employed the one in the Rappahannock, and the other in James river.

I frequently reminded Mr. Robinson at the board of directors of the inconsistency of this arrangement, the fast boats being employed elsewhere, and the Powhatan, the slowest and worst boat, and without any relay in case of accidents, being the only boat on the Potomac, which was beyond all comparison the great line of travel and the line of the great U. S. mail north and south. Upon this and upon all similar questions, I regard myself as merely a looker on. Opposition to Mr. Robinson and those who were known as his directors, was entirely fruitless, and I had no desire to encounter useless wrangling. It is proper to add, that I was slowly learning my way among these contrivances, and as yet, imperfectly understood them.

Ques. 6. When the contract for the Mount Vernon was reported to the board of directors of the steamboat company, did you vote for approving and confirming the same?

Ans. My answer to this is indicated by what I have said above. The contract was laid before the board of directors and nothing was said pro or con on the subject-it was acquiesced in by every body in confidence in the president-I believed his representations that a fast boat was wanted for the Potomac, and had no suspicion that the boat was to be otherwise employed. The contract passed as a matter of course-I can't say that any vote was taken upon it.

Ques. 7. At the meeting referred to by you in January last, when you say you were first apprised of the indebtedness of $20,000 on the part of the steamboat company, did you not vote for a resolution authorizing a dividend of three per cent. on the stock of the steamboat company?

Ans. I did. Col. Munford the other state director voted against the dividend, saying that he would not vote for a dividend while the company was in debt. I stated that I should vote in favour of a dividend, because the profits of their business shewed a capacity for making such dividends, and a surplus of several thousand dollars beyond. That the debt which they had incurred was owing to us as their directors in subscribing to the Port Walthall association and in building a new boat, and that it was not fair to deprive them of their dividend which they had been led to expect regularly, when they transferred the management of their affairs into the hands of the railroad company.

Ques. 8. You say that you have not acted as the committee of accounts since February last-have you not reason to believe that you may not have been called on so to act in consequence of the repugnance manifested by you on previous occasions to the performance of this duty?

Ans. I have no reason to suppose that I have not performed my usual portion of duty of that character, but if I had supposed that I would have obtained exemption by requesting it I would have requested it, as such investigations are not at all to my taste.

Ques. 9. Do you mean to say that the statements for each month, passed by the committee of examination, spread upon the minutes do not embrace the receipts as well as the disbursements of the month?

Ans. I have never intended to say so or any thing like it; what I meant to say was, the monthly statements would give no exhibition of the general balance due from the steamboat company to the railroad company. A monthly statement might shew cash in hand in favour of the steamboat company to the amount of a thousand dollars or more, while the steamboat company was in point of fact in arrear upon the general transactions to the railroad company of $20,000. An exhibition however of the monthly stateme its of the company will exhibit this matter more fully to the committee. All that I intended to say in my previous answer on this subject was that no information was laid before the board of directors indicating in the slightest degree these heavy advances from the railroad company to the steamboat company, and that no order was made by the board of the railroad company, authorizing them in the first instance or approving them afterwards.

Ques. 10. Who was the director that in the election of. Mr. Edwin Robinson, remarked "we would get rid of Mr. Moncure Robinson ?"

Ans. As a matter of delicacy I abstained and requested to be exempted from mentioning this name. I remarked myself, that Mr. Robinson's ill temper and overbearing and arbitrary disposition, would make me glad to accept almost any one in his place, when Col. Munford said, "that is one of my main motives for voting for Mr. Edwin Robinson, for we will get rid of Mr. Moncure Robinson.'

Question by a member of the committee.

Has Mr. Moncure Robinson resigned his office of president of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company, or his office of president of the Washington and Fredericksburg steamboat company? If not, when will the election of Mr. Edwin Robinson as president of the railroad company take effect?

