
 A. I sold him the tickets that I had collected. 
 
 Q. Tickets that had been once used ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell Lewis W. Clark tickets by the $3 worth at a 
 time? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell him any ? 
 
 A. I have taken half fare of him. 
 
 Q. Did you also sell Lewis W, Clark tickets in the Manchester 
 depot which had been once used ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; never in my life. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell him any tickets ? 
 
 A. I never sold him a ticket outside of the cars. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell him tickets that had been once used inside of 
 the cars? 
 
 A. I have taken his fare and given him a return ticket. 
 
 Q. My question is, did you ever sell Lewis W. Clark tickets that had 
 been once used ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell Mr. C. W. Stanley tickets that had been once 
 used ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell Mr. William Whittle tickets that had been 
 once used, or give him a return ticket ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of doing so. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you did not ? 
 
 A. I do. I have no recollection of it. 
 
 Q. AVill you say that you have not ? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever did. I say that I never did unless I had 
 orders to. 
 
 Q. Did you sell William Whittle tickets that were once used, or 
 give him a return ticket when he paid you fare in the cars ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect anything of the kind. 
 
 Q. My question is whether you ever did or not ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Can he say anything more than he has ? 
 
 The Chairman. He can say whether he will or will not swear posi 
 tively ? 
 
 Witness. I will not swear positively, but I have no recollection of 
 doing so. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. George.} Did you ever sell L. B. Clough, of Manches 
 ter, tickets at half fare, or tickets once used ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of it. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you did not ? 
 
 A. I will not state whether I ever did or not. There were people 
 that I had orders to sell to ; I don t recollect whether they were among 
 them or not. 
 
 Q. Who were the other people ? 
 
 A. I can t tell now. 
 
 Q. Can you mention any of them ? 
 
409 
 
 A- I can t say who they were. 
 
 Q. Did you sell tickets to other people, that had been once used ? 
 
 A. If I had orders to do so. 
 
 Q. I do not ask about your orders, but about the fact. Stater 
 whether you did or not ? 
 
 A I could not -state. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by saying that there were others that you ha<Jl 
 orders to sell to V 
 
 A. I think there were. I have no doubt that there were. 
 
 Q. Can you tell who they were ? 
 
 A. No, I don t remember. 
 
 Do you know Mr. Lafayette Kobinson, of Manchester ? 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you sold him tickets that had been once used ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect that I ever did. 
 
 Q. Do you say that you did not? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever did. 
 
 Q. I ask you if you will say that you did not ? 
 
 A. I will not say that I did not. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by saying that you might have sold him some: 
 coupons ? 
 
 A. I mean coupons to Boston. The tickets the tickets that I usedF 
 to buy. 
 
 Q. Have you sold Mr. Eobinson tickets that had been once used,, 
 and had been rode upon, and you had collected but did not punch ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether I did or not. 
 
 Q, Did you ever sell any to Mr. Orison Hardy ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I know him ? 
 
 Q. Here is a note given him for $522, in the schedule ? 
 
 A. I never took any fare of him. That is to say, he always had 
 tickets that he bought at the ticket office, I suppose. 
 
 Q. My question is, did you ever sell him any tickets that had been? 
 once used ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. You can say that, can you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Can you say that with regard to Robinson ? 
 
 A. No, for I don t know. I think I have let Robinson have tickets* 
 at half price. 
 
 Q. How many tickets have you sold him at a time ? 
 
 A. Never more than one at a time, and I gave him a return ticket- 
 
 Q. Perhaps your recollection is refreshed with regard to Mr. Williasa 
 Whittle ? 
 
 A, No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you sell to W. P. Newell, of Manchester, tickets that 
 been once used, or give him a return ticket ? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever did. I have no recollection of doing so. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you never did ? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever did. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that you never did ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of it, 
 
 Q. My question is, will you swear that you never did? 
 
 A- No, sir, I would not. 
 
410 
 
 Q. For how many years has Mr. Lewis W. Clough, or C. W. Stanley, 
 or Mr. Bobinson, or Mr. Edgerly, paid you fare in the cars ? Did you 
 give them a return ticket ? 
 
 A. I should think four or five years. 
 
 Q. Did you ever do the same thing for Mr. True Eaton, of Pittsfield ? 
 
 A. Ne, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know him ? 
 
 A. I do. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell Mr. True Eaton a ticket or tickets that had 
 been once nsed ? 
 
 A. I never did. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell to David S. Carr tickets that had been once 
 used ? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever did. 
 
 Q. When Mr. Carr was in the substitute business here, did you sell 
 him tickets that had been used ? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever did. 
 
 Q. Or give him return tickets if he paid you in the cars ? 
 
 A. I don t think 1 did. 
 
 Q. Are you willing to swear that you never did ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect anything of the kind. 
 
 Q. Are you willing to swear that you never sold Mr. David 8 Carr 
 a ticket that had been once used, or give a return ticket when he paid 
 his fare in the cars? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of having done so. 
 
 Q. That is not my question. I ask whether you are willing to state 
 absolutely that you never did ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of ever having done so. 
 
 Q. Do you know Mr. J. S. Carr? 
 
 A. I know there are two brothers by the name of Carr. 
 
 Q. Are you willing to state that you never sold him tickets at half 
 price, or that you never gave him return tickets when he paid you in the 
 cars ? 
 
 A. I state the same as regards others. I can t remember of ever 
 having done so. 
 
 Q. I should like to know about how many people there were that 
 you had orders to sell tickets to at half price, or to give return tickets 
 to when they paid you in the cars ? 
 
 A. I recollect three, distinctly. 
 
 Q. Can you recollect any more. I want to know how many there 
 were ? 
 
 A. I don t think of any more now. 
 
 Q. Then if you sold those other tickets for half price in the cars, 
 you did it contrary to instructions or without directions ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether I did or not. 
 
 Q. Don t you know if you had instructions to sell to three people 
 and you sold as many more, those that you sold to other than these 
 three as to whom you had instructions, were sold without instructions ? 
 
 The Chairman. He has not yet said that he had orders to sell to only 
 three. He has said that he remembers three distinctly, but he does not 
 say that he had no instructions tp sell to any others. 
 
 Witness. A good many of those men were riding during the war times 
 and Mr. Gilmore used to make it a practice to come along in the cars to 
 me and tell me to pass those men at half price. I don t remember all of 
 ill em, now. 
 
411 
 
 Q. Assuming that there were but three that you were instructed to 
 pass and give return tickets to, tickets that had been once used, then 
 all that you gave to the others besides the three, you gave without 
 instructions and in violation of instructions, did you not ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I submit that a man is never bound to testify upon 
 an assumption of that kind. 
 
 The Chairman. I should think he was not obliged to. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) 1 will now ask you about E. M. Topliff, of 
 Manchester, and a lawyer. Do you know him ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell him any tickets, or give him return tickets 
 when he paid you in the cars ? 
 
 A. I believe I did, once or twice. 
 
 Q. Did you have any instructions from Gilmore to sell him tickets? 
 
 A. I don t recollect whether I did or not. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Topliff ever pay anything more than half fare to you at 
 any time whenever he rode over the road during the time when you were 
 passing Stanley, Clark and Edgerly ? Was it not your uniform practice 
 to give him return tickets ? 
 
 A, No, sir ; I think not. 
 
 Q. What were the occasions when you sold Mr. Topliff tickets or 
 gave him return tickets ? 
 
 A. He was one^of Gilmore s friends one of his runners. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that you gave to Mr. Gilmore s friends and 
 runners tickets at half fare, or tickets that had been once used, -or gave 
 them return tickets ? 
 
 A. That was Gilmore s orders at the time he was governor to favor 
 all those politicians of that kind and all bank men. 
 
 Q. Did you give the bank men return tickets when they paid their 
 fare in the cars ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We want the referees to understand that we make 
 the same objection to this testimony that we have already made that 
 the road is estopped of availing itself of this evidence. 
 
 The Chairman. We understand the objection that has been made. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) What bank men did you give tickets that had 
 been once used or give return tickets when they paid you fare in the 
 cars ? 
 
 A. There were not many that paid fare anyway. 
 
 Q. If any I want to know who they were ? 
 
 A. I don t remember now. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell David Cross any tickets or give him a return 
 ticket when he paid you fare in the cars ? 
 
 A. I don t think I ever did. I have passed him. 
 
 Q. Will you state that you did not sell David Cross or give him 
 return tickets, or tickets that had been once used. 
 
 A. I will say the same that I do of the others. I have no recollec 
 tion of it. 
 
 Q. What officers of the banks in Manchester did you ever passer 
 give return tickets to ? 
 
 A. 1 don t know as I have passed them on my own account. I think 
 they had passes from Gilmore. 
 
 Q. Many of them ? 
 
 A. Mr. Harrington was one. 
 
 
412 
 
 Q. How many people in Concord were there that you sold tickets 
 to at half fare, or sold tickets that had been once used, or gave return 
 tickets to ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect now. 
 
 Q. How was it with Mr. George Eaton ? 
 
 A. I never sold him any tickets. 
 
 Q. George Eaton is the man that you were concerned with in the 
 tobacco business ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you never give him any tickets ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever pass him ? 
 
 A. No ; I don t think I ever did. 
 
 ^ Q. Did Mr. George Eaton, during the time you were connected with 
 him, pay one cent of the fare to the railroad company ? , 
 
 A. I have passed him through the direction of Mr, Gilmore. 
 
 Q. Was that the time when he was engaged with you in the tobacco 
 speculation ? 
 
 A. He had a pass from Mr. Gilmore at that time. 
 
 Q. Did Geo. Eaton ever, during the time you were connected with 
 him in the tobacco speculation, pay you one cent of fare when he rode 
 with you ? 
 
 A. He had a pass from Gilmore and he did not pay fare to me. He 
 had a pass from Gilmore during all the time that he and I were together. 
 
 Q. Did Geo. Eaton ever pay one cent of fare when he rode on your 
 train on the Concord Railroad. 
 
 A, He did not pay any fare, because he had a pass from Mr. Gil- 
 more. 
 
 Q. Did he ever at any time when he rode on your train pay one cent 
 of fare? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he has had, sometimes, regular tickets, that I suppose 
 he got from the regular office. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that you never passed him unless he had a 
 pass from Gilmore or tickets ? Do you say that you never supplied him 
 with tickets ? 
 
 A. I never supplied him with any tickets. 
 
 Q. And you swear that you never passed him unless he had a pass 
 from Gilmore or a ticket ? 
 
 A. I will not say but that I have passed him a few times. 
 
 Q. Did you ever give a return ticket or pass to your insurance 
 agent, Mr, Keys ? 
 
 A. I never did. 
 
 Q. I was asking you with regard to the bank directors to whom you 
 gave return tickets, as you stated you were ordered to do. I want to 
 know who of the bank directors had passes, or received return tickets 
 from you ? 
 
 A. I didn t say that I gave return tickets to any of the bank direct 
 ors. I said that they had passes. 
 
 Q. What ones ? 
 
 A. Mr. Currier and Mr. Smith. 
 
 Q. Mr. Currier is the treasurer of the Portsmouth road, isn t he ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. Governor Smith is another? 
 
 A. I don t think of any more in Manchester that I passed. 
 
413 
 
 Q. Then all but Governor Smith (assuming that Currier was trea 
 surer of the Portsmouth road) were entitled to a pass according to the 
 usages of the road, on account of their positions ? 
 
 A. A good many of those men that had passes to and from Man 
 chester, I don t know whether they were bank directors or not. 
 
 Q, Is there anybody at Nashua that you used to give return tickets 
 to? 
 
 A. I don t think of any now. 
 
 Q. Did you ever give any return tickets to Mr. Barrett, of Nashua, 
 a lawyer there ? 
 
 . A. I don t think I ever did. He had an old ticket once, but I had 
 a quarrel with him in the cars about it. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell any tickets to Mr. William Barrett that had 
 been once used, or give him return tickets on payment of money to you 
 in the cars? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of having done so. 
 
 Q. Will you say you never did ? 
 
 A. There were people that used to come into the cars that Gilmore 
 has told me to pass down and give them a ticket back, but I do not 
 remember who they all were. Gilmore would come along to me with a 
 nian and say pass this man to Nashua or Manchester, or give him a 
 ticket back, if he was a man that he wanted to pass both ways, and did 
 not want to give him his pass. There were a good many of that kind 
 of men that went over on Gilmore s account. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Why didn t Gilmore want to give them 
 his pass? 
 
 A. He didn t want to give so many passes out. He said that the 
 directors were finding fault with him because there were so many passes 
 given, and he did not want to give them. There were times without 
 number that he would tell me to pass persons in that way to pass them 
 down, and if they did not come back on my train, to give them a return 
 ticket, and I don t know but that some of the men that have been men 
 tioned here may have been passed by me in that way. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Then Gilmore wanted to cover up the fact 
 that he was passing so many people over the road? 
 
 A. It looked like it. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to state that he told you that the directors were 
 finding fault with him and therefore he wished you to give to them 
 tickets to supply the places of passes ? 
 
 A. He said that the directors thought that there was a great deal of 
 free riding to Boston, and he requested me to bring the passes to 
 him when I collected them, and not to allow them to go to the ticket 
 agent, where they should have gone. 
 
 Q. If you carried passes to him instead of carrying them to the 
 ticket agent, how could anybody know with regard to the passes except 
 Gilmore and yourself? 
 
 A. That was only during the last three or four years that he wanted 
 me to do that. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to be understood here that the object was to keep 
 the fact of these passes being used from the notice and knowledge of 
 the directors ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever sell tickets that had been used to William Moore, 
 of Merrimac ? 
 
414 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever give him a return ticket ? 
 
 A. I never did. 
 
 Q. Are you certain of that ? 
 
 A. I don t know that I ever did. I don t know that I know the 
 man. I may know him by sight and not by name. 
 
 Q. Have you ever given a Mr. Moore, of Merrimack, tickets that had 
 been once used ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I never did. 
 
 Q, At the time Eobert Moore was interested in a speculation there, 
 did you ever let him have tickets that had been once used ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever pass him free ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. He always paid his fare ? 
 
 A. I don t know but that I passed him over the road. I think I did 
 pass him when he went out to Milford over the Concord Eailroad. 
 
 Q. How was it with Gill. Howard, of Nashua. Do you know him ? 
 
 A. I do. 
 
 Q. He kept a billiard saloon in Manchester, did he not? 
 A. I don t know as to that. 
 
 Q. Didn t you sell him tickets that had been once used? 
 
 A. I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Are you willing to say that you did not repeatedly sell him tick 
 ets that had been once used ? 
 
 A, I have no recollection of having done so. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you have not ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you say that you have not given him return tickets when he 
 paid you fare in the cars ? 
 
 A. I have no recollection of it. 
 
 Q, Will you say that you have not done so ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. Stanley here read a schedule produced by the witness showing the 
 amounts for which the houses owned by Mr. Clough were severally 
 insured ; the rates of insurance, and for how long insured. 
 
 Q. Do you pay for insurance on the Sherman House ? 
 
 A. I do not ; the man that hires the place pays the insurance and 
 taxes. 
 
 The Chairman. What is the object of this testimony? 
 
 Mr. George. It has a double purpose : First, Mr. Clough has stated 
 that all the insurance that he ever paid amounted to $341, and we de 
 sire to contradict that statement. Another purpose is to show the value 
 of the property which he has himself insured for these amounts, with a 
 view of contradicting him as to the value of his property. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF JAMES T. MOREY. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Where do you live now ? 
 
 A. In Montreal, Canada. 
 
 Q. For how long have you lived there ? 
 
 A. About two and a half years. 
 
 Q. Did you formerly live at Franklin ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
415 
 
 Q. In whose employ were you there? 
 
 A. In the employ of Mr. James Colburn. 
 
 Q. What was James Colburn s business ? 
 
 A. He was a dealer in produce, and had a store for country goods. 
 
 Q. Were you a clerk in that store ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. State whether you were a clerk in his store at the time George 
 Clough was running as conductor ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. For about what length of time did Mr. Clough run as conductor 
 to Franklin ? 
 
 A. As near as I can remember, I think it was near the space of one 
 year. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Clough have any trading with Mr. Colburn ? and, if soy 
 what kind of trading, and to what extent ? 
 
 A. He had a good deal of trading at that time in produce ; poultry,, 
 potatoes, butter and cheese, and farm produce generally. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Colburn a very lame man ? 
 
 A. He was. 
 
 Q. Will you state who delivered the articles that were sold to Mr, 
 Clough at the depot ? 
 
 A. I delivered them myself, unless it was a cart load of produce. 
 
 Q. State, as near as you can recollect, the extent of Mr. dough s- 
 dealings in those articles with Mr, Colburn ? 
 
 A. If I remember rightly, he used to come there about three times 
 every week, and would buy some $300 or $400 worth at a trip. 
 
 Q. What did the produce consist of ? 
 
 A. Potatoes, butter, cheese and poultry. 
 
 Q. For how large a portion of the time that Mr. Clough ran to 
 Franklin did this continue ? 
 
 A. In very warm weather he would buy butter and cheese ; when it 
 moderated he would buy the other articles as they would be coming in 
 from the farms. 
 
 Q. With reference to the time that Mr. Clough was in the trade : 
 how long did it all continue ? 
 
 A. Perhaps a year. I should think about a year. 
 
 Q. Where did the most of this go ? 
 
 A. If he bought a large lot, it would go to the freight depot. If it 
 was a tub of butter or cheese, it would be carried to the passenger sta 
 tion. 
 
 Q. How would it be with poultry ? 
 
 A. It went as freight, if I remember rightly. There were boxes of 
 400 or 500 pounds each. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} When did the cars run to Franklin ? 
 
 A. I could not tell you when they began to run there. 
 
 Q. Did they not run to Franklin in the winter of 1847 ? 
 
 A. I don t remember. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to state that Mr. Clough run from Franklin through 
 to Boston and back for a year ? 
 
 A. If I am not mistaken, he did. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to state that ? 
 
 A. I mean to state that he came to Franklin three times per week, 
 
 Q. Did he run to Franklin when the cars run beyond Franklin ? 
 
 A. No, he did not. 
 
416 
 
 *Q. When did the cars go beyond Franklin ? 
 
 A. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Do you remember whether they stopped at Franklin more than 
 itehree months ? 
 
 A. I don t remember, but I think it was about a year. 
 
 Q. These transactions happened twenty years ago, or more, did 
 #hey not ? 
 
 A. They happened at the time the cars first came to Franklin. 
 
 Q. That is full twenty years ago ? 
 
 A. If 1 am not mistaken, it is. 
 
 Q. What is your impression? 
 
 A. I have no impression about it, only that I was there when the 
 <:3ars first came to Franklin. 
 
 Q. What train did he come up in ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 Q. What time of the day did the train arrive in which he came ? 
 
 A. One train used to come into Franklin about 2 o clock. 
 
 Q. Which train did Mr. Clough run ? 
 
 A. I think he used to come in the 4 o clock one day. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by coming at 4 o clock one day ? Did he 
 ^eonie at different times on different days ? 
 
 A. I think at that time there were three conductors going through, 
 Mr. Perkins, Mr. Clough, and another conductor who is now dead 
 Mr. Dole. 
 
 Q. What trains did Mr. Clough run ? 
 
 A. As I told you before, he used to come in at 4 o clock in the af 
 ternoon some part of the time, and go out again in the morning. 
 
 Q, He used to stay at Franklin over night, did he ? 
 
 A. I think he did. 
 
 Q, Are you certain of that ? 
 
 A. I think he stayed there more or less at nights. 
 
 Q. Have you seen, or have you any memorandum or minutes with 
 .reference to these dealings ? 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q. Who else used to buy stuff of Mr. Colburn ? 
 
 A. We had a good many customers. 
 
 Q. Please name some of them ? 
 
 A, He used to ship a good deal to Lowell, I think. 
 
 Q. Tell some of the customers who bought goods there ? 
 
 A. I don t know now that I could tell who they were. 
 
 nQ. Can you name any of them ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I cannot. 
 
 Q. Can you mention anybody, and the particulars of his dealing ? 
 
 A. I don t think that I can. 
 
 Q. {By Mr. Rolfe.} Is there any particular reason why you re- 
 member about Mr. Clough ? 
 
 Mr. George. I have not asked any question which entitles to a re- 
 ^examination of this witness. 
 
 The Chairman. I don t know that there is any objection to the wit 
 ness being re-examined. Of course the counsel will not go over the 
 same ground that he has already been over. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Is there any other reason why you recollect 
 Mr. Clough ? 
 
417 
 
 A. We considered him a great customer, and sold him a great deal. 
 We calculated that what we took in one day we would sell to him 
 when he came up again. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, George.} You can t remember a single other customer 
 beside Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. He was the largest customer that we had. 
 
 Q. Can you tell one single other person that you dealt with ? 
 
 A. I could not recall their names. 
 
 Q. For how long were you in that store ? 
 
 A. I was in that store from three to four years. 
 
 Q. What is your business in Montreal ? 
 
 A. I keep a livery stable. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF HORACE JOHNSON. 
 
 Mr. Stanley offered to read in evidence the report of the case of Hor 
 ace Johnson v. the Concord Railroad Corporation, (46 N. H. R. 213.) 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. What is the object of this offer ? 
 
 Mr. George. The object is to show that there was a case, the fact of 
 which Mr. Clough knew, against Mr. Noyes, for putting Mr. Johnson 
 out of the cars for attempting to ride upon a coupon ticket, which will 
 be produced here. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We object to that. Proving the existence of the 
 suit, is no proper or competent way of showing knowledge of the suit 
 home to us. Our witness has been interrogated and has sworn to all the 
 information he has on the point ; and the offering of the record referred 
 to has no tendency to contradict him in any way. 
 
 The Chairman. We understand that this suit of Johnson v. The Con 
 cord Railroad, was an action which was brought against a conductor for 
 putting a man out of the cars, who was trying to ride on a spent ticket. 
 The question, if I remember rightly, which was determined in that case, 
 or which was one of the important questions in that case, was whether 
 the railroad had the right, in the way in which they attempted to do it, 
 to limit the time which that ticket had to run, and under the circum 
 stances to enforce that limitation. It is, therefore, perhaps correct to 
 say that it was a case where the railroad was contesting the right of a 
 passenger to pass on a ticket, which by their regulations, was a spent 
 ticket ; and we understand Mr. Clough to say that that was his under 
 standing of the case ; that the railroad at that time were contesting the 
 right of Johnson to pass on a ticket, which by their regulations, was a 
 spent ticket. This testimony, if it went in, would have a tendency to 
 prove Mr. Clough s knowledge of the resistance of the road to any such 
 use of the coupon tickets, but perhaps would have no such tendency to 
 contradict any idea that the superintendent had authorized any such 
 use. But according to our recollection, there is not a particle of evi 
 dence in this case tending to show that Mr. Clough ever sold a spent 
 ticket. Mr. Clough states that Mr. Gilmore authorized him to sell tick 
 ets which had time to run, which were not spent tickets ; but that he 
 told him to sell no others ; and he states that he did buy and sell tickets 
 which were not spent, and had time to run. In another point of view, 
 the testimony as to the using, the buying and the selling of tickets 
 which were not spent, is important ; and on that point we have an opin 
 ion which we are willing to give at any time it may be required. We 
 think that this testimony, about the existence of this case, and the con- 
 
 27 
 
418 
 
 test that was made about it, has no tendency to prove that there was any 
 resistance to Mr. Clough, or to disprove what Mr. Clough says about 
 buying and selling tickets which were not spent tickets ; and therefore 
 we think the testimony is inadmissible. If I remember rightly, the 
 referees have already communicated their view with regard to the mat 
 ter of buying and selling tickets which were not spent. I think that 
 they have intimated to the parties here, that Mr. Clough, being an agent 
 of the road, and an agent to sell the tickets of the road, and the evi 
 dence tending to show that the buying of these coupons at a low price, 
 and selling them for full price, was injurious to the road, and would 
 deprive the company of their profits, the road would have a right to 
 adopt his acts, and make him its agent for that purpose, and to claim 
 from him the profits ; and very likely it would be able to hold them in 
 that matter, but we do not think the testimony in this case has any ten 
 dency to prove that. 
 
 Mr. George. I think it would be well to read this deposition of Mr. 
 Clough s. 
 
 Judge Bellows, As I understand the evidence, it was offered for the 
 purpose of enabling the referees to make an inference that Mr. Gilmore 
 gave no such authority. 
 
 Mr. George. That is one point. 
 
 Judge Bellows. And that Mr. Clough had knowledge of the fact of 
 this action. Now, so far as regards the selling of tickets which were 
 spent, Mr. Clough does not state that he had any authority to do so 
 from the corporation, in any way. He had authority only to sell such 
 as were in force. Therefore if he sold any that were wholly spent, it 
 was without authority, and this evidence in that point of view, would 
 be a matter of no importance, because he does not pretend that he had 
 any authority to sell a spent ticket. 
 
 Mr. George. I beg leave to suggest in reply to that, that these tick 
 ets were all, every single one of them, spent tickets ; that every ticket 
 that Mr. Clough took, as matter of fact, was a spent ticket. We say 
 further that the object of the rule was clearly and simply to prevent the 
 substitution of through tickets for local fares. Nobody can conceive of 
 any other object of the rules, because, otherwise, the local business of 
 the road would be very largely diminished. Mr. Clough makes the state 
 ment here that Mr. Gilmore told him he might sell some of those tickets 
 in contravention, as we say, of the rule, and of the reason of the rule if 
 you please ; and as bearing upon that question, we say that both the 
 notice served upon Mr. Clough by Mr. Gilmore, and the fact of the 
 existence of that suit, is competent. The only way that the road was 
 imposed upon, was not by the passenger laying over on one of those 
 tickets, but it was by the substitution of that ticket for a local fare ; 
 and that is what we say was the fraud upon the road. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. That is the inference that you make from the evidence 
 that is in ; we take an opposite view from that. Do I understand that 
 the referees have considered the question, and nave intimated an opinion 
 as to whether or not there was any fraud practiced upon the Concord 
 Railroad by the purchase and sale of tickets that were not spent, or 
 within thirty days of their purchase ? 
 
 The Chairman. The present ruling has nothing to do with that. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I thought that the referees intended to make a sug 
 gestion as applying to that point. 
 
419 
 
 The Chairman. Not at all. I should have said that the rule, notice 
 of which was served* upon Mr. Clough, orders that these things shall be 
 don,e "as soon as possible;" that is, the rule distinctly contemplates 
 that the old order of things may go on some time longer, 
 
 Mr. George. The order was that as soon as practicable, the tickets 
 should be dated. In order to date the tickets, it was necessary that the 
 ticket offices should be supplied with stamps. 
 
 The Chairman. But the material matter is not with respect to the 
 tickets sold over the Concord road, but those sold over the western road. 
 
 Mr. George. But all the offices had to procure stamps in the same 
 way. 
 
 The Chairman. But this rule contemplates that some time would 
 elapse before it went into operation. 
 
 Mr. George. That time was fixed in Mr. Gilmore s notice to Mr. 
 Clough, that the rule would go into absolute eifect on the first day of 
 January following. 
 
 The Chairman. The idea now, as I understand the matter, is this : 
 that in neither point of view is the testimony in regard to this case 
 admissible, because it does not relate at all to the selling of tickets 
 which were not spent, and Mr. Clough avows that he had no authority 
 to sell tickets that were spent. 
 
 Mr. George. In his deposition, in reply to interrogatory 178, Mr. 
 Clough says: "My way-bills would have been larger if I had not 
 bought tickets at the office with the money that I took in the cars. 
 Another thing, I used to buy Boston coupons that were brought from 
 the north, and sold them." 
 
 Interrogatory 185 is: " In answer to interrogatory 178 you say you 
 bought Boston coupons. Please state what you mean by Boston 
 coupons/ how manv you bought, what you paid for them, and for how 
 much you sold them, and how you disposed of them. ANS. People 
 used to buy tickets up north, and could buy tickets through to Boston 
 just as cheap as they could to here. I used to buy their tickets of them. 
 Some used to stop here, and some at Hooksett, and some at Manchester. 
 I used to buy them for from 50 cents to $1 apiece. I have had them 
 given to me. There was a family of eight once got out at Manchester, 
 and gave me their tickets to Boston, saying they didn t want them any 
 longer, as they stopped there ; and I used to buy them. My impression 
 is that I bought from 150 to 200 per year. I sold them for regular 
 fare. I disposed of them in the cars. If passengers wanted tickets to 
 Boston, I used to sell them if I had them." 
 
 "Int. 186. Was not this buying of tickets, and selling them for 
 local use, a direct fraud upon the road, and were not said tickets, both 
 upon the face, and by the rules of the road, not transferable, and good 
 only to the original purchaser, and on the day of their date, and for 
 such additional time as would enable the passenger to complete the 
 passage ? ANS. I did not understand it was any fraud to buy those 
 tickets and sell them again. Gilmore knew I was buying and selling 
 them. I considered them good for one seat to Boston. I think they 
 were not not transferable. I don t think they were on their face good 
 only to the original purchaser and for such time as would enable per 
 sons to complete the passage ; but I am not certain about that." 
 
 " Int. 187. Did you not put a person off the cars who claimed to pass 
 on one of these tickets, and were you not sued, and did not the corpor 
 ation defend your suit, and sustain your action ? If yes, state who it 
 
420 
 
 was, and when, and what kind of a ticket was attempted to be used. 
 ANS. I have no recollection of being sued for putting off a man. I 
 recollect having a fuss about it. I recollect putting a man out who Bad 
 one of those western tickets, but I think it was a very old ticket, which 
 looked as if it had been rode on over the road once before. I think it 
 iiad been punched." 
 
 " Int. 188. Did you ever refuse, or were you ever instructed to refuse 
 &o take these western coupons when they had passed into second hands ? 
 ANS, I did so refuse when they were of old date. I was instructed to 
 so refuse such coupons of old or long standing date." 
 
 " Int. 189. If said coupons were good in second hands, and they had 
 never been rode upon, what diiference did it make whether they were of 
 old or of recent date ? ANS. On these western tickets we didn t get 
 but little any way. Our proportion was very small. I think I have 
 heard Giimore say that the road didn t get more than 25 or 30 cents on 
 them. 1 never had anything to do with the western tickets. The tick 
 ets I bought were from western New York and Canada way. They 
 sometimes used to get by us on these old ones. We might skip them in 
 ;sonie way. When they were very old I did not use to take them. I 
 did take them unless they were very old, rather than have a fuss with 
 them. I do not know why they are not just as good, if old, as if of 
 recent date, provided they are good in second hands and never have 
 been rode upon." [Adjourned. 
 
 ^TWENTIETH DAY. Friday, December 25th, 1868.] 
 
 The hearing was resumed at 9 o clock A. M, 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEOBGE CLOUGH CONTINUED, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Since you were discharged from your position 
 as conductor, have you made any addition to your property, with the 
 exception of the ordinary increase of the property from rents and 
 income, that is, since February or March, 1866 ? If so, what? 
 
 A. I do not think of anything now. 
 
 Q. Then your property now, so far as the amount is concerned, is 
 the same that it was in 1866, adding the difference between your in 
 come and your expenses, and deducting the losses that you have testified 
 $o, between these two periods ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Have you a niece in your family ? and have you supported her? 
 and, if so, for how many years ? 
 
 A. I have. I think she has been there about five years. 
 
 Q. You have found her her clothing and supported her entirely ? 
 
 A- I have. v 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) How old was she when she came to your 
 
 A- I think she was seventeen years old sixteen or seventeen. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. George.) What kind of a fence have you around the 
 house where you live, and what was the expense of the fence around 
 your lot and connected with it ? 
 
 A. It is the same fence that I bought when I bought the place. 
 
 Q. You have not made any addition to the fences ? 
 
 A. I have painted them ; that is all. 
 
 Q, Do you know what the expense of painting the fences was ? 
 
421 
 
 A. No, sir; I do not. 
 
 Q. How large a lot is it ? 
 
 A. 1 think it is not far from a quarter of an acre ; it may be a little 
 more. 
 
 Q. You have been to considerable expense in setting out trees and 
 flowers, and arranging the grounds, have you not ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; the trees were all set out when I bought the place. 
 
 Q. How about the stables connected with the place ? Have you built 
 new stables, or built additions to the old ones? 
 
 A. I have put some wings on to the stable. 
 
 Q. How large is the stable connected with your residence ? State 
 about its size ? 
 
 A. I think it is about twenty-five feet by thirty or thirty-five. 
 
 Q. Including the wings ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I want the size of the wings and all. How large are the wings ? 
 
 A. I should judge they were about from eight to ten feet each way, 
 
 Q. Is the stable clapboarded and painted ? 
 
 A.* J- S. 
 
 Q. Is it painted the same as your house ? 
 
 A. It is. 
 
 Q. Is the stable lathed and plastered, or finished in any particular 
 way ? 
 
 A. There is one room that is plastered ; and that is the same as it 
 was when I bought it. 
 
 Q. In what wood is the stable finished ? 
 
 A. It is finished mostly with spruce. I think. 
 
 Q. Is it painted, or stained inside ? 
 
 A. 1 think it has had one coat of lead-colored paint. 
 
 Q. How are the stalls arranged ? 
 
 A. They are common stalls. 
 
 Q. With racks, or patent feeding apparatus ? 
 
 A. With patent feeding apparatus. 
 
 Q. How many stalls are there with patent feeding apparatus ? 
 
 A. Five, I think. 
 
 Q. Who put those in ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Have you a furnace connected with your house ? 
 
 A. I have steam. 
 
 Q. What was the expense of that ? 
 
 A. I think it was about $800. 
 
 Q. When was that put in ? 
 
 A. It was put in when I built the house. 
 
 Q. The stables were not burned when the house was burned ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What was the expense you laid out on the stables ? 
 
 A. I should estimate it at somewheres near $1500. 
 
 Mr. George. I will now read a copy of the purchases and sales of 
 stock, by Mr. Clough, of the Concord Kailroad Company, furnished by 
 the treasurer, which it was agreed should be read without objection. 
 
 [Statement read.] 
 
 In this case October 31, 1868, when you bought 100 shares of 
 stock, you simply altered the certificate, or had the certificate divided 
 up. 
 
422 
 
 A. ^ I will explain how that was. The stock was transferred to the 
 Merrimack Eiver Savings Bank, where I expected to get money ; but 
 Governor Smyth said that Mr. Bartlett had $3000 that he wanted to 
 let, and I got of him ; and as the stock had already all been transferred 
 to the bank, I had it transferred back to myself. There was a certifi 
 cate of 150 shares, and I had 100 shares transferred back to myself. 
 
 Q. There was then no purchase and sale of stock on the 150 shares? 
 
 A. No, there was not. 
 
 Q. When was the stock of the Concord road the lowest ? Are you 
 able to state about what it was worth in 1846 ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it was then at par. 
 
 Q. Was it not worth $75 per share then ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. From 1842 to 1850, did not that stock pay ten per cent.? And 
 did not the directors then make an extra dividend to cover ten per cent, 
 on the investment on the road, from the time that the investments were 
 called in ? 
 
 A. I do not think the stock was far from par at that time. 
 
 Q. Did the stock pay ten per cent, interest, from the time that the 
 road was tuilt, up to the time of the opening of the Lawrence road, 
 right along ? 
 
 A. 1 think it did. People were more afraid of railroad stock at 
 that time than they are now. 
 
 Q. Was not the second track built about that time ? and were not 
 the rights to subscribe sold for $10 or $15 ? 
 
 A. I do not know ; the rights were sold, but I do not know at what 
 price. 
 
 Q. Then if the rights were sold the stock must have been above 
 par ? 
 
 A. Yes, if the original stock was not below par. 
 
 Q. Have you ever heard of the original stock being below par ? 
 
 A. Yes ; it has been as low as $33. 
 
 Q, When did you buy it as low as $33 ? 
 
 A. In 1856 or 1857. 
 
 Q. I am now talking about 1846, when the Lawrence road was 
 opened. Do you not know that up to that time the road divided ten. 
 per cent, and then made an extra dividend to cover ten per cent, upon 
 the amount invested from the time the investments were made ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect about it. 
 
 Q. You say that in 1856 or 1857, you bought stock as low as $33. 
 Will you state how many shares you bought as low as $33 ? 
 
 A. 1 do not remember. 
 
 Q. In 1857 was not the market price of the stock at the brokers 
 board, $38.75 ? 
 
 A. I do not think so, 1 know I bought some stock at $33 per share, 
 but how much I cannot tell. I bought it, I think, all the way along, 
 from that up to par, about that time. My documents at home will show 
 that. 
 
 Q. Will you bring in everything that you have showing the price of 
 the stock ? 
 
 A. I will. 
 
 Q. It seems that on February 2, 1846, you transferred to the Merri 
 mack River Savings Bank, twelve shares of stock, which was the first 
 stock you had. Was that a sale to the Merrimack Bank, or wa3 it a 
 collateral transfer. 
 
A. I think it was to borrow money, 
 
 Q. February 5 there was a transfer of twelve shares to the bank. 
 Was that a sale or a collateral transfer? 
 
 A. I cannot say whether it was a sale or not. I bought stock, and 
 sold it, and 1 also pledged stock. 
 
 Q. " C. A. Evans and J. A. Elkins, 16 shares ; " was that a sale or 
 ja tiansfer? 
 
 A. I think it was a sale. 
 
 Q. Are* you positive about it? 
 
 A. That is my impression. 
 
 Q. " 1859, May 11, Joseph A. Gilmore, 7 shares." Was that a 
 sale or a transfer ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell, I should think it was a sale. 
 
 Q. If you will be kind enough to bring in any papers that you have, 
 showing what you paid for this stock, it will save further increase upon 
 that branch of the subject. I omitted to ask you upon one point. 
 What was Daniel Kaymond Kimball s business ? 
 
 A. He kept a livery stable. 
 
 Q. In the rear of the Merrimack House, at Lowell ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Had he any other business ? 
 
 A. He used to let and hire money. 
 
 Q. But as far as you know, he had no other business except keeping 
 a livery stable, unless he hired or let money ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you undertake at one time to carry on the livery stable busi 
 ness in Manchester? 
 
 A. I had an interest in one there. 
 
 Q. How much did you make or lose in that operation ? 
 
 A. I think I came out about square, but I do not recollect now 
 certainly. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. I think that was in 1846 or 1847. 
 
 Q. Was John Floyd your partner ? 
 
 A. He and Captain Walker were my partners. 
 
 Q. Did you not lose money there ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect. We lost but little, if any. There were three 
 owners. 
 
 Q. How large a stable was it ? How many horses were there, and 
 how much had you invested in it ? 
 
 A, My impression is that there were about twenty horses. 
 
 Q. Do you remember how much you had invested there ? 
 
 A. I should think not far from $4000. 
 
 Q. Was there $16,000 in all, or only $4000 in all? 
 
 A. I think there were $4000 invested in all. 
 
 Q. Did not John Floyd burst up, and did you not lose all of your 
 investment in that transaction ? And was he not poorer than a church 
 mouse when he came out of it? 
 
 A. He hadn t much when he went in. 
 
 Q. Did he have anything when he came out ? 
 
 A. I do not think that he had much money. 
 
 Q. He was as poor as a church mouse whenJie came out, was he not? 
 
 A. I do not think that he had a great deal. 
 
 Q. He was the managing man, was he not ? 
 
424 
 
 A. Yes ; he stayed there. 
 
 Q. What was James Whitcher s business ? 
 
 A. In wooden ware, brooms, &c., I think. 
 
 Q. Did he make brooms, clothes wringers, sap buckets, mop handles 
 and wooden ware of that general description ? Was not that his occu 
 pation ? 
 
 A. 1 do not know that he made mop handles, or clothes wringers, 
 nor do I know but that he did. 
 
 Q. Did he make clothes dryers ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. He made wooden ware of that general description ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. How many sap-buckets did you have of him during the time that 
 you were letting him have tickets, be they more or less ? 
 
 A. I had three hundred sap-buckets of him at one time. 
 
 Q.. Did those go up on your Orange farm ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you have brooms, pails, and a clothes dryer of him ? 
 
 A. I did ; and when I got into my new house 1 had some brooms and 
 pails of him. 
 
 Q. Didn t he furnish you the wooden ware for your new house, in 
 the line of his business ? 
 
 A. I say that I had some brooms and pails of him at the time I went 
 to keeping house the last time. 
 
 Q. Did you have a clothes dryer of bim ? 
 
 A, Yes ; and I owe him for it now. I told him to send his bill when 
 he sent the things, but he did not, and I have not seen the man since. 
 When I see him 1 intend to pay him. I have the list of the stuff in my 
 pocket, now, and I intend to pay him as soon as I see him. I have seen 
 him but once since then, and he was standing on the platform at Hook- 
 sett, and I was in the cars, which were in motion. 
 
 Q. Have you sent nobody else to see him ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that you did not send Mr. Rolfe down to see 
 him ? 
 
 A. He went on his own hook. 
 
 Q. Didn t you know that he was going ? 
 
 A. I do not think that he told me anything about it until he got 
 back. That is my impression. 
 
 Q. Your deeds are somewhat mixed. In my examination of them 1 
 am unable to understand them precisely. Will you be kind enough to 
 select all the deeds that you have of all of your real estate property 
 of all that you have purchased from 1842 down to the present time, and 
 let me have them ? 
 
 A. They are all here in this bundle. 
 
 Mr. George. We offer these deeds, so that there may be no question 
 about the matter. If there is no objection, the referees may consider 
 as in, such deeds as the witness shall produce. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} You were asked in relation to the deed of 
 Howe and wife to you ; and I think that you stated that you did not 
 own that land at this time, and was not able to explain about it. State 
 whether you previously owned a farm in Holderness ? 
 
425 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. State whether you deeded all of that property to Mr. Howe T 
 
 A. I believe I did, a part of it. 
 
 Q. State whether you sold the whole farm to Mr. Howe ? 
 
 A. I think I did. 
 
 Q. And took a mortgage back? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did, or did not Mr. Howe want to sell a certain part of it to tws 
 men by the name of Webster ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How was that transaction managed ? 
 
 A. Mr. Howe deeded it back to me, and I deeded a portion of it to 
 Mr. Webster. 
 
 Q. And this is the land that you afterwards sold to Mr. Webster, 
 that was deeded to you by Mr. Howe ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. At the time you gave your deposition two years ago, state, whether 
 you made a detailed statement of all that you then owed ? 
 
 A. I calculated to at that time. 
 
 Q. Did you do it, according to your best recollection ? 
 
 A. I did. I did not know that I left anything out. 
 
 Q. When you were enquired of the other day in relation to your 
 losses, and your outs, did you give in the statement you made, what yott 
 had paid as internal revenue tax the year before ? 
 
 A. I believe not. 
 
 Q. Please look at the statement and see how that is. Look on the 
 statement and see if you do not find the internal revenue tax paid ? 
 
 A. I now find that I did estimate that. It is here $441.05. 
 
 Q. Then if you neglected to state that, the other day, you did it bjr 
 mistake ? 
 
 A, Yes; I supposed that was in my deposition. 
 
 Q. Have you anywhere a detailed statement of your indebtedness- 
 on the first day of February, about the time this suit was bought ? 
 
 A. 1 have. [Witness produces it.] 
 
 Mr. Rolfe, I think, if I am not mistaken, that the witness has stated 
 the amount that he owed, but not in detail. I propose to have him. 
 state now, in detail, the amount of his indebtedness at the time this 
 suit was brought. 
 
 Mr Stanley. Is it the same as in his deposition ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I do not think it is in his deposition. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. There is a detailed statement of what he owed, in his 
 deposition, which is to be put in. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} I want to ask you if you put in that estimate 
 any physiciansj bills? 
 
 A. I did not. 
 
 Q. Why not? 
 
 A. I forgot it ; it did not occur to me at the time. 
 
 Q. Who has been your family physician? 
 
 A. Dr. Carter has been our regular family physician. 
 
 Q. Have you employed Dr. Morrill some ? 
 
 A. Yes ; and Dr. Moore. 
 
 Q. You were enquired of yesterday as to the amount of your phy 
 sicians bills. Will you state now, as near as you are able, the average 
 amount that you have paid for physicians bills ? 
 
426 
 
 A. I should estimate it at somewhere from $15 to $20 per year, dur 
 ing the time I have lived in Concord. 
 
 Q. You were enquired of yesterday as to whether you had ever em 
 ployed Dr. Gage, and you said that you did not think that you had, 
 Upon recollection what have you to say ? 
 
 A. I think that I did once, when 1 first came to Concord. 
 
 Q. Can you state the amount of his bill ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect precisely ; I think perhaps, it was $15 or $20. 
 
 Q. Since you have been connected with the railroad, what, to your 
 knowledge, has been the custom of the Concord road in relation to hav 
 ing a boy, or other person, ride on the cars and peddle sweet-meats, 
 apples, oranges, &c. V 
 
 A. They always had one. I never knew the time when they had not. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) State the fact, during the time that you were 
 -on the road, as to a boy running in the cars ? 
 
 A. There was a boy running on the road and I employed him. 
 
 Q. For what length of time did you employ him ? 
 
 A. My impression is that he run six or seven years. 
 
 Q. During what years, from the first opening of the road ? 
 
 A. Yes; from 1842 to 1843 or 1849. 
 
 Q. In what trains? 
 
 A. He used to run with me a part of the time, and I think he run 
 .on the other trains a part of the time. 
 
 Q. How frequently ? 
 
 A. Every day. 
 
 Q. What has been the fact since then, and up to the time you left 
 ;the road, about boys running on the trains ? 
 
 Mr. George. I wish to renew my objection to that. I suppose that 
 .may be objectionable upon another ground. The objection that we now 
 make is, that the fact that a boy ran subsequent to his employing one, 
 wpuld have no le^al tendency to show any fact with regard tt) their run 
 ning previously. Subsequent custom does not tend to show preceding 
 custom. 
 
 The Chairman. We think that this evidence, in connection with the 
 evidence that is already in, is admissible. 
 
 Mr. jRolfe. Proceed, and state what has been the fact since you left 
 the road ? 
 
 A. The fact is that they have always had a boy on the trains. I 
 never knew a time when there was not one. There were two, a news 
 paper boy and a peddler boy. 
 
 Q. State the fact as to their paying fare ? 
 
 A, 1 never knew of their paying fare. I never had any order to 
 make their pay, and I do not think they ever did pay anything. 
 
 Mr. 7 appan, I would like the referees to make a note of the fact 
 that the whole deposition of Mr. Clough is in the case. 
 
 Mr. Clark. We did not say that it was in, but that we proposed to 
 put in in. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I understood you to put in the whole depostion. 
 
 Mr. George. We shall not put in the whole deposition ; but I want 
 to examine the deposition with a view of seeing whether there is any 
 thing in it that would make it objectionable as a legal matter. We 
 shall probably put in the whole deposition ; if we do not, it will be 
 because we suppose it will be objectionable, because of some legal tech- 
 n icality. But everything that pertains to this, we will put in. We 
 
427 
 
 do not propose to be bound to put in the entire deposition. We propose 
 that the detailed statement of property shall go in ; and I will say in 
 addition to what I have said, that unless there is a legal technicality 
 against putting in the entire deposition, we shall put the whole of 
 it in. 
 
 The Chairman. On the suggestion that the deposition, if already in, 
 was put in by mistake, I think the parties can, if they desire, modify 
 their action. It being understood now that this detailed statement of 
 property will be put in with the deposition, do you, Mr. Kolfe, care 
 about going on now with the details ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I suppose that if the deposition is put in for that pur 
 pose, there is no object in going on. 
 
 Mr. George. I wish it understood that only that part which relates 
 to the detailed statement is now put in. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} You were enquired of yesterday in relation to 
 some notes that you had on the list, and whether or not they were paid. 
 Will you now turn to the list that you showed yesterday, and state 
 whether or not you have been able to find the notes of which Col. George 
 ^enquired. 
 
 A. I have not been able to find them-. I think that my agent at 
 Jamaica Plains must have those notes. Some of them have been paid. 
 
 Q. Are they all Jamaica Plains notes ? 
 
 A. Yes ; all of them. 
 
 Q. How is it with John McDonald s note? 
 
 A. That has been paid. 1 found a document last night that satis 
 fied me that that has been paid. 
 
 Q. How is it as to the other notes ? 
 
 A. 1 supposed that I had them at the time, but I think now that 
 Mr. Dudley, my agent there, must have them. They pay every year, 
 .more or less, arid Mr. Dudley indorses the payments. 
 
 Q. You have not the other notes that are mentioned on the statement ? 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q. What amount has been paid on them, as near as you recollect? 
 
 A. I think there are none of them but have more or less indorse 
 ments on them, but how much has been paid, I cannot tell, 
 
 Q. Indorsements of money paid to you ? 
 
 A. The money is sent to me by Mr. Dudley, the man who tends to 
 my business there. 
 
 Q. Give a list of the Jamaica Plains notes? 
 
 A. John McDonald, that has been paid; P. Sweeney; Thomas 
 McGuire ; M. E. Donohue ; Patrick Glennen ; John Glennen and James 
 Morrison. 
 
 Q. Now come down on this list, to the note of David Dearborn ? 
 
 A. That has been paid. 
 
 Q. When was it paid ? 
 
 A. 1 think it was paid a year and a half ago. 
 
 Q. State how, and in what manner the note was paid ? 
 
 A. Mr. Eolfe collected it for me. It was paid in money. 
 
 Q, State whether there was a suit against the surviving partner of 
 fchat establishment ? v 
 
 A. There was. 
 
 Q. Do you. recollect who was the man that paid the money ? 
 
 A. I think it was his partner ? 
 
 Q. You have spoken about a note that was given in consideration of 
 a pair of buckskin horses. What about that note ? 
 
428 
 
 A. That note was Ira Morse s note for something over $400. My 
 first impression was that it was this Dearborn note that was given, but 
 I find that it was not, 
 
 Q. State whether you gave me the note and I paid you the balance 
 between that and the horses. 
 
 A. You did. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. We may wish to call Mr. Clough again, and would like 
 to save that privilege. 
 
 The Chairman. Of course ; and perhaps the other side may wish to 
 examine him further. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF ISAAC SPALDING, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Will you state for how many years you were 
 one of the directors of the Concord Kailroad ? 
 
 A. Twenty-five years, I think. 
 
 Q. From what time to what time ? 
 
 A. From the commencement of 1866. 
 
 Q. State how it was about your being also treasurer of the road? 
 
 A. I was treasurer of the road. 
 
 Q. From what time to what time ? 
 
 A. The same time. 
 
 Q. Were you the first treasurer ? 
 
 A. No ; Mr. Peter Carter received one dividend, and died, and I suc 
 ceeded, and remained treasurer for several years. 
 
 Q. You were subsequently president of the road ? 
 
 A. Y T es, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you remember the years when you were president ? 
 
 A.. I think I was president 20 years or more. I was president over 
 20 years. 
 
 Q. You were president from 1846 t to the time Judge Upham was 
 elected ? 
 
 A, Oh, yes. I was director all the time. 
 
 Q. Judge Upham was elected in 1857. Mr. Spalding, I want to ask 
 you how it was with regard to your having or, were you present at the 
 time the rules were adopted in 1864 and 1859? Were you present? 
 
 A. At all the meetings. 
 
 Q. I will ask you how it was so far as you have any personal know 
 ledge, and so far as you are aware of any knowledge on the part of the 
 directors as to those rules being waived, modified, or annulled. [Same 
 exception by deft, as previously.] 
 
 A. No, never. 
 
 Q. Mr, Spalding, I will state, Mr. Clough has stated here, that in 
 the early years of the road, prior to 1849, he carried express matter, 
 butter, eggs, etc., down over the road, and brought up articles over the 
 road, from which he estimates a profit of $5200. From 1846 you were 
 president of the road and director ; now I want to know if you ever 
 heard of any such business ? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George. Will you state whether you had any know 
 ledge of Mr. dough s doing any express business during the time you 
 were president ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Had you any knowledge of his carrying stuff over the road ; and 
 if so state what? 
 
429 
 
 A. Except when Judge Upham was superintendent, I was coming up 
 here, and the Judge said that Mr. Clough had brought some fish, I 
 think he said ; as 1 understood, it was but one or two that he brought. 
 And he wished me to talk with him about it ; and I went and talked 
 with him about it. It wasn t anything of any consequence, and I told 
 him that he could not be allowed to carry stuff. 
 
 Q. With that exception, have you knowledge of his carrying any 
 thing over the road ? Had you any knowledge ? 
 
 A. I had not. 
 
 Q. And had the board of directors, so far as you are aware ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Mr, Mugridge called the attention of the referees to the fact that ex 
 ception was taken to the introduction of all this testimony, the same as 
 in the previous objections. 
 
 Q. How was it about that being the only time that your attention 
 was ever called to it? 
 
 A. That is the only time. * 
 
 Q. Mr. Glough has testified, sir, that he had a boy upon the cars, 
 paying him a certain sum. [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. It will be enough if you simply ask the question. 
 The counsel on the other side object to your reciting the testimony of 
 Mr, Clough or anybody. 
 
 Q. Had you any knowledge, or had the board of directors, so far as 
 you are aware, of Mr. Clough s employing a boy to run upon the cars to 
 sell peanuts? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We take an exception to this, on the same ground as 
 previously ; and the further exception that it is entirely immaterial in 
 this connection. [Admitted provisionally.] 
 
 Q. Had you any knowledge on that subject ? 
 
 A. I had not. 
 
 Q. W T hen was the first time you ever heard of it ? 
 
 A. Yesterday, I believe, 
 
 Q. So far as you are aware, had the board of directors any know 
 ledge ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; never heard any mentioned. 
 
 Q. Mr. Spalding, had you any knowledge, or had the board of direct 
 ors, so far as you are aware, that the conductors, Mr. Clough, or any 
 of the other conductors, did not return the money taken in the cars 
 upon their way-bills ; but did take the money, and buy fresh tickets at 
 the ticket office, and punch them, and return them in their collections 
 as representing the money. Had , you any knowledge of any such 
 transaction as that ? [Same exception as before.] 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. If this matter is excepted to, there is one limitation 
 perhaps. I suppose this should be confined entirely to Mr. Clough. 
 Before, we have ruled out everything that did not relate to Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. When was the first time you ever heard of any such thing as 
 that? 
 
 A. Day before yesterday. 
 
 Q. Had you any knowledge, sir, or had the board of directors, so 
 far as you are aware, that Mr. Clough was buying up coupons of upper 
 roads where the fare is the same to Manchester, Boston and Concord ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
430 
 
 Q. Mr. Spalding, I want to cal] your attention to this. Do you 
 remember, sir, a series of rules that were adopted in 1864, which were 
 required to be signed by the conductors ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I am not certain about the year ; but I presume 
 it was 1864. 
 
 Q. You remember the fact ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now I want to ask you who presented those rules to the boaiyi ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. How is that material. 
 
 The Chairman. Well, it was permitted to go in to gratify CoL 
 George. 
 
 f A. You or Judge Upham, I believe it was you, I am not certain. I 
 don t know whether we did or did not modify them. There might be 
 some circumstances that would recall it. It is gone from my recollec 
 tion now, 
 
 Q. Mr. Spalding, I want to know whether you had any knowledge, 
 or the directors, so far as you are aware, of Mr. Ciough selling tickets 
 that had been used once. I want to ask you whether you had any 
 knowledge, or the directors, so far as you are aware, of Mr. Clough s 
 selling tickets that had been once used, and that he took the money 
 that he received from these tickets, and bought fresh tickets and 
 punched them and returned them with his collections ? 
 
 A. No, sir, 
 
 Q. When was the first time you ever heard of that ? 
 
 A. Day before yesterday. These have an agreement on the back. 
 
 Q. Yes. 
 
 A. I now recollect something about it. I believe it was offered 
 before ; I am not sure. I believe this with an endorsement on the back, 
 they were to sign it, weren t they ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. I believe that was the fact. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Spalding, I want to ask you on the 24th of October, 
 1865, there was a meeting of the board of directors in Boston, when aB 
 order for investigation was made I want to ask you upon what repre 
 sentation, and who made it, that representation was made, [Mr. George 
 reads from the records of the corporation, " present the whole board, 
 except Mr. Peaslee." Vote also read.] Do you remember the circum 
 stances of that vote being passed ? 
 
 A. I know it was passed. 
 
 Q. Mr. Spalding, was I present at that meeting ? 
 
 A. I think not ; I was clerk pro tern, and Col. George came in before 
 the meeting adjourned, and the votes were passed over again, that he 
 might record them instead of myself. 
 
 Q. Will you state upon what representation, and who made the rep 
 resentation, that vote was passed ? What was the representation and 
 who made it ? 
 
 A. What? 
 
 Q. Who was the foundation and reason of that vote being passed? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Was any statement or representation made to the board about the 
 irregularities of the conductors ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I don t know as I understand your question. 
 
 Q. Did anybody make any statement to the board as to what the 
 conductors were doing? 
 
431 
 
 A. They had several meetings, and there were some intimations thai 
 there was fraud. I cannot say who made the representations. 
 
 Q. Do you remember Mr. Gilmore s making the representation that 
 the conductors were stealing to a large amount ? 
 
 A. Oh, yes. 
 
 Q. What did he say. 
 
 A. He said they had stolen $50,000 worth. He had considerable 
 to say about it; and the directors thought there was something wrong 
 about it. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Mugridge.) What is your age ? 
 
 A. I am sixty-eight or nine. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if representations were also made to the board 
 by Col. George that the conductors were stealing large amounts of money 
 at different times ? 
 
 A. 1 should think there might have been some ; I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, Mr. Spalding, if Col. George at different times 
 before and since that time represented to you that the conductors were 
 stealing large sums of money from the Concord Kailroad ? 
 
 A. He has since. 
 
 Q. Has he told you that he was satisfied that Mr, Clough had been 
 stealing more than $50,000 a year. If so, will you state it? 
 
 A. That was Gilmore, I think. 
 
 Q. Hasn t Mr. George ? 
 
 A. I don t remember ; he thought that the conductors were stealing 
 money from the Concord road. 
 
 Q. Did he ever undertake to show you from papers that he had, at 
 the time he talked with you, how much they were stealing ? 
 
 A. I should think that he had something about the different amounts ; 
 I don t know what; I couldn t say what. 
 
 Q, Where did he carry the papers that he showed you ? Can yow* 
 tell ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you remember ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Where were you when you had this meeting, when these things 
 were said ? 
 
 A, At the Eevere House, Boston. 
 
 Q. Did the Colonel talk pretty freely about this ? 
 
 A. He explained them. 
 
 Q. He is apt to talk pretty freely when he gets a going ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know who wrote that vote passed October 26th, 1865? 
 
 A. No, I do not ; I don t remember who wrote the vote. 
 
 Q. Who ordinarily wrote the votes? 
 
 A. Mr. George wrote some, and Mr. Upham wrote some. 
 
 Q. You are familiar with his style ; hear this, and see if this is his- 
 style. [Reads the vote,] Now, sir, from hearing that read, who should 
 you say wrote that vote ? 
 
 A. I don t know but Col. George made the first draft. I don t know 
 but it was amended afterwards. 
 
 Q. You say he made the first draft? 
 
 A. 1 don t know, but I think he did ; whether he made it or Judge 
 U pham, I don t know. 
 
432 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Spalding, about the peanut boy. Have you ever known 
 , a time since you knew anything about the Concord Eailroad, but that 
 .there has been a boy on the train selling candy and sweetmeats, etc. ? 
 
