« AnteriorContinuar »
not think he did. Finding that the papers were not in the jacket, I called Mr. Totten's attention to the fact, and he could not think it was possible; so I brought Mr. Green to show him the empty jacket, and to show that the papers were withheld for the purpose of enabling Walsh to get this money.
Q. Then Green simply brought the empty jacket 1-A. It was not exactly empty. There was something in it. He also gave some addi. tional information that they requested. Nothing improper. I believe Mr. Green to be an honorable gentleman.
Q. Those were all the papers that Green furnished !-A. That I do not recollect now. The other case was one of fraud and perjury con. cocted here in Washington. I communicated it to Judge Wylie and wanted to be allowed to go before the grand jury, and I prevented that fraud from being consummated. Mr. Bliss met me in Mr. Cook's office. I produced the record there. I kept the record straight, so as to convince the most skeptical.
Q. Will you state again now just exactly what it was that Green did in the way of furnishing papers ? - A. I requested Mr. Green to call upon Mr. Totten, the son-in-law of the Postmaster-General, to verify the statements I had been making to him, and to furnish such evidence as would convince Mr. Howe, because I wanted to go before the grand jury and make the statement in both cases.
Q. Did you go to Mr. Howe or to Mr. Totten ?-A. I went to Mr. Totten, and I wrote to Judge Wylie and received his answer. I wrote also to Colonel Cook and received his answer. I was simply fighting the combination that was in the Post-Office Department.
Q. You desired simply to protect the interests of the Government in regard to these allowances, which you believed to be unjust!-A. I do not know that that was my object altogether. I wanted to expose the system. I did not ask anything for it; I agreed to do it gratuitously. Sometimes I charge, but generally I get humbugged by officials.
Q. But your desire in this matter was to prevent the allowance of claims which you believed to be unjust and fraudulent !- A. Yes, sir ; if you will recollect, Mr. Chairman, I furnished you a memorandum of that matter at an early stage in your proceedings, which you had an opportunity to digest, and to call upon me for further information or explanation of, if you desired. If you had called upon me for it I would have given it. I do not want to make any Democratic campaign thunder, as I am not a Democrat.
Q. You desired to have the Government officials indicted 1-A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you so wrote to Judge Wylie ?-A. Yes, sir; and I have got his response. I wrote, also, to the foreman of the jury, Mr. Mitchell. Q. What did Judge Wylie say -A. Here is a response (reading):
WASHINGTON, May 19, 1882. DEAR SIR: Your note dated the 17th inst., with a copy of your communication to the Postmaster-General of same date, has been handed to me. I think you had better await the decision of the Postmaster-General in the matter, and advise also with District-Attorney Corkhill before going to the grand jury. Very respectfully, &c.,
A. WYLIE W. P. Wood, Esq.
Q. You may state in what respect that allowance to Mr. Walsh was unauthorized by law. Was it a remission -A. I have written upon that subject, and some of what I have written upon it has been published, and some not. Some of the publications that have been made in the
Sun are mine. I have a pretty long one there which, I think, explains the subject, and I could give you that.
Q. I prefer that you should explain it now, biietly.-A. It would be impossible to do the subject justice briefly. It is a fraud. There is nothing honest in it. It is just as much of a fraud as that matter of the mail. bag fastener that I desired to call the attention of Mr. James to in connection with that carpet-bagger, Sheridan, that was put upon the people of Washington by Hayes. They paid some $28,000 there, and they did not make any investigation, but it was just as great a steal as that matter of Walsh. They would not do anything about it but cover it up. I ex. posed it, and they hate me a great deal worse than they do any of the Democracy.
Q. Do you want to make any further statement about this matter A. I am satisfied that that Walsh matter was a fraud, and I can establish it whenever the committee desire to have it done.
Q. This committee has not been engaged in re-trying the star-route cases, or undertaking to determine whether the parties there charged were guilty or not. We have merely been endeavoring to ascertain whether the officers charged with the prosecution did their duty-A. Well, I have expressed my opinion about Mr. Bliss.
Q. Have you any further facts that you desire to state ?
The witness was proceeding, in reply to this question, to read a paper. in which he spoke of Post-Office Inspector Woodward as a “ creature," and stated that he (Woodward) and Mr. Lyman had recommended the allowance of what was known as the Jennings claim.
The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Have you any further facts i Confine your statement to facts.
The WITNESS. I believe these to be facts. If they are not, let them be thrown out.
Mr. WOODWARD (to the witness). Did I ever recommend the pay. ment of that claim, or did Mr. Lyman ever recommend it? The WITNESS. You did—Walsh's claim.
By the CHAIRMAN: Q. Did Mr. Woodward recommend the payment of that claim ?-A. I understand that he did.
