{
  "schema": "tga.work.v1",
  "identifier": "dresden:vol-10:second-star-route-trial-opening",
  "slug": "second-star-route-trial-opening",
  "title": "Opening Address — Second Star Route Trial",
  "subtitle": "Washington, D.C., December 21, 1882.",
  "excerpt": "Ingersoll's opening jury address in the second Star Route trial — a methodical account of the routes, bids, contracts, partnerships, and petitions at the heart of the case.",
  "year": 1882,
  "volume": 10,
  "category": "Legal",
  "author": {
    "name": "Robert G. Ingersoll",
    "wikidata": "Q360326",
    "viaf": "44331023"
  },
  "isPartOf": {
    "title": "The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll",
    "edition": "Dresden Edition",
    "publisher": "C. P. Farrell",
    "year": 1900
  },
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/",
  "url": "https://thegreatagnostic.com/works/second-star-route-trial-opening/",
  "wordCount": 26277,
  "body": "Washington, D. C., Dec. 21, 1882.\n\nMAY it please the Court and gentlemen of the jury: We consider that the\nright to be tried by jury is the right preservative of all other rights.\nThe right to be tried by our peers, by men taken from the body of the\ncounty, by men whose minds have not been saturated with prejudice, by\nmen who have no hatred, no malice to gratify, no revenge to wreak, no\ndebts to pay, we consider an inestimable right, regarding the jury as\nthe bulwark of civil liberty. Take that right from the defendants in any\ncase and they are left at the mercy of power, at the mercy of\nprejudice. The experience of thousands of years, the experience of the\nEnglish-speaking people, of the Anglo-Saxon people, the only people now\nupon the globe with a genius for law, is that the jury is a breastwork\nbehind which an honest man is safe from the attack of an entire nation.\nWe esteem it, I say, a privilege, a great and invaluable right, that we\nhave you twelve men to stand between us and the prejudice of the hour.\nWe believe that you will hear this case without passion, without hatred,\nand that you will decide it absolutely in accordance with the law and\nwith the evidence. This is the tribunal absolutely supreme. In a case\nof this character, gentlemen, you are the judges of what is the law; you\nare the judges of what are the facts; you are the absolute judges of the\nworth of testimony; and you have not only the right, but it is your duty\nto utterly disregard the testimony of any man that you do not believe\nto be true. You, I say, are the exclusive judges, and for that reason we\nask, we beg you, to hear all this testimony, to pay heed to every word,\nand then decide, not as somebody else desires, but as your judgment\ndictates, and as your conscience demands. Here before this jury all\nletters of Attorneys-General, all desires of Presidents, all popular\nclamor, all prejudice, no matter from what source, is turned simply to\ndust and ashes, and you are to regard them all simply as though they\nnever had been.\n\nThere is one other thing. Some people are naturally suspicious. It is an\ninfinitely mean trait in human nature. Suspicion is only another form\nof cowardice. The man who suspects constantly suspects because he is\nafraid. Whenever you find a man with a free, frank, generous, brave\nnature, you will find that man without suspicion. Suspicion is the soil\nin which prejudice grows, and prejudice is the upas tree in whose shade\nreason fails and justice dies. And allow me to say that no amount of\nsuspicion amounts to evidence. No case is to be tried upon suspicion.\nNo case is to be tried upon suspicious facts. No case is to be tried on\nscraps, and patches, and shreds, and ravelings. There must be evidence;\nthere must be absolute, solid testimony. A case is tried according to\nthe rocks of fact and not according to the clouds and fogs of suspicion.\nNo juror has a right to make a decision until he feels his feet firmly\nfixed upon the bed-rock of truth.\n\nSo I say, gentlemen, that we are glad of the opportunity to make a\nstatement of this case to you, and to tell you exactly the manner in\nwhich my clients became interested in what is known as the star-route\nservice. You have to be guided in this case by the indictment. That is\nthe star and compass of this trial. You cannot go outside of it. The\nevidence must be confined to the charges contained in that instrument.\nIf you find us guilty of a conspiracy, it must be such a conspiracy as\nis set forth in that indictment. That indictment is the charter of your\nauthority, and you have no right to find us guilty of anything in the\nworld except that which is therein charged.\n\nNow, let me give you an exceedingly brief statement of what we are\nhere for. It is charged in that indictment that all these defendants,\nincluding one who has been discharged by a jury, who has been found not\nguilty, Mr. Turner, including another who is dead, Mr. Peck, conspired\ntogether for the purpose of defrauding the United States, and we are\nmet at the threshold with the statement that conspiracy is very hard to\nprove. It is like any other offence, gentlemen. They say conspirators\ngenerally meet in secret. My reply to that is that people generally\nsteal in secret, and the fact that they stole in secret was never deemed\nan excuse for not proving the offence before they were found guilty. You\ncan see that this is precisely like any other offence in the world. Men\nwhen they commit crimes endeavor to get away from the public eye. They\nare in love with darkness. They do not carry torches in front of them.