Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1837-03-30
EXPORT, r.. 1. THURSDAY MORNING, MARCH 80 1887.

O'Jccteu 10 ny mr. Alann, and adopted "a
follow:
Yeas-mr. P"arcc, mr.. Muhlenberg, mr..
Campbell, mr. llannegan, mr.. Wise-5.
NayS-nr. Parks, mr. Lincoln, mr.. Mann
3
Answer by mr.. Lilllrfeld
came 10 the knowledge that DAVID Nj
vii did not, III my opinion, weigh according to
law,I think, something like six or eight months
ago-perhapS eighteen months alter he ccas-
ed tn be employed rs weghrr The case
to which refer was one of constructive meigh
ing. in which he was paid for services never
performed. knew nothing ot his intentions,
nor whether corrnptly or not: neither do
know whether amy, or how many, cases of n
like character may have occurred before;
neither do know whether my predecessor
over corrected or rcbukcd him or others for
violating the laws Intentionally or uninten-
,ionaly.
Question by mr.. Wise to mr. Litiriell;-
ii. Please look upon the letter of mr.
Melvlll presented to you, and state whether
the case therein described of a vessel belong
ing to William Gray, of Boston, from Cuba,
bound to Sl.PeterSburg. which put in at New
port to obtain clean bill of health is not the
case alluded to by you, wherein you charge
him IN your testimony with having received
pay or fees without performing the service
required by law?
Answer by mr.. Littleiield:
] should suppose that the case mentioned
in David Melvlll's letter was the one referred
to by me III my testimony; bul it occurred
several years before 1893.
Question by mr.. Wise to mr.. I.ttlefeld:-
II. At the time that David Mevill weigh.
ed and guaged the cargo of the vessel Char
lotte of mr.. Gray, was not David NJ. Cogges-
hall wcigher and guagcr also with mr. Mel
will; did they not divide fees and emolunen's
in That and all cases; and state whether you
know that Coggcshal knew OF the facts of
that case as intimately as Melvill did; and
whether said Coggeshal is not now sole
guager under you:
Answer by mr.. Llttlcfeld:
David M. Coggeshall was weigher aud
guager at the time Melvll weighed part Of
the cargo Of the brig Charlotte.
have always understood that they divided
their fees and emolumcnts.
do not know whether Coggeshall knew OF
the facts in the case alluded to as Intimately
as Mclvill did.
Coggcshal is now sole guugcr at the port
Of Newport.
Question by mr.. Wise to mr.. Lttlcfcld:-
13. Was Coggcshall not removed, III the
first instance, by you or the Secretary OF the
Treasury, for the reason that he and his son
had voted against the administration? And
was he not re-appointcd few days alter
wards, sole guagT,upon the condition that ne
and his son should. in future, vote for the adj
And was not David MelvlIl
removed by you or the Secretary for the rca-
son that he was not freeholdcr and had no
vote?
Objected toby mr.. Pearce, andrjcctcd as
follows:
Yeas-mr. Campbell, mr. Lincoln, ,mr.Wise
-3.
Nays-mr. Pearce, mr.. Muhlenberg, mr.
Parks-3.
Question by mr.. Wise to mr. Littlefeld:-
II. Have you a copy your report to the
Secretary of the Treasury. and of your cor
respondpncc with him, in relation to the re-
moval Of David Melvill?
Objected to by mr.. Pearce, and rejected as
follows;
Yeas--mr. Lincoln, mr.. Wise-2.
Nays-mr Pearcc, mr. Mnhlenbcrg, mr..
Parks-3.
Question by mr.. Pearce to- mr. Littlcfield:
Is. You say in answer to some OF the
foregoing interrogatories, that, "as at present
advised, and from documents in vonr posses
sion, the said Melvill was not faithful and
efficient officer" Will you state to the com
mittec what you mean by the words "as at
present advised?" And also state the nature
and character Of the documents in your pos
session.
Mr.. Lincoln called for the yeas & nays on
this qnestipn,a it was adopted UNANIMOUSLY,
as follows:
Yeas-mr. Poarcc, mr.. Muhlcnberg, mr..
Parks, mr. Lincoln. mr. Wise-5.
Answer by mr.. Lttlc6e!d: by cat present
advised" | mean To state that documents are
in my possession, aud atfidavits have been re-
celvrd by me recently Ay.implicating the conduct
of Mclvil as weiyhcr aud as contraction
The first document referred to is nn aiiida-
VT of the commission merchant who did the
business of the brig Charlotte, showing that
part only of the cargo of said vessel was land
ed and weighed. The others are dispositions
alleging untaithinlness in the performance of
a contract with Government.
Question by mr.. Wise to mr.. Littlefeld:--
I6. Please furnish this committee with
the documents referred to in your last an
swcr.
Answer by mr.. Lttlefeld:' They are here
with presented, marked Nos. ], 2, 6, Z, and q.
Question by nr. Wise to mr.. Littlefeld:-
II. Did you give David Melvill notice that
the depositons which you have filed with
your last answer would be taken? Did you
know of the alleged facts therein stated when
he was removed? Did he know that you
brought such papers on with you? And with
what object did you procure such evidence
1t this time, if 1t was not known to you at the
lime of Melvill's removal? II
Answer by mr. Littlefcld: did not give
David Melvill notice that The depositions,n now
fled, would be taken. n
I did not know of the alleged facts, therein
stated, at the time he ceased TO be employed
"a weioher and punrcr, | suppose that he