* STATEMENT
OF
II E R M A. -ÎN HATPT
PRESENTED TO THE
JOINT SPECIAL COMMITTEE
ON "
TROY AND GREENFIELD RAILROAD
AND HOOSAC TUNNEL.
FEBRUARY, 1864.
v ¡Alf ^
I
MEMORIAL.
To the Senate and House of Représentatives op the Commonwealth op
Massachusetts, in General Court assembled : —
The memorial of Herman Haupt, civil engineer, formerly chief engineer of
the Troy and Greenfield Railroad and Hoosac Tunnel, and recently chief of
construction and transportation on the military railroads of the United States,
respectfully represents, — ^
That, during his absence in the service of the government, Jonn W. Brooks,
chairman of the Board of Commissioners of the Troy and Greenfield Railroad,
did, without authority or orders from the Legislature, without the concurrent
action of his associates, and as far as is shown by the record, without solicitation
by the Governor or Council, volunteer a statement of receipts and expenditures
per tainin g #to the private affairs of the firm of H. Haupt & Co., which no con¬
siderations of public ox official duty required him to make, and which conveys
impressions entirely at variance with the facte.
That this volunteered communication was Bent to the Legislature, printed
and distributed as a public document, and has in various ways been productive
of Berious mischief and misunderstanding, conveying the impression that the
contractors have received several hundred thousand dollars from the State
more than they were entitled to, and more than they have expended, when they
can prove that their expenditures» on the contrary, were very largely in excess
of their receipts.
Your memorialist further declares that the Commissioners have transcended
any authority conferred upon them by the Act of 1862. They have demanded
concessions and imposed conditions not required by said Act. They have failed
to carry out its spirit and intent. Instead of satisfying, they have purchased at
a discount, and hold claims against the contractors,, to a great amount, which
the appropriation of the Legislature was intended to cancel, and which may at
any time be put in suit. They have caused suit to be brought in the Supreme
Court against your memorialist, individually, and have attached property to the
extent of one hundred thousand ($100,000) dollars on an alleged over-issue of
State scrip, although no scrip was ever issued by the State to your memorialist,
and the issues to the Railroad Company were, as the law contemplated, at pre¬
cisely the same rate as in the case of the loans to the Western Railroad Com¬
pany, which were at the par of "the pound sterling.
Instead of having received from the loans of the Commonwealth several
hundred thousand dollars more than he has expended, your memorialist will
undertake to prove that he has expended several hundred thousand dollars
more than he has received from all sources ; and that the course pursued by
the Commissioners, and other agents of the State, has been unjust and oppres¬
sive, to an extent probably beyond a parallel in the history of the Common¬
wealth.
Your memorialist does not ask any pecuniary compensation for the injury
that he has sustained, but he does ask for an investigation before an honest
and impartial tribunal, and in the presence of the Commissioners, whom he
wishes to have an opportunity to explain, excuse, or justify their action, if it be
possible so to do ; and he also asks that the claims of sub-contractors and others
which have been paid in part, and other just and equitable claims upon which
no payment has been made, shall be paid in full, and your memorialist released
from further liability on account of such claims.
(Sionedi
HERMAN HAUPT,
Cambridge, February 4,1864.
Hon. John E. Sanfoed, Chairman of Joint Special Committee
on Troy and Greenfield Railroad:
Sir : The statements herein contained were prepared with the
intention and expectation of submitting them to your committee,
at a public hearing, at such time as you might be pleased to order
it ; but as the members of the committee are much occupied with
duties of a more important and public character, as they might
not all find it convenient to attend a hearing, and as the time
allowed for a single hearing would be insufficient for a careful
consideration of all the facts presented, your memorialist, .after
consultation with judicious friends, has concluded that he would
save much time, and also consult the convenience of members of
the committee, by furnishing each of them with a copy of the me¬
morial, apd also of the statements proposed to be submitted.
This course will also be attended with other advantages.
Copies can be sent to the Commissioners and others, and ample
time given them to point out and correct any errors of figure or
of fact thát they may discover, without consuming the balance of
the session in preparing an answer, if they shall think proper to
make one.
Should any additional statements or representations be made
by the Commissioners or others to the disadvantage of your me¬
morialist, he asks an opportunity for explanation or defence before
they are allowed in any way to influence the opinions or the
actions of the committee.
The detailed statement of disbursements, copied from the
memorandum account-book, is submitted in writing, with the
request that Mr. Brooks may have an opportunity to inspect it,
if he so desires.
It will readily be understood why the contractors have not
been willing, on previous occasions, to submit to an examination
of their financial condition. They well knew that such examina¬
tions were instigated by enemies, who sought material for news¬
paper publications to destroy their financial credit. The private
affairs of the firm of II. Haupt & Co., the amounts expended
by them upon the work, the losses they have sustained in their
efforts to prosecute it to a successful completion, and the
4
amount of their liabilities, were matters of no public interest or
importance whatever, and^only became so by the act of Mr.
Brooks in making them the subject of an official communication,
which was printed and distributed at the expense of the State as
a public document.
This fact essentially changes the condition of affairs : and your
memorialist respectfully asks for his statements and explanations
a distribution as extended as has been given to the reports and
statements of the Commissioners ; but, whether at his own ex¬
pense or otherwise, the truth-loving citizens of Massachusetts
must know the facts. Property may be taken away without
eliciting remonstrance or complaint — it is of value chiefly for
its use in doing good to others ; but when reputation is at stake,
so long as there remains a tongue to speak, or a hand to write,
silence cannot be maintained.
Very respectfully submitted,
H. HAUPT.
To the Joint Special Committee on Troy and Greenfield Rail¬
road and Hoosac Tunnel :
Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee : I have
asked for an investigation of certain matters connected with the
Troy and Greenfield Railroad and Hoosac Tunnel, in the belief that
the legislature, and the people of Massachusetts whom they rep¬
resent, are, with few exceptions, lovers, of truth and justice, and
that, although truth may for a time be perverted, facts misrepre¬
sented, and injustice perpetrated, yet in the end a course that is
uniformly consistent with duty and propriety will be appreciated.
I do not, however, expect you, or the legislature of Massachu¬
setts, to repair the damage that I have sustained through my
efforts to complete the Hoosac Tunnel; that is entirely too serious
to be effaced by pecuniary compensation or simple acknowledg¬
ment of error. These cannot restore the years of time expended
in the successful effort to demonstrate the practicability of this
great work ; they cannot make amends for deranging the cher¬
ished plans of a lifetime ; for insults received from the privileged '
lips of honorable but misinformed gentlemen in high position ; for
libellous publications, -repeated year after year, until the public
5
ear became familiar with the terms knave and swindler, as ap¬
plied to the contractors of the Hoosac Tunnel.
In the history of railroad enterprises throughout the world, it is
probable that no parallel is presented to the difficulties encoun¬
tered, and the persistent efforts to achieve success, made by your
memorialist and his talented and energetic associate, Henry Cart-
wright. The "Western Railroad Company encountered difficul¬
ties, but they had no Hoosac Tunnel to build. The State gener¬
ously gave them five millions of dollars in aid of the work, and
the little that remained for individuals was divided amongst
many. Other corporations have experienced financial difficulties
also, but there is probably not another case on record where the
whole financial burden, as well as the engineering plans and
locations, rested on a single individual, compelled to struggle
against every species of opposition of which it is possible to
conceive, whilst contending against natural difficulties trän-'
scending any, with a single exception, that were ever before
encountered.
The exception referred to is that of the Mount Cenis Tunnel ; but
in this case government supplied all the funds, and the engineer
was not compelled to devote his time to efforts to maintain finan¬
cial credit and provide means to carry on the work.
Without occupying more time in introductory remarks, I pro¬
pose to proceed at once to the consideration of a communication
addressed to the Governor of the Commonwealth by John W*
Brooks, Esq., Chairman, dated Boston, March 13, 1863. This
communication, with accompanying statements, is published in
Senate document, Ho. 82. The writer admits that he sent it on
his individual responsibility, without conferring with the other
Commissioners. He also remarks that the statement applies to
the road between Greenfield and» the tunnel, and that, in a few
days, he may be able to submit a similar statement in regard to.
payments on account of the tunnel.
The.promised statement in regard to payments on the tunnel
does not appear in the record, but the public is left under the im¬
pression that if the contractors received $116,000 more than the
work cost them on a portion of the road, their profits would be
largely increased when the other portions and the tunnel were
taken into consideration, particularly as calculations have been
published more than once to prove that the tunnel cost the
contractors less than $30 per foot, while the State advanced $50
upon it.
This statement of Mr. J. W. Brooks was offered voluntarily.
6
While investigating the claims of sub-contractors and others, he had
obtained some partial information in regard to the disbursements
of H. Haupt & Co., and the necessary inference from his commu¬
nication is, that he felt impelled by a sense of duty to the public
to expose the extent to which II. Ilaupt & Co. had diverted the
funds provided by the State to their own private uses.
It must be observed that repeated attempts had been made in
the Legislature, year after year, to procure the passage of orders
to investigate the accounts of H. Ilaupt & Co., but such orders
were uniformly rejected on the ground that the private affairs of a
firr^, having no contract with the State, did not constitute a proper
subject of legislative inquiry. H. Haupt & Co. never refused to
show their books to members of the legislature who desired in¬
formation in order to enable them to act intelligently on the
questions presented for their consideration, but they would not
recognize the right of outside parties to demand this privilege,
and they could never be induced to compromise their self-respect
so far as to present their accounts to the scrutiny of individuals,
who were openly and avowedly hostile, for the purpose of gratify¬
ing curiosity, or to furnish them material for newspaper publica¬
tions, to injure Jthe< financial credit of the contractors.
When a witness is placed upon the stand, he is sworn not only
to tell the truth, but the whole truth ; and if a witness volunteers
his testimony in a matter affecting the public interest, and ostensi¬
bly for the purpose of preventing a public wrong, be is clearly
bound, by an obligation not less imperative, to tell the whole truth,
without equivocation or mental reservation.
Mr. Brooks has not told the whole truth. It will be for you to
determine, after the facts have been presented, whether he has told
as much even as he knew. While offering to public scrutiny an ac¬
count of the expenditures of H.^flaupt & Co., he has suppressed sev¬
eral very important items, of the existence of which he must have
been perfectly cognizant. Mr. Brooks will surely not assert that he
did not know that ten per cent, of all payments received from the
.State were to be paid into the sinking fund, for this is an express
provision of statute, which he has examined repeatedly ; neither
could he have been ignorant of the fact that the .interest on the
State loans was paid by the contractors, and even^if his state¬
ments had been literally true, the impressions which they convey
are entirely the reverse.
