The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-01-12
Rathbone Alleged to Have Received
the $4,000 Gained by the Stamp
Burning Incident.
SEVERE CROSS EXAMINATION
UNDER WHICH THE WITNESS
FLINCHED AND TOOK REFUGE.
Declined to Answer Several Questions
Put by NeeIy's CounseI-A Letter
Written by RathbOne.

HAVANA, Jan. 11.-At to-day's hearing
of the charges arising from the Cuban
postoffice frauds the government asked for
a further examination of w. H. Reeves.
He submitted several letters from Charles
f. w. Neely, the governments purpose be-
ing to show the intimacy which existed be-
tween Neely and Reeves. In reply to a
question of the court, Reeves said he did
not get any portion of the $4,000 from the
mp-burning incident. Reeves said Nicely
told him he had given II all to Rathbone.
The cross-examination of Reeves by Moya
and Mascaros, attorneys, did not bring out
any new evidence. When cross-examined
by Rathbone's attorney Reeves said he was
appointed by Perry S. Heath, the first as
sistant postmaster general.
The contention of the government to-day
to prove intimacy between Reeves, Rath-
bone and Nicely by introducing correspond
ence between them brought out letter
from Rathbone to Reeves, which the gov
ernment had in it's possession, but failed to
introduce yesterday. Rathbones counsel
declared that the letter itself shows that
Rathbone was not desirous Of concealing
fraud. The letter was written while Reeves
was ill in Florida in February, 1900. Rath-
bone wrote that Colonel Burtons examina-
ton of Reeves's books had disclosed dis
crepancy of $500. Colonel Burton thought
the error lay with the bank and suggested
that the matter be left open until the next
investigation, but Rathbone insisted on
finding the discrepancy without waiting un-
til Reeves returned to explain. Reeves ad-
mitted having received the letter and said
he thought it was an honest expression
from Rathbone.
While under cross-examination by coun-
sci for Neely and Rathbone, Reeves took
advantage of his position defendant, re-
fusing TO answer several questions.
The chief points brought out were the
facts that special agents from the United
States examined Reeves's accounts in May
1899. and reported them to be correct
Reeves admitted that if they had examined
the accounts correctly frauds would have
been discovered after July, 1899. He said
that Rathbone had no authority to order an
inspection of his accounts, this step being
only within the jurisdiction of Colonel Bur-
ton under orders from the military govern
ment. Reeves further said that after his
arrest Rathbone suggested that all three
get together and they could fool the gov
authority TO allow certain accounts without
voucher when the accounts were approved
by Rathbone. The defense contends that
the law forbids this. Reeves declared that
no orders had been issued TO audit the
monthly accounts of the postmaster of the
island He did not recognize the alleged
order shown by the defense. and he said
that it never was posted on the postofice
bulletin board as other orders were.
Neely's counsel sharply cross-examined
the witness. Reeves recalled the stamp
burning and said that the packages were
sealed. though he was not sure whether
with the Washington seal or with another.
He took down the amounts marked on the
outside and the sum, he said. corresponded
with the amounts which IL was reported
were destroyed-S310,0 He knew, he said
that fraud was intended, but he did not
know exactly how il was to be committed
He did not observe any fraud. He said that
Neely told him there was one and he knew
there was from the investigating commit
tees report which stated that the number
of stamps sent from Washington did not
correspond with the stamps accounted for
at Havana. On the second burning the
greater part Of the stamps had a seal which