Q. Did Mr. Woodward or Mr. Lyman, either or both, recommend the payment of that Jennings claim -A. I believe they did, for the reason that Mr. Bliss came to Colonel Cook's office and I furnished bim'the papers, and he said that he had already stopped it. That was in the office, iu Mr. Cook's presence, and I base my statement on the strength of that.
Q. You base your statement on a conversation that you had with Colonel Cook ?-A. No; but in part on the conversation I had with Col. onel Bliss in Mr. Cook's office. Apart from that I know that Mr. Wood. ward did sign a recommendation of the Walsh matter, and that Mr. Cook did not, when I requested him not to do it, and I know that Lilley called upon me and stated that he had “had Woodward all right,” and that I had prevented him getting the Jennings matter through. I believe that Woodward and Lyman and the rest of them would have put that claim through, and that, had I not put in a protest, it would have been paid. No one else made a protest against that payment but myself. Nobody else interfered with it, and it would have been paid, as other frauds have been paid.
Q. What claim do you refer to now?-A. The Walsh claim.
H. Mis. 38, pt. 2— 52
couped, so that they would not have lost anything. Walsh was paid without rendering any service to the Government. Favoritism put it through.
Q. There were some three or four claims that Walsh had against the Government. To which claim do you refer?-A. I refer to the lump, some $24,000 or $25,000, that he got when he ought not to have got 25 cents, and would not have got it if he had not promised what he did. This Jennings claim would have gone through in the same way, if I had not prevented it. I challenge the production of any paper showing anything done towards stopping that Jennings matter outside of what I did. I will give you the affidavit of one of the parties who was interested in the fraud, and he aided in the perjury. [The witness here handed a paper to the chairman.
The CHAIRMAN (after examining the paper). This is simply an attidavit stating what you did in reference to the case -A. Yes, sir; and there are several others.
The CHAIRMAN. I think this paper is immaterial so far as this committee is concerned.
The WITNESS. All right; I just wanted to show you the proceedings that I took in the matter.
Q. Is there anything further that you want to state -A. Nothing particular.
Q. In the first part of our investigation there was some evidence before the committee to the effect that you had been authorized by some of the star-route defendants to employ Colonel Cook in their behalf. Will you state what your recollection of that matter is -A. I called on Colonel Cook at an early stage in the prosecution, and advised him not to accept any position under the Government, saying that he would get a larger fee from the defendants, and for him not to accept Government employment. Mr. Gibson was running to his office at that time to secure him as counsel for the Government, and I advised him not to accept it;I told him that Gibson was in the interest of the Democratic party, that he had done everything he could to hound Garfield in this DeGolver paving matter, when Colonel Cook was counsel for the corporation of Washing. ton; and also that it would be impolitic for the colonel to go into the matter for the Government—that it would be a fizzle, and for him not to get into it. I thought I had advised Colonel Cook sufficiently to keep him out of the Government employ, but I went off to New York on some business, and when I came back Mr. Gibson had trotted Mr. Cook up to the White House, or they had both been up to the White House, I do not know the details of what happened there, but Colonel Cook was no longer accessible to me, so far as star-route matters were concerned. But I will say this, that he never aided me, directly or indirectly, in any manner, or betrayed the Government or any interest connected therewith. I believe him to be an honorable gentleman. He has been such in all my transactions with him. I furnished this information that I have been speaking about in the interest of the Government, as well as to show the surroundings of the parties engaged in the prosecution.
Q. Were you authorized by any of the defendants to retain Colonel Cook in their behalf ?-A. I think that I recommended it myself, that it was left entirely to my judgment, and, had he been accessible to the parties, negotiations in the matter would have commenced. I have had some experience with counsel, and I imagine that he is without a peer in Washington.
Q. Was there a sum that he could have as compensation mentioned by you ?-A. Yes, sir; I offered him $10,000.
Q. And he told you that he was employed for the Government !--A. No, sir. He did not then, but subsequently he did, when I came back to renew the proposition and to increase the offer, after I had gone to New York to see certain parties and to attend to some other business.
Mr. Cook (to the witness). Please state what the proposed increase was.-A. Well, I was directed to make it $5,000 more, or $10,000, if successful.
Here is a paper signed by Gibson and Woodward in relation to the Walsh payment, and I will say that I do not think the other route (Jen. nings) would have been entertained bad it not had similar approval.
The CHAIRMAN. All the facts about the remission of the fines in that case were laid before the committee, and I supposed there was no dispute as to the facts.
The WITNESS. Well, I will say that I do not know this positively, but I believe it, and was so informed by inside parties in the Department.