Part of the statement is made up, as is asserted, from actual
accounts, and part is estimated; but the estimate on "sections three
and four, particularly for solid rock, is considerably below the cost
7
of the work. Instead of being amongst the best, these sections
were the worst. The rock was full of springs ; it lay in an unfa¬
vorable position, and was difficult to excavate. The contractor re¬
fused to take out the rock for the very price, $1 per yard, contained
in Mr. Brooks's estimate ; and the reason assigned by him for throw¬
ing up the contract, that he was not permitted to fill the ravines
with borrowed material, is without foundation in fact. These are,
however, comparatively unimportant points ; I will not waste time
in explanations upon them. The great wrong committed by Mr.
Brooks consists in selecting one part, and by far the most favor¬
able part, of the contract, and exhibiting it as a specimen of the
whole. If Mr. Brooks felt it to be his duty to present to the pub¬
lic a statement of the profit and loss account -of II. Ilaupt & Co.,
I cannot understand why he was not bound, as a fair and honor¬
able witness, to take the whole contract, instead of selecting the
only portion of it, the exhibition of which could possibly be made
to appear to the disadvantage of H. Ilaupt ; and I particularly di¬
rect your attention to the fact that the promised expose in regard
to .the tunnel was not given, thus conveying the impression that
the large amount pocketed by the contractors on the road was
only » small part of the plunder, with which they -bad enriched
themselves at the expense of the Commonwealth.
I propose to offset the estimates, conjectures, and assumptions
of Mr. Brooks by the oath of Mr. Henry Cartwright, a gentleman
whose word no one has ever ventured to call in question, who was
sent to the legislature by the almost unanimous vote of. the dis->
tfict which he represented, and who, whatever may be said of
myself, will not be suspected of any equivocation or misrepresen¬
tation.
Statement of Disbursements and Liabilities * incurred by
II. Haupt & Co., in the Construction of the Troy and Green¬
field Railroad and •Iloosae Tunnel, as compiled from the
Account Rooks of the Firm, and divided as follows :
1st. Tunnel Acc't. "East End" and "West End." "Shaft."
2d. Railroad Acc't. " Western Division," " Eastern Division."
3d. Tróy and Greenfield Railroad Co.
" East End," Br.
For am't per Ledger, $44,656 00
" " Machinery account 7,484 39
* The liabilities here referred to are chiefly for capital advanced or salaries allowed
to members of the firm — outside liabilities are not included.
8
For am't per
P. Maher's account
$1,500 00
«
u
Store
u
37,002 00
«C
il
Inc. Exp's
u
1,085 00
a
u
Interest
a
6,171 00
u
u
E. W. S. & Co.
u
2,503 00
u
u
Supervision
u
30,00D 00
u West End," Dr.
For am't per Ledger,
$21,099 50
it
u
Machinery account
18,772 40
u
u
Store
ti
27,408 00
u
u
Inc. Exp's
u
804 00
u
il
Interest
II
4,571 00
a
u
E. W. S. & Co.
il
1,834 00
u
u
Supervision 1
u
20,000 00
« Shaft,"
Dr.
For
am't per Ledger
$27,769 00
u
u
Inc. Exp's account
563 00
u
u
Interest
il
3,200 00
it
u
E. W. S. & Co.
u
1,282 00-
11 Western Division," Dr.
For am't per
' Ledger
$41,767. 65
«
u
Road superstruct.
II
1,739 59
«
u
Ballou & Simons
II
20,518 00
«
u
Store
II
43,854 00
u
u
Inc. Exp's
u
1,286 00
u
il
Interest
II
7,314 00
a
il
E. W. S. & Co.,
il
2,931 00
u
il
Supervision
u
15,000 00-
11 Eastern Division," Dr.
For am't Freight account
$1,054 28
«
" Sec. 1, 2,
il
19,771 00
«
u (C
3, 4,
il
.47,147 73
u
il II
5 to 25,
((
205,261 45
u
u
Road superstruct.
(C
151,251 09
u
il
Masonry-
u
2,841 00
u
il
Fencing
il
370 75
u
il
Bridging and
trestling
u
95,890 55
u
il
Track laying
u
6,693 48
u
il
Inc. Exp's
il
13,463 00
u
u
Interest
u
77,600 00
tt
u
E. W. S. & Co.
il
30,971 00
u
u
Supervision
u
7,000 00-
—$130,401 39
$94,488 90
— $32,814 00
-$134,410 24
—$659,315 33
" Troy and Greenfield Railroad Co.," Dr.
For am't Carpenter & Davis 11,250 00
« Right of Way 25,279 54
" Sundry acc'ts and incidentals 5,327 11
" State Interestand Sinking Fun d
account 92,692 60—$134,549 25
Deduct unpaid bills payable for Right of Way 2,937 80
$131,611 45
"Engineering" account $22,550 00
Recapitulation.
East End . • . . . . 130,401 39
West "
Shaft
Western Division
Eastern "
Engineering
. 94,488 90
. 32,814 00
. 134,410 24
. 659,315 33
. 22,550 00
Troy and Greenfield Railroad Co. 131,611 45
Total Expenses — $1,205,591 31
Receipts 864,755 00
$340,836 31
Note.
In compiling this statement, it has been necessary to distribute various items, such
as "Store account," "Inc. Exp's," "Interest," &c., over the work on the Tunnel,
Shaft, and Road, in proportion to the relative expenditures on each. The interest ac¬
count may seem large, but it must be remembered that a floating debt of from
$100,000 to $200,000 was carried from 1855 nearly seven years, at rates varying from
six to twenty-four per cent, per annum. The accounts previous to January 21,186.1,
were made up from memorandum accounts of H. Haupt. At that date the members of
the firm met in Greenfield, and made an examination of his vouchers, and credited all
presented. Subsequently the accounts have been kept by the subscriber, and the dis¬
bursements made under his direction. Any outstanding liabilities, for which no ac¬
count had been rendered at the time of the suspension of the work, are not included
in this statement.
I hereby certify that the items in the foregoing Statement exhibit, as nearly as possi¬
ble, the cost of the different portions of the work, and are correct% to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
(Signed) HENRY CARTWRIGHT.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this second day of December, A. D. 1863.
[Internal Revenue Stamp.] (Signed) DAVID BEITLER, Alderman.
The amount of receipts in this Statement,, viz., $864,755, was
made up of the following items : *
Receipts from State ' $725,388 88
" " Towns 125,100 00
Rents, Western Division, and other sources 14,266 12
$864,755 00
From this sworn statement of Mr. Cartwright, who kept the
books, it appears that the expenditures of H. Haupt & Co. were
2
10
$340,836 in excess of all receipts, and $480,202 in excess of all pay¬
ments by the State. If to this be added the $131,000 expended by
the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Co. previous to the contract with
H. Haupt & Co., and $39,375 by E. W. Serrell & Co., the whole ex¬
penditures; in addition to State payments, will appear to have been
at the time when Mr. Brooks's statement was submitted, $649,577,
which was not far from equal to the State payment, and very far
in advance of any payments outside the State appropriations on
the Western Railroad at a similar stage of progress.
When the Western Railroad Corporation had raised, or secured
to be raised, from private sources the sum of $600,000, they were
entitled to $3,700,000 from the State.
When the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Company had actually
expended $650,000, raised from private sources, the State had ad¬
vanced $725,000, or less than one-fifth the advances to the West¬
ern Railroad at a corresponding period ; and if the resources of
the State be considered, only one-fifteenth part as much. It is
well to keep such facts in view.
Returning to the statement of Mr. Cartwright, it appears that
the expenditure at the east end of the tunnel was $130,401 37.
The number of feet excavated was,2,400 ; the cost per foot, $54 35 ;
but as this includes the approach, which Mr. Whitwell estimates
to have cost $6,000, the actual cost of the tunnel itself, at the
east end, was $52 ; confirming my statement made before the com¬
mittee in 1862, but without any accurate data to base it upon,
that the cost of the tunnel at the east end had been slightly in
excess of $50 per lineal foot.
At the west end, the total cost had been $94,488 90, which is
equivalent to $171 per lineal foot; but deducting, as before, $9,000
for cost of approach, on Mr. Whitwell's estimate, and $18,772 for
machinery, the cost of the tunnel proper, as excavated, will be
found to have been $121 30 per foot, lineal.
From this statement it appears that, instead of realizing a
profit, the contractors are out of pocket more than three hundred
thousand dollars. In making up these statements, interest has
be#en allowed to members of the firm on balances due to them at
the rate of 6 per cent, per annum, while they were paying from 1
to 2 .per cent, per month on loans, in consequence of being unable
to withdraw capital from the work. H, Haupt and Henry Cart-
wright, and, for part of the time, W. A. GaTbraith and E. W.
Serrell, were also credited with salary for personal services ; but
neither of them received as liberal a compensation as is author¬
ized to be paid to the chairman of the Board of Commissioners,
11
although theií labors and responsibilities were certainly not less
onerous. And this salary, had it been paid, which it was not,
would not have compensated for the relinquishment of more prof¬
itable positions elsewhere. There is margin enough, however, to
throw off $40,000, if salaries be objected to, and still the expen¬
ditures of contractors beyond receipts will exceed $300,000.
The balance, as shown by the books, is, however, a very inade¬
quate exhibit of the financial condition, or measure of the loss
sustained by the contractors, in their efforts to carry on the work.
I can here refer only to my own individual position, not being so
familiar with the condition of other members of the firm. I came
into the contract with property valued at considerably more than
$200,000, and almost entirely without liability. I was chief engi¬
neer of the Pennsylvania Railroad, with a liberal salary. I was
also a director of the company, elected by the Select and Com¬
mon Councils of the city of Philadelphia. I was president of
several mining and manufacturing companies, and was in receipt
of a large income, while enjoying Unequalled facilities for profita¬
ble operations in real estate. I had faith in Massachusetts and in
the tunnel, and agreed to act as consulting engineer, and advance
my paper to a certain extent, to carry on the work. The opposi¬
tion encountered, and especially the abusive and personal charac¬
ter of the opposition, after I had become committed by larger ex¬
penditures than I had intended to make, induced me to throw
myself into the breach. I believed that I had brains enough and
resources enough to carry the work through. I had never failed in
any thing, and I was determined not to fail in this. I abandoned
every other interest, removed to Massachusetts with my family,
and for years was engaged in an incessant but successful struggle
to maintain the credit of the firm, and keep the work in progress.
