The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1903-05-26
THEIR DENIALS
Both Officials Fall Back on the Ex-
ANIMATION of the Washington Post
Ohce-POStmaster General Payne
Helps Out Their EXplanatiOns-A
Man Named Gilmer Who Thought
He Was the Real Thing-CIerl<s on
the Pay Rolls Who Did No Ser
vice.

Washington, May 23.-Postmaster
| General Payne today made public the
answers of Henry A. Castle, the audi
| tor Of the treasury of the postof1ice de-
| Dartment. and Comptroller Tracewell,
| of the treasury. regarding the Tulloch
| charges of irregularities in the postal
administration. The answers specifical-
| ly deny allegations of wrongful pro-
cedure.
| Comptroller Tracewell charges t. w.
| Gilmer formerly an expert Of his Of
| flee. with abstracting but subsequently
returning upon demand the letter au-
| thorlzing Mr.. Gilmer to examine the
accounts of any postoffices except
| Washington and New York. Mr. Trace
we'll alleges that this letter was writ
| ten bv Gilmer himself without any
| suggestion from the comptroller. Mr..
! Castle says that the sum of the tenta-
| tive disalloWanceS by Expert Gilmer
| and the comptroller aggregated 1892,
! that the credits finally disallowed out of
| q total of a quarter of a million were
| $165, of which he claims only seven dol
| lars was incorrectly audited. This, Mr..
l.
| loch's charge of disallowanceS of $50, 900
or $4,000
| The postmaster generals statement
says that the letters are made public
at the request of the two officials and
| that it will appear from them how
| much foundation there was for the TuI-
| loch statements. Mr.. Payne adds:
| In the Dostoffice department the
| complaint made of Mr.. Gilmer was that
! he would abruptly and discourteous-
ly enter the rooms of the department
| clerks. demand papers IN an offensive
| wav and then carry them away without
| leaving a receipt. 1t was demanded that
| he be instructed to act as a gentleman,
| and leave receipts for all papers which
| he carried out of the building for if any
| We're misplaced the department clerks
would be held responsible
| Mr.. Castle in his answer says that Mr..
| Tulloch shares IN miSapprehension that
| an auditor is charged with the respon-
| sibility of keeping other officials cor
| rect and hon, ST. and in determining
| the necessities of the service. The au-
| dItor says that such functions would be
| fatal TO administrative freedom by the
| head of a department. He said:
| "Regarding the settlement and sub
| sequent revision on an account of the
| late Postmaster Willett, of Washington
| which involved alleged Irregularities in
| Porto Rico during the military opera
| tions. the auditor replies that every
| item believed to be illegal was disal-
| lowed by the auditors office. The wide
| discretion given in the language of the
| appropriations for military postal SER
| vice. according to the auditors answer,
| shows that congress intended to exempt
| the disbursement of those appropria-
| tionS from many ordinary recommended
| tions. Every report made was author
| lzed in advance of the department and
| every voucher approved and actually
paid by a postmaster weeks or months
| before its presentation to the auditors
| for allowance. Many expenditures were
| unusual. and few of them were by us
| held to be illegal and disallowed. AS to
| whether the service was necessary or
the compensation extravagant, the de-
| partment was the sole judge"
| Mr.. Castle goes at length into the de-
! tails of the examination of accounts,
| and says:
While this revision was thus barren
| Of financial gain it was directly profit
able. Through Tullochs private inter-
| views with Gilmer, irregularities were
! pointed out which did not appear on
the face Of the papers and were un-
| known to the auditor. These Comp
| troller Tracewell exercised the author
| ity of his office to correct.
| This was the whole story of the re-
| vision of an account wherein Mr.. Tul-
| loch alleges that the comptroller dis
| allowed $50. 900 or $40, 900 previously ap-
proved by the auditor, and upon which
he bases an assumption that SubSe-
! quent accounts would have revealed
| immensely larger extravaga gances. 1t
| saved S165, to the government and con-
victed the auditors office of S. incor-
rectly audited"
| Mr.. Castle says the funds at a post
office belong to the general postal revH-
nues and the surplus is legally subject
to draft by the postmaster general for
postal purposes. Although not illegal
the custom of drawing on local funds
sometimes violates rules Of correct ac-
counting. Hence the auditor frequent
| ly suggests to the department that GER
tam expenditures should be ordered by
| postmasterS. These include the ac-
counts of departmental officials foI
travelling expenses.
But our critic" says the author 'un-
justly reproache the auditor for Der
mitting a practice which he had nc
power 20 prohibit. Mr.. Heath's expense
| r:ll. II which he 8 sty allu les. wa
charged to tN= proper appropriation
| and not to any allowances for The
Waar rgton poSthficc. Concerning the
al'-~: ton that certain employees were
. kept on the rolls of the Washington
. postoffice who never performed services
therein if anywhere, the auditor an.
swers that no accounting officer car
possibly know in each case whether the