The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-04-25
And There Is Nothing to Show the
Papers Abstracted Were the Prop
erty of the Government.
VIEWS OF KNOX AND PAYNE
ATTORNEY GENERAL AND POSTMAS-
TER GENERAL UNDECIDED.
Case May BE Considered Again To-day
Letter from Harrison j. Barrett
to Mr.. Payne.

Special to the Indianapolis Journal.
WASHINGTON, April A.-In the light
of present events the keen wit of one wom-
an may yet defeat the government author
tiles from taking any criminal action in
connection with the most recent develop
ments in the Postoffice Department. From
the present indications it will not be pos
sible for the government to successfully
prosecute General James N. Tyner or Mrs.
Tyner for the action of the latter in taking
from a safe in the Postofice Department
papers and records said to have been de-
posted there. This, at least, is the infer
ence conveyed in an official announcement
made to-day by the attorney general, who
has called on Postmaster General Payne
for full information as to the character of
the papers removed from the department.
Mr. Payne Is unable to supply the attorney
general with any data to the nature or
number of papers taken by Mrs Tyner.
Neither is any other official of the depart
ment In a position to comply with the re-
quest of the attorney general.
The government, 1t appears, is therefore
without any evidence on which to base
criminal proceedings. 1t is impossible to
say what will be done until the case has
been reviewed by Attorney General Knox.
after he is officially advised that the post
master general is unable to throw any
light upon the matter except the simple
recital of the facts surrounding Mrs. Ty-
ner's visit to the office of her husband and
her subsequent refusal to give up the pa
pers on the demand of department in
spectors. The Tyners contend that the
papers taken were the personal property
of the former assistant attorney general;
that Mrs. Tyner acted under the direction
of her husband, who was clearly within
his rights when he ordered that his pri-
vate papers be transferred from his office.
from which he was about to retire to his
residence.
An offer was made by General Tyner to-
day, through his attorneys, to permit an
Official of the Postoff1ce Department to ex-
anime the package taken from the depart
ment. 1t is understood that the postmaster
general refused to accept this advance,
stating that the Tyners should have per-
mitted such an examination when the de-
mand was first made upon them. The
Tyners also offered to place the papers in
the custody Of the attorney general, who re-
fused them, on the ground that he had not
yet taken jurisdiction over the case.
The defense made by Mrs. Tyner of her
action in taking the papers from the de-
partment appears to be a reasonable one.
The contention is made that If General
Tyner had been able to do so he would have
visited the department and taken the papers
himself. Being unable to leave his home,
he deputized Mrs. Tyner to perform the
task AS General Tyner's resignation had
not yet taken effect, there appears to be
some question whether the government
could support a criminal action on the
meager evidence in possession of the off,
Gals
Postmaster General Payne has not ques-
toned the right of General Tyner to take
from the department any private papers
that he may have deposited there. But he
has strongly condemned the manner in
which the act was done, and asserts that
1t gives the matter an ugly look, no matter
how innocent the intent of or purpose of
General and Mrs. Tyner.
Postmaster General Payne will tomorrow
formally advise Attorney General Knox
that he is unable to throw any further light
on the case. The Department Of Justice
will then have complete jurisdiction over
the case, and any action that is taken will
emanate from the attorney generals office.
General Tyner has engaged r. Ross Perry,
one of the ablest attorneys of Washington.
and Louis T. Michener, formerly of In
diana, to care for his interests Mr.. Mich
ener expressed the opinion to-day that the
government has no case against either
General Tyner or his wife.
JOHN E. MONK.