Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1884-03-09
GlBSON'S STORY
Told Befors Sprinqer's Committee
Yesterday.
He Says the Attorney General Paid No
Attention 10 the Prosecution Of the
Star Route Cases.
Special 10 the Register.

WASHINGTON, March S.-The investigation
of the House Committee on Expenditures
in the Department Of Justice was resumed
sb ortIy after 10 o'clock this morning.
A. NJ. Gibson, attorney, of this city, was
hear in explanation OF his connection with
the star route prosecutions. He said he was
paiu IS 600 for his services. He thought he
had been underpaid. He began work in the
Hostcffice department in 1872, and by
making study of the department was
familiar with the contract division. When
the star route matters came up he tabu-
lated the excesses OF star route expendi-
lures. The detail of the preiMinaries Of
the prosecutions were related at length by
the witness, but no new information
brought out. He stated that the govern
ment had at first intended to proceed
sgainst the contractors by grand jury in
dictmept, but the grand Jury was adj rurn-
ed before the conclusion was reached, and
the proceedings were begun by informa.
tion. The fist report of witsess was made
to the sttorIsy general and submitted to
Congress in
Ehe Annual Report OF ihe Latter.
About this time it wss announced by the
press at the instance OF the department of
Justice, which was arrayed on the side OF
the accused, that he mad no connection
with the department, and from that time
the connection of witness actually terml-
mated. The department of justice had
caused to be published statements that he
bad no authority 10 make the report
hinh yna1a If raised a hptwaan
witness and the department. The publ
cation, witness thought, was tue work
of MIR. Woodward. the report WAS
sent by witness to Solicitor Philips, bat
it's receipt by the solicitor general was
refused. On December /, 1881, Attor-
pey General Wayne MacVeagh ad-
dressed witness a letter cCmpli-
mentiEg him upon the character OF his re.
port; aISo letter 10 Solicitor Phillips OF
tbe Department Of Justice, endorsing the
employ ment of witness. There was clash
between witness and Mr.. Woodward IN the
examinations they we're making. Wood
ward thought that joint reports were to be
made, but the latter had submitted sep
arate report.
The inspectors acted under the direc-
tons OF witness during the time he was
Conducting the Inv nyestigatiOns.
Brewster Cameron was one Of the inspect.
ors. Witness was first led into the inVesti.
tions il 1872 by information he received
III regard to straw bidders. He worked
in the department until 1882 mere
EFT for the news there was
in it. He was actually employed by the
Government from April - TO some time
il November, 1881. "Were you constantly
employ ei during that time" inquired Dir.
Srswsrt Of the committee. Yes, sir, re-
ped the witness promptly, II worked
fourteen hours aday, including Sundays"
The Sundays ought to have b en-
DEDUCTED fs, contributed ed ..iG member Der
other member OF the committee,
"he ought to pay for the Sundays" He
will pay for those hereafter" replied the
first member. (Lsughter) Speaking Of the
strength OF the prosecutions made
on the routes selected, witness
said he had advised prosecutions on other
routes than those upon which proceedings
were instituted, but Bliss had overruled
him. whit did Mr.. Brswster say about
what routes should be included in the in.
dictm, nts?' Inquired member. Nothing
replied witness. He paid no attention
20 the star route cases; he entrusted
il ali 10 Mr.. Bliss. Mr.. Brewster may have
been consulted about the Philadelphia
cases" Witness at one time recommended
to tie Attorney General that proceedings
be
Instituted Against Senator Kellogg
uron information in possession Of inspec.
ttrs relsting TO the San Antonio and
Corpus Crisu route. He wrote out the
basis for the prosecution and submitted it
to tie Attorney That was
in the fail of 1881 while
Mr.. Kellogg was in the Senste)
but the Attorney General did not avail
| himself OF the Information. There was no
prosecution instituted and it was no. long
until the statue of limitation had ruu,
This route was in the Salisbury combina-
tiun. Witness met Mr.. Merrick, attorney
for the prosecution, during the pro.
gress of tie first trial, and told him
be cid not know what he was ABOUT;
that be had taken the wrong route
and that the case was being laughed
out OF court Mr.. Merrick seemed con-
| csrned Called at the residence OF witness
and the result was that Mr.. Walsh was
| called to testify upon the authority of Me-.
&erriCk; witness ststed that the prosecu
tion acknowledged the first trial to be
failure; that the govern msnt had been un-
able 10 prove q conspiracy. Mr.. Wslsh's
testimony, in toe opinion of witnesses,
finally saved the case for the prosecution.
The committee adjourned until next Mon
dsy.