The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1876-04-29

! AZ AoPAy w Yuooston Uy oecr6tery
Bristow the witness sand there was no
chargeof fraud against the vessel and
that the whole ground of forfeiture was
on . point in the reciprocity treaty, and
had nothing to do with smuggling. -
The Secretary read the following from
. resolution directing this Investigation;
And thereupon one of the attorneys for
the owners of said vessel applied to said
Bristow, Secretary of the Treasury, for
the remittance of said forfeiture to which
said Pristow replied that he would do
nothing himself, but his private secretary
could fix it up, and said attorney met
his private secretary and had the for
feiture remitted." The secretary asked
witness, presuming that he was
the attorney alluded to, whether there
was any truth in that allegation? Wit
nsss replied it was wholly untrue. the
Secretary never said any such thing to
him and he never saw the private secre
tsry.
Secretsay B.-Did I not tell you had
rendered the same friendly assistance to
Ferland and Evans without fee and not
as an attorney and therefore declined to
act in the matter, but while I could no:
act, l believed that every petitioner had
the right TO be heard.
Witness-I don't remember that as
the precise words, but il was to that Of
feet.
Secretary Bristow-Did you ever make
any arrangement with me- in the pres
ence of Senators Carpenter aud Wilson,
or in the absence of either or both Of
them, that 1 was to leave the department
and let some one else fix it2
Witsess-No, sir; it is false in every
particular.
Secretary B.-Did you ever know any
person in the Treasury Department to
have anything to do with this case in
any improper way2 -
Witness-No, sir; not one.
Judge Hubbell testified that John
son reported TO him that he had
Just returned from Washington and
found things there very favorable and
that Secretary Bristow was gong to
Philadelphia and would leave the assis-
tant secretary to remit fine or release the
Mary Merit. The witness understood
johnson to say this to him more than
once.
The chairman-Did you under
stand johnson to say that
Secretary Bristow was gong to-
Philadelphia with the view that settle
ment would be made in his absence?
Witness-1 do not give my under.
standing; that is what johnson said.
johnson told me- settlement would not
be made unless gave my assent
In the course of the examination Sec
retary Bristow asked the witness if
he did not know the predecessor OF Mr..
Banfleld had gene carefully over the
ground, and said that the offence charged
against the Mary Merritt was merely
technical. t
The witness replied that he recollected
something of it.
Secretary Bristow asked the witness
who testified if be was throughout op.
posed to the remission by what process
he changed his mind.
Witness replied because he was assured
that the department was prepared to
make the remission and thus arrest fur
ther legal proceedings, and because he
thought it would be done. Any how he
had nothing whatever to do with the re-
mission of the forfeiture, further than to
give his assent.
Secretary-Was not this your princi-
pal reason, SO the customs officers, Ms In
formers, should have their moeitiesf
The witness replied that it was SO IN
part.
During further examination, the wit.
ness said he was interested In the settle
ment TO the extent OF two per cent on the
amount of Judgment.
Secretary Bristow referred to the
statute to show that Judge Hubbell was
not entitled TO receive such per cent,
but the Judge took different view OF
the question.
Representative w. B. Williams re-
marked that the statement Of Judge
Hubbell should be excluded from the
record. Agreed to.
Mr.. Bristow expressed hope that the
committee would not misunderstand MIN
As far as be was concerned no did not
want his statement in reply to go on the
record.
Secretary Bristow recalled Mr.. John
son, who testified before Judge Hubbell
that a check for $500 ard 2 per cent on
the entire amount Of SIS 900 was remit
ted in the Mary Merritt case.
w. Evans, of Kentucky, formerly
law partner OF Feland. testified as to their
connection with the Merritt case He
s,id be came here in the spring.
or summer of 1873, in order
To secure the remission of forfeiture OF
the vessel. Gen. Bristow having resigned
The Office of Solicitor General, was at the
time in Philadelphia engaged in railroad
business rs An attorney. He stated to
Gen. Bristow the object OF his eriand,
and offered 10 give him q part OF the
compensation. Gen Bristow declined to
take fee. but said he
would assist in presenting the
matter iairly to the Secretary OF the Navy.
Secretary Bristow introduced him, the
Secretary and Mr.. Banfeld. The solici.
tor was informed it was policy then not
In GRANT any remission OF the forfeitures
nending negotiation. Mr.. Bristow's con-
duct IN the premises was merely an ACT
of kindness, be having declined all or
sny compensation and was merely serv.
ing his Kentucky neighbors, General
Br,stow had no professional
CON nec,ion with the case
and was very careful to have his TACT
clearly aud explicitly understood. He
empha,icaily declined TO have anything
TO do with . fee. :.
Secretary Brlstow called the attention
of the witness to that part Of the House
resolution directing the Investigation In
which il is said that zone Of the attor-
neys for the owners Of the mary Mer.
rett applied to B. Il. Bristow, Secretary
of the treasury, for remission of the
forfeiture. to which she said Bris,ow re.
nl;ed ,hst be would do nothing himself,
but his private secretary could fix it up
and said attorney me. bis private scre-
tary and had the forfeiture remilted-
Tbe witness replied that the mention
Of the attorney in the eItrac: read. eer-