ey had grossly violated their charter by charging illegal and
extortionate rates, oppressive to both commerce and travel. It was shown
that while the average rate per ton per mile of thirty-five neighboring
roads was 2.85 cents, that of the Camden and Amboy Company was 4.54
cents. It was also shown that neither the stockholders nor the State had
received the share of the company's revenues to which they were
entitled. These articles were extensively reprinted and caused a great
commotion wherever they appeared. After the first storm had subsided the
directors issued an address to the people of New Jersey, in which they
bitterly complained of the people's loss of confidence in their
integrity, and declared that the charges preferred against them were
founded on falsehoods.

The "Citizen of Burlington" replied by accusing the directors of
defalcation and falsifying their books. He charged that from 1840 to
1847 no account had been rendered of the receipt of no less than
$5,266,431, on which $493,066 was due to the State. As soon as the
legislature convened, a resolution was introduced that a commission be
appointed to investigate the charges preferred against the Camden and
Amboy Transportation Company. The resolution was adopted, but it was
virtually left to the accused to select the members of the commission.
That the directors had a guilty conscience appeared from the fact that
the last annual report of the company, which had just been printed, was
withdrawn and destroyed. To silence their unknown accuser, they
threatened him with criminal prosecution. He now gave his name. It was
Henry C. Carey, the noted writer and authority on political economy. Mr.
Carey did not give up the contest. He proceeded to show how the policy
of the managers of the Camden and Amboy Transportation Company depressed
commerce, manufactures and agriculture alike. He showed how the company
as a public carrier discriminated in favor of industries which they
carried on as private individuals. He claimed that the company had
forfeited its charter, and that it was the duty of the State to
authorize the construction of another road. In the meantime, early in
1849, the legislative investigation committee submitted its report. It
was perhaps as shameless a document as was ever placed before a
legislative assembly. It lauded the directors, to whose influence the
members of the commission owed their selection, and whitewashed their
past management of th