National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-03-13
INVESTIGATING ELLIS.
Witnesses Testifyng Before the House Com
mittee on Pos offices.
some curlous Matters Brought Out Ina the
Examination.

Orleans and Columbia, Miss. He denied alb
solutely that he ever made statement to
Inspector Woodward, of tho postottice depart
ment, connecting MIR. Ellis with any contract.
No such transaction had over occurred with
Mr. Ellis, therefore he could not havc stated
IL. He did not recoloct that Mr.. Ellis had
anything to do with the New Orleans and
Pearl river route. Bo was trying to get that
route William Lilley told him that If he
paid him $1,000 he would get him tho con-
tract. Witness thought it was rather steep,
but agreed to it, and the next day got the
contract He had the contract two months,
when the department cut his head of and ho
lost his 81, 600 and more too.
The witness having stated that eX-Con-
gresham Hooker of Mississippi, had gone to
the department to sec about getting service
on tho route the chairman stated that Dir.
Hooker had gone TO secure service for his
district pursuant 10 petitions received by
him. Mr.. Hooker did not know Mr.. Brott.
There was no impropriety in anything Col.
Hooker did. No man could ever assail his
reputation in his (Alr. Money's) presence.
Mr. White thon questioned witness as to
that portion Of tho memorandum which re-
fers TO pictures sent by Lillcy TO Brady.
Witness replied that he was at Lilloy's house
one evening, and saw about $2,OOO worth of
pictures, which Lilley told him Brady had
selected, Witness's impression at the time
was that Lilley had not made $1,000 clear
profit out of the contract though he could
not say whether Brady paid anything for tho
pictures or not.
"You did say to Woodward something
about these pictures ?" said Mr.. White.
"I should Judge so. | had long con.
yorsation with him, and told him good
many things should not have told him. lie
,,ot thin us mixed II n pretty badly.'
j.. j. Edwards, Washington correspondent
of the New York Sun, was the next witness,
and was examined touching the publication
in his paper of tho documents in which the
statements rejecting upon hr. Ellis were
made.
you published extracts from a paper be-
longing to the postotfico department" sold
tho chairman. Twill you tell how you got
that paper? Was it the original or COpyY
TT was q copy. Further than that, with
due respect to the committee, cannot 60"
DO you decline with view TO protecting
tho public interesp'
"No, sir: ] decline simply because | re-
ceiyed the information in the pursuit Of my
duty as a correspondent under the pledge of
confidence"
In reply to Mr. Wakefield witness stated
that he had the copy in his possession two
weeks before the publication.
did you get the paper. which you copied,
"The information was obtained from no.
body in the postoffice department and from
nobody connected with the house of repre-
sentstives"
Witness then detailed conversation which
he had with Mr.. Money on the day when the
documents wero transmitted to the house, in
which Mr.. Money and Speaker Carlisle who
had Joined them said that the documents
would not be given to the press. He then
told Mr. Money that he had already sent u
copy of the documents to the SHn, and, in
reply to a question, said that among others
they implicated Mr.. Ellis.
Did you get the copy from the department
of Justice" asked Mr.. Taylor.
sd5 fc ESm S 70 emRSy9 & Of sa the
''Did you get it from anybody connected
with the star route investigation ?" asked
Mr.. Ellis.
IL decline TO answer"
'In your conversation with Mr.. Money did
he not ask you If you believed the statement
and did you not reply that you did not2"
.'My impression is that Mr. Money asked
me If / believed that the statement was
truthful and think l replied that j was
doubtful about il"
WAS not Mr.. Dana over here a few days
before the publication"
Yes, sir"
"Did you not submit this publication to
bim?"
mo, sir"
"Did you not state to me at the New York
hotel that you did SEQ Mr.. Dana and consult
with him.
YES but not that ! submitted the papers
to him."
Did you pay anything for this paper"
II cannot answer that"
Was it given to you as free gift?"
81 must decline to answer that"
somebody was hawking slander, and you
were tho purchaser"
"You say you sent this paper believing il to
be untrue" said the chairman,
mo, sir; when | sent 1t over ! knew
nothing about its truth or falsehood. sent
it as | would send the record of the Ste
nographer of this committee. When made
rho copy | did not know Mr.. Ellis from
Adam except that he had q seat in the house,
and treated him as treated Others, After
Ii had gone over certain person whose name
] cannot give, friendly to FL lis, said that he
did not believe that the statement Brott had
made was true, but that ho believed Brott
made the statement. ! thought then that he
ought to know, so l began to have a doubt
about the accuracy of the paper"
In reply to questions by Mr.. Ellis witness
stated that he had no instructions from the
homo office, but that Mr.. Dana had told
him to publish the records without editorial
comment.
Ibid you know that Brott had filed q
denialY"
II did not. never saw that
1.-THE gentleman who furnished you with
the memorandum did not furnish you with
the contradiction"
"No, sir"
Tho chairman made a statement as to his
conversation with Mr. Edwards, in which he
told that gentleman that the documents
would not be given to the press Mr.. Edwards
said that he did not care if tho Associated
Press did not get them, for he had already
sent them to the sun lie also told him that
Dir. Ellis was affected, and, in reply TO
question, eaid that he did not believe then
10 be true. He said, however, that he would
publish them because it was not his state
ment, but an official record. lie Money
replied that he would not publish an otfca
misstatement quicker than any other. HC
understood that bIr. Edwards was going tC
20" Ny wills; otherwise he would have done
50 himself.
Capt. Brott was recalled and asked If he
had recently had occasion to ask Mr.
Woodward for an Endorsement as a man o.
good character. he replied In the negative
but said Mr.. Woodward had written letteI
to the department Of justice in which ho had
referred to witness In high terms, and hai
read the letter to witness, lie was well ac
auaintod with Mr. Woodward and theii
families were intimate
Witness was asked what business he wa
engaged in at present.
"Well," he said, that puzzles me. an
trying 10 get my dues out Of the government
They have got great deai Of my money, anC
have worn out three or four attorneys try
ing tn get il, and am pretty nearly gon
myself"
William A. Cook, was called at his owl
suggestion He had written a letter TO MI
Ellis resnectinp WoodWard's testimony O