THE VENTILATOR. THE VENTILATION OF THE RADICAL HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SHOWING THE MOST INFAMOUS SYSTEM OF SWINDLING THAT CAN BE FOUND IN THIS OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY, Wi J . t\ a n Var PUBLISHED BY THE DEMOCRATIC STATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF OHIO COLUMBUS : OHIO STATESMAN PRINT- 1868. ) ^>7/, oq *4qrh: V * 7-ff* 2 C> ' 0 THE VENTILATION OF THE RADICAL HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. I trust the reader will not regard me as intruding upon the patience that is too often taxed unnecessarily in personal explanations. It is due, however, to myself, that I should make some explanation in regard to my course. I have been a Republi- can from the organization of the party in 1854. Prior to tnat time, I was an abolitionist of the strictest order. In 1844, however, I voted for Mr. Olay for President. From 1846 until 1854, I acted with the Liberty party. I re- „ ceived an appointment in the Door- cL keeper’s Department of the House of & Representatives, through the influ- Qc ence of my member of Congress, Gen- eral Coburn, in the beginning of the Fortieth Congress. I continued in that position until the first of July, 1868, when I resigned my place. I endeavored to discharge my duty in the very humble position I held in the House, with as much propriety and civility as my nature, mnder such circumstances, would allow. I was one among many others who were wronged, as I believed, by an opera- tion connected with the Doorkeeper’s Department. I allude to the “ substi- tute” matter, that is fully explained in the “ Ventilator.” In my efforts to investigate that subject, my attention was arrested by the many evidences that were continually looming up be- fore me of the enormous squandering of public money i» matters connected with the House expenses. I, there- fore, determined to devote my atten- tion to the wijole subject, and, if pos- sible, secure ihe attention of honor- able members to the facts in the prem- ises. In this, however, I was most sadly disappointed. I called the at- tention of several members to some of the more shameful abuses in regard to the subject, but to no purpose. I became satisfied that this scandalous waste of money would never be stop- ped, or honestly inquired into, while the present party was in power. I, therefore, determined to give my ef- forts, humble as they are, to any party organization that would correct those abuses. My object, therefore, in presenting the following facts and figures in relation to the expenditures of the House of Representatives, is to call the attention of the industrial classes of the country to the alarming profli- gacy and extravagances that are con- tinually going on, and increasing to such enormous and frightful propor- tions, (and that too, under the very eyes of Congress) that, if not checked by the voice of the people, will soon reduce the laboring millions of this country to the most abject vassalage and dependence upon the will of the, moneyed aristocracy of the country that is experienced * by any people upon earth. I hope, therefore, that my efforts, feeble as they are, may be of some service in arousing the honest labor- ing masses of the couutry to a realiz- ing sense of their duty to themselves, their country, and their God, in the terrible struggle that is just begin- ning to stir the already troubled waters of political strife. Remember that when the wicked rale the people mourn. Let this Radical party, that is held together by the cohesive pow- er of public plunder, be hurled from place and power with that terribie instrument, the ballot, that makes tyrants and pretenders tremble, when wielded by the hand of an honest, industrious, and an outraged people. W. J. Mankee. f 4 The public mind has become so accustom- ed to fraudulent and extravagant transac- tions in relation to the people’s money, that it would seem almost useless to attempt to engage their attention to that subject at all. It is a matter of the most common occur- rence to read accounts in the daily papers that A. B. or C. D., collector of customs, or some other position under the Government, for the collection or disbursement of the public money, has been discovered to be defaulter to a large amount, or that some wliisky-ring has cheated the Government out of large sums of money by colluding with Government officials, or in some other of the thousand ways that dishonesty is so fruitful in inventing ; all such announce- ments, however, are soon forgotten. There must be some reason for this seem- ing want of a proper vigilance upon the part of the people upon a question of such vast importance to the material interest and permanent prosperity of the country. This seeming apathy arises from one of two causes : either the masses of the people are not informed as to the extent and magni- tude of the shameless swindling that is con- tinually going on in almost every depart- ment of the Government, or they have come to the conclusion to toil on and submit pa- tiently to the enormous exactions that the bondholders , the capitalists, and the moneyed aristocracy of the country — and last, but not least, in the list of public plunderers, the law-makers of the land and the officers of the Government, whose duty it is to pro- tect the interests of the people — may de- mand of them. It looks as though each one who has an opportunity to swindle isvieiDg with the other to outstrip his fellows in deeds of the darkest and most villainous swindling, as I shall, humiliating as it is, be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of all candid minds; If the people have concluded to toil on and still furnish this army of swindlers with supplies to glut their insatiable thirst for personal gain, it is with a hope that they, like the leech that hangs upon the liv- ing body and feeds upon the vital fluid un- til its once lank and flabby form, from very plethora, drops in disgust from the body that furnished the supply. But as yet we see no indications of the swindling crew fol- lowing the example of the leech; on the contrary, we see every man of them ready to again do battle against the people’s in- terests in endeavoring to perpetuate the power of the present ruling party, the bond- holders' party, that has already brought the Government to a state of bankruptcy, and oppressed the industrial laboring millions of this country with exactions, in the shape of taxation, to an extent unheard of before, and without a parallel in the history of the civilized World, while the capital of the country has to a great extent been exempt from taxation. Banks have been instituted at the bidding of that same capital, with privileges and immunities unheard of be- fore — the whole action of the Government tending to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. It must be borne in mind that the last grain kicks the beam. This should be an admonition to the party in power, I mean the Republican party. It is said that his- tory repeats itself. That being the case, we have only to look back a few years, and call the events of this brief period to mind to determine the fate of the party in power. It is within the recollection of many that the party in power in 1840 and 1860 lost the confidence of the people ; whether right or wrong it is not necessary to stop to inquire. The facts are, the people had lost confidence in the ruling party more on account of the extravagance and the tendency, as the peo- ple believed, to concentrate and perpetuate, in the hands of dishonest and designing men, the control of public affairs. The ter- rible rebuke administered to the party in power then, has been lost sight of and for- gotten by the party now in power. Remember that history repeats itself, and the same causes will bring the same fate to the ruling party now, that overtook those iu former years. The same fiery indigna- tion that hurled parties frojn power in for- mer years will, with a power equaled only by the fierce and mighty tempest, led on- ward in its desolating course by the light- ning’s flash, as a messenger of approaching danger, and driven by the more terrifying peals of the deep-toned thunder which pro- claims His own majestic power, and defies resistance or control, overtake and over- whelm the Republicans, unless the confi- dence of the people can again be restored by a thorough reform in public affairs by the party n'ow in power. Its days are num- bered. The handwriting is already seen upon the wall. Reform is impossible with- out a change in parties. A change is de- manded and will be made. Hurl from place and power the party that has become the mere tool of the bondholders and the mon- eyed aristocrats of the land. That once proud party that held in its hands the destinies of the civilized world, and had for its votaries the master intel- lects of the age; that proud party that broke in pieces the bonds of four million human beings ; that proud party that sus- tained the country through the terrible w r ar that threatened the destruction of Republi- can goverment, and to whom the laboring classes looked with bright hopes for the fu- ture, has degenerated into the willing tool for dishonest aud designing men. The interests of the laboring classes have been forgotten. The widow and the uncared-for children of the gallant soldier who fell in defense of the country, are turned aside with the pittance allowed them by law, in a depreciated cur- rency, while the rich bondholder is paid in 5 gold ; the poor widow is taxed heavily upon her mite, while, the bondholder is exempt from all taxation, and the voice that is raised in favor of equal taxation is soon drowned by the more stentorian yells and shouts of repudiation by the bondholders and their