New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-04-06
right to ton,rac. with him for the collection 2, such

DEPARTMENT, should not EXPIRE legal opinion on t.ss
oue.tioB at all: II acting as secretary OF inc
reasury woui refer Il to tue proper oalers' anu
should not express an opinion on asu'J'o' "H'n ""
mo- qualified To- express an opinion upon.
Mr.. FosrER-Docs not the word - discover nave 'o"e
Mr.. s,wygR-There you are still pursuing inc same
line Of Thought. ,,..,, ..
NJ ,vgo I do moi con .idcr myself crowded."
but decline questions oil that nature, "heh
are technical and prO'esslOn'i'
THE SOLICITOR OF TIE TREASURY RESPONSIBLE
Mr. BEcK-gr Foster has read TO you the requirements
Of Secretary Boutwc-that the evidence by when thc
claim IL to be supported well as the character OF inc
details ~ the claim shond AL be Laid before him before
he would consider contract. Do you know whether
that done, attempted TO be done. or ah) thing
Ike II was attempted to be done, when tn,>e 'fo''
Mr. sAwYER--I have already stated that mover read
one OF those contracts IN my ne.
Mr. BECK-The secretary hi uscf seemed 70 D" utterly
ignorant of them. and yon seem no To know any thing
ABOUT them VINO does Know a., -r--..-. ~. ...
law officer Of the Department whose business u 10 20
draw contracts.
conclusive on the Secretary
Mr.. SAwYER-Of course the secretary may modify
lie pcases, but lac assumes that the law officer ~
Department will draw no paper tnat i not correct
all papers are submitted nam matter OF course,
and approved or dsappr9yed and when al original
contract is 10 be made hc makes n.
Mr. that # there mas been any violation OF
the IN the making Of tue contracts, or IN their az
muisraton you regard the solicitor as the responsible
Mr. sAwYER-It there was a failure to make the con-
tract according 10 the law, should certainly -.
going beyond the limits Of the law
Mr. sAwYEant shCud say that ne was rssp9nsibe o
railroad companies into general dragnet on the simple
request OF sanborD, as being papaOe Violation Oh ne
Mt sAwYER-That is question which have already
declined TO answer because It is question winch
qIres examination to see the nature statement
Mr. BEcK-Yon know the law itselft
Mr. sAwYER-I remember II generally
Mr. BECK-I find in IA paper this morning the indicla
opinion OF Judge Benedict, delivered Ia Brooklyn yes-
terday, as 10 the way in which these contracts were
executed treading the opnionl. Do You undcrstand
your knowledge Of the original law that there was
any authority in the Teasgry Department ., Ia any .,
Mr. sAwYER-Inat Is technical and sproiesslonai
question again. The contract made by Mr. B'utNc
while he in Office and suppose be took the advice
Of his legal assistant do not wish 10 pronounce ah
opinion question Of this kind II 4 legal question:
| MR. sAwYERs PROFOUND IGNORANCE OF WHEAT HE
SIGNS.
Beck here called Mr. sswyers attention 20 tho fact
that Mr. Coughn, OF New-York had offered TO col!ect
the legacy and succession taxes at fifteen per cent,
which were afterwards given to sanborn at nity per
cent and that Cougblns letter had been referred ~
him Csawyer) to the solicitor and that no answer had
Mr. sawYER~I know nothing about H.
Mr.. BECK-Iherc Is your name to the Enforcement
| Mr.. SAwYER-But L have stated before that when .
paper belongs naturally to the solicitor the chief clark
signed by Secretary Assistant Secretary, a. tho
case may be- hat Is al know about II 30 not Know
| Sanbom except by your statement.
|
Mr. sAwYER-I have not read it, because never
nj. 'BTcK1rhe secretary and yourself seem to have
been excessively reluctant u read your own papers,
Mr.. sGwYER-Niy dear Sir, allow to suggest that
the House Of has kept about $50 clerks
months answering resolutions aud II tue secretary or
Assistant Secretary had undertaken 10 real all those
| even the members Of the Committee on ways and
| Means
Nj. BEcK-I am inclined to think that that is putting
itrather strong; cali your attention nov =" s 'IGi
ternal Revenue requesting them 10 assist MI Fsbey
who has been employed assist in collecting claims ~
| Mr.. sAwYER-I have no doubt signed thar, ~ II -
published, but have no recollection Of IT, ...
| knew that Mr.. Prcsbcry lad been employed D.. the
Mr. siwYER-No Sir; ( know that II wrote II bad
the cheek OF some man, whom supposed Aur" "ha' Lo
Mr. BECK-wss Mr.. Presbery so employedi
Mr.. SAwYER-Not 10 my knowledge; never heard OF
Mr.. BEcK-By what authority would you si-n a paper
requiring all the Collectors and Supervisors 10 assist
Mr. sAwYER-I do not think had any authority
Mr. BroK-whv did you sign ~
Mr. sAwYER-l signed Il because the letter came 80
m %i, are Very y' We'll aware thai the car aud mo
Assistant Secretary do not read all the lcl'vr wh'n
bear signatures some hundreds OF letters 10 GU
of the Department every day all signed by either ibo
secretary or the Assistant ssciet.Gy; and We as
matter OF course, on te rails IA e euuer WHEN ""
recognize the initials OF the person VINO hhr tbp
preparation OF letters on mat particular su.cci wal
STATE in is elton ID the other dy, Uud'r rOmo
these contracts the solicitor came 10 me- ana sad
that Ma Presbery wanted letter VI s identical ehd
acer; said: What Is Nj. PrlsDerl : relation TO tbo
| Department he said "be IS employed 49, IL. san.
born :" SAID lyon cannot give NJ Presbery iei"ror
this kind for is agent Of the Gyernu'ni, bus
you may give Nj sanborn letter Of tHis ad and Mr.
sanborn may, II he chooses, lntrst that icrr 10 NJ
Presbery - now was not aware at mat time 81 tho
| existence Of such a letter As ANS.
M. BECK-And you do not know how many u.ure ot
| thar KIND there arc ont tlnd!ngf
Mr. sAwYER-Of coarse, do not know
MR. SAWYER DECLINES TO STATE WHO rs RE-
sPONsIBIR.
Mr.. KASsoY-You have deciiue % give an opinion -
10 the legality OF these orders. Now 10 ask you
| If the very objec. of having head t. department
whose signature necessary sO the validity OF paper
is not that shall exercise the power OF rcysloli
Mr. sAwYER-of course that is the general object OF Il;
but you will the physical impossiuity OF seer'-
! tary passing by his mental operation, on eyeiy
transaction in department % TIE Wdgu-
tUde OF the Treasury Department, or The interior DO
! Mr. KAssON-Is there not somebody IN yonr depart
ment responsible Tor Violations OF the law, II any arc
Mr. sAwYER-Of course, because all That hss been
done under tine has been done IN the department,
il there is violation Of The terms Of the h"' Z"
| course the department j. Responsible.
| Mr. KAssoS-SDt tie department.
| SAwYER-Nel. somebody IN the department.
Mr.. KAssoS-I want 10 get at that resporsioly Ihas
| is the essential point
| Mr.. SAwYER-l thirk all that has been slid IN INST
subject should lead The Committee 90 infer char. vi hoUJ
the absolute statement from Inc thai o. respon-
Mr. Ktssoy-Thc law itself authorizes "a, s. rotary
10 do certain thing IL the Secretary comes SGd SAYS
that ne was ignorant aud knew nothing dboJt tncn
| not make any eXfminl'On Now, wdrt e. know iron
the the head and the assistant head WHO - tho
Mr. sAwYER-I suppose that Technically The SECRETARY
of the Treasury responsible Tor anything 10 "ch Do
Mr. KAssoS-But the real responsibility understand
| won not TO nut on the Secretary
M NV nj we