 A. There is generally some such thing. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if there sometimes have been two ? I don t 
 .mean that they both sold peanuts ; but hasn t there been one that sold 
 peanuts and candies, and one that sold papers? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; there have. 
 
 Q. Now, did you ever know of one of those boys paying anything 
 to the railroad for the privilege of running ? As president or director 
 did you ever know of a single fare being paid by a boy who ran on the 
 .train to sell peanuts. 
 
 A. Never did. They might or might not ; I don t know. 
 
 Q. You didn t know of anything of that kind ? 
 
 -VT " 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you acted, Mr. Spalding, sometimes as superintendent ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Never in that capacity ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q But you have acted as president ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, let us go to another matter. You say that you do remem 
 ber that you had an interview with Mr. Clough once ; at the request of 
 Judge Upham, was it not? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you remember when that was ? 
 
 A. I do not know. 
 
 Q. What would be your impression, as near as you can state ? 
 
 A. It was before Judge Upham went to Europe. 
 
 >Q. He went to Europe during Gen. Pierce s administration ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did George Clough stop over that day for the purpose of seeing 
 you, and having an interview with you ? 
 
 A. I suppose he did. I think it was his day to go down. 
 
 Q That is, he should have gone to Nashua that day, but remained 
 for the purpose of having this interview with you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; the conversation was very short. 
 
 Q. Now, didn t you understand, hadn t it been stated to you by 
 , Judge Upham before you had this interview with Mr. Clough, that Mr. 
 Clough had been carrying produce over the road to the market below ? 
 
 A. He stated to me that he had violated the rules. 
 
 Q. in what particulars ? 
 
 A. In carrying something, some fish, or something that he took with 
 him. I talked with Mr. Clough, but it did not seem to amount to any 
 thing. 
 
 Q. Did you understand that Mr. Clough stayed over, and that Mr, 
 Upham requested that interview simply for carrying fish over the road ? 
 
 A. I thought there was more to it than there was. I thought he 
 iiad been violating some of the rules. I think he said he had brought 
 two fish. 
 
 Q. I suppose you are not certain as to the exact words of the con 
 versation ? 
 
 , JL I am not. 
 
433 
 
 Q. And you would not undertake to come in here and repeat the 
 exact words that were used, or the exact extent of the transactions 
 jou were called upon to consider with Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You would not attempt to testify with assurance with regard to 
 it? 
 
 A. I am sure I had this conversation. 
 
 Q. I mean as to the details of the conversation ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I didn t think it was of much consequence. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you some other questions. There has been 
 some evidence here regard to collusion. I want to ask you if you ever 
 saw those tickets "not good unless countersigned by Mr. Spalding." 
 ^Showing a package of tickets or passes.] 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. These were issued upon occasion of your being a candidate for 
 councilman ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; Mr. Gilmore gave me fifty, and I used about half. 
 
 Q. Was it at your suggestion ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; they were sent to me. 
 
 Q. It was an original movement on his part, which you knew nothing 
 about ? 
 
 A. I knew nothing about it. 
 
 Q. Why did you understand that he put on, "not good unless 
 countersigned by Mr. Spalding?" 
 
 A. I suppose for that purpose ; because 1 was a candidate for coun 
 cilman. 
 
 Q. What position were you occupying V 
 
 A. I was director of the road. 
 
 Q. Did you understand that Mr. Gilmore, in the first place, had any 
 right to issue these tickets for this purpose ? 
 
 A. 1 don t know as I ever understood anything about it. 
 
 Q. Did it occur to you, when you signed these, that it was his right 
 to do anything of this kind ? 
 
 A. 1 don t know as there was any prohibition. 
 
 Q. Didn t you understand that the special object of issuing these 
 was to further your interests as a political candidate ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Did you think that Mr. Gilmore had any right to do that ? 
 
 A. I didn t think it was prohibited. 
 
 Q. Did it occur to you that he violated the rules of the road ? 
 
 A. It didn t occur to me, 
 
 Q. Did you know of any special reason why that was put on ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Gilmore undertake to shoulder off on to you part of the 
 responsibility of these passes ? 
 
 A. I don t know what he did. 
 
 Q. Didn t you understand that Mr. Gilmore was unwilling to do it 
 entirely as his own act, and was unwilling to issue them unless you 
 would take your responsibility as director ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I did. 
 
 Q. Didn t you have a talk with him about that ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You say that was put in without your knowledge, and without 
 talk between you and him ? 
 
434 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And it was not put in there to shoulder part of the responsibility 
 on you, and you had no conversation to that effect ? Do you say that ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I never had any conversation about it. 
 
 Q. Did it occur to you, when you signed these tickets, that Gilmore 
 had transcended his authority at all ? 
 
 A. I don t know that I did ; I don t recollect that I did. 
 
 Q, How many of these did you countersign ? 
 
 A. I should think about half. 
 
 Q. Didn t you sign all the fifty ? 
 
 A. No ; I think J. burned up ten or fifteen of them. 
 
 Q. You signed all except what were burned up ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. It didn t seem to you that you were doing anything in violation 
 of the rules of the road ? 
 
 A. I thought he was not prohibited from issuing the tickets himself. 
 
 Q. Did it occur to you, when you countersigned these passes, that 
 you and Gilmore were doing something that the rules of the road did 
 not authorize? 
 
 A. I suppose it might have done ; I think it did. 
 
 Q. You did think that and understand it. Now let me ask you if, 
 after you signed them, they were used to a certain extent ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it seems so, by that. 
 
 Q. Now, wasn t it understood by you and Gilmore that Gilmore 
 should not issue them alone, but that you and Gilmore should issue 
 them together ? 
 
 A. They were sent to me without my knowledge. 
 
 Q. And you never asked him to do it? 
 
 A. No way, shape, or manner. 
 
 Q. There are 28 of these tickets. Do you mean to say there were 
 not but two or three more ? 
 
 A. I know there were 50 sent. 
 
 Q. How large was your councillor convention ? 
 
 A. I do not know. 
 
 Q. You don t remember how many there; were present ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 BE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I want to ask you if any tickets were sent to 
 you before or afterwards ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. I neglected to ask you one question which is involved in the 
 other perhaps. Had you any knowledge, so far as you are aware, or 
 had the board of directors, so far as you are aware, that the conductors, 
 when any man paid in the cars, gave him a return ticket, either that 
 had been once used or otherwise ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q When was the first time that you ever heard of that? [Not 
 answered, the witness having stated previously.] 
 
 <}. (By Mr. Mugridge.} You was not a candidate for councillor for 
 but two years, were you ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 The counsel for the defendant then offered in evidence the deposition 
 of Mr. Charles H. Clifford, taken Sept. 7th, 1868 ; and the same was 
 read by Mr. Rolfe. 
 
435 
 
 It was agreed by the counsel of either side that the certificate of the 
 market value of the stock of the road at the brokers board in Boston, 
 might be put in without requiring the calling of the secretary to certify 
 the same, provided such statement be competent evidence of itself to 
 be admitted. [Adjourned to Tuesday, Dec. 29, It 68.] 
 
 [TWENTY-FIRST DAY. Tuesday, December 29th, 1868.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF N. G. UPHAM. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Judge Upham, you were formerly superin 
 tendent of the Concord Eailroad, and subsequently president for many 
 years? Won t you be kind enough to state your first connection with 
 the road, and what your relations were ? 
 
 A. I have been connected with the road as director, superintendent, 
 or president, since the road was opened, down to within about two years 
 two or three years. 
 
 Q. Well, sir, won t you state from what time to what time you were 
 superintendent ? 
 
 A. I have been superintendent since three or four years after the 
 road was opened. 
 
 Q. Wasn t it earlier than that ? 
 
 A. It was from the early commencement of the road that I was 
 superintendent. 
 
 Q. This road was opened in the fall of 1842 ; now could you tell ? 
 
 A. I think I was superintendent in 1843. 
 
 Q. And continued to be superintendent until 1856 or 1857 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And when you ceased to be superintendent you became and 
 remained president up to the time you left the road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Judge Upham, I will ask you whether you were aware, or, so far 
 as you know, any of the board of directors were aware of Mr. Clough, 
 or any of the other conductors, doing express business, carrying articles 
 on the cars ? 
 
 A. I was not aware myself that the conductors, any of them, were 
 concerned in doing what might be regarded as an express business. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We want to have a distinction between express busi 
 ness and the business which Mr. Clough has described himself as hav 
 ing done here. 
 
 Q Were you ever aware of the conductors carrying articles such as 
 butter, cheese, and provisions ? 
 
 The Chairman. I suppose this testimony is confined particularly to 
 Mr. Clough. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We except to any testimony in regard to other con 
 ductors, 
 
 Q. I will put you this question whether you were aware, or whether 
 the board of directors, so far as you know, were aware of Mr. dough s 
 carrying produce, butter and cheese, and articles of that character 
 backward and forward ? 
 
 A. I never understood that he carried butter and cheese and matters 
 of that kind. I think that the express agents made complaint at some 
 time that he brought fish up, or something of that sort, by special trains ; 
 and there was some little complaint made about it, and the matter was 
 discontinued. That was in the early history of the road ; and I sup- 
 
436 
 
 posed that anything of the kind was limited to something of that char 
 acter. I was not aware that Mr. Clough, or any one else, was concerned 
 in doing what might be regarded as general express business. I think 
 when he first went upon the road, he might have done some business in 
 small articles; I don t recollect of hearing anything said except about 
 bringing fish, or something of that sort. But for a long time 1 think 
 that the complaints from that cause were continued a very short time 
 this whole matter ceased. It was in the early history of the road. That 
 as my recollection of it. 
 
 Q. I will ask you whether any permission was ever given, directly 
 or indirectly, for conductors to carry articles of that kind? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Mr. Clough has not claimed that there was any per 
 mission. He does not say that the superintendent, or anybody else, ever 
 authorized him to do it. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you understand, Mr. Mugridge, that there is 
 evidence in this case tending to show that the conductors were permitted 
 to do this ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Yes, sir. 
 
 TJie Chairman. Then the question will be, I suppose, whether that 
 evidence can be rebutted here or not. The ruling now stands on this 
 .ground, that the defence claim here that there is evidence tending to 
 jshow. The plaintiff is putting in evidence to rebut that evidence, what 
 ever it is, which tends to show permission. On that ground we think it 
 is admissible. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Is that evidence competent as bearing upon the gen 
 eral question? 
 
 The Chairman. I understand that the position has been taken here 
 %y the defence very distinctly, that the superintendent has very great 
 ^power ; that he is a controlling man ; that he has very great power; and 
 that his position would authorize many acts. It seems to me, therefore, 
 that if the defence claim that there is evidence tending to show that 
 4-he superintendent permitted these things to be done, it must be proper 
 *6 rebut it by the evidence of the superintendent. I cannot see how it 
 is not. 
 
 Mr. Tappaii. By the evidence of the superintendent ? 
 
 T/ie Cftaintian. Why, certainly if the superintendent authorized it. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. Is this offered to rebut evidence of permission? 
 
 The C/tairman. He was superintendent at the time ; and I under 
 stand that this is offered to rebut this evidence of permission. I don t 
 "exactly see why it is not admissible, in that point of view now. 
 
 =Q. (By Mr. George.) I will ask whether any permission was ever 
 given to Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. I don t know that Mr. Clough ever asked any permission to take 
 nany articles of any kind over the road ; I have no recollection of having 
 :a>ay conversation with Mr. Clough in reference to that subject. I do 
 not now recollect of having spoken to him at all about it. I think 
 tliat Mr. White, the express agent, was a little sensitive about some 
 things that were done by the conductors ; and he made some complaint. 
 There was some talk in reference to practices of carrying articles that 
 he thought might interfere with him, or come in collision with him in 
 some way. And I suppose it came to the knowledge of the conductors, 
 <artd I heard nothing more about it after that. I have no recollection of 
 conversing with Mr. Clough in relation to fiis carrying any articles, and 
 personally 1 have no knowledge. 
 

 437 
 
 Q. Whether any leave of course it follows any leave was gives, 
 so far as you know ? 
 
 A. No ; I was not aware that any leave was asked or given. 
 
 Q. How it was with regard to Mr. White s having an exclusive con 
 tract for the express business over the Concord Railroad during this 
 time? [Objected to.]; 
 
 Q. Now will you state whether you had any such knowledge, or the 
 board of directors, so far as you know ? 
 
 A. Knowledge of what? Won t you repeat ? 
 
 Q. Knowledge that Mr. Clough was purchasing tickets of upper 
 roads and selling them for the local fares over the Concord road ? 
 
 A. I never heard any intimation of that kind while I was superin 
 tendent or president ; and I had no suspicion of any transaction of that 
 sort ; of course could give no permission to anything, 
 
 Q. It is, of course, unnecessary to ask if, so far as you knew, any 
 of the other directors knew ? 
 
 A. I never heard from any of the directors that a practice of that 
 kind existed while I held office on the Concord Railroad, either super 
 intendent or president, on the part of one of the directors. 
 
 Q. Judge Upliam, I will ask you whether you had any knowledge* 
 while you were superintendent or president, or whether any of the other 
 directors had, so far as you are aware, of the conductors selling tickets 
 which had been once used selling them a second time ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We take the same exception, of course. 
 
 A. i had no knowledge of any practice of that kind until some tes 
 timony was taken, after suits had commenced ; not aware of any prac 
 tice of that sort; didn t suppose such a practice existed, if" it did 
 exist. 
 
 Q. Whether you had any knowledge, or any of the other directors, 
 so far as you are aware, had any knowledge, of conductors taking money 
 received in the cars, and going to the ticket office and purchasing fresla 
 tickets and punching them and returning them for the collection^ 
 Whether you heard of that? 
 
 A. I never heard any intimation of that kind from any quarter,, 
 until since this hearing has been going on. 
 
 Q. Whether you had any knowledge, or, so far as you are aware, the 
 directors had any knowledge, any of them, that the conductors took the 
 money received in the cars for fares, and, instead of returning it to the 
 general ticket agent on the way-bills, took that money and bought tick 
 ets at the ticket office and returned them in their collections ? 
 
 A. I was not aware of a practice of that kind ; never have heard 
 any of the directors speak of anything of the sort. 
 
 Q. And, so far as you are aware, they had no knowledge of that 
 kind? 
 
 A. They never communicated the knowledge to me, at any rate. I 
 had no knowledge myself, and I had no suspicion myself, because I 
 think there would have been some conversation on the subject if they 
 had had any knowledge of the kind. 1 supposed the money taken in 
 the cars was returned as usual ; I wasn t aware that 
 
 Q. What do you mean by usual ? 
 
 A. Returned to the cashier. 
 
 Q. That is, on the way-bills ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I supposed that the money taken in the cars was 
 returned there. I was not aware that any substitute was adopted in 
 pi ace of buying tickets of any kind. 
 
438 
 
 Q. _ 1 want to ask you now the same question that has been asked Mr. 
 Spalding and Mr. Kidder, whether you were present at the meeting 
 or, I want to ask you how it was about your having any knowledge, or 
 the board of directors, so far as you are aware, that Mr. Clough em 
 ployed boys on the cars, to ride upon the cars, and sell peanuts for his 
 private benefit? 
 
 A. I was not aware that Mr. Clough had any pecuniary interest in 
 anything of that kind. I think I have heard him speak of some lads 
 that had the privilege of going on the cars, as being very well behaved 
 boys, that they were poor, etc. something of that kind ; but I did not 
 know of any pecuniary interest, if there was any. There have been 
 boys upon the cars distributing papers ; occasionally other articles ; 
 there was a man some time used to go with parched corn. I am not 
 certain but that he may have paid something to the road for that privi 
 lege. It never occurred to me that this traffic of the boys was of much 
 account ; and I did not know that there was any pecuniary interest 
 on the part of the conductors in reference to it. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you if you were present at the meeting held Octo 
 ber the 24th, 1865, at the time this investigation was ordered into the 
 affairs of the road, into the manner in which the conductors had done 
 their duty ? Were you present at that meeting ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir ; I was present at the time when the vote was passed. 
 
 Q. Will you state upon whose representation, and who made it, that 
 vote was passed? 
 
 A. Well, Mr. Gilmore at that time at that meeting and at some 
 other times along some other meetings before and subsequent to that 
 time, made some round statements about losses that he thought the 
 road had incurred ; and seemed to speak with a good of confidence in 
 regard to them ; and Mr. Crocker introduced a resolution that inquiry 
 should be made by the counsel of the road. 
 
 Q. What was Mr. Gilmore s statement? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We understand the referees to rule this to be com 
 petent so far as to what his actions were. I understand that ruling to 
 go no farther than to the fact that a communication was made by some 
 person to the board. But I did not understand the referees to rule that 
 the particular communication was to be introduced here. 
 
 The Chairman. Judge Bellows understands as I do, that what was 
 said about Mr. Gilmore went in by consent. [Objection waived.] 
 
 Q. Now will you state what Mr. Gilmore said ? 
 
 A. He stated that he had not any doubt that the road had lost more 
 than $50,000 a year by money that was taken in the cars by conductors 
 and not returned to the road. He made some broad statements of that 
 kind, and seemed to persist in it, and it occasioned a good deal of 
 surprise to many of the directors. 
 
 Q. You say Mr. Crocker introduced a vote, or made a motion for a 
 committee of investigation? 
 
 A. Mr. Crocker made a motion that the counsel of the road be 
 directed to inquire into the subject in some way ; and the vote was 
 passed ; and at that time you were not present ; you were delayed for 
 some cause or other. At a subsequent time you came in, and the vote 
 was reaffirmed. 
 
 Q. You recollect who was clerk pro tempore in my absence ? 
 
 A. Mr. Spalding was usually appointed clerk pro tern., and I think 
 he was at that time. I believe there was an expectation that you would 
 

 439 
 
 be in before the directors separated. And in this instance, and in one 
 or two other instances where there had been some delay, votes had been 
 passed and were re-affirnied after the regular clerk came in, in order 
 that he might make the record. That was the case at this time. 
 
 Q. I will ask you, sir, if you remember, if you will please state 
 who informed me first of the passage of this vote when I got to Boston, 
 and of the proceedings of the directors ? Who was the first man that 
 informed me ? Do you remember ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect with regard to that. I think you came in, and 
 shook hands all around with the board, and had general conversation 
 about what had been said and done. I think all the directors talked 
 more or less about it. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Judge Upham, you say that Mr. Gilmore 
 made certain representations to the road with regard to the amount of 
 money that the conductors were taking. Let me ask you if you ever 
 heard Col. George express any opinion to the board on that subject? 
 
 A. Well, I think I have. 
 
 Q. What representations did he make in that direction before these 
 suits were brought, I mean ? 
 
 A. At that time, 1 think that Mr. Gilmore s representations on that 
 subject exceeded those of any other person. 
 
 Q, Let me ask you whether Col. George did make representations to 
 the road on that subject, and if so, what they were, before these suits 
 were brought, I mean ? 
 
 A. After the passage of the resolution and before the suits ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. I will ask you in the first place, if you will allow me 
 to withdraw that question, whether Col. George made any representa 
 tions at the time of the meeting on the 24th of October, on that sub 
 ject, at the time the resolution was passed, if you remember? 
 
 A. Well, I don t recollect further than this. I cannot recollect 
 what words he said, but I think he concurred in the idea at that time, 
 that money had been taken that had not been accounted for ; but when 
 he understood that the matter was to be submitted to the counsel of the 
 road for investigation, he inquired what course he should take ; and his 
 conversation was rather in that direction than otherwise. There wasn t 
 a great deal. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether, before this time, the matter has been 
 alluded to in general by Col. George, as to the conductors appropriating 
 funds ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, I am not aware that he was in the habit of speaking 
 on that subject, or speaking in reference to it, in any peculiar or marked 
 manner. 
 
 Q. Well, without reference to any particular manner, let me ask 
 you if he has frequently made that suggestion to the board of direc 
 tors, antecedent to the meeting of the board in October, 1865 sugges 
 tions to the effect that I have indicated ? 
 
 A. Well, I don t know ; I have no recollection of his suggesting it 
 to the board that 
 
 Q. Well, to you, sir, as president of the board, did he ever make 
 the suggestion? 
 
 A. I am not aware that he made any suggestions or further inquiries. 
 The only measures taken in that direction by the board were, from time 
 
440 
 
 to time we passed some resolutions to require an extra amount to be 
 taken in the cars, or something of that kind. And at those times it 
 was thought to be very desirable, for every reason, to check the pay 
 ments in the cars. 
 
 Q. Now, let me see if I cannot refresh your recollection. Mr. Cor 
 ning left the road some time before Mr. Clough did ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, he did. 
 
 Q. Did Col. George make a suggestion to you at the time Mr. Cor 
 ning left, that the conductors were appropriating the funds improperly? 
 
 A. Well, there were some complaints that the rules were not enforced 
 and some suspicions that the road did not receive all that belonged 
 to them at that time. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you this question. Were not these suggestions 
 thrown out by Col. George to you as against the conductors ? 
 
 A. Well, i don t think he ever undertook to come formally. 
 
 Q. I don t mean that he came in a formal and ceremonious way to 
 you as president of the road. But do you mean to swear that he did 
 not make these complaints and throw out these intimations to you, 
 against the conductors antecedent to October 24th, Ir65 ? 
 
 A. I have no doubt that he made a statement that he thought there 
 was not a full return of the amount collected on the cars, but whether he 
 undertook to state any specific sum. I don t think he did. 
 
 Q. Now, 1 don t mean to inquire for that. Let me ask you- whether 
 Col. George, after the vote of October 24th, and prior to the commence 
 ment of the suits, undertook to demonstrate the fact to you, by the fig 
 ures that he carried, about, that George Clough had stolen $250,000. 
 
 A. I don t think he ever made any statement to me. 
 
 Q. Did he say that he could demonstrate by certain figures that he 
 carried that George Clough had stolen $250,000 ? 
 
 A. I think he said that he could show, and he had reason to believe 
 from the evidence he had got ; but as the $250,000 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that he didn t say that he stole $250,000, and 
 that he could show it by a comparison of the way-bills ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect his stating the figures as high as that. 
 
 Q. How high did he set it? 
 
 A. I think he stated large sums, but didn t put any definite figures. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say, Judge Upham, that since you have known 
 anything of the Concord Eailroad, there has been a boy upon it who has 
 peddled peanuts and sweetmeats and pop-corn and the like of that ? 
 
 A. Not exactly. 
 
 Q. Well, what did you say ? 
 
 A. I said there had been boys upon the road. 
 
 Q. I don t mean the same boys, of course. Has there not been upon 
 the Concord Eailroad, since you have been connected with it, a boy or 
 boys peddling sweetmeats, pop-corn, &c., sir? 
 
 A. I think the pop-corn administration commenced very long after 
 the administration of the Concord Eailroad. 
 
 Q. Leave out the pop-corn peddled sweetmeats and candy, oranges 
 and apples ? 
 
 A. The first I recollect of, there was quite a large sized man came 
 on to the road. 
 
 Q. Hasn t there been a boy who has run upon the train, who has 
 peddled articles of some kind ? 
 
441 
 
 A. It hasn t been a permanent institution. I should think likely 
 that a boy, carrying papers and selling some small articles of different 
 kinds, had been running on the road a considerable portion of the time, 
 
 Q. Did you ever know a boy to pay a cent for this privilege ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; it was considerably a charitable matter. 
 
 Q. Did you ever know a charge to be made by the road against such 
 a boy ? 
 
 Q. No, I never did. I am not certain of it. 
 
 Q. Wasn t he understood to be there, acting in that capacity for the 
 accommodation of the passengers riding upon the road, as well as for 
 himself? 
 
 A. Sometimes there was complaint made of their being an annoy 
 ance ; but if the boys were well behaved, they were ordinarily permit 
 ted to run. I rather think not more than one to a train. 
 
 Q. I don t care how many run. Did you ever know of one paying 
 for the privilege of riding in the cars ? 
 
 A. I never knew of their paying anything. It was regarded as a 
 matter of charity in part ; perhaps as a convenience to passengers in 
 part, where they were not annoying, and where they were well behaved, 
 We had to look after them a little, but when the conductors said that 
 they behaved well, and were good clever boys, we ordinarily let them 
 run without anything being said. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you just one question more. You have said 
 that Mr. Gilmore came to the board of directors and made a statement 
 to the effect that the conductors were stealing $50,000 a year. Did you 
 ever tell George Clough what you thought the reason was why he made 
 that statement ? If so, what did you say that reason was ?. [Objected 
 to.] 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Judge Upham, do you know why Grilmore 
 made the statement that you repeated here to the referees ? 
 
 A. He appeared to make it in great sincerity; and he insisted upon 
 it as his belief. 
 
 Q. That ain t the question. 
 
 A. That is all I know about it. I don t know as I know. 
 
 Q. You answered in regard to the manner in which he made the 
 statement, I made an inquiry as to that. Do you know why Gilmore 
 made that statement? 
 
 A. Of course I don t know. 
 
 Q. Have you stated to anybody that he made it for the purpose of 
 covering his own rascality and rottenness ? 
 
 A. I can state the conversation in relation to the subject. 
 
 Q. The question I put you is this : Have you stated to any person 
 that Mr. Gilmore made that statement to the board of directors for the 
 purpose of covering his own rascality and rottenness, using these two 
 terms ? 
 
 A. No, I did not make a statement covering that in the way you 
 state it. If you want to know, I will state that at the time this reso 
 lution was passed Mr. Gilmore apparently seemed to be acting from his- 
 own knowledge and impression, and made statements to the board there ; 
 and there was no apparent excitement or malice, it seemed to me. But 
 after the investigation went on, and at subsequent meetings, there were 
 new declarations. There were not only declarations that came out be 
 fore the board implicating the conductors to a certain extent, but also 
 implicating Mr. Gilmore more or less. The effect of the investigation 
 
442 
 
 was to attract more or less attention to Mr. Gilmore, and certain acts of 
 his that had been brought to the knowledge of the board ; and at these 
 subsequent meetings Mr. Gilmore seemed to enter with a great deal of 
 aeal into this matter of fraud on the part of the conductors. But af 
 ter this investigation went on, now combinations and alliances were 
 formed, and they were surprised at the different talk that Mr. Gilmore 
 had before the board apparently, and what he had outside. I have no 
 doubt that I stated that he persisted in the accusation, and continued 
 after the investigation went on, and that his object in part may have 
 been to screen himself from attention. I recollect having a conversa 
 tion of that kind with Mr. Clough, or with Mr. C , something of 
 
 that character, that after circumstances came out that implicated Mr. 
 Gilmore to a considerable extent, and his persisting so strongly as he 
 did, and enlarging so much on the action of the conductors, it occurred 
 to me that he wanted to show his zeal to the directors in the course he 
 was taking, so as to screen himself in part. I have no doubt that that 
 in part was his object at the later stage of this proceeding. That is my 
 opinion at the present time. At the later stage of the proceeding,, the 
 fact is, a great many things were developed that occasioned suspicion 
 on the part of the directors. 
 
 Q. What were some of them ? 
 
 A. In the first place we looked into his accounts. 
 
 Q. What did you discover there ? 
 
 A. We discovered that there was undoubtedly a large defalcation 
 on the part of Gilmore. 
 
 Q. To what extent ? 
 
 A. To a considerable extent ; I could not tell. 
 
 Q. Give us your best judgment. 
 
 A. I supposed that if we got into a fight with Mr. Gilmore at that 
 time, it was in his power to withhold funds from the road to the amount 
 of at least $50;000. The election was coming off, and he seemed to 
 think that his position was rather dangerous anyway. I have no doubt 
 he had that impression. I did all I could for the last six months to in 
 duce him to bring up his accounts to the fullest extent. I was mor6 
 alarmed as the facts came home to my knowledge as to other particu 
 lars. I devoted my time to bringing up his tickets, and succeeded in 
 bringing up most of some $5000 or $6000. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if he didn t practically turn out to be a defaulter 
 in the sum of more than $50,000? 
 
 A. No sir ; I don t believe any such thing. 
 
 Q. How much do you think it was ? 
 
 A. I never undertook to form an opinion. 
 
 Q. What was your best opinion at that time ? Wasn t he practi 
 cally a defaulter to the amount of $50,000? 
 
 A. I know that his defalcation was misrepresented to a considerable 
 extent. 
 
 Q. Did you direct this suit to be brought at the time it was brought ? 
 Now that is a plain question ? 
 
 A. Of course I did not undertake to direct in regard to this matter 
 at all ; for this reason, that the resolution required that the counsel of 
 the road should take such measures as he deemed proper. 
 
 Q. Are you quite sure that that is the resolution? 
 
 A. That is my impression, that the counsel of the road was directed 
 to make certain inquiries in reference to money; whether he was 
 
443 
 
 instructed to institute suits or not, I don t know, but I understood, so 
 far as 1 recollect, that the matter should be submitted to the counsel, 
 leaving Mr. Gilmore and myself out of the question. For. I thought 
 possibly some collision might arise between us perhaps between Mr. 
 Gilmore and myself, some way or other ; and I understood the matter 
 to be left with the counsel. 
 
 Q. And you understood that the counsel commenced a suit on his 
 own arbitrary motion ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect that I had any conversation with the counsel 
 except after the disclosure of Whitcher. 
 
 Q. Did you direct this suit at the time it was brought ? Do you 
 remember giving any such direction ? 
 
 A. I don t think I directed the suit. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF SYDNEY H. CARNEY. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} State whether you are a brother of Geo. H. 
 Carney ? 
 
 A. I am. 
 
 Q. Practice in Boston ? 
 
 A. Not practicing in Boston; have been for six or seven years. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you whether you were desired by your brother, 
 Major George J. Carney, to visit at Concord, and if so, when, what 
 fares you paid, and how much money you paid? Won t you state 
 briefly ? 
 
 A. Yes, I can give it in my own way. 
 
 Q. Give it in your own way, only as briefly as you can ? 
 
 A. My brother asked me sometime in November. He sent to my 
 iiouse and sent me some money. 
 
 Judge Bellows. November what year? 
 
 Mr, George. November, 1865. 
 
 A. He wished I should visit Concord. I did not see him, but I at 
 *>nce I can t say whether he suggested that I should visit the Lunatic 
 Asylum, but at any rate, as I was interested in it and had never visited 
 it, I did. He told me to pay in the cars, and that was all that I knew 
 about it. I took four with me part of the way five and started on 
 Thursday, the 28th day of November, 1865, as appears from my note 
 liere which I wrote to him. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Are you testifying from a minute, a mem 
 orandum ? 
 
 A. I am not ; I am simply refreshing my memory. 
 
 The Chairman. I think the witness says he wrote it at that time ? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Was it made at the time? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You knew it to be true at the time ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) That is the original one? It is not a 
 copy? 
 
 A. That is the original. At the Boston depot I purchased five tick 
 ets to Nashua and handed those tickets to the conductor. At Nashua 
 the conductor came through, and I purchased five tickets to Concord. 
 I came to Concord with five persons, and visited the Lunatic Asylum. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Paid in the cars? 
 
 A. Paid in the cars out of the money. [Objected to.] 
 
444 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Did you give the day of the month ? 
 
 A. Twenty-eighth day of November Thursday, the 28th day of 
 November, 1865. I purchased tickets from Nashua to Concord for five 
 persons. It was the first train in the morning from Boston. We visited 
 the Asylum at half-past three in the afternoon. I got on board the 
 train for Boston. The same conductor was on the train as was there in 
 the morning, I purchased five tickets to Boston in the cars, and when 
 I got to Manchester, as I had been asked to go over that road and re 
 serve the tickets, I did so. We all got out at Manchester, and pur 
 chased from Manchester to Boston again. 
 
 Q. On the Lawrence road ? 
 
 A. To Lawrence. The conductor told me at that time that he hadn t 
 been on for a month, and he hadn t through tickets to Boston, 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Mugridge.) What did you say about buying at Con 
 cord ? 
 
 A. When I started from Concord, at half-past three in the afternoon r 
 I purchased five tickets in the cars, of the same gentleman who was 
 acting as conductor, I suppose, that I met in the morning coming up. 
 And when I reached Manchester, he left the train, and I purchased of 
 another conductor, in the car, tickets from Manchester to Lawrence, I 
 could not buy through because he said he had no other tickets to Boston, 
 as he said it was his first trip for a month. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappah.} The tickets that you purchased here were 
 from Concord to Manchester? 
 
 A. No, sir; from Concord to Boston. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Are these the tickets. [Handing tickets to 
 witness] 
 
 A. I think those are the tickets. 
 
 Q. Won t you look at them on the back ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, those are the tickets. [The tickets were put in evidence 
 by Mr. George.] 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} What was the date, Mr. Carney, when you 
 first bought tickets from Nashua to Concord of Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. The 28th of November nearly. 
 
 Q. How many tickets did you purchase in the cars, of Mr. Clough r 
 from Nashua to Concord ? 
 
 A. Five, sir, 
 
 Q. And paid him in the cars for them? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, when you went back again in the afternoon, you bought 
 five tickets to Boston where ? 
 
 A. 1 bought five tickets in the cars of this same conductor. 
 
 Q. Did they run from Concord to Boston the five tickets that you 
 purchased ? 
 
 A. From Concord to Boston yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you paid him for them in the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. These went by the way of Nashua? 
 
 A, Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And that was the same day, the 23d [28th], and you only came* 
 up. went there and went back the next train ? 
 
 A. That is it, sir. 
 
445 
 
 Q. Now, Dr. Carney, did you visit Concord again after this ? 
 
 A. 1 did, sir. 
 
 Q. With whom did you ride ? 
 
 A. With friends of mine. Oh, you mean the conductor ? 
 
 >Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. I shall have to refer to my notes. On Monday, the 18th of 
 December, 1865, 1 purchased two tickets for Newmarket Junction. 
 
 Q. Did you ride again with Mr. Clough and buy any tickets of him 
 .after the 23d of November ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. That is I say, yes, I haven t seen these papers until this 
 snorning. 
 
 Q. Well, you can refresh your recollection and see ? 
 
 A. That 1 cannot say. That is not fresh in my mind ; and I notice 
 liere that I simply say that I asked for them yes, I can say that I 
 (bought two tickets of Mr. Clough at half-past three on the afternoon 
 following December the 18th on the 19th. 
 
 Q, On the 19th of December, 1865 ? 
 
 A. On the 19th of December, 1865, at half-past three in the after 
 noon, I bought two tickets of Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. Where did they go to ? 
 
 A. From Concord to Nashua. 
 
 Q. Have you got those tickets ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Where are they ? 
 
 A. I don t know. 
 
 ;Q. What did you do with them ? 
 
 A. I don t know that. My object was to buy a ticket to New York 
 <of Mr. Clough, as 1 understood that he sold to New York, and he was 
 very much disturbed, and it was with much difficulty that he answered ; 
 1 think he knew that I was - 
 
 Q. What did you think he thought you was? 
 
 A. I think he knew that 1 was a " spotter " as they are called. 
 
 Q. Did you say that you thought that he thought that you looked 
 like a " spotter" ? 
 
 A. I think very likely I may have said so. 
 
 Q. Will you please describe fully the embarrassment, the nervou* 
 excitement which Mr. Clough seemed to be laboring with at the time 
 you asked for a ticket? Describe his trepidation? 
 
 A. I cannot describe it fully ; but he was a man who had been set 
 .down as a thief for years. 
 
 Q. Go ahead, sir, from where you left off. 
 
 A. The first time that I saw Mr. Clough, that is, the first time 1 
 Bought these five tickets, he acted as he had a great while, in an ungen- 
 4-lemanly manner, to say the least, towards the passengers, and in a 
 Haughty and overbearing way ; and I had my doubts at the time that I 
 jpaid the money where it was going. 
 
 Q. You did ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.) That was when you bought the two tick 
 ets? 
 
 Mr. Mugridye, The first tickets ? 
 
446 
 
 A. The second time when I saw him on the train, he came along 
 and I handed him some money and asked him for some tickets to New 
 York first. He turned pale, and trembled, and was very much excited* 
 1 cannot give you any further particulars of his appearance at that 
 time ; but he afterwards stammered out that he didn t have any to> New 
 York. I told him then that 1 would like to go to Groton Junction, which 
 didn t highten| his color at all ; he looked, if anything, paler. 
 
 Q. Well, proceed. 
 
 A. I then asked him to sell me as far as he could in that direction 
 to sell me to Nashua. 
 
 Q. You say he was paler when you said to Groton Junction ? 
 
 A. I could not swear. He was pale enough. 
 
 Q. Did he tremble a good deal ? 
 
 A. He did, a good deal, for an honest man. 
 
 Q. You didn t look at him as an honest man ? 
 
 A. I didn t. 
 
 Q. You regarded him as a thief? 
 
 A. Y^es, sir. 
 
 Q. And you do now ? 
 
 A. Y T es, sir. I know it 
 
 Q. Now, sir, 1 want to ask you what brings you upon the stand here 
 to denounce him as a thief? What do you see in his conduct which 
 leads you to swear that he is a thief? 
 
 A. I don t say that it is anything that I have seen in his conduct. 
 
 Q. If you never saw anything in his conduct which leads you to> 
 believe he is a thief, what do you come here and swear that he is a- 
 thief for, if you never saw anything in his conduct which indicates it ? 
 
 A. Because, I have information which leads me to regard him so. 
 
 Q. And you will swear that he is a thief upon representations made 
 to you by other people ? 
 
 A. No, sir, I think not. I have had some dealings I can tell an> 
 honest man when I see him. 
 
 Q, Let me ask you, sir, what dishonest action you ever saw in Geo. 
 Clough in your life ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, I will tell you. His actions when I asked him for that 
 New Y^ork ticket, were the actions of a thief. 
 
 Q. They were ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, you mean to swear that he is a thief by reason of actions 
 that you then saw on his part ? 
 
 A. I mean to swear, sir, that I am satisfied. 
 
 Q. And you state here, that he is a thief, and you regard him a a 
 thief, and are willing to swear and have sworn he is a thief, because of 
 his actions when you asked him for that New Y ork ticket ? 
 
 A. Actions and subsequent representations from other parties. 
 
 Q. From what parties ? 
 
 A. My brother. 
 
 Q. W T ho else beside your brother? 
 
 A. I could not give the name, sir, definitely. 
 
 Q. Did ever you hear another man in your life call George dough * 
 thief? 
 
 A. I never heard any man say that definitely, 
 
 Q. Name a man ? 
 
 A. I cannot name one. 1 never heard a man mention his name but. 
 
447 
 
 what said it. 
 
 Q. Name a man that you ever heard call George Clough a thief ? 
 
 A. Every man. 
 
 Q. Name one man, sir? 
 
 A. I should not wish to name, for fear I might do injustice. 
 
 Q. Name a man that ever called him a thief, if you can ? 
 
 A. Am I obliged to name ? 
 
 Q. You are, sir. 
 
 A. One man that has called him a thief is George T. Comins, who 
 has a contract here in the state prison. 
 
 Q. Give me another man ? 
 
 A. I cannot do it, because my memory does not serve me. 
 
 Q. .Name a man ? 
 
 A. I cannot recollect the names. 
 
 Q. What is your business ? 
 
 A. I am now surgeon general of the Travellers Life and Accidental 
 Insurance Company. 
 
 Q. How old are you ? 
 
 A. I am over thirty-one. 
 
 Q. What business have you been engaged in during your life time ? 
 
 A. I have been engaged in study, at school, and in college and med 
 ical school, and the practice of medicine, and as surgeon general of this 
 company. 
 
 Q. Where have you practised medicine ? 
 
 A. In Boston. 
 
 Q. How long a time ? 
 
 A. I practiced first at Bridgewater, in the year 1861. Since then,, 
 and until a year and a half ago I have practiced in Boston., 
 
 Q. How long since you occupied the position of surgeon-general of 
 the Accident Insurance Company ? 
 
 A. For a year and a half, perhaps. 
 
 Q. How long did you practice in Boston ? 
 
 A. From 1862 until that time. 
 
 Q. Who got you this place as surgeon-general here ? 
 
 A Myself. 
 
 Q. Where is the company located ? 
 
 A. In Hartford, Connecticut. I will give you my card if you would 
 like. 
 
 Q. No, sir, I don t want it, and I shouldn t call upon you. Now I 
 want to ask you another question. Did you ever see an act of George 
 Clough s that indicated dishonesty ? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. What was it? 
 
 A. The second time I was on that train. 
 
 Q. And asked for a ticket to New York ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you describe it? 
 
 A. I will. He was as mean a looking man as I ever saw under the 
 circumstances. 
 
 Q. Will you describe the particular look of meanness ? 
 
 A. I could not, sir. All that I could say is, he was perfectly pale, 
 and trembling like a leaf very much embarrassed. 
 
 Q. And you think his embarrassment was greater when you asked 
 for a ticket to the Junction than when for a ticket to New York ? 
 
448 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it kept increasing. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you how much Mr. Clough charged you fo r 
 the fare of the five persons from Nashua to Concord the 18th day of 
 December ? 
 
 A. For the five? There were only two. Oh, yes ; from Nashua to 
 Concord, $8. 
 
 Q. Eight dollars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Is that the full fare ? 
 
 A. I haven t the least idea. 
 
 Q. The fare is $1.50, and ten cents more. Let me ask you if there 
 is anything dishonest about that ? 
 
 A. I have nothing to do with whether he returned them or not. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay Mr. Clough for the three fares backtigain 
 on the half-past three train ? 
 
 A. Fourteen dollars and twenty-five cents. 
 
 Q. Is that the precise amount that he should have taken in the cars 
 from here to Boston ? 
 
 A. I haven t the slightest idea. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Fourteen dollars and how much? 
 
 A. Twenty-five cents. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Muyridge.) How much did you pay him? 
 
 A. Fourteen dollars and twenty-five cents. 
 
 Q. Have you a minute of that ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where is your minute of that? 
 
 A. Eight there [indicating.] 
 
 Q. Now, sir, did you pay him for the two fares that you paid the 
 next day. or the 18th day ? 
 
 A. Concord to Nashua, $3.20. 
 
 Q. How many fares ? 
 
 A. Two. 
 
 Q. That would be exactly the fare, wouldn t it, in the cars? 
 
 A. I haven t the slightest idea. 
 
 Q. Now, I want to ask you how much money your brother, Major 
 Carney, put into your hands to do this business with ? 
 
 A. One hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. Have you made any account to him of the balance of the hund 
 red dollars? 
 
 A. I have. 
 
 Q. How much did you spend ? 
 
 A. Fifty dollars and fifty-five cents. 
 
 Q. Did you charge anything for your services up here? 
 
 A. I cannot tell you. 
 
 Q. Did you expect to get any pay for your services ? 
 
 A. I haven t the least idea. 
 
 Q. Did your brother promise you anything? 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You have got in here a dinner $3.75, sundries, carriages, etc., 
 $3.75, What was that " sundries " for? 
 A. I haven t the least idea. 
 Q. Did you drink anything? 
 A, I am not a drinking man, sir ? 
 Q. Did your companions ? 
 
449 
 
 A. None of them drink. 
 
 Q. What were those sundries ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. That bill is just as 1 made it out honestly and 
 fairly, withno intention to defraud the company, I don t see what that 
 has to do with the case at all. If my brother gives me a hundred dol 
 lars I can spend it as I see fit. 
 
 Q. You have paid back the balance between the hundred and the 
 fifty? 
 
 A. I have ; yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, will you be kind enough to look at Mr. Clough s way-bill 
 of the 23d day of the 3 o clock train, and see if there are fares be 
 tween Concord and Boston returned, and if so, how many? 
 
 A. AVell, I don t understand the arrangement of these things. 
 
 Q. I will put it in this way, if you please. There are eight fares 
 on the way-bill of the 23d of November, on the 3.30 train returned 
 between Concord and Boston. Now you say that on the 19th day of 
 November you paid Mr. Clough how many fares from Nashua to Con 
 cord ? 
 
 A. Two. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough upon that day has returned four fares upon his way 
 bill. And you paid him the full fare ? 
 
 A. I suppose so. 
 
 Q. Now, we put in on the up train, on the 23d of November, five 
 fares between Nashua and Concord. 
 
 The Chairman. I want to make this inquiry ; if there has been any 
 evidence put in I don t remember how it is tending to show whether 
 it was the duty of the conductor to return on his way-bill the proceeds 
 of the joint tickets which he sold? 
 
 Mr. George. Oh, yes. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. Always. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. And they did so. 
 
 Mr. George. That was their duty. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. These were joint tickets through to Boston, and Mr. 
 Clough has returned them here. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. He accounted for all the money that he got to the Con 
 cord Eailroad, and the Concord Eailroad to the others. 
 
 Mr. George. The way-bills must show that he did it. 
 
 Mr. Mygridge. He has returned the fare in the cars from Boston to 
 Concord. The fare from Concord was $2.85 ; and Carney swears that 
 he paid him $14.25. That would be just the fare. Your honor will 
 bear in mind that when he went down he bought five tickets to Boston ; 
 and he paid $14.25 for them. That is just exactly the fare that Mr. 
 Clough should have taken in the cars, according to the way-bill. 
 
 Mr. George. The way-bill shows the fares of either the up or down 
 train. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It was either the up or down train, and he shows 
 five fares returned. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Did you buy any tickets of Mr. Clough 
 the last time you came up to Concord ? When was the last time you 
 came to Concord? 
 
 A. The last time was on the 19th day of December, 1865. 
 
 Q. Who came up with you then ? 
 
 A. I went by the way of Newmarket Junction, and then from Ports 
 mouth to Concord with Mr. Kendrick ; and when I got to Concord, I 
 
 29 
 
450 
 
 went back at half-past three with Mr. Clough. That was the time 1 
 had this conversation about the New York tickets. 
 
 Q. Then the last time you came up, you didn t have anything to do 
 with Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. I didn t come on Mr. Clough s train. 
 
 Q. But when you went back that was when you had the conversa 
 tion you had with Mr. Clough. ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did you know Mr. Draper, a man who was in 
 your brother s employ ? 
 . A. I did not. 
 
 Q. Knew nothing about his being on the same train ? 
 
 A. [No answer.] 
 
 Mr. Stanley offered in evidence a list of stock sales of the brokers 
 board, an organization doing business in the city of Boston, in the state 
 of Massachusetts, said list including sales by auction, and being certi 
 fied by Joseph GL Martin. 
 
 Mr. George. Mr. Stanley has added up the first 400 shares pur 
 chased by Mr. Clough, as appears by the stock record. The first 400 
 shares Mr. Clough swears he estimates at $40 a share. Now the first 
 400 shares as shown by this certificate were sold at the brokers board 
 for $47.50 per share. The price of the stock at the brokers board 
 since the 400, that is, the average cost at the brokers board was $64 
 within a> very small fraction ; or more accurately, it is $63 7-10. There 
 were sixteen sales. The whole cost of the sixteen shares was $1019, 
 which would be over $63 a good deal. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I don t know as I object to putting in this testimony 
 in this way. If it is put in to contradict Mr. Clough, it is not compe 
 tent. I do not understand the object of the testimony. 
 
 The Chairman. I understand that Mr. Clough has not testified here 
 to the precise cost of his stock. I understand that, testifying now from 
 recollection, he estimates that it cost him about so much. Now, for the 
 purpose of showing that his recollection may not be exact in that par 
 ticular, I understand that they have offered here a record of sales at 
 that time; and then that they have made a calculation themselves, 
 which of course is not evidence, except so far as it is verified. They 
 offer the calculation to show that the average price of the stock, instead 
 of being $40, would be $47, for the purpose of correcting what they 
 think may be an inaccuracy in Mr. Clough s recollection. 
 
 Mr. Mvgridge. It does not appear that Mr. Clough bought his stock 
 in Boston at the brokers board. The point we make is that, what the 
 stock sold for at the brokers board is not competent to contradict him 
 as to the price paid for the stock that he bought up here in Concord. 
 
 The Chairman. As this has been laid before us, it is not necessary 
 for the referees to rule now. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF JOHN D, COOPER. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rplfe.} State whether you formerly owned estate on 
 Warren street, that was afterwards purchased "by Mr. Clough ? 
 A. I owned a place formerly, on Warren street. 
 Q. AVhere Mr. Clough now lives ? 
 A. Where Mr. Clough now lives. 
 Q. Who made the sale? That is, who was the negotiating party 
 
451 
 
 I 
 
 when it was sold to Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. I made the bargain with Mr. Clough, all the bargain that I ever 
 knew anything about. 
 
 Q. State whether you know the exact sum that was paid for the 
 house and furniture ? 
 
 A. All there was there, both real and personal, was about $8000. 
 Q. Do you recollect how that was paid ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; there was a note given for $6000, and $2000 paid 
 down. 
 
 Q. State whether you built that house, substantially, and whether 
 you purchased the furniture, the same furniture that was sold to Mr. 
 Clough ? 
 
 A. 1 bought the premises when the house was partially built, of Mr. 
 Clough. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Mugridge.} Of whom? 
 A. Of Mr. Clough. 
 Q. (By Mr. Eolfe.} Joseph L. ? 
 
 A. Joseph L., I should think. He was the young man that built it, 
 or partly built it : or rather I took it and quite a portion of the work 
 that was done, and built it somewhat different from what he had calcu 
 lated, and finished it up. 
 
 Q. What furniture was there in the house that you sold Mr. Clough 
 with the house ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether I can tell every article, but I can the most 
 of them, I think. Mr. Clough had all the carpets that were in the 
 house. He had all the carpets that were in five rooms. He had the 
 mirrors ; four small chairs, 1 think ; two large ones ; and two sofas that 
 were in the parlor ; two large mirrors, 
 Q. Four small chairs ? 
 
 A. I think there were four of the small size, and two of the large 
 ones, and tw.o sofas ; and the furniture that was in two chambers, with 
 the exception of the bed and bedding. He had the bedsteads in one 
 chamber. I want to correct that there were six rooms that those nice 
 curtains were in, instead of five. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You said that, with one exception, all the 
 bedsteads in one chamber? 
 
 A. He had the bedstead and all in one chamber, but I took the beds 
 out, leaving the bedstead for Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} He had no beds nor bedding ? 
 A. He had no beds nor bedding ; he had the bedstead and the rest 
 of the furniture in the chamber where the bedstead was, consisting of,, 
 I think, about four small chairs and one large chair. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Rolfe.} Was there a carpet on the entry stairs? 
 A. There was. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect how many curtains there were in the parlor? 
 A. I think four. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect what the expense of that was ? 
 A. The curtains in the parlor, I think, cost $100 to the window. 
 Q. Do you recollect the cost of the carpet? 
 
 A. I don t I think all the carpets I have I paid for in one bilL 
 The man came up and took the dimensions of the rooms, and they were 
 all made and brought to the house, and the man put them down. 
 Q. You recollect the entire cost ? 
 
452 
 
 A. I think I paid $400 for the carpets. I am quite sure I am right 
 on that point. They didn t take any rugs that were on the floor the 
 mats ; I am speaking of the carpets. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect about the expense of the carpets in the other 
 rooms ? 
 
 A. It is impossible for me to tell now. 
 
 Q. Describe them. Take the two in the sitting-room ? 
 
 A, Those in the sitting-room were paid for somewhat similar to 
 those, only I should judge a good deal nicer than those. 
 
 Q. What they call trepanned damask carpets ? 
 
 A. Those in the chamber were considerably more expensive than 
 those in the sitting-room. In one chamber they were such curtains 
 somewhat similar to those ; and then those that came part way down. 
 
 Q. That is the parlor chamber ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; in the parlor chamber. 
 
 Q. Now in the sitting-room, how many were there there ? 
 
 A. Two. There were two in each of the three chambers. There 
 were two in every room except the parlor, I think. 
 
 Q. Are you ready to state the expense of those in the parlor chamber ? 
 
 A. I am not. 
 
 Q. Can you state what the two mirrors cost ? 
 
 A. [Witness shakes his head negatively.] 
 
 Q, Were they high cost? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; they were very high cost. They went from the floor up 
 as high as they could, and the scroll came over them. And the other 
 was not as high, going from the mantle-piece, and reaching up to the 
 veiling, and was wider than the longer one was. I have a bill of them, 
 fcut I don t feel at liberty to put the cost. 
 
 Q. At what you think they cost ? 
 
 A, What they cost. I have got in mind that I gave $1100 for the 
 two ; but for fear that I am not correct, I don t want to say that posi 
 tively. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} The two mirrors, you say? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Do you recollect what you gave for the mantle- 
 piece in the parlor? 
 
 A. I paid $500. You understand, the marble fire-place. 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I paid $500 for that. I did not consider that personal 
 with the furniture. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state the sum that you paid the sum that the 
 house that you sold to Mr. Clough, cost you ? 
 
 A. Well, in telling the price of the house, I have to take my stable 
 in with it. 
 
 Q. Very well, I mean everything ? 
 
 A. And my fence ? 
 
 Q. Yes. 
 
 A. I am quite sure that it footed to $22,000, or a fraction over. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} That includes everything? 
 
 A. Everything there was up there. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} That included the furniture ? 
 
 A, That included the furniture that I have been telling you about, 
 that went into the house. I had other furniture that was not carried 
 there, that I made no reckoning on. 
 
453 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Stanley.} You state the cost $22,000? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I am quite sure that I am right on that. I have the 
 figures somewhere now. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Are you able to say the consideration was put 
 at $12,000? 
 
 A. All I can say of that [Objected to. J 
 
 Mr. Rolfe, He knew more about it than anybody else. 
 
 The Chairman. He can state about that, if he knows. 
 
 Q. Can you state at whose suggestion that was put in ? 
 
 A. Mr. Corning was the man who mentioned that. He gave his rea 
 son why he wanted it done in that way, [Objected to.l 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Were Mr. Clough and Mr. Corning on youf 
 notes. 
 
 A. They were. 
 
 Q. To what extent ? 
 
 A. I cannot possibly tell. 
 
 Q. State as near as you can ? 
 
 A. At that time I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. State as nearly as you can ? 
 
 A. Well, I should think $15,000. 
 
 Q. Was your property all put into Mr. Clough s or Mr. Coming s 
 hands ? 
 
 A. Into Mr. Coming s. 
 
 Q. It was all put into Mr. Coming s hands? 
 
 A. I sold to him 
 
 Q. Was it put into his hands because they were on your hands ? 
 
 A. I cannot answer that. 
 
 Q. You cannot answer that ? 
 
 A. I know I sold to them with the consideration that Mr. Corning; 
 was to pay up, as I supposed, everything I owed, and then the remain 
 der was to go to two of my sons. 
 
 Q. What property did you put into Mr Coming s hands ? 
 
 A. Well, what we call the foundry property, and I think this house 
 that we talked of, and some other I can t tell exactly now what, 
 
 Q. How many debts did you owe ? 
 
 A. I could not tell you. 
 
 Q. How many did you pay of the insecured debts ? 
 
 A. P don t know; I couldn t tell you. 
 
 Q. Did you pay anything ? 
 
 A. I don t know ; I didn t have a statement of them. 
 
 Q. Well, were there a large number of debts remaining outside ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. Did you know whether there were or not ? 
 
 A. No, I don t know. 
 
 Q, Can t you tell how much you owed ? 
 
 A. I could not tell you. 
 
 Q. Can t you give an estimate ? 
 
 A. I cannot, because I did not have anything to do with the 
 
 Q. Could not you tell somewhere in the neighborhood of how mucb 
 you owed? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I can not. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Gilmore one of the parties into whose hands your prop 
 erty was put? That is, did it go into the hands of Mr. Gilmore ? 
 
454 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. If this is insisted upon, I think the deeds are the 
 proper evidence. 
 
 The Chairman. It is pretty difficult for me to see the relevancy of 
 the testimony. 
 
 Mr. George. I simply want to show what I suppose the fact is, that 
 he did not know anything about it. 
 
 The Chairman. If it is for the purpose of testing the witness, I 
 suppose it is admissible. 
 
 Q. Can you tell what debts were paid ? Were Clough and Corning 
 and Gilmore all together on your paper ? 
 
 A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Didn t Corning take this property for the benefit of the three ? 
 
 A. I don t know whose benefit they took it for. He bought it, and 
 agreed to satisfy those notes that were due, and the remainder was to 
 pay two-thirds to one son, and one-third to the other ; and my son had 
 a box and kept them all ; I never knew anything about it. 
 
 Q. What became of the debts not included in those debts ? What 
 became of those debts ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. The witness hasn t testified that there were any other 
 debts that were not included, 
 
 Q. What was about the amount of your indebtedness ? 
 
 A. I can t tell. 
 
 Q, Can t you give us the best estimate you can ? 
 
 A. I don t want to, because the fact was, I might not be anywhere 
 .in the neighborhood. My son kept the books and managed the business, 
 and settled up with them. 
 
 Q. Can you tell anywhere in the neighborhood of how much you 
 owed whether it was $50,000, or more or less? 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that after he had stated that 
 the books were all in the hands of his son, and he "had nothing to do 
 with the business, it is not competent for him to state. 
 
 The Chairman. If the witness says he don t know, it is not. 
 
 A. At the time I suppose I could tell a good deal more about it 
 than I can now. 
 
 Q. Was Corning, or Gilmore, or Clough on your notes to the extent 
 of $25,000? 
 
 A. I think not. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about it, so that you can swear ? 
 
 A. I think I can safely swear that. 
 
 Q. How much were they on for ? 
 
 A. It is possible it might be eighteen, but I should think not. 
 
 Q. Where were those notes ? W r here was that indebtedness ? 
 
 A. At the banks. 
 
 Q. At what banks ? 
 
 A. The major part of it, I think, was here in Concord, and I think 
 at the State Capital Bank. That I wouldn t be positive of, but think so. 
 
 Q. What particular property did you put in his hands ? Did you 
 have a particle of property that you did not put in his hands ? if so, 
 what was it ? 
 
 A. I had two houses. One of them on Warren street, and one on 
 the corner of Green and Warren. 
 
 Q. Where did these go to ? W^ere these attached ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, These were attached before you had the conveyance made ? 
 
455 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Which was done first, the attachment or the mortgage. 
 A. This foundry and some of that that I have told you of, was 
 not attached at all. 
 
 Q. After the attachment the conveyance followed immediately ? 
 A. I cannot tell you now. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEORGE T. COMINS. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mvgridge.) Let me ask you whether you are a con 
 tractor at the state prison ? 
 
 A. 1 am. 
 
 Q. Do you know Sidney H. Carney? 
 
 A. Y^es, sir. 
 
 Q. How long have you known him ? 
 
 A. We went to school together from the time we were six years old. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you are acquainted with George Clough ? 
 
 A. I am not acquainted with him. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if you ever spoke of Mr. Clough as a thief. 
 
 [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridye. This man Carney came in here and made the volun 
 tary statement that Mr. Cornins told him that Mr. Clough was a thief. 
 I propose to show what statements he did make. 
 
 The Chairman. The testimony appeared to me, and, I suppose, did 
 to the other referees, as being utterly irrelevant. Mr. Dr. Carney, I 
 remember, blurted out something about his considering Mr. Clough as 
 a thief; but it seemed to me that that was entirely immaterial and 
 irrelevant, and having nothing to do at all with the matter. When you 
 pursued the matter, I thought it seemed, and according to the rule of 
 law it would seern that the testimony was inadmissible. It cannot be 
 of the least possible competency in this case. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We supposed that exception would be made, but we 
 offer to put in the testimony. 
 
 The Chairman. 1 remember thinking at the time that if the witness 
 was rash enough to lay himself open to a slander prosecution, I did not 
 see what it had to do with this case. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GRANVILLE REMICK. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Mr. Remick, where do you live now ? 
 
