get service at that time if I recollect right, but I was going to Paris to visit a military company and carried the subpoenas with me.

Q. You didn't get service at that time?-A. It was a counterfeit case. No; I don't think the service was made at that time-my recollection--it seems to me she was away from home.

Q. When you didn't get service you couldn't travel on it?—A. I don't know; that was the custom-our rule-man traveled on a writ

Q. Whether he got service or not?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. That is even if service was had subsequently ?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Charged two mileages, then?-A. When I came in here I was told that could be done. I mean that I could charge mileage whether I got service or not, or when I subsequently got service.

Q. Where was service had on that writ?-A. I think she was notified and came in. Q. Came in, and then service was made right here in Springfield?-A. I don't remember as to that, but I know she came in and service was actually had on her.

Q. If she came in and you got no service on her-if she was ever served at all she must have been served right here -A. I can't say positively. I know she lives near Neoga. I was informed she wasn't at home. I couldn't say whether service was had on her there, or where it was.

Q. Have you ever sent any writs to Mr. P. Saup, at Cairo, by mail?-A. 1 have sent several.

Q. Have you never sent writs or subpoenas in criminal cases?-A. Don't remember. Q. Why did you put in two hundred dollars-adding so many dollars to that account -subpoena, William Kershaw, served in February, '831-A. I was instructed to put it in-miles traveled.

Q. By whom?-A. Mr. Saup.

Q. Did he or not travel at all on it, or was it sent to him by mail?-A. I certainly had information that it was traveled on.

Q. Who did you receive it from?-A. Either Mr. Saup or Marshal Wheeler.

Q. What does that cross mean-that runs through the accounts-that cross mark I see in several places?-A. I think a mark made by Mr. Wheeler.

Q. General, you made out that account, didn't you [exhibiting]?—A. Mr. Hill made out that account.

Q. Well, that's an account against the United States for service by Mr. Hill in March, 1883, for the arrest of one Lafayette Hamilton. You recollect, General, that Mr. Wheeler recalled that account to make corrections, and charged twenty miles in there for J. H. Jacobs as a guard?-A. He did make corrections on one of these accounts. I think he reduced the account, if I recollect right.

Q. Why was that raised to $20.60 from $2, which it was originally?—A. I don't know.

Q. That's your handwriting?-A. It is all in my handwriting with the exception of the change. I did not charge the amount. If I recollect right-in a memorandum we had of the earnings of Mr. Hill-I think $80 he had credit for in this case in the book as I entered it up, and he took exception to it and insisted his earnings in that case were over $100. If there is any change it was done without my knowledge or consent. I know I made up the earnings and gave Mr. Hill credit as fixed by Mr. Wheeler after he had made the change, striking out-I don't remember the particulars about it or anything of the kind-know that was done.

Q. You know Mr. Wheeler didn't allow on that to exceed $2 and it was afterwards increased to $20. That was done without the knowledge and consent of Mr. Wheeler?-A. I know in a memorandum I had it was something over $80, as I said,

and

Mr. WINSTON. It shows at the bottom.

A. Yes.

Mr. WINSTON. It appears here in your figures $87.90 and subsequently increased. Q. Now, General, there is the account for arresting Charles L. Cullins (?) in March, 1883. That account also made out by you?-A. No, sir; by Mr. Hill; made out at the same time the other was made out. Mr. Hil always made out the account where he made any account. I think he had a writ for both those parties, and he invariably made his own return.

Q. Do you swear positively, General, that the data on which you made out this account were furnished by Mr. Hill?-A. My recollection is that he made out the tab himself without my assistance at all, and that this is merely a copy of the original tab. Q. Well, there is a charge in there for R. C. Johnson, guard, $20.60; do you know whether R. C. Johnson acted as guard ?-A. I don't know.

Q. Who told you that he did?-A. I only know as the information was given there by the parties making up the returns.

Q. Now, Mr. Hill seems to have been accompanied on the trip by a man by the name of Clemmens-Cullins; Mr. Cullins wouldn't have given that information. You would have gone to Mr. Hill?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then if there is anything wrong in this account Mr. Hill is responsible for it?— A. Certainly; for he had entire charge of it.

