The New York Herald Newspaper, January 28, 1879, Page 4

NEW YORK CL Secretary Sherman's Charges and Mr. Arthur’s Reply. TEXT OF THE COMMUNICATIONS, Why the Removals Were Made and Persisted In, ° AND A DIFFERENT COLORING PEE. NENTALS UBNTALO STRONG How Investigations Were Made by the Jay Commission. DEFENCE TO A LONG TERM OF OFFICE. Wasnixeton, Jan, 27, 1879, The following is the text of Secretary Sherman's communication regarding the New York Custom House nominations, addvessed to the Senate on the 15th inst., and General Arthur's reply thereto ‘Treasury DerartMent, Jan, Hon. Wii.tiam A. Waxeier, President of the State, — Sux—Lhave the honor, by direction of the Presi- dent, to transmit to the Senate the enclosed official reports to this department relating to the abuses irregularities in the New York Custom House, pearing Upon the nominations pending in the snate of Ldwin A, Merritt for Collector ot Cus- nus at the port of New York, in place ‘of Chester A. Avthur, suspended, and of Silas W. Burt as Naval Ofiver at that port in place of Alonzo B. Cornell, suspended. Ibeg to adda fuller statement of the causes that led to these nominations and suspensions than appears upon the public record. ABUSES COMPLAINED OF, The management of the Customs service has for al years been open to much criticism in Con- “in the press and in popular and business cir- founded upon alleged arbitrary abuses by the 1879, United se gress, cles officers anc upon undervaluation and = trauds, When I entered this office I — determined to make a full. examination into these allegations and into the existing methods of conducting the customs business, with d reform, not only at New York but at every other port of the United States. The ent took great interest in, the matter and rtily supported the measure proposed. The ex- ious were made mostly by committees of pri- 1s, and resulted in @ large saving and many Naturally the port of New York, where about seventy per cent of the duties on customs is collected, attracted the chief interest. that for a series of years, from 1872, the receipts from enstoms at that port have constantly dinin- ished, while the expenditures have, with the exes tion of but a single year, steadily increased, as is shown by the following statement :— Expenditures. $2,201,946 a view to economy Year. Keceipts. + $148,381,446 4,900 Doon 2,605,; ore. —In 1876 there was a reduction of ten percent salaries of nsisting of two eminent y York and an officer of the Depart- iment of Justice whose official duty brought him iuto active connection with the collection of customs, have made a very full and elaborate examination of the methods ot the business in the Custom House at citizens of Ne that port, and their reports—copies of which I have the honor to send you—-show great abuses. It appears trom their first report that in May, 1877, there were in the Collector's office 923 persons; in Naval Office, 81 persons, and in the Surveyor's , 32, making in all 1,035 permanent employés in the Custom House, exclusive ot the Appraiser's de- partment, consisting of deputies, clerks, inspectors, weighers and gaugers, and that this number could be sately reduced twenty per cent. This reduction of twenty per cent was opposed by Col- lector Arthur, who stated that a reduction of more twelve per cent could not be made in dull times yut injury to the efficiency of the system and to isiness of the merchants. Notwithstanding the U this opposition, the reduction was substantially ried rv to effect’ by my order, making an annual s $235,208, and increasing the efficiency of the BRIBES RECEIVED. fhe second report shows that it was a common practice among entry clerks, weighers, gaugery, inspectors and storekeepers to Teceive from import: ers and brokers irregular fees, emoluments, gratui- ties and perquisites in the nature of bribes. ‘This practice was a matter of general notoriety in the Custom House, and it does not appear that any effort was made by the Collector, Naval Oflicer or Surveyor to suppress it. The remedy sug- ‘or this evil by & commission, so ax it relates to entry clerks, wus ‘that ries should be taken entirely in charge by th Custom House, and that the porter or broker should not be allowed to select the entry clerk to pass his entry. While Collector Arthur admitted t this plan, if made compulsory, would go far to y the evil, he thought “it might involve aunoy- ing results to importers by delw It has, however, been adopted without causing annoyance, but, on the contrary, increasing the facilities afforded ‘to the public doing business with the Custom House, and sleved that the payment of gratuities to clerks in the Custom House has entirely ceased. THE WEIGHERS, The third report shows that th ties ted in the gravest irreguli department of weighers gaugers; that the larger number of thirteen weigh- ers and eight gaugers rendered but little, if any, personal service to the government; that the weigh: ers’ foreman performed but little service; that weighers’ clerks, in some instances, performed no duty; that in most, if not all, weighers’ oflices men were hired as empl and assigned to do the work of regular clerks; that the number of laborers thus assigned varies from four to persons in each weigher’s office; — that assigned had but little duty to perform: borne on the pay Toll as laborers litical services who performed no m their names to rolls and re- ceive their pay; that part of the weighable merchan- dise was not weighed by government officers, but by city Weighers, who furnished memoranda upon which United States weighers made their returns ; that part of the ble goods were not weighed at all, but that the marked weights on packages were copied off and returned by weighers as if weighed; 1 the weighers had adopted a schedule of irregula: »sected from merchants 1 returns and copies of weights, delaying © returns to the Custom House until the im- ular fees, that by reason of ing and pauging 1 goods at the port of New York has increased enormous sim ot § 4 40 per annum, ils were not unknown to Collector Arthur, y sade no attempt during his term of office to remedy them. On the contrary, in a letter to me he tuted that he was confident that the commission wholly tailet to eppreciate the amount of work done by their general asser- om anlarities was subse- pene t by inde cde tinder my directi 7 mmmission in the we 1 angers’ de- partment were subsequently carried out by my order and effected a reduction of over ),000 per anni vet of this branch of the service alone, be- sides securing @ great saving to the government in jucreased duties, YREE PERMITS, It also appears from evidence on file in this depart- ment that a vicious practice has for # long time ex- permits for imported goods These permits were ni Collector Lydecker, detailed on file in this de- it apy over two hundred nite were granted from March, 1874, to May, lue of goods thus illegally delivered mounts toa very large sum. Ip a sin- 00, The total vane . from the fact that, except praisement was ever had, tion of the papers it is apparent that erchandise, if it had been properly , would have been subject to thas there by this illegal y t The w of duty asianee t ule it is impossible toe in a ve duty practice lost | on In the investi L commissions cases’ the fact was disclos slorks engaged in making up statements of refunds in those cases received gratuit 1 attorneys, ‘These claims are many and aw the aggregate toagreat sum. It was ascertained up tion that ivan ity of cases, #0 fw they were per a fraudulent mar by protests te ent eou made. As the i » claim it mn investign= examined, t~namely we at the tin The frand consisted in wrong fuily filing @ protest long after the entry, with th pr » that it wus made at the time of te for refund of claims fi recently been made by clerks in the or’s department of the Collector's and Naval ices, who had been Miegally receiving from an at- torney for the claimants @ percentage upon the amount of the elaix THE RRSPONSTNTLITY. These reports disclose other abuses, but as many of them had existed for along time, end some were beyond the power of the Colleetor to correct, it war (foirto impute them all to his fault, orto bola Lim responsivie for them, though he had bee STOM HOUSE, NEW YORK HERALD, TUESDA Y, JANUARY 28, 1879.