being engaged nearly a week upon this comparison of the accounts with the books, we started in the southern part of the State, the southern part of the southern district. We went to the parties who had been arrested, and also to reputable persons, in their neighborhood, to get such testimony as we could in regard to those accounts. After having visited the greater portion of the southern part of the State, and gathered this testimony upon these irregularities, we returned to Springfield. We then got Mr. Wheeler, the ex-marshal, before us, who made a statement in regard to the transactions of his office. Then we got his principal clerk, Mr. J. M. Reece, and he made his statement. We have the testimony that we took, and from that testimony we have made proofs, which are embodied in our report. The report describes every case investigated. There were 104 cases investigated, and the irregularities, or what you would term, I suppose, fees charged not allowed by law, amounted to $2,152.22 in the 104 cases.

Q. Had the marshal presented accounts upon those and obtained payment of them from the Government of the United States?—A. Yes, sir; his statement shows that.

Q. What was the nature generally of those charges not authorized by law?-A. Well, sir, there were guards charged for where they had no guards employed; mileage charged where the mileage was not trav eled upon the writs; deputy marshals charged for that were fictitious; the names of men put in who did not act; transportation charged for prisoners where they were not transported by the marshal or transportation paid for; charges for subsistence furnished prisoners, the subsistence not having been furnished; charges for attendance before the commissioner with the prisoners when the attendance was, in many cases, fictitious, the persons whose names were put in not having attended; and in many cases charges for guards before the commissioners which we considered not necessary at all. I believe those are the principal irregularities. There were subpoenas sent out by mail to deputies in remote parts of the State, and served and returned without fees, and the fees were placed upon the writs after they were received at the marshal's office and the mileage charged in all cases.

Q. That is where writs were sent by mail?-A. Yes, sir; re-sent by mail to the party acting as deputy, and returned by mail. Our investigation commenced with the accounts, beginning on the 1st of January, 1880, and extended down to December 30, 1883, covering four years.

Q. How many criminal cases were there in the district court for the southern district of Illinois during the last four years?-A. There were 843 cases on the judge's criminal docket from January 30, 1880, up to December 31, 1883.

Q. Do you remember how those cases were disposed of?-A. I have compiled from the docket a brief statement which will give you that information, and which I now present as a part of my testimony:

Frauds committed as judges and voters at Congressional election....

11

Violations of internal-revenue laws, January 1, 1880, to January 1, 1884 (528 cases).

Violations of postal laws (64 cases).

Fines assessed.
Fines collected.

$675 00

275 00

Counterfeiting, passing, &c., (100 cases).

Fines assessed, none; fines collected, none; costs paid to clerk, none.

$50 00

50 00 237 55

11

3

5

22

Frauds as judges and voters at Congressional election (11 cases).

Fines assessed..

Fines collected..

Costs paid to clerk...

Cases dismissed by the United States..

2

Trial by jury, verdict defendant guilty..

Trial by jury, verdict defendant not guilty.
Plea of guilty entered ....

Impeding and obstructing the administration of justice (6 cases).

Q. Have you and Mr. Bowman, since you returned to Washington, prepared a report in writing under the instruction which you received from this committee?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Under the resolution appointing you a copy of that report was to be furnished to this committee and one to the Attorney-General ?—A. Yes, sir.

Q. State whether you have that report prepared for the committee and ready to submit.-A. Yes, sir; here it is [producing it].

Q. Have you carefully examined the matters embraced in this report and prepared it in connection with Mr. Bowman?--A. Mr. Bowman and myself have been together all the time making up this report.

Q. State whether all the facts set forth in that report are true, so far

as you have been able to obtain information in regard to them.-A. They are, sir.

Q. In what way are they supported?-A. By the written statements of persons named in the report.

Q. How did you obtain those statements from those persons?-A. We went to them and explained what we wanted, and asked them if they were willing to give voluntary statements of the facts. They agreed to do so and did so. Those statements were reduced to writing as we went along, and we insisted that the parties should read their statements over carefully, and in the majority of cases, after they had read them, we, one or the other of us, read the statements to them ourselves and asked them if they were true and if they had been voluntarily made, and they answered yes, I believe, without exception.

Q. Please state what course you pursued with reference to the late marshal, Mr. Wheeler.-A. After having gotten up our testimony and returned to Springfield, we notified ex-Marshal Wheeler that we would hear a statement from him, if he wished to make it, but that of course he could make a statement or not, as he pleased. He said he would like to make a statement, and we took the different accounts and showed them to Marshal Wheeler, indicating to him where we thought the irregularities existed, and asked him in every case to explain them, and his explanation appears, of course, in his written statement.

