Litchfield enquirer., 1831-03-17


allowance, you first put pen to paper. no mat
ter what is the name Of the book or the docu
ment. They brought " the cash hook $"
there the allowance was stated, and the time
for which it was made. but not when the de-
cisiOn was made. But perceived. IN small
note in red ink, - sre letter of 18th April"
demanded the letter, and it was brought
and, behold, il was letter of PhiReGs Bradley
to Harrall. six DAYS after Abraham's functions
had ceased. stating that the Postmaster Gen
eral Barry had examined his claim for ex-
ira compensation, and had directed him tn
pass the sum of 1899 so, per ann. to his
credit, as extra allowance. Here the thIng
was settled. The charge Of Bradley to the
President of Barry's extra allowance was
true; the attempt in Barry's official report to
shoulder it off on Bradley was entirely defeat
ed. The Assistant Postmaster General. Gard
ner, and Chief Clerk, Brown, were forced to
admit the error, and that the rule which had
fixed about 5000 Ofallowancrs upon Brad
lev, took these allowances from M Lean, but
chiefly from Barry, where they IN fact belong
cd, and charged them upon Bradley, where
they did not belong. 1t was strange, indeed,
that this abstract should have been, at first,
made out correctly, and that Mr.. MLran's
and Barry's names should have been improp-
erIy erased and Bradey's improperly insert
ed. Now, it is not to he presumed that char
ges so grave as those presented by Bradley to
the President of the U. S. in his letter of the
18th Of Oct. were never communicated to the
Postmaster General. MIR. Bradley had been
an Assistant Postmaster General, full thirty
years, and, in all that time, had maintained
an irreproachable character. He had been
removed without being permitted to know
the cause. One of the charges Ito wit: prod
igality,) which he prefers againt the Postmas-
ter General, Barry, is attempted to be shout
dered off on him. This the witness declares
on oath was the act Of Barry himself and
proves it in the way have stated.
The dispositions of Brown, Dundas. Tay
lor, Sutcr, and Gardner, admit the misrepre-
sentation in this " abstract" but i" it is an in
nooent mistake" 1t may he SO, and we wish,
in all charity, that we had better grounds to
presume it. This "abstract" is neither an
original record, nor a copy from any record.
1t states briefly in each case, the amount of
the contract, the name of the contractor. the
amount ofthe extra allowance, and for what
time. 1t is neither an extract or abstract from
| any record or document. 1t is rather a COM
pilation Of these facts from the letters, the
cash book, and the ledger. 1t seems singular
that there is no direct record ofthe time when
these allowances acre granted. But neverthe-
less, it happened in this case that the subor-
dinate officers found no difficulty in ascertain
ing which Postmaster General did make the
allowances; and nothing but the rule pro mu-
gated ny MIR. 0. B. Brown. changed the right
into wrong. Now, it would seem that rule
so utterly faIlacous as this, would operate
! sometimes for and sometimes against Mr..
( Bradley; but this (strange to tel) operated
in every case against him, and fixed upon
| him the most nuDoernuS and
ira allowances that were ever made in twice
that distance of time. Considering, there
fore, that Mr.. Barry had been, long before
| this, presented to the President for extraya-
Sance in these allowances, that His answer to
call from the Senate had been altered, by
erdSureS, so as to remove this charge from
him, and fix il on Bradley; that the falsity of
the official document had been detected and
ackno wledged by the officers who have the
chief management of the department. it is
for the public to decide whether sEch errors
in such department, which combine tn de-
stroy the fair fame Of worthy and highly
distinguished citizen, are to be ascribed to
gross ignorance or base DIES ign.
From all the evidence which we obtained
from the department, it would seem that in
less than four weeks, Mr.. Bradley is made to
have given extra allowances in AZ cases; in
""'J -S'A w WHICH 4F. MCLean anu barry,
were rightly charged. hut their names were
erased, and Bradley's wroDgfully Inserted
1t appears further, that though the call as to
these extra allowances, which was made nine
months before it was answered, extended al
so to the reasons, or consideration for them,
yet in very few instances has the reason or
consideration been given; and 10 some it is
found thatit has heen enormously given. In
this very case Of Harrall. all that is pretend
ed t" have been gained for this 1899 per an
mum, is expediting two hours in twenty -four,
which, upon inquiry, turns out to be but an
hour and half. In the short time that this
mass of matter has been before us, we have
discovered enough to convince me that this
mutilated. mangled, perverted document new
er ought to 60 to the public with the sanction
of the Senate. The senator from Tennessee
that the petition and this document
may both be published. But the Committee
know that the petition is true and the docu-
ment is not. Shall we, then. give currency
to official SANDER against citizen who has
served You near forty years with distinguish
ed ability and stern integrity? Ifhis faithful
services could not save him from relentless
prescription, hut he must be- cast upon the
world in the evening Of his days, pennyless,
ana without employ, surely we will not give
currency to that, which, il true, would con-
sign MN to infamy, but which we know is
a.