Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-04-21
THE WITNESSES roDAr.
Those Who Testified Dsfsrs the Hpaes Pen
sion OfAes Camn1etSo.

Those Who Testified Bsfsrs the Heuss Pen
sion 0fnes Csnn1eess.
yoa B. arssnwsll, slsrk h ~ board a
penson appeals and formerly clerk b
another bureau, testified thss his ceunestiou
1890. The charge brought against him Va
thai he was . democrst aad had offered 70
furnish evidence that democrats we're not
receiving their proper sAa<s Of pro-
Notion Mo .a The sAasss ~as made y
made an effort 70 dsisad ains.lf .s.i.ss he
charge, but be was refused hearing By Cou-
missioner Raum. He had then writtsa letter
to Secretary Noble. and had subsequently, had
conversation With the Secretary IN which be
had stated the charge upon which be had been
removed Secretary Noble treated him very
courteously. and said that he did not supposs
that 1t WAS felony TO be q democrat
he said he would look into the
matter. The result was that witness was REIN
stated He did not get letter from the COM
ment by tho appointment division Of tho In
terror Department
Questioned as to his political afiliation Wit
ness was rather retieent, much to the anuse-
ment OF the members of tho committee, Who
badgered Mr.. Greenwich 70 some extent and
who finally came to the conclusion that Green
we'll was a safe politician with democratic pre-
objections, but with weakness toward voting
the republican ticket.
Walter J. Brooks was the next witness. There
vas nothing OF importance In his testimony.
Mr.. MARTINS TESTIMONY.
". A Martin, frst-class clerk In the PEN
sion office, who had opened mail received in
Washington for Attorney Legs, who resides in
Kansas, testified that he did SO merely to sep
arate the private mall from tho business mail
The fact that Legg was a pension attorney
In IN Ac S~ffh fxx,is
tho mail Witness was pressed by Mr.. EnIoe
and BY members OF tho committee TO show the
nece ssity for opening the mail and separating
1t, but he gave no reason othor than that
noted above. Witness admitted that be
might have separated the mail at the post
oificc, where the letters we're received aud
then sent TO Legg instead Of carrying the
letters 10 some other place and separating
them. He also acknowledged that he might
have merely rodrected the letters and sent
them 70 Legg.
FORMER DEPOSITION.
Mr.. Enlos had before him deposition made
by witness when examined By Inspector Brooks
in regard TO The matter some time ago,
and asked witness number Of
questions with view to discrediting
the answers being different from the original
statement Mr. Enloe asked witness which we're
correct. and witnoss replied thas 1t depended
upon the conception Of the question a given
him at the time.
Mr.. BAYLx RxAxIxkD.
VIM. b Bayly, chief Of tho Law division Of
the pension Office, tho next witsess, vas asked
by Dir. Enloe il aIetter Of April 10. 1892, writ
ten by witness exonsrating the former witness
(Martin( from any criminal intent in opening
the mail was not written for the purpose Of
breaking the force Of the case against Martin
Witness replied that that had nothing to do
with the writing OF the letter. The commis-
sioner Of pensions desired formal report on
the case, and witness wrote the letter in accord
anca herewith. Is appeared from Mr.. Eayy-s
testimony that tho report of Inspector Brooks
on Martins case. made in 1880, should havc
been filed in his {EayIy's) division, but had
been kept in Martins personal fiss under ths
supervision OF Green b Raum, jr. He admit
ted that tho report Of Inspector BROOKS was not
az complete as hs Bayiy) should hare made II.
MR. LANDoN OK MRs. wRIoHTs COMPLAINT
L. D. Landon. an assistant chief of the record
division when Maj. Barker vas chief, testified
that Mrs. Caddls /. Wright had spoken
70 him of the conduct toward her Of
VIM. T. Ford. She expressed fear that Ford
might use his oficiai position against her.
as she was in Office on probation.
Witness bad spoken 10 his chief
about Mrs. Wrigbts complaint. II wss Wit
ness opinion that Mrs. Wright did no. want to
testify before the committee IN relation to
Ford's conduct
The published statement Of Ford's conduct
with respect to Mr.. Wright agreed substantially
with what she had told him. Witness had
loaned money to both MAJ. Barker and Mr. Ford