The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1874-04-16
BY TELEG R A b.
ASSOCIATED PRESS REPORT.
BY the Western Union Line, office North
west corner OF Main and 18th streets.
WASHING TON.
WAsHINaToN. April Is.
The Sanborn Contracts.


The Sanborn Contracts.
Assistant Secretary Sawyer, Of the
Treasury Department. appeared before
the Committee on Ways and Means
this morning, his attention having been
called to a statement made by Ban6eld
solicitor OF the treasury, 10 the com.
mittee, and be had sought this opportu'
nifty to make few comments on ths,
statement. He did this in justice to
himself, for there seems to be some
discrepancies OF statements between
them, which were matters due to I'M
periectness OF memory, but he wa,
quite certain that in every case in
which be made statements, he was sub
stsuIially correct.
Mr.. Banfield he said, testified as fol-
lows: will say further that / never
have prepared any paper, be it contrac.
or be it letter. involving the signature
Of the Secretary OF the Treasury except
by his direction, written, verbally or BY
the direction OF his assistant. 1t ia ina.
possible that should do so iu nature
and course OF business, unless il can
be shown that l am usurping the pow
ere OF the department, which think
am not. Every one Of the three letters
has been prepared in that way, and
Of course have from time to time pre-
pared great many letters bearing the
signature of the Secretary. That is in-
evitable in the cou.ee OF business there,
but | never know what letters
he wants written until he
tells me what he wants, and
then it is prepared as best l eau to
meet his views.
Assistant Secretary Sawyer after fur
ther quoting from Banfield's testimony,
said, in the first place Bsnfield had not
read any testimony as 1t was given, or
he would not have made the statement
in the way in which he hae. ! did not
say in the summer l had any conver
sation with him about letter to DR..
Presbery. | certainly don't remember
having had any conversation with Dr..
Presbery or Mr.. Bsnfield about such a
letter in July. 1873. If it was called
to my attention / certainly didn't un-
derstaud then as I did on the latter oc-
oasion the relations. or rather want oi
relatiops, which Dr.. Presbery had
with the Government. There is
nothing mandatory in the let
ter; il is simply a request, but
yet it is = request which 1 should not
have thought proper to make if it had
not been explained to me. DR.. Pres-
berry was simply an agent of Sanborn
and not an agent oi the government.
am convinced, therefore il Baufield
is right 10 saying that it was called TO
my attention, it must have been in a
cursory manner, and | signed the letter
because it bore the check of the solicl-
tor, whom l supposed would be in pos
session OF the knowledge OF the facts
which justified it. did not know, uu-
til a very recent period. that DR.. Pres
berry was an agent Of Ssnborn, though
I did know long since that he had been
in the employ Of the government as
Supervisor OF internal Revenue.
10 this connection Mr.. Sawyer called
attention to the internal evidence
that letters of introduction to supervi-
sors and collectors OF internal revenue
given by Boutwell, aud Richardson, and
this one OF July 2lst, 1873, signed by
Sawyer, have common origin. There
was no question whatever OF the letter
OF October Is, 1873, purporting to be
signed by Richardson and written In
the Solicitors Office, for it bore his
check, and the letter Of July 2lst,
1873 also bears his check. In further
review Of the evidence OF Bapfield,
Sawyer said | never gave an opinion
nor had an opinion that the act OF 1878
could fairly bear the construction which
would authorize such a cont act as
Kelsey sought and finally obtained un-
der the latter law. j never asked
Bapfeld to give it construction
broad enough 10 cover ii. The
only foundation for such statement on
the part OF Bsnfeld is owing to the
fact that Kelsey made the suggestion
that a reading OF the act was
possible by which such construction
could be given it as to isclude the
cases not in the States lately iu insur-
rection. l am not prepared to state
that | did not say there ought not TO
be law under which taxes not acces-
sible by ordinary means OF collection,
could be reached, when withheld by
powerful corporations from the gov.
ernment. Mr.. Sawyer further quoted
and commented on the testimony OF
Banfeld, re'utiug the position
OF the solicitor. He said the
general tendency and effect OF the
Solicitors recent statements before the
committee, convey the impression that
the duties OF solicitor in regard to these
contracts were scarcely more than
clerical, that everything which was
done by the Solicitor was directed from
the Secretary's Office and that very
little was left to the judgment, discre-
ton or direction Of the Solicitor. Now
if this be the view held in the Solic.
itor's Office i: differs entirely from the
view held in the Secretary's office. In
the Office OF the Secretary it is under
stood and admitted that the question
whether q contract shall be made with
any Individual under this law is one
which the Secretary alone can decide
and it is altogether probable that the
Solicitor will consult and has consulted
the Secretary as to the general terms o
the contract. And it is also understood