« AnteriorContinuar »
Q. Into whose hands did you pay it !-A. It was inclosed in an envelope. Q. To whom was it addressed ?-A. I don't remember the name now; the chairman of the committee, I think-the national Republican comunittee.
By Mr. FREEMAN : Q. You said a while ago that the invitation to contribute came from the department, but you really meant that it caine from the chairinan of the national executive committee bere 1-A. Yes, sir; that is the idea—from Washington, but not from the PostOffice Department.
By Mr. CALDWELL: Q. Were the employés in the habit of coutributing, generally? Did they all respond 1-A. Pretty generally, I think.
Q. Were there any exceptions, so far as you know, while you were in the service 1 A. I think where they came oftener than once a year some of the boys did object.
Q. Do you know of any of them being removed on account of their failure to respond 1-A. No, sir; I don't koow of any one being removed for that particular reason.
Q. But was there not a general apprehension or feeling that they would be I-A. Most undoubtedly there was.
By Mr. MONEY : Q. Didn't you know that the chairman of the national Republican committee could not remove an employé of the railway mail service 1-A. Well, I don't know as to that. I don't know why the chairman of that committee would not have the same influence that other members of Congress would have in removing employés, and men oftentimes are removed even without members of Congress asking for their removal.
By Mr. FREEMAN : Q. But still you knew of cases where the employés did refuse to pay and they were removed !-A. Yes, sir.
By Mr. GIDDINGS: Q. Has the fact of the failure of Mr. Cheney to perform service been known to the Post-Office Department here; and, if so, for how long a time!-A. For a period of about a year and a half they have been notified of the fact of Cheney's general abuse of his office in that division.
Q. Has there been any investigation instituted by them, so far as you know I-A.
By Mr. CANNON: Q. For a period of a year and a half, you say, the Post-Office Department have been notified !-Å. I think it is about a year and a half.
Q. Who notified them !-A. I did, myself.
Q. How did you notify them ?-A. By letter, and by sending them copies of papers containing different articles on the subject.
Q. To whom did you send them 1-A. I sent one to Postmaster-General Key, and one to Tyner and one to Vail, each week regularly.
Q. You speak of the papers, now ?-A. Yes, sir; and I wrote personal letters to them all, too.
Q. When you wrote articles attacking Cheney you sent them copies of the papers ? A. Yes, sir; and some personal letters also.
Q. And you call that a notification ?-A. In most other cases it would be so considered.
Q. Was your name signed to those articles 1-A. They were published as editorials in a weekly paper in the city of Boston.
Q. You wrote the articles 1-A. I did, sir.
Q. And a year and a half ago you wrote to Mr. Key and Mr. Typer and Mr. Vail 1 A. I won't say that it was a year and a half ago; but I do say that I have written letters to each of those gentlemen.
Q. When did you write a letter to Mr. Vail, making definite specific charges against Mr. Cheney ?-A. I can't tell you the date.
Q. About when 1-A. I think it was in the neighborhood of a year and a half ago.
Was it a long letter or a short one -A. I don't remember exactly. I guess it was rather a short letter. It did not set forth any particular specifications that I know of.
Q. It was just a general complaint against Mr. Cheney 1-A. That is the idea.
Q. Was that the nature of the letter you wrote to Mr. Tyner !-A. Just about the same, if I remember rightly.
Q. You did not file that in person ?-A. I did not.
By Mr. CALDWELL: Q. Have you got with you copies of any of these articles you speak of ?-A. I bave them at my hotel.
Q. Will you please furnish them to the committee before this examination closes A. I will, sir.
By Mr. TOWNSEND:
Q. How long is it since you left the mail-service ?-A. Two years ago this present month.
Q. Yon say you were in Mr. Cheney's office every day; were you engaged in that office !-A. I would arrive there at half-past three in the afternoon, and on signing my name down stairs I would go up into Mr. Cheney's room, and the same way next day when I came back to go out. I went out the next day at three o'clock.
Q. Did your business require you to go to his office when you came in to report anything, or for any other purpose -A. Not necessarily.
Q. You simply got in the habit of doing it?–A. Yes, sir; I got in the babit of doing it, and I did it.
Q. Have you ever been employed in his office ?-A. No, sir. Q. Your means of knowing whether he was present in his office or not - was that when you came in from your route you would notice that he was not there ?-A. That is it.