-TRIPLE SHEET. oe —— longer in office than any of his predecessors—for | forty years-—having been first appointed December | My sus) service | 2, 1871. During the his compensation amounte t to $155,460 36, a detailed statement of which is herewith transmitted. Au officer charged with the high dutics of Collector of the Port of New York, and receiving such compen sation, ought properly to be held responsible for all abuses that grew np oF continued during his term of ottice, and the oxistenee of such abuses is sufficient, i within his power to ‘correct them, to: justify his removal, yoy of his ATTEMPT AT REFORM. The President was strong of opinion, upon re- ports of the Jay commission, that the public in- terest demanded a change in the leading officers of the New York Custom House, 5 oem d to try to exeente the reforms proposed with Mr, Artbur in office rather than a teaduer, The President acqui- esced to this view, but gradually it became evident that neither Mr. Arthur nor Mr. Cornell were in sympathy with the recommendations of the com- mission, and could and did resist their fair execution, ‘The President became entirely satistied that it was his duty to make a change in both offices, but, with a view of consulting the Senate, this was postponed until the beginning of the following session, when Mossrs. Roosevelt and Prince were nomi- nated for the office of Collector and Naval officor. ‘The Senate, however, deemed it best not to confirm these nominations, and without further controversy or any attempt or desire to send to the Senate other noniinations Messrs, Arthur and Cornell remained in their positions. A brief experience proved that any hope of carrying out any re- torms or changes in the mode ot conducting busi- | ness would be abortive while the Collector held his position, The same system, the same persons, the same influence prevailed as before, From the nature of things it dificult for a Collector long associated with the chief subordinates under him to believe evil of any of them. Mr. Lydecker, the Deputy Collector, was practically Collector, WANT OP PERSONAL ATTENTION. General Arthur did not give that personal attention to the business of the office that would seem to be necessary for the proper discharge of it duties. He did not usnally arrive at his off until afternoon, Continued ‘complaints came fr other ports of entry, that criminations were made im favor of the port of New York by methods of conducting business at that port; that allowances for damage not permitted at other ports were made; that a system of under- valuation was made, and that by ‘these means im- portant branches of business were turned from their usual course almost exclusively to the port of New York, causing a reduction of revenue and injustice to other ports and to the people of the United States. THE MEREDITH REPORT, respectfully call your attention to the report of General Appraiser John F, Meredith and Special Agents N, Bingham and B. H. Hinds, of date of July 17, 1878, acopy of which is herewith transmitted. ‘These gentlemen, having had long experience in the customs service, were directed to examine into al- alleged irregularities in the administration of the Customs laws in the chief ports of the United States, and the general result of their examination at the port of New York is disclosed in their report. From testimony taken and documents referred to by them, all of which will be placed at your service, it would appear that the system of frauds complained of, in- cluding Undervaluations, improper weights and measures and illegal damage allowances, was clearly proven. These officers say in regard to Collector Arthur:— It came to our notice early in onr invostigation that the Collecto wzlected to appear at his offic t midday of after. claimed by his Special Deputy, Mr. Lydecker, in explanation «the Collector being absent on ‘hat he made up for his late arrivals at his office by . This, however, we do not regard ay A neglect of conspiewously " subordinates must inevitably cent of the entire ¢ lected. In this connection we wonld respectfully call at- tention to ‘our special report in relation to certain practices of Speciui Deputy Lydecker, and to. the sev eral reports in relation to him of ‘a similar acter which, us we are informed, have heretofore by submitted to you. We were surprised to learn th lector Arthur, after having been advised of the e Mr. Lydecker, with ache fraud th conduct in Mr, Lydecker t him ‘to. practical pears to repose ntidence and to allow the business management nost implicit control of the office. We found that the more hoi and intelligent officials at the Custom House had long had rengon to distrust Mr. Lydecker's integrity, and that the intluence exercised Collector b. been for along time the subject This matter as well as the Collycto: urs wits repeatedly referred yy the hants who wer investigation A CHANGE DEMANDED. It would also appear from a special report made by the suine officer, of the date of June 25, 1878, that Mr. Lydecker, chief deputy, had been guilty of certain neglect and fraudulent practices rein stated, I also enclose a copy of a report oi (iv date of May 2, 1978, made by Assistant Secretary French, who is the ofticial head of the customs service in this depart- ment, and J. H. Robinson, Assistant Solicitor of the ‘Treasury, relative to the abuses and irregularities im the New York Custom House, These documents, together with many detailed reports of officers of this department, convinced me, after several months’ trial and consideration, that without any arraignment of the personal character of Collector Arthur and the Naval Officer the public service demanded a chauge in the incumbents of these offices, ‘THE NOMINATIONS. Some time after the close of the session of Con- gress and after the experiment had been carefully tried, the President suspended these officers and ap- winted General Merritt, Surveyor of the Port, as Col- jector, and Mr. Burt as Naval Officer, Mr. Burt had been for years practically Naval Officer, and had con- dueted the business with fidelity and skill to the satisfaction of all. Mr. Cornell held simply a sinecure position, his real duties being dis- charged by his deputy, and Mr. Burt is now perform- ing the duties both of Naval Officer and those for- merly discharged by him as Comptroller, the latter office having been discoutinued. in the selection of nominees great care was taken to secure those whose long experience and fidelity in public service gave ample assurance for a faithful and constant disebarge of their duties. General in unconstitutional dis- | Merritt was Naval Officer from April 1, 1969, to Au- " gust 1, 1 conducted, that have since been adopted by him as Collector. He received the cordial approval of George 8, Bont- well, Secretary of the Treasury. He was a) Surveyor of the Port December and occupied that position seven during which time he ers’ department = in — harmony with the report of the Jay Commission, largely increasing the efficiency o: the service and reducing the cost. He corrected several of the abuses pointed out in the printed report of the General Appraiser and entorce1 the regulations in regard to actual tare, thus securing an increase of revenue, the result on sugar alone showing @ gain’ to November 30, 1878, of 3,965,928 pounds, which, at the average rate | of duty on al sugars caused a gain of revenue of $97,238 73, and also a proportionate gain in weighing of many’ other articles, In these two points alone there is demonstrated a gain to the gov- ernment of $164,000 for the period covered, being << to $245,636 15 per annum, while the resulis ol during which time that oftice was. ably He then recommended many reforms months, reorganized the weigh- tained by a higher condiiion of disci- pline and a more rigid — responsibility ot weighers cannot be — estimated, It is manifest that during his incumbency as Surveyor and % r, which latter position he accepted with re: tance, # yeneral improvement has taken plac and the