St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-07-15
GOV. HENDRICKS.
His Reply to the Letter OF Secretary
Chandler, Published Yesterday.
A seathing Rebuke, and which Places the
Secretary in an Awkward Position.

INDIANAPOLIS, July 14.+Ex-Gov. Hen
bricks has written the following in response
to the letter of Secretary Chandler, published
in associated press papers this morning.
INDIANAPOLIS, July 14.-To Hon. w. E.
Chandler-Sir: I find in the newspapers
this morning letter to me from yourself,
written yesterday and circulated through the
associated press You complain that l did
you an injustice in an address to the people
Of tbs city made the night before. In that
address I urged, ''We need to have the
books in the government offices
opened for examination" and as an
illustration, cited case OF fraudulent
vouchers in one of the bureaus OF your de-
partment, and that upon your testimony be-
fore the subcommittee OF the senate it ap-
peared that the frauds amounted 10 S63, 900
and is not every word OF that true? You
were brought before the committee and testi-
fed as I stated. You admitted under oath
that the sum of money lost amounted to
S63, 600, but your defense that the embezzle-
ment did not wholly occur under your adj
ministration. but part of it was under that
of your predecessor. 1t seems to have COW
cred period from June ri, 1880, down to
January %, 1884. Does that helpyo cases
You were at the head of the department one
year and nine months of that period. Your
predecessor about one year and ten months.
He was in office at the payment
of the first false voucher June
21, 1880, and up to April IL,
1882, when you came in and you continued
thence until the last false voucher was paid,
Jan. 25, 1884. The period was almost
equally divided between yourself and your
predecessor. How much of the 500, 600 was
paid out under yourself and how much I'M
der your predecessor, your letter does not
show. But, sir, upon the question that l
was discussing, does it make any difference
who was secretary when the false vouchers
were mades 1argued that cases like this,
when frauds are concealed in the vaults or
in the books of the department the only
remedy of the people is by change of con-
troll, so that the books and vouchers shall
come under the examination of new
and disinterested men. Do you
think l am answered when you say
was mistaken in supposiag that in
this case the frauds were all under four adj
ministrations, when in fact part OF them
extended back into that of your predeeess-
or's! Why, sir, that makes your case worse,
for the bureau of medicine and surgery de-
is that it could and did extend through two
administrations of the department, a period
Of nearly four years, without detection. But
it becomes more serious SO far as you are in
dividually concerned, when the fact is con-
sided that you had notice and yet took no
sufficient action The information upon
which 1 spoke was from Washington the 10th
of last month, by Associated press, the same
haf hrin nd mo a
Associated press obtained its information
either in your department or from the inves-
tigating committee. If you were not cor
rectly reported that was the time for the COM
plant and correction. You testified that the
total of suspicious vouchers discovered so
far was about s63, 600, and that the money
frauduiently obtained was in some instances
''divided between watchman in the de-
partment, Corrigan. chief clerk, and Kirk
wood, in charge of accogntfn Now what
notice had youl According to the the Asso-
ciated press report of your testimony you got
letter last year charging Corrigan, one of
the parties, with drunkenness, and after
that man came TO you and told you that
Kirkwood and Corrigan were engaged in
frauds. Did not that put you upon
notice. And in the investigation you testi-
fed that some inquiry was made, and that
the conclusion was that while there were
some suspicious circumstances they do not
warrant conclusion of guilt After notice,
verbal and in writing, you left the men in
Office, you did not bring the frauds TO light
nor the guilty parties to punishment. TWAS
Government Detective Wood who discovered
the frauds, and the Associated Press report
says Wood declared he would have no further
dealings with your department, but would
press an investigation before congress. What
is your next excuse. Worse, if possible,
than all before You say a
large number Of congressman,
including some gentlemen of influence and
position, recommended that the head of the
bureau, DR.. Wales, should be reappoiDted.
Members Of congress knew nothing of the
frauds. They had no opportunity to know.
It was within your reach and duty. They
were probably his personal friends. You
were his ofieiilI superior, but in fact did you
reappoint him Understand not, perhaps
the detective discovered the frauds too soon,
but DR.. Wales was not one of the three
guilty parties. He neither forged vouchers
nor embezzled money. His respon sibility in
the case is just the same as your own. He
was an official superior to the three rogues. as
you were Of himself, as we'll as them Neither
he nor yourself exposed the frauds or pun
ished the parties. have not thought of or
considered this as a case Of politics, address
ing my ueighbors said that this and like
cases admonish them To demand civil SER
vice reform in the removal Of all from Office
who viii not seek to promote it within the
sphere of their official duty and authority
Respectfully,
I. 4. HENDRICKS.