New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-12-17
. CONCLUSIONS REACHED.

The summary and conclusions of the report are
as follows:
AS result Of our inquiry IN the "TuIloch
charges and the considerations hereinbefore
our Judgment
First-7The discussion Of the %Tulloeh"
and gravely disoredtsbe abuses during the
years 1898. 1899 and 1900 in the Washington
Postoffiee and the office Of the First Assistant
seeond-These abuses involved conduct on
The part Of various public officials which was
certainly often illegal, and may have been some
times criminal; but such offences, if committed,
were in all cases committed more than three
years before we were ordered to investigate
the Charges" and, SC far as we are clearly IN
formed, more than three years before Mr.. Tul-
Ioch's interview of May last
the possibility, and even probability, but does
not prove that abuses ay have continued both
sn the department and the postofice subsequent
20 the early summer Of 1900, when We lose
sight of them and that in connection there
with criminal acts may have been committed
within the period OF limitations.
Fourth-The report of Inspector Crowel and
the facts relating to the claim Of George w.
Beavers above set forth, indicate the possibility
that similar conditions may have existed both
within and beyond the period OF limitations in
the New-York POstoffice.
FiFth-The persons PRIMARILY responsible
for the above mentioned abuses and the result
inc scandals appear TO have been Perry 5.
Heath, then First Assistant Postmaster Gen
ersi, and George w. Beavers, then chief of the
Salaries ard Allowance Division, neither of
whom is now in the service of the United
sisth-charles Emery Smith, late Post
master General; James WilIett, late postmaster
Of Washington, now deeeasedi John a. Merritt,
his successor in said Office and its present in
eumbenti Robert J. Traceweli, Controller, and
Henry a. Castle, Auditor for the Postoffice De-
psrtnnent, all appear to have shared, in some
measure. their responsibilities; the late Post
master General for his seeming failure not
Mlthstansins rspesssS; wargngs' 20 t appreciate
quent necessity for its prompt and adequate
punishment; the two postmasters, for toiera-
zion of these abuses and obedience to plainly
improper orders without exposure or, appar.
entity, protest, and the Auditor and Controller,
fer acting upon lax and arbitrary principles in
whereby the payment OF Illegal and seemingly
fraudulent claims by the treasury was rendered
possible
ILLEGAL EMPLOYMENT.
seventh-The employment of subordinates in
rostofices about 10 become classlhed for the
purpose of thus securing their admission with
out examination into the classified service was q
practice in fra uoem egis, and officials guilty OF
II thereby established their own unftness for
public employment.
Eighth-The employment Of so-called labor
ers' 10 DO classified work was clearly Illegal
and under the express directions of the Civil
Service rules. 10 be punished by dismissal from
office
CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD.
Nfnth-An agreement by any public officer
with any person, whether in out of the pub
lie service at the time, that the latter shall re-
CeiVe the emOlumentS. OF puDlc employ lleill
under pretence of being employed without rem
eering any services to the government. consti-
flutes a conspiracy TO defraud the United states,
and, il followed by any overt act tending TO its
accomplishment by any Of the parties. renders
an of them responsible under the terms Of the
United States Revised Statutes. Section 5.44o
Mr.. VANDERBILT CRITICISED.
srebth-The detail of Thomas W. Gilmer 10
0ifferent work Of a lower grade and at reduced
CONDENSATION ry T. A. Nanderlip, then Acting
Secretary o. the Treasury. under all the circunl-
stances attending il, was apparently unjust ano
oppressive. and certainly disastrous TO the pub
lie interest since IL would be generally ana
naturally understood by those cognizant OF 1t as
a punishment inflicted on a faithful public SER
want who had by the honest discharge OF his
duty Incurred the enHlity of active and inhuen-
tial politicians Il seems to have been preceded
by no sufficient inquiry on the part OF Acting
Secretary Vanderlip and would render proper
an investigation Of the latter's CONQUER were ne
etrl in the public service.
the propriety Of Seymour w. Tuliochs removal
from he office Of cashier by Postmaster Merritt.
the precipitancy and discourtesy shown by the
latter in effecting this removal seem TO have
been without justification and tend to cast grave
doubts upon the good faith of his explanations
OF the removal Itself aud his course was clear
IL regrettable n the public Interest. as leading
naturally 10 the belief that the cashier had been
IN fact removed for his failure TO comply with
irregular ard even Illegal demands upon the
funds IN his custody.