|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1876.] <OF THE HOUSE Olf DELEGATES. 16«T
ment of Col. Earle by interrogating him as to the truth of
the statement made by him as to the interview in the Senate
Chamber. Col. Earle further testified that at a sub-
sequent meeting of the Committee on Pittance, Colonel
Woolford appeared to enlighten the Committee as to the
merits of the bill that had been the subject of conversation
between Col. Woolford and himself. The Committee imme-
diately laid aside the work upon which they were engaged,
and out of deference to Col. Woolford's position as Comptrol-
ler, took up the bill which brought Col. Woolford before
them.
He at once began an explanation of the bill, and Col.,
Earle swears that, before proceeding far, Col. Woolford's
"manner excited my suspicion; I thought there was some*
thing wrong, and I said to him very quickly and in a sharp-
manner, cCol. Wool ford, was that man ever in the army ?*
His reply was, 'No, Col. Earle, he never was in the army,
but he is very good or first-rate Democrat;' I will not be
positive which expression he used, meaning at all events a
first-rate Democrat; he added, £we cannot do without his1
services in some part of Somerset county,' which he named;
I then said to him, 'There is an end of it. sir;' at this Col.
Woolford left the room, as you may suppose there was tre-
mendous indignation in the Committee; I think I expressed
my indignation very strongly nayself,and I am sure the present
Governor did also. As te the nature of the bill in which Col.
Woolford was thus interested, Col. Earle swears that "it was
certainly a pension bill and nothing else; its provisions were
of a simple ordinary pension bill, I am sure I did not make
a mistake as to the character of the bill." This testimony as-
to the nature of this-bill taken with the testimony of Mr.
Charles M. Jump, that the party named in the bill was the
same as the party named in the petition for pension, which
had enlisted such interest on the part of Col. Woolford, must
demonstrate conclusively that Noah Webster who received an
appropriation in consequence of having been illegally drafted,
and the petitioner for pension, were too separate and distinct
persons.
L. S. Claggett was sworn, and said that he was a member
of the Senate of 1872, and a member of the Finance Commit-
tee ef that Body, and remembered the circumstances attend-
ing the appearance of Col. Woolford before the Committee
on Finance, to advocate the claim of a man in Somerset
county for a pension. Mr. Claggett further says that he
"would not have remembered the bill had it not been for the
unfortunate occurrence that took place on that occasion, and
the predicament in which Col. Woolford placed himself, and
the surprised expressed by the Committee at his conduct in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
