Viewing page 123 of 339

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

15

Eaton, Backhus & Co. knew Col. Eaton personally and had confidence in his honesty and integrity-  and consequently trusted him with a few thousand dollars worth of goods. The freedmens department did not receive the credit. It was Col. Eaton individually, and in order to carry out the project of the Freedmen's stores and give it a fair trial he made himself personally responsible and he was the one, and only one who was held accountable for the payment of the purchase money.

Suppose Col. Eaton had been a partner in the said firm? what then? would there be anything wrong about it? I cannot understand that there would be. It seems to me that Col. Eaton might be interested in the Firm of Eaton Backhus & Co.& have charge of the freedmen in the Mississippi Vally & purchase goods of the firm and cause them to be sold in the manner that they were sold, and yet be perfectly honest.

The Invoices and bills show that the goods were purchased of the said firm at a very small advance on New York prices, and I am satisfied the same goods were disposed of to the freed people at reasonable rates, and that the 10 or 15 pr. cent profits on sales passed to the credit of the General Department and was expended and laid out in various ways by Col. Eaton's direction but in all instances for the direct advancement and benefit of the freedmen. Col. John Eaton was not a member of the Firm of Eaton Backhus & Co.

As to the Fourth Charge.