In 1857 my partners became embarrassed, and since then I have
borne the financial burdens alone. In consequence of my connec¬
tion with the tunnel, I was unable to manage and protect impor¬
tant interests in Pennsylvania, which were lost or sacrificed to
raise money for the tunnel; and now I find myself after nearly
eight years of labor and responsibility, 6uch as no other living
man has probably encountered in building railroads, driven from
the work, deprived of property, and, by the action of the State
authorities of Massachusetts, loaded with an incubus of liabilities,
from which I could not expect to relieve myself, by my own
efforts, this side the grave. And yet the public has been made
to believe, through official publications, that I have realized large
profits from the tunnel, and that, too, in a way which compromises
my reputation as an engineer and as a man of integrity.
12
In confirmation of the statement made by Mr. Cartwright, from
the books kept by him, I will submit, from my memorandum
account, the expenditures made previous to the payment of the
first instalment by the State — all which I submit in detail.
Expenditures on the Troy and Greenfield Railroad and Hoosac
Tunnel previous to the Payment of the first Instalment of the
State Loan.
General Summary.
Cash paid by II. Haupt, or forwarded to partners
for disbursement, , ... .
Paid by II. Haupt for Troy and Greenfield Railroad
Company,
Engineering,
Interest and discounts,
Incidental expenses,
Machinery,
The above represents only the payment by H.
Haupt, of which the sum of $67,000 was advanced
by Messrs. Dungan, Cartwright, and Steever, leav¬
ing $210,263 39 as contributed by H. Ilaupt indi¬
vidually.
To complete the list of expenditures to the time of
the payment of the first instalment, it is necessary
to add for railroad iron, spikes and chairs on
Western Division,
Interest on capital of D. C. & Co., at 6 per cent., 2
ycsrSj •••■«••»
By settlement of August 4, 1857, with William A.
Galbraith, the advances by him were liquidated
at ^ . . . .... . .
Interest to October, 1858,
Cash by E. W> Serrell, on the work (probably),
Interest from 1855,
W. A. Galbraith, salary for services and superintend¬
ing, &c., two years,
Unpaid liabilities of E. W. Serrell & Co., for work
done previous to contract with H. Haupt & Co.,
at least, ........
$211,463 00
8,561 74
13,491 02
23,023 80
1,951 40
18,772 40
$277,263 36
$40,000 00
10,440 0Q
15,300 00
943 00
5,000 00
900 00
7,232 00
10,000 00
$367,078 39
This does not include the floating liabilities, which
varied during the progress of the work from $100,-
000 to $200,000, and which, at the time of the pay¬
ment of the first instalment, were necessarily large,
as credit had been strained to the utmost.
. It is certain, therefore, that the expenditure by
the contractors, in cash or its equivalent, previous
to the payment of the first instalment, must have
exceeded very considerably the sum of $400,000, at
which I have previously represented it,.without go¬
ing into a careful examination.
This sum is exclusive of payments previously
made by the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Compa¬
ny, as per statement of treasurer, . . . $131,376 00
and exclusive also of liabilities of said company.
It would thus appear that the expenditures of the
railroad company and of the contractors together,
previous to the payment of the first instalment of
the State loan, were not less than . . . $600,000 00
at which I have previously estimated them.
It will be readily understood that the exact expenditures at any
given time cannot be stated, except approximately; they could
only be ascertained by stopping work and calling in all outstand¬
ing accounts. This was done after the suspension in 1861, when
the liabilities were found to be nearly $200,000 ; besides this, I
had too much financial pressure upon me to do more than keep a
memorandum account of expenditures, in which were numerous
omissions to my loss. I was on the wing continually in search
of money to keep" the operations in progress, and could only
make transfers from my pocket memoranda at distant intervals.
When, in 1861, a general examination of accounts and vouchers
was made, it appeared that I had omitted to credit myself with
many thousands of dollars that I had sent for disbursement on
the work ; but I have not been very careful about money matters
when the errors could onfy be against myself. I feel sure that the
statements now submitted are below rather than above the actual
expenditures or cost to the contractors.
Assuming that it has been shown that the expenditures of
the contractors beyond receipts, at the time of the payment of,
the first instalment, were not less than $300,000, I propose to
examine whether it was possible that the further prosecution of
the work could have improved their financial condition.
14
Surplus of expenditures on first payment, . $300,000 00
Cost of sinking shaft, for which State paid nothing, 32,814 00
Expenditures beyond receipts at west end, . 10,000 00
Interest on loans, discounts, &c., . . . 76,000 00
Receipts from State bonds, as stated by commis¬
sioners, $778,695. As given by H. Cartwright,
$725,88. The difference is, . . . . 53,702 00
Payments into sinking fund and for interest on State
scrip, 92,692 00
Expenditures on county roads, not estimated, say, 6,000 00
Land damages, ....... 25,000 00
Buildings and improvements, .... 10,000 00
Drills and experiments, ..... 10,000 00
Engineering and superintending, . . . 20,000 00
$635,813 00
• »
Here are items which Mr. Brooks has given us no credit for,
amounting to only $635,813. If he shall say that he did not pro¬
fess to present an estimate on the whole contract, but only on a part
of it, then I answer that he had no right, as a witness, to make
such a partial exhibit. Volunteering, unsolicited, a statement of
the affairs of H. Ilaupt & Co., it would seem to have been his
duty to make the statement full, including the whole contract; but
even as a partial statement it is erroneous, for he gives no credit
for State interest and sinking fund, land damages, and other items
of which he could not possibly have been ignorant.
In making up this statement, only $10,000 have been allowed
for drills and experiments, and yet with this comparatively trifling
expenditure a degree of success had been achieved far in advance
of any thing ever accomplished elsewhere. The experiments at
the Mount Cenis Tunnel, independently of the cost of the tunnel it¬
self, invelved an expenditure, as shown by Mr. Storrow's report, of
a million of dollars. Massachusetts has not given one cent to de¬
fray the expense of experiments on the Hoosac, and now our
practical and comparatively inexpensive plans of operation are
abandoned by the Commissioners without even an examination
into their rùerits, and the costly arrangements of the European
engineers adopted, which will involve the State in vast and useless
Expenditures, only, as I predict, to be abandoned hereafter when
more enlightened counsels shall prevail.
There is yet another statement to disprove the assertion that
H. Haupt & Co. had made large profits on the road east of the
15
tunnel, which is simple, intelligible, and admits of no question.
It is clear that the contractors could not have made a larger profit
on the road, east of the mountain, than the difference between the
cost of the work done at the prices allowed in the estimate of the
State engineer and the cost at the prices paid the sub-contractors.
Mr. Whitwell's estimate was as follows :
519,818 cubic yards earth, at 19 cts., . »
$98,765
42
89,623
tt
rock, at $1,
89,623
00
57,143
tt
loose rock, 50 cts., .
28,571
50
3,752
It
culvert masonry, at $2,
7,504
00
7,911
tt
vertical wall, $2,
15,822
00
4,306
tt
rip rap, 75 cts.,
3,229
50
290
tt
tail wall, $3, ►
870
00
2,667
tt
bridge masonry, $8,
21,336
00
200
tt
stone delivered, $4,
800
00
I span Green River Bridge, $16,
II spans in other places, 114,
Bridge material delivered,
40,300 cross ties, at 25 cts., .
2,823 tons iron, at $54, .
5 miles track laid, $472,
1,920 .00
9,240 00
12,002 50
10,750 00
152,442 00
2,360 00
$455,235 92
Now, I repeat, it is clearly impossible that H. Ilaupt & Co.
should receive a greater profit from the road east of the tunnel than
the difference between the amount received from Mr. Whitwell's
estimate and the amount paid for doing the work.
The prices paid lor earth to sub-contractors were 20 cents on 9
sections, 16 cents on 11 sections, and 18 cents on 2 sections, the
average 18 cents,—the saving on Mr. Whitwell's estimate one cent
per cubic yard.
The cost of solid rock was above the estimate.
The average for loose rock was 42 cents, or 8 cents below the
estimate.
The cost of cûlvert masonry was above the estimate.
Vertical wall was to be at cost to sub-contractors, with addition
of 20 per cent. This arrangement for the masonry was made to
insure superior work, regardless of expense. Some of it cost
twice as much as estimate : there was no profit to H. Haupt & Co.
on this item.
The same remark applies to rip rap.
16
The bridge masonry is estimated at $8. Childs and Bell received
$4.50 simply for quarrying and laying the stone. The hauling 15
to 18 miles, and the cement, were paid for by II. Haupt & Co. But
summing together the various items in Mr. Whitwell's estimate of
bridge masonry, $21,336 ; stone delivered, $800 ; bridging, $11,160 ;
bridge material delivered, $12,002 ; the total is $45,298, which is
$7,194 less than cost to H. Haupt & Co., as shown by statement of
Mr. Brooks.
Ties are estimated at 25 cents, which is about cost, as nearly as
can be ascertained, and it is also the price allowed by Mr. Brooks
in his estimates.
The allowance for rails is $54 per ton, which is 24 cents less
than cost, including freight and hauling.
We are now prepared to invéstigate, with some accuracy, the
actual profit of H. Haupt & Co., being the difference between the
amount received from the State and the amount paid to sub-con¬
tractors on the eastern division of the road.
Items on which the estimate of Mr. Whitwell exceeds cost :
519,818 cubic yards earth, 1 cent, . . . $5,198 18
57,143 " loose rock, 8 cents, . . 4,571 44
3,769 62
Items on which estimate was less than cost :
Bridge masonry and superstructure, . . $7,194 00
2823 tons iron, 24 cents, 677 52
$7,871 52
•
The difference, on the supposition that the State paid cash or its
equivalent, is $1,893.10. *
Thus the excessive profits of the contractors on the eastern di¬
vision dwindle down to the petty sum of $1,898.10 when back per
centages and other arrearages are paid, but in this is no allowance
for interest on State loans, State sinking fund, land damages, su¬
pervision, county roads, interest on capital, discount on sale of
bonds, and various other items. Can it be supposed that Mr.
Brooks was ignorant of the fact that these items had to be paid,
and were paid, by the contractors ?
A gentleman who acted as assistant to Mr. Brooks informed me
that when he presented his statement tp the Governor it was
with no expectation that His Excellency would ever publish it.
I cheerfully give Mr. Brooks the benefit of this explanation, if
any benefit can be derived from it.
17
It is usually supposed that figures cannot lie, and I may be
as^ed to explain more particularly how it is that Mr. Brooks appa¬
rently proves very conclusively that I have made a large profit on
the work upon the eastern division of the road, while I prove that
1 have made none. I repeat that it must be perfectly obvious that
it was impossible for the contractors to make a larger profit than
the difference between the amount received and the amount paid
out, and if the sub-contractors had all been paid in full, it has
been shown that these amounts would have been nearly balanced
if the State scrip could have been sold at par, but the retained per
centage of contractors was not payable until the work was finished,
and this would have left some balance in the hands of II. Haupt
& Co. if not absorbed by other payments.
