Huntsville gazette., 1889-12-14
SILCOTT'S BIG STEAL.

Notarfes Doing a Thriving Business with
Protested Notes.-The Investigating Com
mittee Following the Matter Up to See
Who VIII Be the Loser by Cashier Sill
colts Peculations-Ex-Sergean
Leedom Wants Indictment Against
His Faithless Assistant.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 10.-The Office of
| the sergeant-at-arms of the House was
| besieged yesterday with notaries with
notes given by members which had been
| allowed to go to protest. As the fee in
each protest case is about $1.50, the
| notaries did a thriving business.
| Mr.. Leedom, the x-sergeant-at-arms,
has detectives at Montreal and Quebec
| looking out for Cashier Silcott. Mr..
Leedom does not believe the story from
Montreal that Silcott and his mistress
are at prominent hotel there. He
thinks that if the story is true, his de-
tective at Montreal would have reported
| the fact.
The investigating committee was
ready for work shortly after ten o'clock
yesterday morning, with Mr.. Adams, of
Illinois, in the chair. Several Con-
gressmen were before the committee to
suggest plans for the distribution of ths
money for salaries of members still re-
| naming in the sergeant-at-arms' office.
Mr.. Mills outlined plan which he
| thought would be satisfactory, because
of its fairness. He held that as the loss
had occurred in November, it should be
borne by all those members who had re-
| ceipted for their November pay. The
| remaining money, he thought, should
| be distributed among all the members
| who had receipted for the months from
| March to November, and whose money
| Silcott had made off with.
Mr.. Catchings, of Mississippi made
long speech, in which he held that the SER
| geant-at-arms was the authorized dis
| bursting officer Of the House, and conse-
uuently. the individual members should
not be made to bear the losses caused
| by the action of Silcott, who drew the
| money from the Treasury as the au-
| thorized agent of the sergeant-at-arms.
| Mr. Catchings said that if the Govern
| ment would pay to members their salary
| for November, which he held had never
been lawfully paid, the whole trouble
| would be ended, because the theft was
| entirely out Of the money for their sal
aries for that month.
A member of the committee adj
mitted that Catchings' views had i'm
pressed the committee.
| Messrs. Pickler, of South Dakota; Hen
| derson, of Illinois; Riley, of Pennsyl
| vania, and several other members told
| the committee about matters connected
with the efalcation. Several submitted
plans for the settlement of the question
as to who shall bear the loss caused by
| the theft. A majority thought that the
| sergeant-at-arms was the authorized dis
| bursting agent of the House, and that
| the individual members should not bear
| the loss.
| Max Long, Of the coast survey, testi-
| fed that he met Silcott on Saturday
| night, November %, the night of his
| fight, and walked to the railway sta
| tion with him. He said he was going to
| New York.
The report to the House will be ready
| Wednesday.
1t has not been decided whether the
committee will favor any particular
recommendations on the question as to
| the authority given to the sergeant-at-
arms to disburse money for the House.
| Most of the members of the committee
favor submitting the salient points in
the arguments that have been made on
this question, and leaving the House to
| decide where the loss shall fall.
Last evening Mr.. Leedom wrote to
the district attorney for the District of
Columbia placing the Silcott case in his
hands and requesting him to have an
Indictment brought against the absent
cashier. Mr.. Leedom's legal adviser
thinks the individual members of Con-
gress should not lose their salaries He
believes that the sergeant-at-arms is a
properly authorized disbursing officer,
but maintains that Mr.. Leedom's bonds
men can not be held accountable, be-
cause their bond expired with the
Fiftieth Congress, for which it was
given. Mr. Leedom, he states, is will
ing to turn over the $40, 900 that he pos
sesses should it be decided that he is
| responsible for the loss, without the
formality of a civil suit
The S14,5O0 which Sllcott paid into
the National Metropolitan Bank in or
der to take up the forged notes which
would be sufficient evidence to extra
dite him, will probably be the cause of
suit. 1t is claimed this belongs to the
Government, and suit will have to be en-
tered to recover it.