friends. Will this condition of things be permitted to continue ? Let the people an- swer at the ballot box at the next election. The subject of public expenditures is one in which the people have a greater interest than any one subject that can be brought to their attention, and especially so at this time, u account of the enormoxxsly high taxes, noth State and National. These high taxes speak in 'thunder tones upon the subject of public expenditures, and ought to be a suffi cient reason with those who control the ex- penditures to use all the economy* in this respect that is possible ; for the people them- selves know but little about the manage- ment, in detail of public affairs. All they fully realize is the terrible hurdens that they, from year to year, are required to bear. My object, therefore, will be to shed some light upon the subject of public expenses. This inquiry, however, will be confined mainly to the expenditures at the Capitol, and especially the House of Representatives. I select this particular branch of the Gov- ernment for the reason that it is under the immediate control of Congress, and as a test of party honesty and integrity. The party, therefore, can not go back on its own record upon this subject, as there is no other de- partment of the Government to share the responsibility. Whatever that record discloses, be it good or bad, it is the record of the party, and no effort upon the part of the party majority t in Congress or out of it, will be able to shift or avoid «ZZthe responsibilities that can attach to their action upon that subject. If the ex- amination of the contingent and other expen- ses of the House, develop an extravagant waste of the public money, the people will know who to hold responsible. Those affect- ed by the publication of the facts have no just cause to complain, for they made the record themselves. If, in the examination that I propose to make, I shall show the exis- tence of a ring of swindlers, more dark and infamous than the whisky-rings ot New York, I trust I shall have the sympathy of all honest men, whether in or out of Con- gress, whether Republicans or Democrats. A statement showing the expenses of the House of Representatives for the years ending June 30, 1864, 1865, 1866, 1867, and 1868: Tear ending June 30, 18G4 $353,630.00 “ 1865 481^884.00 “ “ 1866 462,438.00 * “ 1867 502,081.00 ' ‘ “ “ 1868 725,555.00 Additional compensation 100,000.00 Total $2,625,588.00 It will be seen that the expenses of the House increased so enormously, for the last five years, that 1868 amounts to $725,555.00 more than doubling that of 1864. This in- crease can not be accounted for upon the grounds of necessity, or even decency. In- stead of this wonderful increase, as shown by the foregoing table, every principle of hones- ty, and a decent respect for the interest, hap- piness, and welfare of a toiling, tax-ridden, and confiding constituency, demanded a re- duction rather than an increase, and I do not hesitate iu asserting that the contingent and officers’ salary expenses can, with great pro- priety, be reduced even below that of 1864, without any detriment to the public service. Iustead of a reduction, however, for the year ending June 30, 1869, there will be quite an increase over that of 1868, as any one who has observed with any care the tendency of the present Congress to extravagance, and a most shameful, and I might with propriety say willful and criminal, disregard of the high trust confided to them as Representa- tives of the people. To avoid any misunderstanding in regard to the foregoing items of expenses, I want it impressed upon the minds of all who care to know, that not one cent of (the regular pay or mileage of members of Congress is inclu- ded in the foregoing table. The salary of members of Congress is $5,000 a year and twenty cents per mile for traveling from their homes to Washington and returning. For instance, if a member of Congress lives five hundred miles from the Capitol, he re- ceives mileage for one thousand miles each session during his term, and an appropria- tion is made each year for that purpose. For the year ending Juue 30, 1868, the sum of $1,100,000.00 was appropriated. It will be seen that the whole expenses of the House of Representatives for the year ending June 30, 1868, are $1,825,555. My purpose, however, is to examine the contingent fund and officers’ salary fund. The officers of the House, who receive annu- al salaries, are paid from the salary fund. All others in the service of the House re- ceive their pay from the contingent fund. With this explanation in regard to the sev- eral funds, which I regard as important to a correct understanding of the subject und^r consideration, I shall proceed to examine in ) detail, to some extent, the manner and ob- jects for which the contingent fund is used; and in order to demonstrate and prove what I have already intimated, the most disgrace- ful and shameful use of the people’s money, I shall be compelled, greatly against my wishes, to give the names of quite a number of distinguished gentlemen who have figured somewhat in making too free a use of public money, or permitting others to do so, when they should have discharged with more fidel- ity the high and holy obligations resting upon them, as Representatives and protec- tors of the people, against all such abuses, when it was within their power to prevent it. I can assure those gentlemen and others connected with the matter, that I am not 6 actuated with any feelings of unkindness or hostility toward them, and I feel quite sure that they can have no cause whatever for the least ill-feeling or “ unpleasantness ” to- wards me, for I shall be exceedingly careful to stick to the record that they themselves have made, and such other evidence as can not be gain-said or disputed. With this un- derstanding, I feel that I will have the sym- pathy and kind regard of all concerned. ^ The first item that I propose to examine is the item of stationery, and in order to make the matter plain and forcible, I shall insti- tute comparisons. It is said that compari- sons are odious things; that, however, de- pends upon circumstances. If those I make are odious, the fault is not mine. Stationery for 1868 $77,500.00 Commutation of stationery for 1868 22, 150.00 „ . $99,650.00 stationery for 1864 $36,600.00 Commutation of stationery for 1864 2,000.00 38,600.00 Excess of 1868 over 1864 $61,050.00 This table exhibits the startling fact that the item of stationery for 1868 cost $61,000 more than for 1864. Let us examine that difference and see, if we can, what reasons, if any, could have made it necessary for this increase of cost in this item. It can not be that more station- ery was required for the use of the House in 1868 than 1864, for there were no more mem- bers in Congress in 1868 than there were in 1864; nor can it be that stationery cost nearly 200 per cent, more in 1868 than in 1864. That surely is not the case, for, if I remember correctly, paper of all kinds was much higher in 1864, when it cost for the use of the House only $38,000, than it was in 1868, when it cost $99,650. The difference in the cost is certainly a matter of sufficient interest to inquire into with some care, and were it not for the fact that the honorable members of Congress have so many other matters of more weighty importance to look after — such, for instance, as the impeachment of the President; the regulating the powers and duties of the mayor and eity council of Washington in such a way as to be sure that the appointing power is always in the hands of loyal men, so that none but the Simon Pure shall be the recipients of favors in the way of laboring upon the streets of said city a t public expense ; the ojectiug of Miss Ream trom the Capitol on account of her holding opinions adverse to the majority in the House npon the subject of impeachment of the President ; or upon the more important question as to whether Mr. Woolley did ac- tually purchase three honorable Senators for the President with that $17,000 that was found in some old safe, after the President was acquitted of the charge of high crime and misdemeanor, notwithstanding the hon- orable managers sent one of their number to the realms of infinite wisdom, through the hole in the skies, to learn wisdom whereby they might convict the President, (I believe it was a failure, after all that trouble ;) and various and sundry other most important matters to claim and occupy their precious time — they would, I doubt not, take vigo- rous steps to look after and inquire into this trilling difference of only $61,050 in the cost of paper or stationery for the use of the House. An additional reason for not look- ing into such matters is perhaps the want of time and adequate compensation. For it will be borne in mind that their salaries, as fixed by law, are only about $8,000 per an- num, at twenty cents per mile for traveling expenses to and from the Capitol, at d only $5,000 and the mileage paid in money, the balance in trade, such as books, paper, gold pens, pocket knives, scissors, gold pencils, visiting cards of the latest French style, and various other articles too tedious to mention ; and then to think of it again, their time is limited to only twelve months in the year, and they are elected for but two years at a time. U nder such circumstances, who would be so unreasonable as to expect them to look after such small matters as the contingent expenses of the House, and especially so when they have so vigilaut, conscientious, and close-fisted a Committee on Accounts as the present, as an examination ot their dis- bursements for the House and their connec- tion with it will abundantly show by the time we get through. It will be seen by an examination of table marked “A” that the House expenses for the year 1865 increased over that of 1864. . . $128,254 Ditto 1866 “ “ “ 108,808 Ditto 1867 “ “ “ ... 148,451 Ditto 1868 “ “ “ ... 371,925 Aggregate increase in four years $757,438 while the average increase per year for the last four years is $184,359.50 The increase of 1868 over that of 1864, is the enormous sum of $371,925, or double that of 1864, and $16,295 over. There are many very interesting facts and items connected with the disbursements of the House funds for the years 1865, 1866 and 1867, but the limits that I have prescribed for the examination of this subject, will not permit so wide a range. I shall therefore content myself, and at the same time I trust that the demands of justics will be amply met, by an analysis of the subject for the years 1864 and 1868, and particularly 1868. The comparisons that have already been made are sufficient to show the most profli- gate and unjustifiable waste and extrava- gant use, or . rather squandering of the people’s money, and that too, in many cases, without the authority of law or even common decency, and resting solely for* a justification upon the mere acquiescence of the Committee of Accounts for their le- gality, or rather npon a custom that is both vicious and dishonest, that has been allowed to grow up 'in the last fewyeais in matters connected with the business of the House, until its proportions have be- come so great, and its capacity for swallow- ing the people’s money so wonderful, that it demands almost an equal share of the con- tingent fund with the legitimate business of the House. I will now return to the item of station- ery, and endeavor to finish that subject without further digression. I will now introduce Table R to the atten- tion of the reader, as a continuation of the stationery subject. This table is compiled from House Mis. Doc. No. 31, 2d Session 40th Congress (Clerk’s Report) : TABLE B. 734 Gold pens $2,908.89 1,736 Gross steel pens 1,886.84 152 Boxes “ 165.65 Quill pens 124.70 $6,086.08 2,786 Penknives 5,620.00 540 Pairs scissors 601.00 Total $11,287.08 The items in the foregoing table are in- cluded in the stationery account of 1808, and my object in presenting them in this form is two-fold ; first, to let the public know to a certainty that which has been but vague rumor, that penknives, gold pens, &c., are bought with the public money ; second, to sustain what I before stated, that this financial and disbursing committee are remarkable for their prudence and interest in the expenditure of the people’s money. I find, upon a close examination of the document referred to, that eighty-six of the pocket knives were purchased expressly for the use of the Clerk’s office, at a cost of $250.00, some of them costing as much as $10.50 each ; forty-six pairs of scissors were also purchased for the use of the same office at a cost of about $50.00 ; thirty-one gold pens were appropriated to the use of the Clerk’s office at a cost of $165.00, some of them costing as high as $18.50. (See page 226 of the Doc. relerred to, Clerk’s report.) The whole amount of stationery purchased would be equal to about $520.00 to each member of Congress. But it will be said that the paper used for book folding is in- cluded in the bill ; that is true, no doubt ; but will any sane man say that one hundred dollars’ worth of wrapping paper would not be ample to wrap all the books that one member of Congress is allowed. I have no doubt that forty dollars’ worth would be quite ample for that purpose. That being the case, and adding the $40 to the stationery allowed by law to each member, would make the stationery allowed each one as follows : Stationery, proper, allowed $159.00 Wrapping paper 40.00 Total $190.00 Making a total amount of paper for use of members, $38,000 dollars, leaving $61,650 for other purposes. But let us look after the seven hundred and three gold pens still re- maining undisposed of, saying nothing about the cart load of steel and quill pens on hand. The gold pens are valued, as per bill, at $2,743.89, or about $15.00 to each member. Is it reasonable to suppose that the members have bought all this $2,743 worth of pens '? It is due to the members to state that all the stationery that they draw as members is charged to them — or that is the law ; and if they draw more than is allowed them, they are required to pay for it. The two thousand seven hundred penknives still re- maining must also be accounted for ; their value, as per bill, is $5,370.00. Let us see what disposition we can make of them. The value of the knives is about $25.50 to each member. If they were equal- ly divided among them, they would be en- titled to about fifteen knives each. I now propound the same question that I did in the case of the pens. I do not suppose any one would be foolish enough to even think, much less say, that these knives were bought by the members. Upon the contrary, I as- sert, without the fear of successful contra- diction, that not even one-half of the knives, scissors and gold pens left, after the Clerk’s office was supplied, was ever drawn by mem- bers of Congress,* This proposition I shall prove most conclusively by such evidence as will not be questioned by any one. The whole cost of the knives, gold pens and scissors, as shown in Table B, is $11,287 ; amount used by Clerk’s office, $465 ; leaving $10,822 to be used by members, or accounted for through them. By an examination of the Clerk’s report, it will be seen that about $8,000 worth of stationery proper, was all that was actually drawn by them ; the bal- ance, about $22,000, to make up the $30,00^ to which they were entitled, was drawn in money, as commutation for stationery not actually drawn by them. It is fair to presume, that the members would, on an average, draw at least thirty dollars’ worth of actual writing materials, such as paper, envelopes, &c., that, in the aggregate, would amount to $6,000, there being two hundred members, including the territorial delegates. It will be seen by this calculation, that $2,000 is all that could be drawn by members, unless they should over- draw their accounts, a thing that is never done, or at least the Clerk’s report, in which these items are found, gives no instance of the kind. I think the proposition that the members did not draw those articles, is proven by the foregoing facts beyond cavil or doubt. According to the foregoing calculations, it will be seen that there are nearly $62,000 worth of stationery left, after supplying the folding room, and the amounts allowed by law to individual members. It will also be kept in mind, that there are still $3,822 8 worth of penknives, gold pens and scissors not disposed of, nor can we find out what has become of them. We know, from the Clerk’s report, the amount drawn by the Postmaster, who is the agent for selling and distributing the stationery to members ; but we have uo report of what the Postmaster did with it. It may be said that a large amount of stationery, including gold pens, &c., was left to run over for another year. That, I undertake to say, is not the case, for, in looking over the reports of former years in respect to the contingent expenses of the House, it will be seen that the samfe shameful and extravagant purchases are made each year. For the year ending J une, 1867, the stationery account was even more scandalous than in 1868. The stationery that year, 1867, was : Stationery purchased, about $85,000.00 Commutation of stationery 20,000.00 Total $105,000.00 and the purchases of penknives, gold pens, scissors, &c., were as extravagant in 1867 as in 1868. There were none of those articles left over in 1867, I am authorized by the facts to say ; for if there had been a supply left over, the purchases for 1868 would not have been made. I therefore conclude, and I think for the best of reasons, that the supplies purchased for each year are always exhausted, and an examination of the Clerk’s reports for the last six years will demonstrate that fact be- yond question ; for each year’s purchase ex- hibits the same profligate extravagance. It may be said, however, that the supplies to committees of the House have exhausted or used up the $61,000 worth of stationery, in- cluding the penknives, gold pens, scissors, Ac. I should very much regret to know \hat to be true, for it would place the hon- orable members of committees in the most unenviable position before the public in which it would be possible to place any hon- orable man. If it be true, however, that this vast amount of stationery, including gold pens, &c., has been drawn by the com- mittees, the public ought to know it, and to know the fact would most certainly bring down upon them the just and merited in- dignation of an outraged people ; for such an act upon the part of committees would be nothing short of robbery, and the pirate up- on the high seas or the highwayman would become, comparatively speaking, respecta- ble beside them. I do not believe that the committees are guilty of any such thing. It is true, however, that the committees are entitled to and do draw all the stationery they need for the purpose of transacting the public business, and it sometimes happens that great abuses occur, unknown to the members ; but that an amount of stationery exceeding by $23,000 the entire amount used by the House for the year 1864, was used by the committees, is too startling to be enter tained for one moment. But what becomes of this vast amount of stationery is a ques- tion that ought, in justice to the people, to be inquired after, fn connection with other expenditures even more startling and un- justifiable, as I shall be able to show before I am through with the subject under consid- eration. I shall, for the present, dismiss the item of stationery, as I will have occasion to refer to it again, in connection with other items. The next item that I propose to examine is the expenditure connected with the office of Sergeant-at-Arms, N. G. Ordway, officer. As a starting point in this branch of my in- quiries, I append the following exhibit : Amounts received by A r . G. Ordway, Sergeant-at- Arms , as per Cleric's Report, January 1, 1868, (26 Mis. Doc. No. 31,2 d Sess. 40 th Congress .) PAGE « 14 Committee on Public Expenditures. . . $700.80 21 Do New Orleans riots 1,987.12 34 Do Internal revenue frauds 1,161.93 43 Item 100.00 47 Committee on Euneral of P. Johnson. 