SENATE.] Post Office Resolutions. [JUNE 27, 1834. ceived no share. Jesse Tomlinson, in his deposition, page and Slaymaker, from Philadelphia to Pittsburg, &c. 307, says, that he is one of the partners on that line-that That is one case in which, in the language of this resoluhe was informed by Slaymaker, in the spring of 1832, that tion, extra allowances have been granted to contractors there was to be an extra allowance on that line, and that without any increase of duty on their part. I might "he (Slaymaker) was to let Mr. Brown have, or to give enumerate many more similar cases: That of Temple, Mr. Brown, $1,000 of it." already referred to. That of Avery, Tompkins, and Co., He further says, "In February or March, 1833, I ask- stated in page 23, of the report, where the pretence ed Mr. Slaymaker, and he told me he understood it was for giving the extra of $2,500, is, that the mail shall be not allowed," and Tomlinson says he was told of its ac- carried in a four-horse wagon, so as to ensure its regular tual allowance, for the first time, after he came to this arrival. Those contractors had already undertaken to city to testify as a witness. The pretended service, for carry the mail, and to carry it punctually, and daily, in which this $10,000 was allowed, was really nothing-- four-horse post coaches; and they had undertaken to all fictitious. I read the statement of it, as made in the carry it in such manner that it should arrive regularly, letter of the Postmaster General, of the 3d of March, and this additional sum is paid them out of the public 1834, to show the ridiculous pretext on which the allow- Treasury, by way of inducing them to perform their conance was made. "No. 1031, 1170. Reeside and Slay- tract. The only additional security obtained by the Demaker are the contractors for carrying the mail from partment is this: the contractors had before agreed to Philadelphia to Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, three hundred carry the mail, but now they agree that they will be sure and two miles, twice a day; and from Pittsburg, by to carry it-and, to put the matter past all doubt, they Washington, Pennsylvania, to Wheeling, Virginia, fifty- will carry it in a wagon. I suppose it would have been seven miles, daily, in four-horse post-coaches, from the taken as a full performance of this part of the contract, 1st of January, 1832, to the 31st of December, 1835, at if the contractors had taken off their coach body, and run a compensation of $27,000 per annum. the wheels without it. It will be seen, that, in some "In consequence of the increased rapidity of this mail, cases, heavy allowances are made for carrying the mail the newspapers which were formerly sent from the East in four-horse post-coaches: in this case a heavy additional by the other routes were now sent upon this, and the allowance is made for carrying it in any thing but a coach. general cry of the public, for the more rapid conveyance All is allowance-extra allowance-it is the very life and of newspapers, required them to be sent in the more soul of the system of reform, on which this Department rapid instead of the slower line, as was contemplated in of the Government has been conducted. their proposals; which so loaded it as to almost entirely In support of the other branch of the 6th resolution, exclude passengers. They were, therefore, allowed, viz: "that in other cases extra allowances have been from the 1st of April, 1332, for transporting all the made which are unreasonable, extravagant, and out of all papers by their most rapid line, at the annual rate of proportion with the increase of service," I will refer to $10,000 additional." This contract had already grown but a few contracts. Those of James Reeside and others, up from $8,250 to $27,000 a year; and what is the pre- stated in pages 11, 12, and 13, of the report; and I refer tence for adding this additional $10,000? That the news- to them the more especially, as that individual has, in a papers had to be carried on the rapid instead of the slower publication, (which appeared in the Globe,) denied that line, as was contemplated by the contract. Now with all the amount of his extra compensation equalled the sum the care in research, and industry of the committee, there stated in the report. I have re-examined it with care, incould be no evidence found that any such thing was ever tending, if there were any error in the estimate, to contemplated. It is not to be found in the contract, and correct it here. I have found a small error, it is true, if there is to be a private understanding between con- but, as far as it goes, it lessens, rather than increases the tractors and the Postmaster General, we may as well do enormity of the transaction-the error is in their favor, away at once with all written obligations, and leave all not against them. Five cases, out of an immense number to arrangement and favor. This is a mere invention-in which the name of James Reeside appears, are select an apology for the gift of $10,000 a year to these men, ed and set out in the report, which in conclusion says, and its true moving cause is yet to be discovered, or drawn page 13: "the above are but a few out of