 A. 1 live in Concord. 
 
 Q. How long have you lived in Concord ? 
 
 A. About six years. 
 
 Q. Where did you reside previous to coming to Concord, and for 
 how long? 
 
 A. 1 resided in Pittsfield and in the vicinity about 25 years. 
 
 Q. State when you were first acquainted with George Clough ? 
 
 A. It was in 1837. 
 
 Q. What was he doing then ? 
 
 A. He was driving stage from Pittsfield to Lowell. 
 
 Q. What was your business ? 
 
 A. I was clerk in a grocery store. 
 
 Q. W T hat store ? 
 
 A. John L. Thorndike s. 
 
456 
 
 Q. State whether you knew about Mr. Clough s business during the 
 time you was there in Mr. Thorndike s store, and what it was, and if 
 he did anything in the chicken and produce line, state it ? 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} When was it that he speaks of? 
 
 A. From 1837 to 1839. He used to drive a stage from Pittsfield to 
 Lowell, and he was in the habit of buying produce, and poultry, and 
 most invariably carried a load, when he went out from Pittsfield, of such 
 commodities. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} Did you say butter? 
 
 A. Butter, eggs and poultry. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Kemick, state what was your business in 
 Pittsfield after Mr. Clough left? Up to the time you came to Concord 
 were you a trader? 
 
 A. I have been a trader. 
 
 Q. You have been a trader here since ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q, State whether you had occasion to pass over the Concord Railroad 
 frequently or otherwise while you was at Pittsfield, and since you have 
 been here ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; had occasion to, and did so. 
 
 Q. State whether you have dealt any in these coupon tickets, these 
 tickets that were bought above here, and where passengers had ridden 
 to this place, and got off. [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. George. The fact that he dealt in them didn t give authority to 
 anybody else to deal in them, and didn t give authority to him to deal 
 in them ; and if the conductors took them, that don t excuse them. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. That is only preliminary. We propose to show that 
 Remick purchased a considerable number of these tickets, and that he 
 rode on them without objection. 
 
 The Chairman. With what view is that testimony offered ? What 
 is the purpose of it? 
 
 Judge Bellows. What is the object of this testimony, Mr. Rolfe ? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. One view is to show what kind of tickets were used over 
 the road. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. The object is to show that the tickets sold here and 
 used over the road were not spent tickets. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. There is another view, which is to show the amount of 
 travel over the road, and how they were returned. If the referees will 
 allow me to suggest, these tickets from above here, from Montreal and 
 Detroit the amount of travel over the road is shown by the sales and 
 not by the collections so that if a ticket is sold from Montreal to Bos 
 ton, the Concord Railroad counts that in as a passage, whether anybody 
 passes over the road or not, and is entitled to its pay. 
 
 The Chairman, Then what you hold, if that is so, is that it is no 
 injury to the road to have a man take a ticket over the road and sell 
 it? 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. I hold it is no injury for anybody to live up to their 
 agreement. 
 
 The Chairman. If you take the position here that during all this 
 time that Mr. Clough was on the road, there may have been others sell 
 ing coupons if you take the position that there were no such tickets 
 that were spent tickets, then this may be evidence to refute. 
 
 Mr. George. We take the position that there were tickets, and what 
 were spent tickets subsequently. Subsequent to 1864 there were no such 
 things as spent tickets. 
 

 457 
 
 The Chairman. If the testimony of Mr. Remick should relate to the 
 time since October, 1864, since that regulation was made, it might be 
 competent to show that these were tickets of that description out then, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} I have inquired if you had purchased these 
 coupon tickets ; and I will ask you further, if you have ridden upon 
 them, and at what time ? 
 
 The Chairman. Perhaps you had better settle the time first, as that 
 might be important. 
 
 Q. Whether after June 1st, 1864? 
 
 A, 1 should think I had since then ; but I don t know as I could 
 state positively when". I have bought several of them of Canadians- 
 who have stopped here, and taken them to pass over the road to Boston. 
 
 [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. The evidence is perhaps pretty slight, tending to 
 show that it took place since 1864. 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 1 know it was since 1864 that I had some of them ; be 
 cause I was in business for myself. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Since what time in 1864 ? 
 
 A. Since spring; since March, 1864, I bought them, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Up to what time, as near as you recollect? 
 To how late a date ? 
 
 A. I should think two years ; two or three. 
 
 Q. Won t you describe those tickets? 
 
 A. Seems as though they were tickets that you tear off a portion,. 
 There were three parts when I bought them ; from two to three. 
 
 Q. Was there anything on them that went to show that they were 
 good for any particular time, or not good for any particular time ? 
 
 A. My impression is that they were good for thirty days ; though 
 they passed them after keeping them longer. 
 
 Q. Had you ever had them refused ? 
 
 A. I don t remember as I had. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You said they were marked good for thirty 
 days? 
 
 A. Most of them said " good for thirty days," but I remember pass 
 ing on them after keeping them more than that time, without being ob 
 jected to. 
 
 Q. Over what road ? 
 
 A. The Lowell the Concord and Lowell. 
 
 Q. State whether you most invariably rode that way ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. How was that generally ? 
 
 A. When I had a ticket of that kind I usually passed that way. 
 
 Q. When it went the other way, you went that way ? [No answer. J 
 
 Mr. Tappan, Did I understand the referees to rule out evidence 
 that tickets of this character were used prior to 1864? 
 
 The Chairman. We only suggest that if does not contradict it is of 
 no consequence. Col. George does not contend that they were or were 
 not. The referees did suppose that it was material if tickets of this 
 kind were used and received in the cars after June, 1864. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Remick, I want to know if Mr. Clougb 
 owes you anything, or if you owe him anything ? 
 
 A. He don t owe me anything, and I don t know as I owe him any 
 thing. 
 
458 
 
 Q. Has there been an assignment? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How much did you owe him ? 
 
 A. He lost the same as the other creditors. 
 
 Q. How much did he lose by you ? 
 
 A. About $100 in the settlement. 
 
 Q. Do you know how much you owed him? 
 
 A. I owed him about $200. 
 
 Q. And you paid fifty cents on the dollar ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, will you state whether you ever had any tickets of Mr. 
 CJlough, or had any tickets given you by Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. Never bought any, or had any given to you ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Never passed you over the cars ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; nor any other man. Never passed over the road with 
 out paying, with the exception of one instance. 
 
 Q. Who was that ? 
 
 A. Mr. Plummer Whipple. 
 
 Q. Never bought a ticket or coupons of Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. Directly or indirectly ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. Y r ou say you bought some tickets of some Frenchmen. From 
 what place were they ? 
 
 A. From Montreal, I think. 
 
 Q. Are you able to tell when it was ? Are you able to fix any date ? 
 
 A. It was during my time of business for myself; from 1864 to 
 
 1866 ; somewhere in that vicinity. 
 
 Q. When did you go into business for yourself? 
 
 A. In 1864. 
 
 Q. What date in 1864? 
 
 A. March. 
 
 Q. Are you certain about the year? What means have you of fix 
 ing the year ? 
 
 A. I was in company with Webster a specified time. 
 
 Q. When did you go into company with Webster ? 
 
 A. 1861. 
 
 Q. What month ? Are you sure about the year ? What means 
 have you of fixing the date ? 
 
 A. Because that was the date. 
 
 Q. How do you fix it ? Have you any means of fixing it that 
 year ? 
 
 It is all fixed. That is the year that I went in with them. 
 
 Q. Haven t you any means of fixing it ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I have the books. 
 
 Q. You have looked at your books to find that, have you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. W T hen did you look at them ? 
 
 A. I looked at them a great many times. 
 
 Q. How long did you remain ? 
 
 A. Two years. 
 
 iQ. That would be 1862. What did you do in 1863? 
 
459 
 
 A. I was in with Mr. Cochran. 
 
 Q. How long was you in with him? 
 
 A. Almost two years. 
 
 Q. What time did you cease to be in business with him? 
 
 A. March, 1864, I guess it was. 
 
 Q. You guess it was. I want to kndw if you can tell ? 
 
 A. It was March, 1864, that our copartnership ceased. 
 
 Q. Now, how did you fix the purchase of these tickets as the time 
 in reference to your going into business for yourself? 
 
 A. Well, I have it on the cash-book. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF ME. JOHN F. K1MBALL. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Will you be kind enough to state where you 
 live, and what your employment is ? 
 
 A. Live in Lowell ; cashier of the Appletou National Bank. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether Mr. Raymond Kimball was your uncle? 
 
 A. Daniel Raymond Kimball. 
 
 Q. And you may state, if you please, what his business was, and 
 what relation you occupied to him of a business character ? 
 
 A. He kept a livery stable connected with the Merrimaok House ; 
 moving there from Belvidere, about 1836. My father died in 1838. I 
 was then about fourteen, and he occupied the position of guardian, and 
 I went to him for any advice or assistance. 
 
 Q. Please state about your uncle being a man of limited accounts, 
 and always keeping accounts, etc. ? 
 
 A. He was a man who relied upon his memory mostly. He kept a 
 ledger upon which he kept his charges. He was a man who disliked to 
 use a pen or make figures. 
 
 Q. Who had charge of his business, and of his accounts and of his 
 business negotiations so far as writing, etc., was concerned, from 1838 
 
 on 
 
 A. From 1838, for perhaps two or three years after that, there was 
 a stage agent by the name of Lewis who used to write his letters, but 
 his accounts were mainly kept by me from the time I was fourteen years 
 old. 
 
 Q. And were you acquainted with his business matters ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; he used to make a confidant of me; more perhaps as I 
 grew older. 
 
 Q. And you continued to occupy that relation until when ? 
 
 A. Until the time he gave up business in 1857. He gave up busi 
 ness in 1857, and became insane ; but prior to that I had the whole 
 charge of that business. 
 
 Q. As far as money matters were concerned ? 
 
 A. Without consulting with me about investments. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you whether at any time from 1842 to 1846, or 
 any time subsequent to 1842, there was any note existing, so far as you 
 know, from your uncle to Mr. Clough, to the extent of $6000, or any 
 other sum? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I am not aware of any amount. No, sir ; he was not a 
 man who borrowed money. 
 
 Q. If there had been an indebtedness of $6000, must you have 
 known it? 
 
 A. In all probability I should have known it. There is a possibili ty 
 that I might not have known it ; but I should, in all probability. 
 
460 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Muyridge.} Mr. Kimball, did you know Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. J knew him by sight. 
 
 Q. And what relations formerly existed between him and your uncle ? 
 
 A. Mr. Clough drove stage there. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough drove stage to Lowell where you uncle lived ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; he drove from the Merrimack House, that being his 
 headquarters, 
 
 Q. Do you know that your uncle always took a particular interest in 
 Mr. Clough, and was his particular friend and adviser ? 
 
 A. No more than to many others. 
 
 Q. Did you know the fact that your uncle took a friendly interest in 
 his affairs and assisted him from time to time with his advice and 
 counsel ? 
 
 A. Not especially ; not more than the other drivers. Their relations 
 were friendly. 
 
 Q. Don t you know that your uncle sustained the position of friend 
 and confidential adviser towards Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. Not especially. 
 . Q. Generally? 
 
 A. Yes, generally. 
 
 Q. Did you know the fact, that your uncle was accustomed to advise 
 Mr. Clough? 
 
 A My uncle was a gentleman who had a pretty good idea of his own 
 opinion, and was rather fond of 
 
 Q. Let me ask you if your uncle was not a man property ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. He was regarded as a perfectly safe man to entrust funds with ? 
 
 A. He was. 
 
 Q. What was the amount of his property when he became insane ? 
 
 A. The estate was settled at $37,000; but the property cost him 
 about $50,000. 
 
 Q. His business responsibility was good, was it not ? 
 
 A. His responsibility was never questioned. 
 
 Q. Did you know of a man in Lowell that was trusted by Mr. Clough 
 any more than your uncle ? 
 
 A. He wasn t a man likely to put out money. 
 
 Q. Wasn t he of that disposition and cast of mind that led him to 
 do these friendly acts for young men ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I think I can call others quite as likely as he. 
 
 Q. That was the tendency of the man s character, to befriend young 
 men in this way ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Wasn t he a prompt man in all his business ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And liked to see other people prompt ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now let me ask you if you mean to say positively, that he could 
 not have held that amount of $6000 for Mr. Clough? 
 
 A. I mean to say that he would not have been likely to without my 
 knowledge, 
 
 Q. You don t mean to say that it could not have been entrusted to 
 him by Mr. Clough ? 
 
461 
 
 A. I don t mean to say that it could not, but it was not likely 
 that it would. 
 
 Q. How old were you in 1842 ? 
 
 A. I was eighteen. 
 
 Q. Had you any other business ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I was clerk in the post-office. 
 
 Q. And that was your regular business ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I worked for him evenings and Sundays. 
 
 Q. Did you do all his writing ? 
 
 A. All that I know of. 
 
 Q. Were there any notes outstanding against him, so far as you 
 knew ? 
 
 A. I didn t know of any. I am not aware of any, except one. 
 
 Q. Whose was that ? 
 
 A. That was one that I had. 
 
 Q. State whether young men were accustomed to entrust their funds 
 to him for safe keeping ? 
 
 A. I don t know of anybody but myself. It was my practice. He 
 has said to me repeatedly, " I ll take this for you, John, but I wouldn t 
 for anybody else." 
 
 Q. I suppose you wouldn t want to be understood as swearing posi 
 tively to the fact that he hadn t that note ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Y r ou say your uncle was of that character that you have described ? 
 
 A. He was willing to lend a helping hand to any person in need. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Clough was frequently at his stable ? 
 
 A. I don t remember his being there so late as 1842. It is my im 
 pression that Mr. Clough was with him some earlier than that time. 
 
 Q. How long? 
 
 A. It is a long time ; and I wouldn t be very particular about it. 
 
 Q. Was he not at the stable of your uncle very frequently from 
 1843? 
 
 A, At the time he drove stage, he was with him perhaps every other 
 night. 
 
 Q. Where did he stop ? 
 
 A. I think he stayed at the Merrimack House. 
 
 Q. That was your uncle s place? 
 
 A. That was where he lived. 
 
 Q f What length of time do you think Mr. Clough was accustomed to 
 stop at the Merrimack House where your uncle was ? 
 
 A. While Mr. Clough was driving stage. 
 
 Q, How long a time, as you recollect it? 
 
 A. I think it was two or three years. 1 shouldn t be willing to 
 swear positively to that. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF JAMES P. EATON. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Where do you reside ? 
 
 A. Manchester. 
 
 Q. Were you one of the conductors that formerly run on the Man 
 chester and Lawrence road, from Manchester to Lawrence ? 
 
 A. I was. 
 
 Q. You are one of the gentlemen against whom a suit is brought? 
 
 A. I am. 
 
462 
 
 Q. State whether you had any conversations with Joseph A. Gilmore 
 with regard to the bringing of the suit against George Clough by the 
 Concord Railroad ? If so, you may state when and where the conversa 
 tion was, and what it was? [Objection to what Mr. Gilmore stated.] 
 
 Mr. Muyridge. They undertake to show that there was a collusive 
 combination between Gilmore arid Clough with regard to that suit. It 
 is competent in that view, if no other. 
 
 Mr. Qeorge. i suppose it is a question whether any statements made 
 by Gilmore after these suits are competent evidence. 
 
 The Chairman. Probably it would not do much harm for them to 
 state what they propose to prove, and then we can see it a little better. 
 
 Mr. George. If anything that Mr. Gilmore stated after this suit was 
 commenced is not competent, I suppose there is no occasion for stat 
 ing it. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge* We propose to show that Mr. Gilmore sent for Mr. 
 Eaton to come to his office ; that he said to him, "your suit is com 
 menced" I dont undertake to use the exact words " this suit against 
 you, Mr. Eaton, don t mean anything, and won t come to anything, but 
 with regard to Geo. Clough s case, I will learn him to refuse to sign my 
 notes, and go back upon me in the way he has." That is what we pro 
 pose to prove by the witness. It is certainly competent on the ground 
 taken by the help of collusion between the parties. 
 
 The Chairman. The evidence being objected to, perhaps, Mr. Mug- 
 ridge, you had better state fully your views. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. In the first place, we offer it upon this ground : It 
 has been suggested here that there was a collusive arrangement or com 
 bination between Mr. Clough and Mr. Gilmore with regard to this suit, 
 and that there were also collusive understandings and arrangements, 
 between Mr. Clough and Mr. Gilmore, antecedent to the time the suits 
 were brought, while they were upon the road. We offer this testimony 
 in connection with other testimony upon that ground, to show that there 
 has been no collusion between them at any time or any where, with 
 reference to this suit or subsequent to the time the suit was commenced. 
 We then offer it as a statement of the superintendent of the road, as 
 bearing upon the nature of the transaction here, and shall contend from 
 it that this was a malicious suit, born in malice, and that it was ma 
 liciously undertaken by the officers of the road, so far as they had any 
 thing to do with it. And then again we offer it as a statement of the 
 agent and superintendent of the road ; and contend that we have a 
 right to draw from that statement, made by him, whatever is legitimate 
 as against the road. 
 
 The Chairman. We understand the proposition is to prove a state 
 ment of Mr. Gilmore while he was still the superintendent of the road, 
 and pretty near the time of the transaction. There is evidence in the 
 case tending to show that this suit was instituted to some extent by the 
 transactions of Mr. Gilmore, acting as the agent of the road. And 
 there is, perhaps some reason why the testimony should be admitted as 
 statements of him in regard to that very particular matter in which he 
 had acted as the agent. And under all the circumstances we think it 
 is best to admit the testimony. 
 
 The ruling was. excepted to by the plaintiff. 
 
 The Chairman. Of course you will understand that this is a pretty 
 doubtful question, but you can put the testimony in. You can assume 
 the risk of it. 
 
463 
 
 Mr, Mugridge. Yes, sir ; we will do that. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Now, you may state what conversation yon; 
 had with Gilmore, and how you happened to go to see him, and state all 
 that happened ? 
 
 A. Why I happened to come up here, Mr. George A. Barnes wrote 
 me a note in Manchester to meet him at his store ; it might have been* 
 three or four days after the suit was commenced. 
 
 Q. After the suit of the Concord Railroad against Mr. Clough was 
 commenced ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; also mine. 
 
 Q. You were sued at the same time Mr. Clough was ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 
 
 Q. Now you may state where you saw Mi*. Gilmore? 
 
 A. At his room. 
 
 Q. Where was that ? 
 
 A. At his residence, where he lived. 
 
 Q. State all the conversation as it occurred between you and Mr. 
 Gilmore at that time, in regard to the suit against Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. Mr. Gilmore says to me, " Eaton, your suit don t amount to 
 anything; don t mean anything," 
 
 Q. Well, you may proceed ? 
 
 A. He says, " Mr. Clough, I will learn him to go back on me, when 
 I lay flat on my back, and want him to sign a note ; I guess he wishes 
 by this time that he had assisted me." 
 
 Q. D-id he say anything else at that time in regard to this matter ? 
 
 A. Various things were talked of, but nothing to any particular 
 point. " Your suit," says he, " amounts to nothing, I will take care of 
 that." 
 
 Q. And then in the same connection with this remark? 
 
 A. Made this remark. I think about the first thing is this that he 
 said of Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. Gilmore was superintendent of the Concord Railroad ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. He left word for me to come and see him; he tele 
 graphed me to come from Manchester to Concord. 
 
 Q. Can you state how many days this was after the suit was com 
 menced ? 
 
 A. No, I cannot. 
 
 Q. State your impression ? 
 
 A. I should think the suits were Saturday, and I think this must 
 have been the middle of the next week. That would be my impression ; 
 I could not swear positively. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You were one of the conductors upon the 
 Lawrence road ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Y"ou ran from Manchester to Lawrence three times a day ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Will yo*u state whether you had any conversation with Mr. Gil- 
 more with regard to the amount of your returns on the road ? Did yoi* 
 have any conversation with regard to the amount of your returns ? 
 
 [Objected to.} 
 
464 
 
 Mr. George. I suppose I have a right to ask him whether there was 
 a conversation with regard to the amount of his returns. 
 
 Tfie Chairman. I suppose they have a right to examine as to all the 
 details of this particular conversation. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. But this is another conversation. 
 
 Mr. George. 1 suppose we have a right to inquire as to all the cir 
 cumstances of this conversation or any other conversation, and inquire 
 what the conversation was, and all the relations. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We think it is only competent for them to inquire 
 as to the particular conversation concerning which we have inquired. 
 
 The Chairman. It seeems to me that you will have to confine your 
 self to that particular conversation, Col. George. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Was anything said at this particular conver 
 sation about the amount of your returns? 
 
 A. At what time do you mean ? 
 
 Q. You stated a particular conversation that you had, Was there 
 anything said about the returns made by you ? 
 
 A. I don t think there was ; I couldn t say positively. 
 
 Q Did Mr. Gilmore say anything to you about your returning ten 
 .eents a train on the average ? Was the fact, so? [Objected to.] 
 
 Q. Did you return on these trains to Lawrence the sum of thirteen 
 dollars a month taken on the cars ? 
 
 The Chairman. I don t see the relevancy. 
 
 Mr. George. The relevancy is this : that if that be so, it is pretty 
 important as to whether Gilmore told him that it was bosh. Here was 
 a suit commenced against him. Now when that suit was commenced, 
 Mr. Gilmore sent for him and told him the suit was all bosh. I pro 
 pose now to show certain facts, with a view of showing whether it was 
 probable or not. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The point is this : Col. George proposes to show that 
 Mr. Gilmore didn t make a certain statement to him by showing what 
 Mr. Eaton s returns were. 
 
 The Chairman. I think we are all agreed that the testimony is not 
 admissible. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Was there anything said in this conversation 
 between you and Mr. Gilmore, that when a new conductor, (Mr. Ken- 
 drick) was put on the train from here to Portsmouth, he returned 
 $2903 while you returned $548 ? Were there any suggestions of that 
 kind? And didn t he show you these returns? Did you talk about it? 
 
 A. I can t say that he did. 
 
 Q. Can you say that he didn t tell you that in five months you re 
 turned $548 to a cent ? Didn t he tell you that ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q Did he tell you at that time how much you did return ? 
 
 A. I told you he didn t, I believe. 
 
 Q. Did he say anything about Kendrick s return ? 
 
 A. He didn t talk with me about matters in general, because I was 
 there but a little while, and he talked with me about Mr. Clough s case. 
 I haven t any particular recollection about it. 
 
 Q. What was the first word he said. 
 
 A. I think he said, " How are you, Jim? " 
 
 Q. Now, go on ? 
 
 A. Well, I don t know what was said. There was a general pre 
 amble that was generally talked over. 
 
465 
 
 Q. What was that? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. Can t you tell anything that was said ? 
 
 A. I have told you what was said about Mr. Clough s case. 
 
 Q. How long were you there ? What did he send for you for ? 
 
 A. Because he wanted to see me, I suppose; he frequently wanted 
 to see me. 
 
 Q. What did he want to see you for ? If you know, state. State 
 every word that you can remember in that whole conversation ? 
 
 A. I have no particular thing to tell. 
 
 Q. If you recollect anything else at all besides what you have 
 stated, state it, from the time you went into Gilmore s house till you 
 came out again that is, in addition to what you have stated, won t 
 jou state it ? You remember anything else ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect anything at all beyond what you have stated ? 
 
 A. General conversation occurred, same as it would if I went into 
 any man s house. It was about these suits, and you know very well, 
 and the court knows very well, that it would be impossible to recollect 
 tbe particular words. 
 
 Q, I don t ask the particular words. Give me the substance. Did 
 you go into any explanation as to how your returns happened to be so 
 small ? Any conversation on the fact of your returns being so small ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Any conversation as to your using tickets that had been used ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Any conversation in regard to your manner of making returns ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Any conversation in regard to the manner of Clough s making 
 letnrns ? 
 
 A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Any conversation in regard to Mr. Clough s using tickets that 
 itad been used? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Any conversation in regard to Mr. Clough s using coupon tick 
 ets? 
 
 A. No, sir. f 
 
 Q. Any conversation in regard to giving return tickets ? 
 
 A, No, sir, 
 
 Q. Any conversation had in regard to the Jim Whitcher tickets ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What was the conversation about that you had ? I don t under 
 stand. You say you was sent for by Mr. Gilmore to go down there. 
 What was the conversation about ? Won t you tell us ? 
 
 A. I would ask if that is a proper question ? 
 
 Q. Yes, sir. Answer it if you can. 
 
 A. I can t answer it. I asked him how he was. "Damn it, I m 
 sick; here I am swelled up; can t piss ; big belly; I want to know if 
 you wouldn t." That is all; general preamble. "I am swelled up 
 pretty big; damn it, hand me some gin there." The waiter came in, 
 It was a very short interview. The details of the road I didn t go into 
 at all ; we didn t go into it. I know that I was. sued. Three years 
 ago it was commenced, and I haven t heard much about it since. 
 
 30 
 
466 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Clough come to you and the other conductors and get 
 
 you to give a bond for loss, or sign a bond ? 
 
 A. I think Mr. Clough didn t. 
 
 Q. Who did ? 
 
 A. I can t tell now who presented it. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay ? 
 
 A. I paid all I agreed to. 
 
 Q. As near as you are able to state *? 
 
 A. I don t know ; I couldn t tell to save my life. 
 
 Q, Won t you state as near as you can how much you paid ? 
 
 A. I can t state anything about it. 
 
 Q. Can t you state as nearly as you can ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Can t you state as nearly as you can ? 
 
 A I don t understand the meaning of that word ; it is beyond my 
 dictionary. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to swear that you have no idea how much you paid ? 
 
 A. I mean to swear that I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. Are you willing to swear here that you haven t any idea ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Is it at all material how much he did pay or didn t 
 pay ? [Question waived.]! 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DANIEL S. WEBSTEE. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Mr. Webster, where do you reside, and 
 what is your business ? 
 
 A. Nashua ; baggage master. 
 
 Q. Baggage master for what road? 
 
 A. Concord Railroad. 
 
 Q. How long have you acted in that capacity ? 
 
 A. Eive years. 
 
 Q. And you are stationed, of course, at the depot ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. The Concord Eailroad came in on one side, and the Worcester 
 road on the other side of the depot? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Will you state how many cars were run over the Worcester road 
 in the hight of travel in the year 1664 and 1865? I suppose you ob 
 served the trains as they came in, didn t you ? 
 
 A. Never more than two passenger cars. 
 
 Q. That is what I mean passenger cars ? 
 
 A. That is the regular trains. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Webster, what is your recollection as to the passengers 
 being able to get their baggage without tickets, at the Nashua station 
 since you have been there. 
 
 A. W T hile I was there, notice came down from Mr. Winslow that we 
 were to see the tickets. 
 
 Q. That is, any passenger who started from Nashua must show his 
 ticket before he could have his baggage checked ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether that regulation has been lived up to ? ^ 
 
 A. I had to live up to it myself, and I dp, not so much as I did 
 two years ago, I don t think, but I used to make the folks show their 
 tickets before they took their checks, and so far as I know, all that 
 came in over the Worcester road. 
 
467 
 
 Q. Have you observed the conduct of Mr. Clough with regard! to 
 directing passengers who came in or on the Worcester road as to get 
 ting their tickets at the station ? You may state what you have seen 
 of his conduct in that direction, and state the extent of it, fully ? 
 
 A. Mr. Clough used to have them get their tickets before they had 
 their baggage checked. 
 
 Q. Used to have who get them? 
 
 A. The passengers. 
 
 Q. What passengers ? 
 
 A. The passengers who came in over the Worcester road, he would 
 have them get their tickets before they had their baggage checked. 
 
 Q. How frequently have you seen Mr. Clough do this ? 
 
 A. Well, Mr. Clough used to do that most of the time. There was 
 sometimes that the Worcester trains would come in the same time that 
 the trains came in on the opposite side. He was most always up there. 
 He would be on the other side. There were a great many that bought 
 tickets only to Nashua, and would have their baggage checked to> 
 Nashua, and before they went on, he would send the passengers around 
 to get their tickets. 
 
 Q. Where would he go ? 
 
 A. He would go right in through the depot. 
 
 Q. He took the passengers as they came in from the Worcester cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Won t you give the referees the best idea you can how long Mr. 
 Clough practised in this way ? 
 
 A. Mr. Clough practised that as long as he ran, while I was there,. 
 
 Q. From 1863 to 1866? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. From what time to what time did he do it ? 
 
 A. I couldn t say exactly ; but Mr. Clough was there more thaL? 
 half of the time. There would be some times that he would not be 
 there. He would be on the Lowell train, and the Worcester train would 
 not be in first. 
 
 Q. But when he was there ? 
 
 A, But when he was there, I should say that he was out there, 
 well, according to the best of my judgment, I should think he was- 
 there well, seven-eights of the time. 
 
 Q. Seven-eights of the time ? 
 
 A. Seven-eights of the time, I should think. 
 
 Q. Giving the passengers these directions ? 
 
 A. Giving the passengers directions. 
 
 Q. You may state how many cars the Concord Railroad ran, in the 
 hight of travel, down from Concord in the years 1864 and 1865? 
 
 A. I should think that the number of cars that ran into Nashua* 
 was three ; it might have been four. 
 
 Q. Do you mean three passenger cars ? 
 
 A. Three passenger cars. 
 
 Q. And sometimes perhaps four ? 
 
 A. Yes, sometimes ; say, for instance, Saturday. 
 
 Q. But the ordinary general run was three cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did ever you see a train of sixteen or eighteen cars run into 
 Nashua ? 
 
 A. Not on the regular passenger trains. I have seen extras. 
 
468 
 
 ^ Q. Did ever you know a regular passenger train of sixteen or 
 -eighteen cars run into the Nashua depot ? 
 A. No. 
 
 Q, What is the largest number of passenger cars that you have seen 
 run into Nashua on the regular trains, that you remember of ? 
 
 A. Well, the largest train I ever saw 
 
 Q, I don t mean the extra cases ? 
 
 A. Well, the largest trains I have seen run in there on the regular 
 train was a year ago this last summer. 
 
 Q. What was that occasion ? 
 
 A. It was when the mountain travel was going. 
 
 Q. How many cars were there on that train ? 
 
 A. There were thirteen, I believe but I don t know as there were 
 but twelve passenger cars and one baggage car. 
 
 Q. That is the largest train you ever saw this last year ? 
 
 A. A year ago this last summer. 
 
 <Q. And you say that the ordinary train was three or four cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, take the 3.30 train in the afternoon, how many cars ordi 
 narily ran into Nashua on that train in 1864 or 1865? 
 
 A. Four passenger and two baggage cars, I think. 
 
 *Q. You are describing now the ordinary train? 
 
 ,A. Yes, sir ; there may be trains that there might be more. 
 
 Q. Did ever you see sixteen or eighteen cars run in there in 1864 
 ;&nd 1865 on the 3.30 train? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you know anything about the substitutes who travelled dur 
 ing the war ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q Let me ask you how it was during the war about soldiers being 
 carried down over the road. Did they go in the regular or extra trains ? 
 
 A. Well, most of them if there was any amount of them, they 
 srent into an extra. But I don t recollect instances of that but once 
 or twice. 
 
 Q. Then they put them on what ? 
 
 A. Then they put them on the Worcester road. 
 
 .Q. How many would there be ? 
 /A. Well, there might be a hundred. 
 
 Q. Was the soldiers travel mixed up with the general travel in the 
 o:?ars during the war? 
 
 A. Well, some of the time there was a few ; where they were trav 
 elling from Concord to Nashua, there would be a few down and back. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} There was an immense deal of travel up and 
 (down during the war. wasn t there, of substitutes and substitute brokers ? 
 
 /A. Well, I shouldn t think there was so much, but still there might 
 liave been more than I knew of. 
 
 Q. Wasn t Concord the general rendezvous ? 
 
 A. Oh, yes. 
 
 Q. Wasn t there an immense deal of travel of substitutes and sub 
 stitute brokers, selectmen and town agents ? 
 
 A. Oh, yes. 
 
 Q. Wasn t there forty thousand of these that came to Concord to be 
 examined ? 
 
469 
 
 A. I don t think there was. My judgment might not be very good? 
 
 Q. How many were there in this state ? Any idea how many went 
 
 from this state ? 
 
 A. I believe they footed up fifteen or sixteen regiments. 
 
 Q. But they were recruited several times. Wasn t the regiments- 
 filled up ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEANVILLE KEMICK. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} "Whether you have got any record of casls 
 paid out for tickets ? 
 
 A. [Producing book.] April 24, 1865, $5.50 paid out; May 19V- 
 1865, $5. 
 
 Q. Give us another one? 
 
 A. I don t know as I can give any more. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} That book that you have there is your ca&E* 
 book ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. If you paid any expenses for any purpose, you put it on tha.tr,, 
 did you ? , t 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, suppose you bought a ticket at the office and went to* Bos 
 ton, wouldn t that appear ? 
 
 A. I would call it cash and expense, and it appears so all through 
 the book. Sometimes I would buy tickets and count them at night as- 
 cash. 
 
 Q. Won t you turn to one of those cases ? 
 
 A. [Beading.] Fare and expense to Boston, June 29, $4.85. 
 
 Q. Well, won t you read those two. 
 
 A. Fare and back from Boston. 
 
 Q. Won t you read exactly what the book charges. 
 
 A. Fare to and back and expenses. 
 
 Q. Well, read the whole. 
 
 A. Well, that is the whole of it. Fare to and back ; then $2 ; then 
 $2.35; and then $4.35. 
 
 Q. Now, was that fare to Boston and back. 
 
 A. I presume it was. 
 
 Q. What is that ? 
 
 A. June 29. 
 
 Q. Of what year ? 
 
 A. 1864. 
 
 Q. The fare from Concord to Boston in 1864 is $2.90. Now, sir, 
 was that fare to Boston and back ? 
 
 A. It says so on here. That is all I can tell you about it. It is- 
 fare to and back. 
 
 Q. You swear it is to Boston ? 
 
 A. No, I don t swear it. 
 
 Q. Where does that mean ? There is fare to and back. Where does 
 that mean ? Won t you tell me where the point is that you go from, 
 $2, and come back $2.35? Then that don t include any fare and ex 
 pense ? 
 
 A. [Reading.] Fare to and back, $2, $2.35; carried out, $4.35;: 
 expense, .50. 
 
470 
 
 Q. You have no recollection of where that was, apart from the book ? 
 
 A. It must have been Boston ; I don t know where else it should be. 
 
 Q. Now will you take the next one ? 
 
 A. Fare and expense, $7.25. 
 
 Q. You don t know where that was ? 
 
 A. That was Boston ; because I paid bills that day Boston bills. 
 Fare and expense, $8.30, October 19, 1864. 
 
 Q. Doesn t say where that is to? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mr. Mugridge.} How do the bills show ? 
 
 A. They don t show. There is a ticket that I paid $1.50 for, March 
 24, 1865. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Now you can describe that? 
 
 A. It was one of those coupon tickets. 
 
 Q. Have you any recollection about it, whether it was dated or 
 whether it wasn t dated ? 
 
 A. No, I couldn t swear to any date. Generally they were dated ; 
 nothing particular on that. Twenty-fourth of April, 1865, paid out for 
 .tickets, $5.55. 
 
 Q. Does it say what tickets ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any recollection about those tickets, and of whom you 
 bought it, or whether at the ticket office, or anything about it ? 
 
 A. It was one of those coupon tickets that I bought of those French- 
 .men that came along ; I bought a great many of them. 
 
 Q. Have you any more of them ? 
 
 A. Y^es, sir. 
 
 iQ How many ? 
 
 .A. Perhaps I might have bought from twenty to twenty-five alto 
 gether ? 
 
 Q. How many ? 
 
 A. Perhaps from fifteen to twenty-five altogether. Fare $6.50, June 
 29, 1865. 
 
 Q. Fare, $6,50. Where was that ? 
 
 A. To Boston. 
 
 <Q. Does that mean fare, or fare and expense ? 
 
 A. Fare and expense, $6.50. 
 
 <Q. What conductors did you ride with when they took them tickets ? 
 
 A. I can t tell ; the regular conductors. 
 
 Q. Did you ride with Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. I think likely I did sometimes. 
 
 Q. There were only two of them, Mr. Clough and Mr. Noyes ; you 
 had to ride with one or the other ? 
 
 A. Y T es. I. recollect riding with Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. They both took these tickets without objection, from you ? 
 
 A. I don t think any objection was made. 
 
 Q. Did you ever have any talk about those tickets ? 
 
 A. Never was any objection raised but once, and that was when I 
 went down on the other road, down through Lawrence. There they 
 wouldn t take them ; said they belonged over on the other road the 
 Lowell. 
 
 Q. Let me ask if you ever had any talk with Clough about these 
 tickets ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. Any conversation with any one ? 
 
471 
 
 A. Never. I don t remember that I had any conversation about it. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Mr. Remick, do you remember now, any of 
 these tickets these coupons that you speak of having bought in this 
 way do you recollect anything printed upon them showing the number 
 of days they were good ? 
 
 A. 1 could swear that there were some of them that said, " good for 
 thirty days." 
 
 Q. Do you remember whether any of these said nothing about it ? 
 
 A. I think they all had a stamp on the back. 
 
 Q. Were there any that had nothing but the date upon them ? 
 
 A. I think there were ; because I called in question, in buying them, 
 that very point. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} [Handing book.] Won t you give that entry ? 
 
 A. " September 7th, tickets and fare, $7.75." 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Is that 1865 ? 
 
 A. 1865 ; yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark.} Is that tickets and fare? 
 
 A. Tickets, fare, and expense. 
 
 Q. Proceed here right along. That is all the fares and tickets you 
 bought. What is that? [Indicating.] 
 
 A. Fare $5.50 and expense $2.50, 
 
 Q. What date? 
 
 A. October 12, 1865. 
 
 Q. Fare $5,50 ; where was that to ? 
 
 A. Boston. Sometimes, you see, I would buy these tickets and pay 
 whatever there was, and count that as cash, and then when I prid them 
 out count them as tickets. Expense $4.50, 14th November. Expense 
 and fare $10.25, Feb. 26. I have a book that is the same in 1864. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Tappan.} Is that 1864? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; commences 1864, in June. 
 
 Q. Now will you be kind enough to state what you paid for tickets 
 in 1 864? 
 
 A. I have got them right along what there is, in this book ; but I 
 : say I have a book back of that ; six months previous. 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Mr. Eemick, I understand you to say that 
 jou purchased these tickets from Frenchmen that came down from Mon 
 treal ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you always pay the same price for them ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you remember how cheap you have got the fare ? 
 
 A. From $1.25 to $1.75 ; I don t know but there are instances where 
 I paid $2 for some. 
 
 Q. You think the smallest was $1.25 ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect what year you paid $1.25 for them ? 
 
 A. No, I don t know as I could state. 
 
 Q. I understand you to say that these were always good in the hands 
 of every conductor, except in one instance when you attempted to go 
 down over the Lawrence road. What was the objection made then ? 
 
 A. It said Lowell. 
 
472 
 
 Q. And you were on the wrong line ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was that the only objection you found? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you how it was in the hands of conductors on the 
 Nashua and Lowell, and Boston and Lowell road, and whether they 
 were recognized by those conductors ? 
 
 A. In every instance, I think. 
 
 Q. Was there ever any objection made ? [Objected to.| 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mvgridge.} How many of these coupons do you think 
 you purchased from the year 18-64 up to sometime in 1866 ? How 
 many do you think you bought of these coupon tickets ? 
 
 A. Perhaps a dozen or fifteen. 
 
 Q. And you bought them all of these Frenchmen ? 
 
 A. Almost universally. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I will put in now the sum received by Mr. Clougk 
 from his stock from May, 1855, to May, 1866, inclusive. It amounts iia 
 the aggregate to $12,603.50. That is for eleven years. Now we pix>- 
 pose, when Mr. Stanley comes in in the morning, to put in the amounts 
 previous to 1855. 
 
 Mr. Eolfe offered in evidence the statement of Mr. W. P. Hills, sec 
 retary of the Newburyport Savings Bank, and the copy of the deposit 
 book of the Institution for Savings in Newburyport and vicinity. G-eo, 
 Clough, Newburyport, No. 3,719, 1835, Jan. 21st, rec d $109.00 
 
 April 8th, 91.00 
 Interest acct., * 26.71 
 
 Footed up, $226.71 
 (On the other side.) 
 
 1837, Sept. 26, paid, $100.00 
 
 Dec. 30, 126.71 
 
 $226.71 
 TESTIMONY OF JOHN L, COLBY. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Colby, where do you live now ? 
 
 A. Franklin ; that is my native place. 
 
 Q. How long have you known George Clough? 
 
 A. Well, I don t know just the number of years, but it was the 
 commencing of the railroad running to Franklin first from Concord here. 
 I could not state exactly, by any means. 
 
 Q. How did you make his acquaintance ? 
 
 A. Mostly by trading. 
 
 Q. What trading did you have with him ? 
 
 A. Well, I sold him various articles, meat and provisions. 
 
 Q. Specify, if you please? 
 
 A. Well, I could not. The first that we dealt was in veal calves, 
 and the skins. 
 
 Q. To what extent, sir, and for what length of time did you deal 
 with him ? 
 
 A. A few months during the year, as generally calves run the 
 trade of them. 
 
 Q. To what extent ? How many a day or week ? 
 
473 
 
 A. Well, that I couldn t state exactly the number of weeks ; some 
 times once or twice or three times a week, as they grew plenty or I 
 could get them. 
 
 Q. Well, sir, what was the course of trade ? Do you recollect what 
 profit you got out of them what profit you got out of the calf and the 
 skin? 
 
 A. Well, we generally I believe that we bought them, and he gave 
 us a certain per centage. There was some over a dollar on the skin and 
 veal, the heads, plucks, and rennets. 
 
 Q. Will you state, if you know, how that was about the profits that 
 you realized on the calves ? 
 
 A. Well, it was understood between us ; nothing very particular. 
 
 [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. That isn t anything more than that Mr. Clough told 
 him so and so, I suppose ? 
 
 Q. I will ask you if you know how that was, aside from what Mr* 
 Clough represented ? 
 
 A. I knew nothing only what the contract was. He was to give us- 
 a certain proportion. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. What we propose to show and we would like the 
 ruling of the refertes upon it is what the contract was between Clough. 
 and this gentleman, under which this veal was sent to market. We 
 propose to show that there was a distinct agreement between Clougb 
 and the witness as to what the interest of each should be under the 
 contract. 
 
 The Chairman. That perhaps is evidence. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) You may proceed and state what the contract 
 was ? 
 
 A. Sometimes the contract was high or low, and we sort of divided ; 
 as we traded from time to time, we sort of divided. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} Was there any agreement between you and. 
 Mr. Clough, what you should do ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; there was an agreement this way, that he would give: 
 us as much as he got ; and sometimes it would be low, and then agaiifc 
 it would be a higher price ; and take it upon the whole, it was satisfac 
 tory, generally. We could do better than we could to sell them out 
 there. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} If you recollect, what was the profit on a calf? 
 [Objected to as being hearsay testimony.] 
 
 The Chairman. I think you may show the fact what he realized. 
 
 Q. Y T ou may go on and show what you realized as profit on a calf OB; 
 the average ? 
 
 A. I think, as nigh as I can recollect, he divided with us some over 
 a dollar average ; sometimes more and sometimes less ; it would average 
 some over a dollar. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} You mean that you got $1, and that 
 you divided? 
 
 A. I mean that I got $1 myself; except the skin ; that was divided 
 afterwards. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} How was that? 
 
 A. The skins raised after a while ; and I let him have them ; they 
 raised about half that year. 
 
 Q. Now what were the profits realized out of the hides. If I un 
 derstand you right, you retained these hides ? 
 
474 
 
 A. 1 did at the first of our dealing. But I think that I was having 
 a dollar ; but it came to something more than that ; it about doubled, 
 it strikes me. 
 
 Q. And you and Mr. Clough, if I understand, made a double profit 
 on it? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; the skins seemed to be a separate contract from the 
 veal. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, how was it ? Did you trade in any other articles for 
 instance, poultry? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; pelts and poultry. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect any particular instance where you bought rather 
 large lots ? 
 
 A. I do. 
 
 Q. How was it with Greenleaf and Greenough ? 
 
 A. We had some of them. We bought part of it from Greenough, 
 and the rest he wouldn t let us have. 
 
 Q. You got all of it from Greenleaf ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. I should think we made a trade with Greenough. I 
 know we got one or two horse-loads, as much as we could draw in a 
 double sleigh like that. 
 
 Q. Anything else ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I could state. 
 
 Q. Did you buy any produce of the parties ? 
 
 A. We used to buy of others. Why I know this more particular 
 was because it was a larger amount. We bought great amounts and 
 could not sell them out there ; didn t expect to. 
 
 Q. How is it about potatoes ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect as I sold him any potatoes. 
 
 Q. Do you know of his trading with other parties ? 
 
 A. I know, by his delivering stuff to the depot, that he traded there 
 with other parties. 
 
 Q. How much did you do in pelts? 
 
 A. Well, I could not recall this, as to the amount, as well as I could 
 the others. 
 
 Q. When you dealt in pelts and other sleigh-loads of property, how 
 did you send it ? 
 
 A. Sent it by the freight train, I think. All this heavy cold weather 
 we sent by freight, and these other trades ; and in hot weather it went 
 by express put on to the express trains. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Put on the passenger train you mean ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) Do you mean that they went in the express 
 car? 
 
 A. They were put into the passenger train. 
 
 Q. Whereabouts were they put? In the baggage car, or the express 
 car, or in the passenger car ? 
 
 A. I don t know certain as to that. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} When did the cars first run to Franklin ? 
 Do you remember ? 
 
 A. I remember the time. 
 
 Q. W T asn t it late in the fall of 1847 * 
 
 A. Yes, I think it was ; sometime in January, I should think. 
 
475 
 
 <Q. What, sir? 
 
 A. Sometime in cold weather. 
 
 Q. Do you remember to where the road was next opened ? 
 
 A. I couldn t state the year not now, I couldn t ; but perhaps I 
 remember. It was in the winter, I know. . 1 couldn t state the 
 year ? 
 
 Q. And he ran on the train as long as the road stopped at Franklin ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, where was it next opened ? You were at Franklin ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 jQ. Do you recollect Mr. Daniel Webster s coming ? 
 
 A. I do recollect something of it. 
 
 Q. Wouldn t that refresh your recollection so as to tell how long 
 he cars stopped there, and when they ran up to Grafton ? 
 
 A. Yes, 1 think so. 
 
 Q. Didn t they run up the following July V 
 
 A. I think not; I think the year after. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that they stayed at Franklin a year. 
 
 A. Yes, I think so. I should think it was all of a year. It was 
 through one season any way, I should think. 
 
 Q. You say it was not the same season. Are you quite confident ? 
 
 A, Well, it is only my impression that it is so ; no records with me 
 sto show any such thing ; only my memory. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough didn t run to Franklin after the road ran beyond 
 there at all, did he ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect as he did. 
 
 Q. When did the Northern road begin to run the road themselves ? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell the time. 
 
 ^TWENTY-SECOND DAY. Wednesday, December 30th, 1868.J 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEOKGE CLOUGH CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} You testified in cross-examination that you 
 3iad some sap-buckets of James Whitcher. Do you recollect the num 
 ber? 
 
 A. I had 300. 
 
 Q. State whether you paid for them, or how that was ? 
 
 A. I paid him cash for them; I paid him $33 for three hundred sap 
 buckets, eleven cents apiece. 
 
 Q. With the exception of the last bill that was furnished, up to the 
 time you left the road, have, you or not, paid for what merchandise you 
 tiave had of Mr. Whitcher ? 
 
 A. Everything. 
 
 Q. In what way ? 
 
 A. Paid him the money. 
 
 Q. Haven t you never let him pass over the road in compensation for 
 buckets and pails? [Objected to as a leading question.] 
 
 Q. I believe I did not inquire of you, when you were on the stand 
 before, in] reference to whether you ever paid back any money to M r. 
 Gilmore for fares taken in the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I have. 
 
 Q. To what extent and how it happened ? 
 
 A. I have paid money to Mr. Gilmore and to George Sanborn by the 
 order of Mr. Gilmore. 
 
476 
 
 Q. What was the occasion of it? 
 
 A. There were some of his friends that went down that hadn t any 
 passes, and he didn t mean to have them pay, and when they came back 
 he went and got the money. 
 
 Q. Would it be before or after you made the return ? 
 
 A. It would be afterwards. 
 
 Q In what way would you reimburse yourself? 
 
 A. I used to take it out on the next way-bill. The last two or three 
 months, Mr. G-ilmore used to come to me himself, and he would say to 
 me sometimes he would say that he had one or two of his friends that 
 went down with Mr. Noyes, and back to Manchester or Nashua, or 
 wherever they went, and he would say, "you may pay me, and take the 
 money out of your next way-bill." 1 should think those times would 
 average once a week certain. I should think it would average once a 
 week for the last four weeks I was on the road. And before that we 
 used to pay it back to Mr. Sanborn. When I went up to settle my way 
 bill, Mr. Sanborn would say to me that Mr. Gilmore directed me to pay 
 back so much money for one fare, or two, just as it happened. 
 
 Q. Well, why did Mr. Gilmore claim that you should pay the money 
 to him ? 
 
 A. Why, he came the last two or three months himself, and I 
 supposed that he paid it back to the persons. I knew nothing about 
 that. 
 
 Q. I wish to make some further inquiry, Mr. Clough, about Ray 
 mond Kimball? 
 
 A. In 1835 ? 
 
 Q. You commenced driving at that time to Lowell ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir ; I commenced driving for Mr. Osgood at that time. 
 
 Q. Now, sir, when you commenced, state your course of business 
 with Mr. Kimball ? 
 
 A. I got acquainted with Mr. Kimball about that time, in the 
 year 1835. I used to put money into his hands that I made along from 
 time to time ; all amounts from $50 and more, just as I happened to 
 have it on hand, until up to 1842. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, do you recollect where you got $1000 that you paid 
 to Mr. ? 
 
 A. I had that of Mr. Kimball. 
 
 Q. W as it money that you borrowed of him ? 
 
 A. Money that he had in his hands. I had his note. 
 
 Q, State whether you had money in his hands beyond that? 
 
 A. I had money out in smaller amounts ; and I think I had more 
 money in his hands at that time. 
 
 Q. From the time you first knew Mr. Kimball until the time you went 
 on to the Concord Railroad, what was his character as a man of wealth 
 and responsibility ? [Objected to.] 
 
 Mr. George. It is entirely immaterial whether he was a man of 
 wealth and responsibility or not. 
 
 Mr. Mvgridge. Our position is this : that Mr. Clough put his funds 
 into the hands of Mr. Kimball to keep for him. 
 
 The Chairman. Haven t you got this particular fact proven well 
 enough by the witnesses called on the other side ? Is there any need 
 of raising a question of that kind, when you have got testimony to the 
 same effect? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Haven t we a right to show the witness s idea and 
 knowledge of his responsibility and pecuniary standing ? 
 
477 
 
 The Chairman. We will consider that question, if you think, after 
 the testimony on the other side, that it is worth the while. 
 
 The question is, perhaps, somewhat of a difficult question to decide ; but 
 the ruling will have to be for the defence. If you choose to take the 
 chance, we can let you put in the evidence. [Euling excepted to by 
 the plaintiff.] 
 
 Q. You may state up to the time you knew Mr. Kimball, until you 
 got your pay of him, whether he was reputed to be a wealthy and 
 responsible man? 
 
 A. He told me himself, in 1840, that he was worth $30,000. 
 
 The Chairman. That, I take it, is not what we ruled in. 
 
 Q. From the time you knew him, until you got your money of him, 
 was he reputed to be a wealthy and responsible man ? 
 
 A. He was reputed a wealthy man. He was called rich, and his 
 note was good for almost any amount. 
 
 Q. Won t you describe your relations with Mr. Kimball ? 
 
 [Objected to as repetition.] 
 
 The Chairman. That has been pretty fully put in. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, when you testified before in relation to the amount 
 of notes that you had, you testified, I think, before from memorandum. 
 Did you have any notes that you had not on that memorandum ? If so r 
 what were they ? 
 
 A. Notes given to me ? 
 
 Q. No ; notes that you had given, How was it with that land that 
 you bought over on South street, and built the brown building on ? 
 
 A. I have notes amounting to $450 that wasn t in that was given 
 this fall. One is $250, and the other $200. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} That you gave for what? 
 
 A. For two houses that I bought of Mr. Thorndike. 
 
 Q. Have you got a memorandum of the Masonic Temple contract ? 
 
 A. I have got the specifications and the articles of agreement. 
 
 Q. Won t you produce it, if you have it? 
 
 [Produces book.] 
 
 Q. That is it, is it ? 
 
 A- It is. 
 
 Mr. Rolfe. If the referees please, 1 will read one article of the 
 agreement: " And in consideration 
 
 Mr. George read from the files of the N. H. Patriot to show that the 
 railroad was opened to Franklin, Monday, Dec. 28, 1846; and to Graf- 
 ton, Aug. 30th, 1847. 
 
 Mr. Kolfe continued the examination of Mr. Clough 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough, won t you state about the Prince street property ? 
 
 A. The Prince street property I helped my nephew buy it ; bought 
 it for him, I think, for $1600. The property was mortgaged for 
 $1000 to the savings bank at the time we bought it. We hired $600. 
 It was mortgaged at the bank for $1000, and we hired $600 to pay 
 the balance of that ; and I signed the note with him. He lived there 
 about a year. But I am to pay the note to the bank. I have sold it, 
 and given a bond for a deed, and something paid on it now ; $400 or 
 $500, I think. The note to the bank my name is on it. That is the 
 way that stands. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You are to pay the note ? 
 
 A. The note is to be paid. 
 
 Q. And you are to pay the $600. 
 
478 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} The note at the bank is not paid ? 
 
 A. No, sir; I believe there is $800 at the bank; I believe my 
 nephew paid $200 on it. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} You sold the place for the same price ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you say you had conveyed it and gave a bond for a deed ? 
 
 A. I gave a bond for a deed. 
 
 Q. What did you say about the payment of the price by these per^ 
 sons to whom you gave the bond for a deed ? 
 
 A. I sold to them for the same price that I gave. 
 
 Q. Has it been paid ? 
 
 A. It has been paid, part of it. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Muyridge.} That is, the person to whom you gave the 
 bond ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Mr. Clough, were you present when Dr. Car 
 ney testified yesterday afternoon ? 
 
 A. I wasn t all the time. I went out to get some papers at my 
 house when he was first put on to the stand. 
 
 Q. Have you ever seen Dr. Carney before ? 
 
 A. I never saw him but once before. I met him on the street once- 
 That is the only time that I ever saw him to know him. 
 
 Q. State whether you have any recollection of seeing him upon the- 
 cars ? 
 
 A. Never ; never saw him before, to know him, until that day yoit 
 introduced me to Jim in Boston. 
 
 Q. Have you heard his deposition read, the one that he gave in 
 Boston ? 
 
 A Yes, sir, I have. 
 
 Q. Did you hear what he stated yesterday in relation to your con 
 duct when he inquired for tickets to Worcester and to Groton Junction ? 
 
 A. No ; I wasn t here then. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether you have any recollection of being agi 
 tated, trembling, or any realization of turning pale 
 
 A. No, sir ; never. 
 
 Q. At any time ? 
 
 A. Never. 
 
 Q. Has there ever been any occasion when you were on the cars,- 
 that you now recollect, that you were in a state of agitation when you 
 have been inquired of for tickets ? 
 
 A. Never any such thing ever happened. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether you knew, or had any intimation, that 
 anybody at that time about the 23d of November, 1865 that anybody 
 was looking after you or trying to detect you upon the cars ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I never knew anything of it until two or three days be 
 fore I left the road, I heard somebody say that there had been detec 
 tives on the road. I think that somebody on the Northern road 
 spoke about it. I don t recollect now who it was who said there had 
 been detectives on the Concord road. That is the first time that I heard 
 or mistrusted anything of the kind. 
 
 Q. Will you now state whether you ever, to your knowledge, inten 
 tionally withheld any money that you have collected on the cars from 
 the railroad? [Objected to as being a repetition. 3 
 
479 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Clough, let me ask you this question : 
 Did Mr. Grilrnore within a month or six weeks within a brief period of 
 the time you left the road send to you, underscored with red ink, a 
 copy of the rules which are attached to your deposition ? 
 
 A. I don t now recollect whether he did or not. 
 
 Q. Will you say that he did not send to you a copy of the rules un 
 derscored ? That is, underscored with red ink the rule requiring the 
 return of the ten cents, requiring you not to use the money V 
 
 A. 1 have no recollection of it. I would not say that he didn t. 
 
 Q. Did you hear Mr. Sanborn s testimony up^on that point ? 
 
 A. I don t know whether I did or not. 
 
 Q. You won t say you didn t receive from him a copy of the rules 
 underscored ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I would not. 
 
 Q. Were you in the habit of receiving rules underscored in that 
 way? 
 
 A. He used to send rules around occasionally ; I don t now recol 
 lect how often. 
 
 Q. W T hat s your idea of his object in sending the rules around to 
 you ? If he told you to disregard them, arid pay no attention to them 
 practically, what was your idea of his sending them ? 
 
 A. My idea was that when he sent the rules, if there was anything 
 that I could not live up to, I would tell him so. 
 
 Q. Your idea was that he sent them around for you to see whether 
 there was any rules that you could not live up to ? 
 
 A That is the way I done it. 
 
 Q. You have received rules from him at various times, now was it 
 your idea, when you received these rules, that you were to say what 
 ones you could live up to? 
 
 A. I don t know what my idea was at the time. 
 
 Q. Didn t you just say what your idea was ? 
 
 A. I don t know what my idea was at that time. 
 
 Q. There was a Mr. Draper, wasn t there, on the cars ? One of Ma 
 jor Carney s men was Draper, wasn t he ? 
 
 A. I heard there was a man by the name of Draper. 
 
 Q. He was a coach driver, wasn t he, down at the Elm House ? 
 
 A. I think there was such a man there. 
 
 Q. He left immediately before the last trial ? 
 
 A. He left. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about his leaving ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you ever have any communication with him ? 
 
 A. When he worked to the Sherman House stable, I heard he was 
 one of the "spotters" one of the detectives; and I may have had 
 some talk with him at that time, but I cannot tell now what that was. 
 1 think that I asked him if he was one of them, and he said he was. 
 That was pretty much all that was said. I told him that I wasn t afraid 
 of any of the detectives, of him, or any of the rest of them. 
 
 Q, Did you tell him that you could show that you bought tickets, 
 and that your way-bills ought not to account for the tickets received in 
 the cars ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I never told him any such thing. 
 
 Q. What did you tell him ? 
 
480 
 
 A. I told him I wasn t afraid of him or any spotters that followed 
 ,me. 
 
 Q. Didn t you have any conversation on the subject of his evidence ? 
 
 A. That was a subject. 
 
 Q. Did you tell him how much money he paid you ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I have told you the weight of the conversation with 
 Mm. 
 
 Q. Did you ask how he paid you money ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. And immediately before the last trial he left? 
 
 A. I don t know when he left. 
 
 <Q. When did you last see him ? 
 
 A. I couldn t tell. 
 
 Q. State as nearly as you can. 
 
 A. I couldn t tell whether it was before the trial or after the trial 
 seommenced. 
 
 Q. Where did you see him then? 
 
 A. I saw him in a hack ? 
 
 "Q. Did you have any communication with him, directly or indirectly, 
 or with any body else ? 
 