2,144.65 47 & 48 Do Southern railroads.... . 1,763.00 50 Do Judiciary 1,620.00 51 Do Indian Affairs 712.80 52 Eor arrests on call of House 577.20 52 Case of assault on W. . H. Painter 263.21 52 Case of C. V. Culver. . . 240.10 52 Crape in case of death of Grider 200.40 53 Committee on Naval Affairs 133.00 53 Horse-car tickets 56.84 53 Cash paid Whaley 50.0Q 53 Summoning witnesses. 24.20 53 Committee on Naval Affairs 359.85 59 Do New Orleans riots 2,392.40 60 Do Public Expenditures. .. 2.192.60 141 & 142 Do Judiciary 3,773.80 143 Do Judiciary 110.00 143 Do Judiciary 264.00 189 & 190 Do * Judiciary 1,236.90 191 & 192 Do Pay Department 1,096.80 192, 3 & 4 Do Prisoners of war 1,955.00 195 & 196 Do Elections 1,233 23 196 & 197 Do Pay Department 371.81 198 Do Judiciary 244.40 Horse and carriage and ' street railroad tick- ets for the year end- ing January, 1868.. 916.84 195 Committee on Pay Department 365.25 Salaries for Sergeant-at- Arms, Clerk and As- sistant 6,912.00 Estimated temporary assistants 3,000.00 $38,169.13 It will be seen that the foregoiug exhibit is prepared in the same order that the sev- eral charges appear in the document refer- red to ; my object in this is to facilitate an examination of the items, if any one should have the curiosity to do so. In the analyz- ing process to which I propose to subject the several items in the exhibit, as well as the expenditures of the committees, I shall have frequent occasion to refer to them. The following bill of expenditures may be 9 found on page 14 of the Clerk’s report I give also the charges of all connected with the committees u{>on this occasion, except witnesses. N. G. ORDWAY — Travel from 'Washington to Boston and return with documents for Committee on Public Expenditures, 960 miles $96.40 Board, in September and October, 1866, with committee 222.00 4 travels from Warner, N. H., to Boston, 450 miles 45.00 2 travels from Holderness, hi. H., to New York, 550 miles 55.00 Paid for rooms to take testimony 93.00 Paid for stationery 69.50 Paid for hack-hire 24.25 Paid for telegrams 75.06 Paid for procuring testimony 21.00 $700.81 C. T. HFBBUBD — Board and expenses as chairman of Committee pn Public Ex- penditures during recess of 39th Con- gress, 43 days at Boston and New York 258.00 4 travels from Boston to Brashear Palls, N. Y., 1,480 miles 148.00 3 travels from Brashear Falls, N. Y., to New York city, 1,200 miles 120.00 1 travel from Boston to New York, 240 miles 24.00 $550.00 E. H. BOBBINS — Board and expenses as member of Committee on Public Ex- penditures during recess of 39th Con- gress, 29 days, at $6 174.00 4 travels from Concord, N. H., to Boston, 450 miles 45.00 5 days’ expenses examining testimony.. 30.00 $249.00 H. G. HAYES — Board and expenses in Bos- * ton and New York as stenographer for / hi.' n TA- 1 Committee on Public Expenditures, 19 days, at $6 114.00 2 travels from New York to Boston and return, 944 miles 94.20 cessarily and actually traveled in executing any process of the House. If the law means anything, it means that the officer shall re- ceive no more pay than for the distance ne- cessarily and actually traveled. No one, I pre- sume, will he foolish enough to suppose even that the Sergeant at-Arms traveled 23,160 miles actual and necessary travel, in connec- tion with his duties for the committee upon that occasion. And for the purpose of com- prehending more readily the vastness of the distance, we will call it trip No. 1 around the globe ; and as there will be quite a number of such trips developing themselves during this inquiry, I desire that No. 1 be kept in mind. The board bill for Mr. Ordway is not set out definitely, but I think, from the char- acter of the charges for board, that his bill would be, for thirty days, $180. I think the charge for board in his account justifies that conclusion. The account, then, stands thus : For mileage $2,316 Board thirty days, at $6 180 Total $2,496 This charge bears upon its face the evi- dence of fraud most base ; but as it is, per- haps, the most decent and respectable of any of his charges, I will refrain from making further comment until his whole record is placed before us, except such as may inci- dentally arise during the presentation of the fact. When that is done, however, I will endeavor to show the vile dishonesty and the outrageous swindling that runs through his whole batch of charges, and give my opinion as to where the responsibility rests. The next in order is the New Orleans riot committee. (See page 21, same Doc.) $208.40 F. H. SMITH — Board and expenses in Bos- ton as reporter for Committee on Pub- lic Expenditures, 14 days, at $6 84.00 \ Travel from Washington to Boston and return, 942 miles 94.40 $184.40 On page 60 I find the following charges (omiting the names) for services for the Committee on Public Expenditures : N. G. ORDWAY — Summoning witnesses.. .$2,192.60 The number of witnesses summoned upon this occasion was 36, for which he was enti- tled to $2 for each witness. Serving the 36 would be $72. Deducting the $72 will leave $2,120.60. This amount was received by Ordway for mileage. The charge would in- dicate that he had traveled 21,206 miles. By looking at the first charge, however, we find that he is paid 1,960 miles more, making in all 23,166 miles. I have always understood that when pub- lic officers were allowed mileage, it was to cover all personal expenses. And the law in regard to the duties of the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House provides that that officer shall receive ten cents per mile for each mile ne- THOS. B. CHENEY — Expenses on trip with Select Committee on Affairs in Bouisi- ana and New Orleans Biots : Expenses from Washington to New Or- leans and return... Hack-hire, carriages, etc Telegrams Stationery Parlors and other expenses at St. Eouis Hotel, used by committee for examin- ing witnesses J. F. Mollers, services as detective 3,159 miles’ Havel from Washington to New Orleans and return Board and expenses, 16 days, at $8 $555.15 266.00 128.79 53.98 434.40 105.00 315.90 128.00 $1,987.12 In this case Mr. Cheney is acting Deputy Sergeant- at- Arm s. On page 59 the following additional charge appears, in connection with this committee, the names of witnesses omitted. N. G. Ord- way, summoning witnesses, $2,392.40. Num- ber of witnesses summoned in this cas§, 300, for which he is entitled to $600 for service, without mileage ; deduct the $600, will leave 17,924 miles as having been traveled in summoning the witnesses; add to this 3,159 miles for travel from Washington to New Orleans and return, the account will stand as follows, to wit : 10 Summoning witnesses $2,392.40 Sixteen days’ board, at $8 128.00 Mileage going and returning 315.90 One-fifth of $555.15 111.03 Total : $2,947.33 The same scandalous charge in relation to mileage occurs in this case, as in the first, making trip No. 2 around the globe. There is lack of distance in this case, but in others, as will be seen, he has quite a lap-over in the traval; for convenience, therefore, we give him the lap-over in these cases, so that no injustice will be done the honorable Ser- geant-at-Arms. There is a feature in this case that does not appear in the first, which is this : “ Ex- penses from Washington to New Orleans and return, $555.15.” This charge is most re- markable, when we examine all the charges connected with this committee. For what was this $555.15 paid ^ The members of the committee charge mileage, and board at $8 per day; so do the clerks and every other person connected with the trip, except, per- haps, one messenger, whose name does not appear in the case. I find that any extended notice in each case would occupy too much space and tire the patience of the reader. I shall, there- fore, give the cases with but little comment, until they are all presented. The next case in order is the following, found on page 34 Clerk’s report : H. G-. ORD WAY— Expenses on account of Committee on Frauds in Internal Rev- enue, December, 1866, and January, 1867 : Parlors and rooms used for examining witnesses at Astor House, Hew York $342.75 Parlors, rooms, etc., at Continental Hotel, Philadelphia 104.75 Stationery 62.85 A. McCloud, for copy of record 20.00 Carriage-hire, car-fare, etc 219.94 Telegrams, etc 27.14 Two trips, Washington to Hew York and return, 940 miles’ travel 94.00 One trip, Washington to Philadelphia and return, 280 miles’ travel 28.00 Twenty-nine days’ board, at $6 per day. . 174.00 Seven days’ board for Hemple in Phila- delphia 31.50 One trip to Hew York and return, 470 miles’ travel * 47.00 $1,151.93 It will be seen that the item of board is still prominent in this case, reduced in price, however, $2 per day. The next case is the charges of Mr. Ord- way, in connection with the Judiciary Com- mittee : PAGES. 