National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1875-10-19

4 view VI cOnultiOn OF the parties, anu the EN-
| has effected, with the approval Of the Unite,
States District Attorney for Nebraska, and tn
Attorney General Of the United States.
PORE.
Professor Marsh's statements Testimony pi)
CLOUD Agency November Is, ISIS Were earefIII,
considered, and the principal farts we beljeye
were fully aseertained. These statements are, il
/. That the issues were made In a careless and
sloyenly manner.
2. That some Of the pork issued was unit 70,
food. ~-'-'' 'O'
On the first point which ls Of minor Importance
except as II is alleged to furnish Characteristic
illustration Of the management Of affairs at the
agency, II may be sufficient TO place the conflict.
ing testimony side by side. Professor Marsh
4 Nys: The method employed IN distributing this
ar tcle to the Indians was CHARACTERISTIC Of the
reis pork were rolled out of the warehouse by
one of the employees, the heads Of the barrels
knocked in with an ak and the contents turned
upon the ,Hround. The pieces Of pork were then
given to he Indians who were waiting for it,
without bein g weighed, or any other measures
being taken to insure Just distribution To
this statement Agent Sayille enters an emphatic
Denial as follows Testimony, 1887:
This is a fair s.9nple Of the willful nisstate-
ments throughout these charges. Professor
Marsh saw one barrel rolled out to q band that
was large enough to reseive two hundred pounds
By their request the barrel was knocked open and
they distributed it among themselves. All the
z.
through an opening into another room, into which
the Indians came to receive IatiOns. As Professor
Marsh had an opportunity of going into the ware
house and seeing the issue, therefore character
iZe this statement as far as 1t represents il as
being the usual manner in which pork Is issued
as; to say the least, neglgently incorrect"
subsequently Testimony p. 1867 Prof. Marsh
reiterates the statement that he saw several
barrels" instead Of one, issued in the manner he
described; but was unable to say whether each of
these barrels was not issued to q particular band
of Indians large enough to be entitled TO that
quantity, and then the heads knocked out to en-
able them to devide 1t among themselves. 1t
seems more than probable that this was the case
1t should be remarked also, that it Is, in the
present feeling and custom among the Indians
any bulk to individuals. They insist on receiving
in one issue the articles designed for each band OF
families, and the distribution is then carefully
made in the presence Of them all by some author
lied or selected member of the band The pro-
ceedfng is rude one, but substantial accuracy is
insured by the watehful oversight Of the persons
With regard to the second statement. that some
of the pork was unfit for use the testimony shows
that the hrst 200 barrels received under the
Slayens contract were mess" pork, in perfectly
good condition; that of the 500 barrels afterwards
furnished very little POSSIBLY haTf dozen bar
rels) had become spoiled in transit from loss of
1t consisted largely of the lean portions of the
animal, and was, therefore, on account of the
habits and tastes of the Indians, entirely unfit
for their use. All the evidence goes to show that
Professor Marsh was mistaken in supposing the
pork to be .old" or that any considerable portion
OF 1t was damaged. Mr.. Armour of Chicago, Of
whom 1t was purchased, states that It was new
and IN perfectly good condition when shipped.
The statement quoted from Red Cloud that he
believed some of the children had died from eat
ing the pork, is too trivial for serious notice. 1t
Is evidently one Of those childish and rresponsi-
BILE complaints which Indians in general land that
chief in particularly are fond Of making 1t is
parallel with the complaint made to us by one of
the Indians, that the pork was spoiled by the
water in the barrels and with the statementsof
he
covered with the graves Of their children who had
died from eating sugar. They have little knOwI-
edge Of the different modes of cooking pork and
in general, use the fat portions only In this in
stance, accordingly, they cut of the fat and threw
the rest away: There was undoubtedly great
waste Of material, but anysubsequent lack Of food
that account is attributable to the improvIdence
Of the Indians themselves, and not to the conduct
Of the agent who appears to have acted in the
matter promptly and effectively. As soon as his
attention was called to the waste that was going
on, he stopped issuing it, reported to the Commits
sioner Of Indian Affairs that the pork then being
use of the Indians, and twas all thrown away,n
and was lying upon the ground about the agency
He recommended that it all be thrown upon the
hands Of the contractor and requested instructions
from the office. After inquiry by the Commits
sioner, an arrangement was entered into with the
contractor as Will be presently pointed out, under
which the remainder Of the pork was distributed
to the Indians.
While, therefore, in regard to the PRINCIPAL
charge we find no evidence that any considerable
amount of the pork referred to was otherwise than
sweet and wholesome the proof clear that il was
of an inferior grade, and we are fully-cOnvinced
and premeditated attempt to defraud both the In
dams and the Government. The facts which lead
to this conclusion are as follows: Under date of
May IS, 1874, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs
advertised for proposals to furnish 1000 barrels of
''mess pork, which is the highest Ofthe five grades
recognized in Western markets, delivered at Oma-
ma. On the ID Of July the bids were put in, .and,
s22.O5.