Mr. Brooks attempts to show (Senate Doc. No. 82, page 22),
that the amount paid out by II. Ilaupt & Co., upon the road, was
$338,325.84, and that the advances made by the State on account
of the $650,000 appropriation were $481,428 ; the difference being
$143,103 : but of this, $140,000 was due to sub-contractors, by
Mr. Brooks's statement, and would not have constituted profits.
Then, again, Mr. Brooks has estimated the receipts for sterling
bonds at $4.91, and has added $26,194 for the premium, when
no such premium was eter realized, but, on the contrai-y, the
actual receipts, after the payment of ten per cent, into the sinking
fund, were considerably less than par, as will be shown by the
statement of Messrs. Blake, Bros. & Co., herewith submitted.
Again, the dollar bonds are charged to II. Haupt & Co. at par,
when the amount realized on some of the lots was as low as 88
and 90, and, if sinking fund be deducted, would leave only 78
and 80 ; making a very great difference in the result. Then, again,
Mr. Brooks has not credited the contractors with interest on State
loans, with about $25,000 paid for land damages, and with various
other items of expenditure previously alluded to ; but it is mani¬
festly unfair, to take that portion of the contract on which the
losses were least, as evidence of a profit on the whole; and I once
more repeat, that Mr. Brooks was bound, by every consideration
of duty and propriety, to make an exhibit of the affairs of the con¬
tractors on the whole contract, if he made any exhibit at all. He
should have told the whole truth, or have remained silent. •
It appears, therefore, from the statements that have been Sub¬
mitted, that on the western division of the Troy and Greenfield
Railroad, and on the first 1,000 feet of the tunnel, the contractors
expended at least $300,000 more than they received; that on the
west end of the tunnel the cost to the contractors was about 3£
3
18
limes as much as they received, without including the shaft,
which cost $32,000, and for which they received nothing ; that
even on the east end of the tunnel, which was most favorable, the
expenditures were considerably in excess of receipts; that the
State payments on the eastern division of the road were about
equal to the cost of graduation, masonry, bridging, and super¬
structure, assuming the State bonds at par, but that no allowance
was made to the contractors for the items of State sinking fund
and interest, land damages, county roads, shaft, approaches of tun¬
nel, machinery, interest on loans, and capital to carry on work,,
discount on sales of bonds, and other very large items of expendi¬
ture ; and that, instead of a profit, the books of the firm show a
direct loss of $840,000, which does not include other losses of seri¬
ous magnitude sustained in efforts to raise capital to carry on the
work. If we had paid the $140,000 to sub-contractors, the excess
of expenditures over receipts would have been increased to
$480,000. It will probably not be difficult for the committee to
believe that the payment of the $140,000 out of our profits was
simply an impossibility, although His Excellency thinks it was
our duty to have done so.
The statement which I have made of the affairs of II. Haupt
& Co. must be sufficient to satisfy every one that great injustice
has been done the contractors by the communication of Mr.
Brooks. There was no profit even on the road, the apparent
profit being more than balanced by the amounts due sub-con-
tractors upon the completion of the work, while several hundred
thousand dollars of items, some of which Mr. Brooks was perfectly
cognizant o£ and others of which he could have been informed
by asking, were left out of his estimate entirely.
One other explanation appears to be necessary. On page 17,
Senate Doc. 82, Mr. Brooks attempts to show that the contractors
have received $131,000 more than they have earned. But this
result is obtained by comparison with an arbitrary and much more
expensive standard than that established by Colonel Lincoln, State
engineer, which was the only true standard of comparison. It
would have been almost as easy for Mr. Brooks to assume a still
different standard, and swell the excess to half a million. He has,
also, in, making this result, charged us with premiums that we
have never received, and omitted to credit interest, sinking fund,
and other payments which we had made.
In order to enable the committee to act intelligently upon the
subjects which may be brought to their notice, it seems to be
necessary, even at the risk of repeating statements made to other
19
committees, to submit a few general remarks, illustrative of some
of the difficulties which have retarded the work.
Early in 1856, a contract was made with the railroad company,
•which I expected to be carried out. I had faith in the company,
because it was a Massachusetts corporation, and amongst.its
directors were some of the best names in the State.
Soon after, the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Company applied
to the legislature for a subscription to the stock, which was re¬
fused. This subscription was designed to enable the company to
make certain cash payments, required by the contract. No sub¬
scriptions were paid in by private stockholders, but every effort
was made, by frequent articles in the Springfield Republican, and
other papers, to convey the impression that the stockholders were
not liable, that subscriptions could not be collected; and the effect
was to cut off all aid from this source — for people were very
willing to believe such statements, and I was unwilling to resort
to law to enforce the payment.
In August, 1856, a reorganization of the firm took place.
Charles B. Dungan, Henry D. St.eever, and Henry Cartwright
agreed to advance $87,000 to the capital and become partners ;
and the work was prosecuted for sème months with the additional
capital and credit thus contributed.
In 1857, an application was made to the legislature for a modi¬
fication of the conditions of the Loan Act, so as to relieve certain
onerous and unnecessary conditions. At the commencement of
the session I was sounded by several persons to ascertain whether
I would favor a bill to repay our advances, and abandon the
work. This idea I would not entertain. The most strenuous
efforts were made to defeat the bill, and some very extraordinary
exposures were made towards the close of the session exhibiting
the means that had been resorted to for that purpose. But as
the facts are generally known, further reference to them is un¬
necessary.
The report of the committee was favorable ; the bill passed by
very large majorities, in both branches ; it was vetoed by Gov¬
ernor Gardner, who ridiculed the whole project of tunnelling the
Iloosac, as visionary and impracticable. The bill passed over the
veto in the House, and failed in the Senate by one vote, through
the imprudence of one of our friends in making a personal attack
upon the Governor.
. The veto message was widely circulated, evidently for the pur¬
pose of destroying the credit' of the contractors and preventing
farther progress. These efforts were so far successful that my
20
partners suspended payment; and finding the load too heavy for
my shoulders, I paid off all the pressing liabilities, and for a time
suspended the work.
In 1858, N. P. Banks succeeded Governor Gardner. I hacT
Strong hopes of relief from the favorable consideration of this gen¬
tleman. I knew that he had faith in the tunnel, and, what was
of more importance, he had faith in me. He knew what my po¬
sition had been in Pennsylvania, and the estimation in which I
was held in Washington. I found, however, that Governor
Banks, for political considerations, was decidedly opposed to any
agitation of the tunnel question during that session, and the idea
x of introducing a bill was abandoned.
The winter of 1858 was a period of much depression. Our con¬
dition seemed hopeless. I meditated for days upon some plan to
raise money to resume and carry on the work ; but money was
worth two per cent, per month on gilt-edged paper, and I had no
more securities of any kind to offer. At last I concluded to go to
North Adams, see my partner, Mr. Cartwright, and make an esti¬
mate of the amount necessary to be expended to reach the first
instalment of 1100,000 of the State loan. I found that it would
require about $70,000, of which about $40,000 was required for
iron. Through the personal friendship of General Wool, I was
enabled to get from his nephew, Hon. J. A. Griswold, of Troy, a
credit on the iron. But the great difficulty yet remained, of rais¬
ing $30,000 in cash. I concluded to repair to Philadelphia, and
assess some of my friends to the extent of $5,000 each. But
almost every one had his hands full. Property had ceased to have
value ; men worth half a million could not raise $50,000 ; and I
should have failed entirely but for the generosity of a friend, A.J.
Derbyshire, who advanced $30,000, and subsequently $10,000
more, without any security, and with a positive refusal to accept
more than six per cent, interest.
With this assistance, the seven miles of road and 1,000 feet of
tunnel were completed. The contractors had expended over
$400,000, and had not received a single cent from the State of
Massachusetts or any of her citizens — not even credit on mer¬
chandise. For many months I had carried the whole financial
burden, with the assistance of personal friends, who were unwill¬
ing that I should sink. But none of these friends were found in
Massachusetts ; and my efforts here, instead of being appreciated,
were repaid with opposition, misrepresentation, abuse, and ridi¬
cule.
When application was made to the Governor and Council, a
21
thorough investigation was made, and the report was in favor of
the delivery of scrip, all the conditions having been, in their opin¬
ion, fully complied with.
Efforts were made to prevent the delivery of scrip, by the
representation that the track was not in perfect surface, that the
ties were not all of chestnut timber, &c. ; but the Council decided
that if other ties were allowed to be used on the Western Rail¬
road, some of them could be admitted on the Troy and Green¬
field ; and while insisting upon a compliance with every condition,
they were not disposed to be excessively captious.
After some weeks of examination and delay, the bonds were all
signed and ready for delivery, when a new difficulty presented it¬
self. The president of the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Com¬
pany had apparently determined that the bonds should go
into the treasury of the company, where they would have been
applied to the payment of old claims ; and he flatly refused to
put to vote a resolution, at a directors' meeting, to deliver the
bonds to II. Haupt & Co., as the contract required. This brought
the proceedings to a dead-lock. The case was submitted to
counsel, and decided, as a matter of course, in favor of the con¬
tractors. The finance committer acted without the president;
they gave an order on the treasurer of the company, and this
officer an order on the State treasurer.
When the order was presented to the State treasurer, he re¬
quested that, if it were possible for me so to do, I would wait
three weeks, until tjie first of October, when the coupons were
due, otherwise it would be necessary to cut off a coupon from
each bond. I consented, with much reluctance, under a positive
assurance that no power in the Commonwealth could prevent the
delivery of the scrip on the first of October. It could not be at¬
tached by any creditors of the railroad company, and there was no
risk ; it was perfectly safe. So thought the State treasurer, and so I
believed : but our troubles were not at an end. A Boston lawyer,
who had acted as counsel for the company, had quietly entered
an attachment against the company before the mortgage in favor
of the State was recorded. He had notified the Governor and
Council of this fact ; and when I called for the bonds, the deliv¬
ery had been stopped. The claim being disputed by the company,
on the ground that payments made on account of it had not been
credited, I proposed to give personal security, or leave scrip suffi¬
cient to settle the claim in the hands of the State treasurer; but
not only were all such propositions rejected, but I was informed
Vy the attorney-general that grave doubts existed as to whether
22
the scrip could be delivered, even by the payment of the claim}
he was not sure that a new bond and mortgage would not be re¬
quired ; and if so, all the old creditors of the company must take
precedence, and their claims be paid before any scrip could be
delivered. Numerous other legal difficulties were kindly sug¬
gested to the attorney-general by lawyers who represented claims,
until, at last, it became necessary to employ counsel, argue the
questions, and obtain written opinions to justify the Governor
and Council in the delivery of the scrip; but I had to pay
the lawyer's claim of over $3,000, in full, principal and inter¬
est: he would not abate one dollar when I was in his power,
although he had offered to settle with the company for less than
half.
