Answer.—I have a general idea of the character of the investigation of the Committee up to this time.

Q.-State whether you have gotten this idea from any member of the Committee or from any witnesses who have been before it; and if so, from whom? A.-It was not through any member of this committee. I respectfully decline giving the names of the parties through whom I obtained my information, unless compelled to do so by the committee, formally entered on the record.

Q.-State what is the character of the information you have received in regard to the action of this committee?

A.-I have learned that the committee were seeking to discover whether or not I was to receive a large sum for the performance of my duties as Official Reporter, on condition of my "stumping the State," or giving a portion of the money to the Republican party of Virginia.

Mr. Gibson moved that an order be entered on the records, requiring Mr. Samuel to answer fully the question asked him in regard to who the witness or witnesses were that informed him of what was going on in this committee

room.

Upon this motion there was a tie vote; whereupon, it was left open till the next meeting of the committee.

Question by Mr. Platt.—Did you have any communication with any member of the Republican party in Virginia before you came to Richmond?

Answer:-I wrote an application, for the position of Official Reporter, to Mr. Hunnicutt and Judge Underwood.

+

Q. Did you receive answers from these gentlemen?

A.

I received no answer from either.

Q. Did you have any positive knowledge that you would receive the appointment of Stenographer to this Convention?

A.—I did not, but was prepared to go on to Atlanta, if I was not appointed here.

Q. Who did you first see in relation to the matter, after arriving in Richmond?

A.-Mr. Hunnicutt.

Q.-To whom did he refer you?

A.—I do not recollect that he referred me to any one. He remarked that he was glad to see me, and that I had better remain about there, and he would see me in a short time.

Q.-Was there any understanding between yourself and any other person, either a member or officer of the Convention, by which you were to render any service whatever except as a reporter?

A.-There never was, nor has there been up to this time.

Q. Are your reports verbatim, and printed precisely as they are delivered in the Convention?

This question was left open for answer until the next meeting of the committée.

Adjourned until the 20th instant, at 10 o'clock A. M.

FEBRUARY 20, 1868.

The committee met pursuant to adjournment.

Present-Messrs. Bowden, Nelson, White, Platt and Gibson.

Mr. Samuel appeared and responded to the questions left open at the last meeting of the committee, as follows:

Question.--Are your reports verbatim, and printed precisely as they are delivered in the Convention?

Answer.—I am a verbatim reporter, of established reputation, and can report with ease the most rapid speakers in the Convention. After a long experience in my profession, and, in this I will be supported by all Phonographic reporters, I affirm that there is not one public speaker in five hundred, who, in an ex tempore public speech, delivers himself with the care and accuracy and grace in the construction of his sentences that he would exhibit, if called upon to write out his speech. I do not think it is possible to find one public speaker who, speaking extemporaneously, if the transcribed report of the speech were given to him, would not deem it due to himself to revise, according to his taste and judgment, the speech that he had made. I say I do not think it is possible to find such accuracy of language, nicety and grace of diction, grammatical correctness and rhetorical beauty in the collocation of words, where the written speech is not before the speaker in any extemporized speech, that all necessity would be done away with for revision. But yet no one would pretend to claim that the speech so revised was not a fair verbatim report. When I refer to public speakers, as above, it is to the ablest in the land. I am compelled to remark, in response to the question, and I do it with all respect to the committee, and with full deference to the Convention which it represents, that I believe there it not one gentleman whose extemporaneous utterances in the Convention for ten consecutive minutes, would not require more or less revision. In the larger number of instances, perhaps in all, the alterations are purely verbal, alterations connected with punctuation, with the structure of the sentence, the combination of two or three sentences as uttered into one, or the division of one into two or more technical sentences. Who shall do this? Reporting is a matter of expedition, of celerity, of alertness, of promptness. The lecture or the speech closes at 10 o'clock P. M., and must appear in the morning paper. The speaker cannot do it, even if he had the time; the paper could not wait. These revisions must necessarily be made by the reporter, whose value is not to depend alone upon his skill as a short-hand writer. Were that all he possessed there is no position in the country that he could get, or fill if gotten. The speech appears, and all who heard it recognize it as a fair and just verbatim report. The word "verbatim" may possibly be made to bear, in the minds of some members of the committee, a stricter interpretation. Let us, then, see how that will operate. "Verbatim" means "by word," or "word for word." We have no adverb in the English language responsive to this Latin adverb “verbatim." We might manufacture one, which, according to our idiom, would be "wordly." What shall be a What shall be a "verbatim" or a "word-for-word" report? Shallit be the sounds as they proceed from the speaker's mouth? or, shall it be those sounds translated into certain alphabetic or elementary signs and characters which, combined, form not the slightest resemblance to the sounds uttered? Phonography deals exclusively in sound, and the ancient system of stenography did so, to a certain extent. From the speaker we hear the sound "kauf;" shall we write the sound that reaches, or should the reporter know that the word