By Mr. STEWART:

Q. Did he make a statement in writing ?-A. Yes, sir; we have his statement in writing.

Q. You have not embodied that statement fully in your report?—A. No, sir. We have referred to it as an exhibit.

By the CHAIRMAN:

Q. Did you also examine Mr. Reece, his chief deputy?-A. Yes, siri in the same way.

Q. Is the package which you have in your hand now made up of the exhibits referred to in your report ?-A. Yes, sir. We have two statements here from ex-Marshal Wheeler which he made at the same time. Q. Does ex Marshal Wheeler in his statement deny the facts set forth by you in your report ?—A. He does not deny them. In some cases he seems not to know anything about them; he does not recollect them; but I think that in no case does he deny the facts.

Q. In your report you have given only a synopsis of his statement?— A. That is all, but we refer to it.

The CHAIRMAN. Then I think that in justice to Mr. Wheeler and Mr. Reece, their statements had better be printed in our record.

Q. Please state briefly now the matter in controversy between ex-Marshal Wheeler and his deputy, Mr. Reece.-A. Mr. Wheeler stated that he had in his office a principal clerk; that he relied chiefly upon that clerk to discharge the duties of his office; that he himself examined all the accounts that were presented to the court for allowance previous to their being so presented, but that he examined them more to find out whether the number of miles was rightly stated than for anything else. To illustrate: Cairo being 220 miles off, he would look at an account for mileage from Cairo, to see whether the distance was correctly charged, or whether more miles were charged, and if he found the dis tance correctly stated, he thought it was all right. In a number of cases it appeared from the writs that Mr. Wheeler had done the service himself, and had made the travel; but Mr. Wheeler acknowledged that he had never made the travel on those writs; that he never had made

the arrests at the places designated, and that if the parties were arrested by him, it was in the hall of the court-house at Springfield. He said that Mr. Reece made up the accounts, and he laid the irregu larities in those accounts upon Mr. Reece. Mr. Reece, in his statement, says that he never made up any accounts unless the deputy making the arrest furnished him a tab, as he calls it, containing the information from which he made up the account, and in case of service by Mr. Wheeler himself, that information, he said, was furnished to him by Marshal Wheeler and from the information so furnished he made up the accounts.

By Mr. STEWART:

Q. All that appears in the statement, I suppose ?-A. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. As I have suggested, we will receive the statements of ex-Marshal Wheeler and Mr. Reece, and print them in our record. In addition, I have received through Senator Cullom, of Illinois, from Mr. Wheeler, the affidavits of Samuel T Dresser, B. B. Longenecker, E. J. Krampff, John C. Bell, and W. S. Larison. These parties were formerly deputies of the marshal, and the substance of each of the affidavits is that Marshal Wheeler gave instructions to his clerk to make no charges except for actual services, and not to allow any constructive mileage or fictitious or illegal charges to be made. That is the substance of the instructions which these men say were given by Marshal Wheeler to Mr. Reece. Receiving those, and thinking it due to Mr. Wheeler that they should be put in as exhibits in the case, I telegraphed Mr. Reece of the fact, and he sent me a telegram in reply which also, I think, ought to go into the record.

Mr. STEWART. Is that sworn to?

The CHAIRMAN. It is not.

Mr. STEWART. Then it goes in for what it is worth. It is not evidence upon which the committee could act, because not verified by them.

The CHAIRMAN. It is not, but I presume it is the statement that Mr. Reece would make if he were under oath. The telegram is as follows: SPRINGFIELD, ILL., 20. (Received at Washington, D. C., 21st.) National Hotel:

Hon. W. M. SPRINGER,

Such instructions were given, but the marshal and deputies always reported the service and travel on writs served by them. They alone know whether there was actual travel or not. I always made the accounts from their reports and from data given me by them, and in their presence and under their directions. If illegal fees are charged they are responsible. The accounts were never made up for presentation until after the marshal had carefully examined them, and were always presented for approval by him in person. I can substantiate this by affidavits of others. Shall I do so? I state emphatically I am not responsible for the irregularities and ask for fairness at your hands, which I know will be given me.'

J. M. REECE.

The WITNESS. I would state that both Mr. Wheeler and Mr. Reece seemed to be very anxious to appear in person before this committee, and said they were coming, and for that reason we supposed they would both be here as they said they would, and we never formed any opinion in regard to which was right or which was wrong. Their statements were, of course, in direct contradiction to each other.

The CHAIRMAN. I will state further that I telegraphed to Mr. Wheeler that the committee would hear him if he desired to come, but I presume he sent these affidavits instead of appearing in person.