The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1880-02-12

The action of Secretary Schurz in removing
Mr.: Hayt from the Office of Commissioner Of
Ind!an Affairs was approved by the Board OF
81 shs 81 tss
pointed to investigate the charges made by
General Clinton b. Fisk. The prOtracted dis
cussion and the examination of new witnesses,
that preceded the final action of the Commits
sioners did not result In any modification of
the report US originally drafted by the COM
mlttee. MI. A. G. Barstow, Chairman Of the
who has not signed this report. ~, 54g..a'''
"On the day of our appointment" say the
committee, I'VE visited the Indian Bureau,
made hasty inspection of some Of the rec.
ords, returned and reported progress, con-
WINGED that q full Investigation would require
considerable period of time" 1.-The case,'
yided intdtwo paiss- the 1rss concerning the
interests Of tie Indians, and the$econd the
seryis e Of left the
nee. AS to the first part our investigation
has brought the committee to the conclusion
that when the ,oifenses Of Agent Hart were
authorities in Washington to investigate their
nature, to remove the Agent from the service,
to remedy the abuses existing at the
control Rat Agency un sss
interests of the Indian. The responsibility for
the long delay which happened in turning over
the property by Agent Hart to the one proper
charged to the Indian Office. As to the second
part-the prosecution of ex-Agent Hart-we
find that a number of affdavits bearing evil
Ct I % h Of Hart
Affairs by Inspector Hammond in the month
OF May; that in June Hammond was directed
to return to Arizona for the purpose, among
other things, of completing the testimony;
that in the meantime these af1idavts remained
ut the Indian Office Enacted upon; that in July
another case of malfeasancc on the part Of the
a VA rArf to N<Nl.
transmitted to the Indian ONCE by Inspector
hammond, and forwarded TO the Depart
ment of Justice for the prosecution Of
Hart; that the afdavits first spoken Of re-
after Inspector Hammond had returned from
Arizona in October without bringing any addi-
tional testimony; that on the sd Of October
the Commissioner recommended to the Secrc-
tary of the Interior that the Department of
Justice be requested to employ an assistant to
the District-Attorney in Arizona insshe prose,
forwarded to the Department Of Justice: that,
however, the affidavits communicated to the
Commissioner Of Indian Affairs by Inspector
ca nnf il ssy ss the Indian
were sent up to the Interior Department for
transmission to the Department Of.Justice,
accompanied with. . number, Of letters from
Inspector, Hammond and various other per
sons, touching the case. y &'9sgs..A LIZ.
. The delay Of action on the part Of the Com
missionerOf Indian Affairs on the a1fidavits
legation that it was best. to keep them until
the facts sworn to, TN them were suppfemented
by testimony expected from Inspector Ham
tSis ana oshss Ssrset Us au
ficient, inasmuch as tho additional evidence
and correspondence transmitted to the De.
partment OF Justice, together with the afiida-
Of the testimony sufficiently to show why tine
same afiidavits might not have been trans
United before. We cannot avoid the conclu-
Hsn th %a sa pne$ SRs G the Be-
with regard 4 to tiss otter Uses, in.
the Commissicner nor fnspecsEs sIsr e's sufi.
ciently in earnest. LnapeQtoF. Henmond ad.
mits that in tie spring Of 1870 he vs. person
ally interested intasPropqe "a pHssaese Of tbs
the arrival IN ArfzonA " Hdward Knapp, the
so-called nephew of the Commissioner, he de-
voted much time and attention in assisting
Mr.. Knapp in securing the mine for Mr.. Hogen
camp. .0.u -ri
Late in the progress of our examination
the following facts we're ELECTED: When Mr..
Hoeencamp telegraphed Mr.. Hammond that
he would send out q special agent to purchase
the mine, he replied to MIR. HOgencamp, How
shall know hiInY To which Mr.. Hayt sent
the following answer: You know Knapp
Hayt with the mining transaction. MIR. Hayt,
as hereinbefore stated, does not admit sending
such reply.
AuOluCr lNCt was ellClLCU-vlZ.s lQaC Ed.
ward Knapp. the socalled nephew of the Com
missioner who figured so conspicuously in this
transaction, was passing under an assumed
name, and was really Edward Knapp Hayt, the
son of the Commissioner, and that he adopted
this name at the suggestion of his father.
These circumstances, coupled with the fact
that the Commissioner declined to give his tes-
timOny until after General Hammond had tes-
titled, his alleged unwillingness to have Cen
eral Hammond correct his statement concern
ing the genuneness of his letterto Hart, and
the long delay in the prosecution of Hart,
though furnishing no positive evidence of
completely or guilt in compromising Il crime
for consideration, as was charged, may be
taken as sufficient proof that the Commission
.ex-Indi;h Agent, charged with gross otfenses,
through his own son. under an assumed name,
to some of his intimate friends, a fact which
can scarcely be relieved by his own assurances
that he had no interest in the transaction.
1t is proper 10 state that the Secretary of
the Int erior has been kept fully and constant
~ advised during ;n the progress Of our sx,
expressed that we should probe this matter
to the bottom, and promptly notify him of all
the important facts that might be developed.
1t Is also but right to state that we have found
no traces of any officer. clerk, or employe Of
except those named"
The report is signed by Albert X. Smithey
and William Stickney, majority of the COM
mittee.
The resolution adopted by the Board is Is
fOllOWS: - - .,l Is"
''ResOired That, in view of the facts devel.
oped in the. report of the special committee
touching the conduct of the late Commits.
sioner, this Board approves the action of the
Secretary OF the Interior in removing MIR.
Hayt from the Office OF Commissioner Of In
dian Affairs" Is ,''''' 7a 80
"A. c. Barstcw presented minority report,
in which he says: General HammOnd's testi-
mony, which, OF all the evidence offered, alone
directly connects Commissioner Hayt with the
wrOng-doing charged was taken January ~,
but was afterward altered. In this alteration
his testimony on one important point was en-
tirely reversed. Though there are many sus-
piciOus circumstances which bear against Mr..
Hayt sufficient to justify his removal, they do
not necessarily imply guilt. Ii these circum.
stances raise doubts, the accused is entitled to
the benefit of them" - -.a.rags,