48, 49, Summoning witnesses $1,620.00 141, 142, Summoning witnesses 3,773.80 143, o Travel for committee 206.00 143, 28 days’ board, at $6 168.00 189, 190, 191, Summoning witnesses 1,236.90 198, By Department travel 94.40 25 days’ board, at $6 150.00 $7,249.10 In this case there were 220 witnesses sum- moned, which would be, for service, $440. The account stands as follows : Mileage, 64,911 miles $6,491.19 Serving process 440.00 53 days’ board 318.00 $7,249.10 This case requires no comment. It stands out in such bold relief that he who runs can but read. Where is thy shame, O man ! Thitikst thou not that a day of reckoning will come h Will the people, the toiling millions of this coun- try, still sleep and permit such outrages as this to continue ? Although a profligate Con- gress may give to such charges the semblance of legality, in order to prevent a conviction for robbery or theft before the courts of justice, the people will arraign the perpetra- tors of all such acts, and the Congress that allows them, before the bar of public justice, from which there is no appeal, and the terri- ble sentence of an outraged and incensed people will sweep from place and power all who have thus proved themselves unworthy of the sacred trust confided to them by an honest and industrious constituency. The mileage in this case is most astound- ing. Think of it, reader; 64,911 miles — a distance almost equal to three times around the globe! We shall, therefore, call this stupendous travel “ Trip No. 3, 4 and 5 around the globe.” Does any body believe the distance charged for in this case was actually traveled 3 I leave the answer for the reader. I must leave this case for the present. As an examination in detail of each case in Mr. Ordway’s account would not only oc- cupy more space than the limits of this work would permit, and the reader would become wearied in perusing it, I shall give but a few more at length. I will recapitulate the mileage, in order that the reader may see, at a glance, the enormity of that branch of the gentleman’s service : MILES. Committee on Public Expenditures 23,160 Committee on Hew Orleans Riot 21,083 Committee on Revenue Frauds 1,690 Funeral of Hon. P. Johnson 1,859 Committee on Southern Railroads 17,179 Committee on Indian Affairs 6,268 On call of the House 222 Case of Painter Culver 2,559 Several cases 1,500 Committee on Judiciary 64,911 Committee on Prisoners of War 19,000 Committee on Pay Department 12,000 Estimated traveling, not included above, by assistants 17‘000 Total miles traveled - 208,403 The foregoing table is believed to be as near correct as it is possible to ascertain from the report. The last item is estimated, but believed to be true ; the others are correct, as they were taken from the charges them- selves" Any one who may wish, can make the calculations for themselves. In order to fully comprehend the vast dis- 11 tance charged as having been traveled by the Sergeant- at- Arms and his assistants, in con- nection with their official duties, I shall make a comparison with the circumference of the earth or globe as to distance. The earth is said to be 24,000 miles in circumfer- ence. The distance traveled, as charged for, would be equal to eight trips around the earth and 16,403 miles, or two-thirds of the way on the ninth trip. It would be an in- sult to an intelligent public to ask any one to believe that this immense distance was traveled by Mr. Ordway and his assistants in connection with their official duties. I have no idea that one-third of the distanee was actually and necessarily traveled. In addition to this unmitigated swindle in regard to this mileage charge, this same man has the audacity, impudence, and har- dihood to present board bills in amount to over $2,000 ; and by reference to the bills it will be seen that $6 per day is charged in every case but one, the New Orleans riot, in which case he charges $8, and from the character of the charges in that case, I have no doubt but his car fare was paid out of the public money tilso. The question naturally arises by whom are those scandalous, swindling accounts allowed % I will state now that all such ac- counts are made out by the officer to whom they are due, and are by him then presented to the Committee of Accounts, where they receive tbe finishing touch, that entitles the holder to draw the money. As I shall have occasion in a separate chapter, to show where the responsibility rests, I will leave that question for the present. The next case I^sliail present is more vil- lainous, if possible, than any that have pre- ceded it. I most especially iuvite the atten- tion of members of Congress to this charge, as I regard it good for both instruction and reproof. X. G. ORDWAY. — Fees and expenses in ar- resting, bringing before the House, and discharging the following named mem- bers of Congress for being absent with- out leave : G. W. Anderson, A. A. Bar- ber, J. F. Benjamin, H. P. H. Bromwell, J. W. Chambers, J. H. Defrees, B. Eg- gleston, E. Hise, A. J. Kuykendall, H. Maynard, J. S. Morrill, J. W. Patter- son" F. A. Pike, A. H. Bice, L. H. Rous- seau, T. H. Stillwell, A. Thornton, H. D. Washburn, Wm. Windom, S. T. Holmes, J. A. Kasson, S. S. Marshall, E. B. V. Wright, J. A. Bingham, J. F. Farns- worth, E. C. Ingersoll, C. H. Winfield, J. G. Blaine, J. w. Chanler, B. Hart, J. M. Marvin, S. McKee. T. M. Pomeroy, H. WardAWm. B. Stokes, L. Rousseau, William D. Kelley, Samuel McKee, Por- tus Baxter, J. Bidwell, B. P. Buckland, II. L. Dawes, C. Delano, C. Goodyear, J. B. Kubbell, G. B. Latham, H. McCul- lough. S. W. Moulton, S. Perham, T. A. Plants, J. H. Rice C. Sitgreaves, Wm. B. Stokes, H. Ward, William B Wash- burn, J. M. Ashley, S. Hooper, G. V. Lawrence, I. C. Sloan, F. E.Woodbridge, A. Brandagee, J. A. Griswold, William Radford, G. W. Anderson, H. P. H. Bromwell, H. L. Dawes, J. B. Hubbell, H. Maynard, J. K. Moorhead, S. F. Wil- son, A. Thornton, T. M. Stillwell, L. W. Boss, J. W. Patterson, J. D. Baldwin, F. C. Beaman, J. G. Blaine, H. S. Bundy, J. L. Dawson, E. B. Eckley B. Hart, William D. Kelley, J. M. Marvin, J. K. Morehead, G. S. Orth, C. E. Phelps, T. M. Pomeroy, L. W. Boss, J. F. Starr, J. L. Thomas, jr., S. L. Warner, S. F. Wil- son, T. T. Davis, E. 1ST. Hubbell, B. F. Loan, A. H. Ward, J. Wentworth, H.C. Demifcg, R. S. Hale, H. J. Raymond, J. D. Baldwin, H. S. Bundy, J. H. Defrees, G. B. Latham, H. McCullough, C. E. Phelps, W. B. Washburn, J. L. Thomas, jr., C. Sitgreaves, E. C. Ingersoll, F. A. Pike, at $5.20 each $577 20 1 am informed that the call of the House that brought this bill intd existence, occur- red near the close of the Thirty-Ninth Con- gress. I insert the entire bill, .including the names, in order that no honorable member of Congress shall have the least cause to complain of me for not giving him ample justice in the premises, as each of them are, to some extent, interested in the case. The twenty cents charge in the bill is for mile- age. Upon a close examination, it will be seen that that model and modest traveler, Mr. Ordway, charges and receives for his services upon that occasion, the very mod- est sum of $577.20. In addition to the arrest and discharge of the honorable members, he charges for traveling 222 miles. The whole distance traveled by every one connected with the arrests did not exceed five miles, and that was done by doorkeep- ers, who received no additional pay for their services. But this man Ordway, the cele- brated traveler, who gets $5 each for arrest- ing the members of Congress, and who, it is said, never went out of the Capitol, pre- sents his modest little claim to the Commit- tee on Accounts, who scanned it with the care peculiar to them in such matters, and who being satisfied that the Sergeant-at- Arms ought to be well paid for his arduous labor in that long and dreary night, with one accord agreed that he did actually trav- el two hundred and twenty-two miles, and ordered the disbursing officer to pay the ac- count ; and the traveler shouted, Amen ! The following bill is one of the most aston- ishing instances of extravagance and folly that can be found anywhere in this country. It is exceedingly difficult to determine where the responsibility rests for the extravagance in this case. N. G.ORDWAY. — Expenses incurred on account of tbe death and burial of Hon. Philip Johnson, late a member of the House of Represen- tatives, thirty-ninth Congress : Hack hire, assistance in care of re- mains, and arranging for the fu- neral in the House of Representa- tives - $50 00 18 white silk sashes for officers of House and Senate 254 00 8 blacK silk sashes for Committee of Arrangement 96 00 201 doz. kid gloves 615 00 2 doz. kid gloves 54 00 2 doz. kid gloves 60 00 12 1 doz. kid gloves $33 00 200 black crape scarfs 300 00 Travel of messenger to Hew York and return 47 00 Hacks to carry escort and friends to depot 16 00 Fare and expenses of escort and re- mains from Washington, D. C., to Easton, Pa 245 00 Hotel bills and hacks at Easton 42 65 Pare and expenses on return to Washington 194 00 Travel of Asst. Sergeant-at-Arms and two messengers, Washington to Easton and return, 460 miles each 138 00 L. WILLIAMS. — Services and expen- ses as undertaker in care of re- mains of Philip Johnson : Case, plate and engraving 16 00 Laying out, &c 15 00 Crape ahd gloves 20 00 Opening vault and attendance on funeral day 1150 Hearse 10 00 4 hacks 32 00 6 hacks 42 00 2 hacks 16 00 2 hacks 1 14 00 5 hacks 15 00 2 hacks 14 00 Removing remains from vault to de- pot 20 00 Attendance with remains to Easton, Penn., and return 30 00 2 , WILLIAM KEYS, furnishing 70 hacks. 