Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1831-04-08
Tije Gomottt,ttio,IaI aWhia.


Committee OF the Senate, recommend the peru
sal OF the very lucid article which follows from the
Portland Advertiser. Let the reuder bear in mind
the apology made by the Chief Clerk. Mr. O. b.
Brown: let him remember that the fact of the era.
sures is admitted but ascribcd to mstuke: and then
If he ca after reading the facts OF the case in their
order, let him believe that it could have been mis-
take. Undoubtedly, officers are at liberty before
document leaves their hands, or afterwards wheth-
er signed or unsigned, to correct errors they have
discovered in it, to those errors and substitute
the truth, But the popularity of this case consists
10 Mts-that not erased and substituted by
truth, but truth erased and substituted by error
Mr.. Barry had made the allowances-thcy were in
the first instance, properly charged to Mr. Barry
but afterwards, Mr.. Barry's name was erased, and
Abraham Bradleys substituted, as the Officer making
the allowances. Mistake! How is it possible that
such mistake could have occurred, when mis-.
take is supposed TO have bsen made it is examined
into and if it be found exist corrected; but here
the facts are stated right at fcst and afterwards al
tered when investigation if had must have corrob-
GRATED the correctness of the first entry.
We have already expressed the persuasion that
the Post Master General had intelligent agency
in this a,terthat he only played the part his rev.
fact, although dushing orator, &c, he is not man
ofbusiness habits qualified for arduous an Office
We believe so still, and the reader in Justice ought
to consider Mr.. Brown, the responsible man, and not
Aluj. Barry.
From the Portland advertiser.
TO PIE PUBLIC.
We have many uesions Of the discoveries
made by the committee of inquiry into the entire
management of the Post Office Department, that
1t has become necessary to give fair view Of the
case
In April 1890, Nr BuInet of Ohio, offered re-
solution which was adopted by the Senate, calling
among other inquiries, for information OF the extra
allowances made by the Post Master General to con-
tractors for carrying The mails and above the
stipulated the contracts and the reasons
or considerations for such allowances This resolu-
ton was modified by the friends ofthe Post Mas
ter General in the Senate that it might embrace
allowances made also by Mr. Mclean, and that the |
answer TO the call might be made at the commence |
ment of the then merit, last session Of Congress.
The answer to the resolution however was not made
to the Senate until the 10th OF February when brce
fourths of the session had expired. The papers
which were very vuluminous, referred TO the 1
standing committee on Post Offices and Post Roads
and retained by them until the 22d February and /
then the chairman Mr. Grundy) moved that the conf
mittee be discharged from the further consideration
of the subject, and that the part of the report which
regards these cXtra allowance be referred to the SC.
lect committee of inquiry (of which he was menu
ber) and be printed; and the Senate so ordered
These documents, vouminous, equal perhaps
to three hundred printed pages of roval octave.
were put into The hands of the committee on the i
23d, Uhen but eight days Of the session remained.
The select commit tee inquire into the mana rr-.
ment of The Post Office Department were appointed
under resolution offered by Mr.. Clayton of Del
aware on the 18th day of December last. This
committee consisted OF Mr. Clayton DIR. Gruady
Mr. Holmes, Mr. Woodbury. and Dir Hendricks. The
three gentlemen in italics the friends of the
Post Master General.--The meetings of the COM
rpIttee had been trequent but from difference of
81 tn thp nod of |
SeediDg and the extent and object of the inquiry but
Little had been done. Messrs Clayton and Holmes /
had insisted, that by the resolution of inquiry, they
were unlimited in the extent of the investigation
into the entire mana cement of the department and to
this end it proper 70 take the testimony of wit
nesses acquainted with the subject submitted. The
other mrmbers of the committee, insisting that they
must first ask fer information OF the Post Master
General himself to his own official conduct.
Interrogatores were consequently sent to the Post
Master General at different perioGs as to the per-
ofmanCe OF specific duties, the arrangement of those
dues account of the funds, and the expenditures
and the removal of subordinate officers from Office
These nterrogatones wero sent to him at All early
period of the session. No answer was given until |
tie I'd Of Yharc and the report then related to only
part of the inquiry. At the request of Mr. Holmes,
Abraham Bradley, late Assistant Post Master Ge-
neral, was summoned before the committee aud
sworn. The frst question asked him by Mr. II. !
was this. "I1ow long were you Assist ant Post Mas
ter General, and what were the duties assigned Won
I'D the department." An answer to the question was
objected to by Messrs GruDdy and Woodbury., but
1t was asked and answered The next question, twas
YOU removed from office, when, and if you know,
for what cause or causes"' met with strenuous OBJ
Jections from the two last named gentemen-the 1
committee adjourned, and before they met again Mr.
Grundy offered his resolution asking the Senate to
forbid the committee to go into that inquiry. The
Senate did so forbid ,
writer in the New Hampshire Gazette has In re-
ply to statement in the Journal, denied that any
portion of the Senate has attempted 'to keep things
close" After this motion Of friend Of the Post
Master General To suppress tho inquiry, and the af-
hrfnatIVe vote of the Senate, strictly party uoe the
public will Judge whether attempt to smother is
not manifested. But the same writer adds that the
Senate had previous decidedly that tcas uncsnsu-
ionat TO Investigate he IF remooais! The uues-
ton here was, shall a committee Of the Senate be
clothed with power to investigate the cause of reno
walls, made By the Post Master GeneraI7 JVheni'
did the Senate deliberately decide, that such an
inquiry was unconstitutional Never. They did to
be sure determine (strange it may seem 10 an i'm
partial mind) they had right to inquire of the
President, why be removed from office -
Though this decision deemed by many dis
graceful surrender of the constitutional powers of