New-York tribune., 1875-03-09

ocen1au,s iofucing tne iudement rom ssOO ava o.slS
10 IA accordance with the terms OF Use warrant OF
p fs,0n AnOh-r 10 compromise lha mncntV ihe's VI
uO0j on the part ot thr suretl's Kerr ana t"'hcn 3
IN DrcsWiper a. tao acceptance Of which, have bcsA
Informed, has been recommended by the sohcor oi o
Fouru II It Ia meant. in the obscure language OF
these Ctarg = 10 ccn6ute me for cohsrhUhs 10 49,
these Judgments, am at loss to determine upon Mts
ground ccnsurc IL chargeabe III tne lhlress'on
INTENDED to be conveyed that my &C Ion ~ ,dg
1 might mention this connection that many luus
mcuts have been vacated on the consent OF 'n Di'i
Atteracl qnder thc aGin''r1!Yn o. tnS @ Inc Interest,"
whether have exercised equal care loi 'lc ,1I
of the Governments, IA such matters the recoi"' "'
FiJfh It is difficult TO under7tant by these charges
for what considered censurab'c IN my dc" ~
IN recommending 20 the demit mat co. Cc'i i'r,ond
the cases above mentioned NJ reasoh oI ~ y,v .ers
ing compromise were fully set forth IN ny ,e I
to the department, which are all Ia your poSseSS'o"' anu
TO which beg leave TO refer. -,
S,1th: The fact Is stated in these charges that the
iu.-monts against Francis swift III the Mel Az
1874 and reentered agaiDs; him the next udY' lhs' ~
well tic other charges, seems 10 pe ~
by any statement showing wherein such acIon s Wa
subject criticism. wnle You are leIC 10 iIcr = ,nr'
there something wrong about ~ lheso; Nv
the facts These Judgments had Doeh optai"o s s
default 10y predecessor, ana opeheu potoo ~. ,. in
and defend ana IN ihe mean tine were 10 stand 10
security. In JAY LIST, and oe!oiS ,nv s,,ne trans
c,iuIs in real estate Of winch nc Is large hoeI | %
Tor this purpose requested tho Temporary ,T TINS
judgments FOR two hrce trdHshct OIs on ,. 10
w bnVoypr dorIncd t. gran: Mr.. Swlit unu IL
had deposited collateral fecJr.y 70 q" All iuGSmcnts
ib ~ as n,"s ihlo TO r cover against hin these ac-
vo1lJ ctGeTwise he 10 the Government,
iur iu tnese actions there were O,hcf h-'B
d.teudaLts as well Nj swift bu, 1 e1LcCed II pt-
nso / was uuv Iling mat L., any action of mine the
Government would 10 lose any security winch II
s. renlt Uider tho seventh head, Col. Tenney ex
plans tue matter Of opening the Judgment against
Eigbm : Under this head Col Tenncy makes very
I'M. XpandOn aud defense OF his action IN the Me
L1ugHnn case, aud represents Mr Hughes as making
Vuti tataiouis o tdcs In his account oi TINS
ctsc Col Icnucy > eAplanatOn under ths head Is Ia
lAe action in the Mclaughlin commenced by
my predecessor De- H. 1853, on the GStliers bond
under ihc Internal R.ycuuo law OF JuJ 90 1868. TIe
bond dated O.t. 50 1865. TIE amount claimed IN
TINS aouOn $3.50 %. with interest ana penaity
added. IL appears by the records th1t nothing was
done In this sut III il Jnne llsl when judgment vas
cnt. rcd aGhnst Mclaughlin ana the ehreues for
d,lcndanrs appearance. 1t uppe!rs mat h9hihs iui-
thrr done IN tins case until req 20 le.5. Wbcn
eN cutun was issued, aud four d~ys aiIcfW@id' on
March !, 1913, vuirh was Ten d"ys peIole assumed
the dutcs ot the odtt. 'ie eAeyull"l W. ~
mandcd and the judgment opened win leave
TO t.c d,.ondauts 10 come IL aud defend on ming tber
answer " tinn p da}s IA, aus @'r wa n!.u nc','a
lugly. My Official cath vii sho" whth assumed ,hc
duues Of this ohe, anouEh my o,drs da,e
IcD ~. c15 Soon aitef oduiJ Ih,O otlt tC
On tins bond came 10 me, and lclresctCo mat they
one Henry Eousch, who represented hm'cI as inc
Marty III interest this GIsriy, and whom they knew
tt ~ of in.i,cd 20 rId'ayur 10 yec Whatever was
que to the Government lo,n han instead o from them,
|
Ic'' Ce shown that he was ne real party in
interest accordingly on OF. 2 of tuat year, com
menced an acton against Mr. EJusch 10 recover the
amount which claimed iu the SUIT against the sure
tried on JHnc o. 1874 as to whether the party
| interest IMs trial WAS ny ne Court Wthunta Jury,
ana the decision for the Government Aud on the
l3A OciOber last the OtBei Issue ~ uS Aco aSHst
Gr R,usch was triod name 70 uciihe !no a.ATIIt
is the more OrGG6Iy method ca trlhg such Issues where
the quest involved chiefly questions o law, as
In preparing the tIial of this Issue mad examined
the papers and the proofs, and my attention had ocen
tuIs @ 49, , snrvcv made under Section Ia Of
the act OF Juy 90 1868. wds survey Tor grain dstl
Iit,Isry II reonircd no argument therefore to
show tpat this survey OF no validity upOn which 10
brsc the assessment wnich eNpeted u prove as IL!
