Published weekly
xT
by? ALEXANDER
’ 3 Wie) 8
o
#
tt te ec tt eet tie
RALPOST GIFICEY
NO. L :
ht of a committee of the hous:
tatives mstituted to enquire in
uct of the post. office department.
yre the public-—and the evidence,
sich as J was thought fit to give, is give:
with it.
In th
case, 1!
course of the proceedings on this
following transactions 100k plac:
—whilfthe commitiee was carrying on
its engfirics, three of the principal clerks
who wfre examined, and who had upon
oath ¢clared and proved abuses, wore
dismifed from the offices which: they fil-
led ; fome of them had been in office fo
cars ; aud every one of them with-
.mish, or imputatioi, OF suspicion on
ISL
charint TY an 2 ia x
ie books of the post office were secret-
othe books of the puslic an erasure of
aif account. involving one of the matters
abuse which was exposed and detected.
as erased after the enquiry cammenced.
nd the erasure was at iength confessed by
‘a public officer.
Upon the report of the committee of the
house of representatives, we have express
ed our opinions euly in part, and on inci
dental points as the publication passco
through the press. It is our purpose new
to go into a more detailed review of the
whole proceeding and we shall do it in the
order of the reportitscit. |
Upon the report. generally, we cannot
In justice to the country, or to that truth
which the country has a right to expect
trom the free press, refrain trom declaring
that it is a reproach to the dignity of the
national representation and a humiliating
evidence of the growing depravity which
appears to pervade in an unprecedented
measure, every: department of npohlic af.
+ Fairs: Fuohic justice and the obligations
of public duty appear to be ne where re
garded 1n this report; and throughout it
betrays the tame spirit of suppression
which marks the conduct of the persons
who were implicat=d in the enguiry de-
manded Uy the head of die department,
“Up After a preamble the report proceeds
go State, that the charges before the gon
mittee arose out of the suggestions of wit
nesses called upon by the committee, and
¢rom various eommuukcations’ made by the
witnesaes. The first of these charges the
committee state in these words:
1. That certain persons in the general
post office; and paiticolarly Abraham
Bradley, jun. assistant post master general,
had sold post office drafts checks, and ap-
pied the premiums to private use.
The manner in which a proposition is
atated, will sometimes very mueh alter the
import of the proposition ; if it be general-
ly expressed, a particular point muy be
seized upon to weaken the torce of the re-
mainder; ora circumstance apparently a-
tising out of the mattier may be subjoined,
and that subjoined matter may be contound-
ed with the \whole ; in this case thie allega.
tions are malerially altered, from the vue
terms in which they were made: this, no
doubt, may hake arisen froni the incapacity
af the chairman) 4s well as from design;
but from whatever cause it has atisen, the
tue allegations de were to the fellow-
inp distinct purpose preciscly :
That more than 300,000 dollars in post
office drafts had been sold since the decla-
ration of war down tothe end of 1815, to
banksand to individuals who were in no
wav ¢onnected with thay office.
That a large portion of these drafts were
worth a considerable pramium in conse-
quence of the variations of exchange be-
tween different parts of the\Union, and tha
some of them had been soldyo high as 20
Jer cent. A
"That the money was public
TT Te er I RR ITT
a PE 4
S A 4 URD A £
Z TERING, May 4, 18186.
-
cE at Ll
cotinectes with the post office, or that
public'service 1+
That adarge portion wes worth a large
premivm
|. That there is ro evidence whatever to
induce a suspicion :
That'there ¥@ no evidence whatever to
: induge a suspicion that'he, Ab, Brad
That no credit for the preminms is giv- ley, jun. had sold any drafts?
