Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1871-02-09
THE CHoRPENN1NG FRAUD.

wing partner of firm that undertook
to carry the mails from Salt Lake to Sa-
cramen,o and San Pedro, in 1854, for
which he was TO be paid 100000 for
four years service. The firm failed in
every particular to carry out its contract
with the Government, and, after two
years service, were thrown over ON no
lice agreed upon in the contract that er-
titled il to months pay in case the ser
vice was discontinued. Besides receiving
full pay for the service performed, the
firm obtained extra allowances at various
times exceeding $3.50, 600. But not con-
tent with that, first the firm, and subse-
quently the surviving partner, Chorpen-
ming, has been before the Government
with an additional claim, based first ON
losses incurred in carrying out the con-
tract, and secondly on Losses of profits
when deprived of the service first sgreed
upon. The claim has been pressed 10
some shape or other for nearly ten years,
and rejected by Postmaster Generals
Brown, Holt, Blair, Randall and Creswell,
together with the Court of Claims, the
last, however, deciding that it had no
jurisdiction. The surviving partner,
Mr.. Chorpenning, has been tireless,
through all that time, in pressing his de-
mand upon the Government. He came
to be, al last, regular lobbyist, and the
Chorpenning clsimtook rank among host
of other recognized chronic demands
upon the treasury. In the last hours OF
the session of Congress that terminal ed
in July last, the managers of this scheme
secured the adoption of resolution
authorizing the Postmaster General to
settle the claim. This resolution was
rushed through both houses of Congress
and signed by Grant on the same day.
Now enters upon the scene man by the
name of Earle. When Mr.. Creswell be-
came Postmaster General, he brought
with him to Washington his former law
partner and friend, Mr.. Earle, as one of
his assistants. This gentleman, however,
remained only long enough in that posi-
ton to inform himself fully of all its
operations, and having scquired the i'm
portant knowledge, he resigned, and has
since that time been a most successful
attorney and lobby agent. He was the
head and front of the Chorpenning claim,
and it rested with his late law partner
whether it should be paid or not. Whether
the above facts had any influence with
Mr.. CIeswell or not we will not say, but
Mr.. Creswell, who had once decided
against the claim, seems, under the inf1u-
ence of his former partner and Assistant
Postmaster General, to have gone into the
affair very complacently, and awarded
Mr.. Chorpenning the sum of $443,0 900
MIR. Dawes, (Rsdical,) of Massachusetts,
states that Mr. Creswell construed the
law of the last session so rs to allow Choir
penning the highest compensation for two
| years of his contract which had never
been performed at all. $50 that" Mr..
Dawes says, 'tyOu will find that he had
| two years aud twenty-five days on his
contract yet to run. If he had run that
/ time, he would have received for running
| it $269, OPS. In other words, the resolu-
ton of last July was so drawn as, in the
| Judgment of the Postmaster General, TO
compel him to say that four dollars out of
every five of the money was clear profit;
he allowed him upon that balance, if the
contract had been carried through, of
| $269, 900, as profit and damage
for not carrying it through $206, 600.
That put with the $257,0O0 | have
already alluded to, makes the sum in ex-
act figures $44S, OO0.10." Mr.. Beck's
language on the conduct of Creswell at
this iuncture is plain, but his remarks are
founded on the truth. He says: cit is
| certain he had ample time to do 80 (call
the attention of Congress, 10 the subject)
! between the 4th and 23d of December,
when he signed the report allowing $443, :
900 on a fraudulent claim. He knew
that this claimant had already received
some $3.50, 600 more than he was entitled
to under his contracts with the Govern
ment; and yet, with the knowledge of
those facts, with the facts staring him in
the face by records in his own office that
| il was fraudulent claim, he refused to
advise Congress"
Mr.. Creswell's defense of his course is
very lame In his report on the claim,
prepared with the same skill that con-
ceived the fraudulent law, he attempts TO
conceal himself behind what he calls
''The report of the Congressional Com
mittee." There was no such report.
| Mr.. Dawes says: 'The committee were
not able 10 make report" Mr.. Hill,
who had charge of the case, stated: 81
went home and never reported il" There
was paper interpolated among the
fabricated proofs, intended to he palmed
off as a report, which would have de-
ceived no honest man who desired TO do
his duty. Unfortunately for Mr.. Cres-
well, this pretext is shivered 10 atoms by
himself. ono information, says he,
"can be gathered from the debates of
Congress, for | find, on examination of
the GloLe, that the joint resolution pass
ed without debate 10 either House" The
whole matter hardly occupies twenty
lines of the Globe. Mr.. Creswell ex-
amined this official record, and it fatty
contradicts his allegation. He pretends
to have been guided by ''the report of
the committee which presented it TO the
House of Representatives" The Globe
denies there was any report al all.
Don Pia;t writes to the Cincinnati
Commercial as follows: