The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-03-26
sANBoRN's COLLECTIONS. f"

The Revenue ONCE "Assfst'' Hfm-Dis-
trict Attorney Bliss Admits Receiving
Perquisites Under the COntract-Thc
Great sanbOrn ON the Stand-The Conn
mittee OF Ways and Means Refuse to
Listen to q Restricted State ment from
Him. t
WASHINGTON. March %, 1874.
The Committee on Ways and Means gave another
hearing to-day in the matter of the Sanborn con-
tracts. Mr. Bliss, United States District Attorney
for the Southern district OF New York, made de-
tailed statement to the connection OF his ONCE
with the collection OF the claims under Sanborn,
ana paired with great deal OF de xterity the at
tempts made by various members of the committee
to obtain an admission from him that the contract
was made In bad policy and was unnecessary. He
said that with the lights before him he would
not now make contract; but that at the time 1t
was made 1t was apparent that whatever should
reach the Treasury under 1t was SO much clear
gain. He admitted virtually, however, that the
great discovery made by Sanborn, the key OF the
whole position, was the obtaining from The Surro-
gates ONCE Of the list OF estates which sub
ject to the legacy and succession tax. He charac.
terzed that list as scoop net, from the contents
OF which the big fish, th:t estates which had not
actually paid the tax, wcie afterwards siitei out
by comparison with the records OF the Internal
Revenue Collectors ONCE. There was no reason
why the regular officers OF the government could
not have obtained the same information, but 1t
was Ike the egg Of Columbus, which anybody
might make stand on end after he saw how 1t was
done. lie expressed mis- belief that the $4,000 col
leored in New York under the Sanborn contract
would never have been collected through the regu.
lar lnsSrNmentalltes OF the government. IL could
have been, perhaps. but it would not have been.
TIE DISTRICT ArroRNEY'S PERQUTsITEs.
On being questioned by Mr.. Niblack in reference
to his own five per cent on the amount collected,
consent Of his SUPERIOR he could at any time get
money lOr rendering services not forbidden bV
nc wS1y d would r H. nc
members OF Congress-.
My: Sleassk sala :M.Judge Noah DAVIS, testified
before us taat he declined the same Oner.n
Mr.. Bliss-t do not know whether ne testified IL
or not saleN
Mr.. Niblack-He stated 1T before the committee.
Mr.. Bllss-I am content to have my position and
that Of Judge Moab Davis as they now Stand be.
solicitor RaG6eld followed Mr. Bliss. He APP
peared, he said, not IN the interest OF Sanborn
any ot6er contractor, but at the request OF the
secretary OF the Treasury, to explain the relation
OF the department 10 tbs contract question. APP
plicatiSM lOr contracts to collect debts due the
governmeut had been made as early as 1862 and,
although t1e Secretary and the Solicitor were not
avoraoly disposed to the system contracts were
giyeD to several parties at rates OF commission
varying IRON twenty TO Dity per cent on the
amounts 20 be coNccte0, the contractors to pay all
the expenses: but the invariabie result had been
government got poibing. me system was abro.
/
the law under which the sanborn contract was
given. anu less care was taken 10 limit tine com.
have Neen II 1T had been supposed that any ching
would be collected. The Solicitor was - -
SHARPLY CBoss-QuESTI0NED .e..f
by Mr. Beck as to why Internal Revenue Commits.
sloner Douglass was not called INTO consultation
6y e &c avg awe Soeo when sy ua
to what authority he had to write letters 10 Inter-
nal Revenue olcers dlrecting them TO aid san;
them. 20 the FIRST question his reply was that
the law referred to debts withhold and not
particularly to internal revenue matters, and to
the second that the idea OF assistance was that IL
should DC mutual, and that Sanporn could not very
well assist the regular oi1cers uuless they were
willing TO assist him: In reply to q question ny
Mr.. sheldon, the Solicitor sad he had no knowL
edge, DHlief or suspicion that any 0ficer OF the
| government mad received or expected to receive
anything In any way nom The sanborn contract
THE GREAT SANBORN IN THE LIFE.
| Guided Mr.. John ID. Sanborn himself came before
the committee. but instead OF proceeding with his
! twcnty-Our hours been advised by his counsel
that. in view OF the indictment pending against
revenue officers to delrard the government, II
would be lnjudicious for him to make the iul
statement which he mad been ready and willing To
make. He was ready, however,, GO give 10 the
committee such general information on the sub
lie was informed by the Chairman and other
members OF the Committee that the Committee
that he was present not by order Of the committed
but or his own, v0htion, and in accordance
Will Ills own request III oruer Lnat ne InlSnt make
a ul and fair statement OF all the circumstances
connected with his contract. If he was not pre-
pared to do that aud to answer such questions rs
the Committee might desire to put to him the Com.
mttee would decline TO listen to any partial or re-
stricted statement.
Mr.. Sanborn's counsel (Mr. Woodbridge, Of Yer
mont, justified the position taken by his client,
although he expressed his belief that nothing
which Sanborn could say could prejudice his case !
but still, out OF caution he thought 1T better loi
! him not to submit himself 80 the examination oil
| the committee. He alluded to the TACT that there
| s.
sistant Dlstric5 Attorney from Brooklynl watching
to take advantage OF anything chat SanbOrn might
say.
! The upshot of all this parley was that the COM
mittee adjourned without any decision whether
SanbOrn should or should not be made Witness.