 A. I don t think I have. 
 
 Q. Will you say you did not have any ? 
 
 A. I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Don t you know that you did ? 
 
 A. I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Will you say absolutely whether you did or not? 
 
 A. I don t think I did ; I don t remember. 
 
 Q. Now, you made a very strong effort to obtain Major Carney s 
 evidence ? 
 
 A. We took his deposition, but couldn t get anything out of him. 
 
 Q. You were very anxious indeed to ascertain what Major Carney s 
 .(evidence would be ? 
 
 A. That was our object. 
 
 Q. You took a great deal of pains, and you went to Boston ? 
 
 A. Took his deposition in Boston. 
 
 Q. Did you keep him here a fortnight ? 
 
 A. Kept him, I don t know how long. 
 
 Q. Did you keep him here a fortnight ? 
 
 A. Kept him, I think, a week or ten days. 
 
 Q. Your object was to ascertain what his testimony would be ? 
 Won t you tell me why the same objection did not exist with regard to 
 Draper s testimony ? " [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. I don t see why that is not well enough in cross 
 examination. 
 
 A, I supposed that Major Carney had all the books. 
 
 Q. Won t you tell me why the same reason did not exist to get at 
 the facts of Mr. Draper s testimony as Major Carney s testimony? 
 
 A. Well, I supposed that Maj. Carney was the headquarters ; he was 
 the one that conducted the job, and he was the man to take. 
 
 Q. Your object was to get at the facts against you, and what they 
 were going to testify against you ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I supposed they were in his possession. 
 
 Q. Will you explain, sir, if you proposed at that time to account for 
 money not returned upon the way-bills, by showing that you took the 
 
481 
 
 money that you received in the cars and purchased fresh tickets, and 
 punched these, how any evidence of that character could by any possi 
 bility tend to show that you didn t receive money that you didn t account 
 for ? 
 
 A. Well, I suppose that there were days that I took the ten cents 
 extra, and didn t buy any tickets at the office. How did I know but 
 that these detectives were on that day ? 
 
 Q. What do you mean- that you didn t return so much money ? 
 
 A. I mean to say that I took the ten cents extra, anddid re earn 
 .all the money on the way-bill. 
 
 Q. There were days? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; there were days when I took that. 
 
 Q. And therefore your view was that there might be evidence that 
 you didn t return that money ? 
 
 A. I suppose that if I had half a dozen men following me, it might 
 be detected of course. 
 
 Q. If Mr. Draper was in the cars, and you understood that he was a 
 " spotter" you understood that Mr. Draper paid you money, didn t 
 you? 
 
 A. He said he did. I understood you to say that he paid money in 
 the cars, and 1 understood you to say that he bought some tickets too. 
 
 Q. Did you say that you didn t have any conversation on that sub 
 ject, with him? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t think I did. 
 
 Q. Very well, pass on to the next. Have you ever stated to any 
 body that as long as Joe Gilmore was living, you might have trouble, 
 but that now that he was dead, you didn t care? 
 
 A. No, sir ; never said any such thing. 
 
 Q. Never said it to your counsel ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. George stated that, if the counsel for defendants would withdraw 
 objection, plaintiff s counsel would show that the statement involved in 
 the last (question was made to Mr. liolfe. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge and Mr. Rolfe each withdrew any objection. 
 
 Q. Have you a not ; given for the Prince street propert} r ? You 
 spoke of the Prince street property that you did not allude to before. 
 You say that you have givpn a bond for a deed. To whom was that bond 
 given, and to whom was security given on the other side ? 
 
 A. The bond was given for a deed to a woman by the name of Bush, 
 I think it was. 
 
 Q. Did she give you a note, or give anything to represent it ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I don t think there is a note ; but she paid the money 
 in to Mr. Kolfe, and Mr. Eolfe paid the money to him. She took some 
 money out of the Nashua Savings Bank, and made the first payment. 
 
 Q. I am merely asking whether there is a note as consideration of 
 the bond, or whether it rests upon agreement on your part ? It rest3 
 on the bond, and you have no obligation from her ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I think not. 
 
 Q. How was the $600 paid by your nephew, and this $1000 obtained 
 at the bank ; that is, $1600 if 1 understand you. Let me see if I state 
 it correctly. Your nephew bought it for $1600, and paid $600, and 
 borrowed $1000 at the bank? That is the first transaction? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; that is the first transaction. 
 
 Q. Then you bought the property of your nephew, paying him $ 1 600 ? 
 
482 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And as part and parcel of $1600, you assumed the note at & 
 bank ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, 
 
 Q. Now, how did you pay the $600 to your nephew? 
 
 A. We borrowed the money at the bank. 
 
 Q. Who paid the $600 ? 
 
 A. I paid it, and received the pay of that woman. 
 
 Q. Do you know the exact amount you received of that woman ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it is not far from $500. 
 
 Q. Then you are $100 out? 
 
 A. That is, if that is so. I think it is somewhere in the neighbor 
 hood of $500 
 
 Q. Then there has been $200 paid on the bank note? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who paid that ? 
 
 A. My nephew paid that. 
 
 Q. Out of whose funds ? 
 
 A. Oh, when he was tending here in the store. 
 
 Q. Who found the money ? 
 
 A. He paid it out of the store there, I believe. 
 
 Q. Didn t you own the store ? 
 
 A. I stood in for it. 
 
 Q. And have lost $1300? 
 
 A Yes, I have got a note to get that out of, if I get it. 1 don t 
 expect to get it all. I have one note of $300, and have collected aboat 
 .$500 on the books. 
 
 Q. Do you know how your trial balance came out? Y T ou own &e 
 store ? 
 
 A. Not all of it. I owned half the property at first, and then Piper 
 and Clough divided, and I took the store. They divided the stock, I 
 know. 
 
 Q. Lost $1300 or $1400 by the operation ? 
 
 A. It depends. . 
 
 Q. You have already testified ? 
 
 A. 1 testified that 1 have paid these notes, but .1 have got a $3$ 
 note, and have collected some $400 or $500 on the books, and I don t; 
 know how it will come out. 
 
 Q. Y T ou haven t reckoned that on your assets ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; those notes that I assumed to pay, I have got to pay. 
 
 Q. You haven t reckoned among your assets these accounts that JOB 
 spoke of? 
 
 A. No, sir, I don t own them. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.] Mr. Clough, I didn t understand you w&e2 
 you testified before to state when your practice commenced of takiag 
 money that you got in the cars and buying tickets with it. .and return 
 ing them to the office instead of returning it on the way-bill ? 
 
 A. Well, sir, I think it was about a year after Mr. Gilmore went 
 on to the road. I don t know whether he went on to the road in 185? 
 or 1858 ; but it is about a year after he went on to the road. Tl 
 first additional price they charged in the cars was five cents instead 
 ten, when Mr. Gilmore came on to the road ; and about a year after, lie 
 put it up to ten ; and it was more difficult to get the ten cents than $ 
 was the five. Soon after that I commenced ; and we had a good deal 
 of trouble about it, and I spoke to Mr. Gilmore about it. 
 
483 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows,} That, you say, was what year that he came 
 on to the road? 
 
 A. 1 think it was 1857 or 1858. 
 
 Mr. George. You recollect, Judge Bellows, I put in the reco-rd. 
 Mr- (jrilraore was not appointed at the beginning of the year. Mr. 
 Spalding resigned. Mr. L pham had been the superintendent. The 
 Concord, Manchester, and Lawrence roads had been united, and Mr. 
 Giimore was appointed between the years ; that is, between the years 
 1856 and 1857. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge introduced in evidence tax bills showing amount of 
 taxes paid by the defendent, Mr. Clough, upon the following property, 
 for the years specified : 
 
 Two houses on Thompson street, 1851- to 1865, inclusive, $324.65 ; 
 valuation in 1851, $1500; in 1852, $1500; in 1854, $2000; in 1855, 
 $2000; in 1857, $2000; in 1858, $2000; in 1859-1865, $2000; 
 amount of tax on Jefferson street property from 1856 to 1865, inclusive, 
 $87.41 ; valuation each year from 1856 to 1865, $600. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Now we have a schedule of the other taxes paid m 
 the town and city of Concord, from 1842 to 1865, inclusive, outside of 
 the Jefferson street and Thompson street property. These are by them 
 selves. We have also a general schedule of all the other taxes paid by 
 Mr. Clough in the town and city of Concord ; it amounts to $3219.01 ; 
 there is another item : the old store on Pleasant street ; the taxes from 
 1859 to 1865, inclusive, amounts to $44.94; the valuation of the old 
 store for the first year, 1859, was $300.; and for all subsequent years to 
 1865, inclusive, $400. That covers the entire amount of taxes that 
 Mr. Clough has paid since 1842. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF MR. C. A. STEWART. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. Mugridge.) Mr. Stewart, you may state whether you 
 are the city clerk of the city of Concord ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Whether you prepared this tabular statement of the taxes paid 
 by Mr. Clough from the books ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. They are correct? 
 
 A. They are correct so far as I know. There may be a trifling vari 
 ation from the fact that the per cent., as worked out, may vary a small 
 fraction of a mill on a cent. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Mr. Stewart, in 1842 I wish to call your 
 attention from 1842 to 1849 Mr. Clough was taxed on one poll, horses, 
 carriages, land and buildings, $9.98. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It don t appear that he was taxed on horses, car 
 riages, or polls by that. 
 
 Mr. Georgo read the title of the schedule of taxes as offered, 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I desire to take exception to evidence put in in that 
 way. And I want to call attention to the paper offered, 
 
 The Chairman. We do not see how there can be any objection to 
 reading this paper, or how it can convey this idea. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to state again how the taxes were on 
 the Masonic Temple ? 
 
 A. One-half, I think, was charged to Mr. Clough, and the other half 
 to Mr. Corning. 
 
484 
 
 Q. Do you know how that was ? For instance, we will take the tax 
 of 1859 ; won t you be kind enough to look at the tax of 1859 and see 
 what was the tax of Mr. Clough ? See what property was taxed to 
 Mr. Clough. 
 
 A. Some of that is on property. That is on the fly leaf. ^ , 
 
 Mr. George. I will put this in : the items of Mr. Clough s tax. 
 
 Q. That is the basis ? 
 
 A. That is the basis on which the tax is made for that year. 
 
 Q. That is the basis from which you made this detail ? 
 
 A. These items, taken down by the assessor. 
 
 Mr. George read the items from the record for the years 1842 to 1862 
 inclusive. 
 
 1863. Value of buildings, 821,600 
 2 horses, 100 
 
 1 cow, 
 
 $21,718 
 
 1864. Value of buildings, $24,700 
 
 2 horses, 100 
 1 cow. 20 
 
 1865. Value of buildings, 
 4 horses, 
 1 cow, 
 1 carriage, 
 
 "o* 
 
 $24,820 
 
 1866. Value of buildings, 
 2 horses, 
 
 1 cow, .... 
 
 1 carriage ," 
 
 $25,270 
 
 1867. Value of buildings, $25,300 
 1 horse. 100 
 
 1 C W o<)0 
 
 carriages, 
 
 $25,640 
 
 1868. Value of buildings, $30,250 
 1 horse. 
 
 1 cow, 4 
 
 carriages, 
 
 $30,540 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Mugridye.) So far as the books show, what was the 
 practice, or what was the fact, in the assessment of taxes from 1842 
 on, as to the itemizing of property, so far as the real estate and the per- 
 sonal property were concerned ? 
 
 Mr. George. The books show for themselves. 
 
485 
 
 Q. From any examination that you have made of the books, do you 
 find any items of real estate, or any items of personal property distinct 
 and by themselves, or are they all classed together ? 
 
 Mr. George. I object. The books speak for themselves. 
 
 The Chairman. I believe the contents of these books have already 
 been read to us. 
 
 Mr. Mugridye. A portion of them have. I did not know but that it 
 was proper for me to call the attention of the clerk to a fact discovered 
 in the examination of the books ; but if that fact is already sufficiently 
 shown, I will not consume further time. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF EOBEKT P. BLAKE, 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe,} Where do you live, and what is your business? 
 
 A. I have always lived in the county, and have worked for the Con 
 cord Railroad Company. 
 
 Q. How long have you been employed by the Concord road ? 
 
 A. I have worked for the Concord Railroad more or less for the last 
 ten years. 
 
 Q. How and where were you engaged during the war ? 
 
 A. A part of the time I was at work in the depot, 
 
 Q. During what years? 
 
 A. During a portion of 1864 and 1865. 
 
 Q. And all the rest of the time in the car house ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; 1 went away from the depot in November, 1865. 
 
 Q. Previous to August 1864, how were you engaged? 
 
 A, I was at work shifting in the yard. 
 
 Q. Shifting about the passenger cars ? 
 
 A. Yes, and the freight cars. 
 
 Q. During the time that you were engaged in the depot, state if you 
 are able, the number of cars that were run on the several trains ? 
 
 A. There were five on the first train the half past five train in the 
 morning. 
 
 Q. Do you include the baggage car in the five ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. On the quarter past ten train down, how was it ? 
 
 A. There were from six to eight cars. 
 
 Q. On the half past three train in the afternoon? 
 
 A. From eight to eleven. 
 
 Q. Do you speak of this as being ordinarily the case, or in the hight 
 of travel ? 
 
 A. In the hight of travel there would "be that amount, 
 
 Q. State how the trains were made up during that time. That is ta 
 say, over what roads did these cars go ? Take the half past five train 
 in the morning ? 
 
 A. There would be three cars that went from here to Lowell, and 
 two that went from here by Lawrence. 
 
 Q. How was it with the quarter past ten train ? 
 
 A. There would be three passenger cars and a smoking car by Low 
 ell, and from two to three cars by Lawrence. Two cars was the regu 
 lar train. 
 
 Q. The half past three P. M. train? 
 
 A. There were five cars to go by Lowell, and three by Lawrence r 
 and one by Portsmouth. 
 
 Q. Did you ever work in the car house? 
 
486 
 
 A. I am working there now. 
 
 Q. When did you first commence to work in the car house ? 
 
 A. About ten years ago. 
 
 Q. Up to what time did you continue to work in the car house 
 commencing ten years ago. 
 
 A. I worked in the car house one season before the old depot was 
 built. 
 
 Q. Did you continue to work in the car house up to the time you 
 went into the depot? 
 
 A. I worked in the car house some, and worked on the train some. 
 
 Q. Previous to 1864, are you to able to state how the trains ran? 
 
 A. I am not. 
 
 Q. What time in 1864 did you commence to work in the passenger 
 depot ? 
 
 A. About the middle of August. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 L Q- (Uy M T - George.} During the war was there an immense amount 
 of travel over the road ? 
 
 A. There was. 
 
 Q. During the war, how was it about the depot, when the trains 
 went out or came in, was the depot crowded ? 
 
 A. Sometimes it was. 
 
 ^Q. Was it usually ? 
 
 A. As a general thing it was pretty crowded. 
 
 Q. It was so crowded that it was sometimes difficult to get from one 
 part of the depot to another, was it not ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I suppose the substitute brokers, substitutes, soldiers, town 
 agents, and people of that kind, were traveling at that time, that never 
 traveled before, nor have since ? 
 
 A. They were. 
 
 Q. Large numbers ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was your attention ever called, during either the year 1864 or 
 1865, to the matter, so that you kept an account of the number of cars 
 that went out on the ten o clock train in the morning? 
 
 A. My attention was called to it by my being there all the time. 
 
 Q. Did you ever keep an account? 
 
 A. I never set an account down, but I have counted the cars several 
 times as they went out of the depot. 
 
 Q. Did ever you see so much travel as there was in the hight of 
 travel during the war, over the Concord Eailroad ? 
 
 A. Yes, I think I did. 
 
 Q. On this road ? 
 
 A. Yes, I think there was as much this last year as there was then. 
 
 Q. According to your recollection, the cars were not much crowded 
 during the war, were they ? 
 
 A. Yes, they were crowded. 
 
 Q. Were the cars crowded right along during recruiting times, and 
 during the war? 
 
 A. Some trains were crowded, and some were not. 
 
 Q. How as a rule ? 
 
 A. As a genefal rule they were pretty well filled. 
 
487 
 
 (<jf- During the war were there a large number of women riding back 
 
 id forward on the. cars? 
 
 A. Yes, there were quite a lot of them. 
 
 Q. Soldiers wives, and soldiers sweethearts ? 
 
 A, Yes; and some that were not wives. 
 
 Q. There was a large number of them ? 
 
 A. Y r es, sir. 
 
 Q. Were they constantly riding ? 
 
 A. They were more or less on the train. 
 
 Q. There never has been any occasion since, or before, as far as you 
 known, when there was so much of this class of travel, substi 
 tute brokers, substitutes, soldiers, town agents, or drafted men, and this 
 el*ss of women ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I do not think there has. 
 
 .Q. (By Mr. jRolfe.) How was it about this crowd at the depot ; 
 what was it composed of? 
 
 A. Some were people going to see their friends away, and some were 
 
 Q. How was it with the people that were living about the town here, 
 rushing to the depot at the time the cars came in ? 
 
 A. I do not know that there were any more folks who went to the 
 depot then, than at any other time. 
 
 Q. How was it about this class of women that were not wives, as 
 j<m say ; were they pretty thick about the depot ? 
 
 A. Y r es ; they were. 
 
 Q. What has been the practice in Concord, about people rushing to 
 $fat depot when the trains came in ? 
 
 A. There are a great many people that now go to the depot to see 
 t&e trains come in. 
 
 Q. And it has always been so ? 
 
 A. Yes ; I think it has. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF W. H. ALLISON. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Do you reside in this city ? 
 
 A. I do. 
 
 Q. Tor how long have you lived here ? 
 
 A. I came here in 1833, and went away a few years, and came back 
 ija 1841, and have been here ever since. 
 
 Q. How long have you known George Clough ? 
 
 A. From the time he first commenced running on the cars. I think 
 &-hat was the first that I knew of him. 
 
 Q. Have you had any trade with him ? Did you ever sell him any 
 Btrses? 
 
 A. I sold him two, I believe. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect the price ? 
 
 A. The first one I sold him was a large black horse, which I sold 
 lini, I think, for $2! 10. 
 
 Q. Did you give it to him for a different price from that ? 
 
 A. I do not recollect how that was ; I think that I wanted more 
 tfeaa that for the horse. I asked that for it, but whether I billed it at 
 the price I asked, I cannot recollect. 
 
 Q. What did you sell the other horse for ? 
 
 &, I think it was $187. 
 
488 
 
 Q. Will you state what was actually paid you for what is called the 
 " Allison Building ? 
 
 A. My impression is that it was $3700. I called it $4000 ; but 
 whether 1 deeded it for $4000 or not, I do not recollect. I think the 
 price paid was $3700. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Was it not $3800 exactly, that you paid? 
 
 A. 1 think it was $3700. 
 
 Q. Can you state that it was not $3800. 
 
 A. I could not without referring to my books, but my impression is 
 that it was $3700. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF E. M. SARGENT. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} Where do you reside? 
 
 A. In Lowell. 
 
 Q. For how long have you lived there ? 
 
 A. I went therein 1836. 
 
 Q. Do you know Mr. Clough, the defendant in this suit? 
 
 A. 1 know Mr. Clough. 
 
 Q. How long have you known him? 
 
 Q. 1 think the first iknew of him, personally, was in 1838 or 1839. 
 He drove stage to Deering and Chester. 
 
 Q. Have you ever been in his employ ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. State when and how ? 
 
 A. I drove stage over the Mammoth road, from Lowell to Manches 
 ter, for him, for nearly a year, in the latter part of 1840 arid the first 
 part of 1841. 
 
 Q. When did you commence ? 
 
 A. My recollection is that it was in August or September, 1840. 
 
 Q. Give to the referees the best idea you are able, of the amount of 
 travel at that time on that line. State first what kind of a team he 
 drove. 
 
 A. He drove a four-horse team into Lowell. He had two six-horse 
 and two four-horse teams. I had a light coach, a six-passenger coach, 
 and three horses. 
 
 Q. Did you drive every day with him? 
 
 A. Yes, but on different hours. He left early in the morning, and 
 I left later. 
 
 Q. On an average, state the amount of travel carried by you and 
 Mr. Clough during that year. 
 
 A. I do not know the average. I have seen Mr. Clough on his coach 
 with as many as twenty-four passengers : but that was not common. Fif 
 teen or eighteen passengers would be an average load. . 
 
 Q. How many did you carry on an average ? 
 
 A, I could not well carry more than eleven. It was but a six-pas 
 senger coach, and eight passengers would be a load. Sometimes people 
 would ride on the baggage. There was a great deal of travel. 
 
 Q. How was it generally. W T as your coach generally filled ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir; always. It was always filled to the capacity of the 
 coach six passengers, and sometimes there were eleven. 
 
 Q. Did you. know Daniel Raymond Kimball. who was commonly 
 called "Rem." Kimball? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
489 
 
 Q. Did he keep a livery stable ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q, Were you engaged there at the stable at any time ? 
 
 A. Previous to ray driving stage I was in the stable. I was a hostler 
 there, and took care of Mr. Clough s horses previous to my driving. 
 
 Q. During all the time that Mr. Clough was driving, and you were 
 taking care of the horses, state whether you ever saw Mr. Clough let 
 Mr. Kimball have any money ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; I have, a great many times. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Kimball give him anything in lieu of the money ? 
 
 A. He gave him what I supposed to be a note, but as I was only the 
 hostler, I could not give any statement of the amount, or what it was 
 that Mr. Kimball gave him for it. I have seen Mr. Clough a great 
 many times count money out to him, and leave it with him ; and Mr, 
 Kimball would pass him a paper back. 
 
 Q. What was the fare from Lowell to Manchester ? 
 
 A. One dollar and twenty-five cents, I think, but I could not tell 
 positively. It was long ago, and I have not had my attention called 
 to it. 
 
 Q. How frequently did you see Mr. Clough with this load of twenty- 
 four passengers ? 
 
 A. Not frequently, with as heavy a load. 
 
 Q. How was it generally ? 
 
 A. I may say, perhaps, that generally, he had fifteen, sixteen, seven 
 teen or eighteen passengers. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} I understood you to say that you attended 
 to Mr. Clough s horses, and took care of them ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Where did he keep them ? 
 
 A. He kept them in the Merrimack House stable. 
 
 Q. Who had charge of that stable ? Who conducted it ? who owned 
 it, and had charge of it ? 
 
 A. I had charge of it. 
 
 Q. You were an employee only ? 
 
 A. W. W Larrabee was the proprietor of the hotel, and the Mid 
 dlesex Manufacturing Company owned the stable. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Kimball run the Merrimack stable at that time ? 
 
 A. He run one of them. There were two stables. They joined,, 
 but were two separate stables. The Middlesex Company owned the 
 stables that I worked in, and Mr. Larrabee rented it. 
 
 Q. Mr. Kimball boarded at the Merrimack House ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And kept the livery stable adjoining the house? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And subsequently bought the livery stable ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He kept a very large livery stable, didn t he ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q, About how many horses ? 
 
 A. He did not keep so large a number of horses to let. He boarded 
 more horses than he let. 
 
 Q. He kept a large livery and boarding stable ? 
 
490 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 <Q. He kept the largest number of livery horses? 
 
 A. No, not the largest number. 
 
 Q. How many did he keep then? 
 
 A. At that time I think he kept fifteen or sixteen horses, 
 
 Q. Did he keep nice horses and carriages ? 
 
 A. They were considered so. 
 
 .Q. He was a bachelor then, wasn t he? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And was never married ? 
 
 A. Not to my knowledge, 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Kimball subsequently become insane, and was he afflicted 
 .with softening of the brain ? 
 
 A. It was so reported. 
 
 Q. And he subsequently died at an insane asylum ? 
 
 A. Y es. 
 
 Q. Do you remember in what year he first showed those symptoms of 
 insanity ? 
 
 A. No, sir. He went to Europe, but I could not tell in what year. 
 
 Q. Can t you tell about the year ? 
 
 A. I should think it was in 1856. 
 
 Q. Do you remember when he first commenced to show symptoms of 
 insanity ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; it was not before he went to Europe that there was any 
 general talk about it. It may have been discovered before that by 
 .some of his friends. 
 
 Q. Who received his property ? Who was the legatee, or heir, if 
 you know? [Question waived.] 
 
 Q. In 1840, 1841 and 1842, how many stages were there running 
 from Nashua and Lowell, north ? 
 
 A. I do not know how many from Nashua. There were several. 
 
 Q. How many stages were running to Lowell ? 
 
 A. Mr. Dudley run one stage half daily, and Mr. Clough ran another, 
 Sialf daily, over the Mammoth road. 
 
 Q, Did J. B. French run a stage there .? 
 
 A. Not that ever I knew of. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Walter run a stage ? 
 
 ,A. Y r es ; but I think it was previous to 1840. 
 
 Q. How many more stages were there running ? 
 
 A. The Darien stages, I think, were taken off previous to 1840, and 
 J think that on the Mammoth road was the only daily stage direct from 
 VLowell to Concord. 
 
 Q. In 1847 the cars ran to Nashua? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And most of the stages running north, subsequent to that time, 
 Tan into Nashua? 
 
 A. From Lowell ? 
 
 Q. No ; the stages ran to meet the cars, didn t they, all of them ? 
 
 A. No ; not all of them. A Mr, Tuttle and a Mr. Beales ran a 
 stage from Lowell to Nashua for a long time after the cars commenced 
 -.to run. 
 
 Q. The great bulk of stages ran to meet the cars ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
491 
 
 Q. How many lines of stages ran from Concord to Nashua, to meet 
 the cars ? There was a very large number, was there not ? There was 
 a line of stages from Nashua up to New Hampton, was there not? 
 
 A. Yes ; and there was the .Forest line that ran out through Han 
 cock, and that way. 
 
 Q. Was there a line of stages that ran to Hillsboro from Nashua ? 
 
 A. I don t recollect. 
 
 Q. There were a number of stages that ran from Concord to Nashua ? 
 
 A. There were several ; I knew several of the drivers ; 1 don t 
 know how many. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) Do you recollect about the " chicken line ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; it was the line that ran from Lowell to Dover. 
 
 Q. Who drove on that line ? 
 
 A. There were two drivers ; Mr. Clough was one of them. 
 
 Q. Were you ever at Lowell at the time that Mr. Clough drove in 
 over that line ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you have an opportunity, when he came in, to see what he 
 brought ? 
 
 A. I did, occasionally. 
 
 Q. What was it ? 
 
 A. There was poultry, and 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.) Didn t he carry any passengers? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.) To what extent did he carry poultry? 
 
 A, I cannot say. There were a great many Lowell people who de 
 pended upon him as much as they would upon their market in season. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Do you know Mr. Osgood, who owned that 
 line ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He failed, and bursted, didn t he ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. What has that to do with the case ? He did not 
 fail upon account of his staging. If it is competent, we will show 
 the occasion of his failing ; but we will not have anything put in by 
 iriuendo. 
 
 The Chairman. It is not very obvious to us how it can be very ma 
 terial whether he failed or not. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF JAMES S. CHENEY. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) Will you state whether, thirty years ago, 
 you drove a stage, or were the owner of a stage, or were in any way 
 interested in a stage that ran into Lowell ? If so, what stage was it ? 
 
 A. In 1838 and 1839 I used occasionally to drive an extra into 
 Lowell from Groton. 
 
 Q. How was it in 1840, 1841, and 1842? 
 
 A. I went from there to Worcester, and drove out of Worcester un 
 til 1842. 
 
 Q. Where did you drive to ? 
 
 A. To Brattleboro, Vermont. 
 
 Q. Were you acquainted with George Clough ? 
 
 A. I was some acquainted with him. I used to meet him at Lowell. 
 
 Q. Did you room with him in town ? 
 
 A. Not then. 
 
492 
 
 Q. Did you subsequently ? 
 
 A. I did a short time, when I commenced on the road. 
 
 Q. The Concord road was opened in 1842. When that road was 
 opened, what was your business and employment ? 
 
 A. It was opened to Manchester in July, 1842, and I then com 
 menced running on the road as express messenger. 
 
 Q. Your brother, and Mr. White, and Mr. Walker had the express 
 over the road ; that is, they were the contracting parties ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you were in their employ ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. For how long a period of time did you continue to run as express 
 messenger after the opening of the road to Manchester ? 
 
 A. About fifteen years, I think ; I could not tell exactly. 
 
 Q. State how it was about your running on the trains conducted by 
 Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. For the first three months that they run to Manchester, and be 
 fore the road opened to Concord, Mr. Clough used to run down and stay 
 over night, and I did the same, and we boarded at the Merrimack 
 House, and roomed together for a short time, perhaps two or three 
 months. After the road was opened through, his route was changed so 
 that he stayed in Concord over night, and mine was changed so as to 
 bring me in Manchester over night. 
 
 Q. But you run back and forward over his train ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You had sole charge of the express business on you trains ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. State whether you were aware of Mr. Clough s carrying butter, 
 cheese, eggs, and articles of that character, on the passenger trains ? 
 
 A. I never knew that he did. 
 
 Q. At that time where was the express matter carried ? Was there 
 a seperate express car, or was it all carried in the baggage car ? 
 
 A. We had a separate apartment generally, but sometimes they 
 would fill that so full of matter going to Concord, that I was obliged to 
 put my express with the baggage. 
 
 Q. It was all in one car ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If Mr. Clough had made a business of carrying articles of that 
 character to any considerable extent on the passenger trains, how would 
 it have been about your knowing it ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I do not know the object of this testimony now at 
 tempted to be put in by Col. Cheney. It cannot be put in for the pur 
 pose of contradicting Mr. Clough. Mr. Clough has not sworn that he 
 used to carry produce by the passenger trains, but on the contrary the 
 evidence is that shipments were all made by the freight trains, and that 
 only occasionally was there some poultry or something of that kind sent 
 by a passenger train. The bulk of the business, as has been shown by 
 several witnesses, was carried on the freight trains. 
 
 Mr. George. It is useless to bandy words. We do not understand 
 the testimony as Mr. Mugridge does. 
 
 The Chairman. My recollection of the evidence is that Mr. Clough 
 testified that sometimes he carried it one way, and sometimes another ; 
 but that the heavy stuff went on the freight trains, and that stuff not 
 so heavy went on the passenger trains. It seems to me that this testi- 
 
493 
 
 mony does tend to rebut Mr. dough s testimony in some degree. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Let me ask you if there was any consider 
 able amount of business of that kind done, you would have been aware 
 of it? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. You cannot ask the question in that shape. The 
 witness can show what means and opportunities he had for seeing what 
 was done in that line. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Were you pretty constant, or otherwise, in 
 your traveling from here to Boston ? [Objected to as leading.] 
 
 Q. How was it, Mr. Cheney ? "Will you state with regard to your 
 constancy, or otherwise, upon the road when you went as a messenger? 
 
 A. Do you mean to ask me whether I was every day on my busi 
 ness? 
 
 Q. Yes. 
 
 A. I do not suppose I lost two weeks in a year, in any year that I 
 ran. 
 
 Q. At the time you roomed with Mr Clough, or at any other time, 
 did you have any conversation with him in regard to his means. 
 
 A. My recollection is that he gave me to understand 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I object to what he "gave you to understand." If 
 the witness will state the conversation, I will not object to it. 
 
 The Chairman. The rule is that the witness shall state what Mr. 
 Clough said, if he can remember it ; but if he cannot remember the 
 words, he can state the substance of what he said. 
 
 The Witness. It would be impossible for me to state the conversations 
 that 1 had with him at various times ; but having been in the same 
 business myself, and being friendly with Mr. Clough, I felt a little in 
 terest in knowing how he had succeeded in the two or three years that 
 I had not seen him. I heard that he had bought on the Mammoth road 
 of Mr. Dudley, and I had some conversations with him about it. I rec 
 ollect distinctly of having a conversation to draw him out, and know 
 what he had done ; and he then gave me to understand 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I object to his stating what he was given to under 
 stand. 
 
 The Chairman. I am not able to appreciate the difference between 
 the substance of what he said, and what he gave him to understand. 
 The witness can state the substance of what he 1 said to him. 
 
 The Witness. My recollection is that he gave me to understand 
 
 The Chairman. The counsel don t want you to iise the words that 
 " he gave me to understand," but they want you to state the substance 
 of the information that he gave. 
 
 The Witness. The substance was that he had made some $4000 or 
 $5000 out of the stage operations. 
 
 The Chairman. When was it that you got that information from him ? 
 
 A, That was during the time that we roomed together, in the month 
 of July, or August, or September, 1842, when the cars first ran from 
 Manchester to Boston. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Do you mean to state that Mr. Clough did 
 not take down any produce, poultry, meat, berries, or the like of that, 
 upon the passenger trains, the first fifteen years that he ran upon the 
 road ? ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; I would not state that. 
 
 Q. You do not know the extent of his operations upon the freight 
 trains in that line, do you ? 
 
494 
 
 A. No. sir. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. George.) You merely mean to state that you do not 
 know anything about it? 
 
 A. 1 mean to say that he could not have done an express business 
 id 1 not know anything about it. 
 
 and 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEORGE CLOUGH CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.) I see that you were taxed in 1859 for cows 
 and oxen, and things of that kind, over eighteen months old. I want 
 to know where they were. Were they down on your farm ? 
 
 A. I think so. A portion of them were there, and a portion of them 
 were where 1 lived. 
 
 Q. You had a stock of cattle on the farm that you run ? 
 
 A. I had some stock there. I do not recollect how many. 
 
 Q. That is the farm that you swapped for the railroad stock with 
 Captain Walker ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The next year, 1860, there was $3766 of stock appraised; that 
 was down on the same farm, was it not ? 
 
 A. I presume a portion of it was. I had some cows at my home, at 
 Railroad square, where I then lived. 
 
 Q. You ran that farm down there in 1859, 1860 and 1861 ? 
 
 A. I put it away, I think, in the spring of 1861 ? 
 
 Q. You were taxed for it in the spring of 1861, were you not ? 
 
 A. 1 do not remember about that. 
 
 Q. You do not remember how that was? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You had no stock of cattle anywhere else that you were taxed in 
 Concord for, had you ? 
 
 A. None, unless I had it at my house where I lived, at Railroad 
 square. 
 
 Q. You did have a stock of cattle down there ? 
 
 A. I think I had some cattle there. 
 
 Q. You say that this book (the specification of the building con- 
 tract with Mr. Mason) is not signed at all? 
 
 A. It is a copy of the original ; it is not signed ; I had it copied. 
 
 Q. Who built that building ? 
 
 A. W. Mason. 
 
 Q, Were there any extra bills on it. 
 
 A. I do not know that there was. 
 
 Q. Who finished off the Masonic Hall ? Did the Masons do that, 
 or was it included in the contract ? 
 
 A. I think the Masons did that themselves. 
 
 Q. How much rent do the Masons pay you ? 
 
 A. I think they pay $400 per year. 
 
 Q. Didn t the Masons finish off the hall and take the money out of 
 the rent? 
 
 A. I do not recollect how that was. 
 
 Q. Can t you tell whether or not the Masons finished off that entire 
 suit of rooms in their own way ? 
 
 A. I do not remember now. Mr. Corning did the whole business, 
 and I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. How many stores are there in the Masonic Temple ? 
 
A, There are three stores : oae on Main street, one corner store, and 
 another one besides. 
 
 Q. Who occupy the stores ? 
 
 A. Mr. Shattuck occupies one, Hoyt another, and Mr. Bond the 
 other. 
 
 Q. What rent did you receive from them in 1861 ? 
 
 A. I do not remember. 
 
 Q. What rent did you receive in 1865 ? 
 
 A. 1 cannot tell. 1 can get it from the books. 
 
 Q. What yearly rent does Mr. Shattuck pay you for the use of the 
 store occupied by him ? 
 
 A. Three hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. What was the rent five years ago? 
 
 A. It was $300 dollars then. 
 
 Q. Who occupies the next store ? 
 
 A. Mr. Hoyt, He pays $600, and Mr. Bond pays $400. Mrs, 
 Jones, milliner, pays $300. Mr. Morgan pays $500. 
 
 Q. How is it with the other two stores on the other block ? Ho-w 
 many of those are occupied ? 
 
 A. Mr, Erown occupies one now. 
 
 Q. For an undertaker s shop ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What does he pay ? 
 
 A. Three hundred. Mr, Cochran pays $300 ; and the other store is 
 rented for $300, but the man has not come to take it yet ; he pays re&t 
 however from the first of December. 
 
 Q. How long has that been unoccupied ? 
 
 A. For a short time, since the last tenant moved out. I think the 
 rent was paid there until fall. 
 
 Q. How long has it been unoccupied ? 
 
 A. OnJy for a short time. * 
 
 Q. For four or five months ? 
 
 A. No, sir ; not more than three months, I think. 
 
 The Chairman. I wish to call the attention of the counsel to the 
 suggestion made the other day, that we shall expect a note of the ex^ 
 ceptions on both sides ; and shall understand, as 1 said before, that the 
 exceptions to which our attention is not now called, are not insisted; 
 upon. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF JAMES H. EASTMAN. 
 
 Q. (By Mr, Mugridge.} How long have you lived in Concord? 
 
 A. About twenty years. 
 
 Q. How long have you known George Clough ? 
 
 A. I have known him, I think, for as many as eighteen years. 
 
 Q. Where was Mr. Clough living when you first knew him ? 
 
 A. He lived down in South street, in Concord. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you whether at any time you worked for Mr. Clongfe, 
 and if so, when and for how long a time. 
 
 A. I worked for him fourteen years ago this winter. That would be 
 in 1854. 
 
 Q. What time in 1854 did you go there? 
 
 A. In the fall, 
 
 Q. For how long a time were you in his employ ? 
 
 A. I was there with him. off and on, for three years. 
 
496 
 
 Q. How was it about Mr. dough s keeping any cows while you 
 .worked for him ? How many did he keep ? 
 
 A. The winter that I went there he kept from three to four cows, 
 .sometimes more and sometimes less. 
 
 Q. During the time that you were there off and on, for three years 
 ;as you have stated, how many have you known him to have at one time ? 
 
 A. 1 have known him to have six. 
 
 Q. Who milked those cows while you were there ? 
 
 A. I milked them. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Clough do with the milk of those cows ? 
 
 A. He sold it to milk customers which he had. 
 
 Q. Who carried the milk out, and distributed it among his custom 
 ers ? 
 
 A. I carried it when 1 was there. 
 
 Q. Are you able to state the number of customers that Clough had 
 during the three years that you were there ? 
 
 A. I do not know as I could. 
 
 Q. If you cannot state the number, name as many of them as you 
 san think off? 
 
 A. There was Mrs. Neil. 
 
 Q. Is she the mother of David Neil? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; and a man that lived in the house with her by the 
 name of Kindalls ; and Tim Flanners. 
 
 Q. Did he keep a boarding house ? 
 
 A, Yes. 
 
 Q. How many quarts of milk did he take ? 
 
 A. I think he used to take from four to six. Deacon Flanners, a 
 brother of Tim, also took milk ; and a man by the name of Babb. 
 
 Q. Are you able to give any sort of idea as to the number of cus 
 tomers that he had during the time you were there ? 
 
 A. As near as I can tell, there were somewheres between ten and 
 twelve. t 
 
 Q. Where were these cows kept ? Where did you milk them ? 
 
 A. They were kept there at his house, on Railroad square. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough was living in Railroad square at the time you were 
 working for him ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. I have inquired about the cows while you were there. Let me 
 ask you if you were familiar with Mr. Clough s premises before you 
 went there, from 1850 to 185-i? Were you about the premises? 
 
 A. Occasionally I was. 
 
 Q. For how long a time prior to the time that you went there, had 
 you known Mr. Clough s premises, by being there occasionally? 
 
 A. Ever since he built his house there ; and I was there before it 
 was built. 
 
 Q. Will you please state how it was with regard to his keeping cows 
 before you went to live with him ? 
 
 A. I should say that he did, as nigh as I could recollect. 
 
 Q, How many ? 
 
 A. I could not tell you that. 
 
 Q. State whether you were familiar with his premises after you left 
 his employ, after the expiation of the three years ? 
 
 A. Yes. } 
 
 Q. For how long a time did you know of his premises and what he 
 Jtept about them, after you left ? 
 
497 
 
 A. Until he moved up to where he now lives. 
 
 Q. Tell how it was about his keeping cows after you left him. and 
 up to the time that he went on to Warren street. 
 
 A. As nigh as I could recollect I should say that he kept from per 
 haps one to three along. I could not tell. 
 
 Q. You say that you worked for Mr. Clough three years in the way 
 that you have stated, off and on, and that you milked the cows and car 
 ried the milk out ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you how Mr. Clough paid you for the services you 
 rendered ? 
 
 A. He had a driving horse and a working horse, and 1 worked the 
 iorses around the streets here and done job work, and got my pay in 
 that way for the labor that I done. 
 
 Q. Y^ou received your compensation in what you got in doing job 
 work with his horses, for taking care of his cows in this way. 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Do you know anything about Mr. dough s 
 running this farm down on eleven lots ? 
 
 A. He had a farm there. 
 
 Q. Had he a farm there at the time you are speaking of, when you 
 lived with him ? ^ 
 
 A. Yes. V 
 
 Q. Who did he have to carry on that farm for him ? 
 
 A. I carried it on sometimes, and Mr. Elliot s man, and a man by 
 the name of O Connor did sometimes. 
 
 Q. Did anybody live in the house, as you remember ? 
 
 Q. There was nobody in it at the first of my going there. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough built a new set of buildings on that farm, didn t he? 
 
 A. Yes, but it was after I got away from there. 
 
 Q. He built a new barn and a new house, or made a barn into a 
 house, didn t he? 
 
 A. There was a barn there, and he made that into a house, and then 
 built a barn ? 
 
 Q. A nice set of buildings ? 
 
 A. It was a nice barn, 
 
 Q. A very nice barn? 
 
 A. A very good barn. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea what that set of buildings cost ? 
 
 A. I have not. 
 
 Q, Y ou are not familiar with such things ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you remember in what year he built it? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether he had a large stock of cattle there for two 
 or three years, twenty or thirty head of cattle, more or less. 
 
 A. I think he had some there, but I could not say how many. 
 
 Q. He run the farm, did he not, and all the operations connected 
 with it? He did not let it out? 
 
 A. He had a man that lived there 
 
 Q. A man that carried it on for him ? 
 
 A. I do not know how that was. whether he let it to him or not. 
 
 Q. You do not know anything about the profit or lo-^s on the opera 
 tions? 
 
 A. No, sir; I do not. & 
 
498 
 
 TESTIMONY OF EOSWELL SILVER. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolf e.} Where do you live ? 
 
 A. In Thorndike street. 
 
 Q, Where did you live in 1849 ? 
 
 A. I think 1 lived on West street. 
 
 Q. In 1859 where did you live ? 
 
 A- I lived on State street for a while. 
 
 Q. Where did you move to then? 
 
 A. I then went on to what is called the Gait lot, near Railroad 
 Bquare. 
 
 Q. State whether you had business with Mr. Ciough ? 
 
 A. I did have some. 
 
 Q. Commencing when ? 
 
 A. It commenced about in 1849, I think. I lived then on West 
 street. 
 
 Q. You had a horse of Mr. Ciough. called the Silver horse, or " Old 
 Bill " ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When did you have him ? 
 
 A. I had him at the time 1 lived on W T est street. 
 
 Q. Where was he kept? 
 
 A. He was kept at Mr. Clough s stable. 
 
 Q. Did you run him from Mr. Clough s stable ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. For how long a time ? 
 
 A. About a year and a half. 
 
 Q, What doing ? 
 
 A. Jobbing. 
 
 Q. Do you know about the stock that Mr, Ciough kept at that time ? 
 
 A. He kept some cows and some horses. 
 
 Q. How many ? 
 
 A. Sometimes three and sometimes four cows. 
 
 Q. For how long a time do you know about Mr. Clough s keeping 
 cows? 
 
 A. I think he has kept cows all the time from that time up to this, 
 more or less. 
 
 Q. Previous to his going up to where he now lives, I mean ? 
 
 A. He kept cows there at Railroad square. 
 
 Q. To what extent during the time he was therejat Railroad square ? 
 
 A. 1 think he had from three to four cows, 
 
 Q. Where did he pasture them ? 
 
 A. Down in the oaks, near the South end. 
 
 Q. On the land that belongs to the Concord Railroad ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you ever take care of his cattle and cows? 
 
 A. Only occasionally, when there was nobody else around. 
 
 Q. W 7 hat kind of cows did he keep.- as to quality ? 
 
 A. He had some pretty good cows. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} How many cows does Mr. Ciough keep now? 
 
 A. I guess he don t keep any. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether he does or not ? 
 
 A. I could not say positively. 
 
 Q. Do you know how many he kept last year? 
 
490 
 
 A. He kept one, I believe. 
 
 Q. Do you know ? 
 
 A. 1 know that he had one a part of the year. 
 
 Q, How many did he keep the year before last ? 
 
 A. I could not say that he kept any ? 
 
 Q, Can you say whether he did or not ? 
 
 A. I could not. 
 
 Q. How many did he keep the year before that ? 
 
 A. 1 am not able to say. 
 
 Q. How many did he keep in the year I860? 
 
 A. He had as many as three, 1 think. 
 
 Q. Do you know ? 
 
 A. That is my best recollection about it. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect anything about it ? 
 
 A. I recollect that he had some cows. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect that he had some cows in I860 ? 
 
 A. I guess so. 
 
 Q. Do you know in what year he moved into his house on Warren 
 street ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Was 1860 before or after? 
 
 A. I could not say when he did move up. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea whether or not he was there in 1860 ? 
 
 A. I think he did not live up there in 1860. 
 
 Q. Do you remember whether he went there in 1860, 1861 or 1862? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF PETER DUDLEY CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Rolfe.} During the time that Mr. Clough was driving 
 stage from Lowell to Concord over the Mammoth road, did you drive on 
 the opposite days ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. For how long a time after he went on to the Concord road ? 
 
 A. I drove until the cars commenced running. 
 
 Q. Whose days were the best ? Do you know ? 
 
 A. I considered Mr. Clough s days the best. 
 
 Q. You met him every day, did you not ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. State whether you had an opportunity of judging of the amount 
 of travel, and of the number of passengers he carried ? 
 
 A. I do not know as I had any means of knowing that in any other 
 way than we passed, as anybody would, when we met on the road. He- 
 was pretty generally filled up. As a general thing he was heavily loaded. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect what the fare was from Lowell to Manchester ? 
 
 A. One dollar and fifty cents. 
 
 Q. And what was it from Manchester here ? 
 
 A. Sometimes we charged $1.25 and sometimes $1.50. 
 
 Q. What was the fare through ? 
 
 A. Two dollars. 
 
 Q. During the time that you ran, did you run an extra on the days 
 that you drove ? 
 
 A. I do not remember about that, I presume that I did run an ex 
 tra, but do not recollect very clearly about that. 
 
500 
 
 Q. .Did Mr. Clough run an extra during the last year ? 
 
 A. I should say that he did. 
 
 Q. Do you recollect, during the first year that Mr. Clough ran, how 
 much you made net ? 
 
 A. No, sir. I do not know what he made, nor can I say what I 
 made. I know that the days that 1 run, after I sold to Mr. Clough, 
 were not so good as they were before. That, all the stage folks will tell 
 you. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF G. G. SANBORN CONTINUED. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) Who ran upon the corresponding trains, 
 after Mr. Clough left the road, to those that he ran on while upon the 
 road V 
 
 A. 1 think Mr. Gale took it first for a short time, and it was finally 
 put into the hands of Mr. LeBosquet. 
 
 Q. Has Mr. LeBosquet since died? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who has run his train since that time ? 
 
 A. Mr. Alexander. 
 
 Q Have you here the returns made by the conductors that have run 
 Mr. dough s trains to the general ticket office since he left the road? 
 
 A. I have. [Witness produced returns.] 
 
 TESTIMONY OF HENRY P. ROLFE. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.) How long have you known Mr. George 
 Clough ? 
 
 A. Since the fall of 1848. 
 
 Q. Where was he living at the time you formed his acquaintance ? 
 
 A. 1 do not know where he did live. The first time that I knew 
 where his residence was. he was living on Railroad square. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to state to the referees whether you had 
 anything to do with regard to negotiating the price,, or whether you had 
 anything to do with the transaction connected with the purchase of the 
 C?ooper house? If so, state to the referees what you knew or did., in 
 connection with that transaction. 
 
 A. I did a part of the business, and was knowing to all of it. I 
 acted as a sort of "go between," between Mr. Clough, and Mr. Corn- 
 iag, and Mr. Cooper, and Mrs. Clough. 
 
 Q. What was the price paid by Mr. Clough for all that he had in that 
 purchase ? If you do not know from your personal knowledge, you 
 aaeed not state it. . What was the price, including the real estate and 
 the personal property ? 
 
 A. I know about it, because I paid the $2000 that was paid down, 
 and I think that 1 wrote the note for the balance, in the State Capitol 
 Bank. I was present when the matter was arranged between Mr. Corn 
 ing and Mr. Cooper, and Mr. Chandler. 
 
 Q. State what the price was, including the real and the personal 
 property ? 
 
 A. It was $8000. 
 
 Q, Be kind enough to state whether the consideration in the deed 
 was fixed at another price than the $8000 that was paid ; arid if so, at 
 whose suggestion was it done ? 
 
 Q. My recollection in that particular is a little different from Mr. 
 Cooper s. Mr. Corning desired the price to be put at $12,OuO; and 
 
501 
 
 Mr. Cooper also desired it. Mr. Cooper claimed that the property costs 
 him a great deal more than that, and that it was worth $12,000 and 
 should be sold for that, but that as Mr. Clough must necessarily lose 
 something from having signed his notes, he wanted this property to go 
 into Mr. Clough s hands at $8000 or so, in order that Mr. Clough might 
 not be the loser by the transaction. That is my recollection about it. 
 
 Q. And upon consideration the deed was fixed in that way? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You say that you paid the $2000 that passed through your hands. 
 What was the amount of the note that you wrote ? 
 
 A. Six thousand dollars. 
 
 Q. And this $6000 note, and the $2000 cash payment, made the 
 amount that was paid for the property ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you have anything to do with the purchase of the Jamaica 
 Plains property ? If so, state in your own way, your connection with 
 the transaction, and what you know about it. 
 
 A. I did nearly the entire business in relation to obtaining the title 
 to that property. I went to Boston with Mr. Joseph Palmer, and was 
 present when the first mortgage was executed, which was made to secure 
 the debt. I afterwards went three times to Worcester to negotiate with 
 Amos Binney ; and I went to Boston two or three times to negotiate 
 with Amos Binney Merrill, who was, I think, a relation. The Amos 
 Binney who lived at Worcester, was a Methodist Presiding Elder. At 
 the time the mortgage was executed to secure Mr. Clough, the property 
 was under an attachment, and Mr. Palmer took me into an ofiice where 
 there was a lawyer by the name of Parker, I think, to have him explain 
 to me that the attachment was not good for anything ; which Mr. Par 
 ker tried to do ; but I failed to see it ; and at Mr. Clough s request I 
 then immediately commenced to negotiate with Mr. Binney, who was the 
 attaching creditor. 
 
 Q. State the result of that negotiation ? 
 
 A. I issued an attachment, and procured the property to be set off. 
 The mortgage did not include all the lots, and I think I procured the 
 whole of the property to be set off on his execution. I made an agree 
 ment with Mr. Merrill and with Mr. Binney (whom I afterwards met in 
 Boston,) that they should assign the execution to Mr. Clough at a cer 
 tain time, and that they should retain the property in Mr. Binney s 
 hands until the equity of redemption should expire, so that we should 
 have a complete title in that direction ; and in order to have no legal 
 controversy about the matter Mr. Binney discounted, on his execution, 
 for the cash, a note ; so that what was paid, in addition to the Palmer 
 note, amounted to between $1700 and $1800. 
 
 Q. You mean to say that the Jamaica Plains property cost Mr. 
 Clough between $1700 and $1800 ? 
 
 A. Y r es ; then after that, Mr. Clough and myself went to New York 
 to obtain a release from Mr Palmer and his wife ; which we obtained ; 
 and Mr. Clough there gave Mr. Palmer $100; so that the whole prop 
 erty cost Mr. Clough at that time, a very few dollars over $1800. 
 
 Q. The title that he got to the property cost him that ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And his title was a perfect title ? 
 
 A. Y T es, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you attend, as counsel for Mr. Clough in the taking of the 
 deposition of Martin D. Starkey? 
 
502 
 
 A. I think I did. I attended the taking of a part of it. 
 
 Q. State whether, since that deposition was given, you have had an 
 interview with Mr. Starkey, and if so, what he said to you at the time, 
 and where you saw him ? And give a detailed account of the inter 
 view in your own way. 
 
 A. Some time after the referees had been in session, and the tickets 
 had been produced, on which were found several dates after Mr. Clough 
 left the road (1 mean the Whitcher tickets), I went to Westmoreland, 
 N. H., to see if I could find Mr. Starkey. I had understood that that 
 was his place of nativity. 1 ascertained there that there was a man by 
 the name of White living at Hinsdale, Mass., who was related to Mr. 
 Starkey by marriage ; arid I went from there to Hinsdale and found 
 Mr. White, and he informed me that Mr. Starkey was in the ticket 
 office, as night ticket agent, at Port Jarvis, on the New York and Erie 
 Railroak. I took the cars from there and went to Port Jarvis, where 1 
 found Mr. Starkey. I reached there Saturday evening, and on Sunday 
 morning, having ascertained where Mr. Starkey lived, I went to his 
 house. His wife came to the door, and as soon as he heard my voice 
 (he was in an adjoining room,) he stepped to the door and called me 
 by name ; and wanted to know if I had " come to take him on to New 
 Hampshire." After shaking hands and passing the compliments of the 
 day. I said " No. " He then wanted to know what I did want of him. 
 I told him "nothing that would do him any injury." I then stated to 
 him the dates of the tickets that were said to have been found upon the 
 person of James Whitcher ; and I. said to him that from what James 
 Whitcher had told me, I inferred that he (Starkey) could tell me all 
 about the Whitcher tickets. At the time he first stepped into the room, 
 he was looking very flushed, and immediately he turned pale, and said 
 to me, " I shall have to sit down ; you frightened me very much ; and 
 when I get over my fright, I will tell you all about it." He then said, 
 " Mr. Eolfe, I have suffered a great deal. I have had my leg cut off 
 by the cars. Put your hand on my shoulder; my shoulder-bone has 
 been broken all to pieces ; three of my ribs were broken, and I was 
 rolled over and over on the track ; and I Wave suffered so much that 
 trouble greatly affects me. Mr. Clough was always kind to me ; and I 
 thought, while I was lying sick and suffering, that I had done him a 
 great deal of wrong by a deposition that I had given in Concord." I 
 asked him if he would be willing to give his deposition again. He said 
 that he did not want to. I inquired "why not?" He said, " If I 
 should state differently from what I stated in my deposition, they would 
 shut me up, would they not ? " I asked him what he meant by that ? 
 And he said, "They would put me in the state prison." I told him 
 that they might, but I .didn t think that they would. He said that he 
 was not yet quite dressed ; and I asked him if he would come down to 
 the hotel and see me, and he said that he would, and that he would be 
 there in a few moments. I went back to the hotel, and he soon came 
 down ; and I then told him what Whitcher had told me. 
 
 Q. State what the communication was that you made to him. What 
 did you tell him ? 
 
 Mr. George. I object. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge, It is a part of the conversation. W T e propose to put 
 in the entire conversation between Mr. Starkey and Mr. Eolfe. 
 
 Mr. George. W r hat he proposes to state is incompetent. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. The conversation that has been already given is en 
 tirely immaterial. 
 
503 
 
 The Chairman. It does not seem as if there could be any controversy 
 about the proper way to examine this witness in this manner. I under 
 stand that the testimony is put in for the purpose of contradicting Mr. 
 Starkey. Of course, nothing can be admissible except what tends to 
 .contradict Mr. Starkey ; and this conversation can only be admissible 
 as being in point of fact a part of what Mr. Starkey said. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We do not offer it to prove the fact of what Mr. 
 Whicher said to Mr. Rolfe. 
 
 The Chairman. It does not prove Mr. Whitcher s statement ; and it 
 <can only be put in by Mr. Starkey s speaking in reference to it, and to 
 what Starkey said contradictory to his deposition. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} Proceed and state what you said to Starkey 
 that Whicher said to you ? 
 
 A. I told Starkey that Whitcher said to n:e that he had most of the 
 tickets that were found on his person, at Manchester, of him that is, 
 of Starkey. I said " of you." I asked him how that was. He said ; 
 -"I stated in my deposition, that 1 let Whitcher have tickets once, but," 
 .said he, "I do not recollect the number that 1 said I let him have, but 
 I did let him have tickets two or three times ; I cannot tell the number." 
 Said I, " Whitcher says that you claim that you let him have $150 worth 
 of tickets." He said, " I do not remember of claiming any such 
 thing." I asked him what tickets he let him have ; and he said : " 1 
 let him have tickets over the Concord road, and coupons from over the 
 Boston, Concord & Montreal road, and over the Northern road, and over . 
 the Concord & Claremont, and the Manchester & North Weare, and the 
 roads below." I asked him if he let him have any Boston tickets or 
 any tickets that were good to Boston. He said " No." I told him that 
 there were several found, and he said that Whitcher must have got them 
 of him when he was not noticing it, or he must have got them 
 of somebody else, for he didn t let him have any ; " for " said he, " the 
 Boston tickets were counted out to me, and I have no recollection of my 
 count not coming out right." I asked him if he ever let Whitcher have 
 any tickets before he went on as conductor ; he said that he had, a 
 good many. I asked him then 
 
 The Chairman. What part of Mr. Starkey s deposition does the evi 
 dence that is now going on, contradict ? 
 
 Mr. Tappan. The part in relation to his having the tickets of Mr. 
 dough. His statement to Mr. Rolfe contradicts the statement in his 
 deposition relative to the number of tickets that Starkey says that he 
 had of Mr. Clough. 
 
 Mr. George. I do not think that it does. 
 
 The Chairman, I believe that in his deposition he says that Mr. 
 Clough let him have twelve or fifteen tickets. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. I will read from Starkey s deposition. Interrogatory 
 7th and its answer: 
 
 " Int. 7. State whether or not. during the time you were acting as 
 conductor, you received or disposed of any tickets. If so, state from 
 whom you received them, and to whom you disposed of them, giving all 
 ithe circumstances in detail. ANS. I did dispose of some tickets. I 
 did not receive any. I gave some to Jim Whitcher ; I think there was 
 a dozen or fifteen, or in that vicinity. They were coupon tickets be 
 tween Manchester and Concord, and Concord and Manchester perhaps. 
 It was somewhere about the seventh of February. He asked me for 
 ihem. 
 
504 
 
 The Chairman. It sceins to me that the established practice in suck 
 cases as this would require that there must be some particular thing in 
 the deposition indicated, that this conversation runs contrary to. 1 do 
 not think it is necessary that the whole conversation should be stated ; 
 but only that part which is contradictory of some particular thing in 
 the deposition, 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The particular point we want to contradict is the 
 fact that he states in his deposition that he only let Whicher have tick 
 ets once, and then some ten or twelve tickets ; and we also propose to 
 contradict his statement that he got tickets of Mr. Clough. 
 
 The Chairman. Any testimony as to that is admissible. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Mugridge.} State what he said in relation to the tick 
 ets ? 
 
 A. He said that he had let Whitcher have tickets a good many times. 
 
 Mr. George. That has not been ruled in. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. He denies in his deposition that he let him have them 
 more than once. 
 