Ans. Mr. Moncure Robinson is still the president of both companies, his proposal to resign was conditioned to be upon the election of a satisfactory successor, which I understood to be satisfactory to him, and that he suggested that his brother Mr. Edwin Robinson would be satisfactory. Whereupon Mr. Edwin Robinson was elected in the manner I have before stated, the election to take effect upon the resignation of Mr. Moncure Robinson. Mr. Moncure Robinson has not yet resigned, and therefore Mr. Edwin Robinson is not president of the railroad company. At a very recent meeting of the board of directors of the railroad company, when Mr. Moncure Ro

binson applied for authority to make the contract with the department at Washington, I understood him to say that he expected before the period of making the mail contract, that he would cease to be president of the railroad company, but to intimate as his reason for asking for that authority, that he intended to continue president of the Washington and Fredericksburg steamboat company-he is still, however, president of both companies.

TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 23, 1847.

JAS. M. WICKHAM.

The committee met pursuant to adjournment.

The examination of R. B. Haxall, George W. Munford, James Bosher, G. A. Myers and C. W. Macmurdo having been concluded, their depositions were received by the committee and ordered to be printed. The committee adjourned to Thursday, evening 4 o'clock.

Interrogatory to Mr. R. B. Harall.

Had you not in the spring of 1844, a conversation with Mr. R. A. Mayo, at the time when he was considering the expediency of purchasing the Curtis Peck to run on James river? If yea, please state your recollection of the purport of that conversation.

Ans. I did have a conversation with Mr. R. A. Mayo, in relation to his purchase of the steamboat Curtis Peck, a short time before he concluded the purchase, and I believe it occurred in the spring of 1844. In that conversation Mr. M. stated that he was negotiating for a boat to run on James river, and I advised him not to make the purchase, as I knew that the Richmond and Petersburg railroad company would run a passenger line to Norfolk, so soon as they could make the necessary arrangements. To which Mr. M. replied that he did not believe the travel could be induced to quit the river, and besides he had a sum of money which he was prepared to invest in that way.

I will add that at the time of this conversation, I was, as I am now, a director of the Richmond and Petersburg railroad company.

23d February 1847.

R. B. HAXALL.

Additional Cross-interrogatories to G. W. Munford.

Ques. 1. It is stated in the testimony of Mr. James M. Wickham, that at the meeting of the board of directors at which the committee made their report to the board advising the election of Mr. Edwin Robinson, you assigned as a reason in favour of the appointment, that the board "would get rid of Mr. Moncure Robinson." Will you please tell us what you did say?

Áns. I do not remember the language I used at the board. As soon as the recommendation of the committee was announced, Mr. Wickham exhibited very great feeling in opposition to it and denounced the whole proceeding as a humbug. I remarked to him that I could not perceive the necessity of such a display of feeling, but if he had any good reasons to assign against the appointment, I would give them all possible attention and consideration. Upon which he calmly stated his reasons against it. In the discussion, among other things I think I stated that it was well known that Mr. Moncure Robinson was unpopular and prejudices thereby were excited against our road, that he was not sufficiently conciliatory to the public or to the companies with whom we were connected; that Mr. Bird and himself I believed were not on speaking terms, that the intercourse between the Petersburg company and our company instead of being carried on between the presidents was conducted by some other officer or some other person. That there were difficulties between the James river boat line and the bay boat company and himself; that there had been similar difficulties between the Baltimore and Ohio railroad company and himself, and that it was evident there would be serious difficulties between the Louisa railroad company and himself, and that under all these circumstances it would promote the interests of the company that the contemplated change should be made. I think this is the substance of what I stated to the board. I stated these and other reasons to the committee and to some of the members of the board individually, and I believe I stated them in substance as delicately as I could to Mr. Moncure Robinson himself and to his brother Edwin in interviews I had with each of them. I foresaw that the legislature would be appealed to, and that we should have trouble and difficulty, and I desired if possible to prevent it. I believed that Mr. Edwin Robinson (aided by his brother's advice while he was making himself acquainted with our affairs,) would be competent to the presidency, and that his conciliatory disposition would put an end to the unnecessary hue and cry against us.

