The Tiffin tribune. (Tiffin, Ohio) 1868-1887, 1874-06-04

nav OCCd COAACCIEua
A careful examination Of the ap-
plieatiOns for contracts diselOses ths
Tact that no contracts were made for
taxes imposed under schedule T.. and
, yet there have been collected Of this
class about SO, 600, all OF which was
collected by Supervisors HAwley and
! Simmons.
The member from MaSsaehusettsfM Mr..
Butlerl said, when this matter was
under discussion on n former occasion
that he wanted no better case to de-
fend SsnbOrn upon than that OF the
Delaware, Lackawanna and Western
railroad Company. Now, what is
this case? Supervisor Hawley tells Us
that in May, 1873, and while Sanborn
was an employe OF the Government,
he came to him, saying that this road
owed the Government, and that he
had contract for collecting what
was due from the company to the
Government, and that this was all
theinformAtiOu furnished by Sanborn.
HAvley then, after Learning his duty
from Simmons, acting under author
ity OF the Treasury Department, de-
tailed two Of the officers to "wOrk
up" the case.
HaWley never sought to ascertain
whether his officers had any know
ledge of the Indebtedness OF the COM
pany, and cannot now tell whether or
not his officers had such knowledge.
Now II appears that the officers de-
tailed for the purpose Of working up
the case did "1ork It up,D under nav
OF the Internal Revenue Department,
and AarakN III u
before commencing to "wOrk it up,n
and some three months thereafter
Sanborn came to Washington and
secured his famous railroad contract
in which this identical road appears.
Mr.. Odell, treasurer of the company,
says that the liability Of his company
in an unaseertained amount was
known to the Internal Revenus De-
partment; that there was 3 difference
OF opinion between him and the Of
ficers as to the amount, but owing to
the decisions Of the courts and the
rulings of the Internal Revenue De-
partment, the amount was undeter-
mined; and In consequence OF this
difference Of construction, the collee-
ton was delayed until the decision
Of the Supreme Court last summer
affirming the right to tax railroads for
the first seven months Of 1870; that
he made the fual settlement with the
very same officers who he had known
all the time the matter was in dis
pute, and that his company had
passed nearly the entire amount of
the tax to the credit OF the Govern
ment.
Can the gentleman from Massa-
| chusetts Mr.. Butlerl now tell US how
| il happened that SanbOrn obtained Q
contract for this collection three
months after the case had been
worked up by the officers of the
] Government? Can lie tell US why
the information secured by the Of
I ficers Of the Government should
properly be made subject of con-
tract? Can he tell Us why SanbOrn
represented to HaWley that he had
the contract some three months be-
/ fore the contract was made q? A
truthful answer to these questions
would throw some light upon q sub
jeet that is now more or less myster-
ious.
Another matter that is mysterious
connected with this Delaware and
Lackawanna Railroad case Is the fact
that Treasurer OdelI remitted his
check in payment of the tax directly
to the Secretary Of the Treasury on
the 9th day Of January, 1874. This
remittance was made without the
knowledge Uf any one save the clerk
who wrote the check. Il was receiv-
ed on the 7th, next day, in Washing
ton by the Secretary OF the Treasury.
Z IN kho Qfk NOlN1 aTfnw GnrhArra rrrHsfaa
from New York, giving the amount
of the remittance and the character
and number Of the check. The
amount ofthe remittance he might
possibly have ascertRined from in
ternal-reyunue officers, but he could
only have learned Of the number of
the check from Warrington. This
circumstances Is one among many
others that go to show that some one
in the Treasury Department kept
who must in this case have promptly
advised Sanborn Of the particulars in
relation to this remittance.
Take another case to illustrate the
manner in which these collections
were made-the case OF Hon. William
Walter Phelps, executor, who paid
some 81, 800 as q succession tax on
tie estate Of John J. Phelps. A. NJ.
Coughlin, who Is q constituent OF my
associate on the Committee on Ways
and Means, the distinguished gentle
man from New York City Mr.
Wood had, until May 20, 1878, heId
the ONCE Of assistant assessor, aud
was assigned TO the special duty Of
the collection Of legacy and success
sion taxes in the city Of New York,
Now, Mr.. Coughlin sent Mr.. Phelps
q notice, Form So Of the Internal
Revenue Department, which was not
dated, and which was received by
Mr.. Phelps in May, 1873, the notice
being signed officially by Coughlin
as assistant assessor for legaeies and
SUGGESTIONS; this notice, NO doubt,
was only one Of many similar notices
sent out by COughlin Immediately
prior to his retirement from office on
the 10th May. Now, Mr.. Speaker,
Coughlin, on bis retirement from
Government service, enters into the
employment of Sanborn, received for
his services 12l per cent. Of the suLns
he collected. COughlin followed up
the case; Mr.. Phelps believing all the
while that he was an intefnal-reyeDue
officer, and finally about the 1st Of
September settled with Mr.. Phelps,
accepting his statement as to matters
that were unsettled, and received
from him S14, 800 of which SanbOrn
got oue-halE Mr.. Phelps all tue
while believed that COuRhlin was an
officer of the Government and never
knew to tie contrary until he saw
4 - 4. -. IT, Oow.kofnarN In ffrA
SecEetary's report to this House.
1t would be an easy matter TO go on
by the hour detailing the history Of
each case manipulated by this mys-
terious man, SGnborn.
Why, Mr.. Speaker, II this lay Is
not repealed and the contracts are to
remain in force, the contractor,
armed With all the power Of the Gov
ernment for the collection OF taxes
that they now possess, will collect
all the taxes due the Government
under repealed laws. These taxes
amount TO millions OF dollars, and
this misplaced power will take It all
out Of the hands Of the proper officers
of the Government, virtually dis
! placing them by the creation Of a
new Bureau for the collection OF back
taxes, with some such person as the
"mysteriOus man OF Massachusetts"
at It's head, and at the cost OF one
half this large sum.
The theory Of the law is that the
three persons employed shall Gsstst
the proper officers Of the government
| The practice as administered has been
To compel the proper officers Of the
Government to dssist the contractors,
thereby completely reversing the in
tent Of the law.
1t impossible to arrive at any other
conclusion than that much Of the
Information furnished Ssnborn must
have come from internal-revenue Of
fieers- AS yet have not been able
to find . single collection made by
Sanborn to which the words discovery
can possibly apply; and 1 give IL -
my opinion that at least six-seyenths
Of the collections were Of q class and
kind that could and wonld have been
easily collected by the proper Officers
of the Government without Other
cost than their salaries.
While there Is no direct evidence
J going to show that any officer Of the
Government had . corrupt connec'
. I the Fanfa arr