Q. Look at that warrant-arrest of Lafayette Hamilton, Charles L. or N. Cullins; do you know when that deputization was put on there; Deputy Cremmens (?) put in as marshal in that case ?-A. No, sir.

Q. You know that was given to Mr. Hill?-A. My recollection is Mr. Hill took that writ.

Q. You never saw W. B. Cremmens but once, and that was when he came back with the prisoner?-A. Don't know that I ever saw him. In that case the tab was made up entirely without my knowledge, and if Mr. Cremmens was here he made his settlement with Mr. Wheeler, and I had nothing to do with it. Mr. Wheeler always made his own settlements with these deputies; something I never had anything to do with. Q. I notice in your accounts, or in Mr. Wheeler's accounts rather, made up by you, that Mr. Louis Vetter is charged as deputy marshal in attendance before the commissioner quite a number of times. How did that charge come to be made ?—A. Always reported by a deputy; I always regard Mr. Vetter as being present.

Q. Didn't you know he was receiving a stated compensation from the United States for his labor?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Didn't you pay him that money yourself every month ?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then did you think you had a right to use him as a deputy and charge the Government over again for his service in any other way?-A. Well, I was instructed when I came in here that Mr. Vetter might be used as a guard before the commissioner. These deputies invariably reported him, and it was a matter that I really know nothing about.

Q. What was the character of these prisoners? Were they desperate men as a rule ↑ -A. Well, there were cases where they were understood to be desperate.

Q. But the general run-wern't these men simply small violators of the internal revenue law, and cases of that kind?-A. The majority of the cases were of that kind. But I had no communication with the prisoners and knew nothing about them-never came in contact with them.

Q. Did you think it was necessary to use two deputy marshals to watch these prisoners before the United States commissioner ?—A. I couldn't say. I asked the question several times why they were reported, and the answer given was it was necessary to have some one in the room as the deputies were called out frequently. That was the explanation given.

Q. Was it not a general custom in this district to use two deputy marshals in this district at examinations before the commissioner?-A. Yes, sir; I believe it was.

Q. Here is a subpœna said to have been served on Leonidas Walker February 3, 11, at McLeansborough—197 miles traveled, at 6 cents a mile, making $11.82 centswhile it appears that Mr. Leonidas Walker made that service on himself?-A. That certainly is an error, for the man couldn't serve himself.

Q. It is'nt likely he would travel 197 mile to serve himself?-A. No; that is an

error.

Q. How do you account for that, general?-A. Well, sir, whoever entered that tab, be just copied the name of the witness.

Q. But this is in your handwriting, general?—A. This part is, of course, but I mean the original.

Q. Isn't that $11.82 in there a fraudulent charge?-A. I couldn't say as to that.
Q. Wasn't that served on Mr. Leonidas Walker by mail, or wasn't it served on him
right here in this town?-A. I couldn't say in regard to that; I don't know Mr. Walker.
Q. Mr. Walker is prosecuting attorney-of what county?

Mr. WINSTON. Of Hamilton; McLeansborough.

A. That is clearly an error.

Q. That $11.82 ought not to have been charged?—A. No, sir; unless it was charged by some party.

Q. Don't you understand that one can't travel and another man charge for service, don't you understand the law on that point?-A. That was the understanding when I came in here.

Q. My understanding of the law is, general, that service can only be charged for by those who actually perform it. If you give four or five writs to Tom Smith and let them be charged in somebody else's name, Tom Smith can go all over the State and they can be charged to Tom, Dick, and Harry as so many miles from Springfield, each one. That isn't actual travel within the meaning of the law. The law says this service must be actually and necessarily performed, and the charge must be made by the man who performed the service. Here is an account against the United States for service in arresting Joseph B. Cowl January, 1880. You will observe Mr. Cowl, according to this account, was arrested in Springfield, Ill., and there is a charge there for endeavoring to arrest January 25, 26, and 27-three days-$6-N. B. Ames.

What do you think of that charge?-A. If I recollect rightly, this man Ames

claimed that this person was out in the country and he spent that number of days endeavoring to find him.