Q. Was his office above the post-office ?-A. It was in the same building, but on the upper floor. I think it was the third floor.
Q. Wben you returned from your route you would report to the postmaster I-A. The books where we signed our names were down stairs in what is called the "oven," and the elevator ran up from there directly to Mr. Cheney's room.
Q. And after you got through your business there you would go up to Mr. Cheney's office to see if he was in 1-A. I went up to see others in the office-friends of mine.
Q. Have the duties of the railway mail-service in that portion of the country been properly managed, do you think, or have they been neglected ?-A. Do you mean for the last half year!
Q. Yes; for the last four or five years has the business become deranged and irregular in consequence of not being attended to, or has somebody else atiended to the business I-A. The daties of the railway service in our division are very nicely managed indeed. It is done by David A. Holmes, chief clerk in the office. Cheney has nothing whatever to do with it, but he is the acknowledged official.
Q. Then the service has not suffered by reason of his neglect; somebody else has done the work?-A. No, sir; we don't claim that the service has suffered by his being away.
By Mr. EASTMAN: Q. You were actuated solely by the desire to improve the public service in making these charges 1-A. I think so.
Q. There was not any private malice that dictated the making of the charges ?-A. There might bave been just a little.
Q. The mearest trifle, just a soupcon ?-A. After I was removed I felt personally ag. grieved by Mr. Cheney. Q. You have got all over it now l-A. No; I think I have got pretty well over it, though.
Q. You regard Mr. Cheney now with the same feelings that you regard mankind in general, on the whole I-A. No; I dou't think I do. I think I don't, on the whole.
Q. You think yon still entertain a little animosity toward him ?-A. Perhaps the least bit in the world. Q. But it is very trifling, I suppose ?–A. I think so. I would not do Mr. Cheney any personal harın nor injure him
in any way. Q. And if it were not for your desire to improve the public service and to see that the government suffered no injury, you would not have moved in this matter I-A. Now I cannot say as to that. Perhaps I may have been actuated by some other motive.
Q. What is your impression about that?-A. My impression is this: The service has been so conducted by Mr. Cheney in our division that it has brougbt the service into disgrace to a certain extent, so much so that the better class of citizens both of Massachusetts and New Hampshire wish, I think, for his removal.
Q. Then, if I can understand your answer, you mean to have the committee understand that it was your desire to further the wish of this better class in both those
States which prompted you to make these charges ?--A. That is just what I wish to have the committee understand.
Q. That tbat is the real motive which underlies this investigation, so far as you are concerned 9-A. Yes, sir.
Q. You said that telegrams that came from Washington asking why certain things were not done, were repeated to Mr. Cheney; how do you know that?-A. Because I have beep in the office several times and have seen Mr. Blount do it.
Q. In what line were your duties ?-A. Head clerk railway mail service, Boston to Albany:
Q. At what time did your train leave Boston ?-A. Three o'clock in the afternoon. Q. And at what time did it arrive in Albany?-A. 11.10 p. m. Q. What time did the return train leave Albany ?-A. It left at 6.20, and arrived in Boston at 3.30 p. m.
Q. Describe the course of your trips for a week, beginning with Monday !-A. I made three round trips a week.
Q. Were you at home on Sunday !-A. Part of the time. Our runs were sn arranged that once in so many weeks I had to be in Albany over Sunday.
Q. Some weeks you left Boston on Monday afternoon ?--A. Yes, sir.
Q. And the next morning, Tuesday, you would start back to Boston, and would arrive there at 3 o'clock in the afternoon 1-A. At 3.30.
Q. That would be Tuesday afternoon, and you would remain in Boston uutil Wednesday afternoon at 3 o'clock, and then go back?-A. Yes, sir.
Q. And return on Thursday 1-A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then remain until Friday, and then go to Albany, and come back on Saturday ?A. Yes, sir.
Q. How much of your time did you spend in Mr. Cheney's office? I am speaking now of the time when you were on duty ?-A. Well, I live just a short distauce out of Boston, and I would come in on one of the regular trains.
Q. Where do you live ? -A. At Auburndale, ten miles out of Boston. I would come in on one of the regular trains, and go into the office and get my mail ready, and then go up into Mr. Cheney's office, and when the time to go came, I would go.