144 65 405 50 420 00 Total $2,970 15 We can see in this, as in all other cases where Ordway has any hand in it, that ever- lasting mania for mileage. It would seem that a case with all the solemn surroundings of this, and an extravagance unheard of be- fore, should have softened his feeling some- what upon the question of filching money from the Treasury ; hut not so upon this occasion, for we see about $500 charged as expenses going to Easton and returning to Washington ; and I have no doubt that this charge covered all the expense of every per- son in any way connected with the escort ; yet our eyes are saluted with that same charge for mileage that has been such a fruitful source of swindling and fraud in almost every case where Mr. Ordway has had to do. In addition to all these villainous charges, Mr. Ordway receives an annual salary of $2,592, and all of his assistants are receiving salaries from $1,440 to $>2,1(50. This fact should he borne in mind in connection with the record in his case. There are many things of interest still remaining in the charges against the Ser- geant-at-Arms, to which I would very much like to call attention, but on account of so many other matters upon the subject under consideration that have not been even allud ed to as yet, I will be compelled to drop Mr. Ordway at this point. I now turn my attention to another branch of the inquiry, and I must say, in the out- set, that this will exhibit, if possible, a more damnable and outrageous state of things 4 * than either of the preceding inquiries. My subject will be carriage and horse-hire, cart- age, &c. For the purpose of showing the enormous increase of the House expenses, I will give the entire cost of the service under consid- eration for the years ending June 30, 1804, and June, 1868, in order that the outrageous character of the expenditures of 1868 may be the more forcibly presented to the mind : Horse and carriage hire and cartage, 1868.. $14, 213 00 ^ ^ A ^ 1 . 4 ^ ^ 1 OC A n K(\A Horse and carriage hire and cartage, 1864.. 6,594 CO Excess 1868 over 1864 $7,619 00 We will try now to inquire into the cause of this great increase. It cannot arise from an increased necessity, for there was no more business connected with this branch of the service in 1868 than there was in 1864. We will compare a few items in this matter, and see the difference. Take the item of haul- ing documents for the two years : 1$68 there were 12,389 loads, at 50 cents. $6,194 50 1864 there were 3,106 loads, at 50 cents. 1,553 00 Excess of 1868... 9,283 $4,641 50 It will be seen that in this item alone, 1868 is more than four times greater than 1864, both in number of loads and cost to the Government. This difference is so glar- ingly outrageous and unjustifiable, that no one, I presume, will undertake to defend it. There were no more documents in 1868 than in 1864. Then why so great a difference in number of loads and the cost to the Govern- ment — the increase being more than 300 per cent ? The question is easily solved, as in all other cases of such increase of similar items. It is simply an unmitigated swindle, not possessing a single element of honesty or fair dealing. And the officer who certi- fies to or approves such claims, and the committee who allows them, and the Con- gress that makes the appropriations to pay them, are all alike guilty of a willful or ig- norant disregard of the interests committed to their care. If it be willful, they disgrace the positions they hold. If it be ignorance, they are unfit for the positions they occupy, and the sooner they are required to surren- der the places they fill, the better it will be for the country. It matters not which horn of the dilemma they take. Either will place them in a position unfit to be intrusted with public affairs. This is only one item in this branch of this subject. The next item to which I in- vite attention is, if possible, Aore scandal- ous than the one just examined. The following is the bill for private horses and carriages for 1868. (See Clerk’s Re- port :) H. G-. Ordway $916 84 Ed. Spicer 1,098 00 Ira Goodnow 515 00 Clinton Lloyd 2,523 00 Total $5,152 84 13 For 1864 : Robert Morris. $900 00 Ira Goodnow - 1,4912a E. Etheridge 14 00 C. Loyd . . 60 00 Total $2,465 25 Excess of 1868 over 1864 $2,687 59 I ain sure that the hill for 1864 is much larger than it should have been, and espe- cially the Doorkeeper’s (Goodnow.) The Sergeant-at-Arms, Mr. Ball, had not received the inspiration that has filled our man Ord- way so unutterably full, that it seems he is unable to comprehend anything except it has connected with it mileage, board, or horse and carriage-hire. Mr. Ball paid for his carriage riding with his own money, as all honest men would do under like circum- stances. There was some reason and pro- priety in regard to this carriage-hire before the days of street railroads, but now all this whole bill is a huge swindle, and ought to be stopped at once. None of the document hauling for the Clerk’s office is included in • this bill for 1868. The whole bill is an out- rage upon public decency, as I think I will be able to show. Let us examine this bill of Clinton Lloyd. I will also carry Spicer’s charge along with it : C. LLOYD. — Use of 3 horses and carriages for Clerk’s office, October, 1867 $232 50 E. SPICER. — Use of 1 horse and wagon for October, 1867 $77 50 Use of 1 saddle-horse for October, 1867 62 00 $139 50 It is very strange that three carriages and horses appear upon the record as the prop- erty of Lloyd. That, however, is a matter of taste, and it makes no difference, so far as the swindle upon the Government is con- cerned, whose name is used for the purpose of filching thousands upon thousands of dollars from the public treasury without any corresponding benefit to the Govern- ment. It is not worth while to mince the matter at all ; it is simply an infamous and disgraceful swindle upon the Government, more scandalous than the whisky-ring ope- ration that we hear so much of. It is none the less a swindle because the Committee of Accounts allow it. This only aggravates and blackens the act. It will loom up be- fore an honest people as a double-headed monster, bearing the inscription “ False- hood ” upon one head and “ swindlers ” up- on the other. This whole bill is tor inivate carriages and horses. The bill, as it appears upon the record, is very far from giving it correctly. Bill as it really is : Horse and carriage hire, cartage, &c One watchman at stable One superintendent at stable Eour laborers There is another thought in relation to this matter that might be looked after to some profit ; that is, in regard to those two horses that are charged as being furnished by Ed. Spicer. It might turn out that he had no horse at all. As much has been inti- mated in regard to that matter, I simply call attention to it. The Doorkeeper, Chas. E. Lippincott, has one horse, I believe, and it might be that that horse has been magni- fied into two horses, in the name of Spicer. This would not astonish me if it should turn out to be the case, as 1 have heard of other “ground and lofty tumbling” about the Folding-room, the headquarters of Mr. Spi- cer. As that department will receive some attention in the proper place, I will leave it for the present. POST OFFICE. I shall now pay my respects to the House Post Office. I shall be as brief as the nature of the case will allow. There is quite a large force of men and horses belonging to this department. Mr. King is the Postmaster, and for aught V know to the contrary, he is a very excellent officer; but as I intend going through the House end of the Capitol, and not wishing to show partiality, or seem unsocial, I will drop a few hints by way of reminder, that “ all is not gold that glitters.” Stick a pin ther ", Mr. Postmaster. By way of introduction, I would ask the name of the mail contractor in the House Post Office, as I have heard some suspicions about foul play upon one S. H. Dunham, who appears upon the record as the man who carries the mail and hauls the docu- ments, and upon inquiry of those around the stable, men who feed and take care of the horses, none of them were able to tell anything about Mr. Dunham ; they say that Messrs. King and Stevens are the contract- ors. In my inquiries in this department, I regard Mr. Dunham as a myth, for such I believe him to be ; I shall therefore regard Mr. King, the Postmaster, and Mr. Stevens, his chief clerk, as the real mail contractors. I propose to analyze this mail service, for of all the monstrous abuses and swindles connected with the management of the bu- siness of the House, none are more enor- mous and unjustifiable than this service. By a reference to the Clerk’s report, Jan- uary, 1868, it will be seen that there are four horses and carryalls, at an expense of $10 per day, kept the whole year, making $3,650 00 per year, and in addition to these four horses and carryalls, which are for the letter mail, as it seems there are two other carryalls kept for the purpose of hauling documents from the House to the City Post Office or the depot. This document hauling for the year amounts to 10,569 loads, at a cost of $5,284 50. This does not include the hauling of documents for the Clerk’s office, $15,123 50 1,000 00 1,440 00 3,000 00 Total $20,563 59 14 •which was 1,821 loads, at a cost of $910.50. The cost of the mail service, including the document hauling, stands as follows : - 4 horses and carryalls, at $10 per day $8,650 00 Document hauling 5,284 50 Feed of horses 5.000 00 5 carryall and wagon drivers, at $1,080 each per annum 1*. 