Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1890-03-05
PAUL ON THE RACK.
Damaging Admissions of Milwaukee,
Ex-Postmaster.

Ex-Postmaster,
BE HAD ACCESS TO THE ELIGIBLE Irsr-rM-
PROPER RE-MARKISe AND ILLEGAL APPOINT
MESrs-sTILL HARPISe ON sHIpY-How THE
LAW WAS EvADKD.
Mr. Roosevelt cross-questioned e1-Postmas-
ter Paul very sharply at the session OF the
house investigation committee after recess
yesterday, leading him into some very damag-
ing admissions. 1t was shown on his own tes-
timony. brought out by Mr.. Roosevelt's pointed
questions, that Mr.. Paul had had access to the
eligible list; that he had told the secretary Of
the local examining board to include in the
next certifcation men who had signifed their
Willingness to accept positions of lower grade
than they had been examined for; that he ap-
pointed a man to place in August, who, as the
record before him showed, was not certified
until September; that ne was in the room with
the local board of examiners when they we're
discussing the re-marking of some examination
papers, and suggested TO them that the man
whose marking II was desired to reduce had
had an unfair advantage in the start, and that
be had drawn up the rough draft of the letter
IN reply to an inquiry by the commission of
the examining board as to this peculiar trans
action. These lew of the admissions
drawn out Of him during the cross-examina-
ton.
LASGLAND's APPOINTMENT.
Immediately after recess Mr.. Webster con-
tinued his cross examination Of the witness.
Mr.. Webster asked how witness explained the
appointment of b T. Langland as stamper July
], 1887, without classification. Witness said
that Langland was certified to him, though
there was no record of II.
Major Webster called witness attention to
the fact that Langland had previously been
certified four times in different class-one
time oftener than he had right to be-and had
not been selected, and that after that he was
appointed stamper without a certifcation.
Witness said he knew only that Langland had
been certified to HIM on scrap of paper. lie
could not, he protested. be required TO account
for what Shidy did. Shidy had certified the
man to him, he insisted Shidy had made q
"scrap paper certificatlon.
Major Webster refreshed the witness men,
DRY by reading from the statement made by
Paul To him, Ill which Paul stated that he re-
called the old carriers certifcation of May 6.
1887, which had been rejected, and had selected
Langland and appointed him stamper. Wit
ness said he thought this was the fact.
WINDING HIM UP.
Maj. Webster asked Paul if he thought he had
right to appoint a stamper from carriers
certifcatiOn.
Witness replied that he could not make such
IN appointment.
Then 1t was shown by his own statement that
he said he thought he had made the appoint
ment in that way. Witness then said he did
not know to what sort of position Langland had
been appointed.
Witness statement as to this appointment
was vague and varying. He first said. in an
swer to questions, that he thought the appoint
ment had been made by him Oh paper Slip
certification by Shidyi When it was shown
that he had stated that he had recalled one of
the old carrier certlfcations and selected him
from this, he said he thought that was the fact
His attention being then called to the fact that
he could not appoint a stamper from 4 carriers
list, he hesitated In his reply, saying he did not
know that Langland had been appointed
stamper. Then he fell back on the broad state
ment that he had made the appointment in no
irregular way.
PAULs STATEMENT
Mr.. Roosevelt asked witness if the testimony
in the possession OF the commission was not
shown him by the commission when they ex-
amined him in the Milwaukee post office, and
if he had not told them TO see Shidy. to ask
Shidy. &c.
Witness denied that he had ever seen the
testimony or knew that the commission had 1t.
Mr.. Roosevelt said then that he and his col
leagues would swear that the examination Of
Mr.. Paul had been conducted with reference to
his statement to Mr.. Webster and that the
statement had been in Mr.. Paul's hands and
examined by him during his examination.
Mr.. Paul said IN a manner Of brayado that
MIR. Roosevelt said ne would like to know
who was In the rOOm during the examination
of Mr.. Paul besides Paul and the commission
Mr.. Paul said the chief clerk was but
finally admitted that he was there only short
time and that one was there during the
whole examination.
DoDGISG THE QUESTION.
Witness having admitted on several occasions
in the course of his examination that he had
10 tba eli Iisth he, sl-o a 1.
interfered in any way with the certifcation of
names for appointment.
The witness fumbled with this question for a
long time and then replied that he had never
interfered in an improper manner"
He was then asked If he had not asked Shidy
to certify men at the next call who had been
taken from higher grade list. Witness evaded
this question In a general sort OF denial He
said he had not directed Shidy with regard to
the certifcations.
did you not hint to him?" asked Mr.. Roose-
welt
Not improperly" was the reply Not by
way OF influencing certitications." Not in the
the sense, witness said, that he wanted him to
do SO and so.
In what sense them" asked Mr.. Roose-
welt.
In the sense of doing his duty" replied the
witness, vaguely.
What do you mean by that?" Mr.. Roosevelt
asked.
In the first place, have no recollection"
the witness replied, ''of mentioning any names;
but II any remark reference was made il
was not made for the purpose Of influencing
certidcations."
IT WAS SHOWN
by the statement made to Mr.. Webster at Mil
waukee, which was signed by Paul and admit
ted to be correct, that he had told Shidy when
man of higher grade had signifed his willing
ness to take lower grade place to include him
IN the next certificatiOn.
Mr.. Roosevelt produced the rough draft BY
Paul OF letter in reply to the commission
from the local examining board and the letter
signed and sent by the board over their sigma
lures, which was an exact copy Of the rough
draft by Mr.. Paul, and asked Mr.. Paul if the
rough draft was not in his handwriting Wit
ness acknowledged that 1t was
IMPROPER RE-MARKINas.
The letter related to certain improper re-
markings and was in reply to a letter from Mr..
Oberly asking the board for an explanation.
IL was q matter which under the law the post
master had no right to have anything to do
with or 10 have any knowledge of. vet he had
drawn up the rough draft of the explanation
to the commission and the board of local ex-
aminers had copied it and sent 1t off as their
own.