Ques. 2. In the testimony of Mr. Wickham, it is stated that at the meeting at which the indebtedness of the steamboat company to the railroad company was a subject of remark by him, Col. Munford said, "Is there not a proposition here from the Louisa railroad company? Why has not that been propounded to the board?' Mr. Robinson said that there was such a proposition, but that he was preparing an answer for it, and that he had not thought it necessary to lay it before the board; that it was on the table, and could be read if desired. By this time the hour was very late-it was evidently impossible to keep the meeting together, and it broke up. The proposition of the Louisa company I have never seen; an answer to it was afterwards prepared, as I understood, and submitted to a meeting of directors at 11 o'clock in the day, when I was necessarily absent at the bank, and Col. Munford at the house of delegates about his business." Please state whether you were not at the meeting referred to when the proposition of the Louisa company was submitted, and whether you did not concur in its proceedings?

Ans. I state that I was not at the meeting referred to, that it was held at an hour when I could not attend. I had read Mr. Fontaine's letter and was disposed to accommodate the Louisa railroad company as far as possible, but I held my mind open to conviction until I could hear the president's statements in reply to Mr. Fontaine. Not having been present and having been too much engaged since to turn my mind to the subject I cannot say whether I concur in the proceedings then had or not.

Ques. 3. Will you please say whether the administration of the affairs of the company by Mr. M. Robinson has been successful in advancing the interest thereof, and whether its condition is better than when he was appointed president; and how far the improvement, if any there has been, has been owing to his energy and attention to its concerns?

Ans. At the time Mr. Moncure Robinson took charge of our affairs the company was in as hopeless a condition as I think any company could well be in to exist for a month; I feared that we should be compelled to stop the transportation until the road could undergo a thorough repair. I went with a committee over the whole road and we examined it critically; it was in a dangerous condition, the iron on a considerable portion was broken up into small pieces and the sills were rotten and sunk: the company could scarce pay its way and its finances were in a most embarrassed condition. Two or three times a week serious accidents occurred, engines were broken to pieces and cars crushed to atoms, and I thought every thing was going to utter ruin. In a very short time after Mr. Robinson took charge new energy was infused into the whole concern; many important changes were made in the workshops and among the workmen, a new superintendent of transportation was appointed, and a better one I expect it would be hard to find; new and better iron was purchased and laid down, new machinery provided, and the means of transportation greatly improved, and I confess that Mr. Robinson's financiering against the difficulties he had to contend with surprised me. In a time much shorter than I supposed possible, the road was put in first rate order and every thing began to wear a thriving aspect. A branch of the road was extended to the coal pits and the main road extended from Fredericksburg to the Potomac, and all this without aid from the state and by the resources which Mr. Robinson's energy and talents had educed. The stock which I had considered almost worthless and which had fallen from $ 109 per share to about $40, began to increase in value, the floating debt of the company was rapidly liquidating and the company again was in a condition to pay dividends. I think this astonishing change has been produced chiefly by Mr. Robinson's agency, aided by the indefatigable industry and judgment of Mr. Sharp; but while I say this much in justice to Mr. Robinson, candour requires me to say that I disapproved of many of his acts and many of his recommendations, and I believed he displayed too little disposition to accommodate and to please.

GEORGE W. MUNFORD.

Interrogatories propounded to Mr. James Bosher.

Ques. 1. Are you a director of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company, and since what time have you been a member of the board? Ans. I am a director of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company, and have been since the organization of the company.

Ques. 2. Are you a stockholder of the company, and if yea, what amount of stock is held by you in it? Ans. I am the owner of one hundred and thirty-four shares in the said company.

Ques. 3. Was not the purchase of stock in the steamboat company by the railroad company deemed not only a most advantageous investment in a pecuniary sense, but an object of the highest importance to the railroad company, on account of the control it was expected to give to the railroad company in the management of the

steamboat line?

Ans. I deemed it a matter of great importance to the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company to have control of the boats on the Potomac connecting this line with the City of Washington, and enabling them to keep the boats in such order as would ensure them at all times to make the trip to Washington with certainty and despatch. The purchase of stock in the steamboat company was I think a very advantageous and judicious investment of the railroad company.

Ques. 4. Was it not distinctly understood by the board of directors at the time that the steamboat stock was purchased by the railroad company, that it would be requisite for the railroad company to advance a considerable proportion of the amount required for the purchase of a second boat adapted to winter or summer service, and when the president was authorized to contract for such a boat, under the resolution of the president and directors sitting as the president and directors of the steamboat company on the 15th day of October 1845, did you not consider it the intention of the members present that the payments for the boat authorized by the board of directors should be made out of any disposable funds of either company?