€n on the public books. - © 1 We shall, before we have done with
These three facts are substantially and!this shameless report, exhibit in detail the
mcontrovertibly proved, and not attempted drafis seld—we shall exhibit them all,
to be disproved. The committee them-! names, dates. gnd amount ; in the present
selves made the inference, that the sale instance, as it goes to four out of five points
was made by Abraham Bradley, ot his a:lof allegation in the decision of the conimit-
ents 3 that the evidence of Mr Sethitee on the first charge and anticipates ade-
Pease, of Mr. Edwards, of Mr. Howard, olicision on the second, we shall introduce it
Mr. Bastor, fully authorised the beliel onihere, Vr
the part of the committee ; the sales appear} = T is Mr. Edwards, whose fidelity to the
o have been conducted thvough a bank,publte; and to his oaths, has caused him
distant two miles from the general post of: {to be expelled from office, proved the era
ficey though there are several banks motelsure on the ‘books; on referring to the
contiguous thereto 3 but Mr. Bradicy being correspondence. the following letter, copy
the president of the distant bank, and hig|of the draft soid; and of the names endorsed
brother and other relations stockholdersiupon the draft will show the cause and ob-
therein, the committee appear to. havelject of the erasure
drawn their inference from these facts in oP » - 3 4
. : RT : ost Qffice, New York City, Jan. 30,1816
IavEgIng sof Ro altaough the aile- iain . 3
VE sTate, ht ve nc ate Rim alleges eine wis
gations were as abo : Splat dk
the| Sir—I have just been favored with your
’
The committee having formed
charge in the fashion most acceptable to'lftier of the 27u inst. and hasten toan-
its sense of public duty, and thew impressigwer. The draft of the assistunt post
sions ot the facts presented to them for sol Master general on me, in favor of Elisha
emit investigation ; their report in reply, Hiss) merchant, or order, dated the 25th
after enquiry, merits to be particularly ex~ ddarchk, 1815, was paid the 4th April, then
amined ; and the followiyg is the deciarati-jmext, to David J Greene, cashier of the
on made in the name of the committee, ons New York Manufacturing Company, of
f2 MILTON: Bellefdnt,
ge £, : AY
Ee Ee rn 1 ea So
Sota rE hk fi Sits a ES ee me Ate sn waa el
EN i CR ko . , Se f : id Fd :
-
eansylvania mash
sey pre rely
NO. 47,
vor Be oni Reh
dence whatever! He
That there wis no evidence whatever s
induce a suspicion !}
That there was no evidence whateve
to induee a suspicion tha he, A, Brag
ley, Jun. had sold any drafis 11] v
From the Politica &xaminér,
We had intended noticing the trans:
tions of the General Post Office ere il,
But ob reflection supposed it more ph .
to defer remark uli the invesugauen ¢
dered by Congress liad ¢loscd. As, be
every, the cowminlitee appouted for
purpose, seem more dispos &° to 8a
guiity individuals than to ect wath,
think 1t higa time that public autem
should be cided tothe mader, hat ny
strous and unwarrantable speculan
have taken place on the Post Oftice dup.
ment, there can be po doubt; wd tha, o
Bradley, kisq deputy post mastor genet
-
SO 10
Wiese ess id fminvbse sume, by suchsp, ©
or A Le aR AR KR ETS Ei 8 Tf sola
Utalions, at the Cxpince THR PGT ee
of
have no besitation im bebeving. luded
tie various publicanuns in the Auiora «
the subject. have placed the fact beyor
dispute. The public have 4 right. o «
mand (he thorough livestigation 1.0 ux}
sure of a business by which they aig
materially affected. He are more ib
the first allegation, as drawn up by thelthis city, anda duplicate receipt for the
committee. :
is no evidence whatever, to induce a suspl about the 12th of May last.
that any other person in the post office, Gessary, for if the draft in auy case, should
has sold them other than drafts obtained Bot be paid,it would be liable for the a-
for their own salari¢s; except in the case fount 1 send you, under cover, a copy
of H. H. Edwards, who bought a post office of the draft in question, with the endorse
draft on Boston for district of Columbia ments.
paper, disposed of it by an agent in New] Iam, respectiully your most obedient
York (as ¢ he pursues”) for a premium. = !8elvant,
On the face of this paragraph there is (Signed) THEODORUS BAILY.
cither the most Hmpudent sophistry of the) Will you have the goodness to inform
most contem tible stupidity. Ime what is the object of your making the
oT NOTE we whatever § “Irequest in relation to this drat?