The bid of Mr.. ]. W. L. SIavens, of Kansas CITY,
Mo-, being the lowest, the contract was awarded
to him. but ty an error the part of the clerk in
Milling 1t out, the contract was made to call for
pork" simply, and not for 'mess pork" 1t ap-
pears, however, as stated by Mr.. Slavens, that
between the date Of the bidding, July 2 and the
date Of his receiving the award of the contract
July 9, the price Of pork had advanced to such a
figure that he could not supply 1t without loss He
says, (page 595:)
i'The price Of pork had advanced IN the mean
time, 50 that could not possibly buy i at the
had q margin at the date of the letting; and
said to the Commissioner that could not furnish
ii at that price, and that would not accept the
award if should be held to furnish it ali fmme-
diately out of old pork; that if only required
to furnish 1t from month to month, as the Agency
needed it, through the year, then IcOuld get even
States is five six dollars lower per barrel
than before the new crop comes into the market.
He said that would be all that would be required,
to furnish 1t as fast as the Agency needed it. and
with that understanding accepted the award,
and delivered 200 barrels as soon as they were
called for. The letting was in New York city,
July2 Bids were opened at noon that day. /
telegraphed to Holden x Co., of Chicago, and got
the price of pork on that day, and made bid, re-
serving myself a margin, and the next day, and
the next, and every day on until the award, 1
was wanting to know whether should furnish il
or not, and there was no decision made in regard
to who should have the contract until in Washing
ton city some eight days aflerward. Then I was
notified that could furnish the pork, and then
occurred this conversation with the Commission
er."
1t will be noticed that Mr.. SIavens, in his con-
versation with the Commissioner, whatever he may
have contemplated, made no allusion to any pro-
posed change in the grade of pork to be furnished
but merely desired an understanding that it was
to be delivered only fast II might be needed.
Under the contract thus concluded, and the ar
rangement thus made respecting the time of de-
livery, Mr.. Slayens furnished 200 barrels of mess
pork of the best quality. He did so because, as
he states Up. SOC, this was what he knew he had
in his bid proposed TO furnish, and what he then
supposed he had contracted to furnish; but AFTER
ward he happened to see Mr.. Threlkeld's copy of
the contract and discovered that It did not call for
ii. 'Thereupon 1t occurred to Mr.. Slavens, ae-
cordng to his representation to this Commission,
that he could substitute for mess pork any lower
grade that could be made to pass inspection.
That" he says, Twas the test with me-inspectiOn
in all contracts With this view he saw the In
spector, Mr.. Threlkeld, and proceeded to convince
him that there was really no need of his being
prescriptions about the grade Of the pork, so
long as II was sound and sweet. He said: Mr..
Threlkeld testifes Up. $50 that parties who had
the contract at Omaha, and above mere, were all
furnishing that class Of pork, and he did not see
why should be conscientious, and refuse to ac-
cept the same pork that they received; and did
not feel that wanted to be Oyerparticular, and If
they were receiving that kind Of pork, of course !
had no right to dispute about 1t.
Mr.. Threlkeld also states in letter to the CON-
missioners Up. 59) that Slayens assured him posi-
him in his bid" The Inspector seems to have la
bored under some embarrassment in choosing be-
tween his desire to serve MIR. Slavens and desire
to serve the Government II he conveniently could.
The following extract from Mr.. Threlkeld's testi-
mony Up. 5SS) gives his version Of the discussion,
as il was drawn out in the examination, and, at
the same time, presents his explanation Of the
course he pursued in passing the pork:
"Did Mr.. Slayens claim that, because the con-
tract did not hold him up to the terms OF the al
vertIsement, therefore he was at liberty to put in
A. SHe contended that the contract was all I
had to go by. - -
whether you should hold him up to the terms of
the advertisement or the terms Of the contract?
A. "Yes, sir; he said IL the contract was not to
be my guide, then had no guide; that there
would have been no occasion for sending IL to me.
q. "Did you say to him that, inasmueh as he
Government had advertised for in terms, he was
was bound to fulfll it according to the contract?
A. "NO, sir.
O. "You did not claim that If he had made
proposal in answer to an advertisement which
calls for mess pork and that proposal was
eepted, that, therefore, he was bound to furnish
mess pork, no matter what the contract stated?
A. II think used that argument with him; but
in reply he called my attention to the advertise
ment inviting proposals for -four, and also, In con-
nectiOn Herewith, to the character Of flour the
Government received, a sample Of which had been