"NORWICH, CONN., _May 5th, 1876_.
"MY DEAR GOVERNOR,--I have canvassed the political
situation in this State since I last saw you, and think there is
no doubt of your receiving the unanimous support of Connecticut at
St. Louis. Indeed, there is no diversity of sentiment, so far as I
can hear, Loomis, of New London, being the only one of the delegates
whom I should regard as doubtful. Dick Hubbard, of Hartford, who
heads the delegation; Waller, of New London, the Speaker of the
House (who will probably go as a substitute); and Hunter, of
Willimantic, are all to be relied on as warm supporters, and they
will control the delegation if it should need controlling. Barr, of
Hartford, is a tricky fellow, and if you could bring some influence
to bear on him it may be as well, though I am advised that it is not
necessary.
"There is one element of the future that I do not like, and that is
the probable election of Barnum to the Senate from this State in
place of English. Barnum is so unfit, so much of the Tweed order
of men, and a pig-iron protectionist into the bargain, that the
effect of his election will be bad, not only in the State, but
throughout the country. It will be cited everywhere as a proof that
the professions of the party do not amount to anything; I do not,
however, know what you can do about it, or whether it would be
advisable to exert an influence if you could; but it is an event
that is likely to disgust the free-trade element intensely, and
also those who have a deep conviction of the necessity of political
reform. Eaton is probably more responsible for this movement than
any other man, except Barnum.
"Do you think I had better go to the 18th of May conference? I see
nothing antagonistic in it to your interest; neither do I think it
will amount to much. I know the Republican managers have a most
profound contempt for the whole movement, and haven't an idea of
allowing to Bristow to be nominated.
"Command me for any service I can render.
"Truly yours,
"DAVID A. WELLS."
"_Hon. S. J. Tilden._"
Shortly after the inauguration of Mr. Tilden as Governor, in
January, 1875, he sent to the Legislature a special message setting
forth his convictions of the corrupt management of the canals of
the State. This message abounded with specific details of fraud
of so infamous a character that even friends of the implicated
contractors in the Legislature felt constrained to grant the request
of the Governor, and by a concurrent resolution, adopted on the
31st day of March, 1875, authorized him to appoint a committee
of four "to investigate the affairs of the canals of the State,
and especially the matters embraced in the special message of the
Governor, communicated to Legislature on the 19th of March, 1875."
In compliance with this authority, the Governor appointed four
gentlemen, whose names are signed to the following report, two
theretofore having acted with the Republican party and two with the
Democratic. The Governor's commissioners organized at Albany on the
12th of April following; but before they began to take testimony
the friends of the canal jobbers in the Assembly managed to pass
a resolution appointing a commission of that body also to make a
similar investigation, but naming in the resolution commissioners
satisfactory to those who constituted what was known as the "Canal
Ring."
This commission met two or three times, and then offered to the
Governor's commission, under pretext of saving time and expense,
to join them, so that the two commissions should constitute but
one body. Of course this proffer was promptly declined, and the
legislative commission took no more testimony, and was never heard
of again.
The interval between the organization of the Governor's commission,
in April, and the time for the introduction of water into the
canals, near the end of May, was devoted exclusively to an
examination of the most important works in progress or recently
completed in the prism of the canals.
Between the 31st day of July of that year, when the commission
submitted its first report, and the 14th of February, when it
submitted its final report, it issued twelve reports. That which
follows gives a summary of the facts developed by the investigation
which confirm in every detail the charges made in the Governor's
message, besides adding very much to the total amount of confirming
testimony. The reason for this confirmation being so complete was
that the Governor, almost immediately after his election, employed
privately, and at his own expense, an engineer in whose professional
training and experience he could place entire confidence, the late
Mr. Elkanah Sweet, to make an investigation of the recent canal
work, gave him authority to take down any portion of the work to
ascertain how far and in what way it was not in conformity with
the contract, and gave him also authority to inspect all the canal
contracts in the archives of the Canal Board and compare them
with his observations. Upon his report the facts presented in the
Governor's canal message were based. Mr. Sweet, therefore, was
naturally employed by the Governor's commission to make the yet more
thorough and elaborate investigation required of them.
The Governor's canal message, with this incontestable confirmation
of all its allegations, gave him a national fame, and contributed
more than anything he had previously done to make his nomination to
the Presidency a political necessity for the Democratic party.
Several previous efforts to investigate frauds in the operation
of the State canals had been made by the Legislature, but all had
theretofore proved abortive. One reason which contributed largely to
prevent the investigation of the Governor's commission sharing the
same fate was the exclusion of reporters from the meetings of the
board during the examination of witnesses. By this means nothing of
its work was given to the public until the testimony was digested
into an intelligible report of what had been proved. The testimony
was necessarily so largely technical that if given to the press
day by day, as received, the public would have soon tired of the
subject, and, what was worse, the witnesses would have been tempted
to shape their testimony rather to its effects upon the newspaper
public than upon the commissioners. The consequence was that when
the reports appeared they were read, and their impact upon the
public was proportionately prompt, instructive, and penetrating.
_CANAL INVESTIGATING COMMISSION_