This payment afforded immense relief, in reducing the floating
debt and in increasing the credit of the firm. It also made
the obstacles thrown in the way of subsequent payments lesá
effective. '
In this year, 1858, 1 undertook to procure the subscriptions of
the towns along the line of the railroad ; and although no encour¬
agement was afforded, and I was told, in some of the largest
towns, by the best friends of th« enterprise, that not twenty votes
in favor of a subscription could be obtained, I made the attempt,
and persevered until I secured the subscription of every town,
amounting to $175,000. This was, under the circumstances, an
extraordinary Buccess, and added greatly to our credit and re¬
sources ; but it cost much labor to secure it. ,
In 1859, an application was again made to relieve the Loan Act
of certain features, which, while unnecessarily onerous to the
contractors, added no real security to the State. The application
was again resisted, but this time the tactics were changed : a new
theory had been invented to account for the formation of the
Iloosac Mountain, by a protrusion of trap from beneath. This
theory of an anticlinal axis was fully exploded by the report of
Prof. Hitchcock; but it has been revived in the report of the
Commissioners ; and, I have good reason to believe, is traceable
to the same origin, although the process by which the Commis¬
sioners have been led to indorse this theory may not be perceived
by them.
After an animated contest, the bill passed and became a law ;
but although drawn up by a lawyer, who afterwards occupied a
seat upon the bench, it did not appear to be possible to use lan¬
guage which legal ingenuity could not find ambiguous ; and the
attorney-general placed a construction upon one of the sections
23
widely different from the intentions of those who framed the bill,
and such as to cause much embarrassment and delay.
During this year the second delivery of scrip was made, which,
being earned by an expenditure less than the amount of scrip de¬
livered, the indignation of Springfield was excited, and the con¬
tractors denounced as swindlers.
At the next session, 1860, it became necessary to ask for the
passage of an explanatory clause, to avoid further misapprehen¬
sion ; but, in consequence of representations prejudicial to the
contractors, an investigation was ordered." The committee, as I
believed, commenced their investigations with very unfavorable
impressions towards the contractors ; but as the progress of the
investigation elicited the facts, they apparently became more fa¬
vorably impressed, and, in the end, sought to frame a bill which
would carry the work steadily through to completion, without
any increase in the amount originally proposed to be loaned j and
this expectation would have probably been realized, had not a
change of administration led to changes of officers, plans, and
conditions, which caused a suspension.
The act of 1860 seemed to give a death blow to the opposition,
which for so many years had sought to destroy our credit, injure
our reputations, and retard our progress. Our liabilities were
reduced to a small amount, and our credit was good for a quarter
of a million of dollars at least. In the darkest times I had never
suffered a note of the firm to be protested, or even asked for an
extension ; every thing seemed bright, and the tornado in which
we were wrecked could not then be anticipated.
The location was made in accordance with the requirements
of the Act ; the plans and location were approved by the State
engineer, after thorough examination, the prices fixed by him,
and the work carried on under his direction. If there was any
thing wrong in the location, plans, or mode of construction, the
State engineer, not the contractors, was responsible for it ; but
there was nothing wrong, and a careful examination of all the
testimony will, I think, suffice to prove it. The opinion of His
Excellency on this subject was not indorsed by either of the two
investigating committees, or by the executive council.
The progress of the work was rapid and satisfactory until June,
1861. I had been appointed a member of the board of visitors
at West Point, was assigned the duty of drafting the report, and
was deeply-interested in securing a recommendation of certain
reforms in the institution, when I was advised, by telegraph, that
Governor Andrew had removed the State engineer, and had nom-
24
inated Mr. "Whit-well. I was asked whether our friends should
resist the confirmation, or let it go ? My reply was, make no re¬
sistance to the Governor's wishes ; we only ask what we are enti¬
tled to receive, and can get along with any engineer who is
competent and honest.
On my return I immediately waited on Mr. Whitwell. I found
that the gentleman from Springfield had preceded me. I had
reason to believe that both the Governor and his engineer imag¬
ined we were making too much money, and that a proper regard
for the interests of the State required that the screws should be
tightened. Mr. Whitwell explained his views ; and I told him
that, if they were adhered to, the work could not proceed. Not¬
withstanding this representation, he reduced the estimates 197,000
below the amount due to us at the prices fixed by his predecessor.
With this reduction we could not meet engagements, or carry on
the work. Operations werç suspended, An appeal was made to
the Governor and Council. An investigation was ordered. The
report unanimously sustained my course, and censured the State
engineer, in terms which necessarily implied that, in the opinion of
the committee, his action had been in violation of the plighted
faith of the State : it concluded by recommending the passage of
an order' to require the State engineer to revise his estimates,
and conform to the prices of his predecessor. I believe, in all
that he did, Mr. Whitwell acted conscientiously; and that any
error committed by him was simply an error of judgment. But
I think that both he and the Governor supposed we were mak¬
ing large profits, and were surprised at the suspension of the
work.
The Governor declined to submit the order to vote of Council.
He expressed himself dissatisfied with the investigation ; called a
second one, at which no one was asked to be present to represent
the company or contractors, although it is probable that the Gov¬
ernor had no intention of excluding us, and supposed we had
been notified when we were not. This examination was con¬
ducted by the Governor himself, and, in his opinion, sustained the
course of Mr. Whitwell. But the Council thought otherwise, and
signed a written protest, dissenting from the conclusions of His
Excellency, which protest being refused insertion upon the
record, was published in the newspapers, and is in these
words : —
25
« COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS.
" Executive Department, Council Chamber,
" Boston, December 26, 1861.
" In the matter of the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Company,
. the undersigned, members of the Executive Council, dissenting
from the opinion of His Excellency the Governor, given September
25, 1861, and his reasons therefor, so far as he indorsed the official
policy of the present State engineer, desire to place on record the
ground of such dissent, as follows : —
" It is our opinion that the good faith of the State was lawfully
, pledged by the first engineer appointed under the Act of 1860, to
the estimates agreed to by him, which became the basis for the
sub-contracts for the building of the road ; and that no succeeding
engineer could rightfully impose new requirements, or change this
basis, in reference to work done or materials furnished, previous to
his appointment, nor afterwards, until authorized so to do by the
Governor and Council, who alone are empowered by law to cor¬
rect abuses, remedy defects, and -enforce requirements, by with¬
holding scrip or imposing new requirements, as the interest of the
Commonwealth shall, in their judgment, require.
" This seems to us to be an interpretation of the law which best
accords with the spirit of the statute, without infringing upon its
letter, and the one best adapted to serve the interests of the
State.
(Signed) «HUGH W. GREENE,
"E. C. SHERMAN,
"JOEL HAYDEN,
«JOHN I. BAKER,
«JAMES RITCHIE,
« JAMES M. SHUTE,
" OAKES AMES."
« This protest, signed by seven of the eight councillors, Gov¬
ernor Andrew refused to receive, or allow to be considered, on the
ground that the question was not before the Council, and could
not be introduced there except by him."
This determination of His Excellency to sustain the State en¬
gineer, prevented any resumption of the work; and when the
legislature met, in 1862, another investigation was ordered, by a
joint special committee of seven from the House and three from
4
26
the Senate. The opposition had prepared their case with great
labor and expense. Engineers had been sent to examine and dis¬
parage the location, plans, and construction. Ex-Governor Bout-*
well was employed as counsel ; remonstrances had been procured
against further aid, and elaborate maps and statements had been
prepared. In opposition to this, not a single witness was called
on the part of the company or contractors ; they rested their case
on cross-questioning the witnesses of the opposition ; and, after
hearings, which continued until near the close of the session,
another unanimous report was returned, sustaining the contract- .
ors and reaffirming, substantially, the decision of the first investi¬
gating committee.
About this time I was asked to attend an evening meeting, with
several of the members favorable to the tunnel, and was, then and»
there, informed that intimate friends of the Governor had declared
that he would sign no bill which did not take the work out of the
hands of the contractors, and place it in the charge of Commission¬
ers. It was represented that it ^ould be better for us to submit
than to resist; that at some future time justice would be done to
us; that our prospects would not be improved by letting the work
continue suspended ; that we could not carry a bill over a veto, and
that a condition could be inserted in the bill giving us the right
of redemption until ten years after the completion of the tunnel,
and paying all the liabilities to sub-contractors and others, at that
time ascertained to be about $168,000, but which have been sub¬
sequently increased by land damages, interest, and other claims,
which probably would never have been asked of the contractors,
or allowed by them.
To all these suggestions I agreed, as resistance seemed useless.
The bill made no provision for any compensation to the contrac¬
tors for services or capital ; it took from them their property, and
ejected them from the work, without any consideration whatever,
except the right, which might possibly be exercised by the next
generation, of redeeming the road by paying back the State ex¬
penditures, principal and interest. It contemplated, it is true, the
payment of liabilities for labor and material, but the State had not
only all the benefit of this expenditure, but, in addition, several
hundred thousand dollars, wrested from individuals who had, by
the report of investigating committees, committed no fault, but,
on the contrary, were clearly entitled to the highest consideration
for the sendees they had performed. It was clearly right, there¬
fore, that the State, in assuming the work, should pay the liabili¬
ties for the l^bor and materials which the State appropriated to
27
herself; hat whether it was right to dismiss the contractors, with¬
out any compensation for money expended and services rendered,
* may admit of doubt.
For myself, I do not ask for compensation. I have too 'much
self-respect — pride, some may call it — ever to place myself in
the position of a suppliant, even for justice. Money can never re¬
pay me for what I have suffered in the ruin of my financial credit,
and the personal insults offered on. the floor of the Senate, by
gentlemen whose information was supplied entirely by my enemies,
and who sought none from any other source. If my associates
shall see fit to apply to the legislature for compensation, they can
do it : their claim would be just, but I do not expect to unite with
them. What I most desire is, to defend my reputation from the
insinuations and charges of the Commissioners.; to remonstrate
against their violation of the spirit of the Act of 1862, and their
assumption of authority not therein delegated to them.