Q. And finally found him right in Springfield?-A. I think he found him within a mile or two of the town.

Q. Don't Mr. Ames live in Springfield-A. Yes, sir.

Q. He would be put to no expense, then, would he?-A. He claimed he had a horse, or something of that kind.

Q. I wish you would look at this account-charges against the United States for the arrest of James M. Garvin, February 15, 1881, at McLeansborough, Ill., and tell me what you know about that case.-A. I know the man was here under arrest and that the marshal made the arrest.

Q. Where?-A. That's a matter I couldn't say, positively. I know I was directed by the marshal to make out the return on the writ in his name, which I did; and I also made up the account under his direction.

Q. At that time the grand jury was in session. Didn't you know the marshal was right here in Springfield?-A. Most of the time he was.

Q. Didn't you know he was at the time this man was arrested?-A. I couldn't say as to that. Frequently he would be out a day, or two days.

Q. There is the warrant under which this man was arrested. You will observe it is a bench warrant, That return is made in your handwriting, isn't it?-A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, general, how could Marshal Wheeler have traveled down to McLeansborough, 197 miles, arrested this prisoner, and brought him up here without your knowing it -A. It would have been hard to do, though Mr. Wheeler was frequently in and out-absent for one or two days.

Q. This account is made out in your handwriting-A. This is my handwriting— if this is not a copy-if this is the original it is my handwriting.

Q. You observe there that the Government has been charged $55.72 for service in arresting that man ?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where did you obtain the information on which you made out that account?— A. I certainly got if from the person who served the writ.

Q. Well, according to the return on the warrant, which is in your handwriting, Mr. Wheeler served that writ, didn't he?-A. Yes, sir; he served that writ.

Q. Then you must have got your information from Mr. Wheeler?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. That, then, is what I am to understand?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Mr. Wheeler, then, told you he arrested this man at McLeansborough?—A. It must follow.

Q. Told you he traveled 197 miles on that writ?-A. Can't say he actually said he traveled that, but he evidently told me the mileage was 197 miles on writ.

Q. Is there any way possible that you could have made up that account without Mr. Wheeler having given you the information?-A. No, sir; I don't think it is possible. Don't know anything about Mr. Garvin, where he lived or anything about it. Q. Then if there are any fraudulent items in that accouat, Mr. Wheeler gave you the information on which such charges were made?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. What would Marshal Wheeler be entitled to in this case if we show beyond any question that this man was arrested right in the hall of the court-house, right here in Springfield?-A. My understanding is he would be entitled to $2.50.

Q. Then $53.22 of that account is fictitious apparently?-A. Unless the mileage was actually traveled as set forth, it is.

Q. I wish you would look at this case. This is an account against the United States on account of arresting William Baldwin, March 4, 1881. He appears to have been arrested by Marshal Wheeler, at Jacksonville, Ill. I wish you would please tell me what you know about that case.-A. Well, I don't know unless the arrest was made by Mr. Wheeler.

Q. Who told you to make that indorsement on that warrant, general?-A. Must have been by the direction of the marshal. I never made any return without his direction.

Q. I wish you would look at that telegram, general-a telegram from Jacksonville, Ill., dated March 4, 1881, to the marshal, and signed by R. C. Johnson, deputy.-A. I have no recollection of ever seeing that dispatch.

Q. That shows beyond question that Marshal Wheeler did not arrest William Baldwin?-A. Looks like it.

Q. Don't it show positively that he did not arrest him?-A. Yes, sir [picking up the warrant]; that, by J. N. Reece, should not be there. If Mr. Wheeler made the arrest the return on the warrant was made by his order.

Q. Suppose Mr. Johnson made that arrest. Then by whose direction did you make that return on the warrant?-A. Must have been made by Wheeler. I didn't make any return unless instructed by him to do so. It may possibly be an error.

Q. I want to call your attention to an item or two in this account. From that telegram it appears that Baldwin was arrested without a warrant, doesn't it?-A. Looks that way; yes, sir.

