The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1900-05-07
TIE AUDITORS ANSWER
Mr. Petty Replies to the Criticism
of John G. Fay.
Brief Review of the Attorneys state
ment to the Commissioners-How
Stop2ed-spicy Language Regard
ing Referces-The Ledger of Audit.

The Auditor for the District has sent to
the Commissioners a written reply to the
statement made before them by Attorney
John C. Fay relative to the clause in the
District Appropriations bill which provides
for the payment of judgments rendered by
the Court of Claims.
In his statement before the Commission
ers Mr.. Fay showed that there was not
OILY no need Cor the law, because the
claims to which il particularly refers have
been reduced from something like 300 to
six now remaining unsettled Mr. Fay also
appealed TO the records OF the Auditors
once. quoting from the books to show that
Mr.. Petty's recommendations in his annual
report and his position in reference to the
proposed law were not consistent with the
facts. Reference was made TO the pay
ment of the judgment for $1,000 in favor of
II L Crawford, while the said Crawford
owed the district $s,601.72
Mr.. Fay also alluded to portion of the
Auditors annual report in which the
claim OF Mr.. Tally was pronounced fraud
ulent and Mr. Fay said that an honest
claimant against the District was branded
as a SCOOnuItl NTlluE 10 ReI PAID Tor
the work which the District officials con-
ceded that he did. And not only was Mr..
Tally abused. continued the Auditor. but
the Tefereee in the case was condemned
Mr.. Fay then went on TO say that the ref
cree In the Tally case was Frank Hackett
whom President Mckinley had recently an
pointed Assistant Secretary OF the Navy.
Mr.. Petty, In his reply. states that be
has considered what Mr.. Fay said. and
then prOpppfC n civ Of
Tally case and how payment was stopped
on the check as follows:
In the beginning O: this controversy.
before the session OF the Beard OF Gem
mlssioners was held, to which | have 1e-
fe-red, Mr. Fay averred that any asser-
ton 20 the effect that a judgment OF the
Court of Claims had ever been paid without
previous notice to the Commissioners and
an opportunity being afforded them 20 af-
nrmatively approve, or by silence acQuiesca
IN its payment was absolutely false /
met his averment b. citing the case of
stephen Tally against the District in
which judgment was rendered and check
issued in payment, without the slight est
previous notice to the Commissioners. their
only information coming to them through
the chance publication of an item OF de-
partmental news. He now admits the
truth OF my statement. but says the oni--
sion was an oversight on the part Ct the
OF falsehoCd on the other foot and the
right enc at that, where il properly he
longs.
He says further on this point: But
the special Assistant Attorney General.
"ho had charge Of the case. knew all about
II Here again he blunders as badly as
-.-f0re. for Colonel Howard. the special at
torney 70 whom he refers. got his :nfor-
nation as l got mine, through the after
noon papers. and. moved by common i'm
pulse. we met at the Treasury Department
The following morning. bent upon the same
errand-that Is TO say. to enter a protest
against the payment OF the judgment
Finding that the check therefor had been
issued but not cashed. We procured the
stoppage OF payment, and unpaid II is
sun IN the hands OF the claimants attor-
neys'"
After denying that he branded a claim
ant scoundrel or that he condemned
the referee. Mr.. Petty goes on to say that
As word juggler Mr.. Fay is a pro-
nouneed success. for one who can trans
mute error into fraud. and create -scogn-
dreI out of claimant, is past master in
the art Of manipulating language and a
lineal descendant of the doughty Sir Hudi-
bras"
What Mr.. Fay really said was read from
the annual report of the Auditor as fol-
lows:
Reports Of these referees often display
such an extraordinary lack OF Intelligent
appreciation of the facts and their relation
10 the cases under consideration that they
would cause profound amazement bur for
their representative character as mem
Ders OF q class of productions in which
frequent repetition dulls the edge Of sur
prise
His gratuitous allusion.' continues Mr.
Fetty' TO the present position of the ref
cree. and his obsequious defence OF that
gentleman against an assault which was
never made, except in Mr.. Fays own ca
ger and superheated imagination. being a
transparent bid for the enlistment of a
prominent recruit. Is dismissed as pueriie
and unworthy OF serious consideration
Mr. Fay's next cause OF anxiety is
fear that my action in suggesting the OBJ
noxious amendment 10 the District bill TO
which be objects. will load upon the cur
rent revenues Of the District the payment
OF these ancient claims Referring 10 the
Northern Liberty Market claims. he be-
walls the fact. which be evidently attri-
outes TO my interference. that the act of
March 3, 1899. makes them payable who'll
Iy from District revenues and plaintiyeIy
asks: Why were not these old claims pro-
Vlded for in 6-5 bonds under the funding
bill
1T might be a sufficient answer 10 sag
that as the issue Of S-65 bonds under the
Funding act is limited by law to So. 600
O0O, of which all but $50 200 have ALREADY
been issued, 1t would be a little difficult to
pay with this remainder a debt Of SIPS
$3.50. but there were other considerations
besides the lack Of bonds which prevented
the adoption Of this mode of settlement
Mr.. Petty In aliuding TO the payment Of
the CRAWFORD judgment practically Yields
Mr.. Fay's contention after a few remarks
relative to ledger" and book of memoir
andum."
The book in which this alleged oyerpay-