Ans. I understood the president of the railroad company to state distinctly to the board of directors at the time the new boat was ordered, that it would be necessary for the railroad company to advance funds in part payment for the same, but that as all the funds of the steamboat company would pass through the hands of the treasurer of the railroad company, and the boats were all insured, we should incur no risk in such advances. The steamboat company were to pay interest on such advances.

Ques. 5. Do not the statements of the monthly committee of accounts which are spread regularly before the board of directors at their meetings and entered on their minutes, shew the amount of the receipts of and disbursements on account of the steamboat company? and do not the books of the railroad company shew at all times the state of the account between the railroad and steamboat companies?

Ans. Monthly statements of the receipts and disbursements of the railroad company, examined by one of the directors, are laid before the board of directors at their meetings by the treasurer, and are regularly entered upon the minutes of proceedings. These statements shew all the receipts from the steamboat company, and all disbursements on account of the same, and the books of the company which are accessible to any of the directors, will at all times shew the state of the account between the railroad and steamboat company.

Ques. 6. Was there any occasion for the resolution of the board of directors of the railroad company adopted on the 13th January, directing that "a statement of the accounts between the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company, and the Washington and Fredericksburg steamboat company, shall be made out and ready to be presented to the meetings of the board of directors of each company at least once in each quarter," and was not that resolution in your opinion adopted by the board merely because it was moved by a director, and there was no objection to it?

Ans. I do not recollect whether I was at the meeting of the directors on the 13th January last, but my impression is that I was not. I do not think the resolution adopted on that day was necessary, as the books of the railroad company would shew at any time the state of the accounts.

Ques 7. Have you ever heard of any complaint being made on the subject of the advances on account of the Mount Vernon previous to the meeting of the 13th January 1847?

Ans. I have not heard of any objections to the advances made by the railroad company to the steamboat company previous to the 13th January by any of the directors.

Ques. 8. Will you state your opinion as to the selection of president recently made by the board of directors, and whether you think a more advisable selection could have been made?

Aus. I think the selection of the president recently made, was under the circumstances a most judicious and proper one, and I am not aware that a better one could have been made.

Ques. 9. Please say what has been the value of the services of Mr. Moncure Robinson to the railroad company, and what change in its condition has been effected by his administration?

Ans. Some time before the election of Mr. Robinson as president of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company, I was in Philadelphia, previous to which time the road, machinery and finances of the company were in a wretched condition. I at that time sought an interview with Mr. Robinson, and believe I was the first person that urged on him the acceptance of the office; his skill, experience, judgment and energy of character, would I was sure, put the affairs of the company in good order, and I urged him by every consideration to accept. I stated to him that salary, even if we paid him $5000 per annum, was no object compared with the great interests at stake; for independent of the great loss to the stockholders, should this road not succeed, there was an end to all improvement in Virginia, by the aid of the state or individuals. In at last consenting to accept, Mr. Robinson stated that it would be at a sacrifice of his individual interests on the score of salary, as he was then in charge, or had the offer to take charge of a railroad in Pennsylvania at a salary of 5 or 6000 dollars. The salary of the president of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company was at that time $2500, and, as it was deemed a matter of the first importance to finish the road from Fredericksburg to Acquia creek, I stated to him that as consulting engineer, a salary of $1500 had been, or would be allowed him on that score, which would make his compensation $4000 per annum. It is impossible for me to detail the numerous difficulties he had to encounter in entering upon the discharge of his duties as president. A road of 14 miles through a difficult and expensive route from Fredericksburg to Acquia creek was to be constructed; the road already completed to Fredericksburg, and the machinery on it, were in the most appalling condition; the finances of the company in any thing but a prosperous state; the monetary affairs of the country in great and unprecedented embarrassment; yet, with all these difficulties to encounter, Mr. Robinson succeeded in having this road of 14 miles constructed on very favourable terms, and in putting the road and machinery upon

it from Richmond to Fredericksburg in the most complete order; restored the credit of the company by his personal influence with his friends in procuring loans to a large amount at legal interest, by becoming personally responsible for some of them, and ultimately by his great exertions and skill, succeeded in putting the company in its present prosperous condition. I have considered the services of Mr. Robinson to this company invaluable-the salary paid to him as inconsiderable, when compared with them. I do not mean by any thing I have said to cast censure upon those who had the management of the road previously to the election of Mr. Robinson. The experiment of railroads in this country was new, and there was a want of experience and skill to conduct them successfully, which time has remedied. They, I doubt not, did the best they could under the circumstances.