2 No evidefice whatever to induce sus-
pt ion ! )
3. No evidence whatever to induce 2
suspicion that he had sold drafts tor a pre-}.
mium ! a . Sir~=At thiee days sight pay
4. Nor dees it Apert that amy other. | STAMP- ) (0 isha Rigas,
person inthe post office sold them ! 4 $5 § order, five thousand doliars, &
5. Except in the case of H. H. Ed-. chidrge to aceount of thi office.
wards | J ; | (Signed) ABRAHAM BRADLEY, ji.
How a committee, on which there were!
at least; some liberal and honorable men,
should be brought to consent to subscribe, Gen: Theodorus Bailey,
or to silently suffer the passage of such a Fost Master, New York City
report to congress, in their names, and; (Acocpited; March 29, 1815—= Theodorus
witheut protest is painful to see and to re-| Builey. )
fiect upon. But if men of lives heretolore | (ENDORSED.)
untarnished, will silently submit to have E RIGGS. :
such a report presented as theirs, their sis G BROWEN & ROGERS.
lence makes it theirs; and, however we! Regeived payment, 4th April. 1815.
may have respected ‘them, it does not fol- | Honsd ddnlicate
low that the imposition should go unexposs| (Signed duplicate)
ed 0 the nation, In order to show the| {Signed) DAVID J GREENE, Cash’r
monstrous fallacy of the report, we have Jereis the evidence of the sale of a
analysed the paragraph into five distifict graf by A. Bradley to Elisha Riggs. The
allegations. each of which we beg the committee in their report of thie evidence,
reader to refer to, and ask the questions onl hayve suppressed the fuct, that Mr Bradley
each as we proceed to review the evidence ‘heing present aL the examination on the
given. Is there no evidence whatever ! Latter of thie draft in favor of Riggs, ac-
In page 7 ofthe Report, is the evidence ‘kndwledged the erastire in the books, but
ot Mr. H H. Edwards, who had becn sevalgaid it was all right now. How tlic com.
eral years a bookkeeper in the post office, mittee could reconcile it to their oaths, and
and whose talents and services were esti lin the eyes of the country, first to suppress
mated so highly as to authorise a salary oflthisfact, and then to present a
$130 ayear. This gentleman, having 0 cengress stating==
incentive or motive to conceal the truth, or!
to tresspass upon it 3 without any quarrel
or jury to complain of is called forthasa
witness, bv'a committee of congress, and
being questioned, upon oath declares,
1. That three drafs to the amount of
280,000 dollars, were sold since the
declaration of war.
T.B.
COPY OF THE DRAFT.
General Post Offices March 25, 18185,
ARCA LIRR OF
That there was no evidence whatever !
That there was no evidence whatever to
“induce a suspicion that he sold drafts !
That a committee with such facts pre-
sented to their senses on oath, should so
report, is beyond the necessity of any fur
ther animadversion, as it relates to the
committee. ‘The affair belongs to tue na-
tion ; the people will judge.
But there is this further asthnishing fact,
which the cominittee appear to have for
gotten altogether ; it 1s the fact proved by
That these drafts on the post master
at Boston in favor of S Elliot, cashier
of tl'e Washineton bank, were sold at
Philadelpliia for 20 per cent. premui-
um.
iSate, was (rangmitted by me to the gener-|
That in relation to the first charge there al post office, among other vouchers, on or)
Assistant Post Master General
report to!
half inchned to believe that oul mes
have been resorted to, to suppress ¢
dence ; why elsc dismiss cieiks lor test
My uniform ing io the truth j this sigic tact 1s astic
cion that he has sold post office drafts or practice is, to take duplicate receipts in all| presumptive prool of = gut,
checks for a premium, nor does it appear cascs of drafis, though; in sLrictness, unne-| that some if not ali of the isinissed cio,
lare men of integrity, who scorn a "base a
We Ki
tion; and we caniol percave either
justice or propriety of distuissing su
men tor speaking the trath, on oaths.
| Bradley can scarcely expr ct to esCape |
{lic indignation, by a couise ot conauct
wards innocent individuals, so offensive
justice and propriety, Jt ds ‘rue, be mi
lelude the ® gond easy men” why have be.