only evidence trom any quarter of dissatis faction as to the manner in which the affairs of the Custom House have been conducted arises from oo who complain of the strict enforcement of the jaw. ‘The reduction of force contemplated in the gauger’s | department aud in several divisions of the Custom House have been fully carried into effect, the result of which will be a large saving to the government in salaries alone. AN INJURY TO PUBLIC #PRVICE, It is respectfully submitted that under the cir- cumstances the restoration of Messrs. Arthur and Cornell would be @ serions injury to the public | aiving a loss of pnblic revenue and an | rerviee, in increased expenditure, It would establish a constant irritation andl struggle between old abuses that ox- isted and reforms that are sought to be accomplished. It would destroy discipline of department, for after all the Collector of Customs is but a subordinate of this department, and, though possessed of great powers, can do but little without the sanction of the Necretaty, but he may seriously obstruct the depart- ment in the conduct of business according to its ideas and plans. It hes been the established custom that this great office should be held as an administrative office, like thut of a Cabinet officer for the officer “who collects over two-thirds of the revenue fro ustoms performs functions equal to tho: of a Cabinet Minister But the law re 1 and approval of his acts Lo rec this business to be by y oatility to the general of the administration would create discord contention Where there ought to be unity and harmony. It would be unjust to the President, and personally embarrassing to me in the discharge of my duties, to have the office of Collector of Customs at New York held by one who will not pertorm his duties according to the general policy of the depart- ment. General Arthur’s term of service expires on Decet ber 17, 1879, and his restoration would be but terny rary, even if the President should not avail himae of his legal power to rend another name to the Ser ate or to suspend him atter the adjournment of the Kenate, The very marked success of the administra- tion of Collector Merritt and Naval Officer Burt would seem to entitle them to the recognition of the Senate and to their confirmation. Ll have the honor to be, very respectfully, JOUN SHERMAN, secretary. REPLY OF GENERAL AWTHL ‘The following is the reply of General Arthur: — New York, Jan 21, 1879, Hon. Roscor Conknrxa, Chairman :— SIR—I have the honor to ackuowledge the recetpt of your favor of Jannary 16, transmitting, by consent of the Senate and direetion of the Commattee on Com snare, 8 CORE 8 Was communication addressed to the Senate by Hon, John Sherman, Secretary of the ‘Treasury, under date of Janwary 15, and pur. porting to state the reasons of my — sus- pension from the office of Collector t this port. For the opportunity to answer the sertions of this paper Lam deeply grateful. Le Word be justifab not, without a longer delay thi reply as fully a8 I would like to all of the stetements oft Mr. Sherman, but L think I shall have no diMewity in eatiafying the Kenaie that if, as ix preeniably the case, bis coumunication contains a that cam be said | should be known to the Senate. against my administration of the office of Collector, usion was not onl ener. contrary to all the professions of the adininistration, but was a violation of every principle of justice. When an administration deliberately avows and con- stantly reiterates that removal from office is to take place only for cause, it is obvious, no matter what may be said to the contrary, that a removal must, at least in the estimation of that portion of the public which has faith in the sincerity of the adminis- tration, carry with it a stigma upon the character of the removed officer, and this stigma is not fully removed even if the first notice of intended removal is accompanied—as was the case with me—with an urgent offer of an important foreign appointment under another department of the government. Mr. Sherman, in the opening of his communica- tion, refers to the criticisms made in Congress, in the press and in private on the New York Custom | House. It is notorious that during the nearly seven years I was in office there was much less complaint aga.nst the administration of the New York Custom House than for many years before. The laws have been greatly criticised and to some extent changed, My administration of them has been rarely com- plained of, THE JAY COMMISSION, Mr. Sherman relies greatly upon the report of the Jay Commission, and in his communication to the Senate implicatly accepts its statements as true. It will be presently seen that in some of his actions he throws entire discredit upon them. It is important, however, that the constitution and methods of the commission, upon which so much reliance is placed, Tu my letter to the Secretary of November 23, 1877, a copy of which is enclosed, 1. correctly, a8 1 believe, described these in the following terms:— ‘There can be no pretence that in the commission as finally constituted any one reprosented the otficers of the port or Was even unbiassed as to the effect of investizat ‘he commission t be said against t tunity for cross-ex: planation, and of © ‘They did wot pretend to i ‘any ques: tion or to seek for evidence on Not only by public advertisement, but by buudreds of letters, they invited merchants, supposed to be agtieved., to present their complaints. A reference to the testimony will show, however, that the promin d honorable merchants of this port ainst the administration of ars. ion manifested their disa tly did not occur to the is. giving no oppor- for rebuttal or ex- ‘ided view, anxious, if bear t ‘or of the inann of the officers were performed. TESTIMONY IN ANSWER REFUSED, The commission either refused to recei answer to such compli inf or where it was fi m1 required that they should bear jonts that had been introdneed, impro rendered the service more efficient. h more economical than at any previous period in the history of the government. Even taking the testimony as the commission present it, without explana tions from those attacked, without unity being given to cross-exumine the witnesses or the spirit whieh animated them, Lam confident that, if you will find time amid your manifold occupations to examine it, you will come to the conclusion that it wholly fails to bear out the sweeping and ral allegations 0} commission, I trust thut if the reports shail be submitted to Congress the tostimony may accompany them. ILLEGAL FEES AND BRIBES, Mr. Shermun says that the svcond report of the Jay commission “snows that it was a common prac- tice among hartpa 4 clerks, withdrawai clerks, liquidat- ing clerks, weighers, gaugers, inspectors aad store- keepers to receive from importers and brokers ir- regular fece, emoluments, gratuities and perquisites in the nature of bribes.” While the Jay com- mission made some general stateweuts which may seem to justify this sweeping assertion, Thave no hesitation in saying (though Mr. Sherman has carefully and prudently kept the evidence taken by that commission from publication) that they ob- tained no evidence which bears out this assertion. Such practices may exist to some extent. but it is a most impossible to obtain proof of them. The pay- ment of gratuities to entry clerks and some other officers is, as Mr. Sherman says, a matter of general report, but as I pointed out in my letter ot May 17, 1877, annexed to the second report of the Jay commission both the giver and the receiver are exempt from testifying, and, therefore, proof is only obtainable by accident, and then it is very difficult to show any wrong intent. Though my letter, just referred to, shows distinctly that I had endeavored to prevent and detect this abtise, Mr. Sherman says that “it does not appear that any effort was made by the Collector to suppress this practice,”” The fact is that no instance of this abuse was ever discovered or sus- pected that was not promptly investigated, and if the facts justified it the persons involved punished by me. UNFAIR ASSUMPTION OF CREDIT. Mr. Sherman gives to