Arizona republican., 1903-11-30


 Daniel V. Miller, assistant attorney. postoffice department; appointed July l. 1902; removed May, 25, 1903; indict- ed once: after one mistrial was re- tried and acquitted.
 Louis Kempner, superintendent reg istry system; appointed clerk in New York postofficA August. 1886; removed October 21 1903
 Charles Hedges, superintendent free delivery service; appointed assistant superintendent free delivery service July ]. 1898: removed July 22 1903.
 James w. Erwin, assistant superin- tendent free delivery service; appo.n- ted postoffiCe inspector June 27. 1887; removed September 16. 1903: indicted once
 w. Scott Towers, superintendent Station C.. Washington, D. C.; ap- pointed clerk Washington postoffice November, 1890; removed October l. lsn3; indicted three times Otto F. Weis, assistant superin- tendent registry division. New York postoffice; appointed clerk. New York p0stoffice June. 1890: removed October 21. 1903.
 T. w. McGregor, clerk free deliv- cry division. In charge of supplies; appointed postofflce department, Mar. H. 1891; removed June 5, 1903: indict- cd twice.
 c. F. Upton, clerk. free delivery div ision. appointed July l, 1900; removed June 5, 1903; indicted once. M. w. Louis, superintendent supply division; appointed September 20 19C0: removed October 21, 1903
 Charles B. Terry, clerk, supply div ioin removed October 21, 1903
 As shown in MT. Bristows report, and as partially indicated by the ac- tions In the several cases. these cases show widely varying degrees of cul- | pability.
 Among outsiders indictments have also been found against
 Fl. J. Barrett, formerly in the pest office department from May II, 1sS9 to September 20. 1893. and from June | l, 1897, to December 31. 1900:
 George F.. Green: Diller B. and Samuel A. Grof; William c. Long. formerly in the postoffice department | from April r, 1890. to August 15. 1893; Isaac s. McGiehan; George H. Hun tington; Gerge E. Lorenz, formerly postmaster at Toledo, Ohio. from Au- gust 3. 1886, to July 9. 1890; Martha J. LorenZ; John T. Cupper; H. c. | Hallenbeck; w. D. Doremus: Eugene | Q. Scheble: William G. Crawford, deputy auditor postoffice department from June F. 1893. to September 15, 1887: Maurice Runkle: Norman R. Metcalf; Leopold J. Stern; Edmund H. Driggs; George F. Miller: Joseph M. Johns.
 1 Several ct the above have been in- dicted two. three or i've times each. The three chief offenders in the gov ernment service were Tyner. Machen and Beavers. The friends of Tyner have advanced the theory that in his case the chief offender was really his nephew by marriage, Barrett. who was his assistant in the office for d part of the time. and that Tyner's offenses are due to his failing bodily and mental powers. The facts set | forth in MT. Bristow's report do not tend to substantiate the validity of | these excuses for Tyner. while they show literally astounding misconduct | In Barrett. For Machen and Beavers no excuse of any kind has been all legged. In the case of Metcalf. the su- perintendent of the money order sys- tenn. the most vigorous protests were | at first made on his behalf by large | number of reputable citizens. and all | so by others who were al the time l deemed reputable. but who it has since been discovered were protited by | Metcalt's misconduct. One of them has been indicted in connection with 1 him. When these investigations were | begun. some nine months ago, many of the chief offenders who have been
 
 above enumerated. were considered to have excellent regulations. A num- her of the most respectable people in the land have offered voluntary testi- mcny on behalf of MT. Tyner. So highly were Messers. Beavers and Machen thought of by those who had been brought in close connection with | them that the congress actually pro vided at its last session for raising the salaries Of both, the salary in each case being increased $500. to take eff ! feet at the beginning of the fiscal year on July 1 last By that date they were
 both out of office. and the department
 Of justice was taking steps to have them indicted. During Machen's term of service he was twice investigated
 by the congress. once by a commit tee of the senate and once by com
 mittee of the house, but cleared on each occasion. Yet at that very per iod. as has been shown in the pres ent investigation, he was engaged in
 the corrupt business for which he has
 now been removed and indicted. This is no reflection upon the committees who conducted the investigation; for so skillfully had Machen concealed
 his wrongdCing that it was only re-
 vealed after months of laboriOus and
 exhaustive work by trained inspect ors.
 , The details of the corruption arc set forth in full in MT. Bristow's re-
 port and need not be recaDitulated by me. As regards Messrs. Beavers and Machen the corruption took the form
 of bribery and blackmail in connec- tion with the purchase of government supplies. In the office of the assistant attorney general for the postoffice de- partment. under Tyner and Barrett far greater wrong was inflicted upon the public than could be measured by a pecuniary standard, for in this office the corruption of the government of ficials took the form of favorfng get rich-quick concerns and similar