\nAnd it is so in every crime. But whether conspiracy is difficult to\nprove or not, it must be established before you can find the defendants\nguilty. That is a difficulty that the Government must overcome by\ntestimony. The jury must not endeavor to overcome it by a verdict. And\nI say here to-day that the same rule of evidence applies to this case as\nto any other, and you must be satisfied by the testimony the Government\nwill offer that these men conspired together; that they entered into\nan arrangement wherein the part of each was marked out, and that that\narrangement was contrary to law; and that the object of that arrangement\nwas to defraud the Government of the United States.\n\nThis indictment is kind enough to tell us the means that were employed\nto carry out that conspiracy. How did they find these means, gentlemen?\nThey must have had some evidence on which they relied. If they had\nevidence enough to convince them, they must introduce that evidence\nhere, and if that evidence establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that\nthese men conspired, then you will find them guilty; otherwise not. The\ndifficulty of establishing it is something with which you have nothing\nto do. How did they conspire? What were the means they had agreed\nto use? Let us see. Thomas J. Brady was the Second Assistant\nPostmaster-General. The Postmaster-General was not included in the\nscheme, consequently they must deceive him. The Sixth Auditor was not\nincluded in this conspiracy, and as by virtue of his office it was his\nduty to go over all of these accounts and pass upon the legality of each\nitem, it was necessary to deceive him. According to the indictment Mr.\nTurner was a clerk in the department, and his part of the rascality was,\non the jackets inclosing petitions, to make false statements in regard\nto the contents of the petitions inclosed. The object of that being that\nwhen the Second Assistant Postmaster-General, Mr. Brady, exhibited these\njackets to the Postmaster-General, it being considered that he would\nnot have time to read the petition, he would be misled by the false\nstatements on the cover touching the contents.\n\nThe next step was for the contractors to get up false petitions; that\nis, petitions to be signed by persons who did not live along the route\nupon which the mail was to be carried. These petitions also to be\nforged; that is to say, the names of persons put there by another, or\nthe names of fictitious persons written, when in fact no such persons\nexisted.\n\nThe next thing to do was to write false and fraudulent letters; to\ninduce others to write such letters; the next thing, to make false\naffidavits; and the next thing, to make false orders—those to be\nmade by Mr. Brady—and these false orders were to have, as a false\nfoundation, false petitions, false letters, false communications, false\naffidavits, and fraudulently written representations.\n\nThat is the indictment. That is the scheme said to have been entered\ninto by my clients with all of these defendants, and the object being to\ndefraud the Government of the United States. Now, in order to establish\nthat scheme, it would be necessary for the Government to prove it. Not\nto assert it. Neither have you the right to infer it. No man can\nbe inferred out of his liberty. No man can be inferred into the\npenitentiary. That is not the way to deprive a man of his reputation and\nof liberty—by inference. They must prove it. They must prove that the\npetitions were false. They must prove that the letters were fraudulent.\nThey must prove that the orders rested upon those false and fraudulent\npetitions, letters, and affidavits; and they must prove that Mr. Brady\nknew them to be false.\n\nIt is also stated in this indictment that service was to be paid for\nwhen it was not performed; that service was discontinued and a month's\nextra pay allowed; that fines were imposed and afterwards set aside\nbecause the contractors agreed to pay fifty per cent, of such fines to\nGeneral Brady. I will speak of them when I come to them.\n\nNow, there is a clear statement. What part, then, did my clients play in\nthis scheme? I will tell you. It is charged in the indictment that John\nM. Peck was in this scheme, and, although he is dead, whatever he did,\nI imagine, can be established by the Government. A man can be found\nguilty, I understand, of having entered into a conspiracy with another,\nalthough the other be dead, and the living man can be convicted.