the Jay commission the credit of suggesting the change in the system of pre- senting invoices to the entry clerks, by which, as he says, the taking of gratuities hay been stopped, so far as they are concerned. On the contrary, my letter just referred to (second report of Jay commis- sion, page 15) shows that the suggestion of the sys- tem was wholly my own. Lexpressed, it is true, the fear that the systein “would involve annoying resuits to importers by delays.” Mr. Sherman says 1 was mistaken in this. My own information is to the contrary, but even if I was wrong I have yet to learn that a tear that merchants might experience delays at the Custom House is good cause for removal Lam compelied, however, to add that the tacts show that the complaint of the Secretary as to my failure to seek to prevent the payment of fees to entry clerks and others is not only unfounded, but in- sincere and at variance with bis own acta, Early in February last evidence was furnished to the Secre- tary by certain brokers that they had paid moneys at various times to an entry clerk, who had, in effect, exacted such moneys from them. After an inves! gation by a special agent the Sceretary, on May 3, 1878, directed me to call for the cterk’s resi, nation, but on June 13 he withdrew lis direction. In like manner, in April last, having received evidence thut two inspectors and a store- keeper had taken gratuities from importers, I ro- moved them, and on April 27 reported the fact to the Secretary, On May 2 he approved my action, but on June 11 he revoked the dismissal of one of them, ‘avowedly on the ground that prominent politicia requested it. The three were alike guilty, or alike inuocent, but do not seem to have had equal influ- ence with the department. FREE PERMITS. Mr. Sherman says:—“A vicious practice has for a long time prevailed of granting free permits for im- ported goods without authority of iaw.” He adds that “the value of the goods thus illegally delivered free of duty amounted to a large sum. Ina singie instance the value was $53,000," The Secretary is right in saying that the practice hus existed “for a long time.” i can trace it back eigity years. to its being “without authority have to say it has known to the department; that the blank forms necessary to carry it out are furnished to the Collector by the Treasury Depsrtment; that until the present Secretary came into ofiice no one had pretended to regard it as being “without authority of law,” but it has been looked upon as a convenient mode of facilitating the passing of sinall articles which were either free by law or of such insignifi- cant value that the exaction ot a duty would, in common phrase, “cost more than it would come to.” It was reserved for Mr. Sherman to make the discovery that this practice of eighty years’ standing was “without authority of law,’ and having made this discovery he calls tor my removal because I did not stop it, and yet the practice continues in as full force as ever, unchanged and uncontrolled, under the acting Collector, and Mr. Sherman continues to turnish to him the very blanks used in carrying it out, Since the acting Collector came into office not less than 1,300 free permits have been issued. MR. KHERMAN'S DISINGENUOUSNEES, Mr. Sherman s reference to the ‘single instance in which the value was $53,000" disingenuous. | ness which characterizes his communication. The goods in question were diamonds taken from this country to Europe by the mother of Mr, James Gordon Bennett, being part of her personal joweiry. Atter her death they were brought by her ton, Being the personal effects of an American dying abroad, they were, under an express provision of law, not liable to duty, anv were passed by means of afree permit. One of t Secretary's favorite corps, who, under the name special agents, gather gossip and impute crime when thwy cannot detect it, learned of the transaction, aud it was by Mr. Sherman's directions investigated by Special Agent Curtis, now the chief special agent at New York. He reported about a year ago, and stated that the diamonds had been at once, ou passing the Custom House, deposited in a safe; that they were still there with the seais unbroken, and that the transaction was an entireiy roper one. The government lost no duties, and he course pursued was certainly proper under any administration which applies a [ittie common sense and ordinary decency to the enforcement of the cus- toms laws. I am informed that the diamonds are the same safe, and that Mr. Bennett has at least once offered the government every facility to ' stood Custom House papers. | importer was suggested by the law officar of the gov- test any claims it desired to make upon them of hin This ‘ntly illustrates the truth of the sng- gestion of the Secretary that the ernment had lost a very considerable amount of dutic this prac- tice, The fae believe to be that it has saved in expense more than it has lost in duties, though it is quite possible that the officers were in exceptional cases imposed upon, and gave tree permits when none should have been given. “CHANGES AND_COMMISSION®."* Mr. Sherma feference to the urges and com- missions” cases affords a striking instance of the manner in which he makes insinuations without ven- turing upon assertions. He says that it “wan dis- closed that the clerks engaged in making up the sta ments of the refunds in thowe cases recet ities from attorneys.” He couples this with the state- ment that it was ascertained upon investigation that in a majority of cases so faras examined there (the causes) “were perfected in a fraudulent manner— namely, by attaching protests to the entries after the entries had been made, while the law required them to be attached at the time of th try.” These ously with the that the clef! pmntaitted my gratuities from attorn 4 in the protests and did it d rin, But the Secretary knows that there is no of evidence that the clerks in question com- any frauds in connection with the protests. Indeed, it #till remains to be proved that any traudn- a Pitted lent protests are on file in these cases, On ex parte evidence, some of which, at leust, is clearly wn- true, the Secretary induced Congress at its last session to order that all payments on jecgment obtained, in these cases should be aus pended. attorney for some or the plaintiff™— among whom ate some of our largest and moat em nent merchantse—promptly offered in writing to have the judgment set aside, atid to allow the Secretary to Present in court any evidence of Traud, but he de- clined the offer, and the result is that théete are now some thirty or more judumouts of record, which are in effect judgments against the overnment, but which Mr. Sherman says were ob- ined on fraudulent protests, though for nearly a Year ke has refused to take any step to prove this ion. It should be added that the government admittedly has in its possession @ large sum ally taken from merchants for duties, and that it is in; in these cases to avoid returning it on the ground that protest inst its illegal action was not made in tine. there are any fraudulent protests on file it is indisputable that they were there long before I took office, The allegation that there are such has been revived under e' udministra- tion for fifteen years past, for it should be borne in mind that these cases arise from matters which took place prior to 1863. INSINCERITY IN THE CHANGES, It 1s in his action as to these clerks that the insin- cerity of the Secretary in aking, theirconduct one of the charges against me is strikingly shown. What the clerks do in the chai and commi cases is to take the entries, and drawing off from them the items held by the courts o have been Segall in- cluded in making up dutiable value, to reckon and tabulate the duties paid on such excess and to calculate the interest thereon, and then to 0 before a referee appointed by the Court, but se- fected by the government, and swear to the truth of j their work and calculation subj to cross-examina- tion by the United States Attorney, This work they performed out of office hours. Any one else could jo it as well as they who had uccess to and