Additional Interrogatories propounded to Mr. James Bosher.

Ques. 1. In the testimony of Mr. J. M. Wickham, he states at the meeting of the board at which Mr. Edwin Robinson was elected president of the company, as follows: "After a few matters of no consequence had been transacted, Mr. Moncure Robinson rose from his seat to relinquish the chair, intimating that the election would be proceeded in; in advancing to the door, he turned to me, who was understood to be the only opposing voter, and with a very pale face and excited manner, addressing himself to me said: 'I have too large an interest in this company to consent to part with the control of it.'" Do you recollect any such incident as Mr. Wickham describes, and did Mr. Robinson make the remark ascribed to him by Mr. Wickham?

Ans. I was present at the meeting of the board of directors when Mr. Edwin Robinson was elected president of the railroad company. Mr. M. Robinson left the chair after the transaction of some business, but I have no recollection of his being excited, and am sure no such remark as attributed to him by Mr. W. was made.

Ques. 2. A great deal is said in the testimony of Mr. Wickham of the increase of Mr. M. Robinson's salary as president of the company, of his receiving a salary also as president of the Washington and Fredericksburg steamboat company, and in relation to charges for hack hire and tavern expenses, and of "murmurings" among the directors on these subjects? Will you please state the facts in regard to such increase of salary of Mr. Robinson as president of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company, and whether there has been any payment of money in any way or under any head to Mr. Robinson, without full and proper authority and to which he was not entitled?

Ans. The increase of salary to Mr. R. was made by the stockholders in general meeting, I think in May 1844-the increase to take effect from the 1st of April preceding. The increase of $ 500 was, I think, approved by all the stockholders, (with the exception of one and the proxy of the state.) The salary of the president of the steamboat company had been fixed by the stockholders previously to the sale of stock to the railroad company. His salary was $4000 as president and engineer, previous to the completion of the road to Acquia creek. When that was completed his salary was only $2500, and the increase was added as above stated. In examining the monthly statements, I have seen the vouchers for payments of hack hire, and some tavern expenses, all of which in my opinion were proper charges. I heard of no murmurings of the board, or of any member thereof, on these subjects. I know of no payment of money to Mr. R. as president of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad company, in any way, or under any head, to which he was not entitled, and which was not made under full and proper authority.

Ques. 3. Will you please state whether there has not been at all times the fullest and freest conference between the president and yourself on all subjects connected with the affairs of the company, and whether there has been, on the part of the president, any disposition to act either without or against the authority of the board?

Ans. There has been at all times the most full and free conference between the president and myself on all subjects connected with the affairs of the company. When the board have differed with the president on any subject, he has acquiesced and carried out their wishes. Nor do I know of any instance in which he has acted without the consent of the board in matters that were of importance to the interests of the company.

Ques. 4. Could not any one acquainted with accounts, at any time on examining the account of the steamboat company, on the books of the railroad company, ascertain the precise state of the account between the two companies?

Ans. Yes, in a few minutes.

Ques. 5. Has a decision ever been pressed on any subject at any meeting of the board, when the members present were not prepared for the question, or when any member desired delay?

Ans. I know of none.

Ques. 6. Is it not your opinion that the organization of the Norfolk and Port Walthall association, and the running of the Mount Vernon during the past season, between Aquia creek and Baltimore by the steamboat company, were measures of great importance to the interests of the railroad company, and do you not believe that but for the adoption and continuance of these measures, the railroad companies between Petersburg and Aquia creek would be obliged either to give up competing for the through travel, or to take it at such reduced rates as would make it impracticable to pay a dividend of six per cent. or even less to the stockholders?