The Commissioners have characterized my location as " a con¬
tractor's line, ; such a one as rpight fairly be anticipated where
the contractor and engineer were the'same person, intensified, if
possible, by his controlling a majority of the stock"
In other words, IX Ilaupt is charged by the Commissioners with
a violation of the correct principles of location which should govern
an engineer, for the purpose of- making money. Still worse, with
a gross violation of duty and propriety as engineer of the Com¬
pany, in prostituting his official position for the Bake of gain ; and,
lastly, with having exercised the influence secured by a control of
the stock to enable him the more readily to carry out his nefarious
schemes.
This is the simple meaning of the language used by the Com¬
missioners. How it was possible for Samuel M. Felton to attach
his name to a charge so insulting and so unsupported by proof, it
is difficult for me to conjecture. Perhaps he signed the report by
proxy, or without perusal. I will seek the most charitable expla¬
nation.
Whatever may have been the character of the location, plans, or
modes of construction, H. Haupt was in no way responsible for
them. The Act prescribed the conditions to be fulfilled, and a
State engineer, appointed by the Governor, examined and approved
the location before it was filed, certified that it fulfilled all the con¬
ditions required by law, and he also monthly examined the plans
and modes of construction, with full power to make deductions for
any work that he considered defective. With what propriety,
then, can the Commissioners use against me the disparaging and
offensive language of their report ?
28
As to Mr. Brooks, his animus has been apparent from the first.
He has evidently directed all his skill to the effort to make out a
case against me. He rejected my offer to accompany the Com¬
missioners over the work to give information, and has never once
allowed an opportunity for explanation or defence, while appar¬
ently seeking, from hostile sources, evidences to justify unfavorable
representations.
The contractors could have prevented the surrender of the road
to the Commissioners, but they made no resistance ; although ap¬
prehensive that the work would not be promptly resumed, or the
Act carried out in good faith, they allowed the company to yield
possession. The Commissioners next required a surrender, by the
contractors, of their claims against the property of the Troy and
Greenfield Railroad Company, which, although not required in the
Act, they released, simply reserving the right to petition the Legis-
ture for redress of grievances.
More than a year was allowed to pass, during which the claims,
for which the appropriation had been made, remained unsettled,
— interest, in the mean time accumulating; and when, after much
delay, settlement was at last made, the amount appropriated was
found sufficient to pay only 85 cents on the dollar : but the Com¬
missioners, without the slightest authority by law, and in violation
of the intent of the Act, instead 'of paying the 85 per cent, on
account, which would have left H. Haupt & Co. an opportunity of
satisfying the balance of the claims with stock or bonds, compelled
claimants to accept the 85 per cent, as full compensation for them¬
selves, and transfer their claims against the contractors to the
State ; so that no part of the debt is cancelled, as the Legislature
intended it should be, and for the purpose of accomplishing
which the possession of the road was surrendered to the Com¬
missioners. The consideration, therefore, for which H. Haupt
& Co. relinquished possession was, by this Act, wrongfully with¬
held.
The Commissioners have also attempted to destroy, perhaps
successfully, the right of redemption. Instead of the original
$2,000,000, the plans of the Commissioners contemplate an expen¬
diture of nearly six millions, which maybe increased indefinitely;
thus increasing, proportionately, the difficulty of raising sufficient
capital to redeem. But, apparently to destroy the last hope of
success, they have made a contract with other companies, which
provides that, in the event of redemption, the Commonwealth may
continue to hold all rights acquired under this instrument. It is
difficult to perceive any object in this condition except to damage
29
the contractors ; and yet it has become a law, by the approval of
the Legislature.
There was still another source from which a remote possibility
existed that some return might be made to the contractors. This
was from the second mortgage company bonds, a portion of which
was held by them. Bui the Commissioners have effectually de¬
stroyed any small value that they might have had by publishing
an argument to prove them worthless. And to accomplish the
object still more effectually, an application has been made to the
Supreme Court for an opinion. "We are entirely satisfied with this
appeal; for if the bonds are worthless, we wish to know it, and
if the State will take advantage of any technical or verbal flaw to
destroy any value they might otherwise have, we wish to know
that also.
It might be supposed that the acts of oppression which have
been enumerated would have been sufficient to satisfy the Com¬
missioners, if they desired to punish us for too energetic a defence
of our rights, our property, and»'our reputation. But it appears
that it was not sufficient to take our property, turn us out, and
represent us as dishonest and dishonorable men. They, or the
attorney-general for them, have brought suit against us in the
Supreme Court, to recover the amount, principal and interest, on
an alleged over-issue of scrip. * On this suit they have attached
the individual property of II. Haupt to the extent of 100,000, and
the stock in the hand^ of the company, and have thus prevented
the settlement of our affairs with the company, or with the other
members of the firm,—bringing all our operations to a dead-lock,
tying them up indefinitely, until the case can come to a trial, and
putting me to the expense of employing counsel in my defence.
Never, perhaps, was a suit brought against an individual with
so little shadow of foundation to rest it upon. The Act clearly
k contemplated that the sterling scrip delivered to the Troy and
Greenfield Railroad Company should be of the same description'
as that previously issued to the Western Railroad Company, which
formed the precedent on which the legislation was based. The
bond required of the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Company was
to be of the same description as that previously given by the'
Western Railroad Company, and was to be approved by the attor-<
ney-general. The scrip was issued to the Western Railroad Com¬
pany at $4.44, and to the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Company
at precisely the same rate ; and the expectation of receiving scrip
at this rate formed part of the consideration to induce the con¬
tractors to take the contract; but note the. difference: the'
30
"Western Railroad Company were required to pay only the pre¬
miums into the sinking fund, which they might receive on the
sale of bonds, thus insuring thera par; while the Troy and
Greenfield Railroad Company were required to pay ten per
cent, on the par value, and never received even as much as $4.44,
• except on the first delivery, while the Commissioners charge the
bonds to them at $4.91. If the attorney-general feels it to be his
duty to bring suit to recover the over-payment on the compara¬
tively small amount of £114,500, issued to aid the tunnel, why does
he not also bring suit to recover the over-payment on the $4,000,000
issued to the Western Railroad Company at the same rate, par¬
ticularly as that company was not burdened with the ten per cent,
payments into the sinking fund, and consequently realized much
larger net receipts, in proportion to the issue, from the sale of
their sterling bonds ?
But assuming that there was even a ground of action, with
what propriety can the action fie brought against me, and not
against the railroad company? The State, as such, has never had
any contract or business transactions with II. Haupt or H. Haupt
& Ce., and has never delivered to him or them any State scrip.
The scrip received by H. Haupt & Co. has always been through
the treasurer of the Troy and Greenfield Railroad Company, to
whom alone it was deliverable by the State treasurer; and it was
accepted by the contractors as part payment on account of the
indebtedness of the company to them. If the State over-paid
the railroad company, on what legal or equitable principle could
that over-payment be exacted from another and entirely different
party — a creditor to whom the railroad company was, and still is,
largely indebted ? A more absurd position, it seems to me, could
not well be taken.
When the Commissioners discover that the Buit to Recover
the so-called over-issue is not tenable, I have but little doubt that
others will be instituted on the claims which they have been buy¬
ing at a discount, and which may be so used as to afford a prolific
source of annoyance for a lifetime.
But we are not yet through with the list of grievances. The
Commissioners, through their agents, have seized upon private
property of the contractors, and occupied real estate not leased
or conveyed to them; they have trespassed upon private grounds
at the shaft near the west end of the tunnel, and have assumed a
right to use the shaft, although the State has never paid a dollar
for any work done upon it, and has no claim to the land on which
it is located.
31
»
In reviewing the action of the Commissioners, there is one other
case which requires attention. After the suspension of the work,
in 1861, John A. (3 ris wold, of Troy, generously advanced nearly
$20,000 to pay off and discharge the laborers on the road and
tunnel, expecting to be repaid when an appropriation should be
made for that purpose. This case was particularly explained to
the committee in 1862, and was intended to be covered by the
section which provided for the payment of claims for labor, ma¬
terial, &c.; but the Commissioners, or the attorney-general, by
a refinement of ingenuity, have decided, substantially, that a pay¬
ment of a claim for labor means a payment into the hands of the
identical man who performs the labor; the man who pays another
for doing the work cannot be repaid. On this ground, the whole
of the claim of J. A. Griswold was thrown out, and not a cent
allowed, although no question in regard to its equity can possibly
exist.
There are so many errors and misstatements of facts in the re¬
port of the Commissioners and accompanying documents, and so
much that conveys erroneous impressions, that I cannot conclude
my remarks without reference to at least one of them.
The Commissioners insist, with singular pertinacity, on the ex¬
istence an of anticlinal axis in the Iloosac Mountain, and even
go so far as to give a profile, showing that the strata on the east
and west side incline in different directions.
The Commissioners also quote Prof. Hitchcock in support of
this theory; but, by a very extraordinary accident, they leave out
a sentence which entirely overturns it, and repeat that portion
which precedes and that which follows, omitting the assertion in
Prof. Hitchcock's testimony, that " the Green Mountain Range
was not lifted up by granite, or any of the igneous rocks pushing
upwards from underneath," " the entire range pitching down¬
wards towards the sea." I have also a recent letter from Prof.
Hitchcock, a copy of which I submit, giving a profile of the
mountain, in which all the strata are represented as inclined in
the same direction ; and I submit, .also, the affidavit of Mr. Cart-
wright, who sunk the shaft at the west end, showing that the
strata incline in the same direction as stated by Prof. Hitchcock,
and in the opposite direction to that given by Messrs. Laurie, La-
trobe, and the Commissioners.
Exception has been taken to the location and plans of construc¬
tion, and efforts made to disparage the work ; but I think it will
be apparent, from the statement of our financial affairs, that we
have done as well as it was possible with our means and resources,
32
and that it would scarcely have been possible to find others to do
as well. But I am not willing to admit that either the location,
plans, or modes of construction were defective, or that with
ample pecuniary resources there could have been-any great im¬
provement.
The location was defined by the topographical features of the
country : no other possible route was presented than the valley
of the Deerfield : and the only question left for the decision of
the engineer was, How nearly shall the line conform to the curves
of the hill-sides ?
All good engineers will, as a general rule in such cases, avoid
an excess of excavation, and incline rather to an excess of em¬
bankment, using trestle-work where the material in the cuts is
insufficient. It is also best not to cut too deeply into heavy
points of rock on steep hill-sides, but touch lightly at first, and
when the track is laid, widen out if necessary, and transport the
material in cars to use for wall or rip-rap. This is precisely what
I did in the location of the Juniata division of the Pennsylvania
Railroad, and also of the Troy and Greenfield Railroad ; and if I
had possessed unlimited resources I would not have done it dif¬
ferently.