The CHAIRMAN. I think that every material fact in relation to that matter was stated by Mr. Woodward and Mr. Walsh.
The WITNESS. That may be. I have not kept the run of the testimony.
Mr. WOODWARD. On top of that payment, Mr. Cook and Mr. Gibson united in a recommendation that Walsh should be given a month's extra pay. Mr. Lyman refused to agree to that. Mr. Cook then sent me to get the paper that he had signed making the recommendation, and I got it and gave it to him and he tore it up.
Mr. Cook. Now, Mr. Chairman, I wish to say that that is a deliberate, studied lie.
Mr. WOODWARD. Well, Mr. Chairman, I say it is the truth, and Mr. Lyman knows it. [To Mr. Cook. Did you not write such a letter? Mr. Cook. That is a deliberate, studied falsehood.
Mr. WOODWARD. I have heard a good many such statements from you here.
Mr. Cook. Yes; and I propose to prove your character outside of this committee. There is another tribunal before which you will appear in due time.
Mr. WOODWARD. Do you say that you never saw or wrote such a letter? Mr. Cook. I will attend to your case in due time.
The WITNESS. Well, I will simply add that no matter by whom signed or recommended, whether by Colonel Cook, or by George Bliss, or by Woodward, or anybody else, it was an infamous fraud.
The CHAIRMAN. You mean the remission of the fines and the allow. ance of the extra month's pay?
The WITNESS. Yes; the wbole affair. All the money given him from the Government was a steal, the whole amount, $24,000 or $25,000. I should not be the least surprised if there were lots of papers torn up. I do not know whether Colonel Cook tore them up, but I should suppose Woodward was an artist at that business.
WASHINGTON, D. C., July 1, 1884. WILLIAM PITT KELLOGG appeared before the committee at his own request, and testified as follows:
Mr. CHAIRMAN: I labor under considerable disadvantage in making a statement this morning, from the fact that I have not been able to procure the last testimony of Mr. Bliss, and there is much in that testimony to which I desire to call the attention of the committee, and also because I have not had an opportunity to refresh my mind with regard to certain facts. After the intimation that I have received from you as chairman of the committee, I do not propose to go into this matter at any great length at the present time. I have made no sort of preparation and taken no notes whatever, and have only partially read the evidence from time to time as I have been able to get hold of it in installments. I have noticed, however, that much has orept into your record reflecting upon me, and it is with regard to this testimony that I desire now to submit a few remarks. I shall en. deavor to be as brief as possible, because you have intimated to me hat the committee desire to get through immediately and adjourn.
The fact that I have been charged with complicity in improper transactions in connection with star-route matters is, of course, well known. The nature of the indictment the committee is doubtless well acquainted with, and I may be pardoned for referring here to the fact that it is an indictment predicated upon the statute of 1782, prohibiting members of Congress from receiving compensation for services rendered in connection with any of the departments of the Government, or in matters where the United States is a party. I notice with regret that a number of witnesses, especially some of the attorneys for tue proseca. tion, have dwelt with great emphasis upon that indictment as though it charged me with an offense involving bribery. I believe there is no charge anywhere—certainly there is none in the indictment—that there was any improper or undue action on my part unless it be receiving compensation for influence as alleged, or for services rendered in procuring the contract, or the two contracts, involved. There is no charge anywhere that I paid Mr. Brady anything, unless it be the statement of Mr. Walsh that I told him when I delivered certain drafts to him that I desired him to set one half of the proceeds to the credit of Mr. Brady and one-half to my credit; which statement I utterly deny.
The first question is as to whether I rendered any service or whether I promised Mr. Price to render any service in connection with the procuring of these two contracts. The two routes referred to are, one in Northern Louisiana, from Monroe to Shreveport, and the other from San Antonio to Corpus Christi. If Mr. Brauy is called upon to testify here and swears to the truth, he must swear, and I beliere will swear, that I never approached him in any manner, directly or indirectly, in regard to either of those two routes. I state here that I never did approach Mr. Brady, and never did attempt to influence him in any manner, directly or indirectly, in regard to the expedition of either of those two routes. The principal expedition, I am told, was upon the San Antonio and Corpus Christi route. Mr. Blackmar, of the Post-Office Department, is here to produce certain papers relating to that route, and the jacket which he has handed me contains a statement (usually called a
brief," I believe) of the merits of the case, together with the names of the persons recommending the expedition. Upon the back of this statement are the words, "Do it from August-Brady." Then here is the order:
From August 1, 1879, expedite service so as to require it to be performed by s schedule of departures and arrivals not to exceed 294 hours' running time each way.
Then follow the usual provisions. This is signed French, and, as I hare said, the indorsement is, “Do it from August-Brady." Here showing it