Q. And that he came to Springfield with Deputy R. C. Johnson. When be got to Springfield the warrant was sworn out, and was probably served on him here. Now, in the account there is a charge against the United States of $2.10 for 35 miles' travel upon this warrant. This is purely fictitious, isn't it?-A. If it wasn't traveled on it shouldn't be there.

Q. From the evidence before you it is clearly fictitious?-A. From the dispatch I should think it was.

Q. By inserting the name of Wheeler you obtained $3.80 for transporting that prisoner?-A. It is the same with Johnson.

Q. If Johnsor's name was where Wheeler's is it wouldn't have cut any figure?—A. Would be entitled to the same.

Q. But if it had been there you wouldn't have charged $2.50 for Mr. Johnson for serving the subpoena in Jacksonville that day?-A. He was a witness, I remember. Q. Couldn't do it at all, could you?-A. No.

Q. Then that is purely false, fraudulent, and fictitious-that charge, isn't it?-A. According to this dispatch here, and if the man was arrested and brought in without

any warrant.

Q. Let me have Mr. Baldwin's affidavit there; that will enlighten the general's mind.

Mr. WINSTON. The warrant couldn't have been issued till the man got here; subpena appeared to have been served at Jacksonville before he was brought here.

Q. That account seems to have been made out very systematically with a view of getting as many fees as possible; if the facts had been stated as they are those charges couldn't have been made against the United States. (Affidavit of Baldwin read; also the affidavit of Johnson in which 1884 instead of 1881 appeared, and was acknowledged by the examiner to be his own error in drawing the affidavit.) There are the facts in that case.-A. Well, sir, I made up that return by order of the marshal, and this is J. N. Reece should not be there.

Q. Do you claim that you made up this account by order of the marshal?-A. Yes, sir. (At this point the examiner administered the oath to witness, swearing him to the statements already made, and any that should be made hereafter as true.)

Q. (Exhibiting.) What is that?-A. A subpoena, I think, I traveled on going down there-Effingham County.

Q. Did you serve that man?-A. I can't say positively I did. I met him, but I don't know whether I served him at that time or not. If I recollect right he was the city marshal.

Q. This refers to a subpoena served January 14, 1882, on H. C. Henry, at Mason. Do you claim to have traveled 97 miles and served that?-A. I traveled on the subpena. I was going to the east part of the State and carried the subpoena.

Q. You noticed the date of that, January 14, 1882. You claim to have served that man at Mason on January 14, and now you will observe a service of H. W. Brown at Altamont on the same day.-A. That may be.

Q. That's physically impossible.-A. Altamont isn't very far from where he re

sides.

Q. But after you served him at Mason City how could he come down here and get a subpoena and travel 96 miles on it and serve it?-A. I don't understand it. I know I traveled on the subpoena.

Q. Didn't you give Mr. Henry a subpoena for Mr. H. W. Brown at Mason City ?A. I don't remember whether I did or not. Don't think I did; no recollection of doing that.

Q. There is the subpoena which was alleged to have been served by you on January 17. on R. W. Hindman, at Mount Vernon, Ill. Look at that and tell us what you know about it.-A. If my recollection is right I was visiting a military company at Harrisburg in the southern part of the State and had that subpona with me. I think I was on the Louisville and Nashville train; had time to stop there and left the subprena, I think, on the train. I don't remember whether I met Mr. Hindman at that tume or not.

Q. Who did you leave the subpoena with ?-A. If I recollect right I left it with the mail agent on the train.

Q. You didn't stop at Mount Vernon, did you?-A. Not any great length of time. I was there probably ten minutes.

Q. There is a subpoena said to have been served by you on January 17, at Weldon, I on Sophrena Hartford and John Nelson. What have you got to say about that?—

A. Well, sir, that's an error.

Q. Did you travel 57 miles and serve that subpoena ?-A. No, sir; I didn't.

Q. Where did you serve it?-A. I don't know that I served it. I would have to refresh my memory as to that.

Q. You know you didn't travel 57 miles to serve it?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then that charge there is fictitious ($2.42) ?-A. It is an error evidently.

