Smyrna times., 1876-07-26

indicted for bribing a post-office clerk.
Sec. 545l of the Revised Statutes makes it
penal offence for any person to bribe an
officer OF the United States with intent to
induce him to do or omit to do " (ia ftt,tro)
"any act in violation of his lawful duty"
1t was under this section alone that indict-
mcnts could possibly be framed against
Hinds. The evidence in the case was
simply this: One VIM. D. Kittle, for the
purpose of securing a large number Of con-
tracts for carry the mail in the State of
Texas, had paid to some three or four
Post-otfice clerks in the month of January
1879, some three or four thousand dollars
for the purpose of inducing them to inspect
the bids on certain routes which were
advertised, to be presented to the Depart
ment by given day, and report to him the
lowest bids on these several routes, and to
file for him (Kittle) lower bids which were
to be handed by him to them after the day
had passed for receiving bids; and endors-
ing these spurious bids so as to have them
appear to have been filed in proper time
In so doing Kittle had certainly been
guilty OF an outrageous violation of the Sec
to which l have just referred, and the
clerks whom he bribed were equally guilty
under Sec. 5501 of the Revised Statutes
After Kittle had paid these bribes he seems
to have suspected that Kinds might also
bribe the same men to give him (Hinds)
the figures of Kittle's bids and to file bids
for Kinds still lower and have them endor-
sed as timely and lawful bids. Acting upon
| this supposition Kittle proposed to Kinds
that they should enter into partnership,
and that Kinds should have an equal
interest with himself in the contracts about
to be secured by Kittle's bribery, provided
| Kinds should repay Kittle one-half the
amount he had expended in bribes.
1t was not shown by the evidence and
was not true in point of fact, that Kinds
ever actually saw Kittle pay any bribe
money. Mr.. Jewells anxiety to convict
| Kinds caused him to let all the really guilty
parties go, by making them Government
witnesses, not stopping to reflect as a
lawyer would have done that any number
of participants in the same criminal act can
not corroborate the testimony of one Of
their number. But even these failed to
prove Kinds guilty of bribing. After the
trial of the first case against Kinds there
were three others still pending; and it
seems somewhat strange, if this case mis-
carried because Of my neglect and inetfi-
cheney, that Mr.. Jewell should have been
in hurry to have the other three noAe
pros'd, instead of having them stand over
| until he naU secured my resignation ana
more faithful and efficient successor
appointed. However, as " noi'cS" in these
cases will not stand in the way of new in
dictments, l would suggest that he start
afresh against Kinds and have him tried
by my successor, whom Mr.. Jewell desired
to employ at a large expense to assist me.
In the trial of Kinds had the assistance
both in and out of Court of Judge Spence
the law officer of the Post-ofhce Depart
ment and gentleman who has no superior
at the Bar of the District of Columbia, anC
whose able management of the case certain
ly more than made up for any lack o
ability or energy on my part.
| have made this statement in cando
and simplicity, with malice toward none
and leave my case to the calm judgemcn
of all honest inquirers for the truth.
GEO P. FISHER.