New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-06-04
,s. Ia cenerally conceded to the stalwar's' % Us
NOT IN imperll the next House.
ONE OF THE PRESIDENTS NOMINEES.
CHARGES MADE AGAINST D. A. STEWART VI
sOITRI

not 10 lnpelu eh0 "N>
ONE OF THE PRESIDENTS NOMINEES.
c,,,pcYs MADE AGAINST d. A. STEWART OF MIS-
SOURI,.
inv TELEGRAPH To THE TRTDUNEI
w,su1SGroN. June 3.-Ihe nomination OF ~. a
Stewart to he Internal Revenue Conoo''' iV
Ivth Missouri District in place of Colonel IL. H.
Iowdcr whose case has been mentioned IN HE
rTpp,-xr has been reported to the Senate without
recommendation as was done in the Louisville case
which has also attracted attention.
The {, ends of Colonel LawdeT. who stated that
his removal presented an ISSUE almost exactly par
alel TO that OF Mr.. Wilson. of Louisville, perhaps
somewhat overstated the case. Mr. Wilson was re-
moved wi ,hout any suggestion from the lnterha'
Revenue Bureau after about TWO years OF service
and AZ time when he held the highest grade III 'ie
service The inference seems inevitable 'hat
the reasons were chiefly political, "ehor"
Grants influence being among tnein'
reasons for Colonel Lawder's removal see'u
also TO have been political IN par', '"e
;nAuence of General Grant being repeatcd but
Colonel Lawder at the time the nomination OF ms
successor was sent up was graded second-class-l 2
or every good but not quite perfect and his re-
rooval followed some recommendation on the SUD
iact from the Bureau. Colonel Lawdcr was twice
graded zone" and three times lone and hall
never below that in his two years OF service III Is
inst 10 HIM TO add that he alleges that there are "
fuences in the Bureau personally tavoraole 10 WI.
Stewart Colonel Lawdcr has hled ui''i
with the Senate Finance COMMITTEES n"Ai's
charges against the competency ana chaIdc'oi
of Mr. Stewart who was the chief clerk OF his Ia hol
the former Collector An official report OF th's oi
fee IN August 1878, said Collector stewart mas
held the office of Collector for nine years, although
nractcallv his son David is the Collector. The Old
no. anti nf
md the affairs of his Office than any Collector we
have metz An earlier report SAYS of MIR. stewart
the present nominee: " He takes too much hoer'y
with the law and the regulations of your ONCE; Is
gwen 10 improvements for which ! do not think he
is capable; should be given to understand
that his duty is to carry OUT anu
obey the regulations of your office without any
amendment of his invention" Inns report
GRADED the Office Dig or fourth class" fair. but
much room for improvement" 1t was at another
time graded q or third class and once l, or iiIst
class.
The most serious charge made against stewart IS
that for twelve years he coDspired TO prevent me
navment of n tax of SO lao due the Government.
Tn 1874 the Collector directed by the Com
missioner to dstrain for the amount, when he cert-
fed. without obeying the order that the money
was uncollectable A year later he was again or
dered TO distrain when he strongly urged upon the
Department an offer OF comprom'se for 500.
About this time the firm in default dissolved and
two members of firm which the solvent member Oh
The firm entered went upon the Collect RS bond.
Suit was finally brought, but the Dstrct-Attorney
could never obtain the record evidence FRO . the
Collector needed 70 sustain H. ne sur hdu oeen
pending five years when Colonel Lawder found the
evidence desired after hours search III It's proper
place among the records and Judgment was Oo-
tanned for the full amount. When Stewart, the
present nominee, transferred the office to Colonel
jawder he stated TO the latter-so the bret says
had been destroyed by fire, although evidence dl-
Iectly TO the contrary on record III the Office