The daily morning journal and courier., 1903-06-18
STILL ANOTHER DISMISSAL
SUPERINTENDENT OF MONEY
 ORDER SYSTEM REMOVED.

Securing Contract for Firm With Which His Son Was Connected Costs Him His Position - Government Lost S45,OO0 by the Contract.
 Washington, June 17.-As result of
 alleged indiscretion in matters pertain ing to the award of contracts for print | ing the money-order forms of the gov
 ernment James T. Metcalfe, for many years superintendent of the money-or-
 der system of the postoffice department, to-day was removed from office by the postmaster-general. A full investiga-
 tion of the case will be made later. The dismissal is the result of acts of
 MT. Metcalfe in opposition to the bid of
 Paul Herman, of Rutherford, N. J.. the
 lowest bidder by 5000, and in favor of the next highest bidder, the Wynkoop,
 Hallenbeck, Crawford company, of New
 York, of which MT. Metcalfe's son is an | employe.
 The story is briefly told in the follow | ing letter of dismissal signed by Post master-G General Payne at o'clock this afternoon:
 Washington, D. C., June r, 1903.
 ''Mr. James T. Metcalfe, Superintendent
 of Money-Order System, Postoffice Department:
 "Sir-You are hereby removed from the position of superintendent of the
 money order system.
 "The charges upon which your re- | moval is based relate to your actions in | the matter of the letting of the contract | for money-order forms. These charges
 were made known to you this morning | by Fourth Assistant Postmaster Gen I eral Bristow and Assistant Attorney General Robb, of the postoffice depart
 ment, and transcript of your answer | thereto is enclosed herewith.
 Ut appears from your answer that | when the proposals of the different competitors for the contract for supply | ing money-order forms were opened
 Paul Herman, of Rutherford, N. J. (for-
 merly employed as foreman by Wyn-
 koop, Hallenbeck, Crawford company, of New York, by which company, it SGSIIlS, yOuI SOll IS dloO ClltplOySuI, Noo found to be the lowest bidder, his pro-
 posal being s45O00 below that of the
 next higher bidder, namely, the Wyn- koop, Hallenbeck Crawford company; that the bid of MT. Herman as submit ted was regular in form, and that he 1 had deposited a certified check for $5,000
 as forfeit.
 Tt further appears that within a day
 or two the Wynkoop, Hallenbeck,
 Crawford Co., filed protest against
 awarding the contract to Herman. al-
 leging that he was not financially re- sponsible; that short time thereafter
 MT. Herman called at your office, and you advised him to withdraw his bid. and re-enter the employ of the Wyn-
 koop, Hallenbeck, Crawford Co.,, un-
 derstanding at the time that such with drawal would result in the contract be- ing awarded to said company, and con- seQuently in a loss to the government; that you offered to write, and did write, a letter to said company, apprising it of your interview with Herman and using your good offices in his behalf: that you advised Herman that his $5,- JUL uGCOSlL WoulU ploDuply bC ICIul HUI to him if he adopted your suggestion. It further appears that you regarded MT.
 Herman as possessing the mechanincal qualifications requisite to the proper performance of the contract, and that it was not any part of your duty to pass upon the question of his responsi- bility financially or otherwise. It also
 appears that you did not acquaint your superior, First Assistant Postmaster General Wynne, with the fact that you had endeavored to have MT. Herman
 withdraw his bid. It further appears that a hearing has been had before
 General Wynne, upon the question of the financial responsibility of MT. Her. man; although it has developed since the submission of your answer this
 morning that you discouraged the granting of such a hearing and mani-
 fested a desire that the contract be awarded to the Wynkoop, Hallenbeck, Crawford Co.
 "Very respectfully,
 HI. c. Payne, "Postmaster General"