General (according to his statements to me, which I have no doubt were entirely correct) to two other gentlemen, and after I had left Washington. And here I ought to state that these newspapers in Washington had imposed upon newspapers throughout the country, and had induced them also to publish statements about unkind relations existing between the President and me, which were as absolutely without foundation as if your name, Mr. Chairman, had been substituted for mine.

Q. Do you mean the relations between you and the present President? A. Yes; President Arthur; and one pretended scene at a Cabinet meeting, where, it was represented, the President had taken me to task and used very peremptory language to me, which was sent out and published all over the country. This was absolutely manufacturedmanufactured without the slightest shred or pretense of truth or foundation in anything that had occurred. There was nothing but the utmost kindliness and the utmost friendliness between the President and myself. This, of course, was embarrassing to me, because these gentlemen who were instrumental in publishing and in commenting very savagely upon these things, Mr. Gorham being one of them, were, very properly, in intimate relations with President Arthur, and when I say in intimate personal and confidential political relations, I speak not only of what is a part of the history of that time, but I myself was brought into constant contact with at least one of those gentlemen when I went to see the President.

Q. What reason did the President assign to you for desiring you to continue responsible for the prosecutions in the star-route cases?—A. That I had been, in the public mind, associated intimately with them from the beginning, and that any failure to remain associated with them would be misunderstood by the country.

Q. Did he say anything about desiring the responsibility to rest with the former administration and desiring to avoid responsibility in the matter himself?-A. No; he never did to me.

Q. Did he say anything about desiring to have you continue in the same work that President Garfield had started you in?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. What did you understand to be his position on that subject?-A. I understood the President's position to be that the cases should go on just as they had been started, and should go on in the same hands in which they had been started. He failed to agree with my judgment that that would inevitably create the impression in the District of Columbia that those cases were treated as a legacy of the dead President, and that I was merely administering upon his estate.

Q. Was any suggestion of that kind made to you?-A. No, sir; that suggestion was made by me, and made by me from the first as the reason why it was impossible for me to do justice to those cases. Another illustration of it was the case of the district attorney here, Mr. Corkhill. I have no knowledge that justifies me in saying anything about Mr. Corkhill, except that he and I had a very unfortunate difference of recollection about a very important matter; but I will say that it seemed to me in these cases from the beginning that it was not only a question whether you might not do injustice to some person then in office, but whether if an officer was generally supposed in this District to be in sympathy with the defendants, an administration prosecuting men of this rank and wealth and position, could afford with one hand to prosecute them and with the other to retain in important official positions gentlemen known to be, or believed to be (which was the same thing for the purposes of the trial), in very ardent sympathy and in close relations with them. Now, almost upon the inception of the pro

ceedings I was told that Mr. Corkhill had not the confidence of the gentlemen engaged in the investigation; but, on the contrary, was supposed to have favored General Brady in a previous investigation into his Department, and to be in friendly, cordial, sympathetic relations with the parties who were involved in this business. Whether that was true or not I had no means of ascertaining, but I made up my mind that it was quite impossible for us to conduct the cases hopefully without a change in that office. Colonel Corkhill had himself written me a letter on the 1st of June declaring that a special assistant ought to be appointed to take charge of these cases in the District, and under the recommendations of the Postmaster-General and Mr. Woodward and Mr. Gibson, Mr. Cook was appointed. Colonel Corkhill's letter pointed out what the duties of such a person would be; that he would be a district attorney for these cases, and would be familiar with the details of them. When I was starting to Long Branch, according to my recollection, Colonel Corkbill met me at the foot of the stairs of my Department and asked me when I thought these star-route cases would be ready for the grand jury. I said that in my anxiety for the President I had not lately been concerning myself about the details, but that of course his own special assistant, appointed for that purpose, could give him any information he wished. Mr. Corkhill's recollection of that conversation is that I said that when the grand jury was needed for the star-route cases he would be informed of it. Mr. Cook's commission, however, had been filed in the records of the court here, and while I was at Long Branch in consultation with Mr. Bliss, Mr. Brewster, Mr. Cook, Mr. Gibson, and Mr. James. Mr. Cook returning here to prepare one of the cases for the grand jury, was told at the depot that Colonel Corkhill had adjourned the grand jury without his knowledge or any consultation with him. The night before President Garfield was shot the subject of a change in the district attorneyship here having been several times discussed, and then coming up again, he explained to me his wish, if I could see my way to approve it, to appoint Mr. Riddle of this District, a long-time friend of his, he said, and one whose appointment he had endeavored to secure from President Hayes at the time when Mr. Corkhill was appointed, and as I knew Mr. Riddle and his character well, I cordially concurred in that wish of the President, and the next morning before the shooting occurred I had written a note to Mr. Riddle asking to see him on a matter of business. I did not see him until that night at the White House, and I then told him what the object had been, but stated to him, of course, that it had been suspended by the shooting. Of course I did not then assume any longer to interfere, but I believe that everybody concerned in the prosecution of the cases thought that Mr. Corkhill ought to be removed, and I earnestly expressed that wish of everybody concerned to President Arthur; but, as was very natural and very proper, he took a different view of it. The President thought that it would not do to remove Mr. Corkhill until Guiteau was tried, he having found the indictment. I, on the other hand, endeavored to point out that having, with the President's consent, selected Judge Porter, of New York, and Mr. Walter Davidge, of this bar, to conduct that prosecution for the Government; and the case being such as it was, I thought the Government could dispense with the services. of Mr. Corkhill at once, and that it was very important, if possible, to have that done now, as his presence in that office would, in my judg ment, be continually detrimental to the prosecution. The President, H. Mis. 38, pt. 2-3*