Q. Would you take your dinner before you went ?-A. I almost always got a lunch at the station just prior to going out.
Q, Where did you have your dinner?-A. That was my dinner at that time. I used to eat a late breakfast.
Q. What time did you take your breakfast ?-A. No regular time.
Q. Were you in the habit of takiog your breakfast before that time !-A. When I was on the Boston end I was.
Q. When were you removed 1-A. Two years ago this month.
l-A. That I was removed by a personal request from Mr. Cheney to Mr. Vail and Mr. Tgner,
Q. Was that the only answer that he made -A. That was the answer at that time.
-A. Yes, sir. I understood some time later, after Cheney found that I was getting after him kind of warm, that he put in something else.
Q. How did you understand that !-A. I don't remember. Some of the clerks in the office told me, I think; but I don't remember particularly.
Q. What else did he put in 1-A. I cannot tell you. Q. What did you understand that he put in ?--A. I cannot tell you. I have heard different stories.
Q. When did you commence writing articles in the newspapers in relation to Mr. Cheney!-A. I don't remember the exact time.
Q. How many articles have you written ?-A. Well, now, I haven't kept an account of them. I cannot remember.
Q. What is your impression in regard to it! Have you written fifty ?-A. I don't know.
Q. Have you written a hundred ?-A. No, sir; I have not.
Q. You are sure you haven't written a hundred ?-A. I don't think I have written as many as that.
Q. But you don't know but you may have written fifty ?-A. I shonld not think that I have written as many as that, for a guess.
Q. Do you think you have written twenty-five !-A. I think I have.
Q. Then it comes to this, that you think you have written twenty-five; but you don't think you have written fifty, and you cannot state any number between! -A. No, sir; I would not want to state positively.
Q. Were those articles of an abusive character?-A. I think they told the thing about as it was. So considered by men in the service. Q. Were those articles of an abusive character !-A. I should not consider them so.
Q. If they had been written about you, would not you have considered them abusive?-A. Not if they were facts.
Q. Would yon have considered those articles of an abusive character, if they have been written about you ?-A. The same answer; if I was guilty, I think I would not.
Q. That is not answering the question. Would you have considered those articles of an abusive character if they had been written about you l-A. I must answer in the same way.
Q. Do you decline to answer in any other way?-A. There is no other way to answer it that I can see.
Q. What was the paper in which those articles were published ?-A. The Boston
Q. Have you succeede 11-A. Well, I succeeded pretty close once, but my friend at
Q. What was one paper ?-A. The Boston Herald was one, and the Boston Post was another. Q. Name another.-A. I think that is all.
Q. Two constitutes "several," does it, in your understanding of the English langnage ?-A. Well, I think it would.
Q. What is the political character of the Boston Post!-A. It is considered to be Democratic, I believe. Q. Don't you know !-A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then my question is, what is the political character of the Boston Post ?-A. Democratic. Q. Is it the leading Democratic paper in Massachusetts !-A. It is. Q. Didn't you know that when I asked you the question the first time!-A. I did.
Q. What is the politics of the Boston Herald ?–A. It is considered to be independent, rather bordering on the Republican side, I think. Q. You considered and understood that you were removed in consequence of Mr. Cheney's influence !--A. I did-personal spite to me, sir ; that is what I consider, if you ask what I consider.
By Mr, TOWNSEND: Q. Were any of those articles, written by you and published in the papers, written and published before you left the service!-A. Never, sir. Q. Not until after you left ?-A. A long time after.
By Mr. CALDWELL: Q. Do you know anytbing about how Mr. Holmes is employed in the Boston postoffice! Do you know anything about bis signing two pay-rolls !-A. Not personally. I can say what the cashier, Mr. Adams, has told me. Q. Mr. Adams was here as a witness, and he has been discharged 1-A. Yes, sir.
By Mr. Williams : Q. Yon had a letter written by Smith ?-A. No, sir; I did not. Q. Didn't you hand such a letter to Mr. Waddell, the chairman of this committee ! -A. I did not, sir.
Q. In consequence of that letter Mr. Smith was subpænaed in the care of the editor of a Boston paper!-A. No, sir; pardon me, you are wrong again. I will explain, if you would like to have me.