under- Access could be ob- tained by having the referee by subperna compel the production of the papers, and while in his hands the calenlations could be made by eny person employed by him. This course was pursuéd for a long time, but several years since the Solicitor of the Treasury sug- gested that it would be better to employ clerks in the Custom House, as then the original entries and invoices need not be removed from the government custody, and the attorneys for the importers assented to the suggestion, which they would hardly have done if they expected thereafter to introduce among the papers fraudulent protests, as their opportunities were obviously much greater if the papers were out of the possession of the government than if they were re- tained in its possession. In uccordance with this suggestion the clerks referred to by Mr. Sherman were employed, and, of course, they were paid by the importers or their attornies, the work being outside of government ‘hours and not done for the govern- ment. There hag never been any allegation, much less any evidence, that those or any clerks have made any of the calculations wrongtully, exc zh that the importers haye, on several occasions, claimed that the clerks had erred in favor of the government, and the Cirenit Court has so decided, It will, there- fore, be perceived that there was no wrong to the government worked by these clerks, and that the objectionable feature of their receiving pay from the ernment, and, as he thought, in the interest of the government. All these facts were investigated by me and reported to the Secretary in April, 1878, and his directions awaited as to the propriety of the ac- tion. (Zhe correspondence upon this subject is herewith enclosed.) ‘The Secretary retained the clerks in office and they are still there. My failure to remove them when that power rested only with the Secretary is urged as justitying my suspension, while I infer that the act- ing Collector's fuilure to remove them is regarded by the Secretary as a good ground for his confirma tion. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE JAY COMMISSION, Mr. Sherman repeats in detail some of the gtate- ments of the Jay commission, though he is careful not to refer to the fact to which I called his attention in my letter of November 23, 1877, that ‘of the fifteen recommendations made by the commission two are for the introduction of what already existed, eight ure repetitions of my own previous recom: mendations, one only differs from my recommenda- in carrying reductions to what I believe to be an un- wise extent, and one other is both unwise and illegal.” ADDITIONAL COMPLAINTS. ‘There remains the extension of hours, the classifi- cation of officers and the complaints as to weighers and gaugers. As to the two first, they relate to mat- ters the control over which is vested in the depart- ment, and not in myself. As to the weighers, a re- duction of this force would have been made betore this time if no commission had existed. ‘The mode of appointment and removal, the tenure of office and the general civil service policy of my administration, which constituted the chiet burden of one at least of the ie | reports, seems to have been so successfully defended by me that the Secretary ab- stains from any reference to it. DIMINUTION OF RECEIPTS, Mr. Sherman says that fora “series of years from 1872 the receipts irom customs at that port had con- stantly diminished, while the expenditures had, with the exception of a single yeur, steadily increased.” He then gives a table purporting to show the receipts and expenditures in cach year from 1872 to 1877, which, however, is not strictly accurate for even one of the’ years. I'do not quite understand whether Mr. Sherman proposes to hold me responsible for the diminution of receipts at this ‘port. In his tabular statement he begins with the year 1872, when, under my administration, there ‘was collected the largest sum ever received. He then parades figures to show the decrease in the revenue down to 1877, the causes ot which should be known to him as legislator and as Longe ns | ot the ‘Treasury. Apart from the depressed condition of the commerce of the country, these causes are to be found in the act of May 1, 1572, repealing duties on tea and coffee; the act of June 6, 1572, reducing the rates of duty ten per cent (restored March 3, 1875), and adding many articles to the free list; the act of March 1, 1873, declaring free “all fish oil and fish of all kinds, the product ot the tisheries of the Dominion ot Canada, Prince Edward island and Newfoundland;” the decision of the Treasury Department of December 3, 1873, under which oranges and lemons wero admitted free until July 1, 1874, after which, per act of May 9, 1874, they were made dutiable; and the act of February 3, 1875, reducing duties and adding other articles to the free list. The Collector, whoever he may be, cannot aug- ment the importations, and without importations he cannot collect revenues, ‘THE INCREASE OF EXPENSES. As to the expenses, they were increased from year to year, because there were improperly, if not il- legaliy, charged to the expense of collecting the revenues large amounts over which I had no con- trol, and which, in strietuess, had nothing to do with the current expenses. Thus in 1875 and i876 there were expended $250,000 in fitting up the new appraiser's store. In: 1877 there were cha: to the account over $165,000 of interes! nd costs on old judgments’ arising ont of mat ters aceruing prior to 1872. In another year there was charged a large amount for fitting up the Naval Office, and for a series of years a large sum for rental. These are but specimens of many vimilur items, For four years alone I can point out an aggreg: of over $675,000 charged to expenses. It shontd also be noted that the expenses of tie Surveyor’s Department, Naval Office and the Appraiser's Department, alt included in the state- ment of py een and amounting to several hundred thousand dollars a year, are in no respect under the control of the Collector. There have been lai ly augmented since 1872 by increased rentals and in other respects. Thus the rental of the Be store was increased by the department in 1873 from $66,000 to nearly $90,000 per annum, Moreover, the expenses have been increased by new burdens thrown upon the office by legislation. Thus the inland transporta- tion system, by which goods arriving ‘at this port e transported withont payment of duty to a large aber of inland cities, imposes a large expenditure while it takes og he om the amount of duties received here. So an elaborate system of preparing Statistics has grown up under the direction of the ‘Treasury Department, and sex an expense of nearly $40,000 a year. None of these are properly chargeable 48 part of the ex- pense of collecting the revenue of this port. Another kystem has in recent years grown up by which the Secretary of the Treasury has appointed persons nominally as special inspectors, who, though draw- tng their pay through the Collector's office, were detailed by the Secretary's orders to assist special | agents and others, This has afforded a convenient way of appointing friends to office at the expense of the revenue, AUTHORITY TO INCUR EXPENSE. It shoukl be borne in mind that tne Collector can ineur no new or increased use, cannot appoint a single additional subordinate or change tie com- pensation of any one without the express and special authority, in every instance, of the Secretary of the Tre a that to obtain that authority he must ‘1 the reasons why he deems it proper. Under these circumstances the Collector is not fairly held exclusively responsible for any increase of ex- pense. Moreover, ever since 1872 the Secretary of the Treasury has’ repeatedly, by special agents who have devoted weeks and months to that duty, ex- amined in detail the entire Custom House, desk by desk, and obtained reports,as to the necessity of maintaining or increasing the force, by which re- ary successive secretaries huve been guided in their action. Upon this subject of the expenses I beg to call attention to the following extract from a letter vy me