The Leavenworth weekly times. [volume] (Leavenworth, Kan.) 1870-1880, 1877-12-20
a.. =. MARSHAL NtLEEg's AC-
StDlJ,ES.

There seems to be disposition on the
part OF Miller, through his organ, upon
whose paper Miller appears as endorser in
the sum of 81 100, according to his own
oath, to misrepresent the facts.
THE TINES can truly say that il has
no desire or inclination To screen the wrong
doer. That a wrong has been committed,
that the United States have en- swindled,
seems 10 be an admitted TACT.
The case now seems to stand in this way
Miller's organ and his friends say that
Wilson and Dave Keller are the guilty
parties.
Wilson and Keller say that the United
States Marshal is the guilty party. Now
what are the facts?
In order that our readers may understand
the whole matter, We will give a full state
ment Of the case, as We have learned it.
The following is copied from Miller's ac-
counts in the Dunlap case, now in the Office
OF the First Comptroller OF the Treasury:
August 9TH, .Is56.
UEnei Suites Is. j. hH DtLlldp:
Transportation of Dunlap, Prisoner and
Guard, L. w. Ayers, from place of arrest to
Leavenworth county jill, via ID. x q, {. &
st. L., and NJ. Il. Il. L., rs miles, nj 10
cents per mile, each, sE.I.l0.
1t is admitted that Miller charged this
up in his account. lie says he was not *
noraat Of the fact. T.. ". Ayers swears
he did not act as guard, did not come to
Kansas with the prisoner Dunlap and did
not receive pay therefor
ID. J. Keller says thai he was the deputy
that brought Dunlap TO the Leaycnworth
Jail from Washington, that said Ayers dill
not accompany him a guard, and that he
did not receive pay for guard
or give any vouchers in the case. These
facts Mr.. Keller tells US he has sworn 10
and forwarded the papers to Senator In
gals.
With these statements which, if true, AMI
they seem to be admitted, the matter re-
mains to be settled between Miller AMI
Keller. II keller's story is true, he is not
in fault, if not true he must have imposed
upon Miller. The fact seems undisputed
that the government has been cheated out
of a sum equal to the cost OF the Guard
Ayers, from Washington to Leaven-
worth.
The great question to settle then seems
to be who got this money which [. 5.
Marshal Miller charg. d in his accounts for
the transportation OF the Guard Ayers?
If Miller did not get it, then he surely
should have a voucher from some one for
it. A friend explains TO us that Miller
says lac leaves the making out of his ac-
counts to clerk Ii this he true and We
think it is, vet even then Mr.. Miller must
be held responsible for the correctness of
his own accounts.
We are told by ID. \. Hook, Esq, that
there was a similar charge made for Il
guard while he was acting as dupuly under
former United States Marshal and
while Miller was Chief Deputy,
Without assuming the truth or the falsity Of
any of the statements made, We leave the
matter for Messrs. Miller and Keller to
settle, as best they can. 1t is a fight be-
tween them, and we are only interested
to the extent, OF having all public officials
do their duty.
The only offence charged against Mr. JOS
Wilson, in the case, seems to be that he
changed the date Of the writ from 1875 TO
1876, while out OF the State, and at Phila-
delphia. In this act of Mr. Wilson, We fail
TO see any wrong. We are informed that
Judge Foster says, he had a right to do So
but granting he had no right, it was evil
IDENTIFY done TO promote the ends of justice,
and not from any wrong motive.