Daily Los Angeles herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1876-1884, 1884-07-15

nOlu IN Iui8 CuuntfJ. ~ - pfDDhDi5
that, under the authority conferred by
the contagious disease clause OF the leg
islatiye bill, medical examiners will be
appointed MS attaches to American Con-
sulates at the French ports infected with
cholera. whose duty It will be to report
periodically upon the progress Of the
disease.
Charm ansbip of the National
Democratic Committee.
WAsnISGToS, y. C., July IL The
names of ex-senator Wallace. OF Penn
sylvania, and Samuel j. Randall are
mentioned In connection with the Chair
manship OF the National Democratic
Committee.
Hendricks Reply TO Chandler
He Makes some Home Thrus =
ISDnNAroLis, Ind, July li.-Ex
Governor Hendricks has written the fol-
lowing in response TO the letter OF Score.
tary Chandler, published in the Asso-
ciated Press papers this morning:
ISDIASAPoLIs, Ind, July IA, 1884 49,
TO Hon. w. Il. Chamberlain: | find
in the newspapers this morning letter
to me from yourself, written yesterday
and circulated through the Associated
Press. You complain that did you in
justice in my address to the people of
this city, made the evening before. In
that address ! urged: 1--WE need to
have the books in the government
Offices opened for examination, and
us an illustration, cited the
case Of the fraudulent vouchers in
one of the bureaus of your department
and that upon your testimony before the
sub committee OF the Senate it appeared
that the frauds amounted to So, 900. Is
not every word Of that true! You were
brought before the committee and testi
fled ms stated. You admitted under
oath that the sum stolen amounted to
$03, 900, but your defense was that the
embezzemtnt did not wholly occur un-
der your administration but that part
Of it was under your predt cessor. 1t
seems to have covered period from
June q, 1880, down to January %,
1884. Does that help your case? You
were at the head of the department
year and nine months OF that period,
your predecessor about year and +, n
months. He was in Office at the pay
ment of the first false voucher, June 81,
1880, and up to April H. 1882, when
you came in and you continued thence
until the last false voucher was paid,
January 25, 1884. The period was
almost equally divided between yourself
and your predecessor. How much OF
the 1853, 900 as paid out under yourself
and how much under your predecessor,
your letter does not show. But, sir,
upon the question that was discussing,
does it make any difference who was
Secretary when the false vouchers were
paid urge that cases like this. wh,re
frauds are concealed in the vaults or
books of department., the only remedy
for the people is by change of con
troll, so that the books and vouchers
shall come under the examination OF
new and dsinterested men. Do you
think | am answered when you say |
was mistaken in surprising that in this
Gaze the frauds were all under your
administration, when in fact part of
them extended back TO your predecessor?
Why, sir, that makes your case worse
1t becomes more serious 10 far as you
are Individually concerned, when the
fact is considered that you had notice
and yet took no sufficient action. The
Information upon which l spoke
was from Washington. the 26rh of
last month by the Associated Press, the
same that brings me your letter. The
Associated Press obtained its informa-
ton either in your department or from
the investigating committee. Ii you
were incorrectly reported that was the
time for complaint. Ytu testified before
the committee that some inquiry was
made and that The conclusion was that
while there we're some suspicious
circumstances, they did not wall
rant the conclusion of guilt.
You did not bring the frauds to light,
nor the guilty parties to punishment.
Ii was Government Detective Wood who
discovered the frauds, aud the Asso-
ciated Press report says that Wood de-
clared that he would have no further
dealings with your department, but
would press the investigation before
Congress. What is your next excuse?
Worse, if possible, than all before. Yon
say large number of Congress smen, in
Guiding some gentlemen Of great inhu.
ence and position, recommended that
the head of the Bureau, DIR. Wales,
should be reappointed. The members
Of Congress knew nothing of the frauds.
They had no opportunity to knew. 1t
was within your reach and duty. They
we're probably his personal friends; you
were his official superior. Bnt, in fact, did
you reappoint him ? l understand not.
Perhaps the detective discovered the
frauds too soon. But DR.. Wales was not