The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1906-01-31
FRAZIER MAKES
FIERCE ATTACK
Discharged Postal EmplOye Assails
Postmaster Thomas and In
spector Sharp.
THOMAS MAKE A REPLY
SAYS CHARGES ARE MERELY RE-
HASH or OLD ALLEGATIONS.

The charges made by Walter ]. Fra
Eier, formerly a clerk IN the Salt Lake
postoffice against Postmaster Arthur
l.. Thomas and PostOffice Inspector
Frank G. Sharp, consist Of a wholesale
onslaught upon those two officials. They
also allege that Senators Reed SmOoJ
end George Sutherland have protected
the two in their evil doing. The object
of the charges is to prevent Mr.. Thorn
as reappointment and secure Mr..
Sharp's removal.
Mr.. Frazier, who now holds office un-
der the American" city administration,
was discharged from the local pOst9ffice
upon Governor Thomas recommended
ton last June, the specifiCs charge
against him being that he struck one
of his suDeriors in the face.
What His Charges Are.
Against Mr.. Sharp Mr.. Frazier makes
charges of immortality and hard drink
Ing. He also alleges that Mr.. sharp
has protected Mr.. Thomas in acts of
northumberland Of affairs in the
poktOffice Further he claims, Mr.
Sharp caused one of his subordiRates
TO search his CFrazier's) coat pocket
and that a memorandum book was ex-
tracted therefrOm Sharp feared Fra
zier alleges, that the book contained
memoranda of alleged acts of immoral
ity against him.
The charges against Postmaster
THOMAS are several in number. They
are that he has kept persons on the
payroll In violation of the civil service
law; that clerks have been given Vaca-
tons on pay in violation of law; that
employees have repeatedly gotten drunk
on duty without repTimand or punish
ment from Mr.. Thomas; that disreDu-
table Cd 70
call on one particular clerk and spend
much time talking to him.
When he previously made charges
against the conduct of the office, Mr.
branzter alleges, they were smOthereI
by Sharp and by Inspector I. B. Gregg
OF Kansas City, who was sent out here
TO investigate. At great length Mr.
Frazier delineates his own troubles
with Mr.. Thomas. and argues that mis-
discharge was unjustifiabe Senators
Smoot and Sutherland. he charges.
promised him in November, 1904 which
was just prior to Senator Sutherlands
election, but after it was certain he
would be elected, they would procure
an official investigation Of the Office by
unbiased inspectors. This promise, he
claims, they broke.
What MIR. Thomas Says.
Mr.. Thomas was shown the full text
y
following statement:
4 recognize the charges. They are
familiar TO me because they have been
made before They are merely a rehasn
y Of charges made q long time ago 10
gain personal and political end. They
failed of accomplishing the object of
the persons behind them
These charges have been sent TO
Washington frequently in the past few
years. Now, rewritten by some person
other than the man who signs them
they have been again sent on their mis-
chtevOus errand. The result this time
will be the same as before.
There is just one new item in the
charges. That is where they deal with
the discharge Of Mr.. Frazier himself
from the postoffce. That was done by
the department last June for cause
AS to sharp's Record.
I'm regard to the allegations against
Mr. Sharp, Mr. Gregg and others. 7 can
say only that I believe them to be alb
solutely false. The statement that
Sharp passed over and ignored charges
against me is absolutely false. Mr..
Sharp at no time was directed to in
Vestigate my office. Two inspectors.
Stice of Kansas City and Clark of New
Orleans, investigated the charges when
they were first made. The people of
Salt Lake know the result"
I wish to express my heartfelt
thanks to the bishOpric Of the
Eighteenth ward, the Commercial club.
the singers and the many friends who
so kindly contributed flowers and SYM
pathies to me in my great bereave-
ment. May God bless you all.
L TrT7TyT