As to construction, exception was taken chiefly to the slopes
and bridges. On the subject of Blopes, many experts were exam¬
ined to prove that the slopes of excavations should have been
more flat than I made them. I used precisely the same slopes
that were employed on the Pennsylvania Railroad. But, setting
aside all rules and theories of engineers, common sense will sus¬
tain my positions. The slope used by me in earth excavation
was 45°; most of the line was located on side-hills; the surface
of the ground was covered with bushes, the roots of which
afforded an excellent protection ; the flatter the Blope, the more
would these bushes be cut away, and the greater the surface ex¬
posed to wash. This consideration ought to be conclusive in favor
of the slope which I adopted; but I was much gratified to per¬
ceive that Mr. Brooks, in his communication to the Governor, of
March 13, 1863, has, unintentionally perhaps, given the strongest
possible proof that my positions in regard to slopes were correct.
He gives, on page 16, an estimate of the expenditures required
to complete the road more than would have been necessary if
the work had not been stopped, and in this estimate he does not
allow a single cent for slopes.
If the work had continued the slides would have been removed,
and washes filled by the ordinary repair forces, and if the effects
33
of two winters on the slopes, without any attention whatever from
repair gangs, did not cause a considerable increase of expense, no
better proof could be afforded that the slopes were not very far
from the true inclination.
In regard to bridges, I must be permitted to say, that I have
given the subject of bridge construction, theoretically and experi¬
mentally, very particular attention; it has been, in fact, my
speciality ; and " Ilaupt on Bridge Construction " is the only re¬
cognized standard and text book in Yale College, Union College,
Troy Polytechnic Institute, and other institutions where engineer¬
ing is taught as a regular branch of study.
I mention these facts to show that I cannot be considered en¬
tirely ignorant of the principles of bridge construction, and would
not be very likely to sacrifice my reputation by erecting an inferior
or discreditable structure to increase profits, in which it is well
known, from the investigations of the committee in 1860, that I
would not have participated. This will be apparent, also, from
the fact that the cost of the bridge was greater than that of other
plans that could have been adopted. The contractor, a very
intelligent and experienced bridge builder, was absolutely unre¬
stricted in regard to prices of material ; he got it where he could
find it best, and H. Haupt & Co. paid the bills. The pine lumber
was brought all the way from the White Mountains ; and, if the
bridge had been allowed to be finished, it would have been one
of the strongest, most durable, and beautiful structures ever built
in the State.
I proposed, as the expense would be trifling, the material being
all on the ground^ that one span should be erected on the plane
near Greenfield, and tested thoroughly ; but it suited the views
of the Commissioners best to denounce the whole as worthless,
and refuse any test whatever, although T. Willis Pratt, the only
witness called by the opposition, who has established a reputation
as an expert on the subject of bridges, declared that there was no
difficulty in constructing a bridge on that plan that would carry
any train. His exact words were, " I could construct it to carry
any load that a railroad train could carry over it."
I am heartily tired of this contest. I do not wish ever again
to be connected with a work which changes of State or National
administration can throw into confusion. I did not undertake
the tunnel with any other idea than that I was dealing with a
responsible corporation, not with the State. After two investi¬
gating committees and the executive council had approved my
action, and pronounced me right, and the agents and officers of the
5
34
State wrong, the work has been taken from my hands; my plans,
matured by years of study, and which I knew to be superior to
any that have been produced elsewhere, are thrown away untried,
even without so lúuch as an examination, and inferior and vastly
more expensive ones are substituted. The practicability of the work
is now considered established ; but it was established chiefly upon
the demonstrations that I have given. Previous to this time no
engineer or contractor in New England was found willing to
undertake the task. Mine, has been the lot to encounter the
sneers and ridicule which attend the efforts of a pioneer. I could
not secure the hard-earned payments on account of the $2,000,000
loan without a contest at almost every application. Now there
appears to be a willingness to pour $6,000,000 into the lap of the
Commissioners, and pay the chairman $5,000 a year for conde¬
scending to disburse it. Well, be it so! Let the experiment be
tried. The Commissioners have much to learn ; their education
will cost the State much more than mine. After spending a
few millions, the sovereign people may become dissatisfied and
demand a change; but I have no desire to be again connected
with the tunnel, particularly if it should be carried on as a State
work,
*
I have but little, doubt that if the work had been allowed to
continue for a few months longer, the road would have been fin¬
ished to the mountain ; the success of our power drills and plans
for tunnelling demonstrated, confidence established, and the way
opened for so large an increase of subscriptions, or other financial
arrangements, that further applications to the State for aid would
have been unnecessary. This was the credit po*it, to reach which
I had been striving for years, and when it was almost within reach,
it was snatched from my grasp forever. The credit of H. Haupt
& Co., preserved by so many sacrifices, never can be reestablished,
and the firm will never again transact any business not connected
with the liquidation of its affairs.
The unfortunate act of Iiis Excellency, in the removal of the
State engineer, has been most calamitous in its consequences to
the contractors and to the State, but he probably supposed he was
doing his duty. I have thought very hard of him at times, and
have not always refrained from expressing my opinions ; but upon
calm reflection, and conversation with mutual friends, I am willing
to believe that the confidence of the Governor has been abused,
and that his course has been influenced, in part at least, by cred¬
iting representations that the contractors were tricky, or were
making money on their contract, and could bear a curtailment of
35
their estimates. How far such opinions were from the truth, the
statements I have submitted will probably suffice to show.
The opinion appears to be entertained by some that, even if the
Governor had not interfered to remove the State engineer, it
would not long have been possible for the contractors to continue
the work. This, of course, cannot be the opinion of Mr. Brooks
and others, who attempt to prove that the contractors were pock¬
eting hundreds of thousands of dollars in the shape of profits ; but
as we desire to meet fairly every argument that has been advanced
to our disadvantage, and present facts'as they exist, some explana-*
tion of our prospects at the tftne of the suspension appears to be
necessary.
In 1860, towards the close of the investigation, I was informed
of the ideas of the investigating committee in regard to the bill
which they proposed to report, and was asked if I felt sure that
such a bill would enable me to carry the project through to com¬
pletion without further aid from the State. I replied, that I had
no doubt that it would; such was my firm belief at that time; and
with my present information I am satisfied that, had the then ex¬
isting condition of things remained undisturbed, or had no changes
occurred but such as could then have been foreseen and antici¬
pated, all my expectations would have been realized, and the result
would have vindicated the wisdom and sound judgment of the
committee who reported the bill. I did not, of course, expect that
the State loans would be sufficient to carry the work through to
completion without other aid, but the sale of the Southern Ver¬
mont road would enable us to extinguish the floating debt that
we had carried at street rates for so long a time ; it would greatly
strengthen our credit, which in the worst times had proved good
for $200,000 ; it would enable us to construct and test at least a
sufficient number of drills to give a full and complete demonstra¬
tion of their efficiency, and prove, that with their aid, five years at
most would complete the tunneL With this demonstration, wit¬
nessed and certified to by engineers and experts, whose statements
would carry conviction to every mind, my plan was to appeal to
Boston and to Boston men for the additional aid necessary to carry'
the enterprise through. Having been successful in procuring the
town subscriptions, with nine tenths of the population opposed until
the subject was explained to them, I could not entertain a doubt
that the application to Boston would have been perfectly success¬
ful. I expected to hold public meetings, show the importance of
the tunnel to the interests of Boston, go personally to her leading
citizens to solicit subscriptions, take subscriptions on any condi-
36
t
tions that would secure them, some payable in instalments on the
completion of each 1,000 feet of tunnel, and others, if nothing
better could be done, payable when the tunnel was completed. In
one way or another, or on one condition or another, I would have
kept at work until I had secured all the subscriptions desired.
These subscriptions would have formed a substantial basis of credit
on which I could have borrowed, with the paper of the firm, and
after a time the securities of the company as collateral. No ono
who would carefully consider what had been accomplished under
conditions which rendered Success almost hopeless, could believe
it possible that I could fail in the dhsier work which remained to
be completed.
The war added very greatly to our difficulties; it produced a
panic, closed the foreign market against American securities, com¬
pelled us to take Federal five per cent, bonds at a time when the
State itself was issuing other bonds at sis per cent. We were com¬
pelled to sell as low as 88, leaving but 73 per cent, after paying
ten per cent, into the sinking fund. In consequence of this condi¬
tion of things, it was probable that I might have been compelled
to ask a release for a time from the payments on account of sinking
fund and interest, but this was the most that I ever expected to
ask ; and this would have been very trifling as compared with the
present policy of assuming the whole enterprise as a State work,
rejecting the important aid of individual contributions and the
economies of individual management, launching into an ocean of
expenditures under the direction of paid agents, who have no in¬
terest in consulting economy and reducing time of completion,
but whose personal interests would rather be advanced by increas¬
ing cost and extending time.
It is now too late to expect aid from individuals. The idea has
been encouraged, that if individuals do nothing the State will be
compelled to finish the tunnel; it would be useless, therefore, to
attempt to procure any additional subscriptions, and the policy
which has been inaugurated will probably be carried out, involv¬
ing an additional expenditure of many millions of dollars and
years of time.
It would seein not unreasonable to ask that the State should
carry out, in good faith, the spirit of the Act of 1862. This Act was
surely onerous enough. It deprived the contractors of possession
of the work, and made them no compensation whatever for capital
expended or services rendered. It provided, or intended to
provide, for the payment of claims against the contractors in¬
curred upon the work; and as the only consideration to them, gave
37
the right of redemption for a period of ten years after the comple¬
tion of the tunnel. This right might at some time become of value
if the expenditures of the State were to be limited, as was sup¬
posed, to the $2,000,000 ; but if the work is to cost $6,000,000 to
$10,000,000, as the present policy indicates, the right of redemp¬
tion becomes valueless, and some equivalent is justly due for its
destruction. The right of redemption and the payment of the
liabilities were the considerations for which the contractors sur¬
rendered possession of the road, which could not have been ob¬
tained under legal processes in less than three years ; and they
might ask, as a matter of justice, that the intended consideration,
or its equivalent, be given. They do ask that the claims on which
85 per cent, have been paid shall be paid in full ; that the claim of
J. A. Griswold, for money advanced to pay laborers, shall be paid ;
that all suits shall be withdrawn and attachments released. They
also ask that the Commonwealth shall pay all counsel fees, and
other expenses caused by the action of the State authorities, in
bringing suits against the contractors or either of them.
Attempts have been repeatedly made to prejudice my claims
before the legislature, by the representation that I have presumed
to call in question the good faith of the Commonwealth of Massa¬
chusetts. Ex-Governor Boutwell, in his argument before the
joint special committee in 1862, took one of the most lofty flights
from this perch, and denounced the presumption of a stranger in
calling in question the good faith, of the State. In my reply, I
showed that I had used simply the language of the investigating
committee in their report, and of the executive council of Massa¬
chusetts in their protest against the action of Governor Andrew,
and asked if it would not be the height of presumption, in a mere
stranger, to dissent from the deliberately expressed opinions of
such high authority?
If a robber should take my purse, would it be a disrespect to
Massachusetts, if the act had been committed within the limits of
her territory, to say the man who did it was a thief? And if an
act of injustice should be committed by agents of the State, would
it be an insult to Massachusetts to report the simple facts, and
give her an opportunity to remove the stain which those who did
not represent her wishes had brought upon her fame? A simple
statement of facts cannot be regarded as an insult to the Com¬
monwealth. If the facts themselves are discreditable, he who
simply enunciates them is not responsible for that; the censure
must fall, not on the victim, but on the perpetrators of the dis¬
creditable acts. If what has been stated be not true, let the
38
Statements be refuted, and let tbe odium of falsehood rest on him
who makes them ; but if true, let the truth have the weight to
which it is entitled.
I assert as facts, that I was prosecuting the work of construct¬
ing the Troy and Greenfield Railroad successfully, judiciously,
and economically; seeking not my own advantage, but, on the
contrary, sacrificing my personal interests in persistent efforts to
achieve success. That the State ^ngineer compelled the suspen¬
sion of the work, by withholding so large a portion of the esti¬
mates as to prevent us from meeting engagements, causing the
paper of the firm to be protested, and credit destroyed. That an
investigating committee of Council sustained and justified my
action, and declared the act of the State engineer to be a vio¬
lation of good faith. That the executive council of the State of
Massachusetts, and subsequently a joint special committee of both
branches of the legislature, confirmed this decision, and reported
in my favor. That, notwithstanding this extraordinary unanimity
of opinion in regard to my action, after the most searching in¬
vestigation, I Was, by a process which may be called compulsory,
ejected from possession of the work, without compensation for
services rendered or capital expended, and with a loss of more
than two hundred thousand dollars individually. That my loca¬
tion and plans, although fully approved after most careful examina¬
tion by the State engineer, have been rejected and disparaged, and
others, far inferior and much more expensive, adopted. And,
lastly, in order to excuse or justify a procedure so shocking to the
moral sense of an intelligent and virtuous community, attempts
have been made to impeach my professional skill and personal
integrity ; and the climax was reached by the chairman of the
Board of Commissioners, in the memorable communication which
formed the subject of my memorial. This is the record — I will
not say the record that Massachusetts has made for herself, but
that which some of those who, for a brief season, have beèn
placed in positions of authority, have made for her—a record
which it will be her pleasure, no doubt, to repudiate. I cannot
believ.e that she will ever sanction and approve it.
I am only human ; and that man must be either more than hu¬
man, or so far beneath the ordinary level as to be destitute of
even the spirit of a mouse, if he could submit to the indignities
' and insults I have received, in addition to the loss of property,
without some emotions of indignation or resentment ; and, as I am
not quite prepared to act on the maxim, that language is designed
to conceal our thoughts, I have sometimes used language that,
faintly and distantly, expressed my own.
39
For the privilege of turning me out, and putting the tunnel in
the hands of the Commissioners, Massachusetts is asked to pay an
additional amount, beyond the original loan, of about $4,000,000 ;
and the tunnel is now in the hands of those who have no experi¬
ence in such operations, and who must be gradually educated by
the slow process of experiments. But there is this difference
bet ween the present and the former condition of affairs : instead
of being conducted by the contractors, at their expense, the State
must now furnish the funds; and if the Mount Cenis operations
are, as appears, to be the model, possibly here, as there, a million
of dollars may be expended in experiments. The work was sus»
pended in June, 1861, and up to the end of December, 1863, as I
am informed, under State management, not a foot of additional
progress has been made in the tunnel or on the road. The ex¬
penditure— $53,503.06—has been for objects, none of which do I
consider necessary and proper, and all of which will be thrown
away if the policy should be again changed, as I predict that it
will be. Still, if Massachusetts chooses to make such expendi-
tures, she has a perfect right to do so. The dam across the Deer»
field may be useful for manufacturing purposes, even if it is never
instrumental in boring into any thing besides the State treasury. I
can readily understand why the Commissioners do not desire that
the measures planned by them should be annually published, and
why such publication would be fatal or injurious to their success.
But if the Commissioners are right in their plans, and are spend¬
ing the money of the State judiciously and economically, why fear
investigation ? Those only have reason to fear criticism who either
know or fear that they are wrong.
I do not make these remarks from any desire that the former
status should be restored. On the contrary, I prefer to be a spec-,
tator for a few years. All I now ask is, that, as we accepted the
onerous conditions of the Act of 1862, it be carried out on the
part of the. State in good faith. It was accepted by us, not be¬
cause we were satisfied with it, but we could do no better, and
relinquished possession under the compulsion of the circumstances
in which we were placed, to secure payment to other parties of
their just claims.
It has not been my wish or intention, in any of ray remarks or
statements at this time, to reflect disparagingly upon His Excel¬
lency the Governor. Many mutual friends, whose opinions I am
compelled to respect, regard this gentleman as eminently honest,
sincere, and conscientious, lie has endeared himself to the people
of Massachusetts by his noble action in this war, and has erected
40
for himself a monument more durable than marble. His name
and his fame will reach posterity, associated with the noblest
efforts for the suppression of the rebellion and the elevation of a
down-trodden and oppressed race. Far be it from me to seek to
abate one jot or one tittle of the credit due for such important
services. In these efforts he has had my sympathies, and, if op¬
portunity had offered, would have received my most cordial co¬
operation. But all men are human, and it is human to err. The
highest zeal in the cause of humanity, the most ardent patriotism,
affords no guarantee that the possessor of these estimable qualities
is beyond the possibility of committing an error, and Iiis Excel¬
lency was most assuredly wrong in his action towards me. Had
he known me, I am sure his course would have been widely dif¬
ferent, and I should have received his most cordial support in my
efforts to carry to completion a work which will bring wealth and
honor to Massachusetts, instead of being crushed by his persistent
determination to accomplish it, after two investigating commit¬
tees, and the executive council, had indorsed my action. Is
it possible, Mr. Chairman, that I could, without remonstrance,
submit to the loss of property, to bear the burden of several
hundred thoussfbd dollars of liability, to see my professional
reputation as an engineer, and- my personal reputation as an
honest man, assailed by one who has apparently sought to sac¬
rifice me in an attempt to sustain and justify the action of
His Excellency, by an exhibition of my unworthiness ? Shall I
leave the members of this honorable committee, and of the Gen¬
eral Court, in error, and refrain from presenting facts, in a matter
vitally affecting the public interest, and suffer myself to sink under
the reproaches and contempt of those whose good opinions lvalue
more than wealth, and whose good opinions Í feel that I deserve,
through fear that the facts might be unpalatable to some who
have been placed in office for a brief period ?
He who unintentionally does wrong or commits injustice, should
know no higher pleasure or more imperative duty than to make
such reparation as may be in his power. His Excellency has been
deceived by false representations. I trust that this investigation
may, to söme extent, undeceive him. It is not in his power to re¬
turn to me what his action has taken from me. To replace me in
my former position as chief engineer of the work I do not now de¬
sire, and the office I would not now accept. My wish is chiefly to
defend my reputation, which has been most unjustly assailed, and
to secure to others the payment of their just dues. For myself, I
simply ask relief from the liabilities which the action of the State
41
authorities has, as I think, unjustly imposed upon me, without be¬
ing subjected to the expense and delays of securing it through the
courts.
Not the least of the disadvantages to which I have been sub¬
jected by the condition of my affairs in Massachusetts arises from
the fact that it compelled me to refuse a commission as Brigadier-
General, which was sent me by the President, at the suggestion
of General Halleck, for meritorious services in operations against
the enemy. I was perfectly willing to serve without pay, to give
myself to the government, so long as I could render efficient aid
in crushing the rebellion ; to abandon, for a time, all private inter¬
ests, and give my enemies, in my absence from Massachusetts, a
temporary triumph ; but I was not willing, by the unconditional
acceptance of a commission, to place myself so completely in the
power of the Secretary of "War (whom I happened to know well),
as to cut off all possibility of defending my property and reputa-
. tion, and protecting the interests of my creditors in Massachusetts,
at times when a suspension of active operations rendered my pres¬
ence in the field unnecessary. I knew that I could never obtain
a leave of absence unless it suited the mood of the Honorable
Secretary at the time to grant it, and that a request from parties
interested in keeping me away would effectually prevent any agi¬
tation of unpleasant questions which might be caused by my pres¬
ence here. For the reasons assigned, I was not able to enter upon
the career which was opened to me, or accept any position that
would deprive me of the right to a portion of my time ; and, after
performing services for a year and a half, in a manner which elicited
frequent expressions of acknowledgment from the President, the
General-in-Chief, and the Secretary of War, at whose urgent so¬
licitation I had assumed charge of the department of military rail¬
roads, I was relieved by the Secretary in an impulse of irrita¬
tion, caused hy my persistent refusal to accept a commission after
the appointment had been submitted to and confirmed by the
Senate.
No doubt the extraordinary character of the offence called for
punishment, for no other individual, perhaps, was ever guilty of
the crime of refusing to be made a general.
Gentlemen op the Committee : I have asked of the General
Court no pecuniary, or other compensation, for the injury that I
have sustained ; I have asked only an investigation before an
honest and impartial tribunal. Before such a one I believe I
have the privilege of presenting my case. If you credit my
6
42
statements, your report will, no doubt, do me justice. If further
information, on any point, is desired, I will endeavor to fur¬
nish it.
With this general statement, I submit copies of papers ex¬
hibiting, — •
1st. Memorandum of cash forwarded by H. Haupt, for dis¬
bursement, previous to the payment of the first instalment of the
State loan.
2d. Copy of declaration of plaintiff in the case of Common¬
wealth v. Herman Haupt. . k
8d. Correspondence with Messrs. Blake, Bros. & Co., showing
the amounts realized on the sale of the State bonds.
4th. Copy of letter from Professor Hitchcock, with profile of
the Hoosac Mountain, made by him from memory, showing that
the statements of the Commissioners and of their engineers, in re¬
gard to the anticlinal axis, are incorrect.
5th. Affidavit of H. Cartwright, confirming statement of Pro¬
fessor Hitchcock. 0