Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1884-09-30
REPORT OF TIE COMMITTEE ON
hfssDlTuREs ~ IHE DEPART.
hENT OF JUSTICE.

9NoHtSslOL 10 tue HO1se on reaSSS.ra-
oiinR. The report IL signed by Messrs.
springer chairman. Van AIstyne. Henp
liii, Ryan and Crisp. the Democratic
hetnoers OF the committee. IL details
al length the history Of the star route
frauds, from Hayes administrator
down 10 the time of the Commencement,
OF the suits. and declares that the
frauds upon the service could not have
been committed without the knoxIe5os
cooperation and assistance of Thomas
>. Brady, and that not only Contractors
out many other peosOns in high official
positions IN the government. were either
cnminaily coRniZant of the frauds or
guilty participants therein. II declares
that the amo1nt ont of which the SOW
eminent was defrauded in the star route
mail service during Hayes ad .ainistra
ton exceeds 100000. At one time
the government was paying S4JO. so per
year Tor carrying mails to otfiees that
yielded less than Sl20, 900 revenue. The
story OF the attempt TO arbi,rate the
Salisbury and Parker cases il told at
some length, and the report has the fol-
lowing 10 say concerning these coIubi-
nations
1t appears from the evidence that thu
Two most poVerful combinations of post
route c. ntracters we're known as the
Salisbury and Parker combinations. All
efforts at procuring indictments ggains,
these parties failed. A material Wit
ness against Salisbury was one Thomas
A. McDavitt, the nominal contractor
Tor the principals, who held a LARGE
amount of expedited service. IL seems
that McDavitt had been indicted in
Philadelphia for fraudulent biddise on
routes In Texas. Inc matter was quite
distinct from those in which his eyid -uce
was chiefly sought. Wood ward was di
rected by Attorney General MacVeagh
and PestmssteF- General James to pro-
cure an affidavit from McDavitt as to
his knowledge of fraud in the Salisbury
Case. McDavitt made a full statement
OF all tho facts within his knowledge.
and Was given by Woodward an
Implied promise of immunity in
consideration of bis making fall
disclosures. The binding force
Of this Implied promise was recognized
by James and MacVeagh. McDavitt
said he would freely communicate any
further information III his KNOWLEDGE
whenever called on by the Government.
Not outstanding this full disclosure on
the part of MoDavitt and the implied
promise of immunity which he had re-
ceived from Woodward, the Philadel
phIa indictment was pressed to trial
and McDavitt was convicted and ssn.
fenced TO the pen'tentIary for one wear.
Woodward protested To the President
and Attorney General that In the trial
and conviction of McDavitt solemn
pledges of the Government had been
broken, and urged Executive olemency
in his behalf, which was not granted.
Woodward testities that McDavitt was
the witness ne should have relied upon
20 break into the Salisbury corbina-
ton and show their methods of doing
business, aud that he WAS the only wit
ness accessible to make the proof
against this powerful combination. but
that the Government took the witness
and sent HIM to the penitentiary.
The report continues " The manner
of procuring expedition was red need to
a science. The atfidayits of contractors
were used ls foundation upon which
expedition and increased service were
allowed. The brazen eifrontery and
perjury of these affisevit makers is
without parallel in the history Of cri,ni-
Nal prosecutions. Afiidavits sIgned and
sworn to in blank we're kept on hand by
the contractors, Just as they laid up sup
plies of grain for their horses. These
aliidavits were the sole measure of the
cost of expedition, and no other evil
dence was required by the department
for granting 40 increase of service and
increase of speed. which cost the Gov
eminent hundreds of thousands of dol
lars. A stock of these blank affidavits
was kept on hand, and the blanks were
filled when occasion was required to use
them. Thus perjury was made the ba-
ais of all the frauds perpetrated.
A considerable portion of the report
is devoted to the subject of the employ
ment and compensation Of attorneys.
The amount paid for this purpose. as
far as ascertained, was $l4i.408, of
which George Bliss received S57, 1872.
review of Merrilfs testimony in ex-
PLANTATION of the failure of the Govern
ment to secure conviction in two star
rsute trials, is given, but the report SAYS
the commission had not time to pursue
the investigation of the reference to at
tempts To bride jurors.
In reference to the contractors not
indicted, the report says: From tabu-
lar statement from the flee of the
Second Assistant Postmaster General,
the amount which il is claimed could be
recovered from Salisbury X Parker, il
estimated at 1854, tU3 While the record
of evidence in the Post Office Depart
ment at the beginning of the investiga-
ton by the department WAS meager
against Salisbury i Parker, vet the evi
dence subsequently procured through
special agents sent out for the purpose,
showed that the operations of these
parties a. contractors were Rlaringly
fraudulent, and that they should have
been indicted, convicted and prosecuted
in civil suits for recovery of large sums
illegally obtained from the Govern
ment. Some mysterious and powerful
influence must have operated to secure
their Immunity"
The next subject considered is the
relative failure to indict Ex-Governor
Kellogg, and the report saws that Geo.
Bliss seemed to oppose the efforts look
ing toward suoh an indictment, and
upon this point continues as follows
There il wide Issue OF veracity be-
tween Bliss and the members of the
Grand Jury as to the efforts made by
Bliss TO secure an indictment against
Kellogg. The foreman OF the Grand
jury, mlLeUG1i. HDu AlrSrIs. " lifafQ.
Edmouston. Stewart and Truesdeil APP
peared before the committee, ami each,
oorroboratiug the Others. stated sub
stantially that Bliss, after the evidence
of Walsh had been conclude before
the Grand jury. stated that James r.
Price VAS expected TO arrive IN the city
on the following day and would appear
before the jury rs a witness for the Gov
ernment in that case, and secured an
Adjournment over one day on that 40.
count. This was on Friday, and the
promise was that on Saturday Price
would appear as witness, the infer
ence being that Prices testimony was
necessary 30 make out the G1vsrnmeni's
case. On Saturday, when the jury met,
Bliss announced the failure of Price TO
appear and was compelled TO submit
the case on the evidence already taken.
The Jury then voted not 10 present an
indictment Bliss stated he did not
promise Prices attendance, but that
be might have said TO the jury that the
case would be stronger when tried be-
fore a petit jury, for then thsy expected
10 have Price as witness for the Gsv-
eminent, but each Of the grand Jurors
above mentioned were positive that this
was not what Bliss said. liz further APP
pears from the evidence OF Merrick and