The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-03-29
OvERSTREET'S STORY.
Tells How Charges Against
Members Became Public.

Washington, March 29.-The Mccall
postoffice investigation committee in
open session continued it's hearings on
the charges concea ming members re-
port regarding their connection with
postoftice leases and increases in clerk
hire.
Representative Overstreet, chairman
Of the house committee on postoffices
and post roads, testified the original
Bristow report dealing with the gen.
eral investigation of the postoff1ce de-
partment had been referred to a SUBJ
committee of the house postoffice COM
mittee. In January the Hay resolution
calling for additional information was
referred to this subcommittee, of which
he was chairman. While this commit
tee was considering the postoffice APP
preparation the Hay resolution was
brought into the several meetings. Act
ing cojointly with his associates, Mr..
Overstreet requested from the fourth
assistant postmaster general details re-
garding property leased to the depart
ment which was owned by members Of
congress. During the hearing on the
postoffice appropriation bill Mr. Waters,
chief of the salary and allowance divi-
sion, made reference to list which in
cludeS the names of members of con-
gress regarding clerk hire. which he
said was on the file of the fourth as
slstant. 1t was suggested that a let
ter be written from the committee to the
postmaster general asking for this in
formation. Mr.. Overstreet dictated this
letter January Is, 1904 1t was read to
the committee before being sent and
asked for the information regarding
clerk hire and leases.
He had never had any communication
with General Bristow on the subject,
but had called on the postmaster gem
eral at his hotel regarding the inforrna-
ton. The information when received
was kept in the safe of the sergeant
alarms of the house. In the meantime
Mr.. Hay was pressing for a conclusion
regarding his resolution Mr.. Overstreet
said he was working for a unanimous
report from the committee to have the
report laid on the table in the house
and not published. Mention of the re-
port was made in a New York paper.
Mr.. Overstreet asserted that inforrna-
ton used by the paper did not coma
from any member of the committee.
This publication he said was entire
wrong, but it did have a vital effect
on members who thought in view of
the exaggerated report in the paper
that the real facts ought to be printed,
because after that publication there
was and always would be a contro-
versy as to whether the committee
was really SuppresSing something that
was a source of reflection on the MEM
bers. was not until after this pub
LEGATION that the subcommittee took
formal action and reported to the full
committee. When the full committee
vanced copies from the printer for the
press. It was not until after the report
had been received and distributed in
the house that it was discovered that
at the head of each page was the fol-
lowing line:
Charges against members of con-
gress.''
He at once ordered the public print
er to take that line off.
Mr.. Richards asked Mr.. Overstreet
if in his conversation with Mr.. Payne
the latter had suggested the irnpro-
priety of publishing the names of
members in this connection. Nothing
was said on this point replied Mr..
Overstreet. The original manuscript
of the report was produced and Mr..
McDernott, after examining it said
that the line Charges concerning
members of congress- did not appear
on it, and must have had its origin in
the government printing office. Mr.
Mccall informed Mr.. Overstreet that
Mr. Wynne. the first assistant post
master general. had testified that a
list was prepared first without the
name of members and that this list
was objected to by the postoffice COM
rnittee and the names demanded. Me.
OverStreet: II made no such request ~