the many confrom the evidence above detailed. And another thing tracts held by James Reeside and others, his partnersdeserves mention: if these contractors were really en- the allowances, in the above cases, beyond the amount titled to this $10,000 a year for extra service, why was it of their open bids, and fair and legal contracts, are $62,316 not given to them at once, when they showed their right; 78 a year, amounting, during the continuance of their and why is not the date of the allowance, as in other cases, contracts, to the enormous sum of $249,267 12, which is set down in the Postmaster General's report just read? given by the Department to these contractors without Why, simply because it was convenient to keep the mat-advertising and without competition. The amount of ter pending for some time, for some purpose of some of these allowances was somewhat reduced in consequence the parties, and the actual time of its allowance does not of the insolvency of the Department." appear in the report, because it would make rather an This is one of the statements of the report which has awkward figure there. An allowance of $10,000 yearly, been contradicted. I ask the attention of the Senate to from the 1st of April, 1832, for carrying all the news the proof; for it is all before us, and attested by the sig papers in their most rapid line, made at the Department nature of the Postmaster General. I hold in my hand a on the 3d of March, 1833, certainly has not a business-tabular statement, showing the sums at which these five like appearance. During this time the contractors seem contracts were bid off, as they appear in the Postmaster to have been kept in suspense about it: at one time Slay- General's report, of the 18th of April, 1832; the amount maker tells Tomlinson that it is to be allowed; and Mr. to which they were raised by subsequent additions and Brown is to have $1,000 of it; and at another time he modifications, and the difference between those amounts tells him it is not to be allowed; and when at last it is al- to which the paragraph of the report of the committee, lowed, it is kept secret from all except the two individu- just read, has reference. als who receive it; and who borrow a large sum of money to lend to Mr. Brown to enable him to buy the property of Doctor Temple. Difference. From Hagerstown to Time will not allow me to dwell particularly on each of McConnelsville these resolutions, and I have partly anticipated the proof From Baltimore to on the 6th, in my observations on the contract of Reeside Chambersburg 1,900 Contract as Actual am't paid $40 Pittsburg, and from Pitsg. to Wheeling 8,250 40,150 00 $16,465 mail routes. I have since examined this matter with some 22,775 00 care, and compared this clause with the provisions of the law of 1825, regulating the Post Office Department, and am of opinion, that the repealing clause in the latter law extends to that clause in the former. The time of the 7,136 72 Senate will not, perhaps, be profitably employed by entering here into that investigation, especially as it is wholly immaterial in deciding on the legality of these contracts; for they are, none of them, made pursuant to the provisions of this clause in the act of 1823, nor with regard to the restrictions in the act of 1825. They are all illegal, as declared by the resolution. The eighth resolution declares 31,900 00 81,231 72 64,766 72 Thus the compensation for carrying the mail on those five contracts, is raised from $16,465 to $81,231 72, and the amount of money paid, over and above the open bids, 8. "Resolved, That the public credit has been pledged and fair and legal contracts, is $64,766 78 a year, instead for the benefit of individual contractors; and that conof $62,316 78, as stated in the report. It is a small error in the estimate, which I take this the earliest opportunity to correct. The amount which this arrangement would have given to Reeside and his associates, on these five contracts, in four years, was $259,167 12, had not this wanton waste of the funds of the Department been in some measure arrested by its hopeless insolvency. tractors have been solicited and induced to aid with their personal credit the business of the Department; and that all such transactions are unjustifiable and improper." We have the testimony of Edwin Porter, who swears, that, on the route from New Orleans to Mobile, on which he receives, by private contract with the Department, $40,000, he lost 150 trips in a single year. No part of Sir, the investigation and the report of the committee his pay is kept back in consequence of this loss, but, on have exposed this plunder of the public treasure, if they the contrary, the Postmaster Ĝeneral accepted his draft have not, in fact, driven the spoilers from their prey. How for $20,000, in advance of his pay, which draft is still was it to be expected, then, that those who performed outstanding; thus pledging the credit of the Department this unthankful and unpleasant task, should escape denun- to sustain a contractor. ciation and abuse? Look at the power, the numbers, and Reeside testified that he had, on one occasion, arranged the wealth which must, of necessity, be arrayed against $6,000 for the Department; that is to say, he enabled each and all of us who have shared in their exposure--them, by his credit, to raise $6,000, in anticipation of their the thousands and tens of thousands variously engaged, own funds; and on another recent occasion, he assisted connected and combined, as they are, from the head him- them to raise $10,000, which is erroneously set down as self of the Department down to the very lowest depth-- $1,000, among the exhibits. I presume no one will deny down to the printer of the vile sheet who is paid for pub- that such transactions, in a public officer controlling the lishing slander and billingsgate, under the cover of pro- public treasure, are unjustifiable and improper. posals for mail contracts. It was expected that all would The 9th resolution condemns the act of the Postmaster open with one cry upon us--and so it is. One after an- General in establishing a second and third daily mail, on other, these extra-allowance men come out, in the extra the same route, at a very heavy expense. This matter advertisement newspapers, with every species of misrepre- is fully considered in the report, and I need add nothing sentation and abuse, against the committee, and especial- to what is there urged on that point. Pains have been ly against me, for daring the exposure. But they are taken to inculcate the idea, that it is the great increase of mistaken, if they believe that this, or any other thing speed that has ruined the Department, I, for one, deny which they may do or dare, will slacken our exertions, that it is so; the speed is very little, if any, greater on the or swerve us one hair's breadth from the straight-forward principal routes, than it was under a former administrapath of official duty. It cannot impel me to greater ex- tion. The difficulty is not in too much speed, for the ertions, for my whole energies have been, and in any event, should have been, devoted to the performance of the duty assigned us. But it shall not abate it—it shall not shake my purpose-it shall not disturb my temper or destroy the just balance of my judgment, by exciting any private feeling, or personal animosity. Nothing of this, for I will not, while in the execution of this official duty, turn aside one inch to regard any attack, however violent or abusive, come from what source it may, but I am and will be devoted to the duty which the Senate has as signed us, until it shall be performed, or we be discharged from its obligation. The seventh resolution is in these words: 7. "Resolved, That the Postmaster General has established steamboat lines for the transportation of the mail by private contract at an enormous expense, and without authority of law." business of the country requires, and the resources of the Department justify, all the speed that is given it; it is the waste of money-its payment without a just equivalent in service of any kind-or its payment for these additional stages at twice and thrice a day, which avail little or nothing to the public interest. The 10th resolution declares, "that pecuniary transactions of a very irregular nature are proved to have taken place between the contractors and some of the chief officers of the Post Office Department." In support of this, I refer to what I have already said of the transactions between O. B. Brown and Slaymaker, Reeside and Temple. Can any man, who has looked at the evidence with regard to those transactions, doubt as to their actual character? But even the face which the actors attempt to give them, is but one degree less deep in the descending scale of official turpitude. There are other transactions which demand a passing notice. I read from page 15 of the report of the committee: The facts on which this resolution is founded, cannot be denied. The contract for the transportation of the mail by steamboat, from the mouth of Guyandotte to Cin. "It also appears, that, in the spring or summer of 1831, cinnati, from Cincinnati to Louisville, and from New Or- Mr. Barry applied to Reeside in Philadelphia, to assist leans to Mobile, were all private contracts, without ad him in negotiating an acceptance for $1,000, to raise some vertisement or competition. An examination of these money for his (Mr. Barry's) individual use. Instead of cases, and the principles on which they rest, is to be doing this, Reeside advanced him the $1,000; and he stafound in the 18th and 19th pages of the report. One ted before the committee, that Mr. Barry paid it by his provision of law, however, was overlooked by the com- acceptance at a short date, which he (Reeside) negotiated mittee. It is the last section of an act of 1823, which in the Schuylkill Bank. On inquiry of the cashier of the made rivers, &c., on which steamboats regularly plied, Schuylkill Bank, we were informed that no such acceptVOL. X.-132 SENATE.] Post Office Resolutions. ance was negotiated there. Your committee having col lected the evidence touching these transactions, leave them without comment." The evidence on this point, and on which the committee founded their statement, is in pages 237, 238, and 239, of the documents and evidence accompanying the report. I will read a portion of that evidence, and ask for it the attention of the Senate. James Reeside, in his deposition, says: "Another instance in which I lent money, was, when Major Barry was in Philadelphia, about three years ago, and was about to bring away his family, and his sick son, who had been under Dr. Physic, at an earlier period than he had intended. He applied to me to know if I could not get him an acceptance for $1,000 negotiated, to enable him to bring his family home. I told him I could loan him $1,000, which I did, and he gave me his acceptance for that amount at a short date, probably at thirty days. It was negotiated in the Schuylkill Bank of Philadelphia, and paid at maturity." [JUNE 27, 1834. The second letter was written under the suppositionthat the inquiry in the first was not extensive enough, and that the paper might be of some other description than Mr. Reeside supposed, or that there might have been a mistake in point of time. On receiving the last answer, the committee came to the only conclusion possible. The words of the report, which contain that conclusion, are, "On inquiry of the cashier of the Schuylkill Bank, we were informed that no such acceptance had been negotiated there." I say this much in justification of the report, which has been furiously assailed on account of this paragraph. I leave it to the judgment of any candid man, whether, with this evidence before us, it would have been right to pass this matter over in silence; or, speaking of it at all, less could have been said, or said less strongly on the subject. Subsequent inquiries, on the part of Reeside or Major Barry, have shown that a draft for $1,000, drawn by James Reeside, (in November, 1830) and accepted by Major Barry, at 90 days, (instead of 30 days,) was negotiated in the SchuylI will next refer to the correspondence of the commit- kill bank; and now I ask of those who are able to give tee with the cashier of the Schuylkill Bank, on that sub- the answer, Why was not the actual state of the fact, if ject, which shows that nothing was presumed by them this be its actual state, sooner disclosed and made known hastily, and that every effort was used to arrive at the ex- to the committee? Reeside was discharged on the 21st act truth. The first letter, which is signed by the chair- of May, when we closed his examination, but he attendman, was written by myself, and presented to him for his ed afterwards until the 9th of June, by order of the chairsignature. I read from page 239 of the documents ac-man, without the authority of the committee; and when companying this report: the letters of H. J. Levis, of the 22d and 30th May, were received, were not their contents communicated? And if so, why was not the matter investigated and explained? I, of course, could not communicate them. I held, after his examination, no conversation with Reeside, except to request him to leave the committee room when we were about to examine witnesses, whom he severally attended to the spot, and watched over till he was required to retire. But why did not the honorable chairman, at whose request he remained, and who was often in conference with him, suggest this difficulty, that it might be explained? WASHINGTON CITY, May 21, 1834. SIR: You will please inform the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads of the Senate, whether there was, at any time, a bill for $1,000, drawn by W. T. Barry, in favor of James Reeside, negotiated in the Schuylkill Bank, (it is supposed about May, 1831,) and passed to the credit of Mr. Reeside. If any such were, you will please send the description of the bill, and designate to whom it was sent for collection. FELIX GRUNDY, Chairman. H. J. LEVIS, Cashier Schuylkill Bank, Philadelphia. SCHUYLKILL BANK, May 22, 1834. DEAR SIR: Your favor of the 21st instant is received. I cannot find on the books of this institution any draft drawn by W. T. Barry, in favor of James Reeside, for $1,000, and passed to the credit of the latter, during the year 1831. With great respect, your obedient servant, Mr. GRUNDY. I was not authorized to disclose to any one what took place in committee. Mr. EWING. The honorable chairman did not, at all times, feel the force of the obligation of secrecy. On at least one occasion, I know he did disclose what took place in committee, and endeavored to parry its effect; and I know of no special obligation resting on him in this case. Whether this be or be not the transaction referred to in the letter from Richard Smith to Major Barry, I know not-probably it is; but if it be, this is a transaction that WASHINGTON CITY, May 26, 1834. ought not to exist between persons standing in the rela DEAR SIR: A few days ago a letter was written by me, tion of Postmaster General and contractor. It is the furand signed by the chairman of the Committee on the nishing of pecuniary aid by the contractor to this high ofPost Office and Post Roads, &c., making some inquiries ficer. It is entitling himself to his personal gratitude and whether a draft drawn by Major Barry, in favor of James especial good will and favor, by pecuniary accommodaReeside, for $1,000, was negotiated in your bank. You tion. And it has been seen that the public money has state that there was no such draft. Please advise me if any note, acceptance, or any other undertaking of Mr. Barry, for $1,000, or any other sum, was, about three years ago, more or less, negotiated by Mr. Reeside in your bank. Yours, respectfully, gone, in flood tides, just where it would have gone, had this debt of private gratitude and good will been paid out of the public purse. Another transaction, not commented upon in the report, but which is to be found in the evidence, requires notice. Isaac Tompkins, in his testimony, page 295, states, that, in the fall of 1830, he had a conversation with Mr. E. Porter, touching the embarrassments of the Postmaster General. He proposed that a loan of about $5,000 should be made to Mr. Barry, and that Mr. Barry's salary would enable him to refund it before many months; and Mr. Porter expressly stated he acted without the knowledge of Mr. Barry. "His plan was, that a few of the principal contractors should make out this amount, and put it into some person's hands to loan to Mr. Barry, who should always remain ignorant of the source whence it came." Mr. Tompkins, on his second day's examination, The date of the letter I do not and when a draft drawn by him on Storm and Company, on receiving the money, that it was ready for him: he was named to him by one of the committee, stated that, has not applied for it. at the time of the conversation, he told Porter that it recollect." would give him pleasure to contribute, but he had not the Colonel Richard M. Johnson testifies that he was secumoney on hand, but would have it in about ninety days, rity for Major Barry for a sum of money, some two years and that then he could furnish $500, the amount desired ago, or more. That he was unable to raise the money, of him. A day or two subsequent to that conversation, and Major Barry was unable. He wanted $1,500, and he Mr. Porter called on him, and he drew a draft on Storm applied to Mr. Porter to assist him; that Mr. Porter adand Company at ninety days. Porter acknowledged him-vanced the money, which was repaid by him in about self indebted to witness for the amount, and has since three months, as he thinks, though it may have been six sent him word by his partner, Avery, that he was not un- or nine months. Much curious comment might arise mindful of the obligation, and that it should be paid be- from a critical examination of all this evidence. The fore long. The witness adds: "The only entry I have single fact is clear and certain, that a contribution was of the transaction, is in the following words: Made draft on Storm, E. Porter, due 1st of April, $500." Thus far Tompkins, whose name will be familiar to all who have read the report. He is one of a company who has received extra allowances, the amount of which is calculated, by its bare mention, to startle and astonish us. Next follows the testimony of Edwin Porter; and that the course of examination, and the consistency of the witnesses, may be the more readily noted, I read a part of his deposition, from pages 242 and 243 of the report. "Question 1st. Did you, at any time, assist in raising a sum of money for the relief of Major Barry? If you did, state the amount, and the time, and the circumstances, and the persons who contributed. Answer. Colonel Richard M. Johnson called on me, I should think about two years ago, in this city, and stated that Mr. Barry was under some pecuniary embarrassments, in consequence of some debts from Kentucky, which had come against him, for which he (Johnson) was bound as security. Mr. Johnson asked me if I could assist him, by lending him some money to meet those claims? I lent him $1,500, five hundred of which was lent to me by Mr. Tompkins. I considered that I lent the money to Mr. Johnson, for the relief of Mr. Barry, and I held Mr. Johnson responsible for it. got up, among some of the contractors, for the benefit of Major Barry; but the time, the amount, and the time and manner of repayment, are variously stated. But I cannot now dwell upon the subject. There are some other things, also, not unworthy of note. I allude to the presents made by the contractors to Mr. O. B. Brown and the Postmaster General; indelicate, to say the least, in the givers and those who received, considering the relation of official duty in which they stood toward each other. Mr. Slaymaker sends a box of choice wine to Major Barry, and two boxes to Mr. O. B. Brown. Tompkins sends a cask of wine to O. B. Brown. But it is all done privately, and neither of those gentlemen knows any thing of the giver. These are small matters, but they are the same, in kind and character, for which an English chancellor, Lord Bacon, was impeached and disgraced. On the 11th, 12th, and 13th resolutions, I will not dwell. They are sustained by the most indubitable evidence; nor have they been at all called in question. As to the 14th, the facts upon which it rests are partly taken from the records and books of the Department, and partly from information not verified by oath. All that is stated of William Smith, Horatio Hill, and Hay & Bennett, in the report, page 25, except the part that each of those persons, or some member of the firm of each, was the Question 2d. Did you take any note, obligation, or owner or editor of a newspaper, is proved by decisive memorandum from Mr. Johnson? or did you make any evidence, such as would be satisfactory in a court of jusmemorandum in your own books upon the subject? tice. Of those facts, the committee expected to procure Answer. Not to my knowledge. such evidence, before the question should be taken on this resolution; and as time has not yet been allowed us to do so, I ask that it be so amended as to submit the matter for further inquiry. Question 3d. Was any person present at the time when you lent the money to Mr. Johnson? Answer. I should think not. Question 4th. State, as nearly as you can, the time and circumstances of the repayment of that money? Answer. I cannot state any thing concerning it. Question 5th. Do you now recollect the fact of the repayment of the money? Answer. I do recollect the fact that the money was repaid. Question 6th. State where that money was repaid? Question 7th. In what house or room was it repaid? Question 8th. By whom was it repaid? Question 8th. What friend of Mr. Johnson do you suppose might have repaid it? Have you any person in your mind whom you suppose might have done it? Answer. I have not any person in particular at present. Question 11th. In what kind of funds was it paid? Question 13th. Have you repaid Tompkins his five hundred dollars? Answer. I have not, but I wrote to him immediately Common rumor says, that William Smith is the proprietor of a partisan newspaper. It has been so stated by the honorable Senator from Virginia near me, [Mr. LEIGH,] on the floor of the Senate; and, in a publication in one of the city papers, to which the name of Smith was appended, the fact was admitted. But we have not the evidence in such a form that it can be placed on our journals, or filed among our archives. So with Horatio Hill. We have been informed by an honorable Senator from New Hampshire, that he is the editor of a violent and most vile party paper; and another Senator from that State, who stands in such relation to the individual as would imply full knowledge of the fact, does not deny it. Still, we have it not in the proper form, and I do not wish the Senate to act upon it. The information as to Bennett, one of the partners in the contract of Hay & Bennett, is the same in character. It was so stated to a member of the committee, by J. B. Wallace, Esq., of Meadsville, who also stated that the press, or Bennett's interest in it, had been sold by the administrator since the death of Bennett, and a respectable member of the other House, from Pennsylvania, assured us of the high standing and unquestionable veracity of Mr. Wallace. But, because the evidence is not on our files in such a form as to stand in perpetual memory of the thing, I do not ask that it be received as fact, but that the committee be permitted to follow up and extend the inquiry. [Here Mr. G. read to the Senate a statement prepared by Mr. Blair's clerk.] I have detained the Senate, perhaps, too long; but the that was charged by the Nationer Ineings relation in which the committee now stand to the public difference between Blair and the Intelligencer, for the must be my apology. Their report, in part, which is now same advertisement, the same length of time, was $5,268. before the Senate, exhibits scenes of black iniquity in one Now it would be remarked by this statement, that the of the departments of the Government, which can hardly cost in the Intelligencer for advertising so much, was find its parallel in any age or country; and that, too, in $2,763; but the advertisement was only put in the daily men of wealth, and power, and influence. A host of re-paper, whereas the excess charged by Blair, was in containers are at the beck of those who rule this Department, sequence of the advertisement's being put in the daily, prompt for any species of action that may be assigned to semi-weekly, and weekly papers. At the first view, it them. They, and the venal press which they command, appeared that the charges of Blair were unreasonablehave attacked us with unsparing fury; each man or com- but listen to what Blair's printer says, and the thing would pany who has received a large share of the booty, and appear plain enough. whose participation in the plunder is noticed in the report, has joined, or is ready to join, in the attack. A universal cry will be raised against us, and they will en- Blair prints the whole advertisement at once, said Mr. deavor to drown the voice of truth in the general clamor. G., and circulates it in the daily, semi-weekly, and weekly In the mean time, the responsibility of our situation per- paper; whereas Gales and Seaton, who print on one side mits to us no defence any where, except on this floor. of the sheet, and in their daily paper, only charge $2,763. Here, and here only, can we speak or be heard upon It ought to be considered that Blair, in printing all this, these questions-and here must we this day be heard for gave a much wider circulation to the advertisement, exthe last time, until the Senate shall re-assemble, and per-pended a much greater amount of paper, and encountermit us to lay before them the result of our further inves-ed also the expense of additional labor. Although Gales tigation. I thank the Senate for their patient attention at and Seaton could do the work for the sum estimated, and this late day, when I know it is hard to yield it-and I Mr. Blair could do it for the same sum, yet the difference have now done. was in the latter's inserting the advertisement in three papers instead of only in one daily paper; and when this whole subject came to be more fully examined by the same printers who had been selected by the committee, and when they came to make a full report, (which they would do before the next session of Congress,) it would then be apparent that no more was charged by Blair, beyond the prices of Gales and Seaton, than was warranted by the additional labor and expense. Before Mr. EWING had concluded his remarks, as given entire above, The Senate took a recess until 4 o'clock. EVENING SESSION. Mr. EWING resumed his remarks, in illustration of the resolutions reported by the Committee on the Post Office, and continued for about half an hour, as given in full above; when He would now say a word or two in reply to the SenaMr. GRUNDY said he thought that, after the reasons tor from Rhode Island, with respect to the $500,000 acassigned by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. EwING] for cruing from postmasters, from the 1st of January to the the course he pursued in the investigating committee, it 1st of April, 1834. This would turn out as easy of exwas due to that gentleman to say, that they met with his planation as the accounts of Blair. The committee reapproval; although the same reasons had not operated on quired from the Department a statement of the amount him. He, therefore, considered it a duty which he could accruing for those dates; and how was the Department to not abandon, to say something further on the subject. He get at it? They were obliged to take the corresponding wished first to be understood, with respect to the charges quarters for the last year, which produced about $500,that had been made, both by newspaper editors and oth-000, and from them make out their estimates. Now, the ers, against the majority of the Post Office Committee, books showed, that of this sum a large amount had been as entirely disapproving of them. He regretted very received by the Department from deposites in banks; but much that they had been made; and he felt it the more the gentleman from Rhode Island said, that this was not a sensibly, as similar injustice had been done to the minori-part of the $500,000-it was not due to the Department. ty. His object, however, on this occasion, was not to True; but what had become of this money? The Senator vindicate himself, or the minority of the committee, but from Rhode Island said it had been all squandered. to let the public understand the subject better than they [Mr. KNIGHT explained.] would if he were to remain silent; and he should, therefore, confine himself to reply to those gentlemen who had spoken this morning. The Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. KNIGHT] had undertaken to say, that the account of Francis P. Blair, for printing done for the Post Office Department, was exceedingly erroneous. Mr. GRUNDY said, the way to adjust the matter was this: There was so much due from the Department, and so much due to it, and when this money was received from the postmasters, it was paid out to extinguish so much of the debts of the Department. That is to say, they owed ten thousand dollars on a particular day, and [Mr. KNIGHT explained. It was not the account of $500,000 was due to them; therefore, supposing they reBlair he had referred to, but it was the statement in ceived three thousand dollars of the debt due them, and the Globe as to carrying the mails, that he called er- paid it out, did not that operation extinguish so much of roneous.] the debt they owed? That was the only way of settling Mr. GRUNDY Continued: As to any disagreement be- this question. tween the Globe and the gentleman, he would say noth- There had been different statements made in reference ing. The Globe was better able to take care of itself than to the proceedings of the committee, with respect to Mr. he could, by any thing he could say for it. His object Blair's account. He, Mr. G., would state what he knew was merely to give an explanation of Blair's charges, so about it. The committee, supposing that some misstatefar as they related to the Post Office Department. There ments had been made against them, addressed to him a was a statement given in by the Senator from Delaware, note on the subject, which he had promptly answered. made by three printers, appointed by the committee to examine Mr. Blair's accounts. Here it is, said Mr. G. [Mr. GRUNDY then read the statement, given in a previous part of the debate, in Mr. CLAYTON's remarks.] By this it will appear, said Mr. G., that Blair charges for advertising, the same number of times, the same sum [Here Mr. G. read Mr. Blair's answer to the note of the committee.] This was as accurate a statement as his memory enabled him to give, after a careful examination. General Robinson and himself went to the Department and examined into the whole subject; but they did not obtain all the in |