to Mr, Sherinan, under date of No- vent, furnished to the Commission, nses of Collecting the revenue at this port ines 1ND7, under Collector Sehell. | Frown expense wae un avernie uf abont SM Harney, from 1461 to 1464, abont 8745 por Mr. Draper, in 1864 and 1 a ; ing, in MBH mu 1886 to LHD, 18G) andl 1870, Murphy, in 1870 and TXT, about 60 per con Arthuf, from 1871 to 1877, abont 62 per cent, ‘This showing, it should be borne in mind, 1s made notwithstanding the large diminution of inporta- tions since 1872. REDUCTION IN THE FORCE, With reference to the reduction in the force, Mr, Sherman says that while I thought a reduction of twelve per cent was all that was proper, the Jay Commission reported in favor of twenty per cent, aud that this haa been carried out at a large annual saving and “increasing the efficiency of the revenue.” wing paragraph Upon this subject I rerer to the foll of the letter jos, retrenchment contd go wit y of the system and emusing delays nity. the rednetion advice of the ‘out injur to the m in excess of this injurious delays have been caused, while business his Ae- cumulated In others beyond the ability of the force to dis- pose of. In & few weeks the delays caused to merchants in a single day by the insufficient force of entry clerks must have cost $5,000, though to relieve the press to some extent, I temporarily took clerks from other duties, where they were needed, to perform the duties of entry clerks, ADRQUACY OF THE Foren, Upon the question of the adequac, may add that no one is yot justiti of the force I in saying that the it force is sufficient. It is easy to say what number of men is necessary for the transac- tion of the clerical and inside business of the Custom House and the examination of 3 baggage. As to that portion of the force which Cor should be employed in what may be described as the preventive service there is room for great difference ot and the loss resulting trom the employ- meut of too small a force cannot become evident until after years of experience. This port has a docked water front of about twenty-four miles. ‘To perfectly watch this front at night so as to prevent smugglin, force, while if only halt force is employed the co ment but certai loss is not easily detected, yain, the proper currying out of the law as to goods intended for transportation in bond and for export required many meu. That duty is now, with the reduced force, performed only on Paper, and there is practically almost no protection against frauds, ‘This fact and the necessity ‘Of # much larger toree fOr this service is shown by ‘a report made to the Treas- ury Department by Special Inspector Madge in Janu- ary, 1878, I have unable to obtain a copy of the report, but it is in the Treasury Department. ‘hat the reduction of the clerical force was carried by me to the extreme limit is shown by the fact that when, within a fortnight after my suspension, the Secretary di @ special investigation to be : the acting Collector wrote the secretary that after a careful examination of the entire foree he could not find any who could be spared for the work required, and he therefore insisted upon the appointment of six additional clerks, and such appointments were made with the approval of the department. Iam informed, though { have not had time to verity the report, that the force has, since my suspension, been much increased by’ the’ appointment of other subordinates, temporary and permanent, and that the amonnt for salaries under the acting Col- lector’s administration during the latter half of 1878. is considerably larger than was paid under my admin- istration during the first halt of the same year. lt should be further noted that the amount of reduc- tion in salaries stated by Mr. Sherman—namely, $235,000—includes the reductions in the Naval Office and the Ap) aiser’s department, over which I had no control. The reduction in the Collector’s depart- ment was only $179,000, CHARGES AGAINST THE WEIGHERS. Mr, Sherman repeats, in considerable detail, the al- legations of the third report of the Jay Commission as tothe weighers, und assumes that they were correct. He should in common fairness not have omitted to state that the truth of these ea is vigorously denied by the weighers in a letter to the Secretary, of which a copy is annexed. The weighers allezed that the Jay Commission had before it no evidence to sustain their allegations. Thoy called in vain for acopy of the evidence. Withont referring to the answer of the weighers in detail I call your attention to the following extract relating to one of the alle- gations adopted by Mr. Sherman, as affording a good sample of the fairness of the Jay Commission. Ihe weighers say lowing 1h rade as jar feos to. be charged for 'd by a weigher to havo be adopted by the wre, and in the text of th report they say that one of the weighers—not one of the undersizned—testified that it had been adopted by the Bourd of Weighers. The commission continue :— “It is proper toadd in regard to this allegation that cer- tain weighers addressed w note to the commission denying fist in question had beon adopted Ly the weit in it were shown to accord with tho: that the but fees mentioned that wore proven to have been paid. “Certain of the woighers addressed a note.” Is this a de- tly Honest way of stating the tact that evory welsh save the one exainined by them, united in a sworn sta ment denying this assertion requesting to be callea defore the commission and subjected to the severest croxs- examination the truth of their assertion, and thit the commission declined to do this? Is such conduct on the part of those who claim to have a right to sit in judgment upon the character of others anything else but disgraceful? hat weight {s to be attached to the judgment of those who have so little appreciation of what is just und fair? In my letter to the Secretary, of November 23, 1877, already referred to, I wrote in that department as woll as in y be in some respects defective, and the system but coimpluints against the weighers reach me very rarely and are always carefully investigated through the Sur. veyor's Department, where the iminediate supervision is by law placed. A very large number of the largest importers have expressed their satixfaction with the manner in which their dutios are performed. The nugber of weighers is probably greater than is necessary for the performance of their dutics during the present period of diminished busi- ness. It was my intention to include them in the red tion of the force, which, as already stated, I had arranged With your predecessor to make. They wero, with the con- currence of yourself and the commission, omitted from: the reduction recently made, pending your action upon the special recommenaations made ay to them. It should be added that after the receipt of the re- port of the Jay commission and the letter of the weighers, Mr. Sherman delayed action for many months, during which he caused various special ex- aminations to be made, and himeelt personally ex- amined into the subject; and as a result, while re- ducing the number of weighers from thirteen to seven, he expressly retained in the service seven, all of them those against whom the Jay commission made the swee] allegations, he now , and in communicating this decision to me he expressly stated that they were excusable for uny breach of regulations they had cominitted. ‘The Secretary claims that the reforms proposed by y comniission in the weighers and gaugers’ departinent were carried out by his orders, and ha’ resulted in a saving of over $200,000 per annum. to the amount of saving, the fact is that itis on the salary and labor account $101,140 32 per annum, as compared with the year ending July 30, 1877, and that, apart trom the ssving of $21,000 by the reduc- tion in the number of weighers, the entire economy in salaries is caused by the fact that the government for very many years, and long prior to the time when I came into office, paid laborers at the rate of torty cents per hour, but that by the present sys- tem the labor 1s obtained by contract for & gross sum perannum. The change to the contract system was