A. L. Bishop — The State Worl's of Pennsylvania. 233 



among the people.' Mr. Rutherford stated to Mr. Bradley that this 

 was the missionary fund; that it was to pay for handbills, circu- 

 lars, etc. ; that each contractor Avas to subscribe a sum equal 

 to one per cent, upon the amount of his contract; and that he [the 

 engineer] was to allow it in the estimate, i.e., allow so much more 

 than the amount of their work, and that this was the only way they 

 could get at the state treasury. Mr. Bradley refused to add this 

 amount to the estimates and was discharged. 



''Mr. !N^. F. Jones, who was a.rodman on the canal, confirmed the 

 statement of Mr. Bradley in relation to the receipt of the letter 

 from Mr. Stevens to Mr. Rutherford; saw the subscription to the 

 'missionary fund' in the hands of Rutherford; heard him say that 

 that was the only way they could get at the big purse ; and that a 

 larger sum than was then subscribed to the paper had already gone 

 into Berks county. James M. Foster was present at a meeting of 

 the contractors, which Rutherford attended. The object of the 

 meeting was to obtain more men on the canal, and to raise money. 

 The men were to be obtained in the county of Philadelphia, — Porter 

 men ; they were to be brought up and then made to vote for Ritner." 



In the matter of "re-letting" contracts, also, the canal commission- 

 ers from time to time were found guilty of illegal and fraudulent 

 practices. The law required: — "In all cases where a contract on 

 the canal or railroad shall be abandoned, it shall be the duty of the 

 superintendent or acting canal commissioner to give at least two 

 weeks public notice of re-letting the same,"* This law was violated 

 at times, however, when the canal board in the re-letting desired 

 to favor their political friends. How this was done is shown in 

 the following extractf from the minutes of the board of canal 

 commissioners. May 21st, 1839, who were investigating the conduct 

 of their predecessors: — 



"It conclusively appears to the board, that, on the 24th day of 

 October last, a notice was published in the bqrough of Wilkes-Barre, 

 of which the following is a copy : — 



Canal Office, Tunkhannock, 



October 16, 1838. 

 Canal Letting 



Section 132, on the Tunkhannock line of the Pennsylvania Canal, and all 

 other abandoned sections on said line, will be re-let at Tunkhannock, on 

 Wednesday, the 7th day of November next. Specifications of the work may 

 be seen at the canal office in Tunkhannock, on the day of letting. 



E. Harding, Jr., Sup't. 



*Laws of Pennsylvania, 1828-29, p. 255. 



fSee J. H. Rep., 1838-39, III, pp. 607-8. This is also confirmed by the 

 report of a committee appointed to investigate the conduct of that same 

 board of canal commissioners read in the House of Representatives on June 

 15th, 1838, and found in J. H. Rep., 1838-39, II, Part II, pp. 7-9. 