{selected to inspest’ his conduct. Ee
whilst the people are compel Sg Ly
€s to govetnment, they will hardly shim ¥ = =
under the oppression of speculating dey
ties. We do not particuiarize Mr. Bi
ley because he is a Lederatist ; were b
Republican, and guilty of speculatiop..
eI se equally soueitavs OT his ey
sure and removal. If oihers be conce;
in the fact-of defiauding thie public, o
endeavouring to screen the culprit org
prits, we trust thelr agency io either ¢
will ‘be made known, “The TAurora
done much to bring the iniquitous busi. -
to light; but, in the swiciurés of the ec,
tor of thet paper, although we find much
1 admire, we also sce much to condemn.
He appears to be too general in his cens
sures. It certainly cannot be possible
that either the exceutive or the post masa
culated to destroy all public eonfidcices
——
Indian News.
Vincennes, March 38
To prevent misappyehensions, with res
apect to the contluetl of the Indians, and tha
result of the Jate Council at tort Hari ison
we are authorised 10 state the 10H owW ing tem
The object of the meetivg vas to. prow
cyre the adoption of arvénpemert that
jwotlld enable the surveyors 10 comple
‘the survey of this public {ard © the hortd
west of the wabasiv. without furtheg puter.
tion from the Indians. Yor 1hot pups ©
it was proposed] for the “West and Ver
million Kickapuous, (a regpetable de putatie
from whom, both 2s to number aud char
dcter attended) that they ‘should Jurrish a
small guard, 10 atcompany the surveyess
dnd for which they should be "libra
rewarded=—they appeared to enterram
objection to the proposiiion ; hat expr
sed a wish to postpone a final a swer umd
a chief of the Pianie Kickopoos could be
present.
sidered that the were compe fent to decide,
ter general would wink at emormities cals
Being. informed that twas con.”
re
that no credit whatever was giv
premiums on the books belonging to the
public, for those profits made on the sale
of the pablic money ; and that many of
them had been sold in Washington Ci
This was the substance and whole téno
. of the allegations ; but of these the folldw
ing facts remain uncontradicted and du-
disputed by the evidence and by the rt.
port-——
That post office drafts were sold with
in the time alleged, to individuals not
Mr. Edwarcs, but which by a failare of the jand that it was expected they wonld give
faculty 8f memory, in which €he committee ia direct answer, the then shifted their
appear to have been peculiarly unloitu- {ground ; complained that ‘the hourdry ea
nate, and to which men 10 power appear tolihe East side of the wobash had teen ine
be lamentably addicted ; i was proved by Inropetly rune—that they had hee fold it.
Mr. Edwards, that the draft sold to Elishajwas to be a line South fren he mouth of
an erasure made by A. Brady, or his Riggs, stood in bis name upon the booksjRacoon creek, instead of which it bad ron
order, while it appears that the draft of the public for ten months, and that it was! Easte—and with respect 10 the tand on the x
was really drawn in favor of E. Riggs, not until after the enquiry bad commenecdiother side of the/tiyer. 154 tles In widihy
at George Town © 4 !lthat the erasure of the name of Riges wastironi Point Coupe to the month ol Racoon
Yet the committee say, creek, they had pever beard before tha 1%
~ fmade, and the name of the Union Bank
That there is no evidence whatever § [substituted for the words erased nad been sold=—They at fengthy howevegg’
. That there 18 an erasure in the cash
book of the public books at the post
office, where a draft of $5000 is now]
entered in the name of the Union
‘Bank, which words are written upot
‘