January 16.-M. Starbuck, storekeeper, vice Rice, promoted to assistant weigher, vice Perkins, promoted to assistant weigher, vice Pindar, resigned. February 1.-C. T. Merritt, night inspector, vice Riddle, removed. (Restored.) February 1.-T. C. Webber, clerk, vice Newell, removed. March 4.-W. H. Atwell, jr., night inspector, vice Pearce, removed. (Restored.) March 4.-J. L. B. Pratt, storekeeper, vice Foster, transferred to inspector, vice Bragg, transferred to assistant weigher, vice Crane, transferred to clerk, vice Butterfield, removed. March 6.-W. I. Ellis, inspector, vice Emery, promoted to special inspector, vice Snow, deceased. March 24.-Edwin Patch, inspector, vice Lander, removed. March 24.-S. Hoyt, clerk, vice Fletcher, removed. April 2.-W. Carter, inspector, vice W. D. Eldridge, removed. (Restored.) April 21.-H. L. Hill, night inspector, vice Aspinwall, deceased. May 1.-C. H. Gray, night watchman. (New office.) May 1.-Oliver Newell, night watchman. (New office.) May 26.-Caleb A. Smith, storekeeper, vice McCormack, promoted to night inspector, vice Huntley, promoted to assistant weigher, vice Bard, promoted to inspector, vice Keyes, promoted to position in appraisers' department. May 26.-Charles C. Burt, assistant weigher, vice Wellington, promoted to assistant weigher, vice Pope, resigned. (Restored.) June 1.-N. M. Jernegan, inspector, vice Edgar, deceased. July 1.-William F. Stetson, inspector, vice Shelton, removed. By the CHAIRMAN ? Q. Among the names under the head of "removals," I find that of George J. Hinds, clerk, with the date, 31st December, 1878. the cause of his removal?-A. I could put a better clerk in his place. Q. Whom did you put in his place?-A. Mr. Hartwell, I think, who was formerly auditor. Q. Mr. Hartwell had been auditor in the custom-house before?-A. Yes, sir. Q. He is a civilian?—A. Yes, sir. Q. Is Mr. Hartwell known as the friend of any prominent politician in the State?-A. I cannot say. Q. Is Mr. Hinds known as the friend of any prominent politician in the State?-A. I cannot say. Q. Did any prominent politician in the State speak to you of either of them?-A. I cannot say that any did. Q. Are no recommendations ou file for either?-A. I presume there may be. Q. Who recommended Hartwell for promotion?-A. I could not say that I have any recommendations on file, without referring to the records. Q. Mr. Hinds is not in the government employment now?-A. Not at the custom-house. Q. What are his political proclivities, Republican ?-A. I have always understood so. Q. Was he a Butler man or one of the other kind?—A. He professed to be anti-Butler. Q. Was Mr. Hinds in the service of the United States during the war?—A. I have understood that he was. Q. He served three years and a half, did he not?-A. I could not tell you. Q. He is commander of one of the most important posts of the Grand Army here, is he not?-A. That I cannot tell. I have no knowledge of it. Q. Was there, that you remember, any special cause for the removal of Mr. Hinds?—A. I have given the cause-that I could put a more capable man in his place and a man whose general character was more reliable. Q. Was Mr. Hartwell ever in the custom-house before?-A. I have just said that he was there several years. He was auditor. Q. Was he there when you came into the office?-A. He was not. Q. Had he been removed before?—A. I understood that he had. Q. You gave Mr. Hinds a letter after you removed him, did you not? -A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the tenor of that letter?-A. That no charge had been made against him. Q. That his character was good?-A. No; it said nothing about his character. I have not the letter with me, but I will furnish you with a copy of it if you wish. Q. Do you know the reason why Mr. Hartwell was discharged from the custom-house before ?-A. It was said that it was because he was not in sympathy with the collector and the collector's friends. know anything about it. Mr. Hartwell was a graduate of Harvard College, had the honors of his class, and was a very intelligent and able man. Q. Was he in college when he was appointed?—A. I could not say as to that. Q. Was he practicing law when he was appointed?-A. That I could not tell you. Q. Is Mr. Hinds living here in the city?-A. I do not know. He told me he was going to California and that he wished I would give him some kind of a letter to show how long he had been in the custom-house. I said to him that, when I had removed a man, it was a difficult thing to give him a letter that would do him any good. He said that there had been no charge preferred against him, and that he had been in at. tendance at the office. Q. He performed the services required ?-A. Yes. I would say, Mr. Chairman, that I give heavy bonds for the performance of my duties; that as officers who are subordinate to me I wish to have those men only in whom I have complete confidence. I had not confidence in Mr. Hinds. Q. Can you tell me upon whose recommendation Mr. Hartwell was put in the place of Mr. Hinds?—A. I have answered that question sev eral times, Mr. Chairman. Q. Not specially. You have answered it generally by saying that you could not remember. Can you recollect now?