New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-08-10
ANOTHER EXPLANATION NEEDED.

Tie testimony of Major A. X. Long before
the Indian Investigating Commission, published
in our Cheyenne correspondence on Monday,
recalls fact or two brought out in Prof.
Marsl's letter to the President in connection
with the -four frauds. 1t also seems to make
it necessary for Indian Commissioner f. p.
Smith to explain one of his early explanations.
Prof Marsh having exhibited to the President
the samples of -four received from Red Cloud,
the Indian Commissioner calmly laid Off the
responsibility for the frauds by denying that
any such dishonesty could have been practiced,
as all the supplies furnished at Red Cloud
Agency were inspected by Major Long. The
Commissioners explanation was given to the
agent of the Associated Press, and published
eli the Sd of May. 1t was in precisely these
words:
II stated nj the indian Bureau With reference to the
complaints concerning supplies furnished the Indians
tho Red Cloud Agency that all the -four sent there
inspected at Cheyenne by Major Long. Comnssary Of
Subsistence " the United States Army, and passed by
him "a equal the accepted sample 1t is therefore
samples OF inferior -four brought here
by Prof Marsh the request OF Red Cloud OF
oil issue like the specimens Of and tobacco had
damaged by exposure to the weather who In the
Indians possession
In his letter to the President Prof. Marsh
says that this explanation which he knew to
be untrue discouraged him from giving Com
missioner Smith any further information about
Encouragement in Indian affairs. 1t now ap-
pears from Major Longs testimony that on
the I'd of October, 1874, Major Long tele-
graphed to Commissioner Smith from Cheyenne
that j. II. Martini the flour contractor, was
shipping flour through that place without hav
ing it inspected, and that his UOns's) rejec
ton of flour of an inferior grade had
caused great dissatisfaction. To this Com
missioner Smith made immediate reply that
Twenty five hundred sacks on Martins
contract had been inspected at Omaha"
On the 30th of October, 1874, Major Long
officially informed Commissioner Smith of the
rejection of As sacks of -four as very much in
ferior to sample, but he added, as they have
apparently been received. am unable to de-
L" terinine what effect such rejection will have
"upon their ultimate disposition" On the
10th of November, 1874, Major Long in
formed Commissioner Smith that j. ii. Mar
tins contract for $4,000 pounds of flour had
been filed though he had received and in
spected only 10000 pounds upon it.
These are facts that must have been within
the knowledge of the Commissioner. Docu-
mentary. evidence of thom was on file in his
department, and the occurrences themselves
were but few months old. Knowing that
Major Long had not inspected all the flour
sent to Red Cloud Agency. and that complaints
had been made by that officer himself of the
acceptance of rejected -four, the Indian Com
missioner did not hesitate to make to tho AssO-
ciated Press tho false explanation given above.
Is it any wonder that Prof. Marsh, having
knowledge of such facts as these touching the
interest felt by the officials in the department
in the exposure and prevention of Frauds
should have declined to communicate further
with them, and gone directly to the President
with his statementi AS for Commissioner
Smith, his explanation needs explaining.