recommended by myself and General Sharpe, then Surveyor, both to the Jay commission and the Secre- tary, but the commission disapproved its adoption. On’ November 14, 1877, however, myself and the Surveyor reported in favor of its introduction, and answered the objection of the Jay committee. THE MEREDITH REPORT. Mr. Sherman introduces some extracts from the report made by Messra. Meredith and others, and relies upon the charges therein contained to justity my suspension. Butl was suspended on July Ll, and was then informed by the Secretary that my sus- pension had been decided upon a considerable time previously, while the Meredith report, is not dated till A eu six days after my sus) mo. It would haye been at least prudent if herman little attention to these dates, As to the reference to the special report of Messrs, Meredith and others concerning Deputy Collector Lydecker, I refer to the answer to these charges made by Mr. Lydecker in July last, of which a copy is en- closed, You will perceive that the charges are based on oceurrences which took piace ten years ago; that they were investigated at the time by the Ireasnry Department and others and shown to be wholly un- founded, and that the same conclusion was arrived at on repeated subsequent investiya- tions. It should ve noted that Mr. Meredith and others, coming here avowedly with the deter- mination to make a case inst the New York Cus- tom House, and especii inst Mr. Lydecker, could find nothing against him, but were compelled to revive stale charges, retuted more than ten ago. It is only necessary turther to add that, in oue ot the two charges made against Mr, Lydecker, the Meredith commissie coupled Mr. ‘an entry clerk, and if one was guilty the other was, and that Mr. Shermau huneeif bas since fully exonerated Mr. Evane and continues him in office, Mr. Sheriman adopts the statement of Mr. Meredith and his associates, that I did not yive “that personal attention to the duties of the office that would scem to be necessary; that he did not usually arrive at his office until afternoon.” I must pis guilty to this charge us far as relates to the hour which I metimes reached my office, Ican only say that I found it constantly necessary to work at my house, where could” escape interruption in the exmuination of voluminous papers ‘and perplexiny questions Ppryeia coming betore me, but that i aiways made it a rule to finish the work of the day before 1 left the Custom House, though that required me to remain there far into the eveuing. 1 say cou- fidently that for many years the duties of the office have not been performed so promptly as I performed them, Every one in or out of the Custom Honse who is familiar with the facts will con- firm this assertion, As to my not giving personal attention to my dution, the charge is absurd. udeed, those who have long been connected with the Custom House inform me that for a great many years no Collector has reserved to himseld for personal at- tention so large a portion of the duties of the oilic or has extended to his subordinates—whether the Special or the Assistant Collector or the ordinary deputies—so liitie of authority or discretionary wer. This fact is so notorious that if Mr. Mere- dith and his associates had made inquiry auywhere but in a single quarter they could not have made their statement to the contrary eflect. Among other things 1 assunied the personal super. vision of all of the correspondence, the dectding of all questions not relating strictly to routine, and for along time personally performed all the duties of the disbursing officer which had been performed by the auditor. Only those who know the tine neces- sary daily for the examination of the large cor; spondence, the signing of the hundreds of checks for refunds and other purposes, and decisions of the ap: peals from the acts of the deputy collectors, ail of ‘which were in iny personal care, will fully appreciate tae amount of Jabor the statement just made im- jes. RATE OF TARY. Mr. Sherman, in hii mendation of the Acting Collector forced the regulations in securing an increase of the revenue, the result on sugar alone showing @ gain to November 30, 1878, of 3,968,928 pounds, which, atthe average rate of duty on all sugars, cansed a of revenue of $97,258 73; and also @ propor- tionate gain in the weighing of many other articles, In thene a) Pointy, alone there is a gain to the ov. ernment of WP for a period covered, bei nal to $46,646 16 per annus” aa add Without at present dij the state iting the correctness of ernment the Secretary erre if he means the acts of the acting Collector, For at least forty years there had prevatied a regulation of the Treasury De- partment which fixed the rate of tate at certain schedule rates, but which gave to the importer and Collector the right in any special case to require actual tare to be ascertained. The schedule tare on suyar was twelve and a half per cent, and this was till within a year or two accepted on all hands as just and satisfactory, In the competition of busi ness it happened ¢l some importers managed to ot their sugars imy i ages, involving an etuat tare of leaw than the schedule. rate, This. tact catived, ax a rule, portations of sugar, Certain importers appealed from my action, c.wiming that the government was bound to schedule tare. My decision was sus- tained LF wg ihe ean on May 22, 1878. On June 22, 1878, I caused a letter to ‘De addressed to the Secretary, in which I said:— 0 itable and safest rule ould nied wt thet awn altar eet tare, he 6 says it shall be, in all cases where there he Collector and the importers to accept tl in no agreomen: the invoice wd ‘This was in effect only suggesting the alteration of tho regulation, ao as to make obligatory & practice I had in fact introduced. To me, and not to the acting Collector, should therefore be ascribed a portion, at least, of the credit for the saving the Secretary claims by taking actual tare. It is obvious that Mr, Sherman was aware of this, forhe 1s careful not to give the period during which the gain he claims was made. He says, “Showing a gain November 30, 187%," but does not tell frowm what period, and further on he speaks with studied indefiniteness of a gain in ‘a period covered,” Mr. Sherman's claim of a proportiona’e gain in the ber peg t of many other Rrtioles than sugar is not justified by any facts which he gives, or which, as 1 believe, exist, for the treatment pf arti- cles other than sugar has not, I am informed, been changed from that which has long prevailed. I may add that in referring to the reforms introduced by the acting Collector the Secretary conveniently re- members to forget to specity them. Every one that he does refer to was introduced while I was Col- lector or recommended by me. UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISCRIMINATION,” Mr, Sherman says thet “continued complaints came from other ports of entry that un- constitutional discriminations were made in favor of the port of New York by the method of conducting business at that port; that allowances for damage not permitted at other ports were made, and that asystem of undervaluation prevailed.” The making of such complaints hurdly proves their truth, and, even if true, they related to Mnatter with which the Collector had nothing to do, as, in respect to the particulars complained ot, the law places the entire power in the appraiser and the Secretary, and mot in the Collector. Indeed, it is proper to state specifically that the classification, appraisement and valuation of goods for duty, and the ascertainment of the existence and extent of damage allowances, are at this port—unlike some other ports—placed by the law exclusively in the hands of the appraiser, over whom the Collector has no control. He can only interfere in cases where, after the raiser has acted, the merchant 1s dissat- isfled and demands a reappraisement. The Collector then appoints a merchant to act with the general appraiser, The dec sion of the two is final if they agree. If they disagree—which is very rarely the cuse—the Collector must then decide between them; but while I was in office I was bound by the