The Washington times., 1911-08-15
A'CABE DISMISSAL
PREDICTED, CLEARS
WILEY DIFFICULTY
Solicitors Suppression of
Part of Letters Crux of
Conspiracy.
Continued from First Page.)

~ PA
CONTINUED from First Page.)
AIRY OF $4,000. AND IF THE SEC
RETARY WILL DO IT, l DO NOT
COULD NOT BE PUT. IN THE SAME
"Kebier and took the matter up with
DR. Wiley today, and he said he would
approve 1t If he had on record an under
standing with you SO that We could
be held responsible for Your receiving
an annual salary, and not devoting your
whole time to the bureau.
Nv. D. BIGELOW,
Chief Of Division OF Feeds" "
Vital Part Omitted.
When the record of this case was
made up, to be forwarded to the Sec
retary of Agriculture, and thence to
the Attorney General for decision as
to whether the law had been violated
in DR.. Rusby's appointment, those
parts of the foregoing letter which are
presented in capital letters, were
omitted. Thus, the officials who must
finally pass on the recommendation to
dismiss DR.. Wiley and DR.. Rusby, were
denied knowledge of the fact that Dr.
BiRelow and DR.. Wiley had relied on
the precedent created in the Remsen
board case.
IIT. Bigelows complete letter shows
Clearly that reliance was placed In this
precedent. But the very essential eX
planatton of this reliance was left sut.
Without this explanation the Letter gave
q very different impression.
II weS this CNpurgated letter which
was sent to the higher authorities as
evidence of a conspiracy TO vialte the
law.
Who Was Responsible.
Who was responsible for that suppress
sion of two sentences? DR.. Rusby, who
WAS on the stand this forenoon. declared
that when the was previously under
examination the eXpdrSatcd letter was
read 20 lin by Solicitor McCabe,
LEAVING OFT THE PARTS WHICH
HAD BEEN SUPPRESSED IN MAX
ING UP THE RECORD OF THE CASE,
be allowed TO see the full text of the
letter Mr.. MCCabe declined - let him
See il.
Had he been handed the full text of
the letter a that time, he would have
seen the suppressed parts, the whole
matter would have been made clear,
and the case would have crumbled in
Rtantly.
Did Solicitor McCabe do the suppress
ing?
After DR. Rusby left the stand. Mr..
McCabe first swOre, the stenographer
who had taken the record of that hear
Ing before the personnel committee Of
the department. and asked him:
Have you looked over your notes of
that OCCasions?"
I have" replied the stenographer
rs there any record OF DIR. Rusby
asking to be allowed to see the letter.
Then stenOgrapher did not think
there was, and as a matter of indie
pendent recollection swore that he did
not recall that DR. Ausby asked to be
allowed to see the letter.
Then Mr.. Mccall be asked to be sworn
and he swOre, positively and .unqual-
ifiedlY, that DR.. Rusby never asked,
during that investigation. for the
privilege of seeing the letter, and
therefore was not denied the sight Of
st.
Incidentally. Mr.. McCabe declared
that ANYBODY who said such a request
was made was a liar" The use of
the shorter and uglier word was very
Snappy and conclusive and brought
things up standing with short Jerk
in the committee.
Somebody demanded that the word
be Withdrawn and a milder form be
substituted.
81 am willing then to say he stated
what was false" suggested Mr.. Nc
Cabe
Wants "Liar" In Record.
Colonel Hepburn, Of counsel for DR..
Wiley, protested against the word liar
being dropped out Of the Record.
we want it to remain in the printed
report" he said. together with the
withdrawal, in order that it may tes-
tify to the character of this witness
Mr.. McCabe had been testifying, just
q minute earlier, that he treated Miss
Davis, the stenographer who was
sweated" in the star chamber Of
ynI l. Il.
tecttve, with the utmost courtesy and
consideration. Colonel Hepburn wanted
to keep in the Record the liar episode
as evidence of the sort of courtesy that
might be expected of Solicitor McCabe
II he got a defenseless witness in a
locked room. The word was allowed to
stand.
Mr. McCabe entered a brief defense
OF himself in the incident of Miss Davis.
He said he had heard of an employe OF
the bureau receiving checks from big
Importing drug house, on whose goods
that employe must pass; and he con-
sidered 1t very proper to Investigate for
what those checks paid. That was the
substance of what he had done and he
had certainly no apologies for it.
Explains Strict Orders.
Mr.. McCabe also explained the rea-
sons for not permitting Bureau of
Chemistry people to talk to district |
attorneys. In one case. he said, an |
employe advised a district attorney to |
reorganIze his pleadings in a food-Iaw |
case, and, because of that change the |
Government lost its case. Mr.. McCabe |
thought the law work would best be |
done by lawyers. He also read a state |
ment cf the cases tried and won, and |
declared that the food and drug law had !
been enforced with great vigor and |
success.