 Mr. George. The deposition speaks for itself. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Jn another answer from that which has been read, he 
 says that he let Whitcher have tickets but once. 
 
 (J. Go ahead, and state in regard to the tickets. 
 
 A. 1 asked him if he had tickets of Mr. Clough. 
 
 Mr. George. He swears in his deposition that he did not receive 
 them of him. 
 
 Mr. Mugridgs. He swears in his deposition that he did have them. 
 
 Mr. George. The only time that he swears in regard to giving tick 
 ets to Jim Whitcher, is in reply to the 7th interrogatory, which has 
 been read. He then goes on and swears expressly that he took his tick 
 ets and was punching them at the rear end ot the car, and Whicher 
 came along, and he let him have some tickets. Then he swears that he 
 said that he had received tickets from Clough and from all the other 
 conductors ; and Mr. Clough swears to the same thing. That statement 
 was in reference to these tickets that he gave to Jim Whicher, because 
 he goes in and tells what he did with them. With the leave of the 
 referees we would like to read the whole deposition. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We object to its being read. 
 
 The Chairman. In that deposition he states that he had a certain 
 uurnber of tickets, or tickets, from Mr. Clough. Can there be any im 
 propriety in contradicting that ? 
 
 Mr. George. Not if they contradict that. 
 
 Mr. Tappan. The whole purpose of the deposition was to show that 
 these Whitcher tickets came from Mr. Clough. That has been the object 
 all the way through ; that was the object of Starkey s deposition ; and 
 it is that statement in his deposition that we now wish to contradict. 
 
 Mr. George. I suppose that you must first point out the statement 
 of Mr. Starkey that you propose to contradict. 
 
 The Chairman. He says in his deposition, " I received tickets from 
 George Clough." I suppose Mr. Rolfe s testimony is directed against 
 that statement. If he has anything that bears against that he can 
 state it. 
 
 Witness. He said that for about a year and a half before he left the 
 road, Mr. Clough did not let him have any tickets. Then 1 said : "You 
 let White, and Gilnian, and others have tickets ; where did you get 
 them ? Did you get them of the other conductors ? " He said no ; he 
 
505 
 
 did not; that he asked Mr. Clough for tickets, and when he had given* 
 him one or two, he asked him for others, and Mr. Clough refused to give 
 them to him, and v told him that If he had anybody that he wanted tc< 
 pass, to let them get into the cars. He said that he had been in the 
 habit, when the cars left Nashua, of helping the conductors take tickets 
 m the cars. And when he took up any considerable number he said that he 
 saved out one or two; and in that way, he said, he had any quantity o 
 tickets ; and he let Jim Whitcher have them, and let others have them. 
 L asked him how he managed to get tickets over the entire length of 
 the road, from Nashua up to Concord. 
 
 Mr. George. Is this competent evidence V 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. It relates, as we say, to these same tickets that he 
 let VVhicher have. 
 
 The Chairman. His letting Whitcher have them is of no consequence, 
 The question is, how it is connected with Mr. Clough. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge, He says that Mr. Clough did not let him have any. 
 tickets for a year and a half before he left the road ; while he states,- 
 in reply to the 7th interrogatory, that he let him have twelve or fifteen 
 tickets, 
 
 The Chairman. Was that read in (he case ? 
 
 Mr. Tappan. I think so. The latter part was ruled out, but 1 think 
 the first part was ruled in. 
 
 The Chairman. My recollection about the matter is that the defence 
 very strenuously, and the referees very properly insisted that no part of 
 that deposition should go in which was not connected with Mr. Clough. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. If there is any testimony in your mind that applies 
 to the testimony of Starkey, as you recollect it, you may state it. 
 
 A. 1 have stated about all. There is nothing more than the man 
 ner in which he got his tickets over the whole length of the road. 
 
 Q. After having this interview with Mr. Starkey, you came home ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If you know anything in regard to George Clough keeping cows 
 at any time since he has lived in Concord, state what you know about it. 
 
 A. He has kept cows more or less, but I know more particularly 
 from Ls54 to 1858 or 1859. In 1854, he had one cow that I recol 
 lect a large red cow. He bought another at Hopkinton a very nice 
 white-faced cow. He bought another of Wyatt a white cow ; and I 
 had a very nice cow that had twin calves, and he bought that cow of 
 me. He rode up with me to Bellows when the cow calved, and on the 
 way back he bought? the cow and calves of me, and they were drivers 
 down here. At that time I recollect of his having these four COVPS. 
 The white cow he sold that fall to a man by the name of Mooney, and 
 .the cow that he had of me he also afterwards sold to Mr. Mooney. Mr,. 
 Mooney asked me about her, and 1 saw the cow when he was leading 
 her through the village to take her away. In 1859 I bought a cow of 
 him, and he had several others left after I picked this out. That is all 
 I recollect about his cows. 
 
 Q. Do you know of his selling milk at any time between 1854 and 
 1859? 
 
 A. Only from what I have heard. 
 
 Q. (By the Chairman.} How many cows had he when you> bought 
 one ? 
 
 A. Three or four. 
 
506 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} How many visits have you made to Mr. 
 "Whitcher and Mr Starkey since these suits were commenced ? 
 
 A. I have made one to Mr. Whitcher and one to Mr. Starkey ? 
 
 Q. Did you get Starkey to sign any sort of writing ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you got that ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q, How long did it take you to get him to sign that writing ? 
 
 A. Not long. 
 
 Q. How long ? 
 
 A. He signed it very soon. 
 
 Q. Will you let me see it ? 
 
 Mr. Mngridge If the gentleman desires to put it in evidence, he is 
 -entitled to it ; if not, he is not. 
 
 The Chairman. If there is no objection made we cannot rule upon it. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. We object to his seeing it unless he wishes to put it 
 in. 
 
 Mr. George. Will you let me see it ? 
 
 Witness. I have no objection to your seeing it, but if Mr. Mugridge 
 and Mr. Tappan think I had better not let you see it, 1 will not. 
 
 Mr. Stanley. I submit that we have a right to see it. Mr. Starkey 
 has sworn to a written statement, and we have a right to see if his writ 
 ten statement compares with his oral statement. 
 
 The Chairman. You will let the referees see it, if they wish ? 
 
 Witness, Certainly. 
 
 Q, (By Mr. George.} You are liable to misunderstandings as well as 
 other people, are you not? 
 
 A. I presume I am. 
 
 Q. You signed a certificate that you had no interest in, or connec 
 tion with Mr Clough s insurance ? 
 
 A. I did. 
 
 Q. Was that true ? 
 
 A, 1 do not know that I had. 
 
 Q. Were you not an agent, and did you not make a charge for ser- 
 vices in that case, and receive pay ? 
 
 A. I do not that I did. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether you did or not ? 
 
 A. I cannot tell ; I will look at my books and see. 
 
 Q. How many justices of the peace, to your certain knowledge, 
 lived nearer Mr. Clough than yourself? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Is this an important matter to inquire into ? Mr. 
 Kolfe certified upon an application made for payment of loss in accord 
 ance with certain rules of the Insurance Company, that he was the jus 
 tice living most contiguous to the fire. Mr. George now proposes to in 
 quire of Mr Kolfe whether he was the justice living nearest to the fire. 
 I would like to know the competency of the evidence. 
 
 Mr. George. The paper is a paper in this case ; it is signed by Mr. 
 Rolfe, and sets forth certain facts. Upon the cross examination of Mr. 
 Eolfe, I certainly have a right to ask him whether he knew, at the 
 -time he signed the certificate, that the certificate was erroneous ? 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. The paper was introduced by Mr. George, who now 
 ^proposes to contradict his own evidence in the case, or in other words, 
 
507 
 
 to show that the testimony he has introduced is incorrect, and to as 
 sault it in some way by Mr. Kolfe. I object to the inquiry in that view. 
 
 The Chairman. What strikes us about it is this : That the paper 
 was introduced here as a paper which had been made out as it was said 
 partly through the agency of Mr. Clough for the purpose of showing 
 that he made a claim to a certain amount of damages on account of his 
 loss by the fire ; and for the purposes of this hearing I. do not know 
 whether it is of any consequence whether it was proved or not. The 
 cross examination is entirely irrelevant to anything that Mr, Rolfe has 
 testified to ; it does not tend to test his recollection at all, and as we 
 think, is entirely irrelevant to anything in the case. 
 
 Mr. George. My point is this ; That it is very fair to presume that 
 Mr. Rolfe s recollection cannot be very accurate if he would certify that 
 he was the nearest justice of the peace, when there were two others 
 that lived within two rods. 
 
 The Chairman. The referees are of the opinion that it is not a le 
 gitimate way of testing the recollection of the witness to examine him 
 about totally irrelevant matters. Perhaps Mr. Eolfe had a different un 
 derstanding from that of the insurance company, as to the meaning of 
 the word "contiguous." The term contiguous, I suppose, could hardly 
 mean anything else than that the property occupied by him was adjoin 
 ing the property insured. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did ever you state to Mr. Stanley in sub 
 stance, that as long as Mr. Gilmore lived, was uneasy, or trouble, and 
 that when he died 
 
 By Mr. Mugridge. Is that material ? Suppose I make a statement 
 to Mr. Kolfe or to Col. Tappan ; does that statement affect Mr. Clough, 
 or bind him in any way ? 
 
 Mr. George. Mr. Eolfe occupies the position of counsel here ; he is 
 now a witness ; I understand that he has made such a statement ; if he 
 has not, I would like to have Mr. Rolfe deny it under oath. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. You shall have that privilege then ; we will with 
 draw our objection. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Did you ever have any conversation of that 
 character with Mr. Stanley, or in his presence ? Was your statement 
 to Mr. Stanley this : that while Mr. Gilmore lived, Mr. Clough was in a 
 good deal of trouble, for he did not know what he would swear to, but 
 that after he was dead, he felt better ? 
 
 A. No; I never said anything of that kind to Mr. Stanley in my 
 life. 
 
 Q. Nor in his presence ? 
 
 A. Nor in his presence. I may have said to Mr. Stanley that Mr. 
 Gilmore was the most depraved man I ever knew, and that he would 
 swear to anything ; but I never said that Mr. Clough was in trouble 
 about it, for I never heard him express any opinion of that kind, one 
 way or another. 
 
 Q. How much has Mr. Clough paid you for the last twenty years ? 
 
 Mr. Mugndge. Is that material ? 
 
 The Chairman. Inquiry has been made as to Mr. Clough s expendi 
 tures in various ways, and I do not know why this is not as relevant as 
 anything else. 
 
 Witness. For actual services, since I have first known Mr. Clough, he 
 has paid me less than $400. 
 
 Q. How much for money paid out for expenses, &c.? How much has 
 he paid you for any purpose or for any reason ? 
 
508. 
 
 A. Up to the time when Kolfe & Marshall dissolved partnershipv 
 in 1859, there was an account upon the books against Mr. Clough, of 
 one hundred and twenty odd dollars. Mr. Marshall desired me on set 
 tlement, to take his part of that in pay, which I did, sixty odd dol 
 lars. That bill Mr. Clough has never paid, dollar nor cent ; and one- 
 third of it was for cash paid out. Some four or five years ago Mr^ 
 Clough asked me to make out my bill against him. I looked the account 
 over as well as I could, and I had less than $400 on my books. When 
 ever 1 have made any disbursements for Mr. Clough, he generally has* 
 paid me the cash for them. That is the way the account stands now. 
 
 Q. (By Judge Bellows.} When were you called upon to make out 
 the account ? 
 
 A. Perhaps three or four years ago. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} Do you mean to say that you have never 
 received, directly or indirectly, any money from Mr, Clough, beyond 
 $400 ? 
 
 A. I have never received, directly or indirectly, for services, more- 
 than $400. I have borrowed money of Mr. Clough in small sums, 
 not large, all of which I have paid him except that I borrowed of him* 
 some two months ago, $50, and since this hearing commenced I have 
 borowed $14 which sums I have not yet paid him. 
 
 Q. You have not received from him directly or indirectly any prop 
 erty, in the shape of presents or otherwise, or anybody else, for you r 
 beyond the $400 ? 
 
 A. I have never received anything in the shape of presents, prop 
 erty or money, in any manner, shape or form, directly or indirectly,, 
 from Mr. Clough, except as I have stated. 
 
 Q. Nor has any member of your family ? 
 
 A. Nor has any member of my family received a dollar or a eecst* 
 
 Q. Has ever any allowance been made to you in trade, or in anything- 
 of that kind? 
 
 A. Not a cent.. I sold him a pair of buckskin horses that I went to 
 Canada and bought, at a direct loss to myself of $107 in cash. 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. 1 believe, Mr. Chairman, that this our case. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF JONATHAN L. PICKERING. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. George.} You are the deputy sheriff who served the 
 writ against Mr. Clough ? 
 
 A. Yes. sir. 
 
 Q. Will you state whether at the time you attached Mr. dough s- 
 property, Mr. Clough had in his possession and you attached the property 
 named in that receipt. [Presenting receipt.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge. Well, now, so far as any attachment is CG<n.cerned, of 
 actual property, 1 do not object : but the idea of putting in that receipt 
 in this way I do not think is competent. 
 
 Mr. Georye. I do not ask about any receipt ; I simply ask whether 
 that property named in that receipt was there and attached by him as^ 
 the property of Mr. Clough. 
 
 The Chairman. It seems to me that, until you in some way or other 
 make the. receipts admissible by some preliminary examination, you can 
 not put it into the case. If Mr. Pickering knows what property he- 
 attached, perhaps he can state that. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Georye.} Mr. Pickering, you may say what property 
 there was that you did attach. 
 
509 
 
 A. The furniture that was named in that receipt that was in the 
 &ouse. I went around through the rooms. There were some horses that- 
 I didn t see. 
 
 Q. That furniture you saw ? 
 
 A. That furniture I saw. 
 
 Q. I want you to state how the receipt was made out ? 
 
 A. I commenced to write the receipt, but Mr. Rolfe said he could 
 write faster than i could, and he wrote. There is some property in that 
 that I didn t see, that Mr. Clough said I might put in. 
 
 Q. Mr. Clough gave the names of articles that you didn t see ? 
 
 A. He said there were some horses and carriages that I could 
 $3ut in. 
 
 Q. Now will you state the articles ? 
 
 The Chairman. Is there any objection to that being used. 
 
 ,Mr. Tappan waived objection. 
 
 Q. You may state ? 
 
 A. [Heading from receipt.] 12 carpets, 2 stair carpets, 8 damask 
 .-stuffed chairs, 2 large damask stuffed chairs, 2 sofas, 4 curtains, 2 mir 
 rors, 1 centre-table, 4 pictures, 1 secretary, 1 piano stool, 1 sick room 
 v-shair, 1 book case, 1 safe, 1 lounging chair, (I should think it was,) 1 
 black-walnut stand, 2 chairs, 5 pictures, 2 statuetts, library, 1 piano 
 .eloth, 1 parlor rug, 4 entry mats, 4 mats in library, 1 secretary, 8 
 ^dining chairs, 1 rocking chair, 3 chairs, 1 clock, 2 mirrors, 1 pitcher 
 .and salver, goblet and basin, 1 rug, 1 hat tree, 6 mahogany chairs, 1 
 rocking chair, 1 easy chair, 1 mahogany sofa, 1 centre-table, 1 stand, 
 1 ottoman, 3 pictures, 1 glass, 1 crumb cloth. 1 entry carpet, 6 rugs, 1 
 chamber set, 1 somnole, 6 beds and bedding, 1 chesnut chamber set, 2 
 .damask curtains, 1 other chamber set, 1 crurab cloth, 1 what-not, 1 
 ,cloth, 1 rocking chair, o chamber sets, 3 horses, 1 three years old colt, 
 <3 carriages, 2 sleighs, and 4 harnesses. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Clough present at the time that was made ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir, he was. 
 
 Q. What was the value fixed upon that property, at that time, of 
 Mr. Clough s 
 
 A. The receipts show $4000, [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. The receipt probably is not evidence of the value of 
 &he property, unless Mr. Clough is made a party to it in some way. 
 
 Q. How was that arranged with regard to the value of the property? 
 
 A. I think we jumped at the amount of the property. 
 
 Q. Did Clough agree to it? [Objected to.] 
 
 The Chairman. What occurs to me about it is this, that if Mr. 
 Clough stated his belief that the property was worth that, a simple 
 .acknowledgement of its value, it might be evidence of its value. I 
 don t suppose it is binding ; I understand the officer to say that he 
 jumped at it himself. 
 
 Q. Any conversation in regard to it? 
 
 A. I think that after the receipt was made out something was said 
 ;&botit the amount. I said that I guess it was about $4000, and I think 
 Mr. Clough said, "It is immaterial what you call it." 
 
 The Chairman. I should think that could be evidence- 
 
 Q. You are accustomed to the buying and selling of that, kind of 
 property, are you, occasionally ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many occasions do you attend the sales of horses and car 
 riages in a year ? 
 
510 
 
 A. Well, I could not tell ; probably well, I used to be in that 
 business altogether. 
 
 Q. How is it now ? 
 
 A. I don t know as I could tell now what the value was. If I had 
 been there with the intention of buying there were some articles that 
 I don t know the value of. I didn t go there with the intention of buy 
 ing, and I couldn t tell as to the valve of that property as I should have 
 if I had been there with the intention of buying. 
 
 [Objected to the opinion of the witness as to value, witness not being 
 an expert.] 
 
 Mr. George read from the deposition of George Clough, taken Nov. 
 24, 1868, and offered in evidence the 1st cross interrogatory and answer, 
 as contradicting the testimony of Mr. Clough. 
 . Mr. Mugridge then offered in evidence and read the whole deposition, 
 
 Mr. Stanley offered in evidence the certificate of J. G. Martin, of 
 Boston, broker, showing the highest and lowest monthly prices, at the 
 brokers board, of the Concord Eailroad stock, from 1860 to 1868, 
 inclusive, and the dividends on the said stock declared from 1860 to 
 1868, inclusive. [Marked D.] 
 
 Mr. Mugridge offered in evidence a memorandum of the dividends 
 paid George Clough on the Concord Eailroad stock from 1846 to Nov. 
 1868, inclusive, amounting in all to $22,769. [Marked B.] 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 
 DEPOSITION OF JACOB F. SMITH. 
 
 INT. 1. (By counsel for plaintiff.} State your age, residence and 
 occupation. ANS. Age, 32 years ; residence, Epsom, N. H. ; occupa 
 tion, shoemaker. 
 
 INT. 2. Have you ever been passed free, or been furnished with free 
 tickets or passes over the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence Eailroads, 
 or connecting roads, to Boston, or any portion thereof? If yes, state 
 the circumstances fully. ANS. I never have been passed over the road 
 to my knowledge without its costing me the full amount of fare. I did 
 once ride up from Newmarket Junction to Suneook without paying 
 anything. 1 think Mr. Langley was conductor, and passed me. I got 
 aboard without any ticket, and he said nothing to me. 
 
 INT. 3. Had you ever purchased any tickets except at the ticket of 
 fice, or of the conductors in the cars, or been furnished with any, or been 
 knowing to others being furnished with any over the Concord, Manches 
 ter & Lawrence Eailroad, or any portion thereof. ANS. I purchased 
 two of a young fellow who said he bought them at the office, 1 can t tell 
 who it was. They were tickets from Suneook to Boston, I paid him 
 $4.50 for the two tickets. He said he bought them to go down to Lynn 
 and did not use them. I never had any other tickets of any one except 
 ticket masters. The conductors had taken up my tickets and given me 
 checks frequently. The checks were taken up the same trip always, 
 excepting once. I could not tell exactly the time nor why he did not 
 take the check. I purchased my ticket at Suneook to Portsmouth when 
 this check was given. I think Mr. Clough was conductor; could not 
 swear positively. I sold Mr. Clough some hay which was drawn here 
 the 20th and 21st days of January, 1865. He paid me the money for 
 it at the time. That is all [ know about it. 1 also bought three of a 
 Frenchman from Concord to Boston, at a discount. I don t know his 
 name. 
 
511 
 
 INT. 4. State whether or not you ever received any tickets or passes- 
 either directly or indirectly from said George Clough. ANS. I never 
 did. 
 
 INT. 5. State whether or not you ever told any person that you had 
 received tickets from him ? ANS. I never did to my knowledge. I 
 don t recollect that 1 ever did. 
 
 INT. t>. State whether or not you ever told Levi Case of Epsom, that 
 you had received tickets of said Clough ? ANS. I think 1 never did, 
 i have no recollection of it. 
 
 INT. 7. Will you swear that you did not so tell him ? ANS. No, I 
 wcmld not swear that 1 never did tell him so, and still I don t recollect 
 of it. 
 
 INT. 8. Will you swear that you did not so tell him, the day before 
 yesterday? ANS. Yes, 1 will so swear. I told him day before yester 
 day that 1 did not receive tickets from him. 
 
 ^NS. 9. Will you swear that you never told either Levi Cass, or any 
 one else, that you sold hay, or any other articles to said George Clough, 
 and received pay or part pay, in tickets or passes, or words to that 
 effect. ANS. 1 never did to my recollection. 1 have no recollection of 
 any such conversation. 
 
 INT. 10. Did you not say, when making your answer to Int. 3, that 
 you supposed you was summoned here to testify with regard to hay fur 
 nished said Clough ? If so, why, and explain what connection there 
 was betweeen said hay, and the question which asked you whether or 
 not you had purchased tickets other than at the ticket office ? ANS. I 
 did so say. Mr. Cass drawed the hay at the time, and said he thought 
 I received my pay for it in tickets. I don t know as there was any con 
 nection between said hay and the question, only I did not suppose I 
 should have been summoned here if it had not been for Cass, and 1 sup 
 posed he told them 1 received my pay in tickets, I have no doubt he 
 told them to summon me. 
 
 INT. 11. State whether or or not you know of any persons having 
 had tickets or now having tickets over said roads, or any part thereof? 
 If so, state who ? ANS. I don t know any one who has tickets over the 
 road. 1 don t know positively of any one having had tickets. I saw 
 that a young fellow of the name of Johnson in my shop, had two. I 
 don t know where he got them, I don t know of any others. 
 
 INT. 12. State whether or not, during the war, you were engaged at 
 at all in the business of substitute broker, and if so, whether or not you 
 traveled in the cars? If so, to what extent, and whether or not with 
 substitutes. ANS. I was somewhat engaged in that business. The first 
 year I was in the business, I was in Boston. I did travel considerable 
 quite often, I can t tell to what extent. Sometimes I had substitutes 
 with me. 
 
 INT. 13. State how many times, as near as you can, you went over 
 said roads with substitutes. How many substitutes you had with you. 
 at each of said times, and from what points to what points you took 
 them? ANS. I could not give any estimate how many times. It is 
 impossible to tell. I can t tell whether it was 20 or 50 times. I start 
 ed at one time from New York with four substitutes and got here with 
 one. At another time when 1 came from New York, three or four of us 
 were connected together, and we had, perhaps, a dozen men with us. 
 1 recollect that case in particular, because they all got away from us. 
 We did not get to Nashua with a man of them, I should think likely 
 
512 
 
 I have carried a hundred men in all over the Concord road and branches, 
 in the years 1864 and 1865. There might not have been as many and 
 might have been more. I used to make them pay their own fare when 
 I could, when I could not, 1 paid their fare myself. When I paid, I 
 .usually paid the fare to the conductors in the cars. What men I paid 
 for [ paid in the cars, as a general thing. I might sometimes have had 
 tickets. 1 can t say as to that. 
 
 INT. 14. State whether or not you have a memorandum which will 
 .enable you to state more definitely and particularly in regard to these 
 matters. If so, will you produce that memorandum? ANS. I think 
 I have. I may have carried 200 men over the road. I had a book, 
 and think 1 have it now, which will give an account of every dollar I 
 received and paid out in 1864. I will produce it if I can find it. I 
 think I have got it. 
 
 INT. 15. State whether or not, since the adjournment, you have 
 made diligent search for said memorandum, and with what result ? ANS. 
 I did search for it, and the result was I could not find it in the house, 
 .and 1 don t know where it is. It may be there. 
 
 INT. 16. State when you commenced the substitute business and 
 when you ceased the same ? ANS. The first business 1 kept any rec 
 ord of was the 21st of December, 1S63. That was about the first; 
 .and closed about the time Lee surrendered, about April 3d, 1865. 
 
 INT. 17. State, if you are able, where you were on Thursday, Dec. 
 54th, 1863, and with whom you were ? ANS. I went on that day from 
 Boston to Concord so my memorandum says. There was a man with 
 me by the name of Downs, A. B. Downs. He used to work at the 
 .American House. 
 
 INT. 18. State how you passed over the road that day. If with 
 tickets, state where you obtained said tickets and of whom? Axs. I 
 passed over the road with tickets that day. Mr. Downs gave them to 
 me. He gave me three tickets, two from Boston to Concord, and one to 
 go back. 
 
 INT. 19. State whether or not while you traveled as a substitute 
 broker, either with or without substitutes, any conductor ever passed 
 *either you or any of your substitutes, or made any discount or deduc- 
 .tion from the regular fares. If so. state all the circumstances? ANS. 
 Itfever to my recollection but once. Once when I came from Philadel 
 phia to New York the conductor wanted me to pay for four men I had 
 with me. I told him 1 would pay for them if I got them through. I 
 got two through and paid for. The others I didn t get through or 
 pay for. 
 
 I XT. 20. State whether or not, George Clough ever passed you. or 
 ;any substitutes you had, free over the Concord, Manchester and Law 
 rence roads, or connecting roads to Boston, or any part thereof, or car 
 ried you or any of your substitutes at any less than the regular fares, 
 -or whether you ever knew him to pass anybody free or carry anybody 
 at less than the regular fares ? ANS. He never passed me free over said 
 road or any of my substitutes at less than the regular fares. I have 
 known Mr. Clough to omit to take up tickets some times. I never did 
 i>ut once. I don t know the persons name whose ticket he did not take. 
 
 INT. 21. Will you make further search for your memorandum for 
 18/J4, and if you can find it wlli you produce it? ANS. Yes, sir. 
 
 JACOB F. SMITH. 
 
513 
 
 DEPOSITION OF JOSEPH K. COLBY. 
 
 INT. 1. {By counsel for plaintiff.} Please state your age, residence, 
 occupation, and what it has been for the past few years. ANS. I was 
 25 years of age the 18th of last October. I reside in Concord, but do 
 business in Boston. I am in the wholesale dry goods business. I have 
 been in the same business since 1859 ; and my residence during that 
 time has been as stated above. 
 
 INT. 2. What is your father s name, residence and occupation ? 
 ANS. Timothy Colby. He is a house carpenter by trade. He resides 
 in Concord. 
 
 INT. 3. How often have you passed over the railroad between Boston 
 and Concord during the last five years, and which line of road ? State 
 as nearly as you can. ANS. Sometimes I have once a week for two or 
 three weeks in succession. And I didn t come once for about six months, 
 between five and six months. I have been west and been gone from 
 four to five weeks. I should not think the average would be more than 
 once in three weeks. For the first two years I came to Concord three or 
 four times a year. I used to come by way of Lawrence. The Jast year 
 I have come by way of Lowell. Lawrence three or four times. 
 
 INT. 4. State whether or not you paid your fares over the Concord or 
 Manchester and Lawrence Railroad. If so to whom you paid them, or 
 if passed over said roads free, by whom you were passed ? ANS. I 
 have bought tickets over the Concord and Manchester and Lawrence Kail- 
 roads, and have had tickets sent me to come to New Hampshire and vote, 
 sometimes. I have bought tickets at the Boston and Maine ticket office. 
 I have passed over the Concord and Manchester and Lawrence Railroads 
 free, sometimes. George Clough has run that road. I have been up with 
 him and with Mr. Eaton. I don t know whether it was up or down. 
 They, Clough and Eaton, have passed me free. 
 
 INT. 5. How many times has George Clough passed you free over 
 the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence roads, or any portion thereof, 
 during the last five years ? State as nearly as you can. ANS. I could 
 not tell how many times, I have kept no account. I have been over the 
 road perhaps once a week for a month or two, and then again might not 
 have been for a month. I should not think it would average more than 
 once in three weeks, each way. Some of the time I have had tickets, 
 and sometimes not. I have had tickets sent me sometimes just before 
 election.. 
 
 INT. 6. Please answer directly, how many times in your best judge 
 ment George Clough has passed you free over the Concord, Manchester 
 and Lawrence Railroads, or any portion thereof, during the last five years ? 
 ANS. That is a question which is hard to answer, as I have kept no 
 account. Sometimes I have not seen George Clough and sometimes I 
 have had tickets. It would be all guesswork if I should say. You 
 might call it fifty times, as near as I could say. But I can t swear 
 to it. 
 
 INT. 7. Upon your oath do you state that fifty times is the nearest 
 estimate of the number of times George Clough has passed you free over 
 the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence Railroads, or any portion thereof, 
 during the last five years ? ANS. I do so state. 
 
 INT. 8. Did you ever pay George Clough a fare over the Concord. 
 Manchester find Lawrence Railroads, or any portion thereof? ANS. I 
 don t remember that I ever did. 
 
514 
 
 INT. 9. Did you ever ride upon a train over said railroads or any 
 portion thereof conducted by George Clough, when you were not passed 
 free ? If so, state how recently and when, and how often. ANS. I 
 have. I have last fall and this winter, when I had tickets. I could 
 not say how often. I don t know. 
 
 INT. 10. Where did you get your tickets over the Concord, Manches 
 ter and Lawrence Eailroads, alluded to in your last answer ? ANS. Star- 
 key gave me some tickets once, several of them, and I had tickets sent 
 me to come to Concord to vote, and*! have bought tickets. Starkey, the 
 brakeman, gave me some tickets. I don t know whether it was those 1 
 used, or whether I bought them. 
 
 INT. 11. Will you state upon your oath that you bought a ticket 
 over the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence Railroads, or any portion 
 thereof, during the year 1865? If yes, state how often, of whom and 
 when you bought such tickets, as near as you are able. ANS. I don t 
 know, and could not swear that I bought a ticket over said roads in 
 1865. 
 
 INT. 12. How many times, in your best estimate, on your oath, did 
 you pass over said roads in 1865? ANS. I don t know and could not 
 guess how many times. You might say thirty times. It might have 
 been more, and might have been less. 
 
 INT. 13. How many tickets, if any, has George Clough directly or 
 indirectly given to you or provided you with during the last five years ? 
 ANS. I don t remember that he ever gave me a ticket except once from 
 Lawrence to Boston, which was a Boston and Maine check. I don t 
 remember that he ever gave me a ticket directly or indirectly over the 
 Concord, Manchester and Lawrence Eailroads. 
 
 INT, 14. Do you mean by your last answer to be understood upon 
 your oath that George Clough has not directly or indirectly provided 
 you with any tickets over any portion of the Concord, Manchester and 
 Lawrence Railroads, within the last five years. ANS. Not to. my knowl 
 edge. I don t know that he has. 
 
 INT. 15. Have you ever had any conversation with George Clough 
 with regard to. tickets furnished you by Starkey? ANS. Never. 
 
 INT. 16. Have tickets been furnished you by any one else than Star- 
 key? If so, by whom? ANS. No tickets have been furnished me. I 
 have had passes. Mr/ Henry Eaton or James P. Eaton might have given 
 me tickets sometime ago. Not recently. 
 
 INT. 17. When did you receive the tickets from Starkey? How 
 many did he give you? What was his occupation at the time, and 
 upon whose train as conductor was he running as brakeman ? ANS. I 
 don t remember how long ago it was. I don t remember the quantity. 
 He was running as brakeman at the time, with George Clough s train. 
 
 INT. 18. State as nearly as you can when it was, how many tickets 
 you had of him, and between what points the tickets extended ? ANS. It 
 might have been a year and a-half ago. I might possibly have had ten 
 tickets. The tickets were between Concord and Manchester and Man 
 chester and Nashua, I think. I don t think he has given me tickets 
 more than three or four times, and not over one or two at a time, except 
 the time when he gave me the ten spoken of. 
 
 INT. 19. State how it was about the tickets furnished you by Star- 
 key, being tickets which had been once used, or whether they were new 
 tickets and never before used? ANS. The tickets never had been 
 punched. They might have been used once, but not punched. 
 
INT. 20. Describe said tickets as nearly as you can ? ANS;.. I 
 know that they were anything more than common tickets, signed by G,. 
 (jr. Sanborn. Good for this day only. Think they were Concord Kail- 
 road tickets, and not coupon tickets from other roads. Think they were 
 not dated so far as I noticed. 
 
 INT. 21. What did you do with those tickets? ANS. 1 used them, 
 on the road. 
 
 INT. 22. How happened Starkey to furnish you with these tickets,, 
 and what consideration, if any, did he receive therefor ? ANS. 1 don t, 
 know, only he was a friend of mine, and gave me the tickets. I never- 
 gave him anything in return to iny knowledge. I sold him some goods 
 once and hain t got my pay. I don t know whether he expects me te 
 allow it on that account or not ; there was never anything said about it. 
 It was a year ago last summer, I think. 
 
 INT. 23. State all the conversation, negotiation, and all the circum 
 stances you are able to state pertaining to the furnishing of tickets by 
 Starkey to you ? ANS. At the time he gave me the eight or ten tickets 
 I was going down on the train, and was in the baggage car. 1 did not 
 agree to give him anything in return. I don t remember that we had 
 any conversation at all, only he took the tickets out and gave them to 
 me. 
 
 INT. 24. How many tickets in all, according to your best estimate, 
 has Mr. Starkey given to you ? ANS. It might have been sixteen. 
 
 INT. 25. Has ever George Clough passed you. or obtained tickets for 
 you over any of the roads connecting with the Concord road ? If yes, 
 to what extent, and when? ANS. Yes, he has given me his own passes 
 from Boston to White River Junction and return ; and also over the 
 Boston, Concord and Montreal Railroad to Littleton and return. Between 
 Boston and White River Junction, he might have given me two, within, 
 the last six months. The one over the Montreal was in the last six 
 months. I got a pass through him once for a young man to go from 
 Boston to Hanover to vote. These were blank passes signed by him, 
 and I filled them out. He has given me no other passes over these roads 
 that I know of. Those are the only ones that I remember during the 
 last five years. 
 
 INT, 26. Have you been in the habit, during the last five years, of 
 paying fare over the roads between Concord and Boston, connecting with , 
 the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence roads? If not, through or front 
 whom have you obtained passes or tickets over said roads ? ANS. I have* 
 sometimes paid my fare over these roads, and sometimes I have had; 
 tickets or a pass. I have been over the Maine road quite a number of 
 times with Starkey, when he has asked the conductor to pass me. Mr. 
 James P. and Henry Eaton have given me tickets once in a while over, 
 the Boston and Maine road. 
 
 INT. 27. Have you paid any fare, either over the Boston and Maine; 
 road, between Lawrence and Boston, or the Boston and Lowell road, dur 
 ing the year 1865 ? If so, when and how often? ANS. I think I have,. 
 I cannot state when. 
 
 INT. 28. Has George. Clough, directly or indirectly, within the lasfe 
 five years, furnished you with tickets or passes, or procured conductors 
 or others to pass you over either the Boston and Maine or Boston and 
 Lowell roads, or any part thereof? If yes, to what extent? Stater 
 fully. ANS. Not to my knowledge. 
 
516 
 
 INT. 29. Will you state upon your oath that he has not done so 
 repeatedly ? ANS. 1 will, that he has not to my knowledge. 
 
 INT. 30. Of what number does your father s family consist ? ANS. 
 My father, mother, brother and sister. 
 
 INT. 31. State how it has been with regard to your father s being in 
 the employment of Mr. Clough, giving the details, so far as your knowl 
 edge extends? ANS. I hardly think he ever done a job for Mr. Clough 
 <*intil he built this house for him. I mean the house in which he now 
 lives. 
 
 INT. 32. State how it has been with regard to your father s family 
 passing free over the Concord. Manchester and Lawrence Railroads? 
 ANS. 1 don t know anything about their passing free. 
 
 INT. 8;>. Do you state upon your oath that you never knew any mem 
 ber of your father s family to pass free over said roads or any portion 
 thereof? ANS, I went once with my mother on the Portsmouth train 
 from Concord to Mr. Eaton s house, about three miles below Manchester. 
 We went free. I think. Lt was sometime ago. I don t remember of 
 any other instance ; at the same time there might have been. I know 
 that my father, when he was building Mr. Eaton s house, had a pass to 
 go and come when he pleased. 
 
 INT. 34. Please state if you have known any member of your fath 
 er s family to pay fare over the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence 
 Railroads, or any portion thereof, during the last five years, and prior to 
 January, 1866? if yes, state when and where. ANS. I know that 
 they have paid fare within five years. I can t say whether they have 
 paid within five years prior to January 1, 1866. 
 
 INT. 35. Can you state an instance where any member of your fath 
 er s family has paid fare over said roads, or any portion thereof, prior to 
 the first day of January, IH66? If yes, please state it. ANS. I don t 
 know that I could give the date. 1 think my father went down with 
 .some workmen and paid fare for the whole of them, or they all paid 
 Gbheir own fare, I don t know which. I think it was while he was at 
 ^?ork for Mr. Eaton, arid before he got his pass. I remember 110 other 
 instance. 
 
 INT. 36. Please state how many tickets were sent to you at any one 
 lime to come to Concord to vote ? Who sent them and what was done 
 vwith them, stating the different times ? ANS. 1 don t know as more 
 ithan one ticket at a time up and back was sent me. James Fellows, 
 -who was then a leading republican, gave me one or two at Boston, when 
 ,he was down. It is my impression that Mr. Burnhain. who is express- 
 .man in Cheney s Express, sent one down for me to come up to vote ; and 
 & got one free from some railroad employee to go back with. 
 
 "(NT. 37. Have you any knowledge of the procurement or purchase 
 of tickets from the conductors or employees of the railroad, or persons 
 not connected with the railroad, except as before stated in this deposi 
 tion ? ANS. I have no knowledge except as before stated. 
 
 J.NT. 38. What was the amount of your dealings with Mr. Starkcy 
 as above referred to V What goods have you let him have, and have 
 you furnished any other conductor or employee of the railroad within 
 the last five years with any goods or merchandise? And if so, what? 
 ANS. 1 think the amount of that bill was somewhere about ten dollars. 
 I believe one item was some linen handkerchiefs. There was something 
 else. I don t remember when it was ; think it was a year ago last sum 
 mer or fall. I have furnished Mr. Clough with some goods, cotton goods, 
 
517 
 
 to furnish his new house, received my pay in greenbacks, at the regular 
 rates or prices, to the amount of about $100. There might have been 
 some others, years ago. Mrs. Eaton has bought goods of me in Boston, 
 1 don t remember the amount. It was small, not over $10. Got my pay 
 in money. Never took any tickets in pay for anything, of anybody. 
 
 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 INT. 39. State whether or not you had any tickets at any of the 
 times when you rode over the road, when Mr. Clough was conductor,, 
 prior to the last fall and winter, as stated in your answer to interroga 
 tory 9 ? ANS. I don t remember as to that 
 
 INT. 40. Have you any means whatever for now making any estimate 
 of the times Mr. Clough has passed you free over the Concord, Manches 
 ter and Lawrence Railroad, or any portion thereof, as required in inter 
 rogatory six? ANS. I have not. 
 
 INT. 41. Is the number fifty, stated in the answer to said interroga 
 tory, anything more than mere guess work? ANS. I should think it 
 was all of fifty. It is just guess work. It might be more and might 
 be less. JOSEPH K COLBY, 
 
 DEPOSITION OF HERMAN STRAUSS. 
 
 INT. 1. (By counsel for plaintiff .} State your age, residence aisd 
 occupation. ANS. Age, 21 ; residence. Concord ; occupation, mer 
 chant. Have been in Concord six years that is, made it my home 
 here. For the first three years I peddled. I was with Mr. Charles 
 Morse about two years, and been in business for myself, at Morse s old 
 stand, since last September. 
 
 INT. 2. Have you ever passed free, or been furnished with tree 
 passes or tickets over the Concord, Manchester and Lawrence Railroads* 
 or connecting roads, or any portion thereof, to Boston ? If yes, state- 
 all the circumstances fully. ANS. I have frequently been passed free- 
 from here to Nashua by Mr. Clough, and once in a while back from?. 
 Nashua to Concord. I should think 1 had been passed from Concord to 
 Nashua about eight times, and about six times from Nashua to Concord, 
 within the last year. Mr. Noyes has passed me from Nashua to Concord 
 about twice within a year. 1 was acquainted with Mr. Clough, and 
 asked him every time if 1 could go down with him. He said I could, 
 I asked Mr. Noyes to pass me, and he did so. 
 
 INT. 3. Have you ever purchased any tickets save at the ticket 
 offices, or been furnished with any tickets or passes over the Concord, 
 Manchester and Lawrence Railroads, or any part thereof, or been know 
 ing to others being so furnished? ANS. 1 have purchased tickets very 
 often. Frenchmen came into the store with tickets from here to Boston, 
 which they told me they had purchased in Montreal through to Boston, 
 and they stopped here, and sold me their tickets the rest of the way. 
 That is, some of them told me so. I bought two of John P. Haven from 
 here to Boston last August. They were regular tickets from Concord 
 to Boston. I used the tickets myself, as I had occasion. Mr. Clough 
 gave me, perhaps, three tickets from Concord to Boston regular tickets. 
 They were coupons from tickets above. They were given to me withfsn 
 six months I asked him for some tickets to go to Boston with, and he 
 gave me these. Nobody else ever furnished me any tickets in any way r 
 
518 
 
 nor have I known of tickets furnished by or for anyone else. Mr- 
 Clough has bought goods at my store. I sold them just as I sell to 
 anyone else. I charged him the same profit 1 did other people. 
 
 INT. 4. Did you charge said Clough any less for goods furnished 
 him for his family in consideration of his furnishing you free passes or 
 passing you free? ANS. No, sir. 
 
 INT. 5. State what goods, and at what prices, you sold to George 
 Clough, and the cost of such goods. ANS. I sold him clothing and 
 furnishing goods. Paper A, annexed contains bill of items sold him up 
 to January 1st, 1866. There maybe three or four items since. The 
 profit, as near as I can state, is stated against each item under the head 
 of "profit" on "Schedule A," hereto annexed. He paid me the bill 
 in full in cash. 
 
 SCECEITLILIE J. PROFIT 
 
 1865 March 27, 1 umbrella, $2.50 .50 
 
 Oct. 12, Overalls and frocks, 3.50 .50 
 
 Cap, 3.00 .75 
 
 3 collars and tie, 2.50 .62 
 
 24, 1 shirt and drawers 4.00 1.00 
 
 1 pair gloves, 2.50 .50 
 
 1 " 1.00 .25 
 
 Nov. 3, Overalls and frock. 3.50 .50 
 
 Overcoat, 35.00 7.00 
 
 1 pair drawers, 3.00 .75 
 
 22, 1 pair gloves, 1.00 .25 
 
 30, 1 pair drawers, 2.00 .37 
 
 Shirt, 4.00 .75 
 
 Scarf, 1.50 .37 
 
 Dec, 27, 2 pairs socks, 1.50 .33 
 
 INT. 6. Did you ever, in any way, directly or indirectly, allow said 
 Clotigh anything for passes or tickets that he ever furnished you ? ANS. 
 No, sir. 
 
 INT. 7. Do- you swear that you never furnished him goods at lower 
 rates for any such reason? ANS. Yes, sir. 
 
 CROSS EXAMINATION. 
 
 INT. 8. State, as near as you can, how many free passes over the 
 road, or any part of it, you have had when Mr. Clough has been con- 
 ductor, within the last six years. ANS. About eight times from here 
 to Nashua, and about six times back. 
 
 INT, 9. Were the three tickets which Mr. Clough let you have, as 
 before stated, all of them coupons on tickets from the north ? ANS. I 
 -rthink they were. HERMAN STRAUSS. 
 
 
519 
 
 .STOCKS IN CONCORD R. R. BOUGHT AND SOLD BY GEO. CLOUGH. 
 
 Being an abstract from the Treasurer s books. 
 
 1846. 
 
 January 30, 
 
 Enoch Plummer, 
 
 
 February 2, 
 
 J, W. Elkins, 
 
 
 10, 
 
 (i 
 
 1854. 
 
 Decemb. 23, 
 
 Defau & Perkins, 
 
 1855. 
 
 Sept. 4, 
 
 Baldwin, 
 
 1857. 
 
 January, 
 
 Defau & Co., 
 
 
 19, 
 
 R. A. Richards, 
 
 
 19, 
 
 Cabot, 
 
 
 July 27, 
 
 Bailey, 
 
 
 Sept. 16, 
 
 C. Arnold, 
 
 1858. 
 
 Feb. 8, 
 
 M. Bowles, 
 
 
 8, 
 
 T. P. Shaw, 
 
 
 9, 
 
 Foster, 
 
 
 March 23, 
 
 Williams, 
 
 
 27, 
 
 Dodge, 
 
 
 29, 
 
 Gilman, 
 
 
 30, 
 
 C. Hill, 
 
 
 August 4, 
 
 J. L. Perley, 
 
 
 Nov. 12, 
 
 Ballard, 
 
 1859. 
 
 Feb y 12, 
 
 E. S. Fowle, cashier, 
 
 
 March 18, 
 
 Defau & Co., 
 
 
 " 18, 
 
 C. Arnold, 
 
 
 May 7, 
 
 T. H. Perkins, 
 
 i860. 
 
 March 10, 
 
 S. P. Clark, 
 
 
 19, 
 
 Defau & Co., 
 
 
 April 12, 
 
 G. W. Joy, treasurer, 
 
 
 12, 
 
 Wilson, 
 
 
 6, 
 
 Richardson, 
 
 
 11, 
 
 Merrill, 
 
 
 26, 
 
 Defau & Co., 
 
 
 May 19, 
 
 Foster, 
 
 
 19, 
 
 Defau & Co., 
 
 1861. 
 
 March 19, 
 
 N. .P. Lovering, treasurer, 
 
 
 May 24, 
 
 Clough, 
 
 
 July 12, 
 
 Wingate, cashier, 
 
 
 30, 
 
 
 
 1862. 
 
 January 14, 
 July 26, 
 
 Amoskeag Savings Bank, 
 New Hampshire Savings Bank, 
 
 
 Sept. 30, 
 
 Union Bank, 
 
 
 Nov. 21, 
 
 J. A. Gilmore, 
 
 
 21, 
 
 Defau & Co., 
 
 
 25, 
 
 
 
 
 28, 
 
 | 
 
 
 Nov. 29, 
 
 ft 
 
 1864. 
 
 April 18, 
 
 Amoskeag Bank, 
 
 1867. 
 
 March 9, 
 
 J. G. Lincoln, 
 
 
 9, 
 
 H. P. Rolfe, 
 
 
 28, 
 
 B. F. Martin, 
 
 
 19, 
 
 J. Henard s estate, 
 
 
 26, 
 
 L. Shaw, trustee, 
 
 SHS 
 12 
 12 
 16 
 15 
 10 
 
 7 
 15 
 
 3 
 
 50 
 50 
 
 5 
 
 25 
 20 
 
 7 
 
 5 
 20 
 
 4 
 20 
 
 1 
 
 150 
 35 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 20 
 40 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 10 
 20 
 50 
 100 
 75 
 50 
 50 
 50 
 50 
 60 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 18 
 
 100 
 
 14 
 
 100 
 
 18 
 
 100 
 
 20 
 
520 
 
 1867. March 26, L. Shaw, attorney, 
 April, Perley Clough, 
 May 1, James E. Hill, 
 
 20, Natt Head, 
 
 1868. 20, N. G. Ordway, 
 October 14, C. F. Low, 
 
 31, George Clough, 
 
 Nov. 2, Merrimack River Savings Bank 
 
 Total shares, 
 
 TRANSFERRED FOR HIM. 
 
 1 846. February 2, Mechanics Bank, 
 
 1858. 
 1859. 
 1860. 
 
 1861, 
 
 1862. 
 
 1863. 
 1866. 
 1867. 
 
 1868. 
 
 October 16, 
 February 1, 
 May 11, 
 March 1, 
 May 14, 
 Sept. 15, 
 Dec. 26, 
 January 6, 
 
 12, 
 
 July 12, 
 Sept. 29, 
 October 9, 
 
 12, 
 
 May 15, 
 
 March 18, 
 
 May 1, 
 
 3, 
 
 June 1 2, 
 January 21, 
 October 30. 
 
 30, 
 Nov. 2, 
 
 C. A. Evans & Elkins, 
 
 E. S. Towle. collateral, 
 
 J, A. Gilmore, 
 
 J. C. A. Wingate, collateral 
 
 J. Kenrick, 
 
 Wingate, collateral, 
 
 N. P. Lovering, treasurer, 
 
 J. Colby and others, 
 
 Defau & Co., 
 
 Wilbur, treasurer, collateral, 
 
 Union Bank, collateral, 
 
 Amoskeag Savings Bank, collateral, 
 
 Merrimack Kiver Savings Bank, collateral 
 
 C. H. Carpenter, collateral, 
 
 Merrimack River Savings Bank, 
 George Clough, 
 C. H. Bartlett, collateral, 
 Balance, 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 George Clough has 
 Amoskeag Savings Bank, 
 Merrimack River Savings Bank, 
 C. H. Carpenter, 
 C. H. Bartlett, 
 Union Bank, 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 150 
 
 50 
 
 6- 
 
 6 
 
 100 
 50 
 
 1976 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 16 
 
 150 
 
 7 
 
 100 
 
 30 
 
 75 
 
 50 
 
 50 
 
 50 
 
 50 
 
 50 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 150 
 
 100 
 
 64 
 
 100 
 
 64 
 
 30 
 
 50 
 
 100 
 
 50 
 
 38 
 
 1976 
 
 380 
 
 100 
 
 200 
 
 94 
 
 50 
 
 150 
 
 974 
 
521 
 
 The defendant offered to show in the trial the amount of money 
 returned in the cars by John Le Bosquet and J. H. Chandler, the con 
 ductors who succeeded him on the same trains formerly run by the 
 defendant, from January, 1864 to January, 1866, for the purpose of com 
 paring the amounts returned by said conductors with the amounts 
 returned by him, for the two years immediately anterior to his leaving 
 the road ; and offered the following tables, made up from returns made 
 by him and said conductors to the general ticket office of the railroad. 
 The last two years that defendant run are compared with the first two* 
 that the new conductors run : 
 
 MEMORANDUM OF CONDUCTORS WAY-BILLS. 
 
 
 Clough. 
 
 Noyes. 
 
 Clough. 
 
 Noyes. 
 
 J. B. Le 
 
 Bosquet. 
 
 Chand 
 ler. 
 
 Alexan 
 der. 
 
 Chand 
 ler, 
 
 January, 
 
 1KO/1. 
 
 $255 70 
 
 1HG4. 
 
 $320 05 
 
 1805. 
 
 $337 95 
 
 IHOo. 
 
 $343 40 
 
 1H6O. 
 
 $459 60* 
 
 1HOG. 
 
 $5(59 33* 
 
 iHoy. 
 
 $251 23 
 
 18O7 
 
 $239 65> 
 
 February, 
 
 303 05 
 
 2->2 75 
 
 254 00 
 
 275 (50 
 
 326 22 
 
 389 (51 
 
 22(5 83 
 
 234 72 
 
 March, 
 
 359 40 
 
 377 40 
 
 2.54 10 
 
 292 05 
 
 462 49f 
 
 353 61 f 
 
 270 21 
 
 288 67 
 
 April, 
 
 395 20 
 
 402 45 
 
 277 35 
 
 230 30 
 
 346 00 
 
 299 29 
 
 291 79 
 
 271 97 
 
 May, 
 
 393 15 
 
 354 15 
 
 225 90 
 
 235 45 
 
 293 25 
 
 263 57 
 
 329 54 
 
 298 82 
 
 June, 
 
 367 80 
 
 410 50 
 
 253 60 
 
 258 (it) 
 
 347 07 
 
 287 92 
 
 349 73 
 
 284 40 
 
 July, 
 
 27(5 75 
 
 252 40 
 
 252 30 
 
 2(52 90 
 
 292 79 
 
 262 80 
 
 316 85 
 
 327 80 
 
 August, 
 
 334 30 
 
 357 40 
 
 277 90 
 
 290 75 
 
 355 27 
 
 31<i 39 
 
 314 48 
 
 285 37 
 
 September, 
 
 355 60 
 
 51 65 
 
 2(57 10 
 
 251 70 
 
 380 99 
 
 351 (55 
 
 316 15 
 
 325 58 
 
 October, 
 
 251 95 
 
 262 05 
 
 274 45 
 
 297 65 
 
 288 70 
 
 35(5 67 
 
 270 75 
 
 317 88 
 
 November, 
 
 244 60 
 
 233 25 
 
 414 25 
 
 355 60 
 
 305 00 
 
 271 48 
 
 275 20 
 
 320 02 
 
 December, 
 
 343 60 
 
 292 20 
 
 422 25 
 
 368 20 
 
 290 50 
 
 319 27 
 
 330 55 
 
 250 8T 
 
 $3,881 70 
 
 $3,576 55 
 
 $3,511 15 
 
 $3,462 20 
 
 $4,147 88 
 
 $4,041 59 
 
 $3,543 31 
 
 $3445 75. 
 
 * A portion of January was run by Messrs. Clough and Noyes. 
 t March 20, 18(56, the ticket office was closed. 
 
 Amount returned as taken in the cars by George Clough, 
 
 during the year 1864, $3,881 70 
 
 Amount returned as taken in the cars by John Le Bosquet, 
 
 during the year 1866, . . . . . 4,14788 
 
 Balance in favor of Le Bosquet, . . . . $266 18 
 Average per train, allowing seventy-eight trains per month, 29 
 
 Amount returned as taken in the cars by George Clough, 
 
 during the year 1865, $3,511 15 
 
 Amount returned as taken in the cars by J. H. Chandler, 
 
 during the year 1867, . . . . . 3,54331 
 
 Balance in favor of Chandler, . $32 1 
 
 Average per train, as above, v . . . . . 03- 
 
522 
 
 EEFEREiS BEPOKT. 
 
 On the 5th day of January, 1869, the referees reported as follows: 
 " That the plaintiif recover of the defendant the sum of five thousand 
 ^LX hundred and thirty-five dollars." 
 
 The referees find the following facts, and award as the court shall de 
 termine the law, viz : 
 
 " The defendant, in certain instances, received of passengers paying 
 in the cars less than the full fares, and in order to conceal this ir 
 regularity from the plaintiff, did not return the fares so received on the 
 way-bills filed in the ticket office from day to day, and pay over the 
 same to the ticket master, as by the rules of the plaintiff, of which he 
 lhad knowledge, he was required to do. 
 
 " The defendant s testimony tended to show that, with the money so 
 taken, he bought tickets at the ticket office, and after punching them 
 .so as to show that they had been used, returned them to the ticket master, 
 with the tickets taken up in the regular course of business, and in this 
 way the money all came to the plaintiff s possession. This was done 
 with the knowledge and consent of Mr. Gilmore, the superintendent of 
 the plaintiff s road, but with the understanding and agreement between 
 iiim and the defendant that the whole transaction should be concealed 
 from the plaintiff and its directors, and it was so concealed. 
 
 " The plaintiff, ascertaining that money received by the defendant of 
 passengers paying their fare in the cars had not been returned on the 
 way-bills and paid over to the ticket master, and having never had any 
 knowledge or given any assent to any other mode of paying over, com 
 menced this action in good faith, and thereby changed its position in a 
 material matter. 
 
 "If the defendant is estopped from showing, by way of defence, that 
 the money came into the plaintiff s possession as above mentioned, or if 
 such facts being shown would not constitute a defence, then, and not 
 otherwise, the referees further award that the plaintiff recover of the 
 defendant the additional sum of five thousand five hundred and nine 
 dollars. 
 
 " The plaintiff had contracts with other railroad corporations, by virtue 
 4>f which such other corporations issued what they call joint tickets, en 
 titling passengers to be carried on the plaintiff s road and the roads of 
 sther corporations. 
 
 " To these tickets coupons were attached for each road, and the con 
 ductor on each road took off the coupon belonging to his road when the 
 bolder passed over such road. It often happened that holders of such 
 tickets from northern and western roads to Boston, over the plaintiff s 
 road, left the trains before passing over the plaintiff s road, and sold the 
 balance of their tickets to other persons, who used them. 
 
 " It was a part of the defendant s duty, as a servant and agent of 
 the plaintiff, to sell joint tickets from Concord, and other stations on 
 the plaintiff s road, to Boston and other places, and he was furnished 
 with tickets for that purpose. 
 
 " The defendant, for his own profit, purchased such joint tickets from 
 northern and western roads, from which the coupons prior to the plain 
 tiff s had been taken, and sold them to passengers in the cars who 
 would otherwise have bought the joint tickets of the plaintiff, entrusted 
 to the defendant for sale. 
 
523 
 
 "This was injurious to the plaintiff s business entrusted to the de 
 fendant, and deprived the plaintiff of the whole or some part of the 
 profits which should have been received from the sale of its own tickets, 
 the plaintiff deriving a larger profit from its own tickets than from those 
 of other roads. 
 
 " This was done with the knowledge and consent of Mr. Gilmore, the 
 superintendent of the plaintiff s road, but the plaintiff s directors and 
 the plaintiff had no actual knowledge of it. 
 
 ** If the plaintiff is entitled by law to recover in this action the profits 
 made by the defendant in thus buying and selling the joint tickets, the 
 referees further award that the plaintiff recover of the defendant the 
 additional sum of two thousand dollars. 
 
 " The referees further award that the plaintiff recover of the defend 
 ant his costs of reference, taxed at two hundred and eighty-one dollars 
 and fifty-six cents, and referees fees and expenses paid by the plaintiff, 
 amounting to one thousand nine hundred and ninety dollars, and costs 
 of court to be taxed by the court. 
 
 " The referees append to their report, and make a part of it, a state 
 ment of the exceptions taken by the defendant. 
 
 EDMUND L. GUSHING, V 
 WILLIAM HAILE, f- KEFEREES." 
 
 HENKY A. BELLOWS, \ 
 
I 1ST 13 E X . 
 