however, as he had a perfect right to do, thought it would be better to retain Mr. Corkhill, and he was retained until his term expired.

Q. What reason had you to believe that Mr. Corkhill would not faithfully perform his duty in the prosecution of the star-route cases?—A. Well, that I could only say from the unfortunate impression that had been made by him in another prosecution which had been instituted and had come to naught some time before, a result which the gentlemen investigating these matters believed was partly due to Mr. Corkhill's conduct; and the fact that the people I spoke to, who seemed to me to be in earnest about these cases, were all of one opinion about Mr. Corkhill and about the misfortune of having him in that office. I had no knowledge on the subject myself, and, as I say, that opinion may have been unjust, but it was so strong that even after I retired he never was intrusted with anything connected with the star-route cases. So that the anomaly was presented of having a district attorney in the District in which these defendants were to be prosecuted who never was allowed to know anything about the prosecution, or to take any part whatever in it. That may have been all right, and I am bound to presume that it was; but that was not my view at all. I only use this as an illustration to show how it was impossible for a person diametrically opposed, as I was, on so many points of political methods and standards to President Arthur, to avoid running into differences as to persons. Then, too, I have always held the view that the President's official family should, in justice to him, be composed of persons in whom he had implicit confidence as to their personal and political fidelity to him and to his views.

Q. Did you have any reason to suppose from the facts you have stated that you would not be earnestly supported by other branches of the Government in the prosecution of the star-route cases if you continued in charge of them?-A. I could not see how I could hope to have any moral support in the cases, and it was moral support alone in this District for which I cared. The record evidence, when laid alongside of the evidence furnished by the inspectors, was, rightly or wrongly, so conclusive to my mind, so absolutely conclusive, that nothing more could be desired in that direction. The question, then, was of the accidents of criminal jurisprudence, such as, first, getting the majority of a grand jury (a body which sits in secret, which need give no account to any one for its doings, and each individual of which is protected from any responsibility for his findings) to indict; and, in the second place, if you escaped that difficulty, to get twelve men selected from the panel in this District to convict. What was needed was not that there should be anything done affirmatively, but that the negative influences in this District should be removed. Of course, I could not go on with any hope of success with the Administration organ (as it at once came to be called, very properly and naturally) edited by Mr. Gorham, while Mr. Gorham entertained, and was in the habit of frankly expressing, the very poor opinion he entertained of me and of these prosecutions, their motives, their methods, and their results. In other words, there would have been a steady outpouring upon this community every morning and every evening and every Sunday, from what were ostensibly Administration sources, of abuse of the prosecutions being conducted by the Government! In addition to that, I knew perfectly well that very soon the President would very naturally and properly find it come in the course of his sense of duty to select for public honor and favor gentlemen to whom the public opinion of this District ascribed sympathy, and ardent sympathy, with the defendants. That was inevitable, and those appointments all followed just as I had ex

pected they would follow, and as they properly followed, so far as I am concerned. I have nothing to say about that. I only say that they were appointments which I foresaw, not as to individuals but as to character, and which, in my judgment, were certain to be fatal to any prosecutions in those cases in this District.

Q. Do you know whether the influences used to retain Colonel Corkhill in office came from those who were suspected to be implicated in the frauds?—A. I have no knowledge at all upon that subject; not the slightest. At the time the President thought it was his duty to retain him in office until the Guiteau case should be at an end, that was the limit he stated to me of his purpose in that regard. Afterwards he changed his mind, for a perfectly proper reason as he saw it, I have no doubt, and all I say is, I wish the committee to bear in mind, and not to lose sight of the fact, that I am looking at these things from the standpoint of my political standards and views, while the President was necessarily looking at the same things from the standpoint of his political standards and views.

