The Leavenworth weekly times., 1878-06-20

son by Smith, which led him Butler I,
believe that Smith would not testify to any
thing unfavorable TO Anderson, and as But
Ter did not knoY~Of the character of thu
. letters in question until within the last five
minutes, ne surely could not have consider
ed him an unwilling witness from the com.
mencement Of his testimony, and, further
Smith asked the protection of the commit.
tee.
} Mr.. Smith further said the gentleman
who had been examining him, had caused
certain statements TO go on record which
he had not intended TO utter.
The investigation was resumed and the
witness stated in reply 10 Mr.. Butler's ques.
ton, that he had not been in consultation
with Judge Sheilabtrger or Mr.. Wilson.
Mr.. Mac cMahon then examined the Wit
ness in regard to M-. Matthews letter re-
ferring TO The appointment OF Anderson,
but he merely corroberated his previous
| estimony.
Q.-By Mr.. McMahon-ln regard 10 that
letter OF Secretary Sherman addressed to
| the commitiee-did he show you the letter
| the committee had addressed TO him? A.
! No, Sir.
Q.-Give Us the language that passed be-
tween you and Secretary Sherman the day
you got together, and when this letter was
written? A.-As near as | remember,
when went in | said to him that ! had re-
celved a communication from the appoint
ment clerk, requesting me 10 send these
letters 10 him as he had wished to examine
them, and had thought it best to wait on
him in person and bring the letters with
me. The letter OF the appointment clerk TO
,,ly- .l,z,,,,-,,r al i
tiers belonging 10 Anderson, | believe, but
SaVen particular description Of them.
Q.-Go on with the in.eryiew between
yourself and Mr.. Sherman. A.-Secretary
Sherman then said 10 me that he wished TO
examine, himself, whether these Letters
were official or not. 1replisd that that was
a matter l had decided for myself, whether
tine letters were personal or not, but had
no objection TO his seeing the letters If he |
wished. That is all the conversation. Then |
l submitted the letters TO him. lie read |
each one, himself. This occurred in the |
appointment room, which is a branch of !
the Secretary's office. Anderson was an |
applicant in the State Department for a 1
position as consul up TO the last Of Nav.
Q.-Now, how was it that the letter of |
the committee, written on the 9th or Sth of I
March to the President, was sent 10 the
Treasury Department and then TO the State
How did it come 10 be sent
10 the Treasury Department when he was
not an applicant for position until months
A.-They may have sent it,
not being aware that he was an applicant
ut the State department. l will say as an
expert, that II you wish that kind of evil
ience, that the Treasury being the Depart
ment OF the Government in which the lar
yest number OF ofiicts-at-large are, that when
here is no special place named by the ap-
plicant, they are very apt to send such let
.ers there. That matter is, however, dis
,retionary with the Presidents Secretary.
and they may not, at that time, have
known of his application to the State De-
partment or remembered it.
ON dealing with Anderson. did YOU
let upon the committee letter? A.-No, Sir.
iever saw that letter until last week 1t
vas filed in the Treasury Department be-
ore was appointment clerk. l was ap-
pointed ON May lst, 1877. i was not aware
hat this letter was on file. l never looked
N the files at all until after the publica-
ion of that letter to Anderson appeared in
he newspapers.
Q.-Is it not usual when any body applies
Or position in Department to require
ONE testimonials from outsiders as basis
1r appointment, even when You have made
p your mind 10 make the appointment
Yes, Sir.
Q-What official papers had Anderson
4 file, the knowledge on which you based
our intention 10 appoint him TO this place \
lat You picked out. A.-Nothing what
rer to base it on, except the letter OF Mr.
Iatthews TO me. | acted on that, solely.
Q.-And the particular letter on which :
DU acted is lost?- A.-Yes, Sir.
Q-And the letter which you wrote in .
ply to that particular letter on which YOU
cted you have no copy OF? Al wrote
, letter in reply to that. ! think it re
Iired no reply, being Recommendation :
r Office. | do not remember writing any :
ply to it. The letter that is lost was the :
lie on which based my intention 10 APP (
lint him. z
would not the President see An :
rsOn? Ale did not give any reason, :
It was very emphatic ard showed great :.
sgust and aversion. :
t.-Giye US, as near a. YOU can, what | :,
c President said. Al can only give ! 2
{ substance: | wen. in 10 tell him that ! :.
rator Matthews had recommended this :
'ung man, a political refugee from LOUi-
ma, Ior an appointment Ill the Treasury, z
I'd that ! Eai offered him 4 minor -
ace, and that he had declined, positively, =
king anv place in the Treasury unless he y
uld have a large salary, something like c.
30 and hat he had told me that if NJ
as to see him (the President / would un- L
.rstand that he was TO have = larger place v
ID he wanted to see him. The President u
,ciined seeing him. lie said he was not =.
ware that any recognition of that Kind of y
5 services was required. lie disavoved
| knowledge OF any such understanding.
Q.-What understanding? You must
i've conveyed some understanding?
A.-This gentlemen claiming there had :
en promise to him, personally, Of
ace that Senator Matthews and the Presi-
mt would know of.
Q-The President disclaimed it?
A.-Ies.
Q.-What did he say about his being a
man to appoint TO any place? Ale
id nothing about it. / cannot say as to
nat the President said, but 1 understood
e President TO convey the idea that there "
Is no objection to appointing him to
inor place. He did not instruct me not
appoint him, and inasmuch as l named ,
him that | had o!ftred to him tha, place, 3
certainly understood that could appoint
m to that place without his objection.
Odd the President say toyOu, or con-
y to you, that you should not appoint
m? A-No: no more than that he