The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-12-17
THE RECORD OF CONSPIRACY.
Result of an Inquiry as to Removals
from Office in Indiana and Elsewhere.
lowed Except in Two Instances-The
President Approves the Method.
TO the Editor of tho indianapolis journal.

Ing that suspensions of postmasterS before the
expiration of their terms were becoming very
frequent, addressed 1913 letters indiscriminate-
~, to postmasters suspended in this State, and
102 letters to presidential postmasters elsewhere.
inquired of each the cause of the SUSPENSION.
! whether any charges had been made. whether
there was any investigation or any opportunity
for an Investigation or defense. To these letters
received 1853 replies some of these showed that
the officer had resigned or that his term had
expired, few failed to answer the questions,
but 136 gave me the desired information.
10l from Indiana and ttirty-fve from elsewhere.
In only two instances, one in Indiana and one in
New York. had there been any investigation;
in every other notice of any charges had
been given, no cause assigned no opportunity
afforded for defense, denial or explanation; in
large number of cases the first information ON
the subject received by the postmaster suspend.
ed was by newspaper report or upon presenta-
ton of the order of suspension by the new APP
pointee In fifteen cases in Indiana the change
was attributed to the congressman in the dis
trict, the successor having been promised the
Office in some instances. Sometimes the parties
learned by hearsay and street rumor that charges
of offensive partisanship had been preferred. In
ten cases in Indiana land eleven cases else
where) request was made for information re-
speeding the charges and an opportunity for in
vestigation, but no such opportunity was given
nor were the charges disclosed
Knowing that this information was ex parte.
and rot believing it possible that these removals
were thus made with the approval of the author
of the letter to Mr.. Curtis, / communicated to
the President, personally, the results of my in
quiries together with the names of the post
masters in question / found, however that the
President approved this course. He stated that
he considered it impracticable to inform the
postmasters of charges against them; that this
would be to turn the question Of their removal
into judicial investigation; that
they were continually protesting, OBJ
jectlng and asking for copies Of
the charges. but that these could not be fur
nished them. Isuggested that there was little
use of requiring that charges should be preferred.
if the postmaster was not permitted to see them
and there was to be no investigations that
charges were frequently made by persons utterly
Irresponsible and often by those who did not
pretend to know the facts; that such charges
were frequently false and that it was not pos
sible to procure accurate information until both
sides had at least chance to be heard; he said
he regretted that l had made these inquiries;
that the department had to get its information
as best it could; that he had great difficulty in
bringing many of his party friends up to his
ideas of this reform. and that Indiana was
particularly bad State in that respect
1t seems to me that this remarkable system OF
secret charges by unknown accusers and re-
movals without investigation is the joint product
of the Presidents desire for civil-service reform
and the camor of the party for the spoils, and
like other hybrids, the progeny is inferior in
character to either progenitor. 1t encourages
spies and informers, SANDER. falsehood and sus-
picion. ''The boys' all understand that they are
to get the Offices by some evasive and under
hand method. Moreover, every man suspended
carries with him the implication that he has been
discharged for some breach of official duty, OF
which he may be wholly innocent. frequently
the accuser is rewarded for his secret SANDER by
appointment to the office. could name many
instances:
Louisa G. Canine states that she was removed
without notice upon the false charge preferred
by A. j. Kit, her successor, that she was nom
resident
The afidavits against A. Ell. SIMPSON, of Win
chester, KY, were prepared by William NJ
Bickner. a relative of his successor. Among
the parties swearing to them was Dory Hazard
a worthless negro, of no character.
w. l.. Seaton, of Jackson, Mich is assured
that his successor Ian editor of a Democratic pa
per, violently partisan), filed charges of often
sive partisanship against him.
Charles G. Michaels, of Hope Ind. writes
IL, 4 Oh ~
nanel, a brother-in-law of his successor, L. 0.
Miller
E. r. Kirk, of Sioux City, Ia, was removed
through the agency of one Chase, an office
broker, upon affidavits of partisanship, made by
an ex-policeman and son-inl law Of his successor,
Crawford.
S. A. Marine, of vinton, Ia, heard that the
specification against him was the delivery Of
partisan address, on Decoration Day, which was.
in fact, delivered by his brother.
In many instances, such as Philip Kendall.
Portland Mills, the charge, alleged to be false, is
attributed to personal enemy, for the purpose
of working out an old crudge.
Mrs. Isabella De La Hunt, of Cannelton was
removed without notice. upon the charge OF
thrusting offensive campaign matter into the
boxes of patrons which, as it appears by her aft
davit. was false.
r. NJ. BARLEY, of Owen, Ind heard that the
charge against him was that he had received cor
ruption funds, bought votes and spent days cleo
pioneering, all of which he pronounces utterly
false.
The charge against j. Fl. Stewart. OF Charlton,
Ia, as he understood it, was exhibiting an OBJ
noxious campaign banner in the postoffce build
ing. He shows, by afidavits, that it was not ex-
hibited by him, nor in any room under his con-
troll, and that he requested its removal His :
successor was violent partisan. and chairman
of the Democratic central committee.
Ida Carpenter, of Butler. Ind, writes that
she understands the principal charge was that
she sent money to the Republican State central
committee. which was false
No doubt some of these denials by the sus-
pended postmasters may themselves be untrue.
so from the fact that neither the charge nor the
accuser is, in most instances, definitely known.
Among so many removals there is, no doubt.
good number which were properly made My
ohiectiop is not IN any partcular case. Init IN q