The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-07-13
FRANK RUMFORD CAUGHT
DISTRIBUTING CLERK AT POSTOF-
FICE ARRESTED By INSPECTORS.
lie Took Money from Special Delivery
Letters-EIcyen Years in
Postofice.

Frank Rumford. a distributing clerk at
the postofice. was arrested last night by
Postofice Inspectors Fletcher and Kiles.
The loss of money from special delivery
letters has been reported to the post
master since the first of the year. Dur
ing the past month the reports have be-
come more frequent. and the inspectors
have been put to work on the case, which
resulted in the arrest OF Rumford.
While the inspectors have been at work
on the case several test" letters have
been sent out over the road with a view OF
detecting the guilty person. 1t was not.
however. until last night that Rumford
took a test" letter from the pouch. The
inspectors missed the letter last night and
waited for Rumford when he quit work
He was taken into the Office Of the post
master and searched. In his purse were
t0una dne Two m al 1ha = stoe erss Ie ~aIeh '"e
Confronted with this evidence Rumford
confessed to taking the money and OF TAX
ing several other letters which contained
money. Owing 10 the ~lateness of the hour
-11:45 o'clock-he was taken to the county
jail until this morning, when he viii be
Moores.
Rumford is about forty-hve years old. and
lives at l240 Brookside avenue, with his
wife and three daughters. He has been
employed in the postofice since 1880.
MIR. SHIDELER NOTIFIED.
When Assistant Postmaster Shideler was
notified by a Journal reporter this morn
ing tina Rumford had been arrested he did
not express a great amount of surprise.
While sorry to hear of any mans undoing,
he expressed qualification that the petty
stealings that had been going on from spe-
cial delivery letters for the past ten months
had at last been stopped. He said the dis
appearance of money in sums varying from
81 TO $40 in special delivery letters handled
in the local office had well nigh driven the
postofice officials crazy. Mr.. Shideler SAID:
These stealings have been going on Tor
nine or ter months. During the month Of
June twenty-four special. delivery letters
were tempered with and the aggregate
sum taken was fully 800. II would be
hard to estimate how much has been Sc
cured during all these months, but ii would
surely amount 10 between $500 and $1,000
Asked If Runford had been suspected,
Mr.. Shideler replied that suspicion had not
been directed toward him until very lately.
investigation showed that at the times the
letters were handled Rumford was always
on duty. Other clerks were on duty at
some of these times, but Rumford was
the only man who was on duty every time
money was taken from letters. This was
what first directed suspicion toward him.
and that was undoubtedly the reason the
postofice inspectors set a trap for him.
PEOPLE WHO LOST MONEY.
Among the letters and the amounts
which Rumford is supposed to have taken
are: July s, c. c. Thomas sent to Mrs. c.
C. Thomas. Frankfort. So: July %. Henry
Slutzky sent to Mrs. Dora Slutzky, La
fayette. 50; June s, Joseph Giek sent to
Mrs. Edith Giek. Laporte. IS; June 8. Will
Cincinnati, s.; June Is. Henry Lewis sent
to Mrs. Ida Lewis. Greenfield, Ind, I'M
known; June IA, John Rickhoff sent to Mrs.
Rickhof. Dayton. o.. 81; May 80, John S.
Mills sent to Mrs. John 5. Mills, Hender-
son, KY, Sc; June 1, l.. A. Higgins sent to
Mrs. Ed Higgins. Newport, Ky, So;
June l, Robert c. Rede. sent
to Henry Rede. Cincinnati. o., $50;
Jun 10, George Van Steenburg sent to Mrs.
Van Steenburg, De Graft, O., IS: May q,
D N. Wrestling sent to f. G. Wrestling.
Greencastle, Ind, SO: June 20, Mrs. G.. b.
Dudbridge sent to Louis b. Dudbridge,
Mount Clemens, Mich. SIS; June &c, G.. b.
Abbott sent TO Charles Abbott. SPRING
field, o., SO: June %, Mrs. c.. C. Duncan
sent TO Charles l.. Duncan, Wabash, Ind,
s.; June q. Henry Hart sent to Mrs. Hart,
Chicago, ILL.,, So. There are a great many
other letters which have not been traced.
All of these cases show that many wives
and relatives. who. perhaps, were in need
of money, did not get ii and were, in conse-
quence, greatly disappointed, and, posi-
bly,, embarrassed. although most of the
amounts were small.