 PAGE 
 
 WRIT, . . 3 
 
 TESTIMONY OF ALONZO H. WESTON, ..... 5 
 
 WILLIAM EOBY, .... .28 
 
 ISAAC W. FARMER, ...... 29 
 
 DANIEL R. PRESCOTT, 33 
 
 F.-M. CRANE 41 
 
 BARUCH BIDDLE, ...... 50 
 
 JAMES R. KENDRICK, 50 
 
 G. G. SANBORN, . . . 56, 131, 161, 174, 500 
 INSTRUCTIONS TO CONDUCTORS, ...... 69 
 
 TESTIMONY OF HENRY P. LANE, . . . . , . 104 
 
 SAMUEL P. CURTIS, ... 122 
 
 ELIPHAZ W. UPHAM, . . . 127, 136 
 
 DAVID PERKINS, . . . . . . 144 
 
 NATHANIEL WHITE, ...... 153 
 
 GEORGE J. CARNEY, , . . 201,217 
 
 PETER DUDLEY, 244, 499 
 
 DEPOSITION OF IRA FOSTER, ..;.... 246 
 ARGUMENT OF HENRY P. ROLFE, ...... 249 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GEORGE CLOUGH, 272, 285, 297, 301, 341, 364, 378, 420, 
 
 475, 494 
 
 H. G. KEYES, 280 
 
 J. S. KIDDER, 357 
 
 HORACE JOHNSON, . . . . . . 417 
 
 ISAAC SPALDING, ...... 428 
 
 N. G, UPHAM, 435 
 
 SYDNEY H. CARNEY, 443 
 
 JOHN D. COOPER, 451 
 
 GEORGE T. COMINS, ..... 455 
 GRANVILLE REMICK, .... 455, 469 
 
 JOHN F. KIMBALL, 459 
 
 JAMES P. EATON, , . 461 
 
525 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DANIEL S. WEBSTER, . . . 466 
 
 JOHN L. COLBY, . . . . . . 472 
 
 C. A. STEWART, . . . . . . 483 
 
 KOBERT P. BLAKE, . ; . . . 485 
 
 W. H. ALLISON, 487 
 
 E. M. SARGENT, 488 
 
 JAMES S. CHENEY, 491 
 
 JAMES H. EASTMAN, . . . . 495 
 
 KOSWELL SILVER, ..... 498 
 
 HENRY P. KOLFE, 500 
 
 JONATHAN L. PICKERING, . . . 508 
 
 DEPOSITION OF JACOB SMITH, . . . 509 
 
 JOSEPH K. COLBY, ... 513 
 
 HERMAN STRAUSS, . . . . 517 
 
 STATEMENT OF STOCK PURCHASED, ... . 519 
 
 COMPARISON OP WAY-BILLS, . 521 
 
 REFEREES REPORT, .... 522 
 
 BULINGS OF THE KEFEREES, 10, 14, 18, 20, 23, 42, 47, 78, 124, 161, 
 163, 169, 170, 171, 176, 177, 178, 180, 200, 203, 211, 212, 214, 224, 
 247, 248, 273, 275, 277, 278, 280, 284, 285, 289, 290, 291, 29, 299, 
 301, 302, 305, 313, 315, 317, 323, 330, 344, 353, 354, 356, 358, 367, 
 402, 416, 417, 418, 419, 436, 450, 454, 455, 456, 462, 464, 473 493, 
 504, 505, 507, 508. 
 
CONOOBD EAILEOAD COEPOEATION v. GEOEGE CLOUGH. 
 
 CLOSING ARGUMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. MASON W. TAPPAN, 
 
 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT, 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 BEFORE THE BOARD OF REFEREES, 
 
 AT CONCORD, N. H., JANUARY 1, !8G9. 
 
 CONCORD : 
 
 THE PEOPLE STEAM PRESS, STATE BLOCK. 
 1869. 
 
AEGUMEIS T T. 
 
 MR. CHAIRMAN AND GENTLEMEN : 
 
 I feel very much the weight of responsibility which de 
 volves upon me, on this occasion, and I would gladly have 
 had it fallen upon other shoulders. I know how important 
 the case is to my client; I know how much is depending 
 upon the result, both to him and all connected with it; I 
 am conscious, also, that even with my best endeavors, there 
 will probably be many imperfections and omissions; and I 
 fully appreciate the fact that I am before a tribunal compe 
 tent to weigh all the evidence that has been put into the 
 case, and to detect any mis-statement or fallacy of argument. 
 I shall endeavor to argue the testimony fairly, and to present 
 our view of the case, on the facts and evidence before you, 
 with such ability as I possess. I am aware, gentlemen, that 
 many points have been fully argued and discussed from day 
 to day, as we have gone along, and I shall therefore en 
 deavor to be as brief as possible in this closing appeal which 
 I make in behalf of my client. 
 
 Permit me, at the outset, to congratulate you sincerely, 
 gentlemen, that this protracted trial has at last reached a 
 stage when we can at least see the beginning of the end. 
 
 But there is no one connected with these proceedings that 
 I can so much congratulate as my client, Mr. Clough. For 
 three long years, gentlemen, he has stood here, a target for 
 all the abuse and detraction and suspicion that these pro 
 ceedings have brought upon him; but at last the hour has 
 
4 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 come when this agony of suspense will be ended, and I 
 hope it is not too much to add, Mr. Chairman, that the 
 hour has come for his complete and entire vindication. 
 God alone knows, or can know the suffering, the mortification, 
 the anxiety that have been inflicted upon him and his fam 
 ily for this long space of time, growing out of proceedings 
 which, I think the evidence shows, were commenced and 
 have been prosecuted for other motives than those which 
 appear merely on the face. I am sorry to be obliged to say 
 this, but I believe the evidence bears me out in the assertion. 
 
 And it is proper, gentlemen, I think, for you to look a 
 little at the surroundings of this case. We certainly desire 
 to have the motives of this proceeding inquired into, and 
 I think we have a right to ask of you to look at this case in 
 the light of some of its surroundings. 
 
 Now if these proceedings were commenced with honesty 
 of purpose; if they Avere commenced in good faith for the 
 purpose of having an investigation into the conduct of Mr. 
 Clough, and the other conductors; if they w r ere commenced 
 deliberately with this purpose, why, gentlemen, that is one 
 thing; if, on the other hand, it is shown that these suits and 
 this investigation were commenced hastily, inconsiderately, 
 without any proper deliberation, but from motives such as 
 have appeared in this case, I think these facts and considera 
 tions ought to have weight before this tribunal or any other. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, what was the initiation of these meas 
 ures ? 
 
 The evidence discloses that the first that was heard of any 
 movement against the conductors was the declaration of Mr. 
 Gilmore, before the board of directors, that the conductors 
 011 the Concord Railroad had been stealing fifty thousand 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 5 
 
 dollars a year in the cars. Whereupon Gen. Butler was ap 
 plied to, and Maj. Carney was employed and put upon the 
 road, and other detectives were put upon the track of the 
 conductors, Mr. Clough included. 
 
 But, gentlemen, it appears from the evidence in the case 
 that Mr. Gilmore afterwards endeavored, as the gentleman 
 on the other side says, to do what he could to squelch thee 
 proceedings and to stifle the investigation. He did this 
 because he found that his own proceedings in connection with 
 the road would bo dragged to light, and this charge against 
 the conductors, which he had made to cover his own mis 
 doings, would be the very means of his exposure. It also 
 appears that Mr. Gilmore had other motives than those of a 
 sincere desire to bring Mr. George Clough and the other 
 conductors to justice, and other motives that induced him to 
 make this declaration. 
 
 It appears that for some "reason or other Mr. Clough had 
 refused to sign his notes; and Mr. Gilmore said, "I will 
 learn George Clough to go back on me, and refuse to sign 
 my notes when I am lying here sick." And it seems to me, 
 gentlemen, that the whole proceedings have been conducted, 
 from beginning to end, and especially at the outset, with 
 something of the spirit that is manifested in this declaration 
 of Mr. Gilmore. I think the whole prosecution I may be 
 allowed to say has evinced, in its carrying on, a bitterness 
 of spirit, an uncharitableiiess and, I had almost said, a ma 
 lignity such as I never saw evinced in any other case. I 
 do not wish to impute wrong motives to anybody. I do not 
 wish to charge my brother, or to charge Mr. Gilmore, who 
 has been summoned before another and a higher tribunal 
 with improper motives. I know the old maxim is "Tread 
 
ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAX. 
 
 lightly on the ashes of the dead." I do not propose to dis 
 turb, ruthlessly, the ashes of Gov. Gilmore; I do not pro 
 pose to say anything against him or about him except what 
 the evidence in this case warrants; I do not propose here, 
 gentlemen, to enter into a harsh denunciation of the course 
 pursued by anybody; but I do not intend to spare a word 
 that I think to be necessary to vindicate the cause of Mr. 
 Clough before you, whether that word shall reflect upon the 
 living or the dead. 
 
 Now, then, gentlemen, I have said that it seems to me 
 that these proceedings were instituted from some other mo 
 tives than those merely of a sincere belief that these men had 
 been stealing and plundering in the cars to the amount of 
 fifty thousand dollars a year, or to any other amount. And 
 I believe it. I believe the facts and the evidence in this 
 case show it. The evidence discloses that this whole concern 
 of the Concord Railroad was grossly mismanaged, and was 
 reeking with corruption in every department. And there 
 were omiiious mutterings everywhere, by the public, before 
 the legislature, and through the press. The stockholders were 
 taking the alarm, and everywhere the atmosphere was freighted 
 with rumors of mismanagement arid corruption in the affairs of 
 this road. And it appears, gentlemen, that there was an 
 annual meeting to come off at no distant day. Somebody had 
 got to be elected directors and clerk and president again. 
 And you will see that the initiation of these proceedings, and 
 the dragging them before the annual meeting, disclosed the 
 fact that it was the intention of somebody, if possible, to raise 
 a smoke and a smudge, and, by prosecuting these conductors 
 upon some imaginary charges, to screen themselves from the 
 guilt which justly attached to themselves. This is the way it 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 
 
 looks to me, and this, gentlemen, is what I believe. As I said, 
 I am not going to impute improper motives to anybody any 
 further than it seems to me the evidence warrants. My 
 brother on the other side has seemed very sensitive in regard 
 to this case, from the very day that the trial opened down to 
 the last moment of the closing of the testimony. And I 
 must say this : that the gentleman has seemed bent upon put 
 ting himself upon trial in the matter. I have not put him 
 upon trial. The counsel associated with me have not put 
 him upon trial. But, for some reason or other, it has seemed 
 to me that he has felt the necessity of relieving himself from 
 improper connection Avith this case, and the proceedings under 
 it. In his opening argument, before any charges or insinua 
 tions had been made against him by anybody, he made the 
 declaration to you I quote his language that "Gov. Gil- 
 more had got him into this scrape, and after making these 
 declarations before the board of directors, and after directing 
 the prosecution, had turned around," as the gentleman says, 
 "and tried to ruin him." 
 
 Well, gentlemen, we have nothing to do with that; and 
 the fact as to whether Col. George is injured or not injured, 
 ruined or not ruined, is a matter of no particular concern, 
 perhaps, in this case. But it has something to do with the 
 motives that have impelled this prosecution. It does dis 
 close something of the animus that has pervaded it all the 
 way through. 
 
 I fully appreciate, and commiserate, what it seems to me I 
 may characterize as at least the rather unfortunate position of 
 my brother on the other side. Gov. Gilmore, by whom, 
 through evil and good report, the gentleman stood as counsel 
 and shield and adviser through his entire connection with 
 
ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 the Concord .Railroad, lias passed to his long home. The 
 old board of directors, with whom he used to meet, at 
 Parker s, and at the American, and at the Revere House, 
 where they used to have such jolly good times, and where 
 the bills for liquors and cigars alone were, one year, fifteen 
 hundred dollars, have all been swept away by the fiat of 
 the stockholders, and the places that once knew them 
 shall know them no more forever; and when the new board 
 came into power, they found, gentlemen, this elephant on 
 their hands. It was 110 elephant of theirs; and I don t 
 think, from the manner that they have given this case a 
 pretty wide berth on this trial, that they care to have much 
 to do with it. So that the animal has been left pretty much 
 in the care of my brother George, to feed and manage and 
 get along with the best way he could. There has been 
 rarely any one here on this trial representing the Concord 
 Railroad. The gentleman has once in a while shown us the 
 rubicund face of Mr. Weld, of Boston. He has occasionally 
 been trotted in here, and would stay perhaps ten or fifteen 
 minutes, and then, presto! he is gone. So that the whole 
 thing seems to me to show that this is, after all, about as 
 much a trial between John H. George and Mr. Clough as 
 between the Concord Railroad and George Clough. 
 
 Now, I say, gentlemen, I am not going to impute motives 
 to anybody ; but it seems to me, and I think I am warranted 
 in saying 1 know that the gentleman on the other side is 
 enthusiastic, I know he is zealous but it seems to me that 
 there has been a bitterness and a vindictiveiiess imparted to 
 the proceedings in this case, and in the manner in which 
 George Clough has been pursued, such as nothing that has 
 appeared in the testimony would at all warrant. And this 
 much I feel it my duty to say. 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION / . GKORGE CLOUGH. 9 
 
 Hut gentlemen, I want to allude to another matter here, 
 because I propose to say at the outset, before going to the 
 testimony, all that I propose to say at all in reference to 
 these extraneous matters. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, it has been said and charged and reit 
 erated, over and over again, that there has been a combina 
 tion, on the part of the conductors and somebody else, for a 
 new administration of the Concord Railroad, and to stifle 
 investigation and to stop this suit. I assert, gentlemen, that 
 there is no evidence of anything of the kind. 
 
 I do not deny, gentlemen, the feelings that these con 
 ductors would be likely to have, after these proceedings were 
 commenced from the motives in which they believed they 
 had their origin. I do not deny that they had feelings in 
 regard to it. I do not deny that they did everything in their 
 power, and that Mr. Clough did everything in his power, 
 that he could legitimately and honorably do, to have the old 
 board of directors turned out, and a new and better and hon- 
 ester and more capable board put in. And if the clerk 
 went by the board, with the board of directors and superin 
 tendent, nobody is to blame but himself. He helped to raise 
 the wind, and they all reaped the whirlwind. Or, in other 
 words, to use a quotation which I once heard the learned 
 chairman of this board quote in an argument at the Sullivan 
 county bar : 
 
 " lie digged a pit; 
 He digged it deep; 
 
 He digged it for his brother; 
 For this his sin 
 He did fall in 
 
 The pit lie dug for t other." 
 
 That is all there is to this charge, so far as this is con 
 cerned. The proceedings were commenced, as I think, with 
 
 2 
 
10 
 
 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 the view and the hope and the expectation that by this ex 
 traordinary zeal and great spasm of virtue, and by parading 
 through the press and before the public and the stockholders 
 their great and strenuous efforts to ferret out these monstrous 
 frauds of the conductors, they themselves would be retained 
 in power another year; and the thing would go on in its old 
 tracks and its old grooves in the same way it had gone on 
 before. And, gentlemen, if the conductors have done 
 nothing else, if it be through their instrumentality that re 
 forms in the Concord Railroad have been brought about 
 if it shall turn out that they were instrumental in relieving 
 the corporation from its former management, and putting it 
 into the hands of new men, of whom nobody complains, I 
 think, instead of being pursued here for fifty or a hundred 
 thousand dollars, when no cent can be proved against them, 
 they are entitled to receive from the corporation fifty thous 
 and dollars for their service; and I think the public will so 
 regard it. Gentlemen, do you believe this charge of fraud 
 ulent combination to stifle this investigation do you be 
 lieve that the men who at present constitute the board 
 of directors of the Concord Railroad ever entered into 
 any matter of that kind? Do you believe that such a man 
 as Judge Miiiot is capable of it? Do you believe that Na 
 than Parker, or J. Stephens Abbott, or the others, are capa 
 ble of it ? Do you believe, gentlemen, that the members of 
 the new board went into a combination, or that there w r as 
 ever any expectation that anything that was done at the an 
 nual meeting would have any reference whatever to the 
 prosecution of these suits ? As I have said, the conductors, 
 in conjunction with the stockholders, or a large majority of 
 the stockholders, were anxious for a change. The public 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION l\ GEORGE OLOFGH. 11 
 
 clamored for it. And they got it. And this very prosecu 
 tion that was got up for the purpose of screening them 
 selves was the very act that finally carried them all away 
 with the besom of destruction. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, something has been said in reference to 
 an attempt to stifle an investigation before the legislature. 
 The evidence in regard to that matter has come out before 
 you. Mr. Clough had no counsel before the legislature at 
 all for himself. The investigation, as I understand it, had 
 nothing whatever to do with these suits. The only question 
 there and I was counsel for the road, with others the 
 only question there was whether after measures had been taken 
 by the new board of directors to investigate the affairs be 
 tween the corporation and Mr. Gilmore, and all the business 
 of the corporation, whether the legislature, at the instigation 
 of anybody, should step in and take it out of their hands. 
 And it was on that ground, and on that ground alone, that 
 the investigation was postponed, in order that the new di 
 rectors might go on with it themselves. And they have 
 gone on with it, gentlemen; they have gone on with it 
 thoroughly; and have probed the affairs of the Concord 
 Railroad to the bottom, and spread the thing before you and 
 before the public, and shown, in their last report, the cor 
 ruption and rottenness which existed there; and they have 
 demonstrated that while the superintendent was charging the 
 conductors with stealing in the cars, of which there has been 
 no proof, he was himself a defaulter to the amount of more 
 than fifty thousand dollars! 
 
 Well, gentlemen, so much for this matter of the charge 
 which has been so frequently made here, that somebody had 
 been trying to shirk an investigation. Why, gentlemen, 
 
ARC; UM EXT OF HON. MASON W. T ATP AN. 
 
 after the proceeding that had been had at that annual meet 
 ing, the new hoard of directors could not stifle this proceeding 
 if they would, or if we had wanted them to. On the other 
 hand, there never has been one moment from the hour when 
 this prosecution first started from the hour when this suit 
 was first commenced against George Clough there never 
 has been one moment when lie would have had it stifled, or 
 would have had it suppressed, lie could not afford to have 
 it, gentlemen. I appeal to one of the honorable members 
 of this board, who knows George Clough, if, up to the time 
 these proceedings were commenced, he did not sustain, in 
 this community, and everywhere that he was known, the 
 character of an honest and upright and good citizen, i be 
 lieve that his reputation stood as fair among those who knew 
 him best, and who had occasion to know all about his busi 
 ness transactions, as any man in the city of Concord. 
 And i say, when these charges were trumpeted forth 
 when these charges were bruited through the press, and this 
 man and that man was button-holed at the corners of the 
 streets and shown these little papers of computations and 
 calculations and comparisons, to prove that Mr. (/lough had 
 been a plunderer for these long years that he had been on 
 the road 1 say that George Clough could not afford to have 
 this investigation suppressed. And never for a moment has 
 the idea been entertained that they could be suppressed in 
 any way, except before a tribunal competent to probe this 
 thing from beginning to end. And, gentlemen, we understand 
 that we are before that tribunal. We understand, too 
 and we knew full well Avhen we agreed to submit it to this 
 honorable board that an adverse decision would fall with 
 greater weight than if from a hap-haxard trial before a jury. 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 13 
 
 ^ I 
 
 And, on the other hand, we know that if we are vindicated, 
 and if the charges are proved to have been false, (as I be 
 lieve they have, every one of them,) a verdict from such a 
 tribunal a vindication from such a source would come 
 with all the more strength in our favor. Aye, gentlemen, 
 there is another thing. Talk about George Clough wanting 
 to suppress this investigation! On the other hand, in all 
 this proceeding, he has courted the utmost publicity; he has 
 courted the most searching investigation into all his affairs; 
 his whole life has been laid open before you, from the time 
 that he started from his father s roof, a poor boy, with all 
 his worldly effects done up in a pocket handkerchief, down 
 to this very moment. Every business transaction, everything 
 that he has done, every dollar that he has made, and where 
 he has made it, the way that he has done his business, have 
 all been laid open before you. Every cent s worth of prop 
 erty aye, gentlemen, the service of silver plate that he won 
 by getting up subscriptions to a newspaper, has been paraded 
 before you; and even the silver spoons that came down to 
 his wife from her mother everything has been inquired 
 into. And we have been willing that it should be so. And 
 I submit that the testimony and deposition of Mr. Clough 
 show that lie has been most anxious to tell the truth, the 
 whole truth and nothing but the truth, and to keep nothing 
 back in reference to his whole affairs. And I say that this 
 ought to weigh something in his favor. I assert that on the 
 stand here, and when for those long weeks he was under 
 examination, when his deposition was taken, that every 
 answer that he has given shows that Mr. Clough let it 
 cut where it might, no matter whether it is made against 
 him or for him Mr. Clough has told the truth in regard to 
 
14 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 everything. Yes, gentlemen; more than this. The counsel 
 on the other side has sought to vindicate himself from any 
 improper motives in prosecuting this suit, or any improper 
 connection with it, or any improper feelings in regard 
 to it. I have this to complain of in regard to that. 
 I say that, at least after these proceedings were com 
 menced, after suit was brought, it was a little in bad taste 
 to use no harsher expression to follow this man in the 
 way he has been followed, through the press, in the stock 
 holders meetings, and on the corners of the streets, and 
 everywhere. That is what I complain of, gentlemen. If 
 counsel were obliged to be present at the stockholders meet 
 ing, for instance ; or if counsel were obliged to be present at 
 the state house it was because, gentlemen, they did not 
 want Mr. Clough s case prejudiced in advance of a trial. 
 They did not want it tried by outside pressure. 
 
 And this leads me to say what I was going to say in re 
 gard to another matter, that Mr. Clough has carefully pro 
 vided for. These suits, these charges were rung throughout 
 the length and breadth of the land. He could not walk 
 these streets without feeling that the citizens with whom he 
 came in contact every day regarded him as a plunderer; his 
 family could not feel that the house they lived in, and the 
 clothes that his wife and his children wore on their backs 
 would be regarded as their own; but that somebody would 
 say: "All this has been stolen from the Concord Railroad." 
 
 And so, gentlemen, we have been obliged to meet all these 
 prejudices, and to repel them as far as we might. And Mr. 
 Clough has been here at large expense on this trial, to have 
 the whole proceedings taken down. Every word that has 
 been said, every particle of proof that has been put into this 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 15 
 
 case, whether it bears for him or against him, has been faith 
 fully reported, and is to be printed and circulated, no matter 
 what your decision may be. If he shall be convicted if, 
 in your judgment, the charges are sustained, it shall at least 
 appear, gentlemen, upon what evidence that decision rests. 
 And if, on the other hand, it shall appear that Mr. Clough 
 has been fully vindicated in your minds, then we want to 
 show to the world we want to show to those who have 
 heard these charges, which have been rung from one end of 
 the country to the other we want to show to everybody, 
 by a faithful report of this case, just the miserable farce that 
 has been played, from beginning to end, in regard to the 
 whole matter. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, what was the first step in the proceed 
 ings in this case? 
 
 Mr. Gilmore makes his charge before the board of direct 
 ors. Whereupon I say, with an indecent haste Gen. 
 Butler was employed as counsel. And Gen. Butler recom 
 mended the redoubtable George J. Carney, "Assistant Quar 
 termaster, and afterwards Quartermaster in the army of the 
 James," to come here, with his associates, and to go on to 
 this road with his detectives. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I want to say this : If there had been, 
 as it seems to me, this purpose to have a quiet investigation,; 
 if there was doubt in the minds of the directors of the Con 
 cord Railroad in regard to the honesty of George Clough, in 
 how much more quiet and proper and effectual a manner, as 
 it seems to me, could all these proceedings have been carried 
 forward. How much easier it would have been and it 
 seems to me, gentlemen, that this course must have already 
 been taken, and I think you must infer and set that fact 
 
16 ARGUMENT OF HOX. MASON W. TAPPAX. 
 
 clown in favor of the defendant, that it has been pursued by 
 the gentleman on the other side, to put somebody (some 
 one or more citi/ens of New Hampshire who would not be 
 suspected), at any one or more of the stations on this road, 
 running through some weeks or months, into these cars, 
 and quietly pay money, and see if they could "spot" or de 
 tect these conductors. I think that would have been the 
 way that would suggest itself to anybody that did not want 
 to make a great sensation and a great splosh. I don t know 
 but it has been done. If it has been done, then there is 110 
 evidence of it before you. It would be the most natural 
 thing to be hit upon by men who wanted quietly to ascertain 
 whether these men were honest or not. But instead of that, 
 we have Major Carney, and we have "Surgeon-General" 
 Carney, and we have Mr. Draper, and Mr. Batchelder, and 
 other detectives, put upon the track of these men for two or 
 three months. We have them here under false and lying 
 pretenses of carrying on a large "claim agency," traveling 
 daily over the road, and paying some fifteen hundred dol 
 lars in money in the cars, but no farthing of which has been 
 found sticking to the fingers or traced to the pockets of 
 George Clough. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I am not going to comment on their 
 testimony now. I shall feel constrained to say a word or 
 two about it before I get through, but I will only allude to 
 it in passing. But, gentlemen, it was some little time (and 
 I have 110 wonder that it was,) before these suits were 
 brought, after Major Carney s reports were made. I do not 
 wonder that no suits were instituted on the strength of that 
 report. And I don t think that you will wonder at all after 
 having these reports before you. 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 17 
 
 But it was the "WHITCHER TICKETS," gentlemen, which 
 finally produced these prosecutions, or caused them to he 
 brought. To use again the expression of the counsel 011 the 
 other side, in the course of this trial, they "accidentally 
 dropped a hook into this hole, where they didn t expect to 
 get anything at all, or at most only a nibble, and they brought 
 out a four-pounder!" And they made a great sensation over 
 it! Two of the best citizens of Manchester were arrested 
 as accomplices in this crime, but were soon discharged. 
 Jim Whitcher was arrested. Extra trains were run on Sun 
 day. The whole world was in a ferment. Sensation des 
 patches were written (mostly by the counsel 011 the other 
 side,) and sent off to the Boston Journal; and everything 
 was done to make this appear to be one of the most atrocious 
 and (to quote the language of the gentleman himself,) the 
 "most astounding" peculation that ever was heard of in the 
 annals of crime! And the sensation was kept up; and all, 
 gentleman, on account of the finding of these three hundred 
 and forty-two tickets 011 the person of Jim Whitcher. Why, 
 as was well said by my brother Rolfe in the opening, if they 
 had not been intent upon making this great noise, and keep 
 ing up this sensation for some ulterior purpose, ten minutes 
 examination of these tickets would have shown them that 
 they could not have been obtained from George dough, not 
 one of them. I undertake to say, the evidence here before 
 you will show that not one of these tickets probably came 
 from George Clough at all. On a part of them the dates 
 show that they could not have come from him ; and if they 
 had made even the most cursory examination of the tickets, 
 when they were discovered, they would have found chat in 
 all cases they must have come from other sources than 
 George Clough. 
 
18 ARGUMENT OF HOX. MASON W. TAP PAN. 
 
 Why, gentlemen, as I said before (and I now come to this 
 matter of the Whitcher tickets) I say, upon careful analy- 
 zation of this testimony there is not one of those Whitcher 
 tickets that could have been obtained from George Clough, 
 
 a 
 
 or that Whitcher ever got from him in any way. Isn t it 
 little remarkable, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, that the wit 
 ness most competent to give proof, if it exists, is it not a 
 little remarkable, gentlemen, that the man of all others who 
 knows most about it, and is supposed to know most about it, 
 Mr. Whitcher himself, is not put upon this stand at all ? lie 
 is the man that occasioned all this uproar. The reports of 
 the detectives amounted to nothing, for nothing was dis 
 covered. These prosecutions had their inception right here 
 with these Whitcher tickets. Whitcher knew where he got 
 them. They could have produced him; and yet they didn t 
 put him before you at all. Do they say, on the other hand, 
 that we might have brought him? Why should we? We 
 have had Lanes and Curtises enough on this stand; and it is 
 no business of ours to go fishing around in their dirty pools, 
 when there is no evidence against us. It is incumbent on 
 them to produce Mr. Whitcher; and they have not pro 
 duced him. And it is because they knew that Mr. Whitcher, 
 whatever he may be, would not have the hardihood to stand 
 here before you and say he got these tickets of George 
 Clough.. Why, gentlemen, if there were no other sources 
 from which these tickets could come, then there would be 
 some suspicion that the conductors, or that Mr. Clongh might 
 have let Whitcher have them. 1 [ere these tickets were flying 
 about everywhere. Everybody had them. Tickets were 
 purchased in Concord. Tickets were purchased in Manches 
 ter by White and Weston and others these coupon tickets 
 
CONCOKD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGII. 19 
 
 Gilmore was having tickets by the hundred. Other men were 
 going to the ticket office, and getting tickets whenever they 
 wanted them. Starkey was on the cars taking up tickets. And 
 there was a hundred ways that tickets could get into the 
 hands of James Whitcher, without presuming that every one 
 of these were furnished him by George Clough. And here 
 I desire to call your attention to the testimony because I 
 want to have it known just how this matter stood in regard 
 to this question of tickets I want to refer to the testimony 
 of Mr. Sanborn, the ticket master. And he swears that Whit 
 cher used to go to the ticket office and get tickets ; that 
 Natt Head used to get tickets there; that Joseph Goss used 
 to get tickets there; and that Tom Wattles used to get 
 tickets there all of them living in Hooksett, where Whitcher 
 lived; and he says that Captain Harrington and others used 
 to get tickets there. And he swears to you also that 
 Whitcher was one of Gilmore s fuglers, one of his men that 
 he relied upon to do anything that he wanted done in Hook- 
 sett and vicinity, and who had just as many tickets as he 
 wanted. This is what he says: "He, (Gil-more,} (could 
 come into the office and get tickets, and gtre me orders not 
 to make any record of them ; tickets were taken out of mi/ 
 package find no record made of them; one year three or four 
 hundred. \\ Intcher said he h< id so many men, whom he was 
 keeping fur toini meeting, and wanted some tickets for them. 
 I should think the days when men didn t come there to <rcf. 
 tickets, for four weeks prior to an election, were the exceptional 
 days." And Mr. Sanborn says, when these men came 
 for tickets, he would deal them out in numbers from one to 
 fifty. And he says further : "I wont say that I have not 
 dealt out to Gilmore a hundred at a, time; there lias been no year 
 
20 AJ1GUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 but that Gilmore would come ami vet tickets to o-Jre or send 
 
 f") ^""5 
 
 away. I recollect one tune, u //et/ (TI] more was a candidate., car 
 rying in twentij-fouT or twenty-jice tickets to I/au, front Manches 
 ter to "Nashua; 1 u as directed to make no account ; he repeatedly 
 ordered me to keep tickets out ; it teas rcn/ common to get, tickets 
 both before and after he was govern or ; It would average three or 
 four times a week; t/tct/ trcnt to all stations; 1 took some of these 
 tickets back again ; I look, them up and made no account of 
 them."" This is the testimony of Mr. Sanborii, the ticket 
 master on the Concord Railroad, their own witness. And 
 the report of the directors, which is in this case, (the last 
 report,) shows that Mr. Gilmore was indebted to the road 
 one thousand dollars for tickets ! Now was n t this matter 
 known to Mr. Gilmore and to Col. George? They took the 
 initiatory steps to have these suits brought, and brought too, 
 not on the report made by " Major Carney of the Army of 
 the James," or of " Surgeon General Carney of the Provi 
 dence Accident Company," or of any other detectives for 
 they delected nothing but because of t/te accidental finding of 
 t/tese tickets on the j>erson of James /( Ink her I Didn t they 
 understand all this. Didn t they know that these hund 
 reds and thousands of tickets were flying about everywhere 
 
 like autumnal leaves { And yet, for some motive or another, 
 i 
 
 either to plume themselves upon some investigation that they 
 
 were to make, or some great saving which they were going to 
 make to the road, for the purpose of subserving their own 
 interests and ends, and getting a new election, they charge 
 this whole matter upon George Clough without ever looking 
 to see whether these tickets were dated before or after he 
 went off from the road ! They made hot haste to jump to 
 the conclusion of his guilt without making the slightest 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION C. GEORGE CLOUGII. 21 
 
 examination ! And my brother, in the exuberance of his 
 fancy and the intensity of his zeal, exclaims that he has got 
 a "four-pounder* where he didn t expect a nibble ! 
 
 I think then that I have a right to characterize the proceed 
 ings in this case not only as hasty, but as vindictive and as 
 malicious. And I feel and have felt all through this thing 
 that there was some motive pervading this matter that I was 
 entirely unable to account for. And I think the referees will 
 be of opinion that there was some motive somewhere with 
 somebody, to push this thing on, other than that of a sincere 
 belief that this amount of money had been stolen in the 
 cars, as they have charged. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, I want just to analyze these Wliit- 
 chcr tickets. And I will only detain you a very few 
 moments. There are three hundred and forty-three of 
 them in all. Of these three hundred and forty-three tick 
 ets, Mr. Sanborn, the ticket master, has sworn that tivo 
 hundred of them, could not by any possibility ami nobody 
 pretend* hare to-day that they could have conic from George 
 dough ! There was then only a hundred and forty-three of 
 them that could by any possibility come from his hands 
 at all. That is the testimony of Sanborn; that is the 
 testimony of the ticket officers, which shows that barely 
 a hundred and forty-three of the three hundred and forty- 
 three could by any possibility have been obtained by "\Vliit- 
 cher from George Clough. And such is the evidence. 
 
 Well then in regard to the one hundred and forty-three 
 that possibly might have come from him. Mr. Clough left 
 the road in January, 1866. Thirty-three of these tickets 
 boar dates (which every man can read) after George Clough 
 left the road. That disposes of thirty-three of them. 
 
ARGUMENT OF IIOM. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 There were three tickets to Boston that could not have been 
 obtained from Clough, for the reason that those tickets were 
 joint tickets, and were charged to Mr. Clough, and he would 
 have them to pay for; and it is not very likely that Mr. Jim 
 "Whitcher would get these from him or any other conductor. 
 That disposes of three more. Sixteen of these one hundred 
 and forty-three bear date of " February ;" some in I860 ; 
 and some " February 5th " only, without the year being 
 named. But it is perfectly apparent that the February 5th 
 could not be February, 1805 ; for it appears from the 
 almanac (of which you take judicial notice,) that February 
 5th, 1865, would be on Sunday. So that of these tickets of 
 which I spoke as bearing date February 5th, the year could 
 not have been 1865. It must, therefore, gentlemen, have 
 been February, 1866, the February after Mr. Clough left the 
 road. I say February, 1866, because although, Mr. Chair 
 man, you will bear in mind that these tickets have the year 
 1865 printed on the end in. that way, it does not by any 
 means follow that these tickets were only used in the year 
 1865. On the contrary, there is one of these tickets (here 
 it is) the date of which is very plain, and which bears the 
 date of 1865 printed on the end, like the others, but on the 
 back you will see that it is issued February 10th, 1866. 
 The practice was, as the ticket master swears, to have a 
 large quantity of tickets printed, use those tickets until 
 they were 4 gone, and then get a new batch; and when they 
 were issued, the year was put on in which they were 
 printed. So here were sixteen more of these tickets which 
 were for February 5th, which have the year marked 1865 
 on the back side 1 , which must have been dated February 
 5th, 1866, after Mr. Clough left the road; because, as I have 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 23 
 
 said, if it was February,, 1865, it would come on Sunday, 
 and the cars did not run on that day. There are nine more 
 of these tickets which are Montreal coupons; two dated 
 February 9th, 1866 ; three dated February 5th, which was 
 undoubtedly February, 1866. I believe the year does not 
 appear on these tickets ; but they are new tickets, as Mr. 
 Sanborn thinks from the face. The tickets were very clean 
 and were undoubtedly tickets that Starkey let him have. 
 Five more of them are dated February merely, without any 
 figure ; new and clean, Mr. Sanborn says. And there is one 
 dated February 27th, which it is evident must have been 
 issued February, 1866. There are three old ones found 
 at his house, neither of which, an examination of the 
 tickets will show, Clough could have had, because they 
 came from points above Concord. That disposes of all the 
 tickets except seventy-two, which bear no date at all. 
 Showing, therefore, that every one of these three hundred 
 and forty-three tickets, with the exception of seventy-two 
 tickets, could not possibly have been received from Mr. 
 Clough. And of these seventy-two tickets, all I have to 
 say in regard to them is, what Mr. Sanborn said himself, 
 when he examined them, that they " are all new and clean, 
 and there is nothing to show handling and nothing that 
 would indicate that they were probably issued before Feb 
 ruary, 1866." They are all new and clean. I say, then, in 
 regard to these seventy-two looking at the testimony that 
 we have from Starkey himself that these tickets show on 
 the face of them, that every single one of them were tickets 
 that Whitcher received from some other source besides from 
 George Clough. The tickets themselves prove that every 
 one but seventy-two must have been received or got some- 
 
ARGUMENT OF IIOX. M.V.SOX W. TAPPAX. 
 
 where else than from Mr. (lough ; and of these seventy- 
 two, as I have said, the indications are, and the testimony of 
 Mr. Sanboni is that they must have been issued after Mr. 
 dough left the road, after January, 18(56 ; because they 
 bear upon their face the fact that they are new and clean 
 tickets ; and there is nothing to indicate that they were not 
 so issued, but on the other hand every presumption that 
 they were issued after dough left the road ! 
 
 But, gentlemen, we have testimony that disposes of this 
 whole matter. And that is the testimony, as you will recol 
 lect, put in by the evidence of Mr. Kolfe, of what Starkey 
 himself stated in regard to this matter, and the circum 
 stances under which he stated it. Starkey says that he let 
 Whitcher have these tickets, and let him have them at two 
 or three different times ; that he let him have them when he 
 was on the road as conductor ; and also when, as brakeman, 
 he picked them up in the cars before he went on the road as 
 conductor. And Weston and White both swear that not a sin 
 gle 1 one of the tickets which were found in their possession, 
 did Mr. dough let them have. They both swear that they 
 never purchased one of dough, nor that Starkey ever got 
 one of dough to pass them. And White says when he got 
 tickets of Starkey he was " boss and all hands on the road." 
 So that neither the Whitcher nor the White nor the 
 Wcston tickets ever came from George dough. Besides all 
 this testimony, gentlemen, which I have referred to on the 
 subject of the Whitcher tickets, wo have the testimony of 
 Mr. Clongh himself; and he swears to you that for a year 
 and a half prior to the time he left the road, he never let 
 Mr. Whitcher have any tickets at all ; and he swears to you 
 further that although he has let him have a few tickets, by 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION f. GEORGE CI.OUGH. 
 
 direction of Gilmore and to give to poor people, not more 
 than ten or fifteen during all the time that he has been on 
 the road; he swears that he never let him have any tickets 
 lor more than a year and a half before he went off the road. 
 So, gentlemen, that disposes, I think, of the Whitcher 
 tickets. And I may say, in dismissing this part of the case, 
 
 that there is not the first particle of testimony from anv 
 
 r 
 quarter whatever, which shows or has any tendency to show 
 
 that any single one of these Whitcher tickets ever came 
 from the hands of George Clough. 
 
 And, gentlemen, it was upon this flimsy foundation, in the 
 finding of these Whitcher tickets which came from Starkey, 
 that Whitcher had picked up from the conductors everywhere, 
 or stolen, or got, nobody knows when or how, it was upon 
 this flimsy foundation that this prosecution was commenced, 
 and this great sensation inaugurated! 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I come now to the great charge which 
 is made in this case. The gentleman said in his opening 
 that all this talk about the report of the detectives and other 
 small matters was of no account whatever. They only related 
 to the subject of a few thousand dollars; that was of no ac 
 count; they were small matters in comparison with the great 
 subject that he was going to present to you. And he said that 
 you would be perfectly "astounded" at the evidence. The 
 "most astounding" and "astonishing" evidence was to be 
 produced to show the wholesale plundering of these men in 
 the cars. And now, gentlemen, I suppose that is the great 
 thing that is in this case, if there is any stealing anywhere. 
 I suppose the public think, and I suppose the stockholders 
 thought, that if there had been any considerable amount 
 stolen by these men, it had been done, not by selling western 
 
26 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 coupons, or peddling peanuts, but by receiving money in the 
 cars and putting it in their own pockets. And I think, 
 gentlemen, when this evidence comes to be laid before the 
 public, as it is now before you, that the most " astonishing " 
 and " astounding " part of the whole case, considering how 
 this charge has been put forth, and with what confidence it 
 has been proclaimed and asserted here that this wholesale 
 plundering was going to be proved I think the most 
 astonishing part of the whole case will be, when vou come 
 to consider it, that it rests entirely in the fertile imagination 
 of the counsel on the other side ; and that there is not a 
 particle of proof to sustain it. I think, gentlemen, when 
 the testimony of the redoubtable Major Carney arid the 
 other detectives was introduced, when every breath in the 
 room was suspended and every ear open to hear what was 
 coming, that you must have been slightly "astonished" as 
 step by step that report was put in; and in no single instance 
 anywhere iras Mr. Clough found to have pocketed a single dollar 
 or a single cent tit at had been paid to him hi/ these detective* in 
 tlie ears! I say this is the most "astounding" part of this 
 case, considering the expectations that had been raised by 
 reason of these reports. And when this evidence falls, 
 when the foundation slips out from under the feet of my 
 brother, and Major Carney falls, and Surgeon General, Car 
 ney falls, and Draper falls, how much is there left/ They 
 say that Mr. Draper was sent away by somebody, and there 
 fore he is not here to testify. The fact was that he got so 
 much in debt that he could not stay. And I think it is not 
 to be imputed that he has been driven away by us. I 
 wish he might have been here, and that we might have had 
 the benefit of his report, as well as Carney s and Batchel- 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION I . GEORGE CLOUGH. X < 
 
 der s. When this evidence of wholesale stealing in the cars, 
 which has heen charged over and over and over again every 
 where, slips away, and there is not the shadow of a shade of a 
 foundation to sustain it, then the gentleman is left to fall 
 back upon the question of "estoppel," and to charge George 
 Clough for the fares of the ."peanut boy." 
 
 JSTow, gentlemen, how is it in regard to this "astoun ding- 
 evidence "? In the first place, (before I come to comment 
 on the testimony of these detectives) let me consider the 
 question of the number of cars and the size of the trains. 
 The "astounding" proposition of the gentleman is, that 
 although, according to the records of the road, there were 
 only passengers enough riding in the trains to fill two or 
 three cars, and that Clough only took, as his waybills shew, 
 some two or three dollars a trip (I forget the exact amount), 
 yet the fact was, all through the war it took sixteen or seven 
 teen cars to carry the passengers, and that instead of t\vo or 
 three dollars a trip from passengers riding in three or four cars, 
 he should have returned a sum corresponding to the amount 
 that would be paid by passengers riding in seventeen cars ! 
 In other words, they were going to show you that hundreds 
 and thousands of dollars had been taken in this way by the 
 conductors. They were going to show it by the size of the 
 trains; by the amount of passengers that rode in the cars; 
 and that, instead of passengers enough, as I have said, to 
 fill up two or three cars, they were going to show you that 
 seventeen cars ran over this road, filled with passengers ; and 
 that substitute brokers and substitute runners, and soldiers 
 and town agents, and soldiers families rode in these cars 
 daily, filling them up, and paying immense sums of money 
 in the cars; and that George Clough stole the whole of it, ex- 
 
28 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAP PAN. 
 
 ccpt lux beggarly return* that he nuidc to fhc ro<id! Well, gen 
 tlemen, this proposition, except to a man, it would seem to 
 me, of very exuberant fancy, would be sufficiently absurd on 
 its face. The bare statement of the proposition is its best, 
 refutation. The idea that when Mr. Clough or any other 
 conductor only returned the amounts that they show the} did 
 return in the cars, the idea that they only returned this 
 small amount in comparison with what the gentleman says 
 was paid to them these thousands of dollars paid by sol 
 diers and brokers and others the pretense that all this ad 
 ditional money should be pocketed by George Clough, 
 right in the face and eyes of the public, and under 
 the very noses of the directors and the superintendent 
 and other officers of the road, I say the very statement 
 of the proposition stamps it with absurdity and impossibility 
 on its very face. Nobody believes it. And I should not 
 suppose that even with the fertile imagination of the counsel, 
 when he coines to sit down and look at it calmly, could be 
 lieve it himself! 
 
 But how are the facts, gentlemen, in regard to this testi 
 mony? What is the evidence which they have brought for 
 ward to sustain this charge of wholesale plundering in the 
 cars ? 
 
 How is it, gentlemen, in regard to the si/e of the trains 
 and the number of passengers who rode therein ( What is 
 the testimony ? 
 
 It would seem that the records of the road ought to weigh 
 something on these points, and that the officers of the road 
 would also be likely to know a little something in regard to 
 both of these particulars, the number of cars and the num 
 ber of passengers. But my brother proposes that it should 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOVGII. 
 
 rest on the loose guesses of Mr. White, the occasional counts 
 of Mr. Perkins, and upon the pure, the intelligent, the xuber 
 and disinterested testimony of Henry P. Lane and Sam 
 Curtis about whom I shall have something to say before I 
 get through. 
 
 You have the testimony of Mr. Perkins and Mr. White, 
 introduced by them; and what do they say? Why, Mr. 
 Perkins states that sometimes there were sixteen or seventeen 
 cars on a train ; and that he counted them. But he states, 
 gentlemen, on his cross-examination, that he never observed 
 particularly in regard to the size of the trains only when he 
 did count, and he counted because, he says, they were extra 
 ordinary occasions and extraordinarily large trains. That is 
 what he says. And Mr. White says in regard to it : " From 
 the month of July to September, I have santetimes counted 
 sixteen cars ; at this time there was a lively recruiting busi 
 ness going on ; it was at the season Avhen the travel was the 
 highest ; soldiers were recruited and marched off imme 
 diately to the field ; it was about the time of the battle of 
 Gettysburg, in July, 1864 ; at this time the soldiers were 
 sent right away; in July the squads were sent away most 
 rapidly; if a squad of a hundred and fifty, they would have 
 to put 011 three cars; if two hundred, four cars, etc." That 
 is what he says in regard to the number of cars ; showing, 
 gentlemen, that when these extraordinarily large trains of 
 cars were run, they were exceptional cases. I do not deny 
 that there were times during the war when there have been 
 sixteen or seventeen cars upon the road. I deny, gentlemen, 
 that that was usually the case. I deny that there is any evi 
 dence which shows that so many cars as that ran usually. 
 But, 011 the contrary, they are mere exceptions, counted, as 
 
30 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAX. 
 
 Mr. Perkins says, because they were extra large trains. 
 Now, gentlemen, it seems that Mr. White and Mr. Gilmore 
 had some dispute in reference to the size of these trains. 
 Mr. White and Mr. Gilmore were talking about it, and Gil- 
 more denied there were so many. And it was said on the 
 other side that Mr. Biddle kept a precise account. And, 
 gentlemen, they were going to show by Mr. Biddle that there 
 were these large trains. Mr. Biddle was sent for in great 
 haste; he was trotted up in a great hurry, and he was put 
 upon the stand, and was to be examined ; but, gentlemen, 
 for some reason or other, he gave way to another witness. 
 And it has happened probably upon further consultation 
 with Mr. Biddle that Mr. Biddle, who kept this exact ac 
 count, and whose account, for some reason or other, my 
 brother says, Mr. Gilmore has destroyed (the Lord only 
 knows for what) Mr. Biddle, who made the account, and 
 who made the record, Inix not been produced upon the stand 
 at all, to su Cf/r to f/ifif. matter! Xow I do not know about 
 the loss of his record. That is the assertion of the gentle 
 man. We have not any proof of it. We have not a word 
 from Mr. Biddle in regard to it. But I kno\v this : that 
 my brother is not apt to forget any testimony that bears fa 
 vorably upon his side of the case, and if they could have 
 shown that there were sixteen or seventeen cars here, by Ba- 
 ruch. Biddle, who knew as much about it as anybody, except 
 Mr. Blake, whom we put upon the stand, I know that Mr. 
 Biddle would have been produced here. But they have not 
 produced him. The fact is not as they have stated. There 
 never were such trains run on the road at that time, unless they 
 were exceptions to the general rule, or were filled with soldiers 
 who had government transportation. The size of the trains is 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 31 
 
 testified to by Mr. Upham, the ticket master at Nashua, and 
 by Mr. Robert Blake, who has charge of the car house at Con 
 cord, and who knows more about it than anybody else, except 
 Mr. Biddle, and he says there never was any such trains. 
 Another thing they were going to show was that the soldiers 
 paid in the cars. They were going to show this transporta 
 tion, and that these soldiers paid in large numbers in the 
 cars; that the brokers and substitutes paid by the thousands 
 of dollars in the cars. Well, it turns out, like all the other 
 large assertions, that instead of large numbers paying in the 
 cars, the soldiers were furnished with transportation by the Gov 
 ernment, and that they were furnished with extra tickets, and 
 day by day large squads of soldiers were being sent off to 
 the field to recruit the regiments that had been depleted. 
 They were sent off in squads of twenty, or fifty, or a hun 
 dred, or a hundred and fifty; and they rode in the passenger 
 cars, and they increased the size of these trains from the or 
 dinary run of travel four or five cars, on the Concord Rail 
 road, to from six to eleven. Bat they were not paying their 
 money to these conductors hi the cars. They paid no dollar to 
 them; but the government furnished them with separate 
 tickets. The government paid their transportation ; so there 
 was no chance for Mr. Clough to steal any money from the 
 soldiers. 
 
 It should also be borne in mind that at this time the cars 
 were filled with "dead heads" everybody, almost, was 
 riding on "free passes" so much so, that when the list of 
 bank directors, lawyers, politicians, insurance agents, substi 
 tute brokers, merchants, clergymen, &c., all over the state, 
 who rode free, was being put in, the Hon. Chairman re 
 marked, in view of the vast throng that was presented, that 
 
>!>: ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 it would probably save time to put in a list of those who 
 paid their fares ! leaving the mass of the great public to ride 
 free ! And a statement has been referred to in the course of 
 the trial, which the new directors authorized, that they found 
 in existence, when they took charge of the road, more than 
 ten thousand of these free passes ! And yet, when the size 
 of the trains were swelled in this way, you are asked to pro 
 nounce that George Clough stole thousands of dollars in the 
 cars, because the trains were larger than the returns from 
 paying passengers indicated! 
 
 Well, gentlemen, a great parade was made over the mat 
 ter to which I have referred, about the thousands of dollars 
 that were being paid by the substitute brokers in the cars. 
 This has been asserted over and over again; but who did 
 they put on to prove this, and what is the testimony upon 
 which this charge against George Clough rests ? Why, 
 they put upon the stand Henry T. Lane and Sam Curtis ! 
 And, as has been said, if they had raked the purlieus of per 
 dition over with a fine tooth comb, they could not have 
 combed up two such infernal wretches as came here upon the 
 stand and testified in regard to that matter. Both, when 
 they were before you, were so drunk that they could hardly 
 articulate correctly. Both of them admitted themselves to 
 be the basest of human characters, and showed that their 
 whole course of life was such that no decent man would put. 
 a particle of confidence in the truth of the testimony they 
 might give. And this was the "astounding testimony" that 
 was going to come before the referees in regard to the matter 
 of wholesale plundering by George Clough in the cars! 
 
 These two runners, gamblers, drunkards, debauchees 
 who admit that they get their living by gambling and liquor- 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION ?:. GEORGE CLOUGH. 33 
 
 selling these are the immaculate witnesses on whom the 
 gentleman relics to furnish this "ASTOUNDING EVIDENCE!" 
 
 But, gentlemen, let us analyze this testimony. Lane starts 
 off as a man of very large consequence. He is put upon the 
 stand as a "substitute broker," a man who brought large 
 numbers of recruits from NCAV York, and recruited our regi 
 ments here! Mr. Chairman, you recollect what Henry P. 
 Lane said. He had always paid in the cars; never bought any 
 tickets, but always paid. He "brought seven or eight 
 thousand men here, and put them into our regiments." 
 Well, if my brother on the other side was content to rest 
 this charge upon such statements, he has the right to 
 do so. 
 
 But how did it turn out? Mr. Chairman, when you come 
 to test and analyze the testimony of Curtis and Lane, men 
 who, if they could keep sober enough, when any recruits 
 were on board the cars, were employed merely to turn them 
 this way at Worcester instead of having them go to Boston 
 it is found that neither Lane or Curtis ever brought a recruit 
 from New York themselves without tho intervention of a 
 broker. They were sent merely to turn recruits this way; 
 and Lane himself swears he had nothing to do with the 
 payment of their fares, but that the company that he was to 
 work for took the delivery of the men here in Concord from 
 the brokers who came through with them. This he was 
 obliged to say upon cross-examination. And I want to call 
 your attention to it. You will remember it; but I want to 
 have it appear that I state, as I go along, what is exactly 
 true in regard to this evidence. I have told you how he 
 started out that he brought on seven or eight thousand 
 men, and that he paid in the cars mostly ; carrying^the idea 
 
 5 
 
ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 that for these seven or eight thousand soldiers he had paid 
 George Clough and other conductors, in the cars, the entire 
 amount of their fares! And he swears to another thing 
 which you know to be false: He always came, he says, on 
 the early train, and George Clough Avas always 011 this early 
 train. Clough, as you know, could not be there only every 
 other day at any rate, lie carried the idea, in his direct ex 
 amination, that he had paid this large amount, not one dollar 
 of which was returned by Clough in his returns to the road; 
 and therefore the whole of that paid by Lane and Curtis 
 swears pretty much .the same thing was pocketed by Mr. 
 Clough! And yet, upon his cross-examination, see how he 
 collapses. He says: "sometimes it was the practice to ticket 
 their men through to Concord, because it was half a dollar 
 less." Mr. Upham, who ran upon the road about the same 
 time, you recollect, swears distinctly that every time he was 
 on the road those men were ticketed through. And he gave 
 vou the reason: that it was for their interest, because their 
 
 I * 
 
 fare would come fifty cents less than it would if paid in 
 the cars. Mr. Upham swears to this distinctly; and 
 he is their own witness, and a man whose Avord will not 
 be gainsaid anywhere. He swears that ci:enj time he ran 
 ocer I he road us conductor, these substitute brokers Jiad tickets, 
 instead of paying lit, t/te cars. And I beg that the referees 
 will make a note of that fact. Lane says farther: "I used 
 to make bargains for these men at the Worcester depot; 
 I simply took their names, and the brokers took them 
 
 through to Concord. Ordinarily the men remained in 
 
 o . J 
 
 the hands of the broker until they arrived at Concord. 
 The broker had the entire responsibility until they were de 
 livered in Concord." Again: "Generally the broker paid 
 
CONCORD RAILKOAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. O>> 
 
 the fares of the men." Although he would have you infer 
 that he paid the fares of these men in the cars, yet he says 
 afterwards: " The broker paid the fares of the men; 1 had no 
 thing to do with the paying of the fares; the broker had charge 
 of them, and paid their fares- until then got to Concord; 1 can 
 not stale how many fares, nor for how many men, were paid to 
 George Clough ; I cannot tell how many men; I cannot give 
 any sort of an idea to the referees, whether it was one or a 
 thousand." 
 
 And then look at the animus of their testimony, too. 
 Both of these men had had trouble with George Clough, 
 who had been compelled, on account of the disturbance 
 they made in the cars, to confine one or both of them in the 
 baggage car, because they were unfit to ride among decent 
 people. 
 
 Curtis starts out in the same manner, with a large number 
 of men, and swears substantially the same as Lane in regard 
 to the brokers paying their fares. You will recollect that 
 one of these men was put in the baggage car; and the other 
 wanted to go free, and Clough wouldn t pass him free. And 
 this accounts for the swift and wholesale manner they came 
 in here to testify against him. And these are the men 
 drunken, miserable, gambling wretches that are fished up 
 and brought in here to support this charge of fraud and 
 wholesale plundering on the part of George Clough in the 
 cars. And this, let me repeat again, is the "ASTOUNDING 
 EVIDENCE" that the gentleman has got and laid before you, 
 in support of this monstrous charge! 
 
