Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-01-08
WITNESS WALSH STEAKS
Light On the Methods OF Pubic Prosecutors
John A. Walsh has addressed lengthy
communication to the president, in which

LiSnt Ou tne metnOOs OF Pubic Prosecutors
John A. Walsh has addressed 4 lengthy
communication to the president, in which
he complains that letter, coucheu IN
courteous language, to Attorney GensI"!
Brewster has met with no response. an;
that although witness for the prusscu-
ton in the Star Route trials, Yet an 1T
tempt has been made to represent him a>
arrayed against the government. LII re
ferring to his letter to Brewster he says:
s. sHbmit that the terms Of this letter
were polite, cOuched i'll the most respect
full language, to which III all courtesy |
was entitled to an answer. This violation
Of official propriety, to call it by no harShcr
term, was the more surprising to me-,
occurring, as it did, in ;.u otlics whose
ularly supposed - plrtaks of the renIis-
sance period
Walsh charges the late grand jury with
conspiracy to defeat the ends Of justice.
and processes to be unable to understand
the devious ways of the department Of
justice in the matter. His case, as he
states it, briefly summed UP, is as follows:
| On June 81, 1881, he filed suit in the
district courts against Brady for cash
| loaned him at various times i'll
| his (Walsh's) capacity IS banker.
This suit attracted the attention of
the prosecution to him, aud in June, 1882,
he was summoned to appear as i witness
before the grand jury. He thinks tho
prosecution was unaware of tho nature Of
his testimony or he would never have b.rn
summoned. Before the grand jury ha
volunteered no testimony, but simply
answered questions proposed by Mr.. Bliss.
His evidence resulted in an Indictment
being found against Brady and Price for
conspiracy, but the name OF Senator kel-
] lOgg was omitted from the iudict
ment, although the evidence bore
most heavily against him. lie
says MIR. Bliss did not mention the nature
of his evidence to Mr.. Merrick. A Iew
grand jury was sworn in in July, 1882, but
adjourned until October on the plea that
there was in possession of the prosecution
overwhelming evidence against sundry
mail contractors. Ho (Walsh) had 70
personal feeling as to the failure Of the
grand jury to indict Kellogg ; he had in
giving evidence simply performed an un-
pleasant duty. Mr.. Walsh calls attention
to the fact that at the time Of the failure
to iudict Kellogg nothing was said about
his (Walsh's) evidence not being
worthy of belief. lie had heard
it rumored that Kellogg's uame
was actually included in the pre-
sentiment, but mysteriOusly disappeared
Mr.. Merrick called on him al asked wha!
his testimony had been, saying he had
received no official information from Nj.
Bliss. When he repeated it Mr.. Merrick'
astonishmeut was profound. and lie sa {.
he would call the grand jury together
lie was summoned to appear before them
In violation of law the Spotford- Kellogg
published testimony, furnished by mem
ber of the cabinet, was brought into the
court room. The grand jury failed to
indict, and at once tho Brady and Kellogg
organs heralded to the world that a grand
Jury had failed to believe Walsh
on oath. A day or two later,
Kellogg in an interview, said there
was not a bill, check or voucher with his
(Kellogg's) name on it. On July II III
(Walsh) gave TO the New York papers
and they published, his testimony befors
the grand jury, with copies of Kellogg
checks, telegrams and letters, and on July
20 a fac simile of a check drawn by Walls,
to tho order Of Kellogg, and indorsed b.
him, being part of the $50, 600 in posta
drafts which Mail Contractor Price hat
paid Kellogg and Brady for expeditius
his service from Corpus Christie t
San Antonio. These postal drafts weri
given to Walsh, as q banker, for collection
by kellogg, onc-halt for kellogg's account
aud one. half for Brady's. The failure O
the grand jury to indict Kellogg, whii'
indicting his co.conspirators Brady and
Price, produced great discomfort but
when the July grand jury was called to-
sether, the cOnspirators pooled thei
issues and determined that the grand jur.
should not believe him (Walsh) on oath
Mr.. Walsh further chragss that, thougl
overwhelming evidence against the Sta
Route trial has been accumulated, yet i
has not been used. Yet with all this evi
dence the prosecution selected a case 10
trial that, but for chance evidence, wOul'
have been thrown out of court, while
was in possession of evidence against othe
contractors much stronger. He further
calls attention to the fact that Colone
Bliss, in his argument, ignored Dorsey. L!
next refers to the arbitration now liz pro
gress between some of the contractors ant
the government as commencing itself t.
every public plunderer, and wonders VIII.
Dorsey, Brady ct al. are excluded from
such a mode of settlement. In conclusion
he calls on the president to remove MIR
Bliss.