\n\nNow, it is stated in the outset that my clients never had been engaged\nin carrying the mail and that is regarded as an exceedingly suspicious\ncircumstance. A man has got to commence some time, if he ever goes into\nthe business, and if this doctrine be true, the first bid that a man\never makes is evidence that he has entered into a conspiracy. Suppose,\non the other hand, my clients have long been engaged in this business.\nWhat would the Government counsel then have said? They would have said,\ngentlemen, that they had been engaged for years in the business. They\nknew all the tricks that were played, and consequently they were the\nvery persons to form a conspiracy. And that is the wonderful thing about\nsuspicion. It changes every fact. It colors every word it reads and\nevery paper at which it looks; and no matter what are the facts, the\nmoment they are regarded with a suspicious mind they prove what the man\nsuspects.\n\nSo, then, the first charge is that we had never been in the business,\nand consequently our going into the business must have been the result\nof a conspiracy. Gentlemen, if the doctrine be laid down that it is\ndangerous for a man to make a bid the result of that doctrine will be\nto double the expenses of the Government in carrying the mails. All that\nwill be necessary, then, is for the old bidders to combine. They will\nknow that there is no danger of any new men interfering with them,\nbecause the new men will be immediately indicted for conspiracy and\nthe old men will have the field to themselves. You can see that this\nis infinitely absurd. There is only one step beyond such absurdity, and\nthat is annihilation. No man can possess his faculties and get beyond\nthat absurdity, if it is evidence of conspiracy, because it is the first\nthing.\n\nAs a matter of fact, however, John M. Peck had been engaged in the\nmail business. He was engaged in the business before 1874. He had been\ninterested with others before that time. He was interested in several\nimportant routes from 1874 to 1878. It was in the fall of 1877 that he\nmade arrangements to bid at the next letting. He was a business man.\nHe was not an adventurer. He was secretary at that time of the Arkansas\nCentral Railroad. He had been, I believe, for two sessions a member\nof the Ar-kansas Legislature. He was in good standing, solvent, and\nregarded as an honest man. In 1874 he was interested in the bids and,\nas I said, was engaged in carrying the mails at the time these contracts\nwere entered into. He became acquainted with John W. Dorsey, I believe,\nin 1874. When he made up his mind to put in more bids for the letting of\n1878 he went after John W. Dorsey, and they met together in the city\nof New York, I believe, in the month of September, and agreed that they\nwould put in some bids for the letting of 1878. Peck was acquainted with\nJohn R. Miner and had been acquainted with him for a considerable time.\nMr. Miner wanted to go into some other business than that in which he\nwas then engaged, and those three men made up their minds to bid. Was\nthere anything criminal in that? Nothing. Any men anywhere have the\nright to combine; the right to form a partnership; the right to come\ntogether for the purpose of making proposals for carrying the United\nStates mails. Of course you will all admit that. Now, that is what they\ndid. There was nothing criminal, nothing secret, nothing underhanded.\nEverything was above board, open, and in the daylight. There is no\nconspiracy yet, and we will show that.\n\nJohn M. Peck had been troubled with a lung disease. He had gotten much\nbetter in September, and thought that he was almost well. Later in the\nfall he took a severe cold and got much worse, and from that difficulty,\nI believe, he never wholly recovered. He went, however, to Colorado and\nNew Mexico, and finally died.\n\nNow, let us see about John W. Dorsey. I believe that great pains\nhave been taken to say that he was a tinsmith, which is a suspicious\ncircumstance. Why? Is there any law against a tinsmith bidding to carry\nthe mails? Is there any such provision in the statute? And yet that\nhas been lugged forward as one of the evidences of a conspiracy in this\ncase, and it has been lugged forward in a way to cast some disgrace upon\nthis man—simply because he was a tinsmith. Well, do you know I have\nas much respect for a good tinsmith as for a good anything. What is\nthe difference? Sometimes I have thought I had more respect for a good\ntinsmith than a poor professional man—sometimes. In this country of all\nothers labor is held to be absolutely honorable, and I think a thousand\ntimes more of a man who works in the street and takes care of his wife\nand children than I do of somebody else who dresses well and lives on\nthe labor of others, and then is impudent enough to endeavor to disgrace\nthe source of his own bread. I think the man who eats the bread of\nidleness is under a certain obligation to speak well of labor. And yet\nwe have the spectacle in this very court of the Attorney General of the\nUnited States endeavoring to cast a little stain upon this man. As a\nmatter of fact, and I am almost sorry to say it, John W. Dorsey is not\na tinsmith. I am almost sorry to make the admission. He happened to be\na merchant, which is no more honorable but somewhat easier. He dealt in\nstoves and tinware. That, gentlemen, is his crime, and upon that rests\nthe terrible suspicion that he is a conspirator. And I want to say more,\nthat his reputation for honesty, his reputation for fair dealing, is as\ngood as that of any other man in the State in which he resides. He made\nup his mind to cast his fortunes with John M. Peck and with John R.