regula tions to adopt in full the decision of one or the other of them. The appraiser also acts exclusively in weighing cigars for duty. It will therefore be eived that the Collector is wholly unaffected by the complaints as to falxe clas- sification, uation, or improper or excessive damage allowances, which constitute the chief bur- den of the reports of Mr. Meredith and his associates, and of Assistant Sect French, voth transmitted to the Senate by Mr. Sherman, I emphasize this statement, which Mr. French in his report expressly confirms, because the utterances of some of the mer- chants trom other places, who vere associated by the Secretary with Mr. Meredith, showed that they were whoily ignorant of this truth. ALLEGED OBSTRUCTION OF REFORMS. Mr. Sherman states that atter the receipt of the re- ports of the Jay Commission ‘the President was strongly, of the opinion that the public interests de- anded a change in the leading offices in the New ork Custom House,” but that he (Mr. Sherman) prefrred to try to execute the reforms proposed with Mr. Arthur in office rather than a stranger. But, he says, it gradually became evident that I was not in sympathy with the recom- mendations of the commission and could and did obstruct their fair execution. It is impossible to answer definitely a general charge like this, I canonly say that my views of the reports of the Jay Commission were expressed to the Secretary from time to time, both orally and in writing, and especially at his request in the letter dated November 28, 1877, already reterred to. From that date at least Mr. Sherman could have had n0 doubt as to my views. How or in what way I “obstructed the exe- cution of the recommendation of the commission” I am unable to So far as the reduction of tho force is concerned I acted in @ manner which the Secretary directly approved, as appears by his letter. ‘Thus, on May 31, 1877, he wroté me:— Thave conversed with Mr. Jay in regard to matters and he says you will probably make the reduction by the aid of oinmiission of trusted officers. I have found in the department here that that mode is the very best in which to make reductions if the officers are carefully selected. Again he wrote:— It is impossible in a force so large as should know the peculiarities and merits o' and it is important in making selections that you secure this information throngh committees of trusted officers. And on July 30, after I had completed the work, he wrote me that persons affected had complained to him, but “that the matter had been fully inquired into by a committee from this department. It is deemed best, after this full examination, to approve your recommendations thoroughly, it irre apparent that your committee have exercised great care impartiality.” As to the other recommendations of thecommission, Ican only say that after I had submitted my own views to the department I carried out promptly and zeaiously every recommendation of the commission 80 800n as the adopted it, whether it met my persoual approval or not. Though I had re- ted interviews and voluminous correspondence with Mr. Sherman with reference to them, he never even intimated to me that there was any dissatisfac- tion with my course, except with my refusal, on tho reorganization of the weighers’ force, to reappoint two assistant weighers, a retusal which I upou good reasons of public policy. Mr. Sherman states that after the rejection by tho Senate of Mr. Roosevelt—which took place on De- cember 13, 1877—‘‘there was no further attempt or desire to send to the Senate other nomin: but “very brief experience ved that ai ope of car- rying outany systematic reforms or c! es in tho the business would be abor tive while the Mector held his position.’ In a subsequent portion of his letter, Mr, Sherman says that “after several months’ trial aud consideration” he became convinced that my re- moval was necessary, and “some time after the close of the session of Congress, and after the experiment had been fully tried, President Hayes suspended me.” I presume it is true that there was “no attempt or desire to send to the Senate other nominations,” though the Senate was in sossion six months after the rejection of Mr. Roosevelt. When communicating to me my suspension Mr. Sherman expressly informed me that from the outset there had been no wavering in the determination to remove me, but it been delayed by accidental causes which he mentioned, among which he did not atate the one he now impliedly a a desire to avoid the control of the Senate. It is furthermore clear that there could have been no ound of suspension occurring after the ad- journment, of the Senate, for I was absent on _ annual leave of absence from the time of such journment until within a week of my suspension. CAUSES OF SUSPENSION, In informing me in July last of 7, intended sus- pension Mr. Sherman distinctly stated that I was not suspended because of any charges, and that I never would hear of any chai from him, but that the suspension was to solely because the Presi- dent deemed that the Collector should be in sym- pathy with the administration with reference to the Custom House. Mr. Sherman offered to state this to me in writing, but not antici Ing the commun:ca- tion just sent to the Senate I was content with his oral assurance. From the time when the Secretary sent me a ro- est to resign, prior to the nomination of Mr. Hrosovelt, in September, 1877, accompanied with the offer of aforcign appointment for myself, down to the time of my suspension in the following July, the Custom House constantly swarmed with com- missions and special agents investigating every por- tion of the business and building, a yom cond aud magnifying, if not creating, complaints. It was, ring all the time, obvious that o strenuous attempt was being made to find some and for my removal; but the Secretary was, as [ ‘said, at 1st compelled to inform me whea I was suspended that the attempt had wholly failed. LT trust the Senate will have no Levey Sand coming to the conclusion that Mr. Sherman was then correct, whatever may be ee —" Tam, very ol , your obedi ‘vant, respectfully, your lent ser’ G, A. ARTHUR, MR, COMNELL'# REPLY. The following is Mr. Cornell's reply to Secretary Sherman's letter :— Hon. Roscor Conaiixe, My Dear Sin—Owing to my absence from the city your favor of the 16th inst. has only just been re- ceived, ‘The communication of the Secretary of tho ‘Treasury, to which you call my attention, contains ‘no allegation of impropriety or neglect of duty during my service as Naval Officer, » ay can any such allega- tion be truthtuily maintaine: At the timo i pe suspension the Secretary of tho Treasury stated that no fault was found with my offi- efal uct and that he was not in favor of suspend- ing me, but that the President had determined upon it con! ‘to his (the Secretary's) opinion. ‘Tho determination to suspend me undoubtedly had its origin in my refusal my personal and political rights, which will be best understood by reference to # letter which was addressed by me to the President SS acon teen 8, 1877, copy h is 61 in, Yours, very respect fully. "ALONZO B, CORNELL, JUDGMENT AGAINST THE CITY. An official statement has been transmitted to Mayor Cooper by Comptroller Kelly in answer to a request of the Mayor as to what judgments obtained against the vity in 1878 now remain nopaid, Their agyre- gate the Comptroller states at $254,009 25, A MASKED BURGLAR, On Sunday night « burglar effected an entrance to the residence of Joseph Lake, in Winfield, 1.1, by climbing to the kitchen roof and prying open a bed. room window, Mr. end Mrs, Lake were the only oc- cupants of the house. The thief collected a quantity of clothing, which he threw out of the window, and the fact that they were not all c: away leads to the conclusion that he was alone in the operation, An overenal ntaloons and pair of shoes are miss mode of conducti| New Youk, Jan. 21, 1879. Chairman :— ing. Me. ee was awakened, but made so mich noise getting out of bed that the burglar became alarmed |. He lea) from the rout to the ground in full view of Mr. Lake, who had fo fire erme, A mask was found on the ground, =