Q. You have spoken of an interview of the President on the steps of a car in the depot at Philadelphia; did that interview have reference to retaining you in office as Attorney-General or to employing you as chief prosecutor in the star-route cases?-A. I don't remember whether at that time the matter was broached of my accepting a retainer from the Government as leading counsel or not, but it certainly was in the subsequent interview at New York. That was a very hurried and unsatisfactory talk in the depot, because that train stops in Philadelphia but a few minutes.

Q. You have stated that you caused the Associated Press, about the 27th of September, 1881, to make a publication with regard to your views; did you also bring those views to the attention of the President in person-A. Yes, sir.

Q. You told him that you could not remain in the service?—A. Yes, sir; I shall be very glad if you will allow me to refer to that publication which I made through the Associated Press.

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly.

The witness read the dispatch as published in the New York Tribune of September 28, as follows:

Attorney-General MacVeagh stated, this evening, when approached on the subject of the Cabinet, that he had no objection to speaking frankly as to his own position. He said he recognized, to the fullest extent, the propriety of President Arthur selecting as his confidential advisers gentlemen who had heretofore sustained relations not only of personal good will, but also of political sympathy with him. Indeed, he did not think any administration could be strong if there was any ground for suspicion or distrust among its members. As soon, therefore, as the President had taken the oath of office, Mr. MacVeagh said he had tendered his resignation in writing. He had also assured the President that the resignation was not a form, but a fact, and that he hoped it would be convenient to designate his sucoessor by the time the Senate met in special session. Mr. MacVeagh added that on public grounds he felt no difficulty in pursuing the course his feelings dictated. The only political work to which he attached any importance at this time was the work of administrative reform, including, of course, the exposure and relentless pursuit of all plun erers of the public Treasury. If President Arthur engages heartily and thoroughly in that good work, as he hoped and believed he would, then he was entitled to the credit of doing it with an Attorney-General of his own selection, and not with one inherited from President Garfield. The Attorney General spoke very kindly of President Arthur, and said he was sure the country would judge him not only fairly, but generously, and not by the selection of one person or another for his Cabinet, but by the general policy of his administration.

Q. The interview of which that dispatch gives an account is the one to which you have heretofore referred in your testimony?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. And it is correctly stated there?-A. Yes, sir; correctly stated. Q. And it explains your position as you have already stated here?— A. Precisely.

Q. This date to which you have referred was, I believe, immediately after the funeral services of President Garfield at Cleveland?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, as to your successor, there seems to have been some difficulty about choosing him. You spoke, yesterday, about a gentleman having been first selected, and the selection afterwards abandoned; who was that gentleman?-A. I beg to suggest to the committee that they do not care to go into that. I only mentioned the fact that the name had been confided to me by the President, to show the kindly relations which we were then sustaining towards each other.

Q. The failure to nominate that gentleman had no bearing, you say, upon star-route cases?-A. Yes; it had some bearing upon the starroute matter. That is, he was not nominated at that time, as I understood it, because of the bearing his selection might possibly have upon the star-route cases. I do not know that there can be any objection to going so far as that, but I don't care to go further than that. The gentleman was subsequently made a member of the Cabinet, given another Cabinet place, and the change was justified in the President's mind by public considerations entirely.

Q. Is there any further statement that you desire to submit in regard to that Associated Press dispatch?-A. No.

Q. Did you have any correspondence with the President with regard to your continuance in office?-A. I wrote him a letter about it which was published some time ago, a full letter, which was made public at the time of the removals in this District on the demands of Mr. Bliss and Mr. Brewster.

Q. What was the date of the publication?—A. I cannot give that now, but I will band you a copy of the letter.

Q. Is that all the correspondence that passed between you?-A. That is all I now recall that I wrote him.

Q. You state that you asked Mr. Brewster, the present AttorneyGeneral, to accept employment in the star-route cases; was that before the death of President Garfield?-A. Immediately before his death.

Q. And after his wounding?-A. Oh, yes; within a week of his death, when his death was, to my mind, only a question of a few days certainly, possibly of a few hours.

Q. You also state that you employed Mr. Bliss on the suggestion of Mr. James; state, if you please, what contract, if any, you made with those gentlemen with regard to the compensation they were to receive in those cases; state first with regard to Mr. Brewster.-A. If you will allow me, I would rather go back so as to include my entire relation with that matter, so far as I have been able to ascertain it.

Q. I would prefer that you should state it all.-A. I remember very distinctly the employment of Mr. Gibson as an assistant of the Department of Justice in this District, with special detail to the work of the star-route cases. I know it was made about April 22, because I have found a letter of Mr. Woodward in the Department of Justice, indorsed by the Postmaster-General, earnestly requesting the appointment of Mr. Gibson, as of that date. I assumed, of course, that Mr. Gibson's appointment had been conveyed to him in proper form, because his appointment was made a subject of immediate comment in the newspapers, and was generally known in the District; but subsequently I discovered that that had been omitted, and I then wrote a letter recti