meant by that sound is not "kauf," but "cough." "Ere the heir went forth in the air," etc. Shall we spell those three words alike, for the sounds are exactly the same, or do you expect that your reporter should have sufficient discretion and education to translate that same sound, thrice repeated, into three distinct combinations of characters, when neither combination represents the sound used? "Heir" is not "aer," nor "ere," nor "air.” "Jeems" is a peculiar and awkward pronunciation or sound of a word, somewhat used in Virginia. Is the reporter to be supposed to be possessed of sufficient sense to know what characters the speaker intends shall be written down for such a sound? Shall the reporter exercise his discretion and translate it "James ?" When the word “Briarean" is accented on the second syllable by a speaker, shall the reporter italicise the vowel of that syllable to indicate that incorrect pronunciation, or shall he translate as usual, and then add the secondary accent to the first syllable and the primary to the third syllable, as a guide for future readers. What shall be done with punctuation? As "et literatim" is not added to verbatim,” the reporter certainly must simply put down the words according to their sounds; as "et punctuatim" is not added to "verbatim," the reporter must certainly omit all marks of punctuation. This is a marvellously fantastic idea, and the work produced would be a magnificent specimen of "Comstock's Phonetus," or "Dr. Rush's Vocal Gymnasium," combined with the "right to left" and "left to right, perpendicular, horizontal, diagonal methods of reading Chinese."

66

Do not the gentlemen of the Convention find that their remarks are correctly reported? A gentleman, who is a member of this Convention, offered a resolution some time since that the reports should be made "verbatim,” or to that effect, expressing the idea, at the same time, that he was willing his remarks should go upon the record, however disjointed they were. The Official Reporter was called upon shortly after to give to a certain "investigating committee” a report of remarks made by that gentleman. As the reporter expected to be called upon to make oath to the verbatim character of the report, he made no alteration or revision. That gentleman, as I have been informed, said, on reading that report, that "Mr. Samuel was a horrible reporter." I certainly would be "a horrible reporter" if I put forth that report in the official reports; and still that was a verbatim report in one sense of the term. In conclusion. I would say, that in the opinion of every public speaker, who is an educated gentleman, and in the opinion of every reporter in the United States of established reputation, the reports furnished by the Official Reporter to this Convention are, in the technical and professional use of the word, verbatim reports, although not printed precisely as delivered in the Convention. Q.-State as to the amount of money you have drawn, and how applied to the performance of your duties?

A.-It is the custom in all such cases to pay the official reporter as he prepares his work, by the manuscript pages he furnishes or exhibits ready for the printer, and not compel him to await the pleasure or the tardiness of the printer. It is very often the case that the reporter insists upon being paid for reporting the work before transcribing. In cases of this kind, the committee, or persons in authority, generally satisfy themselves that the matter will be transcribed. That is specially done where the reporter thinks he will be compelled to wait long, or may not get paid at all, if he transcribes the report. The last draft that your Reporter made covered all the reporting up to the day on which he presented his account-that is, for work actually done,

as the reporting is the principal and far more responsible duty-the transcribing being merely tedious, and an ordinary phonographic amenuensis, who cannot possibly take charge of the reporting, easily performs the duty of transcribing. The Committee on Printing were satisfied at the time that there was a balance due the Official Reporter fully sufficient to pay for the transcribing of the notes, in case of the death or other accident occurring to the Official Reporter. I very frankly state that I would scarcely have been in such haste to make that last draft had I not received a variety of rumors and information to the effect that no more money would be issued after that, and I was impressed with the belief that if I did not then draw I might be compelled to wait a year for any returns for my work. This I was indisposed to do, equally with the members of the Convention, all of whom, I believe, have taken excellent care not to be behind in their per diem. I say this with due respect. Further, the committee should consider that I had to pay amanuenses and clerks, and had made arrangements for a short-hand assistant to relieve me, all of whom would have expected their pay at reasonable intervals, and I would have had no money to have done it with, without inconveniencing myself. I have drawn no money except for work actually done.