\nMiner and make some bids for carrying the mails of the United States.\nThat is all there is about it.\n\nThere is, however, another suspicious circumstance, and that is that\nJohn W. Dorsey was the brother of Stephen W. Dorsey, and Stephen W.\nDorsey at that time was a Senator of the United States. That is another\nsuspicious circumstance. Whenever you find a man with a Senator for a\nbrother, put him down as a conspirator. Another suspicious circumstance,\nJohn M. Peck was the brother-in law of S. W. Dorsey, absolutely married\na sister of Mrs. Dorsey, and that was the beginning of this hellish\nconspiracy. It was suspicious. He intended to rob the Government when he\nwas courting that girl.\n\nNow, we come to another man, Mr. John R. Miner, and the suspicious thing\nabout Miner is that he lives in Sandusky. But that of itself would be\nnothing. Dorsey lived there once, too. Now, do you not see how they\nmoved to that town with the diabolical purpose of swindling this great\nGovernment? Miner was not in very good health—do you not see—pretended\nto be sick so that he could leave Sandusky; and in some way Miner and\nDorsey were excellent friends—another suspicious circumstance; and\nfor several years whenever John R. Miner visited Washington he laid\nthe foundations of this conspiracy by always stopping at the house of\nSenator Dorsey—another suspicious thing. And do you not recollect the\ndelight, the abandon with which Mr. Bliss emphasized the word house,\nwhen he said that they met at Dorsey's house? I had a great notion to\nget up and plead guilty on that emphasis.. Miner came here. He and Peck\nwere acquainted; and wherever you find four men acquainted, gentlemen,\nlook out, there is trouble. When Miner came here he went directly to the\nhouse of Senator Dorsey. I admit it with all the damning consequences\nthat flow from that admission. He did not even go to a hotel. He went\ndirectly to Dorsey's house. I want that in all your minds, because\nthe prosecution regards that as one of the foundation facts in this\nconspiracy, and while admitting it, do you not see how much I save them\nin the way of evidence.\n\nAnd there is another damning fact connected with this case. Dorsey in\nthe top of his house had set apart one room for an office. It was up\ntwo or three pair of stairs. I think he established his office there to\nshield himself a little from the people who usually call on a Senator in\nthe city of Washington. But he found that he put himself to more trouble\nthan he did them, so he moved his office to the lower part of the\nbuilding, and when John Miner got to that house he occupied a room right\nnext to that office upstairs, and sometimes he went in there and wrote.\nNow, you see, gentlemen, how that conspiracy was planted; how the\nbranches sprang out of the windows of that room and covered all the\nterritory of the United States. I might as well admit that frightful\nfact. I do not know that they know that, but I might as well admit it,\nbecause we want the worst to come first. Before Miner came here he wrote\na letter. There is another place to put a pin of suspicion. He wrote a\nletter to S. W. Dorsey; that is, it was Miner or Peck, I have forgotten\nwhich, and may be that very forgetfulness of mine is another evidence of\nconspiracy. A letter was written either by Miner or Peck to Stephen\nW. Dorsey, saying that they were going to bid; that Peck was not well\nenough to be here at that particular time, and would he be kind enough\nto hand that letter to some man in whom he had confidence and let that\nman get such information as he could with regard to the routes upon\nwhich they expected to bid—all these Western star routes.\n\nNow, what did S. W. Dorsey do? There was a man in town by the name of\nBoone. He sent for Mr. Boone, and I believe that Mr. Boone went to Mr.\nDorsey's house, and that Dorsey handed him that letter in his house.\nAnd what was the object of the letter? For Boone to get information\nregarding these routes. Well, now, what did Boone do? Boone made up a\ncircular which he sent to all the postmasters, or most of them, through\nOregon, Washington Territory, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, California,\nKansas, Nebraska; that is to say, the Western States and Territories;\nand in this circular a certain number of questions were propounded to\neach postmaster. First, the distance from that post-office to the next,\nand from the next to the next, and so through the route. Second, the\ncondition of the roads, whether hilly or level. Third, about the snows\nin winter and the floods in spring. Fourth, the cost of hay and corn and\noats. Fifth, the wages that would have to be paid to the man or men; and\nit may be some other questions in addition. Now, these circulars were\nsent by Boone to all the postmasters in consequence of a letter that he\nreceived in Dorsey's house. What for? So that by the time that Miner and\nPeck and John W. Dorsey came they could sit down and bid intelligently\nupon these routes; so that they would have some information that would\nguide them; in other words, that they would not be compelled to bid at\nrandom.