A. L. Bishop — The State WorTcs of Pennsylvania. 231 



quate to its completion, and if completed it could never be pro- 

 ductive of general benefit. , . . The committee express their 

 belief that a total abandonment of this work involves the least 

 sacrifice of public funds the state can make upon it."* 



The following year the canal commissioners endorsed the above 

 report. They regarded the money already expended upon the 

 branch in question as literally thrown away. Further they con- 

 curred in the general belief that the work ought not to have been 

 undertaken, also that, if it were completed, the road would be a 

 source of continual expense and entirely worthless to the state. 

 Accordingly, by an Act of Legislature approved on February 19th, 

 1839, provision was made for its abandonment. f 



Proceeding now with the consideration of corrupt practices 

 other than those connected with the procuring of legislation, atten- 

 tion will be given first to the matter of "letting" contracts for 

 building the works. Here the canal commissioners found a wide 

 field for partisan- favoritism and political corruption. Some inter- 

 esting information in these particulars is given in the report of a 

 committee appointed to look into these matters, and submitted to 

 the legislature on June 15th, 1839. | A state election campaign had 

 been in progress during the period investigated by the committee. 

 The two candidates for governor were Joseph Kitner, a repre- 

 sentative of the political party then in power, and David R. 

 Porter. A court of inquiry was held by the committee and some 

 startling disclosures were made. Although the main facts brought 

 to light at this time were confirmed by several witnesses, the most 

 important one was James Bradley. The latter had been the prin- 

 cipal assistant engineer on the Wiconisco division, and, for refus- 

 ing to assist in the corrupt practices of his colleagues, he was 

 discharged. "While yet in the service of the state, he had attended 

 a letting of contracts at Halifax on the 8th of August, 1838. All 

 the canal commissioners were present. Before the court of inquiry, 

 Mr. Bradley testified that at the above letting one of the com- 

 missioners said that the bids of the "Porter men" should be "sent 

 endways"; that certain bids to be considered later were laid on 

 the table, while others were thrown on the floor. Furthermore, he 



* J. H. Rep., 1838-39, II, Part II, pp. 16-18. 



fj. H. Rep., 1840, II (Appendix), p. 43; and Wilson, History of the 

 Pennsylvania Railroad Co., I, p. 389. 



t See J. H. Rep., 1838-39, II, Part II, pp. 4, 5, et seq. 



