Sunday morning globe., 1901-11-10
NACHEN AGAIN!
This Information Is for the PreSi-
dents Benefit
AS A BASIS FOR ACTION

Sources OF Uur Information and How Nc
Came 10 Grlef-Tho Clerks Suspected and
an Attempt Made 10 Punish Tho Suspected
Ones August Worried and ON tho Run.
II has finally leaked out after several
months suppression that Rural Free
Delivery Machen attempted to remove
clerk in the Postofiice Department,
lot under his immediate supervision.
II appears from our information on
the subject Mr. Machen suspected that
the editor Of The Globe had been peri
odically Stuffed" with documents, etc.
by some one familiar with the superin-
tendents record under the last demo
cratic administration. IL has been re-
ported to us that in his effort TO dis
place the aforesaid clerk, he resorted
to his usual modus operandi, formed a
conspiracy" with two other clerks,
one of whom, presumably his conf
Dental clerk, and the other an employe
! I'm the city postOfice were his stool
pigeons. The trick resulted in a COM
plete izzle but its failure caused much
uneasiness and for several days there.
after so much so, indeed that the con-
! fdential clerk wanted to be trans.
| feired..
The Globe would advise Mr. Machen
! to adopt Davey Crocketts motto. First
know you are right, then go ahead"
! His suspicion is wholly unfounded,
This paper has always procured and
will continue to procure its informa.
! ton I'm a legitimate way, and from
a trustworthy source. We shall aim to
publish the truth and nothing but the
| truth.
In doing this we do not expect the
plaudits Of our men or women either
whose records are bad We believe In
! pure, honest public service and that
can only be attained by honest men
and women in the public service.
/ Would an honest official have his own
/ brother appointed under an assumed
name, and not even require that
/ brother to subscribe to the usual oath
Of Office? We challenge Mr. Machen
/ to produce the sworn obligation of
alias VIM. A. Clark Cor state where 1T
can be found), whom he had appointed
| I'm 1895. quartered on the postofice at
! Richmond, Va and paid out Of the
| free delivery appropriation. Can he
produce the oath of office of a single
one Of the ifty-nine secret agents EN-
ployed in that year his brother-in-law,
! Bellman, included? We say he cannot,
Is this true, or is it false?
Machen knows He need not worry
himself over the source Of our informa-
ton. It is easily obtained. The Con
| gresional Record Is replete with his
] - o. In-
ly exposed i'm March, 1896, but unfOr-
tunately another, the responsible
official. was made the innocent vic
| tim of that exposure. Not one
clerk in twenty, we venture to
state who knew and admired Hon.
Frank H. Jones, could locate that gen
tleman now. He has dropped out Of
public sight. He stood by his superin-
| tendent Of Free Delivery to the bitter
end of Cleveland's administration, al
! though he knew him to be officially
corrupt. Later in May or June, 1897
he hurriedly came back to Washing
/ ton and appeared before the Senate
committee I'm vindicauon Of the Sec
ret agency fraud, but rendered his case
uaiculously weak and absurd by adopt.
| ing Machen's testimony. He did not
| have the slightest, remOtest idea OF
what that evidence revealed That
plaguy, veXatious testimony, like the
proverbial polecat, is very offensive to
Machen i'm consequence of the publicity
given It by this paper All this in
formation, and much more, bearing on
the subject is printed in the report Of
the Senate Committee. is It true, or is
it false? Machen knows.
Would an honest unright official in
the public service promote a scheme
to depete the treasury, knowing that
his project was not only irregular, but
Illegal? Would he combine or comprO-
mise, with other officials, compromis-
ing and corrupting the clerks in his
own Office to consummate a fraud?
Would an honest upright public sery-
ant hazard his character and the repu-
tation of his own kin and blood, to
carry out an iniquitiOus scheme for
no other purpose under the sun than to
raise Doodle for his party? We need
not ask the question, Is this true, or is
1t false? Machen knows it is true, he
admitted 1t.
Let us diagnose this case correctly,
and see how Machens record appears
in print. In the fiscal year Of 1885,
we base our statement upon the record
published by Congress, Mr. Machen, It
is we'll known, had appointed and en-
ployed in the Free Delivery service
SO men and boys, a job lot at IS per
diem and their expenses. Congress had |
made no provision for this service and
the expenditure was not included In
the appropriation for Free Delivery
So much, then, for the iuegality Of
the thing. This being true, was It not
fraud nay, more, a steal, pure and
simple? Admitted that the money to
pay the secret agents was purloined
from the treasury, is it not equally true
that a portion Of their salaries was
stolen from them to help elect Camp
bell governor Of Ohio in 1895. We be-
lieye this Is good logic. Is Il true or