\n\nNow, we will show, gentlemen, that that was done, and if at that time\nthere had been a conspiracy, certainly such information was of no\nparticular value. Now, that is what Mr. Boone did, and I believe that is\nabout all he did at that time. There is no conspiracy yet, no fraud\nyet. It is utterly impossible to defraud the Government by getting\ninformation from postmasters as to the condition of the roads, and as to\nthe distance from one post-office to another. There is no fraud yet, no\nconspiracy up to this point. In a little while Mr. Miner and Mr. John W.\nDorsey appeared. Ah, but they say Stephen W. Dorsey was at that time\na Senator of the United States Yes, he was, and I believe he remained\nSenator until the 4th of March, 1879. When his brother came we will show\nto you that Stephen W. Dorsey said to his brother, \"I would rather\nyou would not bid; I would much rather that you would keep out of this\nbusiness, because I am a Senator and somebody may find fault. Somebody\nmay suspect, and consequently I would much rather you would get out of\nthe business.\" John W. Dorsey did not agree with him. He said he did not\nsee how that could interfere with him, and that he believed he could\ndo well in that business, and the consequence was he went on. There is\nnothing suspicious so far as I can see in that. That is what we will\nshow.\n\nThis man being a member of the United States Senate did what he did out\nof pure friendship; did what he did for his brother, what he did for Mr.\nPeck, and what he did for Mr.\n\nMiner from pure friendship. I know it is very difficult for some people\nto imagine that any man does anything for friendship. They put behind\nevery decent action the crawling snake of a mean and selfish motive. My\nopinion of human nature is somewhat different. I have known thousands\nand thousands of men capable of disinterested actions, thousands of men\nthat would help a brother, a brother-in-law, or a friend, and help\nthem to the extent of their fortune. I have known such men and I never\nsupposed such acts could be tortured into evidence of meanness.\n\nThe first charge against Stephen W. Dorsey is that he sent some bonds\nand proposals for bids to a postmaster by the name of Clendenning, in\nthe State of Arkansas. The trouble with these bonds, as I understand it,\nwas that the amount of the bid was not put in the blank in the printed\nproposal. It is claimed by the prosecution that according to the law the\npostmaster has no right to certify to the solvency of the security until\nthat blank is filled. I want to explain this so that you will understand\nit. I think I have one of the bonds and proposals here. I would like to\nhave the Court see exactly the scope of it. [Exhibiting blank form of\nproposal and bond.] The proposal is that the undersigned,———— whose\npost-office address is————, of the county of————, and State\nof————, proposes to carry the mails of the United States from July\n1, such a date, to June 30 of such a date, being four years,\nbetween such and such a place, under the advertisement of the\nPostmaster-General, for the sum of————dollars per annum. Now, if I\nunderstand the matter of the Clendenning bonds, they were filled up\nwith the exception of the blank in which the amount of the bid was to be\nwritten. That is the charge, as I understand it. Whenever a man makes\na proposal to carry the mail for four years on a certain route, that\nproposal must be accompanied with a bond in a certain amount, and\ncertain men must sign that bond as sureties, and then a certain\npostmaster must certify to the solvency of the sureties, the sureties\nhaving made oath as to the value of their property. Now, understand that\nperfectly. It is not the bond that a man gives after his bid has been\naccepted. It is a bond that he gives to show that his bid is in good\nfaith. That bond is conditioned that if the contract is awarded to him\nhe will give another and sufficient bond not only, but I believe it is\nalso conditioned that he will carry the mail. The charge is—and let us\nget at it just exactly—that some bonds were sent to a man by the name\nof Clendenning, who was a postmaster, and this blank was not filled.\nLet me tell you why. It was the custom—and I want your Honor to\nunderstand that perfectly, because so much was made of it before in\ntalk—to leave that blank unfilled. It is the blank for the amount of\nthe bid. In the advertisement of the Government the penalty of the bond\nis stated, so that the amount of the bid has nothing to do with the\npenalty in the bond. Understand me now. If the bond was for ten thousand\ndollars, it was because that amount had been put in the advertisement\nby the Government. It did not depend upon the amount of the bid. It had\nnothing to do with it. The amount of the bid threw no light upon the\namount of the bond. The penalty of the bond was fixed by the Government\nbefore the bid was made and inserted in the advertisement published\nby the Government. Why then did they not wish to fill up this blank?