Q. Yes ; I would like to know about that letter.—A. The editor of the Boston Satarday Evening Express wrote me a letter, personally, telling me about Mr. Smith in relation to Mr. Cheney ; that is the letter I think you saw.
By Mr. EASTMAN:
(Mr. Eastman stated to the committee that he desired to see the letter, and the witDeas said he would produce it at the next meeting, and that he bad no objection whatever to having it read to the committee.)
By Mr. GIDDINGS : Q. What do you know in relation to the charge that Mr. Cheney bas employed personal friends and relatives in his department in excess of the number necessary to discharge the duties of the mail service there !-A. I know that his office has been filled with a large number of personal friends of his, and they have remained there for a number of years up to within a few months. For some reason or other they have been sent now to different parts of the country-removed so as to reduce the help in that office.
Q. Has be kept a larger number than was necessary to properly discharge the duties of the office 1-À. I should think that he had. It is so considered by men in the railway mail service.
(Mr. Eastman objected to the witness stating what was “considered” by other people.)
Q. Do you know of any other cases than that of Mr. Holmes where the same party was receiving pay on two different pay-rolls ?-A. No, sir ; I do not.
Q. How many employés do you know of that in your opinion are in excess of the number required for the proper discharge of the duties 1-A. Do you mean at present !
Q. At prosent, or at any time during his service there.
(Mr. Eastman objected to the witness expressing an opinion on this point, on the ground that there was no evidence that he was competent to do so, and also on the ground that better testimony could be had.
The objection was overruled.) The Witness. If you have reference to different routes, or to the service in Mr. Cheney's office, I will answer either qnestion.
Q. I mean either route agents or employés in his office. --A. I consider that in his office at the time I was in the service, and soon after, there were a number of clerks that were unnecessary. I think that any man acquainted with the service will testify to the same thing. On the different routes in and around Boston, so far as my knowledge goes, I don't think there are any in excess of what are really needed ; at least I cannot call any to mind at the present time, especially on the route that I ran on.
By Mr. WILLIAMS : Q. Then it is only in the Boston office that you think more men were employed than were necessary I-A. Yes, sir; men taken from the roads and taken into that office.
By Mr. MONEY: Q. This $5 per diem which was generally drawn by superintendents of the railway mail service- I believe it was stated the other day that that was considered as much a part of the salary as the $1,400 or $1,600, or whatever the salary was. Is that the understanding in the service 1-A. Well, to my knowledge, it is not.
Mr. CANNON. What I said about that was that I thought the Attorney-General had rendered an opinion that the $5 a day was part and parcel of the salary, and I think
Q. Do you know anything about the custom among the superintendents of the railway mail service in drawing this $5 per diem? I want to know in what way it was drawn. When a man went up to draw his salary, he didn't have to put in any sort of a voucher for the salary, did he ?-A. No, sir; he signed the pay-roll and drew his pay.
Q. Now, did he draw his $5 per diem in the same way?-A. No, sir; he went up and signed his pay-roll, and drew so much per month.
Q. How did he get the per diem 1-A. I am speaking abont the clerke in the railway mail service, you understand. Mr. Cheney didn't draw his salary in Boston, as I understood it.
Q. Well, he goes up at the end of the month and signs a pay-roll and draws his month's salary!-A. I could not tell you about that, because I don't know of my own personal knowledge.
Q. You don't know about the $5 per diem, how it is drawn l-A. All I know is that I have seen Mr. Cheney make out his vouchers showiog that he has served so many days. Q. What sort of service; service in his office ?-A. It is so snpposed.
Q. And he is allowed $5 per diem extra for serving in his office, is that it!-A. He is allowed $5 per diem for traveling, and such like.
Q. Well, he is not in his office when he is traveling. Now, I want to know by what process he gets $5 per dien. I understand that he goes up and signs the pay-roll at tbe end of the month and draws his regular salary, and then that he has to produce certain vouchers before he can draw the $5 per diem. Can ho draw the $5 per diem without producing a voucher ?-A. I think not.
Q. He produces vouchers which show so much traveling and other expenses !-A. That is the way I understood it. But there are special agents hers who can testify in regard to that better than I can.
Mr. GIDDINGS. Is it admitted that Mr. Cheney received the salary and also the $5 per day!