The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1872-09-28
WAYNE COUNTY. IND, SEPT.

with his case; had NO knowledge
Of his claim, and had never beon approached,
directly or indirectly. BY any person whom
soever in his behalf.
On leaving the Department had no pur-
pose OF representing his Glamour any other
before you as Postmaster General: l naa
never been employed in any case before your
Department or any other Department OF the
Government.
In NAV, 1870, almost six months after my
resignation as First Assistant Postmaster
General had been accepted, Major Chorpen-
ming, in company with another gentleman,
called at my Office and retained me as his
counsel.
Thus, in Nay, 1870, commenced my con-
nection with the claim of George Chopper
ming, which has been styled "the great Chor-
penning fraud" l examined his case with
great care, and satisfied myself that he had a
just claim against the Government. Having
arrived at that conclusion, the next pointfo
be considered rela,sd to his remedy.
Yon had already rejected an Application 70
reopen that branch of his claim which arose
under the act of 1857, on tie ground thatlt
had been adjusted. and we'll knew that %
was useless to appeal to you for . rebearing
But the other branch OF his claim hAd
never been before you for adjudication, aed
agreed with Chorpenniug 10 brinK-it to yeex-
notice. As soon the case WAS stated, sou.
decided promptly that you would not under
take to just the damages CROWN out oi ihs
aunuimens OF an old contract without express
sanction OF law, and thus my client was with
cut reuress, unless ne could obtain the neces-
sary legislation from Congress.
At tl,is crisis OF the case learned that he
had already memorialized Congress tor re-
lief. On the 10Th day of February, 1871,
(iong before had anything to do with his
case, he had filed in the House of Representa-
tives printed petition, wherein his entTe
claim was clearly and succinctly stated inls
petition, On the day Of its presentation to the
House, had been referred to the COMMITTEE
on Post Offices and Post Roads, and by that
committee had been again referred to sub
committee for investigation.
At the request of my client, prepared tor
the committee report setting forth the facts
in his case, and also drafted the joint resol1-
tion which was afterwards passed by the
House and amen led in tue Senate. These
papers were handed to the chairman OF the
subcommittee several weeks before the 1nal
adjournment of Congress, and the fact that
| tee joint resolution was not introduced IN the
House at an earlier stage OF the session IS
attributed to the rules and orders of business,
| and not to any design on part of the friends
Of the measure to bring it forward and hasten
! its passage at the close oil q prolonged ses'
| sion.
| Congress was in session full Eve months
after Chorpenning had presented his petition
4 in the House of Representatives, aud ample
opportunity was allowed for thorough inves-
| tipation. These circumstances are alluded to
for no other purpose than TO repel the impu.
4 tation of undue haste in procuring this legis-
| lation. So far as my knowledge extends, no
improper influences were resorted to for the
purpose OF securing the favorable action o.
Congress.
Soon after the passage Of the law, applied
to you for hearing on that branch of tbs
case which related to the act of 1857, and
! was then ready for argument. The Other
branch of the case, owing to the absence o
witness whose testimony was deemed i'm
portant. was not in condition tor the fina
hearing, and hence the desire for its post'
ponement.
But you refused to hear one branch of th,
case until the whole was ready for argument
and thus Chorpenning was subjected 10 delay
and his attorneys were held to the stcicktes
rules of the practice.
The evidence, on which We relied wa
carefully arranged and presented to you
with the arguments of counsel, in printet
pamphlet.
No part of the evidence beating on the cas-
has at any time been suppressed. All allega
tions to the contrary have been made il
error. The famous letter Of Chorpennno
one to the special agent in California, and th
other to the Postmaster General, asking fo
permission to carry the mails at certain sea
sons Of the year by the Southern route, vii
be found in the printed pamphlet OF eyidenc
on the seventh and fourteenth pages respec
lively. These letters have always been relic
upon by Chorpenning as evidence in hi
favor.
He presented them to the Committee o
Post Office and Post Roads, when his appl
cation for relief was pending in the Thirty
fourth Congi esss, aud they are commented o
in the repo.t of that committee made to til
House in 1856. These very letters are 81
lrded to in the act of 1851, under The e1
preston ''alIidavits ard proofs on file in til
House of Representatives" they are mer
toned in my printed argument, and wer
placed before you at the trial under cor
venient form for examination. 1t is to
hoped that nothing further will be said abo:
the suppression of The Chorpenning letters.
The case was fully and fairly argued y
counsel. No effort was made to inaecn,
your judgment, other than by legitimate arg
ment, and by reference to weli-establishe
authorities.
In the articles of the Tribune to which "
call my attention find the old charges
collusion, fraud and corruption between "
and "your former law partner" in conne
ton with this Chnrpennipg case. The
chArneS are utlerlf iaIse, tDaHc'ous aud i'he
Gus. They have not the shadow OF truth {
their foundation.
Your letter does not call for au expressit
Of my opinion as to the merits OF the ciai
in question. but cannot close This commur
caticn without expressing ms firm convict
that the claim OF George Chorpennipg again
the Government is based on principles
equity and justice, and that in no stage of
progress has il been tinctured 18th fraud.
/ Truly, yours, GEORGE EARLE.