The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1879-07-17
LEIGHTON YEARS. OF FRAUD.
looETlNunD, FROM SD pAee.j

and the Nv ordH -sfOr expenses" put IN,
both in Woodworth's handwriting. DR.
Frank W. Reilly pne q Woodworth's
assistants, drew hib elllaf pby from the
hospital fund. All s c b v Tor investi.
eating two subj W iAnle y me.
The Marine ,fah was
sold ON Wo9a ffh " haflen datiqn
fer $37 900, a tft1 opinion beine0b
tanned from NJ fli6k Com tnat
$4,000 airead. ipcei Red ifein teaIe OF
part of the gr0i eleoild bs used for 9
new building. Ger, NAele9 engineered
q bill through Cong leps alithoriElng the
sale and purchase 0f d new site, The
sale being made; y eite was bought from
Negley on recommendation OF a COM
mission Of Treasury clerks, designated
by Assistant Secretary Conant, for $780,.
O00 which, according to the best infOr-
NATION obtainable, was worth $5 600 or
5000. Then the First Comptroller dis
covered that to apply the 500 900 for q
new building would be unIaN fnl; and
Gen. Negley having got his $50 600 OF
sailors money, the land remains Unused,
Woodwork acknowledged that $50 900
had been spent in the service in three
years above the receipts. The bills for
$2,l00 in seven months for preparing q
report on cholera on fourteen pages, be-
sides his regular pay for services render
ed as Surgeon General in the same time
above referred to, were made out and
certified correct by Woodwork himself
and paid on his order from the Marine
Hospital fund by the Collector of Gus
toms at Georgetown. A letter authoriz'
ing this unlawful compensation was
written beforehand and signed by Secre-
tary Richardson.
The bulk of the cholera report, a vol.
ume of about 800 pages, Was furnished,
not by Woodworth, but by the Army
Surgeon associated with him, DR.. Nc
Clellan' Woodworth made up his re-
port for 1877 in form to show that he
had made the hospital service self'sup
porting and did not acknowledge that 1t
was not so till the committee had ascer-
tanned that it was not. AT Baltimore the
charges for care and maintenance OF sick
seamen were under 80 cents a day, but
at New York they were so cents, and at
Philadelphia 80, which leaves margin
for a nice profit to some one.
At the San Francisco Mint there was
deficiency of $235,000 in the Meter
and Re6ner's Office in 1864 great dis
crepancy between the Treasurer's and
the coiner's accounts in 1865, and large
losses in 1870. The Superintendent was
dismissed Tor corrupt practices in 1871
Losses were also discovered in 1870 at
the Denver Mint and the New York AS
say Office. The New York accounts
we're passed by the Auditors and Comp
troller's offices of the Treasury without
proper examination of the vouchers,
which were paid by the New York AS
Bistant Treasurer without the approval OF
the officers who should have received
the supplies
Up to 1870 the Director seemed never
to have examined the New York Assay
Office, and the mint regulations were
hard to find there. The report OF the
Director of tie Mint for 1877 says lin ia
bles prepared by Martin V. Davis of
Philadelphia) that the gold coinage un'
der Director Linderman, lS64-7 inclu'
BiVe, was $l56 900 900, and greater than
that of any previous four years. This
was untrue. The coinage f 1874 was
Sl66 100000 more), and that for 1851 4
inclusive wss $50 600 600, or $24 ,OO0,OOO
more The Director also fell Into this
error of $40 QUO, and understated by this
sum the total gold coinsge Of the nlints.
He also understated the gold coinage
1851 4 by 81 100000. He stated the total
1852 8 inclusive at $238 900 600; but his
subordinate, Mr.. Davis, stated it in the
same report, for the Philadelphia and
San Francisco mints alone, at S247, 600,
over So 600 0J0 more. Thus according to
official figures two of the mints coined
$l3 600 COO more than the whole five
The San Francisco melter and rehner's
returns of bullion above the amounts
charged as delivered to him, $36, 600,
1854 n, is credited to that mint twice IN
the same report, thus making the mint
expenses appear $4,000 less than the
truth.
The New York Assay Office smelter
, and re6ner, Mr.. Andrew Mason, by
great care and skill saved and turned in.
to the Treasury in 1868 $64, 600 more
than the bullion delivered him for
treatment was charged at. These re-
turns were suppressed from the Direc
tors reports, being Jumped with earn.
ings, and Mr.. Mason was instructed to
return them as such, the motive an.
nounced in the instructions being to
shield the mints from annoying iuqui.
ries as to why they, instead If returning
surplus like Mr.. Mason, they charged
the Government with waste. Thus
Mr.. Mason was denied the credit he
richly deserved, and was in one report
made to appear as wasting So 1000 in or
der to hide the mismanagement IF 9th.
ers The letter ordering this suppress.
sion was signed as Acting Director of the
mint by Robert E. Preston, who figures
unpleasantly elsewhere in connection
with cotton accounts. In 1876 Congress
cut down the appropriations asked by
the Director over S300,000 but Linder.
man contrived to smuggle in a provlso
allowing the earnings rom separating
gold from silver, and from refining both
to be used in melting expenses without
going into the Treasury. The result is
that, every wear since, the earnings have
been spent in addition to the sums al
lowed by Congress, and 100000 yearly
have been expended without Congress
BuSpecting it.
The New York Assay Office receipts
from the sale of blue vitriol and sulphur.
ic liquor in 1873 were stated by the Di.
rector thereat SAIL 1850 81. -Four years la.
ter the annual report stated them as
S,3O25, Both proved to be wrong; the
amount was $l0,360 81.
The Directors annual reports for 1873
46 state the receipts aggregating So O46,.
600. The report for 1877 shows the
same expenditures to be $2,409 600 or
over 100000 more than was acknoWl. |
edged at the time. The expenditures
are shown by the yearly reports Tor 1873.
BinclusiVe as 45 062,000. The report for |
1877 shows them TO be S., ,635 600 or over |
457O0 900 more; $306 600 of this suppress. |