Question by Mr. Gibson.-Are there not some speeches in which you have been compelled simply to catch at the idea of the speaker, and clothe in your own, and different language from that used?

Answer.-Yes.

Q.-State your understanding of your contract for the reporting of the Debates and Proceedings of the Convention?

A.-Upon going before the Committee on Contingent Expenses, I laid before them all the facts in the case. The ordinance reported upon a consideration of these facts, gave me $3 33 for the matter reported or furnished equivalent to the size and compactness of type in a page of the Journal of the House of Delegates of 1866-'67. A report of the Proceedings and Debates comprehend all done in the Convention. The expression, "report of the debates" would comprehend resolutions, reports of committees, ordinances, orders, etc., as debates upou such resolutions, reports, etc., would be meaningless, vague and indefinite unless the subject matter of the debate were stated. This is responsive to the question, so far I understand it.

In the matter of the order of the committee that Mr. Samuel should answer a question put to him yesterday, as how he got certain information, the committee decided that he should answer. Whereupon, Mr. Samuel made the fol

lowing answer :

The information received by me, as I said before, did not come through any member of the committee. Upon full reflection, I feel quite confident that it did not come to me directly from any witness before the committee of whom the question was asked, as to the existence of a certain understanding between the Republican party and the Official Reporter, but that it came through other channels and very indirectly. The asking of the question is very generally known.

Question by the Chair.-Was it because you could not obtain the assistance of any competent clerk that you employed a member of the Convention to assist you in making off your report?

Answer.-Yes. For the two or three weeks after being elected Official Reporter, I found it quite difficult to obtain competent copyists. I employed Mr. Allan because of his ability in that respect, and have in addition employed, and am now employing some three copyists, one during the day, myself on part of the

day, Mr. Allan during the early part of the evening, and Mr. Painter until 3 o'clock A. M. At the time I employed Mr. Allan, I did not know where to seek for a competent copyist, and I found him entirely and thoroughly competent, and have always been glad to have him write for me when his duties from the Convention and committee would allow him.

Question by Mr. Gibson.-Did Mr. Allan suggest to you the employment of himself or not?

Answer.--The action of the Committee on Contingent Expenses, placed that subject entirely within the control of myself, and removed it from all possible inquiry upon the part of the committee appointed by the Convention.

The committee having decided the above not an answer to the question, the witness further responded:

7

The answer referred to is also designed to apply to the preceding question. To the question last asked, I reply, "yes."

Question by Mr. Platt. -Was there any understanding between you and Mr. Allan that your pay was to be in any way effected by the amount you paid him? Answer.-None at all.

Q.-Was the fact, that the gentleman in your employ, as clerk, was chairman of the committee which audited your accounts, ever a matter of conversation between you and him?

A.-Never until the matter was brought up as a subject of general remarks. Q.-Have you acted as Stenographer for other deliberative bodies before, and state what bodies?

A.—I have acted as reporter in almost every professional way, but have never had charge of any body of this kind before, as they occur so seldom-perhaps in ten or twenty years.

The Committee adjourned until the 21st, at ten o'clock A. M.

The Committee met at eleven A. M. Carter and Platt.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1868. Present-Messrs. Bowden, Gibson,

Captain R. S. Ayer being summoned and affirmed, testified as follows: Q. Do you know or have you heard of any member of this Convention having stated that he was making money out of the printing of this body? A.-No.

Q.-Have you any knowledge of any member having said that he was so managing the printing as to assist others in making money?

A.-I heard a member state, on Thursday evening, December 19th, that he had so arranged the printing that it would pay the printer some five or six hundred dollars more than it otherwise would have done.

Q.-To whom was the statement made?

A.-To Mr. Massie and myself.

Q.-Who was the member who made the statement?

A.-Mr. Allan, the Chairman of the Committee on Printing.

Question.-Did he state in what manner he had made this arrangement? Answer.—He did, but not being acquainted with printing, I do not recollect the exact terms used. He further stated that he fooled the other side of the House, and if they had been sharp they would have discovered it.

Q.-Did you, from this conversation, get an impression that there was any improper or fradulent intent on the part of Mr. Allan?

A.-I did.

On motion the Convention adjourned to February 27, at ten A. M.