Q. I wish you would look at that service of a subpoena on George Dunway, January 19, at Mahomet.-A. At that time I had business with Mr. White, of Hoopstown, about the purchase of some land. He desired to purchase some land of me in Christian County, and I made a trip-went by way of Bloomington, and from there to Champaign, and at Mahomet-I am not positive whether I saw the man or not, but I stopped there a few minutes-went from there to Champaign, and from there to Hoopstown.

Q. Do you recollect of ever having served that man?-A. That man Dunway I think I served. I wouldn't be positive, but I know I traveled on the subpoena. Mahomet I think is in Champaign County.

Q. Whose writing is that; isn't that yours, with a stub pen [exhibiting]?—A. It looks very much like it, but still I wouldn't be positive.

Q. An account against the United States for service alleged to have been rendered in the arrest of Edward Daily, January 13, 1882, at East Saint Louis, Ill. ?-A. Mr. Carrigan frequently did work for the office.

Q. Is that account made out in your handwriting ?-A. I wouldn't say positively whether it is or not.

Q. What is your impression about it?-A. I don't think it is. (An admitted resemblance to his handwriting.)

Q. Here is a charge of $9.60 for a guard, B. Luddington, in this case; do you know anything about that man?-A. Don't know Mr. Luddington.

Q. Where did you get the information that he was a guard in that case?-A. Got it from Mr. Kerrigan.

Q. If you made out that account you swear positively that you got the informa tion from Mr. Kerrigan, who said he was his guard ?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Eighty-one dollars and forty-two cents the total amount of that account; I wish you would look at the case-charges against the United States on account of the arrest of David Calvert on January 19, 1882, and tell me what you know about that case.-A. I have no knowledge only as presented by this tab here.

Q. That's in your handwriting, isn't it?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. From whom did you obtain the information upon which you made out that account?-A. From the marshal.

Q. Do you swear positively to that?-A. No other source from which I could get it. Q. What is the total amount?-A. The total footing is $81.42.

Q. If that man was arrested right here in Springfield, how much is the office entitled to on that account?-A. If he was arrested here the office would be entitled to $8.50.

Q. I wish you would look at this account against,the United States for the arrest of Samuel Gates in January, 1882, and tell us what you know about that.-A. I know nothing only as it is shown by the tab there.

Q. By the tab you mean the account?-A. The account; yes, sir.
Q. That account is in your handwriting, isn't it?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where did you get the information on which you made up that account?-A. The only source I could get it from is the marshal.

Q. Do you swear positively, then, that you got the information on which you made out that account from him?-A. There is no other source from which I could.

Q. I wish you would look at that warrant for the arrest of Samuel Gates. Isn't that indorsement in your handwriting?-A. This Wheeler is in my handwriting; 27th of January is in my handwriting; that is not.

Q. You don't know where that man was arrested, you say?—A. No, sir.

Q. All you know about it, then, is what Marshal Wheeler told you?-A. Yes, sir. Q. What is the total footing of that account?-A. Eighty dollars and ninety-two cents.

Q. If Mr. Gates was really arrested in Springfield, how much would the marshal be entitled to?-A. He would be entitled to charge $8.

Q. Then the difference between $80.92 and $8 is fictitious?-A. If those are the facts, it is.

Q. I wish you would look at this-alleged service of P. D. Tyrrell in arresting one Thomas Andrews, January 30, 1882. Tell us what you know about that.-A. I know Mr. Tyrrell brought the man-I think that was the case-brought him from Belleville and made that return. I recollect in that case of Mr. Tyrrell he acted rather mysterious about it, of course, and I asked him some questions, and the impression was left on my mind that he was using this man Andrews in some counterfeit cases he was working up and had him confined in jail; and, if my recollection is right, Mr. Wheeler paid him $10 at one time. He didn't want to take it, and I don't think there was any receipt given for it.

Q. Yes, there was, and that receipt accompanies the emolument return, too. Who furnished you the information on which this account was made out ?—A. Mr. Tyrrell. Q. Positive of that?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Sure he told you Patrick Kerrigan was guard on this occasion ?-A. Yes, sir.