The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-03-07
ONE MORE DAY OF FRENCH.
The Grist of Testimony Ground by the
Commissions Mill Yesterday.
More Belated AfEidavits for the Prosecution
No Argument Will Be Allowed, but
Rebutting Evidence Will Be Heard.

asked the privilege of taking down the questions
so freely ruled out by the commission as incom-
petent irrelevant. The request was granted.
and the new reporter was given several of the
questions ruled out by the commission the day
before, as the compliments desired to make
them matters of record Mr.. Spahr said: 1--WE
asked, two days ago. as to the time that would
be given to argument in this case, and now I'M
derstand that the commission will refuse to
allow any arguments understand, also, that
we not to be allowed any rebuttal"
President Jones-We have not as yet decided
anything whatever concerning rebuttal testi-
mony
Commissioner Myers-I think there is no de-
sire on the part of the commission to refuse re-
buttal testimony, if 1 know what rebuttal testi-
mony is.
Mr. Duncan, attorney for Mr.. French-I OBJ
ject This is not the time to talk about rebuttal
testimony There will be time enough at the
close of the case. don't deny the privilege to
introduce competent rebuttal when the proper
time comes, but I do object to bringing in new
witnesses to bolster up the prosecution.
President Jones and the members of the com
mission conferred and decided that legitimate re-
decision was arrived at, Mr.. Spahr informed the
commission: you are not here as court; you
were to come here as a commission to sit and
hear [great emphasis on hear complaints and
charges; not to reject them"
The examination Of witnesses then began
again. A. G. Crook, of Cincinnati, head clerk in
the railway mail service, being the first witness.
He testified as a result of his personal observa-
ton that Mr.. French was honest, ETC.
The question was asked if he had not heard
numerous complaints against Mr. French by en-
ployes. Objected to by Mr.. Duncan. Objection
sustained by the commission.
w. E. Livesy postal clerk, living at New Cas-
tie, Ind, testified that he had met Mr.. French
three or four different times during the past
three years, and considered him honest efficient.
Courteous etc. All the cardinal virtuesl
Question: will ask if you have not heard
numerous complaints on this division against
Mr.. French?
Objected to by Mr.. Duncan. Objection sus-
tanned.
Questionable you not say to Mr. Ellis Miller
that Mr. French had made several promotions
that seemed very queer to you3
Answer-Do not think l had any such con
versation with him. There has been considera-
BILE talk among the men at different times.
Question-You say there has been great deal
of talk among the men2
Objected to by Mr.. Duncan Objection sus-
tanned.
W. H. Talbot. of Coatsville, who has been in
the postal service about nine months, testified
did not exhibit favOritism, etc. Had met Mr..
French two or three times, and been treated
courteously by him.
Question-Haven't you heard numerous com
plants against Mr.. French on the Chicago and
Cincinnati and on the west division of the P. &
St L.?
Objected to by Mr.. Duncan. Objection sus-
tanned.
R. j. Doyle, of Chilicothe, head clerk on the
Cincinnati and Grafton railway postofice, testi-
fed to Mr.. Frenchs honesty, capacity and eff
fciency.
E. W. Warfeld, of St Louis, superintendent
of the Seventh division, told the commission
what his duties were and the method of punish
ing clerks who failed to do their duty. He vol
unteered the statement that he was more severe
on the men under him than French was on his
| in the matter of recommending reduction of
salaries.
Mr. Sam Ollie, postal clerk, asked Mr. War
field a number of questions in regard to the
effect of the Bee line missing connection with
the Vandalia here and the holding of mail twelve
hours trans Mississippi connections, and the
dispatch of Kansas, Texas, Colorado and other
mail. Mr. Ollie called attention to the fact that
this connection had been missed twenty times in
January and sixteen times in February of this
year. Mr.. Warfeld's answers were neither
rather to the speculative and abstruse than to
the clear realm of fact
G. G. Clark, of Macarthur, O.; G. NJ. Simeral,
of Steubenville o., and o. I. Holloway, of Co
lumbiana, o., also testified.
The prosecution offered several affidavits Mr.
Duncan objected to their introduction, but the
commissioners decided upon admitting two, of
which they had been advised before the testi-
rnony for the compliments had closed These
are as follows:
Charles E. Thorpe, of Cincinnati, associate
telegraph editor Cincinnati Commercial Gazette
makes affidavit under date of March D, 1884
that he was employed by G. Jay French, during
the weighing of mails in 1876, to assist in conso-
idating the daily reports, and from that time
was continued in service having charge of all
weight reports up to and including the general
weighing of 1880. That during the weighing in
| 1880 route was weighed on which the service
| by Mr.. Frenchs order, doubled during the
continuance of the weighing Afiant let Mr.
| French know that he (Thorpe) was aware of the
| fact and French said twice to witness that the
service on the route would be discontinued docs
not think it wasl after the close of the weighing
and that he wished to give the railway company
| all he could. Upon afiant demurring, Mr.
| French settled the matter by saying that it was
none of his (Thorpes) business. Shortly after
! this affant was informed by Mr.. French that
the position he (Thorpe) held to be abol-
| ished and that affiant had better look for
another situation Affiant charges that, in
doubling the route before mentioned, Mr. French
acted against the interest of the government;
that he (Thorpe) was deprived of employment
after long and faithful service, without justice
| or valid excuse; that it was atlantis observa-
| ton that many other employees were deprived
of their employment unjustly, being given tasks
to perform beyond ordinary ability. and being
unable to perform them were forthwith dropped
from the service. Mr.. Frenchs circular, in opin-
ion of afiant was to convey the impression that
| if clerk did not check over hundred errors in
a month his record was unsatisfactory to Mr.
French. While in Mr. French's Office and since
leaving there, have heard complaints from clerks
compelled to double on their run" and suffering
sickness in consequence; that Mr. French was
considered by the clerks, as rule harsh IN
reasonable and tyrannical in his exactions; that
during the last weighing of mails on the Pitts