On page 23, we are requested to "look at the item of the amount of the people's money applied by _Mr. Brooks_ to the payment of Mr. Haupt's debts," than which "there never was a more atrocious swindle." By referring to the records of the executive council for May, June and July of 1863, it will be seen that the subject of paying these claims was referred to a committee of the council, consisting of Alfred Hitchcock, F. W. Bird and Joel Hayden for special investigation. Upon the question of the meaning and intent of the Act of 1862, and its legal interpretation, the committee took counsel of Dwight Foster, Emory Washburn, and Isaac R. Redfield, lawyers who had been designated by the governor, as a commission to whom should be referred such questions upon legal points as might arise in prosecuting the work, and in accordance with the advice of these gentlemen, and their own convictions, a majority of the committee (Mr. Bird of course opposing) reported that the claims ought to be paid. A majority of the council and the governor being of the same opinion, the claims were paid. The part performed by Mr. Brooks and his associates was merely to audit and allow them. They could not draw a dollar from the state-treasury for any purpose except upon the governor's warrant. _If_ the payment of these claims was "an atrocious swindle," then the governor, a majority of his council, and the three lawyers, as well as the commissioners, were the atrocious swindlers. It would appear that the incorruptible and virtuous Bird was the only person about the state house, at that time, who could make any pretension to honesty or fidelity. The motives of Mr. Bird, in these unscrupulous attempts to disparage the judgment and asperse the character of Mr. Brooks are best known to himself, but it will be remembered that when Mr. Brooks received his appointment he was thought to be opposed to the tunnel enterprise. He has proved to be one of its ablest and most resolute friends. The disappointment and grief of Mr. Bird may have been rendered more poignant by his defeat last fall as a candidate for the honor of representing his district in the Legislature, a defeat which he has publicly attributed to the opposition of Mr. Brooks.