 Well, now, what does Mr. Perkins say? I will read the 
 substance of his testimony: "I don t remember about Mr. 
 dough s trains in particular." That is his testimony. He 
 
36 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 swears that he cannot distinguish particularly in regard to 
 dough s trains. "I never counted the up trains/ he says. 
 "The reason why I counted that going down was because it 
 was an extraordinary long train. I never noticed only when 
 I counted." And again, on page 20 of my notes: "I count 
 ed because they were extra long trains; a great many soldieis 
 in the train." (Corresponding exactly with Mr. White s tes 
 timony.) "The whole of our company had a pass. I don t 
 recollect any particular instance of brokers paying to Mr. 
 Clough." So you see there is not a particle of reliable tes 
 timony; the whole charge rests upon inferences and asser 
 tions alone. He don t recollect of any particular instance 
 of brokers paying to Clough. " Ordinarily" he says, "the 
 broker came through on the trains; we had nothing to do about 
 paying their fares." Occasionally, it was undoubtedly true 
 that these runners might have picked up a man, and then 
 they paid their fares, if they did not purchase a ticket. But 
 ordinarily, Perkins says, the broker came through with the 
 men, and he had nothing to do with paying the fares. He 
 speaks about two car-loads of substitutes that paid in the 
 cars. And this was a matter that was referred to by the 
 gentleman on the other side that they "paid by the car 
 load." But Perkins, although he says he knows that two 
 car-loads of substitutes paid in the cars, he also says : " / 
 know it was not paid to either ( 1 /ot/gh or Soyes; It was paid to 
 a conductor on the early express train" And again: " It waf 
 /><> part of our business, or of our men , to sec to the payment oj 
 fares; they were delivered to us here; when we got a 
 squad of fifty or a hundred men they were sent off to a regi 
 ment ; sometimes we would put in a hundred men in a day ; 
 have seen them march off under guard." Showing that 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGII. 37 
 
 while these large trains were being run, gentlemen, it was 
 at a time when recruiting was going on briskly here. Regi 
 ments had been depleted in the field, and it was necessary 
 to send the men off immediately; and they went by the 
 passenger trains. But they did not pay their fares in the 
 cars, and neither Mr. Clough or the other conductors could 
 have stolen a cent of money from them, for the government 
 paid their transportation. But there is another omission 
 here, that seems to me to be a little bit remarkable, in re 
 gard to this, as well as in regard to Biddle s testimony. This 
 case has been pending some three years or more. There has 
 been ample time to get evidence from every quarter of the 
 globe almost, if it was necessary. It was well known exactly 
 how these facts were, to the gentleman who was managing 
 this case on the other side. And if they could have shown 
 that these brokers (these men, Lane and Curtis, did not rise 
 to the dignity of substitute "brokers" even; for the "brokers" 
 were of a much higher grade than Lane and Curtis, how 
 ever low a broker s position might be; they were mere sub- 
 agents and runners, as I have said;) and now, if it could 
 have been shown that these "brokers," as Col. George says 
 they did, paid invariably in the cars, let me ask you why no 
 single broker has been put upon this stand? Not one has 
 been brought forward. Aye, gentlemen, they hare taken the 
 testimony of a few brokers. That has come out in evidence 
 before you. They have taken the depositions of one or two 
 or three of these brokers. That you understand, and that 
 is in evidence before you. But have the depositions of these 
 brokers, gentlemen, been put into this case? Not one of 
 them. Perhaps I am wrong when I say not one; because I 
 believe Jacob Smith, in his deposition, says that he some- 
 
38 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON AV. TAPPAN. 
 
 times brought on a few substitutes. It was attempted to be 
 shown, in order to implicate Clough, that he had at one 
 time passed Smith free, and received pay for doing so in hay. 
 But, unfortunately for my brother, Smith, when he came to 
 testify, swore that for the hay which he let Clough have 
 Clough paid him in money. That ended that matter. But 
 Smith, although stating that when he had substitutes he 
 usually paid in the cars, yet swore that he did not recollect 
 of ever paying any money to Clough and Smith is the only 
 person in the shape of a substitute "broker" who has testi 
 fied in this case, out of the hundreds of "brokers" that 
 were running men in here ! So that I am right when I say 
 that there is not a particle of proof here from these brokers 
 from New York, Concord, Manchester or Boston or any 
 where, to show that they paid a single cent in the cars to 
 either of these conductors. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I ask again, is not this omission a little 
 significant ? If the fact were so, when we have the names 
 of twenty or more different men in New York who were 
 constantly coming on here to see the town agents, and who 
 were constantly bringing 011 men to fill up our regiments, 
 why, let me ask again, has not some one of them been pro 
 duced? They were "brokers;" they were men known in 
 New York, and probably, most of them, known to people 
 here. It docs not appear that the least inquiry has been made 
 to find where these substitute brokers were, by whom they 
 could support this charge that has been made of plundering 
 thousands of dollars from day to day and from week to 
 week by George Clough. And it rests only upon the unsub 
 stantial and false and malignant testimony of such men as 
 Ilenrv P. Lane and Sam Curtis. 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 39 
 
 When it is shown by Perkins, and even by Lane and Cur 
 tis, that the "brokers" had charge of the men they brought 
 on that they had the oversight and paying of their fares, 
 or purchasing their tickets that they delivered their men 
 in Concord, and that the parties with whom they dealt here 
 had nothing to do about paying their fares when TJpliam 
 swears that these men always had tickets when he ran the 
 trains, is it not singular, gentlemen, that not one of them 
 has been put upon the stand to show what amount of money 
 they paid to George Clough? So much, gentlemen, for this 
 " astounding testimony! " 
 
 And, gentlemen, this brings me to consider the testimony 
 of these detectives. And, as I said before, I think every 
 body, including this honorable tribunal, feels that here, after 
 all, is the great hinge of this case. If the fact be that these 
 conductors have been plundering this road in this way, and 
 they have had three or four detectives upon their track for 
 two or three months, more or less, of course they must have 
 ferretted this thing out, and it must appear from this evi 
 dence, if at all, that these men have been false and fraudu 
 lent and dishonest plunderers and thieves, and entitled to 
 the execration of every honest person in the community. 
 Xow then, I believe this was what we all expected. When 
 Major Carney, "of the Army of the James," was put upon 
 the stand with such a parade, and his testimony referred to as 
 of such paramount importance, it is no wonder, although we 
 were firm in the faith of his innocence, that we should ex 
 pect, if there \vas any evidence against him anywhere, that 
 the disclosures in this report of the chief spy would furnish 
 that evidence. But what is the fact? Let me state it, " - en- 
 
 7 O 
 
 tlemen, and let me proclaim it so that everybody may hear 
 
40 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 and know that although Maj. Carney was on this train as de 
 tective, this Carney, who swore that his pay depended upon 
 the amount that he found against the conductors who was 
 thus interested in convicting Mr. Clotigh, and his testimony 
 and his manner and his words showed that he got, from some 
 source or other, imbued with the same spirit that has been 
 pursuing George Clough all through these proceedings, al 
 though he went on there with this prejudice although it 
 was for his interest to get all against Mr. Clough that he 
 could, and although he swore that his pay depended, as I 
 have said, on the amount that he found against him, not one 
 stngle dollar or cent does Ite report as having been found against 
 George Clotigh! Every dollar, every cent that Major Carney 
 paid in the cars, day after day, to George Clough, is returned, 
 on George Clough 9 s way-bill at night every dollar, every cent ! 
 But on the cross-examination of Major Carney, "of the Army 
 of the James," it is shown that he was put on to the Con 
 cord Railroad by General Butler, the senior counsel in this 
 great humbug; and he was obliged to state, when he took 
 the returns of George Clough in his hands and looked them 
 over and compared them with his report, that George Clough 
 had returned every dollar and every cent. "On such a date 
 I paid him thirteen dollars in the cars for so many fares be 
 tween Concord and Boston, perhaps, or between Concord 
 and Manchester, or Concord and Nashua;" and that was 
 reported. We took George dough s return for that date, 
 put it into his hands to read, and you find every one of these 
 fares is returned just exactly as he had reported them. I 
 have got them analyzed here, gentlemen, but I don t pro 
 pose to take np your time in reading it. I went over them 
 carefully last night, after one o clock, to see that I was not 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION . r. GEORGE CLOUGH. 41 
 
 mistaken in regard to this matter; and I say that in every 
 single wMtince Major Carney- s report corresponds with Clough s 
 returns! Why, gentlemen, I said this was the hinge the 
 pivot upon which everybody will consider this case to 
 turn ; and we, as counsel for George Clough and his family 
 in this matter, naturally felt anxious concerning this redoubt 
 able gentleman and his famous "report." And we tried to 
 get hold of it and find what this man, who, it appears, took 
 a thousand dollars to make a report in another case, would 
 swear to; and so we made anxious search for "General But 
 ler s box" containing it. We traced it to Boston and to 
 Lowell, and then, as we believed, into the custody of the 
 gentleman who is here as counsel on the other side, at Con 
 cord; and then we followed it to Boston again, and then we 
 heard of it at Washington; and we followed it everywhere, 
 all the time pumping the terrible "Major Carney" to see 
 what he knew about it. But, like an ignis fatuus that it was, 
 it everywhere eluded our grasp! And when at last the box 
 came before you, and the key was turned, I admit that my 
 heart palpitated a little; I didn t know what Major Carney 
 might say in that report. But when, with trembling hand 
 and anxious eye, we came to open the box and see all that 
 it contained, I must say that the mountain which, you recol 
 lect, went through that terrible agony of labor and brought 
 forth only the smallest kind of a mouse, didn t compare with 
 the abortion that jumped out of that box ! And there is no 
 thing that I remember in history that compares with the en 
 tire fizzle of this testimony and the report of this puissant 
 "Major of the Army of the James" and the other detec 
 tives, but the redoubtable exploit, down South, of General 
 Butler s "powder boat!" Now, gentlemen, I don t stand 
 
AKGUMEXT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 | 
 
 here to disparage the military ability of General Butler. But 
 whatever may be his fame as a soldier or a statesman, it 
 must be conceded on all hands that his "powder boat" was 
 a failure. His name, and his great reputation as a lawyer, 
 have been paraded and blazoned before you, as if, by their 
 aid, this " Major Carney " and "Surgeon General Carney" 
 and Colonel George were going to turn the universe all up 
 side down and explode at least half of Concord, and par 
 ticularly George Clough and the other conductors! And so, 
 I say there has been no fi/zlo in history that at all compares 
 with it, but just that "powder boat" fi/zle to which I have 
 alluded. And it seems to me, gentlemen, that this same 
 "Major Carney, of the Army of the .James," must have been 
 the very fellow who touched that boat off! There, you 
 recollect, was a terrible noise, a great deal of smoke and 
 smudge, and a few clams and considerable sand went into 
 the air. But after the smoke and smudge had cleared away, 
 there stood Fort Fisher, with not a single brick or stone dis 
 placed. And it is just exactly so h,uv. There has been a 
 great noise, a terrible stench, an awful smudge and a dread 
 ful sensation, but nothing in the world to it a complete 
 fi/zle! Why, what a tremendous man this " Major Carney, 
 of the Army of the James," was. You recollect what airs 
 he put on when he testified; and you recollect, also, the ap 
 pearance of his brother, "Surgeon General Carney, of the 
 Accident Company," who appeared later upon the scene of 
 action and testified as a detective! Yes, you recollect how 
 the Major was struck with the guilty appearance of Mr. 
 Clough. I beg you to remember this, because it is of the 
 same piece exactly with "Surgeon General Carney" who was 
 on the 1 stand day before yesterday. You recollect the Major 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION / . GEORGE CLOUGII. 43 
 
 went down one day, and paid George dough, he says, thir 
 teen dollars in the cars. Well, ho thought, he said, that he 
 would "try a little game of his own." And this was the 
 "little game": this is what he says I read from his jour 
 nal: "This afternoon I took the 3.30 train for Nashua. I 
 had only three men with me, and I intended at first to give 
 to Clough just $7.50, the fare of us to Nashua, 3, and Bos 
 ton, 1 ; thus: 3 a $1.50, $4.50 
 1 a 3.00, 3.00 
 
 $7.50 
 
 But as there were a number of soldiers 011 board, 1 deter 
 mined to tnj a little game of nuj own, and accordingly, when 
 Clough came round I told him I wanted to pay for six to 
 Nashua and one to Boston; thinking that if required to 
 identify my men I could do so for three of them, but hoped 
 to allay suspicion by stating that very possibly they went 
 down to Lawrence by mistake." In this way, by this nice 
 "little game," he hoped to detect Mr. Clough. So he gave 
 him a ten dollar bill, a two dollar bill, and a one dollar bill, 
 making thirteen dollars in all. He says, after they left Man 
 chester ( lough came along and asked him how many he 
 paid for. He told him ai.c; and that Clough then told him 
 he would be back and see him soon. In a short time, he 
 says that Mr. Clough came back, and approaching " stealthily 
 from behind," he slipped something into his hand. He 
 looked, finally, when he dared, to sec what it was, and there 
 were fifty-five cent* in money! He said, after Mr. ( lough 
 passed out he (the Major,) was in great trepidation, to use 
 his own language; that he was in considerable excitement; 
 and he said he took out a book to keep from showing his 
 " nervousness ; " and when Mr. Clough came up behind him 
 
44 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON \V. TAPPAN. 
 
 in that "stealthy" manner and thrust these fifty-five cents 
 into his hand, then his nervousness was almost beyond con 
 trol, and he didn t know hardly what to make of it, (this 
 was on the direct examination) and he concluded that as 
 this was not any "multiple of six or seven," these fifty-five 
 cents "must have been intended as a present!" And Mr. 
 Clough looked guilty in all his lineaments. Well, it turned 
 out, when my friend, Mr. Mugridge, inquired about this 
 matter and punctured this bubble, that these fifty-five cents 
 were exactly the change to which Carney was entitled! He 
 paid Clough six fares to Nashua, a $1.60 each, (the regular 
 fare and 10 cents extra added,) $9.60 
 
 and four to Boston, a $2.85, (extra 10 cents added,) 2.85 
 
 $12.45 
 $13.00 
 12.45 
 
 .55 
 
 Twelve forty-five, from thirteen dollars which he gave 
 Clough, leaves fifty-five cents, the exact change to which he 
 was entitled and Avhich Clough paid him back! And it was 
 this perfectly proper transaction that Carney undertakes, in 
 his direct examination, to magnify into evidence of dough s 
 guilt! This paying him back the fifty-five cents which be 
 longed to him as change between the price of the fares and 
 the thirteen dollars, was distorted by this supple tool of his 
 employers into a "stealthy" approach from behind to give 
 him a bribt; of fifty-five cents! .But Carney himself, when 
 followed by Mr. Mugridgc s " sharp stick," on cross-exami 
 nation, was compelled to say that he "knew lie was testifying 
 to what was not true in regard to Clough 9 8 giving him the pres 
 ent" and that "Clough returned him (lie exact change for the 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 45 
 
 thirteen dollars, and that he did not sec the slightest impropriety 
 in Mr. Clough in reference to this transaction." 
 
 \ ou see here, gentlemen, the character of the man who 
 took the thousand dollars in the Leighton case, for making 
 his report in a particular way; and I don t think you will 
 wonder that, according to his own admission, (although he 
 was "with General Butler, in the Army of the James,") that 
 the treasury department promptly dismissed him from its 
 service on account of that Leighton affair! He is, however, 
 just the pimp for those who set this ball in motion against 
 the Concord Railroad conductors! 
 
 Gentlemen, the entire evidence upon which this case rests 
 I don t care where you place your finger is not one 
 whit more substantial than the testimony that I have just de 
 tailed; and I thank God, after these charges have been blaz 
 oned forth to the world, that the evidence on which they 
 rest is to go too, so that everybody will see whether George 
 Clough is the thief and plunderer that they charge him to 
 be. or whether the whole case does not rest upon testimony 
 just as frivolous and unreliable as this I have detailed here, 
 of "Major Carney, of the Army of the James. . 
 
 Well, gentlemen, they had another detective, and that 
 was Bachelder ; and he rode frequently in the cars. He tells 
 you the number of times that he rode, and the number of 
 tickets that he bought, and the amount of money that he 
 paid in the cars. And so far as his appearance was con 
 cerned, he appeared tolerably well on the stand compared 
 with Carney, although he was in this unfortunate office of 
 spy and detective, and hoped to get a place as conductor if 
 he succeeded in getting the old ones off. He appeared well 
 compared with Major Carney, and he puts in his report here. 
 
4(> ARGUMENT OF TION. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 lie tells you that November 23d he purchased three tickets 
 of Clough to Boston for $8.55, and one fare to Nashua. 
 Taking up George dough s report for that date, every one 
 of his fares is returned. And so it is through the whole of 
 Mr. Bachelder s operations upon the cars. November 23d, 
 25th, 28th, December 13th, 15th, 16th, 25th all these 
 dates he rode in the cars and paid money, more or less, to 
 Clough; and every single time, gentlemen, these fares are 
 returned by George Clough in just the way (with the ex 
 ception [ will make in a moment,) that they were paid ! 
 
 No\v then, gentlemen, when it appears from the testimony 
 of these detectives who were on these trains following in the 
 
 O 
 
 track of this man, that not a single cent of stealing or mis 
 appropriation has been discovered, I ask you if there is not 
 an end of this case, if substantially that is not all there is 
 to it, if substantially that is not all there was charged, and 
 that the charges have all been dissipated into thin air? 
 
 .But we have another detective here, and that is "Surgeon 
 General Carney," to whom 1 have alluded. And, by the 
 way, gentlemen, George (/lough swears before you that lie 
 never had the least intimation that any of these men were 
 on his track, lie knew nothing about it until two days, I 
 think he says, before the vote of the directors. And, gen 
 tlemen, how could he know? Here were not only one or 
 two, but four different detectives, all of them on George 
 ( lough s track, because Mr. Gilmore had said he was the 
 
 chief offender in this matter. And not one of them succeed- 
 
 I 
 
 ed in "spotting" him at all, to use the language of Surgeon 
 General Carney. And I thing, gentlemen, that it is remark 
 able that neither by mistake because I suppose that is not 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION C. GEORGE CLOUGH. 
 
 pretended or contended here at all but that Mr. Clough 
 mi-Hit make a mistake in his returns. 
 
 o 
 
 MR. ROLFE. He did make a mistake against himself in 
 making change with Bachelder. 
 
 MR. TAPPAX. Yes, sir; and I think it is remarkable that 
 it did not happen that by mistake even, there was one soli 
 tary instance where Mr. Clough lias taken a dollar or a cent 
 wrongfully! And I say, when this fact became known to 
 the men who had this investigation in charge I say, when 
 this fact was apparent on Carney s report to those who set 
 this ball in motion, it is evident it was pursued afterwards 
 from some motives other than the honest motives of having 
 
 O 
 
 this thing investigated, or from the belief that George 
 Clough had been plundering to the extent to which he had 
 been charged, or to any extent. When these reports came 
 in they stood as they do to-day. There was nothing upon 
 them to show or to warrant the fact that he had been steal 
 ing in this wholesale manner, or in any manner, in the cars. 
 The whole thing was dissipated and shown to have been 
 false arid idle and without foundation, and there the matter 
 should have ended. 
 
 And now I want to refer a moment to " Surgeon General 
 Carney." And, gentlemen, I need not say much in regard to 
 him. lie came here very much as his brother did, and seemed 
 to be very much inflated with his own consequence; and he 
 undertook, wholly without warrant, after he had sworn 
 that there was nothing in the transactions from which he 
 could infer any such thing, he volunteered the assertion, or 
 the declaration, that he regarded Clough for years as a thief. 
 He knew he was a thief. After his report had shoAvn that 
 Mr. Clough had returned every dollar when he had him- 
 
48 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAX. 
 
 self sworn that there was nothing in any transaction that he 
 had detected to inculpate Mr. Clough, or which showed that 
 he had been dishonest at all still he went out of his way, 
 (and it shows the animus with which he testified,) he 
 told you that he had regarded Clough for years as a thief, 
 although he never knew him! Well, gentlemen, if the char 
 acter of that man and of his brother, so far as they have any 
 character, was not depicted in their own lineaments, and if 
 the true character that that man bears is not carried in his 
 face, arid it is not that of a sneak, I never saw that word 
 written upon the face of any man on earth ! But " Surgeon 
 General Carney" comes here like his brother, and he was 
 put upon the track as a detective, and he paid money in the 
 cars to George Clough ; and he swears to you how and when 
 he paid it. It seems that on November 23d, 1865, he paid 
 five fares from Nashua to Concord : $8. Clough has return 
 ed five fares, Nashua to Concord, at $1.00 each, making ex 
 actly $8. And in the afternoon of that day he bought five 
 tickets to Boston: $14.25; and Mr. Clough has returned 
 five tickets to Boston, $2.85 each, which is the regular fare 
 and the ten cents extra added, making $14. 25. At this 
 point the gentlemen on the other side supposed, I presume, 
 that they had got enough of Surgeon General Carney, and 
 they stopped. But it seemed, on cross-examination, that ho 
 admitted that he was here once after this, and he testified 
 that he came up again, and on the 19th of December he 
 bought two tickets from Concord to Nashua, and taking 
 George dough s report in his hands, he found that four 
 tickets were returned between Concord and Nashua on that 
 day; so that Surgeon General Carney, no more than his 
 brother, Major Carney, detects Mr. Clough in anything that 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GKORG1-: CLOUGH. 49 
 
 is dishonest. On the contrary, everything taken on the cars 
 was returned by Mr. Clough in the same way and manner 
 that the detectives paid him. 
 
 And, gentlemen, for all this work what has the Concord 
 Railroad got to pay? For this immense labor and these im 
 mense services which have produced such "astounding" re 
 sults, the Concord Railroad, Major Carney says, has got to 
 pay him $25, 000! That is what the Concord Railroad are 
 in to pay for the services of Major Carney, of the Army of 
 the James, and Surgeon General Carney, of the Provident 
 Accident Company, I suppose, $25,000 more! and I should 
 like to see the counsel on the other side institute a suit to 
 recover that fee for Major Carney, for he seems to be set on 
 this particular sum, and he swears that if lie could have 
 $24,999.99 he would not take it! And he says, further, that 
 he thinks his services are worth that sum. He thinks he has 
 been of that benefit to the road. And, gentlemen, I hope in 
 your report, when you come to consider Major Carney, you 
 will recommend that the Concord Railroad should pay to him 
 at least $25,000 for the services which he has rendered. He 
 ought to get a great deal more, but he would compromise, 
 gentlemen, for $25,000! If he gets, as he suggests, only a 
 "percentage on the increased revenue of the road," by 
 means of his operations, I do n t think it will come to quite 
 that sum! But, gentlemen, I suppose the counsel on the 
 other side will argue, although not a dollar has been de 
 tected or disclosed by these reports to have been wrongfully 
 taken, that they do disclose one astounding fact that nobody 
 ever heard of or thought of before; and the gentleman is 
 obliged to fall back from his $50,000 a year plundering in 
 the cars to fall back from his terrible bombshell, that Major 
 
ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON TV. TAPPAN. 
 
 Carney and the other detectives were going to throw into our 
 camp, and undertake to charge him because he reported 
 perhaps he will say shows that in a few instances he failed 
 to take the extra ten cents ! That is all there is to it, gen 
 tlemen; all there is in those reports that by any possibility 
 can be tortured into anything favorable to the other side of 
 this case. And yet, although we have shown to you how 
 this matter of ten cents extra has been carried forward all 
 through, ever since the rules were promulgated, although 
 that is a fact that must be in the knowledge of everybody 
 that has anything to do with the Concord Railroad, let me 
 just say that out of forty-one fares as paid in the cars, as 
 shown by this report, there are but five instances where it 
 appears that only the regular fare was returned. And from 
 the fact that because in five instances only, out of forty-one. 
 Mr. dough, although receiving only the regular fare, with 
 out the ten cents, returned them with the ten cents added, 
 therefore he did not return them at all! And although Mr. 
 ( lough shows you exactly how it was done, and although 
 out of these instances, as I have said, there are only five in 
 forty-one 1 , the position is taken that because Mr. Clough, re 
 ceiving from Dr. Carney, for instance, or from Mr. J3ach el 
 der, $1.50 for a fare in the cars from Concord to Nashua, re 
 turned on his way-bill $1.60, which would be $1.50 with the 
 ten cents added, therefore he failed to return their fares at 
 all, or that he is estopped to say that lie did. 
 
 And that brings us to the 4 famous doctrine of ESTOPPEL; 
 and I may as well consider that, and say what I have to sav 
 now on that subject as at any other time. Now, what is the 
 testimony? I think that you will have no doubt, gentlemen, 
 that Mr. Clough has told, in regard to this matter, just ex- 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION I . GEORGE CLOUGH. 51 
 
 actly the truth, with no attempt to extenuate anything that 
 he has done, because he has clone nothing except what he 
 was instructed to do; and so he has told you that in some 
 instances, after this ten cent rule was promulgated, he could 
 not always get the ten cents extra in the cars. The tickets 
 were obliged to be taken up between each station, the cars 
 were filled with "dead-heads," with free passengers, every 
 body was going free and having Gilmore s passes, the cars 
 were filled up; and many of the passengers objected to pay 
 ing the ten cents extra. And so it turned out that not only 
 on the Concord llailroad, but on all roads, (such must be 
 within the knowledge of the referees themselves,) it became 
 utterly impossible to enforce this rule at all times. Well, 
 you will see, gentlemen, how often Mr. Clough did enforce 
 the rule. You will observe that this was only an exception. 
 When money was paid to him in the cars, in the large ma 
 jority of cases, as he reports and these detectives show, the 
 ten cents extra, Avas collected and received; and in the ex 
 ceptional cases Mr. Clough was not able to take the ten 
 cents extra, simply because, being obliged by the rules to 
 take down the names of those who had free passes, if he 
 stopped to quarrel with everybody that objected to paying 
 the ten cents, he could not get through the train, and take . 
 up the tickets, before he arrived at the next station; and 
 therefore he was actually obliged, when they gave him 
 change, to take what change was given, and not to stop and 
 have a quarrel. That is all there is about it. And, under 
 the circumstances, what does he do ? Why, he did just ex 
 actly what every other honest man, who is desirous of doing 
 his duty and doing nothing else, would do; he Avent to the 
 fountain head to know what course he should take. Now, 
 
52 AKGUMKNT OF HON. MASON ^V. TAPPAN. 
 
 what was the fountain head ? VThere could he go ? When 
 he found it \vas impossible to enforce this rule- and collect 
 this ten cents extra, to whom did George Clough turn for 
 information as to what his duty was under the circumstances ? 
 Why, he went to the agent and superintendent of the 1 road. 
 He went to the man who was the executive officer of the 
 road, lie went to the man who had the entire power over 
 these trains, lie went to the only person who had any 
 authority to speak for that corporation. This, gentlemen, 
 was the man who goes to the platform and says, "Conduct 
 or, pass that man free," and " Let that man go for half 
 fare," and carried this wood at such a price, and that wood 
 at another price, and whose word in all these things at 
 least so far as those under him were concerned was the su 
 preme law; and all this was within the scope of his author 
 ity to do. Suppose Mr. Clough had seen Judge Upham upon 
 the platform suppose he had seen Mr. Spalding suppose 
 lie had seen any other of the directors. They had nothing 
 more to do with this than you or I have, and their authority 
 in such a matter would bo of no sort of effect whatever, be 
 cause Mr. Gilmore, the general agent and superintend 
 ent" the man who runs the road the man who is the 
 eyes arid ears and mouth of the corporation, was the mouth 
 piece through which the corporation speaks and takes notice, 
 and there can be no other avenue of communication with or 
 from the corporation. Now 1 am not aware that there is 
 any judicial decision anywhere I have not been able to find 
 any in the books in regard to the powers of the superin 
 tendent of a railroad. But it is apparent from the very na 
 ture of the case, what the powers and duties of a superin 
 tendent are and must be. George Clough cannot stop to call 
 
 o o -* 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION /;. GEORGE CLOUGII. 53 
 
 the board of directors together. They have nothing to do 
 about it. What they resolve or undertake to do is one thing ; 
 but when they put forth an executive officer, or their mouth 
 piece who manages their concerns, they are bound by what 
 he does, and by what he says. 
 
 But I take another position. I say the act to which I re 
 fer, and that is the assent of Mr. Gilmore, the direction he 
 gives Mr. Clough in regard to returning the ten cents and in 
 regard to his course of conduct when he was unable to take 
 it, was an act fully within the scope of the general agent s 
 authority. As I said, George Clough could not go to any 
 body else and ask what he should do. lie could not go to 
 the other directors to ask them what he should do, but he 
 went to Mr. Gilmore and asked instructions from him. Mr. 
 Gilmore tells him to get the extra ten cents when he could, 
 and when he could not, then buy a ticket and punch it and 
 return it to the general ticket agent, and that would make it 
 all right. And that is the course that Mr. Clough says he 
 pursued, and that is the course that he was obliged to pur 
 sue; and 1 say that Mr. Gilmore ordering him to transact 
 the business in that way, that act was an act of the corpora 
 tion and within the scope of the agent s authority, and so 
 within their knowledge. But I take the further position 
 here, that even if the act in question was beyond the scope 
 of Mr. Gilmore s authority, (which I do riot admit, only for 
 the sake of the argument,) the corporation have held him 
 out, or enabled him to hold himself out, as having more en 
 larged powers than the strict letter of their rules would, in 
 dicate, and are therefore bound by his acts. The way in 
 which Mr. Gilmore conducted the business of the road 
 the departure from the fixed tariffs in the matter of certain 
 
04 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASOX W. TAPPAN. 
 
 kinds of freights the constant issuing- of free passes his 
 directions to the conductors to pass this man and that with 
 out any ticket or pass the taking of tickets from the ticket- 
 master and conductors without any account being made of 
 them, and other acts outside of the "rules and regulations," 
 were matters of public notoriety, or if not of public notori 
 ety, they were well known and understood by everybody 
 connected with the operation of the road were known to 
 the directors, for they, themselves, were constantly violating 
 their own rules, and they cannot now be permitted to sav 
 that Mr. Gilmore acted in excess of his authority, especially 
 as against this defendant, with whom he came in daily con 
 tact, and who was cognizant of the powers which the super 
 intendent exercised. Nor will it do to charge corrupt col 
 lusion- between the agent and the defendant, for this will ap 
 ply as well to Mr. Sanborn, the ticket-master, to Mr. Spal- 
 ding, one of the directors who had the benefit of the irregular 
 tickets, and to every other officer and employee of the road, 
 wherever the rules Avere varied from, as they constantly 
 were. 
 
 1 say then, if these directors, having constant knowledge 
 that Mr. Gilmore was setting aside the rules every day, if 
 they held him out as having more enlarged powers than he 
 actually possessed, or if they allowed him to hold himself 
 out as having more enlarged powers, then they are bound by 
 his acts; and that is the doctrine of Hatch v. Taijlor, in 10 
 , New Hampshire Reports, as I understand it. So then, I 
 say, when Mr. Gilmore directed Mr. dough to purchase 
 tickets and punch them and return them to the general ticket 
 agent, that is all the authority that Mr. dough needed, and 
 he did exactly what was in the line of his duty, when failing 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION C. GEORGE CLOUGH. 55 
 
 to collect ten cents extra, as he must fail in a few instances ; 
 he did as he was directed, and purchased tickets and punched 
 them and returned them to the ticket office in that way. 
 
 Now, then, the evidence in reference to wholesale plun 
 dering in the cars fails, and there is no evidence, as I under 
 take to say, upon which you can lay your finger, that George 
 Clough has taken one cent s worth in the cars, and the gen 
 tleman is ohliged to fall back on something else. He sets 
 
 up now the technical doctrine of "estoppel." And so this 
 I | 
 
 case dwindles down and fizzles out! Starting with the 
 
 ! ! charge of immense wholesale plundering to the tune of fifty 
 
 thousand dollars a year, at last, gentleman , the counsel is 
 j 
 
 obliged to stand before you, contending that you shall charge 
 
 Mr. Clough for money taken in the cars, although he has re 
 turned every cent so taken, because he has not been able in every 
 instance to colled the ten cent* extra ! "Well, gentlemen, he 
 
 i ! 
 
 gets a little lower even than this, before he gets through. 
 lie not only wants to charge him 011 this fraud and " estop 
 pel," but also for the fares of the "pea, -nut boy" who rode 
 back and forth on the train! And so ends this great sensa- 
 
 I i O 
 
 tional bubble of wholesale plunder on- the part of George 
 Clough. Gentlemen, I do not propose to detain you very 
 long on this matter of "estoppel," which has been very 
 fully argued by myself, and particularly by my friend Mug- 
 ridge, when the point came up in course of the trial. The 
 proposition here is, even admitting the facts to be as we have 
 found them, even admitting that everything we say is true, 
 even admitting that Mr. Clough has paid into the corporation 
 Inj purchasing a ticket and returning it to the general ticket 
 agent, ecenj dollar he thus received in the cars, but failing to 
 take the ten cents extra that even though he has done all this, 
 
56 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 he ?.v (f estopped" -non 1o aaij w, ami t/i.af he /,v to be charged in 
 this st/h, although he may hare paid over crcn/ dollar! And I 
 say here, as has been said before, and as has been said by 
 one of the learned referees in a case that is reported, that 
 the doctrine of estoppel might well have been termed "odi 
 ous," if it were allowed to work such a wrong as this! 
 Again, I contend that the rule of the road has been substan 
 tially complied with, and that everything has been done that 
 possibly could have been done under it, and, if the conduct 
 or has not in all instances returned the ten cents extra, he 
 has done the next best thing that he could. 
 
 If you should find, gentlemen, from the evidence, (and I 
 think that not only the evidence, but your own experience 
 and observation will convince you of this,) that it was im 
 possible for Mr. Clough to collect this ten cents extra, and 
 perform the other duties, of taking up tickets between the 
 stations, &c., and that the road would have lost more by his 
 attempting to do it than it would by sometimes omitting it, 
 
 I ; 
 
 then I hold that there has been a substantial compliance with 
 the rule. I say further that the doctrine of "estoppel" can 
 not apply here, because the corporation have in 110 way 
 changed their position. There is not a particle of evidence 
 in the case from Carney s report, or from the report of either 
 of the other detectives, or from any other source, that 
 Clough had ever received a cent of money in the cars that 
 he had not returned, prior to the bringing of this suit. The 
 evidence that he did receive money and did not return it in 
 the regular way because of his inability to take the extra ten 
 cents, comes wholly from Clough, when he gave his depo 
 sition, since this suit was commenced. I repeat that there has 
 not been pointed out, and there cannot be, a scrap of evi- 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. I 
 
 dence of this fact before the suit Avas instituted. How, then, 
 has the corporation changed its position, and in what way 
 can the doctrine of estoppel en pals apply to this case? It 
 was from Mr. dough s mouth alone, after the suit was 
 brought, that the corporation has any knowledge that he re 
 ceived a dollar in the cars that he did not return on his way 
 bills; why shall he not have the benefit of the explanation 
 that he gives, and the reasons that compelled him to return 
 it in another way? The evidence from Mr. Upham, the 
 president, and from Mr. Sp aiding and Mr. Kidder, two of 
 the directors, shows that they did not know, nor did the 
 other directors, so far as they are aware, know before the 
 suit was brought, that Clough received money and did not 
 take the ten cents extra, or that he returned it in the way he 
 did thus completely negativing any knowledge on the part 
 of the corporation that the defendant had received money 
 that he did not return on his way-bills, except the knowl 
 edge they had through their general agent and superin 
 tendent. 
 
 And, as has been before urged, the knowledge, to Mr. 
 Gilmore, of the way this money was paid over, was knowl 
 edge to the corporation, and was therefore done by and with 
 the consent of the corporation, and they are estopped to say 
 it was not so. Arrangements made by him, directions given 
 by him were of supreme authority to Mr. Clough, and such 
 must be the rule. Railroads cannot be operated upon any 
 other basis. The agent or superintendent for the time being- 
 has the power which governs and directs the whole machinery 
 of the running of the road. The directors can turn him off if 
 they please, but those who are under him, and the public can 
 know no one else but the general agent and superintendent 
 
 8 
 
58 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 that they hold forth to the public and to their own em 
 ployees as the man who is to give them direction, and the 
 man from whom they are to receive instructions. And I 
 think, gentlemen, that it comes with a bad grace, I think 
 that it comes with an exceedingly bad grace, after this great 
 flourish of trumpets in regard to this wholesale plundering, 
 and the burdening of the public ear through the public press 
 and everywhere with the charges against these conductors of 
 
 the amounts of money they have stolen, taken in the cars 
 
 i 
 
 fraudulently and appropriated fraudulently to their use; I 
 say that it comes with an exceedingly ill grace from the gen 
 tleman on the other side when he now undertakes to charge 
 Mr. Clough 011 the ground of this technical "estoppel;" that 
 although the facts that we allege are true, and although 
 every dollar has been paid, yet he cannot be allowed to say 
 so! And if there is a decision against us on that ground, I 
 am really glad that everybody will know the position that 
 has been taken and the reasons for such decision. But, gen 
 tlemen, there is no fear of it. I don t believe that this doc 
 trine of estoppel can be sustained before this tribunal, or 
 that there is any law which warrants setting up such a 
 ground as this when it works such gross and manifest in 
 justice! But I want to allude to one or two other things, 
 gentlemen, in regard to this charge which I am now answer 
 ing of wholesale "plundering in the cars," for that is the 
 great charge we are called upon to meet. Now, then, I said 
 the other day, that it seemed to me if I was sitting in the 
 place of this honorable board, or one of them, when these 
 charges were put forth in this manner with an assertion that 
 Mr. Clough returned only one-quarter part of what he ought 
 to have returned, that the evidence that would carrv most 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION 11. GEORGE CLOUGH. 59 
 
 weight to my mind would be the returns of these conduct 
 ors who succeeded George dough in running these same 
 trains. Now that is the way it strikes me, gentlemen, and I 
 think that if the conductors who succeeded Mr. Clough, 
 cither Mr. Chandler or Mr. Le Bosquet or anybody else, had 
 been produced and he had stated that he ran the same train 
 that Mr. Clough did, and it appeared from his report in the 
 two years that he had run that he had returned a very much 
 larger amount than Mr. Clough had returned I think, my 
 self, gentlemen, that that testimony would have carried con 
 siderable moral weight with it; and I think, also, although 
 the testimony was not legally competent, and could not be 
 put in except by agreement, I think if there had been an 
 honest purpose to do only one s duty, as the gentleman says 
 he wants to do in this prosecution 110 more and 110 less, 
 and no disposition to charge Mr. Clough except upon all the 
 evidence and the facts in the case I think that he would 
 have allowed that testimony to have gone in when we 
 offered and desired to put it in. And if, gentlemen, on put 
 ting it in, after this great braying of trumpets in regard to 
 this plundering and stealing, it had only turned out arid I 
 am now only supposing it to be the fact, (the gentleman has 
 been full of his "suppositions" and "illustrations" all 
 through the case;) and I have 110 right to say what that re 
 port did show, but I will suppose what it showed that 
 these new conductors took only thirty-two cents a trip more 
 than Clough returned, would it not have had considerable 
 weight in your minds as tending to show that Mr. Clough 
 had made honest returns ? Aye, gentlemen, more than that : 
 would it not have been entitled to great weight, especially, 
 as Mr. George Blake swears, the travel has been quite as 
 
60 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 much since Mr. Clough left the road as before? The trains 
 have been quite as large in 1866 and 1867 as they were in 
 1864 and 1865. And when, too, it appears in the testi 
 mony that all these hundreds and thousands of free passes, 
 upon which everybody rode over the Concord Railroad, had 
 been cut off, under the new direction and management if, 
 under such a state of circumstances as that, the returns of 
 Mr. Lc Bosquet and Mr. Chandler, the conductors that suc 
 ceeded dough, only showed thirty-two cents more a trip, 
 would not that be pretty strong evidence to show that no 
 dollar had been stolen by George Clough I And if the facts 
 were not so, the gentleman would have allowed us to put in 
 these returns. I appeal to you if it would not be so. And 
 I have argued this omission; and I have the right to insist 
 upon it, and to have it make all the weight in favor of Mr. 
 Clough that it can possibly be made to have; because it 
 would be the most satisfactory and convincing testimony, 
 aside from the positive testimony of these detectives who 
 were in the cars, that any tribunal or the public could possi 
 bly have as touching the innocence or guilt of George 
 Clough. But Ave have been offered to put in this testimony 
 if we will put in the evidence of the returns of the con 
 ductors on the Portsmouth road, or the returns of another 
 conductor on the Concord road. Xow, as I told you the 
 other day, I do not know what the returns of Mr. George 
 Noyes will show; I have not looked into that; but I infer 
 from the fact that the counsel on the other side is willing to 
 put in the returns of Mr. Xoyes, that his returns are, for 
 some reason or other, favorable to them, Mr. Noyes, perhaps, 
 having returned a greater amount than Mr. Clough. And 
 I ask you if there is any fairness when, the gentleman offers 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION r. GEORGE CLOUGH. 61 
 
 to put in evidence the returns on the Portsmouth road. If 
 he has looked them over and seen that there was a larger 
 amount returned, from the fact that there are more way sta 
 tions where tickets cannot be furnished, and finds that he is 
 willing to put them in in comparison, I say that those returns 
 have nothing to do with this case; and I say you had no 
 more to do with the Portsmouth road than you had with the 
 Grand Trunk road or the Erie road. But it would be more 
 satisfactory, I think, if you were to compare the returns of 
 Mr. Clough and the returns of Mr. Lc Bosquet, who succeed 
 ed him on the same train. But to show that, we have not 
 been allowed. We have shirked no responsibility; we have 
 dodged behind no covert. We have tried to meet this thing- 
 knee to knee, foot to foot, and breast to breast; and if we 
 have not, gentlemen, we have not done what we intended to 
 do. If we have failed in a single instance, we have riot 
 done what we intended. And if we have not followed 
 every step, and answered every charge with evidence that is 
 irrefragible, then we greatly mistake the evidence that is be 
 fore you. 
 
 But, gentlemen, I want to call your attention to another 
 thing. Over and over again has the counsel reiterated the 
 assertion thas there was a very meagre amount (I do not re 
 member the exact figures,) returned by George Clough in 
 the cars; that it was " astonishing" and "astounding," with 
 all this travel that he should only return the pittance that he 
 has returned. 
 
 I want to have you remark another thing. There is 110 
 doubt of the truthfulness of Mr. E. W. Upham; and I am 
 glad that this testimony has got into this case. I am glad 
 that, although the gentleman is unwilling to institute a com- 
 
ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 
 I 
 
 parison whore it would seem that a comparison ought to be 
 instituted, I am glad that he put in the testimony of Mr. E. 
 "W. Upham. Because he is an honest man. There is no 
 charge against him that he has stolen a cent of money in the 
 cars. And yet he ran on the train a few times, that same 
 year; and his returns are before you. And now I want to 
 show how they compare Avith Mr. dough s. 
 
 On the 24th day of October, 1865, gentlemen, Mr. Up 
 ham was on the train as conductor, and his entire way-bill 
 on that day is $17.40, according to my minutes. 
 
 MR. GEORGE. How many trains, Mr. Tappan? 
 
 MR. TAPPAN. I do not know. I have it lumped to 
 gether. Mr. Clough ran on the 24th of October, and his 
 entire returns for two trains are $17.90, a little larger than 
 Mr. Upham s. Mr. Upham was on the road on the 25th as 
 conductor, and he has returned as his whole way-bill $8.70 
 on that day. Mr. Clough was on the road on the 25th 
 the same day and he has returned $17.40 on that day, on 
 the same number of trips. On the 26th day of October Mr. 
 Upham was again on the train, and his whole way-bill is 
 18.05. Mr. Clough was on the road on that day, and his 
 whole way-bill is $22.15. Mr. Upham was on the train on 
 the 27th, and on that day his return is $7.65; and Mr. 
 dough s is #4.45. On three of the days that Mr. Upham 
 was on the road Mr. (lough s returns exceeded those of Mr. 
 Upham, and on only one does that of Mr. Upham exceed 
 that of Mr. Clough. And all the way through, you may 
 look through the returns of Mr. ( lough that year, and coin- 
 pare them \vith the returns of Mr. Upham, and you will 
 find that just about the same average amount is returned all 
 the way along by both of them. And I suppose that if Mr. 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION r. GEO11GE CLOUGII. 60 
 
 Le Bosquet s and Mr. Chandler s returns had been put in, 
 even after the free passes were all eut off, you would have 
 seen just exactly the same state of things. 
 
 And, gentlemen, I believe this is all that I cure to say 
 upon this point of stealing in the cars, except to state to you 
 the fact, which of course you know, that Mr. Clough him 
 self comes before you, and with an oath upon him, swears 
 that to his knowledge, either directly or indirectly, intention 
 ally, he has never wronged the Concord Railroad out of a 
 dollar, or ever taken a cent. You can judge whether in 
 this respect, or in any other respects, where Mr. Clough has 
 testified, he appears before you in the character of an honest 
 man, and whether as a witness he means to testify truthfully 
 and honestly to everything. And I submit to you whether, 
 even in some instances where the truth has seemed to make 
 against him, as perhaps, apparently, it has, he has not como 
 up and told everything to you, Avith an honesty and straight 
 forwardness of purpose, such as few men exhibit on the wit 
 ness stand. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, all I have to say is, that Mr. Clough 
 is known to this community; he is known, too, to one mem 
 ber of this board. And if he is a man, if his character en 
 titles him to be regarded as a man that can stand up before 
 this tribunal and wilfully burden his soul with perjury, I 
 never have heard any such intimations in regard to George 
 Clough. Nor do I believe that a man who has come forward 
 in the way he has (dragged before a magistrate as he was, 
 day after day, week after week, and month after month,) 
 and made a clean breast of everything stating facts that 
 were within his knowledge alone, many of which he might 
 well have excused himself from stating, and which, as in 
 
64 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASOX W. TAPPAX. 
 
 this matter of the extra ten cents, was susceptible of being 
 tortured against him, and which he might have denied, or 
 withheld, if he intended to be false, I say I do not believe 
 that such a man has deliberately perjured himself before 
 you. And I submit to you whether he has not manifested a 
 disposition to meet all these charges, and state the truth in 
 regard to them, according to the best of his knowledge and 
 ability. And I say, then, if George Clough stands imcon- 
 tradicted if this thing rested on his testimony alone 
 and there is no evidence to convict him upon his own testi 
 mony, he should go free. But, as I have said before, there 
 is no single scrap of testimony upon which a man s finger 
 can be placed nothing but these violent inferences and pre 
 sumptions and suppositions, that have been made over and 
 over again in the course of this trial, upon which there can 
 be any pretense to charge Mr. Clough. 
 
 But there was an attempt, gentlemen, to show, and one 
 of the charges of the famous " synopsis" of the gentleman 
 on the other side is, that Mr. Clough received and was cog 
 nizant of bogus tickets sold and used by other conductors. 
 And that was put in, gentlemen, with a great flourish of 
 trumpets. Now there is not a particle of testimony upon 
 which to substantiate that charge ; and all the testimony that 
 has any tendency to show it, was the testimony of Carney, 
 who said that he got four tickets of Kendrick, and he un 
 dertook to describe the tickets which Mr. Clough took up. 
 Now, gentlemen, I undertake to say that when you come to 
 examine these tickets you will find that every one of them 
 (I believe I have not examined them particularly) were tick 
 ets that were not good over the Concord Road. I believe 
 that Mr. Clough and Mr. Sanborn state in their testimony 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION T. GEORGE CLOUGH. 65 
 
 that it was the practice of the conductors, if they had no 
 ticket which was good, to put in a ticket of any kind, and 
 then, when they arrived at the place of their destination, to 
 replace it with a good one ; or sometimes they would send 
 forward a scrap of paper and write on it "Good for a pas 
 sage to Nashua," or whatever the station might be. These 
 might have all been got in this way. There is no evidence 
 to show that it was not so. And this evidence was ruled 
 out, unless in some way Mr. Clough was shown to have par 
 taken of the fraud, if fraud there was. But there is no 
 fraud. There is no evidence that Kendrick perpetrated a 
 fraud, nor that George Clough was cognizant of a fraud. 
 Therefore there is no evidence, not a particle, in regard to 
 these "bogus tickets." 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I will just say a word or two in passing 
 in regard to this matter of free passes. It is not worth while 
 for me to take up any time in regard to them, because by the 
 decision of the referees all the evidence in regard to that 
 subject has been ruled out. Whatever has been done in re 
 gard to free passes the court here hold that Mr. Clough can 
 not be charged with it, inasmuch as he has received nothing, 
 or unless in cases where he has passed persons free and has 
 received some benefit from it. Now, gentlemen, everybody, 
 as I have said, was passing free over this road; almost every 
 lawyer and physician and prominent man in Concord and 
 Manchester, and everywhere; bank officers, politicians, and 
 myriads of people were riding free over the Concord Rail 
 road, and it would be strange indeed if, under these circum 
 stances and under this loose rule, Mr. Clough, having not 
 only the authority of the superintendent, but having, at va 
 rious times, been ordered bv everv director in the board 
 
66 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 one, to pass people free, had not, now and then, let one slip 
 by him. The counsel 011 the other side is now a great stick 
 ler for rides. But it Avas all very well for the directors to tell 
 Cloiigh to pass their friends free all very well for my 
 brother George, as clerk of the road, with his family and 
 friends to pass free in violation of his famous "regulations" 
 and "rules," but George Clough is now to be "estopped" 
 from making a defence to this suit, because lie has "violated 
 the rules!" Consistency, thou art a jewel! That the di 
 rectors did violate the rules by ordering Clough to pass 
 people free has been proved. Mr. White says that he heard 
 Gilmore tell Mr. Clough to pass persons free, and Mr. San- 
 born swears to the same thing; and, therefore, I don t think 
 it is becoming in these gentlemen to make such a great noise 
 about Mr. Clough occasionally passing persons free, when 
 every officer was passing in the same way, including the 
 clerk, and their families! I don t think the public will give 
 them much credit for sincerity when these facts are con 
 sidered. 
 
 Well, now, gentlemen, there has been an attempt to show 
 that in some instances Mr. Clough has received some benefit 
 from persons having been passed over the road by him. As 
 I understand the testimony, there is no evidence in the case 
 to show that Mr. Clough has ever received a dollar of bene 
 fit by passing persons free; that is to say, that anything has 
 gone into his pocket. One of the grounds stated in this 
 "synopsis" is that Mr. Clough sold tickets and passages for 
 boots to J. Grier, and that he improperly passed his tenants 
 and workmen, and others, for his private benefit. Now, 
 gentlemen, in regard to Grier : it does n t appear, except from 
 the testimony of Mr. Grier himself, and I submit when you 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION r. GEORGE CLOUGH. 67 
 
 view that in the light of the bills that he has produced in 
 connection with Mr. dough s own testimony that there is 
 not a particle of evidence by which it can be shown that Mr. 
 dough ever received a cent s worth of benefit from Mr. 
 Grier. Mr. Grier was a poor man. Mr. dough has not 
 denied that he occasionally passed him over the road, 
 and Grier says that he supposed he made consideration 
 enough when he worked for him to pay him for what 
 passes he had. On the contrary, Mr. Clough swears that 
 he never had any understanding- that he was to receive 
 any consideration, directly or indirectly, when he passed 
 him, but he passed him merely 011 the ground of charity. 
 And I submit, when you consider the bills paid, and the 
 prices shown in those bills for the work that Grier did for 
 Clough, whether he ever made any consideration to Mr. 
 Clough for passing over the road. But this deposition was 
 made in time of great excitement; people were taken up 
 here and their depositions taken ; and all they got from Mr. 
 Grier was that he supposed he made some allowance and did 
 his work enough cheaper to pay for passing over the road a 
 few times. But the receipted bills, which were paid in cash, 
 show that full prices were paid. And then they brought on 
 Dr. Blaisdell, and Dr. Blaisdell swears in substance I need 
 not repeat what he swears, but he says that when he sug 
 gested the making of repairs that Mr. Clough never gave 
 him any intimation that he would pass him over the road; 
 and he got down there once to go to Boston and asked him 
 to pass him free, and Mr. Clough was obliged to send him 
 back; and this was after he had got part way over the road. 
 And then they put on Jacob F. Smith ; and the object I sup 
 pose was to show that Jacob F. Smith had been passed and 
 
68 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 that dough had received some pay for tickets in hay; but 
 it turned out, when the gentleman came to testify, that he 
 swore that dough paid him the money for the hay; so that 
 ended that. And they put in Herman Strauss deposition, 
 which however was ruled out, I believe, as not tending to 
 show that Mr. dough, received any benefit. However that 
 may be, he says he never in the world furnished him goods 
 at any lower rates by reason of having been passed free over 
 the road. The evidence from Strauss is that he never gave 
 dough a cent s worth of benefit in any way for any time 
 that dough may have passed him over the road. Mr. 
 Clough, I believe, swears himself that he passed one or two 
 of his workmen, but it do n t appear that he received any par 
 ticular benefit one way or the other, or that he would not 
 have passed them if they had worked for Mr. Gilmore, or 
 anybody else. And I submit, then, that this attempt to 
 charge him with having received any benefit from free 
 passes, is an utter failure. 
 
 Xow, gentlemen, there is another charge that has been 
 made here with a great deal of parade by the other side; 
 and you recollect on a certain day, I believe it was Decem 
 ber 19th, when I requested you to make a note of it, the 
 gentleman stated what great things he was going to prove. 
 I told you then that we had had assertions all the way along 
 that at this time the counsel on the other side said he was 
 going to. prove "most overwhelmingly," these were his 
 words that Mr. Clough had taken fares repeatedly in the 
 cars, not once or twice, and then had slipped return tickets 
 into their hands for the purpose of inducing them to pay in 
 the cars ; that it had been not once, but many times. Now 
 gentlemen, what I have to say in the first place in regard to 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION i . GEORGE CLOUGH. 69 
 
 that is this : unless there is some evidence to show that money 
 has been received by Mr. Clough in that way and appro 
 priated to his own use, he cannot be charged in this form of 
 action. Suppose he has suppose the very worst that is 
 possible suppose he has given tickets and taken half-fare, 
 if it is not shown that Mr. Clough has taken that money and 
 appropriated it to his own use, he cannot be charged in this 
 form of action for taking half-fare and returning half-tickets. 
 And there is no evidence that he has ever appropriated a 
 dollar, or a cent. But how are the facts in regard to it? 
 The evidence is that this whole practice of Mr. Clough 
 perhaps it may turn out so in reference to the other conduct 
 ors of giving return tickets and taking half- fare was a mat 
 ter that was directed by Gilmore himself. You have the tes 
 timony from Sanborii as well as from Clough; you have the 
 direct testimony from G. G. Sanborn and the gentleman 
 on the other side will not attempt to detract from the credit 
 to be attached to him. It doesn t depend upon the testi 
 mony of Mr. Clough alone, although there has been nothing 
 put in to detract at all from Mr. dough s testimony, but 
 it appears from the testimony of Mr. Spalding and Mr. 
 Sanborn, as well as of Mr. Clough, that Mr. Gilmore was 
 in the frequent habit of altering these rules and direct 
 ing how everything in regard to the Concord Railroad should 
 be done. Why, Mr. Sanborn has just as much disregarded 
 his duty as Mr. Clough. lie has just as much liability as 
 Mr. Clough. He has let Mr. Gilmore have tickets out of 
 the ticket-box and failed to return them. He has recog 
 nized the "governing power of the road" as in Mr. Gilmore, 
 and he knows and has sworn that he was in the practice of 
 setting aside the rules of the road. Now, gentlemen, 
 
ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 was it ? Why, here was, as the evidence shows, this multitude 
 of free passes everybody had a free pass. Mr. Gilmore 
 became delicate about giving his passes. Here were some 
 few of his fuglers, lawyers and friends; here were my friends 
 Stanley and Clarke, associate counsel in this case with Col. 
 George, and my other friend, Topliff, of Manchester, who 
 was a warm friend of Mr. Gilmore, and they didn t get Mr. 
 Gilmore s pass, and they felt that they had a right to ride 
 free quite as well as others who had Mr. Gilmore s pass ; and 
 they complained to Mr. Clough, and Mr. Clough would say 
 to tl^em, " I cannot pass you without authority from the higher 
 powers;" and so Mr. True Garland went to Mr. Gilmore, 
 and through the agency of Mr. Garland Mr. Clough was 
 finally directed to pass these gentlemen by taking fare one 
 way and giving them a return ticket. Now, gentlemen, that 
 is all there is to that ; but yet the counsel says that he is going 
 to prove, "most overwhelmingly," that it was not once 
 nor twice, nor thrice that this was practiced, but that Mr. 
 Clough gave a return ticket into the hands of these persons 
 "for the purpose of inducing them to pay in f/ie cars." So the 
 gentleman gets up a considerable bluster over the matter. 
 There was Edgerly, Stanley, Clarke, French, Topliff, and oth 
 ers that were riding by the instructions of Mr. Gilmore. 
 And then Mr. Clough was asked to state whether he had 
 ever passed Mr. I,. B. Clough; and Mr. Clough testified 
 that he had. It appears, gentlemen, that he had no especial 
 authority, but he said, "If one passed him, I have gener 
 ally." "Well, what did you do it for?" "Why, I knew 
 he was a particular friend of Gilmore, and I knew that Stan 
 ley and Clarke were friends of his, and I did n t know that 
 there was anything wrong in that." I merely bring it up to 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. t 1 
 
 show the force of his testimony. "Did you pass Obadiah 
 Clough in that way?" Ans. "Well, I would not state pos 
 itively." The gentleman is going to argue that he did once 
 pass him. What is the explanation? "Why, there were 
 a good many persons that he was passing for Gilmorc, 
 and he would tell me to save out so many tickets sometimes, 
 and I would do it; and he desired that a great many people 
 might go for half-fare, receiving tickets back. And it is 
 quite likely that men that I don t now recollect did pass in 
 this way." There was LaFayette Robinson, and Clough was 
 asked the .same questions in regard to him; and he say s 
 " he thinks he has sold him tickets." Mr. Clough was also 
 asked if he ever took fare of O. B. Hardy and gave him a 
 ticket to return on. Mr. Clough says, "he always had tick 
 ets I never sold him any." He was inquired of in regard 
 to Mr. True Eaton he don t recollect in regard to him, or 
 in regard to Mr. David Carr and John S. Carr he may 
 have passed some of these persons whom Mr. Gilmore was in 
 the habit of dead-heading. Now, then, I believe here are all 
 the persons that Mr. Clough was inquired of as passing in 
 this way for half-fare and giving back return tickets. Now 
 if Mr. L. B. Clough, or Mr. Eaton, or the Carrs, or anybody 
 else were in the habit of riding in this way, unless by the 
 express instructions of Gilmore, why have not these men 
 been produced? 
 
 If these practices had been general; if Mr. Clough had 
 been in the constant habit of receiving fare in the cars, and 
 then going up and slipping tickets into their hands "for the 
 purpose of inducing them to pay on the cars," why havn t 
 some of these men been produced here to contradict Mr. 
 Clough, when he says that he never passed them in that way 
 
ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 and gave them tickets for that purpose? And from any 
 thing that has b?en shown, gentlemen, in regard to these 
 half-fare tickets, has there been a look as though this was 
 done by Clough to "Induce people to pay in llie cars?" It 
 was a very silly and unnecessary device, one would suppose, 
 when he had such ample opportunities for stealing, if he was 
 so disposed, without resorting to any such mode as this. 
 We never should have had any display of eloquence over 
 such matters as this if they had made out anything on the 
 main charges in their case. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, I submit to you that all this talk in 
 regard to this matter of giving a return ticket, to induce 
 people to pay in the cars, so that he might steal the money, 
 rests on no foundation whatsoever; and the "overwhelming 
 testimony" that Avas to be put in here has not been forth 
 coming, and there is no evidence upon which, when it is 
 fairly understood, Mr. Clough can be charged as having 
 made any departure from his duty in this regard. 
 
 MR. GEORGE. Mr. Tappaii, I don t care to contradict 
 when you make statements of this kind, but I simply desire 
 to have it understood that I don t, by my silence, acquiesce 
 in their correctness. 
 
 MR. TAPPAX. You will of course correct me if I am 
 Avrong, and the referees will correct me. What is the 
 mistake ? 
 
 MR. GEORGE. Your mistakes have been in reference to 
 misstatcments in regard to persons to whom he gave a return 
 ticket. I simply wish to call attention to this. Either you 
 are wrong or else Mr. Stanley s minutes are wrong. 
 
 MR. TAPPAN. Very well; it is barely possible that I may 
 be mistaken, and it is barely possible that Mr. Stanley s min- 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 73 
 
 utes are mistaken. I have stated it as I have it in my min 
 utes, arid as I believe the testimony to be. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, a great deal has been said in regard to 
 this matter of "using tickets over and over and over again;" 
 and I should really be glad, gentlemen, if you have time, as 
 a matter of curiosity, if you would just look over your min 
 utes and see how many times the counsel on the other side 
 has repeated that language, of "over and over again," in 
 this connection. They were going to show how Clough had 
 taken up these tickets and sold them "over and over and 
 over again;" and we have had it ad nauseam during the 
 twenty-seven days since this trial began. I admit that it 
 was possible for Mr. Clough, or any other conductor, to 
 have taken up these coupon tickets and used them "over and 
 over and over again," if they pleased; but what I say here 
 in the first place is that there is not a particle of evidence 
 except what came from the testimony of Mr. Clough him 
 self, as I understand it, that any such tickets have been used 
 in any such way. And then it has been explained to you 
 how and why they were so used. They could be used to a 
 limited extent, I admit, but it is one thing to charge and it 
 is one thing to show how these tickets could be taken up and 
 used "over and over again," and another thing to back with 
 proof that they have been so used. 
 
 Now, in the second place, gentlemen, you will recollect 
 the testimony of Mr. Sanborn, who swears distinctly in refer 
 ence to this coupon ticket matter, and the practice of the 
 road under it. Mr. Sanborn swears expressly and he 
 shows you how and why that no considerable peculation* or 
 operations of ihlx Ic md could be transacted without the whole 
 
 thing being brought to the knowledge of the road. All the 
 10 
 
1 4 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 tickets issued by the upper roads are charged to the Concord 
 road; these coupons are taken up by the conductors and re 
 turned to the general ticket agent, and the Concord road 
 settles with the upper roads at the end of every month. The 
 coupons returned by the conductors should correspond with 
 the number charged to the road, and if they did not so cor 
 respond if any were missing, kept back to use "over and 
 over again," that fact would be known at the end of the 
 month. 
 
 And how can Mr. Clough know, supposing that he had 
 any desire or wish to use these tickets over again how 
 could Mr. Clough knoAv that the tickets he gives out, or, if 
 the inference is that he gave out tickets in large masses, as 
 the Whitcher tickets, which were "used over and over again" 
 how can Mr. Clough have any assurance that those tick 
 ets would not be kept out, or that they would come around 
 by the end of the month? And Mr. Sanborn swears if there 
 was any material discrepancy between the number of tickets 
 reported by the upper roads and the account at the office, 
 they would discover it at once and inquire into it. It is ab 
 surd to say that Mr. Clough, who is a somewhat shrewd man 
 in his business matters, if he was doing anything fraudulent, 
 would have been likely to have laid himself open to detec 
 tion in this way. These tickets were merely local tickets and 
 could not be used off the Concord Railroad. I think Mr. 
 Clough states that he may have perhaps given one of these 
 tickets in a few instances, when he happened to have no 
 other local ticket. You will see, therefore, even if Mr. 
 Clough were so disposed, he could not abstract these tickets 
 and use them "over and over again" to any considerable ex 
 tent, or put any considerable amount of money into his pock- 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. < ) 
 
 cts in that way. It could not be done. But what necessity 
 was there, gentlemen, for doing it ? As I have said, they were 
 merely local tickets they could be used only on the Con 
 cord railroad; there was no necessity for giving such tickets. 
 When a man was in the cars and had no ticket, why should 
 Mr. Clough, or any other conductor, when he paid his fare, 
 give him one of these tickets? Why couldn t he, instead of 
 giving him a ticket, take the money and put it in his pocket ? 
 Every ticket that he kept out in that way would be the ready 
 instrument for his detection. There was no necessity for his 
 doing it if he wanted to steal. All he had to do, and 
 which was more safe for him to do, was to take the money 
 and put it in his pocket without giving any ticket at all. 
 And I don t see what benefit it could be to Mr. Clough or 
 anybody else, the practice of stealing these tickets in that 
 way. 
 