| rlgut 10 recover tho amount clCmcd.
And that all We could hope to recover was the tax on
inc .Drits actually prOdHccd Tie SUSPENSION tax, and
10 ainounf for tnc dis: lory warehouse stamps which
s~ra tycs we're accordingly TcCkOned NJ by Ar Pat
terson ana amounted - The sum o sS' 10 TINS amount
v,is acrnrdinEiy proved the witness stand by
W PttSrsoa ana inc deicndant,' counsel not object
lug and beng wiling 10 pay Inc taA on 1io spirits
actually lroddced Judgment was acco. ng!y enterrd
for h- amount The facts concerning The survey ana
assessment were stated 20 the COdr in opening the
recovered the S37 10 without tue C0as a OF tlc defend
a,s' attorney VIII admit, for the sake OF the drsu-
| case Of CIuktnbeard agt. IIe UAIed states Int Rev
Record Vol. 81. No page 81 "ctideI III tho siprtmo
Court Of United States Gems to be against IT, Bat
thot tho Government cOud have recovered than
mat amount under the Circumstances OF this case
n upossiOity. VIII appear in the case OF CAuken
lard agt I'll. United States above cied as wc!l il
Inc ease OF the Uned States ast kag' Ben, 40 and
many Ter which might be cied among winch Is
ne Gaze Of Peabody ag,. Stark, l6 wallace, pag: 2p
Uuuer the tcLthnni eleventh sccilons OF ms answer
Co Trnney giyos sn extended explanation OF his action
N two cases cOEacctO with 7. j. Gleason and others
The eleventh secHol OF tAe ahs"II t!hC' up ,lo ser
ons contained IN letter OF Mr. Hn6hts 10 thc Aior-
neJ cneral, dlted jan ~ 1870 lac CONCLUSION 0I the
IIavipg AS above answered the charges specifically
trust that It VII not b. considered Inappropriate for ne
have been MADE Mr.. Hughes Was my former ass'stan;
m TINS Cice. and being Ouns man WITHOUT tHpercnc
| was shown every Enduess and given every faciity
yIthin NV power long be continued loyal 20 the
OF the Government. But at the very tlno when
Ioan D. SanhOrn and others and while yet in ohca, hc
wa secretly plotting FOR my removals aud when ii be
claimed as had before, that lie would cause my 10
| noyal from Office within thirty days.
On whot ground IL was 10 De doae was left to con
| lecture Ii Will, however, be observed that tho fac
out Of which these present charges are manufactured
WI, 70 ne removed has however been continually mad,
~ MIN from tnat time until nOw. But that OF th'
mn ,dlate motives FOR making lhese particular charge
a Le they were made may be Understood. ii Is ne
cessary for you to Auow that Mr. Hughes, since h
iyfOI Rrokiy1 And IT SO happened that on the sai
ay Of October last the extensive Illicit distery
Mcssrs. Brady aud Mull4dy was seized
Sna arrest Of Brady and Gaaay was issued Mr. Hushc
in tue of that day called al TINS oce and re
quested ore OF my assistants to accept from them nom
ai bail and to agree that they should not be prose
| cuted coupliRg such request with offer OF a larg
| pecunary reward. 1t Is needless to add that sucl
equest and offer refused. Bnt these criminals u
once frou the city. aud have ever since been
| are now fugiIyes from justice, having since been In
clcted. that the next day, Oct. 81
the charges of Mr. Hughes against preferred
the Attorney General. This is but one Instance. vii
not mdItiDly details leave you to jadgc whether hi,
charges against made inhe interests OF the Gov
erpnent or the interests 6 those VINO violate The
| law.
THE LIQUOR,DEALERy STRUGGLE FOR iRELIEF
The Liquor Dealers Executive COMMITTEE