5,400 00 Proportion of cost of tends at stable 1,500 00 Salary of postmaster 2,592 00 Assistant “ 2,088 00 4 messengers, at $1,728.00 6,912 00 Total $32,338 50 This table seems fabulous, yet every item is shown upon record, and can not be dis- puted, except the item of forage, which is estimated ; but I believe the appropriations for that purpose justify the estimate that I have made ; but leave that item out entirely, and the account is still so monstrous that it staggers belief. The following statement, showing the expenditures of the committees named, is made up from H. Mis. Doc. No. 31, lid ses- sion, 40th Congress. The subject-matter upon which they were required to act was mainly political in its nature. The immense expenditure of public money, occasioned by their appointment, has resulted in no bene- fit to the people. The only person who has been profited by them is high salaried offi- cers, who sought their appointment as a means through which they might perpetu- ate their power, and at the same time ap- propriate to themselves large sums of the people’s money. The statement, however, speaks for itself : Committee on the Treatment of Prisoners of T Far. J. P. C. Shanks, M. C., 118 days board at $6 $708 00 4,520 miles travel 452 00 $1,160 00 A. F. Stevens, H. C., 70 days board.. $420 00 80 miles travel 8 00 428 00 Sergeant-at-Arms 2,136 57 Clerk, witnesses, etc 2,600 00 $6,224 57 Judiciary Committee. Samuel S. Marshall, M. C., 58 days board $348 00 6,000 miles travel 600 00 $948 00 Jas. F. Wilson, M. C., 47 days board.. $282 00 2,956 miles travel i 295 60 577 60 C. E. Eldridge, M. C., 38 days board $228 00 2,784 miles travel 278 41 506 40 J. C. Churchill, M. C., 67 days board. .$402 00 2,264 miles travel 226 4l 628 40 F. E. Woodbridge, M. C., 36 days board $216 00 1,100 miles travel 110 00 326 00 G. S. Boutwell, M. C., 41 days board. .$246 00 908 miles travel 90 80 336 80 Thos. Williams, M. C., 63 days board.. $378 00 760 miles travel 76 00 454 00 Francis Thomas, M.C.,30daysboard.$189 00 954 miles travel 94 49 $274 40 Wm. Lawrence, M.C., 41 days board. $246 00 1,194 miles travel 119 40 365 40 Cash to G. S. Boutwell, 1 550 00 Cash to J. F. Wilson, l To procure 610 00 Cash to Wm. Lawrence, [ evidence, 300 00 Cash to other parties, J 2.350 00 Witnesses 6.500 00 Sergeant-at-Arms and deputies 7,149 10 $21,876 10 Committee on Public Expenditures. C. T. Hulburt, M. C., 66 days board at , $6 per day $396 00 4,800 miles travel, at 10c 480 00 $876 00 E. H. Eollins, M. C., 43 days board, at $6 $258 00 1,392 miles travel 139 20 397 20 J. M. Broomall, M. C„ 11 days board, at $6 1 $66 00 596 miles travel 69 60 135 60 Stenographers, 62 days board, at $6.. $368 00 3,796 miles travel..' 379 60 746 60 C. D. Hubbard, M. C., 8 days board, at $6 $48 00 400 miles travel 40 00 88 00 Sergeant-at-Arms and assistants, board, mileage, expenses, etc 3,072 40 Carson and others, for procuring evidence.. 800 00 Reporter ^ J. 178 00 Estimate — witness fees and incidental ex- penses not included in the above 1,000 00 $7,294 80 Committee on Internal Pevenue Frauds. L. S. Tremble, M. C., 24 days board,' at $6 $144 00 1,229 miles travel 122 00 W. A. Darling, M. C., 24 days board, at $6 $144 00 1,220 miles travel*. 122 00 F. C. Beman, M. C., 24 days board, at $6 $144 00 1,220 miles travel 122 00 Leonard Myers, M. C., 24 days board, at $6 $144 00 1,22 J miles travel 122 00 B. F. Eggleston, M.C., 24 days board, at $6 $144 00 1,220 miles travel 122 00 Witnesses, clerk and messenger. Sergeant-at-Arms, etc $266 00 266 00 266 00 266 00 266 00 1,200 00 1,151 93 $3,681 93 Committee on Elections. Samuel Shellabarger, M. C., 15 days board $90 00 944 miles travel 94 40 $184 40 G. W. Schofield, M. C., 23 days board.$138 00 1,173 miles travel 117 30 256 30 B. C. Cook, M. C., 18 days board $108 00 1,173 miles travel 117 30 225 30 L. G. Poland, M. C., 12 days board.. $72 00 1,200 miles travel 120 00 192 00 H. L. Dawes, M. C., 8 days board $48 00 320 miles travel 32 00 80 00 15 Sergeant-at-Arms . 1,233 23 Witnesses — estimated 800 00 Clerk 2,160 00 Messenger 345 70 Stenographers! 539 50 * $6,009 93 Committee on New Orleans Riots. T. D. Elliott, M. C., 21 days’ board, at $8 $168 00 3,159 miles’ travel 315 90 $483 90 Statement showing the amount of money expend- ed by the committees named , as pen' House Mis. Doc. No. 31, 2d Sess. 40 th Congress. Committee on Judiciary $21,876 00 Do Elections 6,600 00 Do Prisoners of War 6,214 00 Do New Orleans Biot 11,250 00 Do Pay Department 7,983 00 Do Public Expenditures 7,300 00 Do Bevenue Brairds 3,700 00 Do Southern Bailroads 4,636 00 $69,465 00 B. M. Boyer, M. C., 21 days’ board, at $8 $168 00 3,159 miles’ travel 315 90 483 90 Samuel Sbellabarger, M. C M 16 days’ board, at $8 $128 00 3,159 miles’ travel 315 90 443 90 Sergeant-at-Arms and assistants 4,379 00 Witnesses, clerk, etc. 4,16100 Stenographers - 1,191 60 $11,142 30 Committee on Fay Department. W. S. Lincoln, M, C., paid for use of parlor for meeting of committee and for services $189 15 49 days’ board 249 00 3,736 miles’ travel 373 60 A. Cobb, M. C., 26 days’ board $128 00 2,440 miles’ travel 244 00 G. W. Schofield, M. C., 20 days’ board. $120 00 1,110 miles’ travel Ill 00 W. S. Holman, M. C-, 7 days’ board. $42 00 1,538 miles’ travel 153 80 Clerk hire, witnesses, and other expenses.. Sergeant-at-Arms and assistants $856 75 372 00 231 00 195 80 4,500 00 1,833 85 $7,989 40 Committee on Southern Railroads. P. Sawyer, M. C., 20 days’ board, at $6 $120 00 3,034 miles’ travel 303 40 $423 40 Clerk..... 750 00 W itnesses and other expenses 1 , 700 00 Sergeant-at-Arms 1,763 00 $4,636 40 The foregoing statement shows an extrav- agant use of public money, that is certainly unequalled in the annals of public expendi- tures, and especially so when we reflect that almost the entire sum thus expended was for political purpose^ only. It will be re- membered that none of these committees, except that on the Judiciary and Elections, have as yet made a report of their doings ; they are, therefore, still continued for the purpose of giving to a set of hungry offi- cers whose especial vocation is to feed upon the industry of the people, continued em- ployment in perambulating over the country at ten cents per mile and six to eight dol- lars per day for board, in addition to tlieir already enormously high salaries. This dees not show the whole expenses, as large items have been held back for the next report that should have been included in the above. The report of 1869, will prove the truth of my statement The item for board included in the above account is as follows, to wit : Members of Congress, 1,172 days $7,171 30 N. G. Ordway and deputies, 268 Estimated additional, not specifi- 2,101 00 E. H. Smith, stenographer, 136 days 869 00 H, G. Hayes, 63 “ 378 00 Ben. Pitman, 12 “ 96 00 D. L. Eaton, clerk, 21 “ 168 00 L. Harvey, messenger, 29 “ 174 00 1,701 $10,957 00 Estimated, to which add board and expen- ses included in other items 1,000 00 Total $11,957 00 All the persons in the above table, except Harvey and Pitman, are receiving large sal- aries from the Government, and in addition to the board-bills, each of them were paid mileage, as follows : Members of Congress 63,248 miles F. H. Smith 9,528 “ B. F. Hayes 3,600 “ Ben. Pitman 1,788 “ D. L. Eaton 3,159 “ L. Harvey 278 “ N. G. Ordway and deputies. 190,000 $6,324 83 952 80 360 00 178 80 315 90 27 83 19,000 00 271,601 $27,163 10 The salaries are as follows : Members of Congress $5,000 00 F. H. Smith 4,380 00 B. F. Hayes 4,380 00 D. L. Eaton 2,160 00 N. G. Ordway 2,592 00 I have given more space to the examina- tion of some of the many sources of extrav- agance than was intended in the outset, but there are so many fruitful items that de- serve to be brought to the attention of the tax-payers, that I find it exceedingly diffi- cult to confine the subject to a reasonable space. I shall endeavor, however, to con- dense as much as possible, keeping in view my original purpose of bringing to the at- tention of the people the infamous swindles that are being continually perpetrated upon their industry by the swarms of dishonest scoundrels that infest the country, and hold the offices. \ 16 I have presented facts enough already to condemn any party, or set of men, that au- thorize or tolerate the scoundrelism that is going on every day under the very nose of Congress. There are other facts connected with this infamous ring at the Capitol that are even more dark and damning than any- thing yet brought to light. I shall, therefore, give them such a notice as will, I trust, re- sult in relieving the people, to some extent, from a continuation of some of the more barefaced and inexcusable of these outrages that have and are being committed daily. I refer to the various departments of the House, which are sources of as wanton ex- travagance, in my judgment, as it is pos- sible to find anywhere in this or any coun- try. I hope the reader will bear in mind all the facts in the forepart of this book, in re- gard to stationery, horse and carriage-hire, &c. What right have these men to get thousands of dollars from the pockets of the people, who are toiling night and day, and depriving themselves and families in many instances, of the most common neces- saries of life, in order to meet the demands of the tax-gatherer to supply the wants of the Government. What right has the Com- mittee on Accounts to take thousands of dollars from the people’s pockets to pay the expense Of horses and carriages for the offi- cers of the House, at an expense that is per- fectly fabulous, while, at the same time, they receive enormous salaries from the Gov- ernment This is an outrage upon common decency, as well as on the people who fur- nish the money. It is a disgrace and scan- dal to the House of Representatives that they should, for a single day, tolerate such an infamous swjndle. Upon the adjournment of Congress, Mr. McPherson returns to his home in Pennsyl- vania, and remains there most of the time during vacations. Congress does not remain in session more than six months in the year. The Clerk is, therefore, away from the Cap- itol at least half the year ; he takes his horses and carriage home with him, and re- ceives his pay for them from the Govern- ment during the time he is rusticating at the expense of Uncle Sam. Is this honest, is it fair toward the tax- payers of the country % He does not stop there ; but he takes one of the Government employes who is receiving $74 dollors per month, with him as a servant, to take care of the horses and drive his