Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1881-04-30
The Great Steal.

A CURIOUS CHAPTER IN THE HISTORY-How AN
INDICTED WHISKY pIsTILLER AND DELINQUENT
CONTRACTOR WAS RAISED" AND "ExPEDIrsD"
BY BRADY.
TIE following shows how star route was
expedited, as developed refore the Senate COM
mittee on appropriations In March. 1850. The
route from Prescott to Santa Fe was q new
route. 1t was let (as set forth by Senator Beck.
who was On the Investigating committee.) 10 a
man by the name OF McDonough for sl3 3lS
year. There were TO be three trips made each
week. The length OF the route is stated at four
hun6red and sixty miles. Mr.. McDonough sub
let the route to man by the name of John A.
walsh, q banker in the city Of Washing
ton. Mr.. Walsh so managed that route as sub.
contractor, SO failed to deliver his mail after
there had been S74 600 added for additional
trips, that the Post Office department declared
McDonough failing contractor. They saii
they could not deal with the sub-contractor.
although the sub contractor was the man who
caused the failure, was the man Who failed to
deliver the mail. the man who had the sole
charge OF the business. Walsh was the SUBJ
contractor; yet McDonough was declared to be
falling contractor Walsh was not held re-
spo1 sible. What happened?
The department struck down the pay from
S.4CCO to $l33l3, and said to the Suretles of Nc
Donough. 'if you want to take this route again
at 1888 you can have It," The department
to be increased until they paid S74, 900: but the
moment McDonough was declared failing con-
tractor, although the necessities OF the service
to sl3,S13, and said to the sureties Of McDon-
ough You can take it at that" These men had
10 facilities; they had no horses, no stages, or
othtr material on hand; and they could not
take 1t. What then did the department do?
They let it at once to Mr.. Walsh for SIS, 500 be-
Ing just below the next lowest bidder to McDon-
oueh. Recollect Walsh was the man who caused
the failure OF the service. What did they do
the route had to be expedited and they added
s64 COO to the sl4, 200, and they paid him
1886 915 a year for the route that McDonougn
undertook to run for s13,313, and that he. as a
sub bcontractor, broke down on In order to get
1t at higher rate, and then he had 1t In
creased to $l36,9Io year, which he now gets.
1t was done, he says. on the statement of MIR.
Walsh himself that he had to employ so many
more horses. so many more coaches, SO many
more men, because of the expedition and trips
Brady says he had no other evidencs OF It
except Mr.. Walsh's own statement. and he
allowed him sl36.9.5 year for expedition and
Increase OF trips on his own ex parte statement
without any investigation. And who was
Walsh? The question Is put to Mr.. Brady:
Question. Did you have anything on which
to predict your action In allowing that SIS. 100
ment?
Answer. His sworn statement.
q was that the only Information that you
had On Which to predicate that action?
A. That and the fact that we had sought to
have the service performed at less rate before
and failed In it. 1t is difficult roue.
~ 1ueu Ills SWOTu StdloutCut Was Wuag you
relied upon?
A. That.was what principally relied upon,
but ! also relied upon the other fact that
could not get the service done at the former
price by the former contractor, and that Mr..
Walsh had peremptorily refused to do the SER
vice for anything like that sum of money.
@. While you were In the government en-
ployment In New Orleans, did you know Walsh
there?
A. did.
@. Was he not indicted, on your own testi-
moDy, for fraud on the internal revenue.
A. had him indicted for failing to produce
his books as distiller. He had been In the
business for some years, and when / first went
there l subp3naed him, as did all the other
distillers In the city, to appear before me with
their books; and those of them who failed to
produce their books (Which had right to call
for under the internal revenue law l hal
1nc1ctt for fraud. That Is the only Indictment
found against Mr. Walsh in connection WITH
that matter.
@. And that was on your own testimony?
A. think so on my testimony or On tnat Of
my agents who were with me-
q AID yet on his own sworn statement alone
you granted An increase OF pay TO the amount
OF S62, 600 Qn round numbers) in excess OF Jne
price allowed for the same service uv his prede-
cessOI"
A. On his own statement. and for the reasoa
(as was saying) that could hot get the service
performed for any less.