\nThis blank, gentlemen, told the amount of the bid. Where there are many\nbidders, and an important route, if you let the postmaster who has to\ncertify to the sureties know the amount of the bid he might sell you. He\ncould go and tell somebody else \"I have certified to all the sureties\non this route, and the lowest bid up to this time is fifteen thousand\ndollars,\" and the person whom he told might go and bid fourteen thousand\nnine, hundred and ninety-nine dollars and take the route. Ah, but they\nsay the postmaster is not allowed to tell the amount of the bid. No.\nWhat was the penalty if he did? He would lose his office. Now, here is\na postmaster holding an office worth, perhaps, a hundred dollars a\ncentury, or, perhaps, fifty dollars a year, and by selling information\nas to one bid he might make ten thousand dollars. I do not know what he\ncould have made. Certainly the bidders did not feel like trusting the\nsecret of their bids to the postmaster who certified to the sureties. As\na consequence the bond was filled up with the penalty according to the\nadvertisement, but the blank in which the amount of the bid was to be\nwritten was not filled, because they wanted the postmaster's mind left\na blank upon that subject. In other words, that blank was left unfilled,\nnot to defraud the Government, but to prevent other people from\ndefrauding the bidder. That is all there is about it. That is everything\nabout the Cleudenning bonds. But it may be well enough to state,\ngentlemen, that those Clendenning bonds were never used on a solitary\nroute in this indictment, and I believe never anywhere; that no contract\nwas ever awarded upon any one of those proposals. The only rascality\nin the transaction, gentlemen, was the failure to fill a blank; and the\nreason they failed to fill that blank was because they did not want\nthe postmaster to know the amount of the bid. Let us come right down to\npractical matters and things. For instance, suppose one of this jury\nis in the stone-cutting business, and the Government should issue an\nadvertisement calling for proposals to furnish dressed granite, and\nspecify that every man who bid must file a bond in a penalty of five\nthousand dollars to carry out his contract, and that that bond must\nbe approved by the postmaster here. Suppose it was a contract of great\nproportions. Would the man who bid be willing that the amount of the bid\nshould be inserted in the blank to be passed upon by the postmaster? No.\nWhy? He would not want the postmaster to know it. Who else would he not\nwant to know it? He would not want his sureties to know it. A man might\nbe standing by while the bond was being approved and read the amount of\nthe bid. The bidder would be afraid somebody would get at those figures\nand go and underbid him. Every man of common, ordinary sense knows that.\nIf you made a bid you would not let your sureties know the amount and\nyou would not give the amount to the keeping of a postmaster, neither\nwould you leave it to chance or accident. You would say, \"I will leave\nthe amount a blank. I will keep it in my mind, and when the paper comes\ninto my hands for the last time I will write, it in there and fold it\nand seal it and give it to the Government.\" That is what every sensible\nand prudent man would do, and what has been done for years. And yet that\nact is brought forward as something to stain the reputation of an\nhonest man; something to strike down as with a sword the character of an\nex-Senator. They even say he wrote upon paper that had the mark of the\nUnited States Senate Chamber upon it. That is only another evidence that\nthere was nothing wrong in it. It was stated, too, in the opening of\nthis case, that an affidavit was made upon paper that bore the mark of\nthe National Hotel of this city. Think of such a damning circumstance as\nthat! Well, gentlemen, so much for the Clendenning bonds. We will\nprove that the blank was left unfilled on purpose, not to defraud the\nGovernment, but to prevent other people from defrauding us. Let me say\nin that connection that there was an investigation in 1878 upon this\nvery question. The Clendenning bonds were brought up. Testimony was\nheard, and we will be able to show you the facts that I have stated.\nThen, if I am right, gentlemen, there is nothing in it; and when the\nopening statement was made the Government knew, just as well as I know,\nthat there was nothing in it; at least they ought to have known it.\nProbably it is not proper for me to say they knew it, because men get so\nprejudiced, so warped, so twisted that it is hard to tell what they know\nor what they do not know. But that has nothing to do with this case and,\nin my judgment, will never be admitted by the Court. If it is admitted\nby the Court we will establish exactly what I have told you. So much for\nthe Clendenning bonds. Do not forget that the penalty of the bond was\nput in by the Government.