591 



Judge Kellogg, a man above reproach, characterizes Benton Turner 

 in almost as severe terms and contradicts his evidence. He is con- 

 tradicted upon material points by Hartwell, by Commissioner Cox, 

 by Commissioner Basselin and Warden Garmon. It is unnecessajy 

 to go outside his own evidence to show the fact that he is entirely 

 unworthy of belief, and I spend a moment upon this cause because so 

 much Las been made of this attack by the counsel for the committee. 

 The statement with regard to the talk with Garmon, as to the 

 arrangement to obtain cancellations of certain State lands, was said 

 by Turner to have been had in 1886 or 1887. The letters were in 1888 

 which he produces. Counsel is in error in making a different state- 

 ment with regard to»the time when this talk was had on the way to 

 Loon lake and in suggesting it was 1888, because at page 617 of the 

 evidence he is asked, "Can't you be any more definite about the year 

 it was, whether 1883, '85, '86 or '87? A. It was 1886 or 1887, 1 don't 

 J know. Q. Can't tell whether 1886 or 1887? A. I could not; my 

 recollection is, it was 1886." And yet the letters produced here bear 

 date, March, 1888, after it had been stated by Turner that he had 

 letters which corroborated his, statement with regard to this mat- 

 ter and which he says were dated two months after that. "Q. "We 

 will go to the letter, when was the next conversation ? A. Mr. Gar- 

 mon came to my house. Q. When was that?, A. I couldn't tell you. 

 Q. How soon was it after this conversation you rbder between Saranac 

 and Loon lake ? A. Oh,- it was some time afterwards; the messages 

 and the letter would give a man an idea of when it was. Q. How soon 

 after that? A. Two mouths. Q. In the same winter ? A. I think so, 

 or the same spring and summer. Q, The spring of 1886 ? A. Or 1887. 

 Q. One of those seasons ? A. Yes." On calling attention to that con- 

 tradiction which is on the most material point with regard to the 

 entire evidence and with reference to which Turner could not be mis- 

 taken, it seems unnecessary to comment upon his evidence. His 

 attempt was to sustain his naked statement by testifying he could pro- 

 duce letters and telegrams two months afterwards which would cor- 

 roborate what he stated. He produced letters and telegrams dated 

 two years afterwards, which the warden says passed between them in 

 the course of his official duty and which upon their face have nothing 

 whatever to indicate that they were with reference to a personal 

 transaction. 



Then, one other witness is brought fprward with reference to the 

 manner in which the business of the commission has been conducted 

 one Daniel Lynch, who at , the outset of the investigation was 

 called "Honest Dan. Lynch." We heard less of that as the invests 



