Evening star., 1903-08-01

assisting the prosecuting officials in the
presentations to the grand jury.
An Official Statement.
Late yesterday afternoon the Post Office
Department made public the following ofn-
cial staten ent of the cases in which in
dictments were returned during the after
noon:
I'm 1892 the department, through the
free delivery division. entered into a con-
tract with the Postal Device and LOCK
Company for the purchase of carriers
satchels for period of four years. The
manager of this company. with whom all
negotiations were conducted, was W. G.
Crawford of Washington, d. c. The
satchels were to be made of a coated cam
vas called pegamoid. instead Of leather, as
formerly. The specifca ations of this con-
tract required the contractor to furnish
straps the same as in the Stern contract.
George T. Lorenz of Toledo Ohio. made
a contract with Mr.. Crawford. representa-
tive of the Postal Device and Lock Com
pany, to aid him in securing the contract
and to furnish the straps for a specific
amount per satchel. Pursuant to this
agreement. which was clandestine agree
ment and not a matter of record in the
department. every time the Postal Device
and Lock Company was paid for a supply
of satchels. remittance was made by that
company to George +. Lorenz, Toledo,
Ohio. for his part of the compensation.
Mr.. Lorenz however. did not furnish the
straps. They were furnished by the de-
partment. through Machen. and paid for
Ivy the department. Crawford. therefore,
paid IorcnZ for the straps hich the de-
partment furnished. and LOrenz. to show
his appreciation of Machen's lberality in
furnishing free of charge the straps which
he Gorenz, was paid for. divided his profits
with Machen. When Crawford remitted to
Lorenz. Lorenz at once RENTED to Machen.
''Machen. Crawford. George Il. LOrenZ
and Mrs. George f. LOrenZ, in whose name
the money was deposited. have been indct-
ed for conspiracy to defraud the govern
ment.
Crawford was deputy auditor for the
Post Office Department from June l.. 1893,
to September Is. 1897.
In 1901 Machen entered into an agree
ment with Maurice Runkle of New York to
furnish n small leather case for the free
delivery service. for which the department
paid 30 cents each This contract was en-
tered into without competition. and the
cases cost Runkle about 81 cents each. The
inspectors have conclusive evidence that
Runkle divided his profit of 20 cents per
case with Machen and McGregor. This is
analogous with the Baltimore case, in
which McGregor and Upton figured and
have been both indicted.
'Machen. Runkle and McGregOr have
been indicted in this case.
In lSsS, through the free delivery divis-
ion. a contract was made with Leopold j.
Stern of Baltimore for carriers Satchels.
The specifications required Stern to furnish
complete satchels, including the shoulder
straps, the shoulder strap being specifically
described as part of the Satchel. and to
be furnished by the contractor. After the
contract was entered into Stern was re
lieved by Machen from furnishing the
strap. the full price being paid for the
satChelS-
Machen's Double Rake Off.
In consideration of being relieved from
furnishing the straps by Machen, Stern
pays to W. c. Long a large amount Of
money which Long divided with Machen.
The straps which Stern had been relieved
from furnishing We're purchased by Machen
from a New York firm without competition.
lie required this New York firm, however,
to pay a commission of cents per strap.
which commission was collected by w. &.
Long and divided between Long and Ma
chen. In this transaction Machen not only
secured money from Stern for relieving him
from furnishing the strap which he had
contracted to furnish, but required the man
from whom he bought the straps to pay
him commission on the strap which he
was giving to Stern. Long was used as the
intermediary in both transactions. over
S22ttt' was paid by the department Tor
straps that were furnished to Stern though
Stern had contracted to furnish them him
self
Long. Machen and Stern have been In
diCted in this case for conspiracy to de-
fraud the government.
Painting of Letter Boxes.
THE department, through the free de-
livery division, entered into an agreement
with John I Cupper Of Lockhaven. Pa. to
furnish material and paint all of the letter
boxes package boxes and letter box posts.
in the United States, for which he was TO
receive twenty-five cents for each post.
fifty cents for each letter box and one dollar
for each package box. The terms allowed
Cupper We're far in excess of the former
cost of painting. The boxes in some Of the
large cities We're painted frequently, some-
times every year. while in smaller cities IN
the more remote sections of the country
they We're painted not to exceed once in
five or six year A part OF the money which
Cupper received from painting the boxes he
paid to w. c. Long, who divided 1t with
Machen.
The contract with the manufacturers of
letter boxes requires them to paint the
boxes yet Cupper was ordered by Machen
TO paint the boxes at the factory. and the
department has paid him over $4,000 for
this unnecessary painting Cupper paid
Long a part of this money. who divided IT
with Machen.
"Cupper. Long and Machen have been IN
dicted for conspiracy to defraud the gov
eminent.
The stamps for which 1t Is alleged, the
government was made to pay twice Were
supplied by a New York firm. which Is said
to have acted entirely in good faith. One
Of the indictments sets out that this firm
in one instance made a payment of 81 go to
Long. who, according TO the evidence cited
in the Indictment. paid Machen 81 go of this
amount. The supply of the straps con-
tinued until the Post Office investigation
began and supply matters We're held up
under orders Of Fourth Assistant Postmaster
General BristOw. 1t is explained at the
department that Crawford had the con-
tract for what were called the A. b and G.
satchels. being those for city delivery, rural
free delivery and collectors in cities, while
Runkle had the contract for supplying the
large sized canvas duck satchels for the
collectors These contracts were for the
six years l9OO-19O6. Stern's contract was
prior to these.