\n\nDo not forget that the amount of the bid was left blank simply to\nprotect ourselves. Do not forget another thing: That leaving that blank\nunfilled could not by any possible peradventure injure the Government.\nThe bond was just as good with that proposal unfilled at the time the\nsureties signed it as though it had been filled. It had to be filled\nbefore it was finally given to the Government or else there would be no\nbid. If there was no bid, then no obligation rested upon the sureties.\nCertainly they could not be harmed, and if there was no bid certainly\nthe Government could not be harmed; unless the bid should have happened\nto be lower than any received; and yet out of that nothing, out of that\none bramble, a forest of rascality has been manufactured. Gentlemen,\nthat is the result of suspicion when it is hoed by malice and watered by\nhatred.\n\nThe next suspicious circumstance, gentlemen, is that we bid. That is a\nsuspicious circumstance. Miner bid, Peck bid, and John W. Dorsey bid.\nAnd the suspicious circumstance is that they did not bid against\neach other. Why should they? I was at an auction the other day and\nunconsciously bid against myself, but I did not think it any evidence\nof rascality on my part; I thought it tended to show that I was not\nattending strictly to business, and yet it is brought forward as\na suspicious circumstance that these gentlemen did not bid against\nthemselves. Another suspicious circumstance is that they bid in their\nindividual names. That is the way all the bidding is done, I believe.\nI believe every bond has to be signed by the individuals and not by\nany partnership. That I believe to be one of the regulations of the\ndepartment. Well, there is no rascality yet, as far as I can see. Now,\nwhen the contract is accepted—I will come to the bidding question\nagain—the contractor has to give a bond. One of those bonds will be put\nin evidence in this case. You will see what the contractor is bound to\ndo. Then it can be subcontracted. You will find that the contract given\nby the subcontractor to the department is not a hundredth part as severe\nas the bond the contractor gives to the Government. In the contract that\nwe give to the Government certain things are provided. You will find\nthat a copy of it will be intro duced. The contractor is left to\nthe mercy of discretion-I believe that is the word—of the\nPostmaster-General You will find that if he fails to carry the mail one\ntrip, no matter by what he may be prevented, by flood or storm or fire,\nhe is not to be paid for it. Although he is there ready with his men\nand horses, if he is prevented by the elements he has no pay. If the\nPostmaster-General thinks he ought to have carried it when he did not,\nhe can take from his pay three times the value of the trip. He can take\nfrom him one quarter's pay. He reserves in his own breast the power\nto declare that contract null and void, because in his judgment the\ncontractor has not done his duty. Everything is left to him. The man who\nsigns that contract gives a mortgage on his life, liberty, and pursuit\nof happiness. He has no redress. I simply call your attention to this\nto show you the obligation that a contractor takes upon himself. We will\nshow you that he is under obligation to discharge any carrier that the\nGovernment does not like; that he has no right to carry any package or\nany letter that can go by mail; that he is to forfeit a trip when it is\nnot run, or not to exceed three times the pay of a trip; that he is to\nforfeit one-quarter of a trip if the running time is so far behind that\nhe fails to make connection with the next mail; that if he violates any\nof these provisions he forfeits a penalty equal to a quarter's pay, or\nif he violates any other provision touching the carriage of the mail and\nthe time and manner thereof, without a satisfactory explanation in\ndue time to the Postmaster-General, he can visit a penalty in his\ndiscretion, and the forfeitures may be increased in the penalty to a\nhigher amount, in the discretion of the Postmaster-General, according to\nthe nature or frequency of the failure and the importance of the mail.\nProvided that, except as specified, and except as provided by law, no\npenalty shall exceed three times the pay of a trip in each case.\n\nIt is also agreed by the said contractor and his sureties that the\nPostmaster-General may annul the contract for repeated failures; for\nviolating the postal laws; for disobeying the instructions of the\nPost-Office Department; for refusing to discharge a carrier when\nrequired by the department; for transmitting commercial intelligence or\nmatter which should go by mail; for transporting persons so engaged as\naforesaid; whenever the contractor shall become a postmaster, &c.