New-York tribune., 1874-04-15
THE SANBORN FRAUDS.

THE SANBORN FRAUDS
TESTIMONY REGARDING THE TAX PAID BY THE DELLA
WARE AND LACKAwANNA RAILROAD COMPANY
SUPERVISOR HAwLEY ExAMINED--AssrsTANT
SECRETARY SAWYER TO APPEAR AGAIN TO-DAY
lBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUYE.l
WASHINGTON, April l4.--Two witnesses were ex-
amined by the Wavs and Means Committed to-day
with reference TO the SanbOrn contracts. The hrst
was Mr.. Odell the Treasurer of the Delaware and
Lackawanna Railroad Company, which contributed
$4,000 to Sanborn. Mr.. Odcll showed the check Tor
the money, amounting within few dollars 10
S1OOOOO. and said that he had never known Sanborn
or apy of his agents. The money had
been paid to the Supervisor of In
terna Revenue, Mr.. Hawley who had conducted
the business from the first. His evidence also showed
that Sanborn did not " discover" the Indebtedness
of the Company to the Government, but IL was
known to the revenue officers long before any steps
were taken by Mr. Hawley, who seems to have acted
all the time as q sort of assistant to Sanborn. III was
known. more especially to Mr.. butcher, afterwards
supervisor. Mr., Odell said, that the number
and amount of the check in payment OF
the sum due the Government must have
been obtained from the Treasury department
There was nothing particularly new in Mr.. Odeus
evidence His statements were but an aggregation
of previousj testimony, which goes to show that
under the Sapborn contracts Mr.. Sanborn obtained
10 per cont of collections which he had no mana In
collecting and that the $23l 600 made by nm, as
his share was obtained with less work than as
many hundreds of ldollars are obtained IN
the ordinary course of profitable business Shn,
the further the inquiry goes the less appears the
fault of Sanborn and the culpable appear the
officers of the Treasury Department. Sanborn
appears more innocent of fraud every day. de was
zion off fIn lazy
Secretary of the Treasury disposed TO turn over
to him the whole Internal Revenue machinery. III
order to place per cent in his pockets he was not
responsible.
Supervisor Hawley of New-York, was the only
other witness examined to-day, although Supervisor
Totten of Philadelphia was present and viii here
after testify. From Mr.. Hawley's statement, there
is much that though not unexpected, is yet new and
interesting. Gen Buffers friend, Simmons, for
merly Supervisor of New-England, and the present
Collector OF the port of Boston, appears
to have been closer to SanbOrn and
Secretary Richardson than his testimony
few weeks ago before the Committee would indI-
cate. Mr.. Hawley did not deny that he was sur
prised when he received the instructions OF the
Treasury Department to assist SanborD but Slm-
mons was present, and brought verbal orders that
the Secretary of the Treasury expected us "-the
Revenue oflicers-to assist in every way possible,
and that the Internal Revenue Office had
nothing to do with the contracts. The
whole effect of Mr.. Hawleys testimony
was to show that SanbOrn received his fifty per
cent on certain collections without performing any
work whatever. The case of the Delaware and
Lackawanna Company is one in point. Sanborn, 1t
seems merely gave the name OF the corporation to
Mr. Hawley, as a company in debt to the Govern
| fnYx toy Mr.
the paid officers of the Government-at work aud
it was found that the Company was indebted
to the Government for taxes. ThereupOn Mr.. Haw
ley and the other Government officers proceeded to
| collect the money, which was a very easy matter
What shall Mr.. Hawley do with the checkf He
writes to Secretary Richardson for instructions, Mr.
Sanborn, in the meantime. not being supposed to
| know that the collection has been made Secretary
Richardson answers by telegraph that the check
draft should be made payable TO the Secretary of the
Treasury and forwarded TO Sanborn. THIS Dispatch
although an important one, has never been sent to
the Ways and Means Committee although five dis
tinct calls upon the Secretary have been made for
all the papers relating to the SanbOrn contracts
The Committee took due note of this fact 1t seems
that Mr. Hawey Sauborns contracts, but
that he and all his force assisted the "myste
rious man" in any case he presented, merely
taking bis word that it was all right. His suspi
cioDs becoming aroused he asked Simmons, who
seems to have kept AN excellent watch on the bust
ness, if Commissioner Douglass knew about the
Sanborn business and the manner of proceeding. aud
Simmons answered that he did Mr.. Hawley's con-
versatons with Simmons led him to believe that was
Secretary Richardson's intention to place SanboIn
the entire Revenue force. Mr.. Hawley detailed
his clerks and assistants to Sanborn who employed
them all the time, but Mr.. Hawley paid them on the
certificates of Sanborn that they had been employed
The men we're paid by the Government regularly
although they did service whatever to the Gov
eminent, and were used wholly in the private busi
ness Of SanbOrn. The latter testified, when on the
stand that he paid one of them, Mr.. Stiner
a reporter on The Herald the sum Of 500
! per month. From the testimony of Mr. Hawley il
ls evident that there other contracts made with
the Secretary of the Treasury of his officers
| with WIN. +. Wood that ought to be investigated
| The Wood contracts have long been a subject of
scandal on the part of the present Administration
and II is not unlikely that they may be called for by
| the Committee
Assistant Secretary Sawyer is said TO be in very
excited state of mind the testimony of Solicitor
Baneld who left the impression that the Assistant
Secretary knew more of the mysterious workings of
the law of May s, 1872 than he pretended. Mr. Saw
yer. therefore has asked come again before the
Committee and he will accordingly be heard to-
morrow Whether his testimony will make il neces-
sary for Mr. Baneld TO appear again cannot be fore
told INIT IL ia hoped that between the two some