National Republican., 1883-06-11
TIE sAL1sBuRYs SUED.
The Arbitration Declared or and Suits
Begun for About $500, ,0OO-Othcr Suits


The Arbitration Declared or and Suits
Begun for About $500, ,0OO-Othcr Suits
90 Follow.
On juno II, 1892 agreements were mado
between George Bliss, assistant United States
attorney, aud II. g. Ingersoll, attorney for
the Salisburys aud the Parkers and others
interested with each of these combinations of
star route contractors to refer the claims of
the government for alleged overpaymonts on
routes 35,0l0 Fargo to Pembina, Oak;
36,l2S, Silver Bow TO Now Chicago, Mont.
4s,l32, Wells TO Hamilton, New; 4G,l2O,
Soledad TO Nowhall, Cal, aud 32,02i,
Vinita, ]. r., to Las Vegas, n. NJ, to
Richard A. Elmer, second assistant post
master general, George Bliss, or any one that
might be designated by him, and Robert
G.. lngersoll, or any one that might be desig-
mated by him. Copies of tho agreements
were transmitted to Mr.. Elmer by Mr. Bliss
with letter Of Oct. %, 1882, and on Nov. "a,
1882, the original agreements were also trans
mitted with n letter from Mr.. Bliss substi-
tuting Mr.. II. ID. Lyman in his place. The
arbitration, however, did not proceed, because
it was found necessary to obtain additional
information on two of the routes embraced
in the submission, and this information Mr..
Elmer proceeded to obtain. lie has secured
il upon one route, and has not completed his
inquiries in tho other.
During the progress of these inquiries, Mr..
Elmer by letter of Nov. 20, 1882, directed
the attention of Postmaster General Howe TO
the provisions of section 1867 of tho revised
statutes (Which declares In substance that
when any sums have been wrOnglully paid by
reason of false statements in mail service the
postmaster general must sue for tho recovery
thereof), and asked his advice and directions
as to the course he should pursue In view of
4,
tration. The postmaster general was of opin-
ion that the agreements were not valid and
binding upon either tho government or the
other parties, aud that an award would not
conclude either party, and ON Nov. 25, 1882,
| ho addressed u lettor TO the attorney general
| requesting his opinion upon the agreements.
The attorney general on Dec. %, 1882, replied
that it was difficult to imply power in the
| attorney general to submit to arbitration a
case in which the postmaster general is
| specially directed to cause suit TO DO brought.
! AS n question of law, therefore, the right OF
submission seems TO bo in serious doubt.
lie further indicated that the proper course
would be to institute suits, when, under the
authority of the court, the arbitrators aftor
appointment could proceed regularly.
Tho investigation having been completed in
one of the two cases heretofore mentioned
and an inquiry in relation to another route
namely No. 46267, Willow Ranch, Cal, Il
Reno, New, having developed facts sufficient
to warrant proceedings for recovery, Mr.
Elmer directed the attention of Postmaster
General Gresham to tho cases, and suggested
in view of the opinion of tho attorney geu.
eral, that steps be taken looking to proceed
ings for recovery, in accordance with tn,
statute cited. Accordingly, on the 9Th in
slant the usual course of action in such case
was adopted. The amount sued for in tn,
iivo cases already stated will be near 100000
Othor cases are to follow against the parties
named, as we'll as against others.