carriage. He appoints one James S. Crawford to a lucra- tive position, upon his pay-rolls — I mean pay- roll, for the pay is all there is in it, as Mr. Crawford has never been in the city of Wash- ington — not even, as I have been informed, on a visit to his friend and relative, the honorable Clerk of the House of Repre- sentatives. The Clerk’s report discloses the fact of Mr. Crawford being upon the pay-rolls of his office, and the fact that he (Crawford) never performed any ser- [ vices for the Government, and the further fact that he never was in Washington, was communicated to me by an individual who is now living a neighbor to Mr. Crawfoid in the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, and whose statement I believe to be true in every particular. The first place that Craw- ford’s name appears, as far as I have been able to see, was on the engineer’s pay-rolls ; the next is the Temporary Clerk’s rolls, this last roll giving him $2,160 per year; quite a handsome pension for an old gentleman who was not wounded in the service of his country. One other item in this connection deserves some notice, as it involves the expenditure of several thousand dollars. The following is the item : Anna E. "Ward, watcher and keeping fires in furnaces under folding room $110 19 This item may be found each month for the last three or four years in the Clerk’s report upon the contingent expenses of the House. This lady is paid $3.60 per day, amounting for the year to $1,314, less government tax. The facts in the case are, that another par- ty performs this service, for which he re- ceives $720 per annum. If any one will take the trouble to examine the appropria- tion bills, they can find the payment for that identical service provided for specifi- cally, and in the same language used iu the Clerk’s report, in this charge to Mrs. Ward- These swindling transactions are augment, ed the more minutely as an investigation is prosecuted. In fact, they are so voluminous as to encompass an encyclopedia of corrup- tions unparalleled in the history of any peo- ple on earth. We think we have pointed out a sufficiency of facts to induce a more elaborate and thorough sweeping of the “ Augean Stable ” by those who are the guar- dians of the public weal, and who may have the power to send for persons and papers. doorkeeper’s department. Insignificant and humble as this name would indicate, it is nevertheless one of the most powerful of all the departments con- nected with the House of Representatives. Its power is wielded with great effect upon legislation of the country, aud especially is it most potent in matters connected with the contingent expenses of the House. This, in part, arises from the fact that almost every member of Congress has his man upon the Doorkeeper’s rolls, or at least each State has quite a number. Those men, as a rule, receive their appointments through the in- fluence of members of Congress. They are generally selected for the place on account of their services in political matters at home, This being the case, it is readily seen that those men who aided greatly in the election of members to Congress, have quite an in- fluence over their action, especielly when fhe interest of the Doorkeeper’s department is at stake. I think I may safely say that 17 there was, during the year 1868, not less than one hundred and fifty men belonging to that department. The folding-room and congressional committee, article of honesty, integrity, or common decency. It has become the mere tender to the infamous, swindling, stock -jobbing rings that feed upon the honest industry of the country, from the Capitol in Washington, to the most remote coiners of the globe. It is not strange, therefore, that a deaf ear should be turned to a request, in th“ most respectful terms, to look into a matter where one of the principal officers of the House of Repre- sentatives was charged with swindling to the amount of thousands, by obtaining mo- ney under false pretences. The reason for this refusal is apparent ; for if the rotten carcass was but stirred, the stench of its vile corruptions would cause the honest masses of the people tu turn with loathing and disgust from the putrid form, that has robbed the industrial classes of the country of the fruits of their labor, for the purpose of lavishing it upon the high-sala- ried official, in paying for horse and carriage- hire, board bills, mileage, &c. I have already mentioned the fact of per sons being kqpt upon the Doorkeeper’s pay- rolls without being required to perform any service. As an instance, I call attention to the name of H. Taylor. It is notorious to almost every person connected with the de- partment* that Mr. Taylor has never been required to perform any service in the fold- ing-room, or in any other place connected with the department, yet he is receiving $120 per month. (See Clerk’s report.) I am also informed that there are some facts connected with his appointment that would not reflect much credit upon those connect- ed with it if they were made public. I for- bear to give particulars. It is for the House to inquire. # The next case is where an individual com- * menced service, as I am informed, about the 20th of the month ; when he applied tor his pay, however, to his astonishment it was made out for the whole month. When he received his money, he was confronted by the superintendent of the folding- room with a demand for ninety odd dollars, stating at the time that he, the superintendent, had a man on from the 1st of the month until the 20th, and that the money was to pay him. Query : Why was not the name of the man, who, it was said, served in this case twenty days, placed upon the pay-rolls, so that he himself could sign the rolls and receive his money, he having served two-thirds of the month, instead of the one who had served but ten days being required to sign the rolls for the whole month, and receiving only about $20 of the money 'i Who can answer the query % Having gone through with this very im- perfect examination of the more important items of expenditure of the House of Repre- 19 sentatives, I will simply add, that the ex- travagance of the United States Senate is fully equal to that of the House', but as that honorable body has not required the officer charged with the disbursement of the con- tingent fund to make a report for the last year, we are left in the dark, e^ept as to the aggregate expenditure. - CONCLUSION. It is scarcely worth while to ask who is responsible for the wanton extravagance and waste of. the people’s money as exhibit- ed in the foregoing pages. In the waste that is shown in regard to the distribution of stationery and other articles furnished for the use of the House, the distributing officers have a greater individual responsi- bility tban any one else, as all such matters are entrusted to them. In regard to keep- ing the names of persons upon the pay-rolls whose services arc not required, also the enormous cost of horse and carriage-hire, &c., the head of each department has an individual responsibility in proportion to the scandalous waste that has been perpe- trated under their supervision. The Com- mittee on Accounts, however, whose duty it is to scan closely every item of the expend- iture from the contingent fund, have shown inmyjudgmentjthemost shameful stupidity and ignorance, or the most criminal disre- gard of the high trust confided to them in matters connected with the expenditure of public money. Instead of standing at the door of the Treasury, with a two-edged sword, to guard well the entrance to the people’s money, as was their duty, it would seem that they had abandoned their post, and allowed each one who chose to make his grab without let or hindrance. But the responsibility mentioned is subordinate to the great controlling power of the radical Congress that appropriates the money ; for not one cent can be used for any purpose whatever, except it is first authorized by an act of Congress. The appointment of an unheard of number of special committees, with unparalleled expenditures attending them, and that too for political aggrandize- ment, is a responsibility that this radical Congress can not shift, or avoid. The Demo- cratic members who were appointed upon those committees, did but their duty in agreeing to serve, as those committees were appointed without their consent, and in most instances against their most solemn protest. The whole responsibility, there- fore, rests upon the radical party. If I have failed to convince the reader of the truth of the proposition that 1 announc- ed in the beginning — the most scandalous, villainous, and dishonest squandering of public money — the fault is my own, and not the facts as they really exist I have en- deavored, however, in the examination of the subject, to present them in the most plain and forcible light that a due regard to truth and fair dealing, as between the swindlers and the people, would permit. I have omitted the mention of many facts of great interest to the public, in regard to the abuses 4hat are of daily occurrence in the management of the House expenditures. I trust, however, that an indulgent public will treat with forbearance the defects and imperfections found in the foregoing pages, as my only purpose in presenting them is the public good. It is alleged that the stationery account for 1868 is over-stated; if that be true, the same may he said with regard to 1864, for the same exhibits, A, B, and C, were used in both cases. The rate of increase is the same in either base. Exhibit C is stationery used in Clerk’s office. Stationery for Clerk’s office, 1868 $3,000 “ “ “ 1864 1,000 Excess of 1868 over 1864 $2,000 The same per cent, of increase is sh^wu in the whole stationery account. 3 011 2 042493103