 Now a word as to the "joint tickets." My brother has 
 the reputation of being an astute lawyer, and what he don t 
 know, especially in regard to the law and practice of rail 
 roads is scarcely worth knowing, and I was therefore a little 
 surprised at the nature of his inquiries, and the pertinacity 
 with which he urged them in regard to the matter of these 
 "joint tickets." You will recollect that he pressed Mr. Saii- 
 born, the ticket -master, and the other gentleman, very hard 
 indeed, and tried to get out of them that Mr. Clough could 
 have retained these joint tickets, and he put this ques 
 tion "over and over again:" "Supposing that you sold ten 
 tickets from Concord to Boston, and suppose having sold ten 
 tickets, he put the money in his pockets, and supposing he 
 took up ten tickets and didn t return them, now I want to 
 know, what means you could have of knowing that. " That 
 
r 
 
 76 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 is the exact question, as taken down by the short-hand 
 reporter; and that is the question that he crowded 011 these 
 men, and as often as it was asked, Mr. Sanborn repeated to 
 him in the most natural manner that could be, " // ////, */Y, 
 this could not be done without collusion with the conductors 
 below, and with the passengers" And I have heard something 
 said before with regard to the testimony of these lower con 
 ductors. I should be glad, if there is any testimony from 
 them, that they would put it in. But at any rate it is enough 
 to say that it could not be done without collusion with the 
 conductors below, and also with the passengers. And if it 
 was so, they could have had these conductors on the stand. 
 I understand that their testimony has been taken in depo 
 sitions. Can any one tell me why they have not been used? 
 It thus appears that the stealing of these "joint tickets" 
 (i. e., tickets that were good over other roads,) could not 
 have been done at all, because they were charged by the 
 ticket-master directly to the conductors, who had to account 
 for them dollar for dollar. And this disposes of another of 
 the gentleman s long-winded "suppositions." 
 
 [At this point a recess w r as taken until o clock, P. M., 
 after Avhich Mr. Tappaii continued.] 
 
 There was one fact, may it please the referees, when 1 
 was touching, before the adjournment, on this wholesale 
 plundering in the cars, (which is of course the main charge 
 on which this prosecution rests,) which I accidentally omit 
 ted, and it is this: the practice (which has been proved by 
 the testimony of Mr. Upham and of Daniel S. Webster,) of 
 Mr. Clough, in every instance where he could, to have the 
 passengers purchase their tickets at the office. You recollect 
 the testimony of Mr. Upham, that it was frequently the case, 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION ( . GEORGE CLOUGH. I 7 
 
 when the passengers came on to Nashua without a ticket, 
 that Mr. Clough would send the passenger or a brakeman to 
 purchase tickets for them at the ticket office, so that they 
 might be furnished with them in the cars. The testimony of 
 D. S. Webster, which was put in only yesterday, I think, on 
 this point, was, that it was the invariable practice of Mr. 
 Clough, when passengers came from the Nashua and Worces 
 ter road, to assist them and direct about purchasing their tick 
 ets. NOW T , this is, perhaps, a small matter, but after all it is a 
 significant one, and I put the question to you if the conduct 
 of Mr. Clough in this respect indicates that he wanted to in 
 duce people to ride without buying their tickets at the ticket 
 office, so that he might steal their fares ? On the other hand, 
 does it not indicate that he was an honest man, and that in 
 every instance where he could, he desired that the passengers 
 should be furnished with tickets; and does it look likely 
 that a man who was constantly every day taking this 
 course to have the passengers supplied with tickets, would 
 be taking half -fare and giving a return ticket to such gentle 
 men as had these tickets, to induce them to pay in the cam? 
 And that is all I propose to say in regard to that. You 
 will bear in mind, however, that the testimony is that passen 
 gers could not get their baggage checked till they showed 
 their tickets. 
 
 Now, there is another matter, gentlemen, that I will refer 
 to very briefly, and I feel that I ought to hurry along as fast 
 as I can, for I know you are anxious that these arguments 
 should be closed to-day. And, I should almost be ashamed 
 to allude to it, if it had not been brought forward here with 
 so much parade as the third article in the famous "synopsis;" 
 which is, that Mr. Clough didn t punch the tickets, simply 
 
<8 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 making a pretence, and making them susceptible to a second 
 
 use. It is charged that Mr. Clough didn t punch the 
 
 tickets. Xow what is the evidence upon which that third 
 
 charge of the "synopsis" rests? What is it based upon? 
 
 Why, just the simple testimony of Mr. Wm. Roby, who 
 
 rode in the cars with his wife and gave his tickets to Mr. 
 
 Clough; and Mr. Clough, as he thinks, failed to punch his 
 
 ticket. And what did he say? Here is the exact language 
 
 he used, showing you how the thing presented itself to Mr. 
 
 Roby : " Mr. Clough took the ticket and went to punch it, 
 
 but the punch didn t happen to hit it." This is what old Mr. 
 
 Roby says; and that is all there is to this, gentlemen; that 
 
 is all the evidence upon which this charge rests. " He 
 
 didn t happen to strike it; it went by the end and didn t 
 
 strike the ticket, and he handed it back to me and afterwards 
 
 took the ticket oif." Who knows but what Mr. Clough 
 
 afterwards punched the ticket; and what benefit could it be 
 
 to Mr. George Clough to take a ticket in that way? Who 
 
 knows but that it did "happen" to hit, and that Roby is 
 
 mistaken? But at most the evidence shows that this failure 
 
 to punch Roby s ticket was purely accidental the punch 
 
 slipped by the end and didn t happen to hit it! And if he 
 
 sold any such ticket to any man, where is the witness that 
 
 has been before you to show the fact? Why, gentlemen, 
 
 while he was finding a purchaser for a ticket taken in this 
 
 way, he could have stolen, if he had been so disposed, a 
 
 hundred dollars in the cars. The thing is simply ridiculous 
 
 and absurd, and only shows the straits to which they are 
 
 driven to find something to substantiate the charges which 
 
 they have made against George Clough. And there I dismiss 
 
 the matter. Now, gentlemen, we find ourselves against 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GPXJRGE CLOUGTI. 79 
 
 another "estoppel," and that is the buying and selling of 
 these coupon tickets. Failing, as I think I have shown in 
 the examination of the testimony that I have gone over, to 
 show where Mr. Clough has fraudulently appropriated a 
 single dollar, or a single cent, and failing to produce any 
 evidence which tends to charge him in that direction, they 
 are obliged to stand upon all sorts of shifts, and upon all 
 sorts of positions and "estoppels" in order in some way to 
 charge Mr. Clough, when everybody understands that if 
 there is anything against him it is this wholesale stealing that 
 he had been carrying on for years, on the train. 
 
 Well, now, how is it about this matter of buying and 
 selling western coupons ? The evidence upon which that rests 
 is the testimony of Mr. Clough, himself, which doesn t deny 
 but that he purchased these tickets, and we don t deny but 
 that he made something out of them. It is a matter 
 that he might have concealed, if he had been so disposed. 
 I put it to this board, that, if he was disposed to commit 
 wholesale perjury, he might have well concealed this matter. 
 Instead of that, he comes forward and tells us exactly how 
 it was; and he tells you he bought and sold these tickets. 
 The evidence shows, and I believe (with great submission to 
 what the opinion of the honorable board before me will be,) 
 that the law will warrant him in doing everything that he 
 did in regard to it. lie says that he purchased and sold 
 western coupon tickets, that he made somewhere in the 
 vicinity of $2000 out of that transaction. Well, gentlemen, 
 it was notorious, (at least the evidence before you shows,) 
 that White and Weston, and traders in Concord and every 
 where, Avere dealing in these western coupon tickets. No 
 body thought there was any harm in it, nor any wrong. 
 
80 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON AV. T API AX. 
 
 They came here in that shape through the instigation of the 
 Concord Railroad themselves. They were issued for the 
 purpose of inducing travel to come this way instead of going 
 in other directions; and hence it was just as cheap to go all 
 the way to Boston as to go to Concord or Manchester, and 
 you could buy a ticket from Detroit and all points west 
 cheaper to go to Boston than you could to go to these other 
 places. And so it happened that hundreds of Frenchmen, 
 coming from Canada, and others, coming to Concord and 
 Hooksett, or wherever they were going, purchased their 
 tickets through to Boston, which gave somebody a right to 
 ride to Boston. That was the contract which the Concord 
 Railroad made when they issued those tickets, and that, pur 
 chasing a ticket to Concord or to Manchester, after they had 
 traveled as far as they chose upon it, if they saw fit to 
 transfer it to somebody else, was no fraud on anybody. But 
 what did Mr. Clough do in regard to this matter? Before 
 he did anything he went to his superior officer and told him 
 what the others were doing, that they were buying and 
 selling these tickets, and he asked him if he could not have 
 the liberty to do it. And Mr. Gilmore informed him that 
 he didn t know why he could not make something out of it, 
 as well as anybody. And here Mr. Clough was only follow 
 ing his natural instinct, such as he has shown everywhere, to 
 improve; every occasion where he could, to turn an honest 
 dollar, and to accumulate the property that he has accumu 
 lated. Mr. Gilmore, as he said, told him he did not know 
 why he might not make something out of it as well as any 
 body else. And with his approbation he bought some of 
 these tickets to the extent of what he says he bought, though 
 he don t undertake to tell or to know the precise amount. 
 
CONCORD R AIT-ROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOTJGH. 81 
 
 Now I don t propose to go over my views again as to how 
 far the road would be holden by the actions of the general 
 agent; but this I believe, that so far as the fact of notice to 
 the corporation is concerned, that notice could not come 
 officially through any other source than Joseph A. Gilmore. 
 And my position is that if Mr. Gilmore, the general agent, 
 had knowledge that Mr. dough was dealing in these 
 coupons, that is the only way that this notice could be 
 brought home to this corporation. They had notice of what 
 he was doing. They continued him in his place; and they 
 are "estopped" now from showing that he had no right to 
 deal in these tickets. 
 
 But I will state here my position in regard to an agent s 
 going beyond the scope of his authority. 
 
 I do not know whether or not Gilmore, in giving instruc 
 tions and saying to Mr. dough that he might do this, was 
 going beyond his authority. I have no doubt that it was 
 notice to the corporation. But my position is that the road 
 held him out, and enabled him to hold himself out in such a 
 manner, as possessing a more enlarged authority than the 
 letter of instructions would give him; and therefore they 
 are bound by his acts, by the adjudicated cases in this state. 
 And therefore I say, if this was an act beyond his powers 
 and the scope of his authority that the directors of the road 
 enabled him to hold himself out as having all the powers 
 that he claimed, and that they cannot now turn round and 
 repudiate what he has done. 
 
 But, gentlemen, there is another thing about this. As I 
 understand it I do not pretend to be a very good lawyer, 
 not so good as either of the legal gentlemen before me but 
 it has seemed to me, in looking over all the evidence 
 
82 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 touching this point, that there is not any evidence here that 
 could properly go to a jury, to charge Mr. Clough with a 
 single dollar of this two thousand as against the Concord Rail 
 road. I cannot see that there is any evidence that a jury has 
 a right to hear under the instructions of the court as to how 
 they shall assess damages or compute the damages growing out 
 of this transaction. Mr. Clough made this money by selling 
 these coupons, not out of the Concord Railroad altogether, but 
 also out of the Lowell road, and the Nashua and Worcester 
 road. Other roads were entitled to some portion of these 
 tickets that he purchased. Mr. Sanborn swears that the 
 amount which the Concord Railroad was entitled to from 
 these western coupons averaged all the way from twenty- 
 eight cents up to fifty-two cents, at different times. Now 
 how has it been shown by the other side how many of these 
 tickets were purchased when their proportion was twenty- 
 eight cents, and how many when their proportion was fifty- 
 two cents, or Avhen they had not a right to a single cent, 
 when the tickets were taken up at Nashua, going to New 
 York, or from Nashua to Boston? I say that the burden of 
 proof is upon them. It is incumbent upon them to put be 
 fore this tribunal such data as will enable you to compute and 
 to say how much Mr. Clough has received which belongs 
 to the Concord road, out of that transaction. It is but a 
 mere fractional part of the whole, at best; and there is no 
 evidence upon which you can say that there is a dollar. 
 
 But, in accordance with the suggestion that has been made 
 by the chairman, suppose the Concord Railroad have the 
 right to adopt his acts, and claim the money that he has re 
 ceived. I think that must go upon the assumption (with all 
 deference to the suggestion) that the corporation would have 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION f. GEORGE CLOUGH. 83 
 
 sold a regular ticket every time that one of these coupons 
 was sold; or in other words, that that coupon would not 
 have been ridden upon. As I understand it, in order to 
 charge Mr. Clough on that ground, it must appear (and the 
 suggestion goes upon that ground) that that ticket would 
 not have been used at all. Well, now, my position is exactly 
 the reverse of that; and I submit that the presumption is 
 exactly the other way. I think the fair presumption is that 
 somebody would ride on these tickets, and have a right to 
 ride upon them, whether Mr. Clough sold a regular ticket or 
 not. And if Mr. Clough had not bought them, somebody 
 would have bought them, and would have had the right to 
 have ridden upon them. And I submit that there is no 
 wrong to anybody; nor should Mr. Clough be charged upon 
 these technical grounds of not having brought home notice 
 to the directors of the corporation, although he had the 
 sanction of its general agent. 
 
 I confess that I am a little puzzled over these rules over 
 which such a display and parade have been made. This rule 
 adopted in 1860 for instance: "All tickets over the Con 
 cord, Manchester or Lawrence Railroad shall be dated on 
 the day of sale; said tickets shall only entitle the holder 
 thereof to a passage on the day of their date; provided that 
 joint tickets shall be good for such further time as may be 
 necessary to enable the holders, by the regular trains of the 
 road, to reach the stations to which such tickets are sold." 
 I think that rule will fairly bear the construction that it is to 
 apply only to tickets sold by the Concord road. But sup 
 pose it applies to tickets sold on the western roads as well. 
 What was the practice under it, gentlemen? What was the 
 practice under it, as shown by the tickets that have been pro- 
 
84 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON AV. TAPPAX. 
 
 duced before you, and as shown to you by the testimony of 
 Remick and, I believe, of one other witness who has testi 
 fied in the course of this trial? What was the practice 
 under that rule? Why, it is evident at once that the west 
 ern roads, if they had assented to that rule, and every road 
 that was bound to comply with that rule, could not comply 
 with it literally. It was impossible for a person to ride on 
 a ticket of that kind, in compliance with that rule. There 
 must be fame time within which such tickets should be good, 
 and some time beyond which they should not be good. The 
 testimony of Mr. Sanborn is that these tickets were marked 
 as being good for "thirty days," or "fifteen days," and at 
 one time for "ten days." But there was a time limited, and 
 a ticket had been produced of that kind, showing that it 
 was good for "thirty days." And Mr. Remick swears that 
 the tickets that he had, some of them were marked good for 
 thirty days, and that they were tickets that had not spent 
 their force, but were good for that length of time. I can 
 not see, therefore, how any rule of the road has been vio 
 lated at all. 
 
 And now, in regard to the instructions of 1864, it seems 
 to me to exactly confirm, by the very letter of the instruc 
 tions, the construction that I am contending for. The fourth 
 and last clause is: "Tickets and coupons over other roads 
 shall not be sold, * * * * when they believe, or the 
 date indicates, that they were not received in the "regular 
 course of business." 
 
 If they were received in the "regular course of business" 
 of the road, nobody can complain. The complaint was in 
 the case of Johnson v. The Concord Railroad, that the ticket 
 was not received in the "regular course of business." It was 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 85 
 
 so far beyond its date being some four months afterdate 
 that nobody could contend that it was good. And the point 
 was not made there, as I understand, in relation to tickets 
 that were not spent. 
 
 Well then, the instructions of the road did not prohibit 
 anybody from riding on such tickets; and if it did not pro 
 hibit anybody from riding on such tickets, it did not prohibit 
 Mr. Clough, or anybody else, from taking a transfer of such 
 ticket. The "regular course of business" would be within 
 thirty days, if that was the time, or within fifteen days, if 
 that was the limit of the ticket, or within ten days, if that 
 was the limit of the ticket. And I say, not only as a matter 
 of fact, but as a matter of law, that when Mr. Clough pur 
 chased these tickets with the full knowledge of the agent of 
 the road, which was the full knowledge of the corporation, 
 and when these tickets were not spent tickets, but tickets 
 that somebody had a right to ride upon, and within the reg 
 ular course of business, I contend that Mr. Clough did 
 just exactly what he had a right to do. And I think every 
 body would feel that it was an outrage, after all this parade 
 of virtuous indignation, and all this great show of doing 
 something to uncover the frauds and peculations of these 
 conductors, that the road should now plant themselves on 
 this position and only attempt to charge him in this round 
 about way. And that, gentlemen, is all, I believe, that I 
 care to say in regard to that matter. As has been suggested 
 to me, it is not what the Concord Railroad might have got, 
 but the question is what they have lost. And what evidence 
 is there to show that they have lost a single dollar? They 
 have, in doing this, only carried out the letter of their own 
 contract; a contract beneficial to them; a contract with the 
 
86 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 western roads to bring travel this way. And it would be 
 monstrous for them to undertake to turn around now and re 
 pudiate a contract with a man who has purchased these 
 tickets with the full knowledge of the "governing power" 
 I undertake to say of that road. 
 
 Xow, gentlemen, I come to the last topic upon which I 
 propose to speak in this case. And that is the question of 
 Mr. dough s property. I am reminded, however, that I 
 have overlooked the "peanut boy!" 
 
 Well, gentlemen, as I referred to the peanut question 
 casually, as I went over it, I do not suppose it is necessary 
 to refer to it again. It only shows the frailty of the other 
 side, in fastening to every little twig in order to save them 
 selves. Their powder -boat having blown up, and failing to 
 show any stealing in the cars by Mr. Clough, they are 
 obliged to cling to every little thing to save themselves ; and 
 they have fastened at last on the fares of this peanut boy! 
 And they say that Mr. Clough is liable for the fares of that 
 boy, because he set him up and furnished him capital and 
 paid him so much a clay. Well, gentlemen, I am not going 
 to say much about that. That only shows Mr. Clough s 
 character in doing everything he could to make a cent. And 
 I think it was certainly quite as much of an advantage to the 
 boy; his gains were sure; he had somebody to stand behind 
 him, and somebody to advise and direct him what he had 
 better sell ; and he had somebody to assist him and furnish 
 him capital. And it was for the advantage of this road that 
 these boys should go on the trains. Some carried water, and 
 some carried lemonade, and some carried newspapers, and 
 some carried peanuts. And who ever heard, gentlemen, that 
 tinv of these roads exacted fare? And does it make any 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION l\ GEORGE CLOUGH. 87 
 
 difference in this, whether he was hired by Mr. Clough or 
 not, that because Mr. Clough made something out of the 
 transaction, the road can turn around now and recover of 
 him the fares of this boy? Well, I suppose that is going to 
 be seriously argued. And the gentleman is welcome to all 
 he can make out of it. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I come to Mr. Clough s property. And 
 this is another great charge in the "synopsis" of my brother; 
 that is one thing that has been paraded on all occasions, in 
 public, at the corners of the streets, and in the course of this 
 trial, "over and over and over again;" that Mr. Clough 
 commenced running on the cars when he had but very little 
 property, and that now his property has swelled up to the 
 enormous amount of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars 
 or more! And, gentlemen, I am very glad to say and to 
 know that George Clough has, by honest accumulations and 
 industrious habits, got some property. And I am very glad 
 that we have been able to show you that he came honestly 
 by every dollar. Three years he has stood here with this 
 brand upon him, followed and hunted by the hounds on his 
 track, and feeling as if every man, woman and child that 
 looked upon him regarded him with suspicion, and as though 
 he had not a right to live in his own house; that even his 
 silver ware, that he had got by getting subscriptions to a cer 
 tain paper; and that the very spoons that came down to his 
 wife from her mother, had been stolen from the Concord 
 Railroad. I thank God that the knowledge is going to the 
 public, sanctioned, as I believe it will be, by the verdict of 
 this tribunal, that the property which Mr. Clough owns he 
 has a right to own that it is his and that if he has got a 
 house, he has a right to live in it; and, if that home has 
 
88 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 been made beautiful and attractive, and surrounded by the 
 evidences of taste and refinement, that it shall redound to 
 Mr. dough s credit; and that he has a right to be proud of 
 his home, because his own honest industry has earned it. 
 And I can stand here and say this, feeling it to be true, in 
 the face of every aspersion, and every charge that has been 
 made. 
 
 Why, gentlemen, look at George Clough. See him start 
 out from home, at fifteen years old, a poor boy, with all his 
 worldly effects on his back and tied up in his pocket-hand 
 kerchief ! That was George Clough when he started out at 
 the age of fifteen to make his own way in the world ! But, 
 gentlemen, that poor boy had about him a capital that was 
 worth more than twenty thousand dollars left him, in the 
 absence of the habits that he carried from his home with 
 him. The capital that he started with, when he left the pa 
 ternal roof, with his earthly effects tied up in that little bun 
 dle, I repeat, was worth more to him than if twenty thous 
 and dollars in money had been left him that day by his 
 father without the habits that he possessed and the resolu 
 tion he had formed! Now, follow him. Follow him to all 
 the places that he went to. Look at him at Newburyport; a 
 chore boy, working incessantly, by day and by night, wear 
 ing the cast-off clothes of the boarders at the hotel, saving 
 every dollar that he made, blacking boots, tending stable, 
 doing all he could to turn an honest penny; never for once 
 no, not for once going into a grog-shop; never for once 
 visiting a saloon; never for once going to a dance; never for 
 once allowing himself a single day or evening of recreation; 
 but saving his earnings and laying up, in two years, three 
 hundred solid dollars of his own! I tell you, gentlemen, 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION l\ GEORGE CLOUGII. 89 
 
 that instances of this kind in a boy of that age and under 
 these circumstances are rare. And I tell you further, gentle 
 men, what you know as well as I know that you never 
 saw a boy there is not an instance 011 record where a boy 
 of that kind starts out in that way, with those habits, with 
 that determination to save what he earns, and to be a rich 
 man, but that he always succeeds; and he always will suc 
 ceed, and always ought to succeed. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, he told you that he took all these hard 
 earnings of two years these three hundred dollars and 
 placed two hundred dollars of it in the Newburyport Bank, 
 keeping a little for himself and giving the rest to his mother. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, here happened to be something that did 
 not die. And we corroborate the fact of the deposit of his 
 first earnings in the Newburyport Bank. It would have 
 been counted on the other side only as one of those lies and 
 fabrications, if we could not have brought the cashier of the 
 bank where he deposited that money. It would have been 
 one of Mr. dough s fabrications. But it so happened, al 
 though some of those with whom George Clough has had 
 dealings have passed to that " bourn from whence no trav 
 eler returns," -but for which, notwithstanding the innuendo 
 of the gentleman, I don t see as Clough is to blame, that the 
 bank was in existence, and we could bring the cashier of the 
 bank and verify Mr. Clough s statement. He put two 
 hundred dollars in the bank, and went home and visited his 
 mother, and gave his mother fifty dollars, and started out to 
 try his fortunes again. We find him next at Raymond ; 
 never losing a moment, saving all that he earned, receiving 
 his wages, gradually increased when he came to be hostler ; 
 
 increased again when he came to be stage -driver and so 
 12 
 
90 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 he went on, until finally he came to be owner of the line of 
 stages on the Mammoth road. And we find him, when he 
 came to be stage - driver, with these same habits, contriving 
 every way to increase his earnings, and the result was, that 
 while on that staging, out of the perquisites he got by the 
 carrying of eggs, butter, poultry, veal, and everything that 
 he carried, he made more than his wages. And it was so 
 notorious that Clough carried all these things, and was 
 trading in these articles, that his line became known all the 
 way from Pittsfield to Lowell as the "Chicken Line!" 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I say that habits such as these will 
 insure success and prosperity. I say that habits such as 
 these will insure wealth. And it is shown here that from 
 the time Mr. Clough started out from his home, in the 
 way that I have described, until he was made conductor on 
 the Concord Railroad, he never lost but twelve days of his 
 time ; and those w r ere ten days when he was sick with the 
 measles, and two days when he stopped to go and get 
 married! These are all the days that George Clough lost. 
 And I thank God, too, that he got a wife that was a help 
 meet, and who co-operated with him, and who was content 
 for many long years "to labor and to wait" in an humble 
 position and an unpretending residence who was content 
 to labor and struggle with him who was not ashamed to 
 do her own work with her own hands who was content to 
 make her own children s clothes out of the cast -off clothes 
 of their father. And in this way their property grew, until 
 to-day they have a competence, and it is property for which 
 he owes the Concord Railroad no dollar; and the Concord 
 Railroad has no right to try and wrench it from them! 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 91 
 
 Well, gentlemen, the counsel on the other side says, or 
 gave you the idea, that Mr. Clough had two or three thous 
 and dollars when he started as conductor. But we have 
 shown you (and that you at least will not gainsay,) that he 
 had property to the amount of eleven thousand dollars at 
 that time. That was his cash capital. That is the capital 
 that he had to start with before he ever went on to the Con 
 cord Railroad. And that is a pretty good capital for a poor 
 boy starting out in life at the age of fifteen, his worldly 
 effects all told not worth nine shillings ! And it is a pretty 
 good capital in the hands of such a man as George Clough 
 to accumulate and to build on; and it has accumulated until 
 at last it has reached the sum of seventy -two thousand 
 dollars. Why, you may take that capital at the time he 
 went on the road, and putting it upon compound interest, 
 that capital to-day will amount to nearly fifty -two thousand 
 dollars! You all know how money accumulates; and you 
 know, as well as I, how property increases in the hands of 
 such a man as George Clough such a man as he has shown 
 himself to be in all his business transactions. 
 
 It was only the other day that an old gentleman that I, 
 and probably the members of this board (or some of them,) 
 have seen a man who had charge of the baggage at the 
 Astor House steps, New York, a "friend of Daniel Web 
 ster," as he was proud to call himself a man that I have 
 been in the habit of always seeing at the stairs at the Astor 
 House, whenever I have been in New York, who went there 
 twenty -eight or thirty years ago, with no property at all, 
 who had no salary, and no pay there, only the perquisites 
 that he could get from carrying the baggage up and down 
 stairs and taking care of it. And the other day he died, and 
 
ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 his remains passed through Concord on the way to their last 
 resting-place ; and he left behind him a property of a hundred 
 and forty thousand dollars! Is there anything extraordinary 
 in this. Why, another man might have gone to the Astor 
 House, and in three years been a confirmed drunkard. 
 George Clough would not. And Mr. Jones was not. Some 
 men would have squandered their earnings as they went 
 along, and always have been poor, but not such a man as 
 George Clough has shown himself to be. Instead of spend 
 ing any portion of his time in haunts of pleasure or of dissi 
 pation, he was always, early and late, attending to his 
 business ; instead of squandering, he saved, and put at 
 interest all he earned, and he has a right to be rich ! 
 
 Is there any doubt, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen, that 
 George Clough possessed eleven thousand dollars when he 
 went on to the Concord Railroad I Do you doubt it? Is 
 there any chance to doubt it? He swears to you dis 
 tinctly how he made it. You have seen it, and you know 
 it. We have corroborated his testimony as far as we 
 could. And the only point where I suppose it is to 
 be contradicted is the fact that Mr. Clough says that 
 he had six thousand dollars in the hands of Mr. Raymond 
 Kimball of Lowell. Gentlemen, have you any doubt of 
 that fact? Why, they would have you believe, perhaps, 
 that Mr. Clough fabricates this story, and states this 
 fact now because Mr. Kimball is dead. The fact that 
 Mr. Kimball is dead is not so unfortunate for them as it is 
 for us. And they bring Mr. Kimball, his nephew, here to 
 testify in regard to his uncle s business. And even Mr. 
 Kimball testified on the stand to the character of his uncle, 
 and told you that he was a man who, when he took a liking 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 93 
 
 to another, lie could not do too much for him. He took a 
 liking to George Clough, and he acted as George Clough s 
 friend, and as his banker. And George Clougli, acting 
 under his advice, whenever he got fifty dollars, put that into 
 his hands, and Kimball invested it for him, or held it him 
 self. And when he wanted it, after he came to Concord, 
 and it became necessary for him to use it, he drew upon him 
 for the money, until he got it all. We did not, of course, 
 expect, after this lapse of time, to be able to corroborate Mr. 
 Clough s testimony in regard to many matters. We can, of 
 course, in the absence of such corroborative testimony, ask 
 you that Mr. Clough s testimony shall be believed when 
 there is no evidence to contradict it. But we have thought 
 it our duty to substantiate the testimony of Mr. Clough as 
 far as we have been able to do it. But we had no idea that 
 we should be able to corroborate the fact of this money in 
 Kimball s hands. That we are able to do so seems almost 
 providential. 
 
 We called Mr. Sargent particularly in regard to his 
 knowledge of Mr. Clough s staging, and were not aware, 
 until he came here, that he knew anything about Clough 
 letting Kimball have his money. But it seems that Mr. 
 Sargent used to be there in that stable, and he states that 
 there was a desk there which Mr. Kimball had, and that he 
 had repeatedly seen George Clough give him money, and 
 that Mr. Kimball would go to his desk after taking the 
 money, and hand him a piece of paper, which he supposed 
 to be a note. So that we corroborate the testimony of Mr. 
 Clough as far as we can in this particular. And if there 
 was no other evidence in this case, I believe that you can 
 find that George Clough had this sum of eleven thousand 
 
94 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 dollars. And with his habits, and with this sum of eleven 
 thousand dollars to start with, I might well ask you, and I 
 might well ask everybody else to believe, that that was suffi 
 cient to account for the amount of property that he has 
 to - day. 
 
 But, gentlemen, we follow him further, and see him on 
 the cars. We see him taking advantage of everything that 
 turned up in his favor to make a cent of money. We see 
 him carrying berries, poultry, all kinds of farming produce; 
 we see him dealing in potatoes ; and he has stated to you the 
 amount which he thinks he gained in that way. If any of 
 you are familiar with the trade of these men who are specu 
 lating in and dealing in these articles every day, you would 
 not be astonished that Mr. Clough made Avhat he did in car 
 rying on this business. He carried 011 this business over the 
 freight trains mostly; and it is some four or five thousand 
 dollars that he says he made in this way. The people of 
 Lowell relied upon him for their marketing articles more 
 than they relied on the market. Such is the evidence. We 
 have shown you by witnesses from Pittsfield, from Franklin, 
 from Concord, and elsewhere, the extent of his operations 
 in this particular. He had persons buying for him in large 
 quantities ; and every day, each way over the road, for years 
 together, he was transporting these articles and selling them 
 at a profit, and in this way adding to his property. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I propose to do little more than to give 
 you some facts and data upon which we rely in regard to the 
 amount of Mr. dough s property. It has been incumbent 
 upon us, by the course that the investigation has taken, to 
 show how much he had, so far as we could, and how he got it. 
 Of course, you understand that this is not a matter that 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION I . GEORGE CLOUGH. 95 
 
 could be reduced to mathematical demonstration. Nobody 
 could do it. But if we show you how this probably could 
 have been, and give you a probability as to how this prop 
 erty could be acquired, we have met and answered all that was 
 required of us. But, fortunately, we have been able to go 
 further than mere probabilities and conjecture; for we think 
 w r e have shown you, step by step, how all his property has 
 been acquired. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, our theory, if it be a theory (but it is 
 not a theory, it is a fact,) our theory, our position is this: 
 We start Mr. Clough off with eleven thousand dollars of 
 property. We have shown you the gains that he made upon 
 that property. And we have simply kept that property at 
 simple interest. I mean the original capital of eleven 
 thousand dollars, and the gains that he has made upon it, 
 which amount to the sum of his property on the 14th day of 
 February, 1866, when these suits were commenced. We 
 have not deemed it competent to show what his property is 
 valued at to-day. That is not a point in this case. The 
 great question which you want to know is how much the 
 property which George Clough has got to-day cost him. 
 That is the question, as I understand it. 
 
 That property cost him, in February, 1866, as he has tes 
 tified, and given you the details you will find it not only 
 in the testimony which you have, but more elaborately in the 
 deposition which he has given, and more fully explained, 
 I think, that property cost him ninety-one thousand 
 nine hundred and thirty-five dollars and sixty-seven cents 
 ($91,935.67). Deducting his debts and liabilities at that 
 time, nineteen thousand six hundred and seventeen dollars 
 and twenty-one cents ($19,617.21); and you have seventy- 
 
96 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON TV. TAPPAN. 
 
 two thousand three hundred and eighteen dollars and forty- 
 six cents ($72,318.46) as the actual cost of his property in 
 February, 1866. 
 
 I will leave all my computations and figures with the ref 
 erees, if they will be of any service to them, and perhaps 
 save the trouble of taking fuller notes. They will do, how 
 ever, as they please about that. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, as I have said, and I desire the ref 
 erees to understand the position that we take; and if there 
 is any fallacy, or anything that is wrong, or anything that 
 will not bear the test of examination, I am sure the referees 
 will understand it; I cannot see the fallacy of it; now 
 then, we have taken this eleven thousand dollars and put it 
 at interest; and the interest on that, for that time, is fifteen 
 thousand eight hundred and forty dollars ($15,840). 
 
 Now that this matter shall be exactly right, and that all 
 proper deductions shall be made, Mr. Clough at this time 
 owned two houses; and we have cast simple interest on the 
 cost of these houses, and that amounts to two thousand one 
 hundred and sixty dollars ($2160); and we have deducted 
 that from the interest on eleven thousand dollars, and we 
 make the balance of the interest thirteen thousand six hun 
 dred and eighty dollars ($13,680) on the eleven thousand 
 dollars. Or in other words, we do not think it is extrava 
 gant to say that a man with Mr. Clough s business habits 
 would keep his capital at simple interest. The fact is, that 
 in many instances he has received a great deal more; but 
 our theory now is at simple interest only. Then, gentle 
 men, we take his salary that he has received; of course out 
 of that we take his cost of living. We take his salary, and 
 that salary for twenty-four years and a half is fifteen thous- 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION I 1 . GEORGE CLOTJGH. 97 
 
 and two hundred and seventy-five dollars ($15,275). Then 
 there is the Brown building 011 Pleasant street. That prop 
 erty he has 011 hand now. And we have put in a table here 
 showing the net gain or net profits, deducting all outs and 
 expenses, that he has made on that Brown lot. I think there 
 is one thing that you will think is somewhat surprising; 
 though, perhaps, not surprising in a man of Mr. dough s 
 business habits. And that is, that out of so many 
 transactions that he has been able to lay before you, he has, 
 in such a large majority of them, been so fortunate. Every 
 thing seems to have turned to his advantage. Take his 
 horses : the gains which he made, the prices which he gave, 
 and the prices which he got, would seem to be extravagant 
 almost. But we have substantiated these in many instances, 
 and we have given names and dates in all, and if they are 
 not true, witnesses could be brought to contradict them. 80 
 it is in other particulars; take this property; it has grown on 
 his hands; take this property, for instance, on Pleasant 
 street; that cost him, originally, five hundred and twenty 
 dollars; he has received, for seven years rent, the amount of 
 fourteen hundred dollars ($1400); the interest on that rent 
 is four hundred and sixty dollars ($460). The gross re 
 ceipts from that purchase amount to eighteen hundred and 
 sixty-four dollars. 
 
 Now we take the water tax, forty -two dollars ($42), 
 and the interest on that. We deduct the interest 011 the 
 original cost, two dollars and forty cents ($2.40) ; we deduct 
 insurance, seventeen dollars and forty cents ($17.40); we 
 deduct interest on that; we deduct the taxes; we deduct the 
 interest on the taxes; and the whole outs amount to three 
 hundred and ninety -eight dollars and seventy -eight cents 
 
 13 
 
98 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 ($398.78). Deducting that from $1864, leaves $1,405.34 
 as the absolute net gain on that one purchase ! 
 
 Now, then, there are the two houses on Thompson street. 
 These houses cost originally tAventy-two hundred and sev 
 enty-five dollars ($2275). The rents that he has received 
 from 1849 to 1862 are forty-four hundred dollars ($4400). 
 And he has detailed all this in his testimony, and shown 
 from whom he received it. The interest on that sum is 
 twenty -five hundred and fifty-one dollars and sixty-eight 
 cents ($2551.68). The rents from 1862 to 1864 were six 
 hundred and eighty dollars ($680); the interest on the 
 same, one hundred and two dollars ($102). The rents 
 from 1864 to 1868 were eight hundred dollars ($800); 
 making in all the total receipts $8,533.68. And now 
 we take from that the interest on the amount invested, 
 $2068.56, water tax, interest on that, repairs, insurance, 
 interest on insurance, and taxes, making in all $33(5(5, which, 
 deducted from the total receipts, leaves $5167 as the actual 
 gain on the two houses 011 Thompson street. 
 
 In the same way, taking the original cost of the Jefferson 
 street property at six thousand dollars, and taking his rents 
 and receipts from the same, and deducting the taxes and all 
 the outs, we find that he has made on the Jefferson street 
 property $1925 actual gain, and legitimate gain, and not a 
 dollar of it stolen. 
 
 Well then, gentlemen, here is the Sanger house. The gain 
 on that, as his testimony shows, is $59(5, and on the Wash 
 ington street property, $612. 
 
 As I said, all these matters are fully explained in detail in 
 his testimony. 1 will not undertake to detain you with the 
 details. The referees will bear in mind that these houses 
 
COXCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 99 
 
 that I am naming now are houses that he bought and has 
 sold. Then there are the other houses still in his possession. 
 But on these other houses I have made no computation, but 
 only on property that he has bought and sold, and where he- 
 has actually made these gains which we have shown in proof. 
 Then there is the Jamaica Plain property, etc. I will riot 
 detain you with the details of that, but he has made on that 
 purchase at Jamaica Plain $4798.81, the facts in regard to 
 which you fully understand. And on the Masonic Temple 
 property we have gone into the same estimate, and will 
 furnish you with a detailed statement of rents received and 
 taxes and outlays that have been paid out. And I do not 
 count now the rise in the value of property; but merely 
 what he has actually received from rents, over and above 
 what he has paid out, and over and above the interest on the 
 money. And he has received $4122.01. 
 
 On the Manchester Print stock he made by absolute sale 
 $1500. 
 
 And on the transaction with Mr. Elkiiis, as he has shown 
 you, he made $5000. On the Boston, Concord, and Mont 
 real stock he made $2000. On the old stock, $200. On 
 the Orange farm, $1000. On the steamboat stock, $2630, 
 more than he gave. On his Manchester land he made $500. 
 On the sale of western tickets he made $1500. The gain on 
 the Page farm was $100. His profits from cows he estimates 
 to be about $40 a cow. Here was a great splurge made, as 
 if a man could not make such a profit on the keeping of 
 cows. Why, gentlemen, if you know anything about the 
 keeping of cows, you know that every farmer will say that 
 the most profitable business of the farm is this matter of 
 
 dealing in milk. But the gentleman thought he had ^ot us 
 
 o o o o 
 
100 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 pretty tight when he found the tax bill. But he kept the 
 cows, and sold the milk; and you can easily see how much 
 the milk will amount to in a year, and see how much Mr. 
 (lough would be likely to "make. And I submit that Mr. 
 Clough had cows taxed. But however that may be, it was 
 very evident that the counsel on the other side didn t 
 believe they were there, and that consequently the facts 
 stated by Clough could not be shown. But, gentlemen, we 
 happened to be verified here. We could get the very man 
 who took care of them. We put before you the very man 
 who milked the cows, the very man that peddled the milk. 
 And, gentlemen, I think we have made that matter pretty 
 tolerably certain in your minds. 
 
 lie got $:21() from securing deserters. lie says, by esti 
 mate, he made these years that the boy ran on the cars, 
 $3276; he estimates these profits at only about nine shillings 
 a day. That is for you to judge. It is a mere matter of 
 estimate. But it all shows that Mr. Clough was not afraid 
 nor ashamed to do anything that was honorable to increase 
 
 J o 
 
 his means. I would like to know where there was another 
 conductor, where there was another man that had a chance 
 to steal a hundred dollars a day without detection, as they 
 assert, that would go into these little speculations for the sake 
 of making a small amount of money, and thus by little and 
 little adding to his gains I 
 
 And, gentlemen, I might ask you another thing here, for 
 fear I may forget it. I ask you if a man of ordinary 
 shrewdness, (and I think Mr. Clough has turned out to be a 
 man of ordinary shrewdness,) if a man such as Mr. Clough 
 has exhibited himself before you, and if he had been 
 plundering by the hundreds and thousands if he had got 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGII. 101 
 
 his property by stealing from the Concord Railroad, whether 
 he would be likely to parade these ill-gotten gains before 
 the public? This is not the way that tolerably shrewd men 
 usually act, and I don t believe that George Clough would 
 have been likely to have lived in a house (though lie may 
 have bought it for less than half its cost,) that would excite 
 the envy and jealousy of those not so fortunate as himself, 
 if the money that went into its purchase had all been stolen ! 
 Xow, gentlemen, I suppose a good deal is to be said about 
 the good house that Mr. Clough lives in. I think you will 
 acknowledge that even a man who has a good deal of money 
 would be glad to have got a house that cost $22,000 
 for $8000, all furnished. But L ask you again, as 
 reasonable men, if George Clough had been cognizant that 
 that money taken to purchase this house had been stolen, 
 would he have been likely to have thus paraded his ill- 
 gotten gains? I tell you that men don t generally do that. 
 But George Clough arid his wife and family had lived in a 
 poor house for many years. And they had toiled there, as 
 I have said, together. And they had a right when the 
 property accumulated, when the money had grown upon 
 their hands from the honest gains that he had made in real 
 estate, and in every other department that he turned his 
 hands to they had a right to live in a little better house. 
 And if they could get it at a bargain, they had a right to 
 live in the best house in Concord if it be the best house; 
 I do not know but that it may be; and nobody has a right 
 to call him in question about it. And I ask you, again, if 
 any man believes, who has common sense, that if George 
 Clough had been conscious that he had done the Concord 
 Railroad any wrong, and taken money which did not belong 
 
102 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 to him, he would have paraded himself before the public in 
 this ostentatious way? Nobody can believe it. 
 
 On the chicken and produce trade he realized $5200. 
 That he could not go into fully; could not tell to the dollar, 
 and did not pretend to. But we show the amount of busi 
 ness that he did, and we show his persistency. Ahd although 
 Mr. Spalding came here and had heard that Mr. Clough 
 had carried a "JitJt or two" not merely a few fish, but a 
 "fish or two" I think you will find that he had been 
 dealing in other kinds of produce as well as a "fish or two," 
 and that the amount which he must have made cannot be far 
 from the sum which he says he has made. 
 
 And then he says he has made $850 in the tobacco specu 
 lation. Mr. Eaton, who was connected with him, is a man 
 well known to the counsel on the other side, and this depo 
 sition was taken two years ago; and if Mr. Eaton could 
 have contradicted Mr. Clough, they would have had him 
 here. But he stated the truth in regard to this, as he has in 
 regard to everything in relation to his property. 
 
 And then his horse trades; he gave you his horse trades 
 in detail, he shows you the amounts that he has made ; and 
 they foot up to the sum of $1543, and many of these we 
 have shown by other testimony than his own. 
 
 And the whole of his legitimate gains then, gentlemen, 
 without any interest whatever, where we show you absolutely, 
 and put our fingers upon the very spot where he has made 
 this money, amount to the sum of fifty -six thousand nine 
 hundred and ninety -three dollars ($56,993.) 
 
 And now, gentlemen, we have taken that sum I mean 
 the gains ; we have not taken it hi the aggregate ; we have 
 not averaged the interest, but we have taken every gain that 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION l\ GEORGE CLOUGH. 103 
 
 he has made for a new principal, and cast interest upon that. 
 And we think, as I have said, that it is not an extravagant 
 nor an unreasonable theory to say that a man like George 
 Clough, with his business habits, has merely kept his gains 
 at simple interest, with the exception of the railroad stock, 
 on which we have counted the actual dividends received up 
 to 1866. 
 
 And, by the way, just look at that. Just look and see 
 how it was in regard to that one item of railroad stock. 
 Where is there a man that can be shown to have made so 
 much on a legitimate rise of the stock. He bought it low. 
 It did not average more than forty dollars per share. He 
 has realized on that stock more than twenty-two thousand 
 dollars of dividends. And yet, notwithstanding we show 
 all these legitimate gains notwithstanding he is able to tell 
 you how he has made the amount which his property cost 
 him when he was sued, you are asked to believe that he has 
 stolen it all from the Concord Railroad! 
 
 Well, reckoning in then these gains on the J efferson street 
 property, on the Thompson street property, on the Pleasant 
 street property, on the Concord Railroad stock, and others 
 not here enumerated but shown in the proof, and casting 
 only simple interest on each gain, and that interest amounts, 
 with the principal and all the gains, to one hundred and 
 twenty-two thousand nine hundred and twenty dollars and 
 thirty cents (122,920.30j; from which we have deducted 
 his cost of living. We have put that in as he has sworn to 
 you, from 1842 to 1848, at $300 a year, making $1800. 
 And we have shown the habits of this man and his wife, and 
 how they were determined to save all they could, and that 
 they brought themselves within that sum for that length of 
 
104 
 
 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 time. And from 1848 to 1860, the time lie moved from 
 Railroad square, he lived within his salary; and since that 
 time, up to the time he was sued, he has estimated his cost 
 of living at $2500 a year. Adding to it the amount of 
 losses, taxes paid, etc., it makes $41,208.44. Deducting that 
 from the amount previously given, and we show where he 
 could have made legitimately $81,716, which is $9398 more 
 than his property foots up on the fourteenth day of Feb 
 ruary, 1866. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, as I have said, we could not bring this 
 to a mathematical demonstration. It is very probable that 
 he may have under-estimated the cost of his living. But 
 we have approximated to the result. We have shown that 
 his property cost him the sum of seventy -two thousand 
 dollars, and a little more; and we have shown by calcu 
 lations from the testimony, which is on record, where he 
 made legitimately the sum of eighty -one thousand dollars, 
 without being obliged to steal or plunder a single dollar 
 from the Concord Railroad. Why, gentlemen, something- 
 was said here in regard to the amount of clothing and the 
 under -valuation that Mr. Clough put upon his expenditures 
 in regard to clothing; and I do not know for what other 
 purpose the testimony of Mr. Keyes, who made the insurance 
 report, was put in, unless it was to contradict the testimony 
 of Mr. Clough in this particular. Well, the counsel on the 
 other side may make all he has a mind to out of that. But, 
 gentlemen, I have this to say, that Mr. Clough had but little 
 to do with making up that insurance inventory. And that, 
 too, was made in the time of the Avar, when everything worn 
 was considerably higher in price than now. The insurance 
 agent made it in his own way, and Clough assented to it. 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 105 
 
 The gentleman may make all lie can out of that, for, making 
 liberal allowance for any under -estimate of his expense of 
 living, <&c., we still have a margin of more than nine 
 thousand dollars above the actual cost of his property at 
 the time this suit was brought. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I have troubled you long longer than 
 I had intended. In the argument I have felt called upon to 
 make, I have been considerably embarrassed from various 
 considerations. In the first place, I cannot help feeling, as 
 I have gone along, that much that I have been saying has 
 been talked about in the course of this long investigation. 
 And I could not help remembering, also, the character of 
 the tribunal before which I stand that you, gentlemen, 
 understand just as fully in regard to this evidence as I do; 
 and that, therefore, there was little need to argue the matter 
 before you. And another thing is the fact that you are anxious 
 to get through with the arguments to-day. And I have, 
 perhaps, discussed the case in a more rambling and desultory 
 manner than I otherwise should if I had been freed from 
 these embarrassments. 
 
 In conclusion, gentlemen, I think I am warranted in saying 
 of this proceeding and the evidence under it though it 
 may be contrasting a comparatively small case with one that 
 is world -renowned as was said by a celebrated English 
 barrister in his great argument in behalf of the queen : 
 "In this case such is the evidence before you evidence 
 inadequate to prove a debt evidence impotent to deprive 
 of a civil right; ridiculous to convict of the lowest offence; 
 scandalous when brought forward in support of a charge the 
 highest known to the laws; monstrous to ruin the honor and 
 blast the name of an English queen." And I say in regard 
 
106 
 
 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON \V. TAPPAN. 
 
 to the testimony brought against the defendant here, that it 
 is inadequate, impotent, scandalous! It is indeed monstrous, 
 and, I might almost add another term infamous, when we 
 take into consideration the magnitude of the charge with 
 which the case set out, and the character of the Avitnesscs 
 by whom it has been attempted to support it! The attempt 
 upon the vaunting, but flimsy testimony that has been put 
 in upon the assumptions that have been made with no 
 testimony to back them upon the suppositions that have 
 been put forth, without the shadow of a fact on Avhich to 
 base them upon the inferences that have been attempted 
 to be drawn from matters in themselves the most innocent, to 
 ruin this man and his family, and to blast his name and 
 reputation forever, is, I think, something unheard of in the 
 history of judicial trials in New Hampshire. I do not 
 undertake to know who is to blame for all this, and, as I 
 said at the outset, I am not going to impute motives. But 
 this much I know, that Mr. Clough has been pursued in the 
 most unrelenting manner the fact of his guilt has been 
 taken for granted from the start, and even when the evidence 
 fails the charge is still continued! Hut I thank God that 
 the time will come, no matter what the decision here may 
 be, when all the facts growing out of, and surrounding this 
 remarkable proceeding, shall be read and known of all men, 
 when the whole truth shall be made to fully appear, and 
 George Clough shall stand vindicated before the whole 
 world ! 
 
 I thank you most sincerely, gentlemen and these are no 
 merely formal words for the kindness and courtesy which 
 you have exhibited to myself and my associates, and to us 
 all, throughout this protracted trial. 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 107 
 
 And now, gentlemen, I leave Mr. Clough, I leave his 
 family, I leave his reputation and good name, which is better 
 than riches; I leave the decision of this case confidently in 
 your hands, for I knoAv that your breasts are inclined to 
 justice, and simple, naked, exact justice is all I ask, all I 
 desire, and all I claim for mv client. 
 
 \From "The People" of January 28.]- 
 In February, 1866, suits were brought by the Concord 
 Railroad against George Clough and other conductors 
 damages being laid, in dough s case, at the sum of "one 
 hundred thousand dollars. Mr. Clough s case only has been 
 tried, and the session of the referees lasted twenty-seven 
 days. The proceedings against the conductors grew out of 
 a declaration by Mr. Gilmore (who was himself, as appears 
 by the annual report of the present board of directors, a 
 defaulter in a very large amount, and who took tickets with 
 out accounting for them, by fifties and hundreds at a time, and 
 who scattered his free passes by the ten thousand,) before the 
 board of directors, that the conductors had been stealing fifty 
 thousand dollars a year in the cars ! Detectives, unbeknown 
 to the conductors, were at once put upon the trains, and con 
 tinued upon them some six weeks or two months, paying for 
 fares in the cars to the conductors about fifteen hundred dol 
 lars in money. When the report of the detectives was put 
 in the case, it would show, for instance, that a certain amount 
 of money on such a day was paid to George Clough in the 
 cars for so many fares between such and such stations on the 
 road. Clough s way-bills, or returns to the road, which he 
 
108 
 
 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON \V. TAFFAN. 
 
 was obliged to make every clay, were then put into the hands 
 of the detective AV!IO was testifying, and he was asked to 
 state whether it appeared from said way-bills that the money 
 he paid to Clongh on that day was duly returned by him. 
 And in every single instance it appeared that the money so 
 paid him by the detectives was returned to the road by 
 Clough. Xot a wrongful appropriation of money paid him 
 in the cars, to the extent of one cent, was discovered against 
 Clough; and the only "irregularity" shown was the failure 
 in five instances only to take the ten cents extra. It ap 
 peared on the trial that it was impossible for the conductors, 
 in all cases, to get the ten cents extra, as required by the 
 rules, for the conductor, if he was obliged to stop and have 
 a quarrel with every passenger who objected to paying it, 
 could not get through the cars and take up his tickets before 
 the train reached the next station. Mr. Gilmore, therefore, 
 instructed Clough to get it when he could, and when he 
 could not, to buy tickets, punch them, and return them to 
 the ticket master with his other collections. Mr. Clough 
 himself testified that this was the way he did in cases where 
 he did not get the extra ten cents, and in this way he 
 received considerable sums for fares, which he paid over to 
 the road by purchasing and punching tickets, as he had been 
 directed. And there was no other evidence but that of Mr. 
 Clough himself, as to his practice in this respect. But the 
 counsel for the road contended that even though the fares 
 might all have been paid over in this way, yet it being done 
 in violation of the rules of the road, he was chopped to show 
 this; and the referees held that, if in the opinion of the 
 court he would be "estopped," or if the facts would not con 
 stitute a defence, that he would be liable in the sum of $5509. 
 
CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. 109 
 
 It also appeared that in order to induce travel to come this 
 way from the west, the Concord Railroad authorized through 
 tickets over their road to be sold from points west to Boston 
 at a less rate than to local points on their road. For in 
 stance, a passenger could purchase a ticket from Detroit to 
 Boston cheaper than from Detroit to Concord. The result 
 was that when the passenger arrived at Concord, or other 
 points on the Concord Railroad, he had the balance of his 
 ticket left, which was good for a passage to Boston. These 
 tickets were sold; anybody and everybody at Concord, Man 
 chester and elsewhere purchasing and selling them. Mr. 
 Clough, by express permission from the superintendent, 
 bought a good many of these tickets, and made, in the years 
 that he was on the road, according to his own testimony, 
 some two thousand dollars from this source. The counsel 
 for the road claimed that what he had thus made belonged 
 to the road, and the referees decided that if, under the cir 
 cumstances, it did belong to the road, then it would have a 
 right to recover of Clough this sum of two thousand dollars. 
 
 It appeared, also, that Mr. Clough had been in the habit, 
 ever since he had been on the road, of carrying produce and 
 other articles, in which he speculated and made considerable 
 money. It was contended that all this inured to the benefit 
 of the railroad; and whether the award of the five thousand 
 six hundred and thirty-five dollars was on this ground, or 
 upon what ground, does not appear by the report. 
 
 Other exceptions were taken besides the questions raised 
 by the referees themselves, and we understand that these 
 are all now before the court for consideration, and will un- 
 doubteclly fo to the full bench. JUSTICE. 
 
110 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 [From tlie "Republican Statesman 19 of January 8.] 
 In the case of the Concord Railroad against George Clough, 
 the referees rendered judgment against defendant for $5635, 
 and on questions contingent to decisions of the court the 
 further sum of $5509, for not returning reduced rates of 
 fare taken to the ticket master, as required, and for joint 
 tickets over roads purchased of ticket agents by defendant, 
 $2000. This result, while not as satisfactory to Mr. Clough 
 and his friends as they hoped, because they have believed, 
 and now believe, that the railroad has 110 legal or moral claim 
 whatever upon him, still is of such a nature as not to re 
 flect upon his character for integrity. 
 
 Mr. Clough testified before the referees, and frankly stated 
 that he had been in the habit, openly, of carrying articles of 
 freight over the road without paying for their carriage; from 
 which transactions, in a series of years, he made considerable 
 profit. Also, that he had been in the habit of purchasing 
 through coupon tickets at a reduced rate, from passengers 
 stopping off at way stations, and selling them again at full 
 rates to other passengers; and that from this system he de 
 rived considerable sums of money, the amount of which he 
 estimated as well as he could. That he had also allowed 
 refreshments and other articles to be carried and sold on the 
 cars, and had received a portion of the profits for many 
 years. The carriage of articles and the sale of coupon 
 tickets, Mr. Clough proved, was with the knowledge and 
 consent of the officers of the road; but the referees were of 
 the; opinion that a conductor ought not to carry on such 
 transactions on his private account that they must be 
 deemed to have been carried on for the benefit of the road, 
 and that Mr. Clough was liable in this suit for the profits. 
 
I 
 
 CONCORD RAILROAD CORPORATION V. GEORGE CLOUGH. Ill 
 
 We do not understand that the referees have found that 
 Mr. Clough retained any of the money paid to him for fares 
 while conductor. This was the only grave or serious charge 
 that was made was the one upon which the action was 
 originally founded, and which was pressed with the most 
 zeal by the counsel for the railroad. We regard the report 
 of the referees as a substantial acquittal of Mr Clough on 
 all such charges. Whether, on the other grounds, he should 
 be held responsible for profits made by him in a long series 
 of years through transactions in which he engaged by the 
 consent of the higher officers of the road, the public can 
 judge. 
 
 [From the "Boston Journal" of January 12.] 
 
 CONCORD, N. II., Jan. 9, 1869. 
 To the editor of the Journal: 
 
 In relation to the late railroad "conductor case," which 
 has excited so much general interest, it is due to Mr. Clough, 
 the defendant, to say that with four detectives upon his 
 trains for about two months they paying in the cars some 
 $1500 not a single instance was shown where Mr. Clough 
 had failed to return every cent of the money so paid to him. 
 It does not appear, therefore, by the report of the referees, 
 upon what ground he is charged for the $5685 whether 
 for carrying freight and articles on the passenger trains, 
 which he had been in the habit of doing for some years, and 
 which the plaintiffs contended should enure to their benefit, 
 or otherwise. It also appeared on the trial that it was im- 
 
112 ARGUMENT OF HON. MASON W. TAPPAN. 
 
 possible iii all cases for Mr. Clough, with other conductors, 
 to collect the ten cents extra in the cars, which the rules re 
 quired when the passengers paid fares on the train, and that 
 Mr. Gilmore, the superintendent, directed Mr. Clough, when 
 he could not do this, to buy tickets, punch them, and return 
 them with his collections to the general ticket agent. On. 
 this ground he was sought to be charged for the fares so re 
 ceived when the ten cents extra was not taken, although the 
 money collected was accounted for in that way. The referees 
 award conditionally the sum of $5509, if the court shall 
 hold that the defendant is estopped to show the above facts, 
 or if, being shown, they would not constitute in law a good 
 defence. It appears also by the report that it was the prac 
 tice of western roads, by virtue of an arrangement with the 
 Concord road, in order to ensure travel to come this way, to 
 issue through tickets to Boston at a cheaper rate than to Con 
 cord and other points on the Concord road, so that pas 
 sengers from the west desiring to stop at Concord, Manches 
 ter, and other points, often bought through tickets. These 
 tickets, good for a passage to Boston, when the passenger 
 arrived at his point of destination, were sold to whoever 
 would buy them. Mr. Clough, by the express permission 
 of the superintendent, purchased many of these tickets, and 
 made in the operation, during the years he ran as conductor, 
 some $2000, and the referee award to the Concord Railroad 
 tl>is sum of $2000, provided that the court shall hold that 
 the road is entitled to the profits thus made by Mr. Clough 
 on those tickets. 
 
 The case goes to the full bench on the above questions, 
 and upon other exceptions taken by the defendant s counsel 
 in the course of the trial. F. F. 
 
YC 25459 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY