The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1903-06-19

cial report anything which he thought |
should be called to the personal atten- |
ton of the postmaster general. This |
he did
n the first of the inspectors reports |
submitted by Mr.. Bristow it appears
that Robert V Willett, a son of the
then postmaster, drew two salaries
from July l to December 10, 1898, one
as a labOrer at the city postoffice at
5000 a year, and the other as mechanic
at 81 per day for each working day
on what appears to have been a special
roll of the free delivery service, and
that \. H Baker likewise was desig-
mated as labOrer on the postoffice roll
April 90, 1899 at 800 per annum on the
same date as mechanic on the free de-
livery roll at 81 a day. The inspectors
continuing say that on June 3rd 1899,
twenty-five employees were borne on
the rolls and paid on what has been
known as the military roll" while the
military roll shows thirty-four
names as having been paid by the
cashier OF the Washington office.
There was also found a special roll Of
employees, paid from miscellaneous al
I0wances, said appointments being un-
der control OF the postoffica depart
nent.'
This roll consists of nine cleaners"
with salaries from $4OO to $500. and one
physician at a salary Of S1,700. Some
of these cleaners" appear to have per-
formed very little service, and others,
none at all.
The most important exhibit is the
confidential report of postoffice inspec-
tor in charge, Smith of the Washington
division made in July 1899 setting forth
irregularities which should be investi-
gated. He names four emioyees on the
military roll who appear not to have
performed any service in connection
with military postal matters and for
whose original appointment or continu-
ance on the rolls no good reason exists.
The payment to w. S. Larner, a mill
tary postal clerk, under protest by the
cashier of S11S93, subsequently disal-
lowed by the auditor of the treasury on
January 4th. 1899, is gone into at length
and it is shown that this matter WAS
entirely irregular, and that payments
were directed without proper vouchers.
Attention is called TO certain items
Of expenditure authorized for the mill
tary postal service of supplies, furni-
$S,750.7O with the statement that the
price paid for some of the articles
enumerated such as wash stands at
forty dollars each, appear to have been
highly excessive.
Attention is called to additional irreg-
ulariUies in connection with payrolls of
clerks and labOrers, and to charging
premiums on the bond Of military pos
II III
penses are not chargable to the Unit
ed States.
An interesting feature concerns irreg-
ularities in the appointment, compen-
sa ton and promotion of Oliver H.
Smith. On November 20 1897, the first
assistant postmaster general authorized
an allowance of 5000 per annum for his
appointment as laborer, stating that
the free delivery division would also
allow s. per day to cover car fare ana
incidental expenses. Smith drew pay
from November 23rd, 1897. to November
30th, 1898, making his compensation for
one year approximately $1,34S60. The
Inspector reports mo one has certified
10 the actual time Smith was employed
nor has any statement been attached
40 Ms pay vouchers showing what par
ticular service he rendered. He was
continued in the dual capacity of clerk
and mechanic until April 1, 1899, when
he was promoted to be finance clerk at
$1,100 per annum."
The inspector says he knows of no
authority of law for his appointment
or promotion.
Attention is next called by the inspec-
ctCseo TO certain vouchers, authorized to
be paid by the first assistant postmaster
general such as expenses of Perry S.
Heath, and George w. Beavers, travel
ing on different business. The inspector
states that these vouchers do not ap-
pear TO have been itemized in the prop
er manner, nor is the necessity for the
expenditure of this money by the Wash
ington postoffice apparent.
Attention is called to seven cleaners,
placed on the payroll of the Washington
office under authority of the first assis-
tant postmaster general to be charged
10 the appropriation for miscellaneous
expenses. The names of these clean
srs-aI female-are given.
The inspector states that neither the
postmaster nor anyone connected with
the Washington office was able to give
any information as to where they were
employed or the nature of their work
and the inspector is of opinion that
practically no service whatever has
been rendered for the money expended.
The inspector says that by the over
tapping of a lease executed in 1897 the
government lost $625, and that the
building was paid for one month beyond
its occupancy.
The inspector reports that when a
cashier of the Washington postoffice on
letters from the comptroller, suspended
payments TO certain persons mentioned,
he was required TO continue these pay
mencs upon direct written order from
the postmaster who states he was YER
bally instructed in his action by the
first assistant postmaster general.
The payments were made under the
cashiers protests.
The inspector cites payment to Cath