-A. I said I could not remember whether I had any papers on file or not; but I put him in from my own knowledge of the man, from the report that there was of him in the custom-house; from the character he had sustained among the men with whom he had served, and who had been subordinate to him in former years. Q. I see here that you have removed another gentleman, Frederick G. Pope. What was the cause of his removal?—A. Mr. Pope was an assistant weigher. At various times complaints had been made to me that Mr. Pope was not as efficient a man as he should be, but I had known him a good many years and knew he was a soldier and passed it along. Special Agent Bingham instituted an investigation into the weight of glass not only at this port but at other ports. In the course of that investigation some cases came up in which Mr. Pope had been the weigher. This investigation was entirely outside of my office and unknown to me or my officers and except to those who were interested. Mr. Pope made an affidavit as to his connection with the weighing of certain invoices of glass. That affidavit went to Washington with other papers. The special agent showed me a letter from Washington in which the ques tion was asked, what the collector proposed to do with that weigher; if he proposed to keep him after such an affidavit. I thought it was time to make the recommendation of his removal. Q. Whom did you put in his place?—A. I could not tell you. Q. Was it a man of the name of Burt?—A. I did not fill the vacancy at once. Q. Do you know who got the place finally?—A. (After referring to list.) Mr. Charles C. Burt. Q. What was the business of Burt when he came there?—A. Mr. Burt had been employed on the wharf as a laborer for a long time and assistant to the weighers, at twenty-five cents an hour when there was work. Q. You say that you knew that Mr. Pope was a soldier ?—A. Yes, sir. Q. He was a colonel of one of the Massachusetts regiments?—A. I could not tell you. I want to say, Mr. Chairman, that I considered it an order from the department to recommend his removal. Q. Mr. Burt, who was put in his place, had been a civilian only, had he not?-A. I presume that he had. Q. What are the political proclivities of Mr. Pope?-A. He is a Republican. Q. With whom had he been recognized as having acted in the last campaign?-A. A Talbot man-a very zealous one. Q. With whom had Mr. Burt been recognized as having acted ?—A. That I do not know. He was formerly in the custom-house and was removed to make room for a partisan of General Butler's some years since. Q. Do you know of any charges having been made against him for wrongful practices ?-A. No, sir; the record makes no charge. I looked it up. Q. The office of C..S. Mixter seems to have been abolished. Was anybody put in his place?-A. No, sir; Mr. Mixter's office was an unnecessary office, created to give him an extra salary. He really had no duties to perform except to see that other folks performed their duties, which was the business of the auditor and collector. He had a salary of $1,800. Q. About the time at which Mr. Mixter's office was abolished, did you not appoint some additional clerks?—A. I appointed two new clerks to fill vacancies. Q. Was not Mixter a soldier?-A. I presume so; he may have been. Q. Did he not serve two years as a soldier in the 23d Massachusetts regiment?-A. I could not tell you. I have his record at the office, I could tell by referring to that. I understood him to be a soldier, but that was no reason he should have an unnecessary office at $1,800 a year. Q. But you did appoint two new clerks about that time-Mr. Searle and Mr. Chadwick?A. (After referring to list.) Perhaps so. I can give you a little explanation as to Mr. Chadwick that may not be so pleasant to the ones who inspire the question. Mr. Mixter's office was abolished on the 8th of July, 1878. Mr. Searle was appointed on the 28th of May, 1878, previously. Q. When was Mr. Chadwick appointed?-A. Mr Chadwick was in the custom-house when I went there. He was not an appointee of mine. I could give you the particulars about Mr. Chadwick if you would like to have them. Q. If he was there before you came, I presume that as to him the in quiry was merely an oversight.-A. It was little more than an oversight. Q. Go on then and state what you desire to state in regard to it.-A. Mr. Chadwick was a clerk in the custom-house, having care of the triplicate invoices and other duties. After my appointment as collector and before I qualitied, during the interim, changes were made. Mr. . Chadwick was transferred from that clerkship to be an assistant storekeeper at $800 a year. The salary of that clerkship was $1,000 a year, and a man by the name of Ham, from New Hampshire, was appointed to fill the vacant clerkship of $1,000 a year. When I came to the custom-house, I found Mr. Chadwick performing the same duties that he had always performed, the duties of a clerk, but that his salary of $800 was charged to the warehouse proprietors as that of a storekeeper, though he was performing none of the duties of a storekeeper. In a short time the superintendent of warehouses, who undoubtedly was in the plan in the first place, brought in a recommendation to me that Mr. Chadwick's place as storekeeper be abolished; but, instead of that, I abolished the office of storekeeper, and asked the department to change Mr. Chadwick's designation from "a storekeeper" to "a clerk," as he was performing the duties of a clerk. That is the explanation as to Mr. Chadwick. Q. I see by the list that there was a removal of A. R. Stover.-A. He was janitor of the building. Q. He was for whom for governor last year, before he was removed? --A. We had not then got to the gubernatorial question. He was removed for inefficiency, and on the report of Special Agent Brush, of New York, because of dishonest connection with the sale of old junk. Q. He, too, was a soldier, was he?-A. I do not know. It made no difference as to his being a soldier if he was inefficient. Q. Certainly not. I want to know the fact, though. Who was put in his place?-A. At that time, a man by the name of Clark was put in his place. Q. Was Mr. Clark one of your former employés ?—A. Mr. Clark bad been in my service ten years as my confidential clerk. Q. In your private business?-A. In my confidential business. Q. Had he ever been in the service of the United States?-A. I do not know whether he had or not. He had three brothers who were in the service. Q. He was there by proxy. I see the name of C. C. Sewall in the list of removals. What were the reasons for his removal?-A. The reasons were fully given to the department-that I could get a better messenger, one who would perform the duties of messenger and clerk, which Mr. Sewall could not do; and that Mr. Sewall was not satisfactory to the deputies whom he served; not so satisfactory as other messengers. Q. Was Sewall a Butler man ?-A. Not unless he lied very much, and did not vote for Butler unless he lied very much. Q. Was he a soldier, too?-A. I did not know that he was a soldier until after his removal." Q. You knew that he was wounded and carried a ball in his body?— A. I knew it afterwards; I did not know it then. Q. Nor that he served for three years in one of your own regiments?A. I did not know it then. Q. Who was put in his place?-A. A former clerk in the customhouse. Q. Give his name.-A. Sidwell. Q. Was he active in connection with the Republican organization ?— A. No, sir; I would know that by proxy, as you have said, Mr. Chair man. Q. Do you know of his having been in the custom-house before?-A. Yes, sir. Q. State when Mr. Sidwell was removed.-A. Sidwell was removed, and I think his office abolished, after Colonel Hall came in there. Two went out and one man took the two offices; I am not certain about that. But Colonel Hall recommended Mr. Sidwell very highly, and after that he was employed. Q. Was Sidwell ever in the service of the United States as a soldier? A. I do not think he was. I think, if I would give you in full, Mr. Chairman, a list of those removed who were soldiers, it might save some inquiries. The force to-day is, nearly three-quarters of it, from soldiers. Q. We would be glad to take it as fully as you can give it to us.-A. I can give it to you from the 28th of May. There have been two or three appointments since, but not enough to affect the general results. [After referring to mem.] Of appointments that I have made since I have been collector, there have been 28 soldiers and 21 civilians; of promotious, 22 soldiers and 14 civilians; of removals, 10 soldiers (in each case for cause) and 14 civilians; of offices abolished, 6 soldiers and 13 civilians. Those are up to the 28th of May. I think there have been three offices abolished since, of which two were civilians and one a soldier. Q. Was there a man named Atwood in the employ of the customhouse?-A. I think not; not as an officer. Q. Was there a man there named Coffin or [Cauffman]?-A. There was when I went there. Q. Was he dismissed or his office vacated?-A. He was not a customhouse officer. Q. What communication had he with the custom-house duties ?—A. He was a truckman who gave bonds. He had the same as a great many other truckmen had. He was connected with the janitor in that matter. of the old junk. Q. Was Mr. McMichael there?-A. Mr. McMichael was there. He was removed. Q. He was superintendent of the warehouses and was removed on May 7th-A. Yes, sir. Q. Who got his place?-A. The man next in line of promotion in the warehouse department-Major Raymond, storage clerk. Q. Where does he live?-A. He is from Worcester. I don't know whether he lives there or not. Q. Who was put in Raymond's place?—A. I should have to refer to the paper there. I think, however, it was Major Cook, who has been in the custom-house eleven years. [After referring to list.] No; I would not find it here, because it is a promotion. Q. What about the case of Hosea Eaton ?-A. His office was abol-... ished. Q. McMichael and Eaton were both soldiers?-A. I never heard that McMichael was a soldier, except "of fortune." Q. What were his proclivities politically?—A. Nobody ever had confidence enough in him to believe what he said. The CHAIRMAN. We will get to know something of the political status of gentlemen about Boston at this rate. The WITNESS. He is not about Boston. Mr. BLAIR. Could you tell what he was by the way he voted? |