The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-05-10
THE Alto ORNEY-GENERAL ANSWERS
why Certain Federal Officials in Baltimore
Were Not Prosecuted.

why Certaln Federai OWcini8 In bhltlmOr0
Were Not Prosecuted.
WASHINGTON, May 9.-Attorney- general
Miller came to-day before the House COM
mittee on civil-servIce reform, which is
pursuing an inquiry into the conduct of
certain federal officials in Baltimore. He
was asked whether two employee in the
marshars Office (Biddleman and Snltzer) in
Baltimore. who were mentioned in Com.
missioner Roosevelts report as having been
guilty of violation of the civil-servioe law
and had been indicted were still in the
government service. He replied that he
had no knowledge that their removal had
been requested. and no recommendation
had been made to him that proceedings be
taken against them. Within q very few
days past a copy of Mr. Roosevelts report
had been sent to him. The marshal
himself appointed the men. and he 1.-THE
Attorney general had nothing to do
with them except as far as he
controlled the marshals. If his [wit-
case and he had been satisfied that the men
had been guilty of willful violation of the
law he should have directed their prosecu-
soon
Baltimore the marshal had written that
nothing had been developed against any OF
his officers that demanded further InveSti-
CATION. Witness could not be expected to
be personally cognizant of all violations of
law, even violations OF the civil-service
law. The district attorneys called upon
HIM only when they felt the need of ad-
visory direction.
These answers were returned to ques-
tions intended to ascertain whether or not
AaA< h.
son TO have account in the case. Contlnu-
ing, the witness said that no question had
been submitted to him relative to the
Baltimore primaries-w hether or not par
ticipation in them constituted violation
of the law, He declined TO give any opin.
th, proceedings. as he had not examined
the ease and was present only to answer
questions of fact. He did not know for
what purpose the primaries were held.
welt was asked why the Attorney general
was not promptly notified of the Baltimore
investigation he turned to his letter book
and produced the following COPY:
WASHINGTON, Aug. 4, 1891.
To the Attorney general:
Sir-By direction OF this commission. I have
the honor TO transmit herewith copy of Com
missioner Roosevelts report OF an Investigation
made by him at Baltimore In respect 10 alleged
violations OF the provisions of the cisil-service
law relating to political assessments by persons
ia the official service OF the United states. A
COPY has also been sent to the President, to the
Secretary OF the Treasury and the Postmaster
general The report will not be made public ex-
cept with the consent Of the President, Very
respectfully, HUGH e. TBonPsoS,
Acting President
II remember perfectly well sending these
reports" said Mr.. Roosevelt. II marked
them confidential so that they would not
be gwen to the press l sent one TO the
Attorney general. also. If the Attorney.
general did not receive his report 1t was
not the fault Of the commission. 1 made
no recommendations for the prosecutions at
at all; testified before the commission"