The National tribune., 1900-06-28
WASHINGTON D. c. THURSDAY 49,

Office the next morning she sent word
that She Mould demand that the state
ment takeb from her should be changed,
as it was not her statement, and If the
Examiner insisted upon sending that state
| ment to Washington it would be nothing
| but lie. ,She dhally concluded to 60 and
see the Exhminer and have the corrections
made, but when she arrived at his Office
he was taking a statement from the old
man and requested that she retire. When
she was called in, the Examiner asked her
| a few questions relative to the objec-
| tions she had totmake to the statement
he had taken from her the afternoon be-
| FORE ,~and then proceeded to write out an
| hther statement. when the pensioner In
| sisted upon interrupting him and saying
what she desired to have changed, he
insisted upon her remaining quiet until
he got through and said he would read 1t
to her. She had no other alternative. and
waited to hear what he had written. After
he had got through writing he appeared
to read the statement, and she again OBJ
Jected to some parts of it. He then made
a pretense of correcting the parts which
were objected TO, and she signed it.
When / commenced my investigation of
this case, Mr.. Alexander had left the city,
and in order to obtain all the information
possible | wrote him a letter asking him
to give me the name of the person who
had first brought the matter to his atten-
ton, and such information as he thought
pertinent to the case. He replied by say
ing that he had forgotten the name of the
party who had directed his attention to
the matter, and then went on to say that
the pensinner had come 10 his office after
she had made her sworn statement, and
stated that she had consulted lawyer
who Informed her that she did not have to
sign the statement, and that If she had
known this t. be the case she never would
bny1. ciprpI II hut TINT she had made
no objection to the statement that he had
taken from her. and had made no request
To have one word of it changed.
Il found that the only statement of the
pensioner appearing in the report of Mr..
Alexander was dated Dec. 81. 1899, which
is the same date appearing upon the sworn
statement of the old hired man. 1t Will
be noticed that the Examiner went to the
pensioners house, and took statement
from her, and that he made an engage
ment with the old hired man to appear
before him at his office the next morning
but the statement taken from her at the
house is not with his report, the place
where it should he.
The pensioners statement. in the re-
port of Mr.. Alexander, practically admits
that she had lived in adultery with the
old man: that she thought it would be
better to hold on to her pension certificate,
and live in adultery. than surrender this
certificates; that She found she bad drawn
Il blank referring to the ADVERTISEMENT,
and that she and the old man had con
cluded to pool their PENSIONS etc The
statement. as it appears, is in the most
brazen and unladylike language, as if
made by an abandoned creature.
"When | interviewed the pensioner l
read this statement to her and she Indig-
nantly denied having made the greater
part of it.
;s, NV Snacinl Eiyopl
incr II. II. Lockwood, who certifes that
the statement had been read in his pres,
ence. and that the pensioner had signed
it. During InS Investigation / called upon
Mr.. LockwoGd and read him this state
ment, and he informed me that there were
passages in the statement that he had no
recollection IL having heard read at the
time he PLACED his signature to the paper.
| also read to the 6la hired man his state |
ment as taken by Mfr. Alexander, and he
also denied that he, had ever made the
greater part Of the statement as recorded.
lar attention. to the, similarity of language |
IN both statements.
''Afr. Alexander goes farther and de- |
scribes the pGnsioncr as woman as lively |
and vivaciouS as a fass of 1G years, with |
few gray hIirs, and then gives the in
pgrapher orr typewriter. The pensioner |
positively denied that she was ever a stem
ngrapher or typewriter; that she had no |
knowledge Of either art, and had never |
been compelled to work for her living un.
til the death of her husband.
'As a result of this Examiners work
the pensioner was given 80 days notice TO
furnish evidence in refutation of the
charge of adulterous cohabitation.
II investigated the conduct of this pen
siorer from the time of her husbands
leath. | took the statements of those
who were supposed to be unfriendly to
-ither the pensioner or the old man, and
lid not find one person who knew or even
lad the least suspicion detrimental to the
pensioners character or morals. L am
that the pensioner is moral,
haste woman. ~
Il made my report on April II, 1900.
md lust about the time it took to reach
Washington and pass through the hands
II the different reviewers. / received let
er, dated May 1. 1900 which peremptoriIy
recalled me to Washington, not even CIV
ng the necessary time for my successor to
,rrive in this city, but directing me to
urn over ali Government property in my
possession into the hands of the Postmas
er. There was no reason given IN this
etter of recall: there never is, but / was
'ully convinced Of the reasons. felt
hat the Commissioner was not acquainted
With the true facts, and that if he was he
would not permit such action. l there
ore telegraphed to Loren Fletcher, ask
pg if he would see the Commissioner and
.ndeavor to have the order revoked. l
earned from him that it was my charges
,gainst Mr.. Alexander which had caused
ny recall After learning of the Com
nissioners desire to discipline me for hay
ng done my duty, had no further desire
o remain under his administration"
WAN IIJcM IN MCDnAcVA