\n\nIt is further stipulated and agreed that such annulment shall not impair\nthe right to claim damages from said contractor and his sureties under\nthis contract; but such damages may, for the purpose of set-off or\ncounter-claim in the settlement of any claim of said contractor or his\nsureties against the United States, whether arising under this contract\nor otherwise, be assessed and liquidated by the Auditor of the Treasury\nfor the Post-Office Department.\n\nAnd it is further stipulated and agreed by the said contractor and\nhis sureties that the contract may, in the discretion of the\nPostmaster-General, be continued in force beyond its express terms for a\nperiod not exceeding six months. You will see, gentlemen, how perfectly,\nhow absolutely, the contractor is in the power of the department. The\nGovernment enforces its contracts. No matter how many years may elapse\nthey are still after the sureties and are still after the principal.\nNothing relieves a man but, death. Only a little while ago a case was\ndecided in the Supreme Court of which I will speak to you. An importer\nof sugar gave the importers' bond to pay the duty upon that sugar. By\nthe custom of trade, sugar is sold in bond.\n\nThe importer sold to a third person and the third person went to get the\nsugar. By law he could only take it after paying the tax; and yet one of\nthe officers of the Government, contrary to law, allowed him to take the\nsugar without paying the tax. The Supreme Court has just held that the\noriginal importer and his sureties are liable to pay that tax—the man\nwho took the sugar out having become bankrupt—although the sugar was\ngiven to the second party simply by a violation of law, and that law\nwas violated by one of the officers of the custom-house without the\nknowledge or consent of the original importer. I tell you, gentlemen,\nwhenever a man gives a bond to this Government the Government stays with\nhim. The Government does not die; the Government does not get tired; the\nGovernment does not get weary. The Government can afford to wait, and\nthe poor man with the bond hanging over him cannot go into business,\ncannot get credit, but just lingers out a life of expectation, of hope,\nand of disappointment. I trust none of you will ever sign a bond to the\nGovernment. There is another thing, gentlemen. If you bid on a hundred\nroutes and they are given to you and you put the service on ninety-nine\nof the routes and carry it in accordance with the contract, and yet fail\non the hundredth route, the Postmaster-General has a right to declare\nyou a failing contractor. A failing contractor on the hundredth route?\nYes. On any more? Yes; on every one. And whoever is declared a failing\ncontractor on one route is by virtue of that declaration a failing\ncontractor on all. They are all taken from him. So that when a man bids\nfor more than one route, for instance, a hundred or a thousand, and gets\nthem and carries them all absolutely according to his contract but one,\nhe can be declared a failing contractor on all. What does that mean?\nIt means not simply ruin to him, but ruin to every one of his sureties,\nunless they are in a condition to go on and carry the mail. I want\nyou to understand something of the obligation of a contractor with the\nGovernment of the United States.\n\nNow, I come to the bidding. These bids were made with a full\nunderstanding of the obligation of a bidder. Messrs. Miner, Peck, and\nJohn W. Dorsey bid, I believe, on about twelve hundred routes. You see\nyou are in great luck in bidding if you get one route in fifty that you\nbid upon. In the first place, there are about ten thousand star routes.\nI do not know that it is too much to say that the number of bids runs up\ninto the hundreds of thousands; somewhere in that neighborhood. Hundreds\nof men often bid on one route. Consequently, nobody who bids expects to\nget more than a few of the routes for which they bid. Now, is there the\nslightest evidence in the statement of the Government as to the frauds\nin this bidding? Let me tell you how some frauds have been committed.\nSuppose, for instance, this was a fraudulent business, and Miner, Peck,\nand Dorsey were bidding. Let me explain it to you. I want you to know\nit. All there is in this case is simply to have you understand it. That\nis all there is. And if you do not agree with me when we get through the\ncase I shall simply think that you have not comprehended it. Say that\nfour men bid on the same route, one man four thousand dol-ars, another\nman three thousand dollars, another man two thousand dollars, and\nanother man one thousand dollars.\n\nNow, the man who bids one thousand dollars is of no account, has not\na dollar in the world, and so when the bid is given to him he does not\nwant it. He is what they call a straw man. The law provides then that\nthe next man may have it. The law does not provide that he must take\nit. He may have it if he wants to, but you cannot force him to take it,\nbecause he is not the lowest bidder. He is the two thousand dollar man.\nHe is another straw gentleman. He does not want it. Then the Government\noffers it to the next man at three thousand dollars. He is another\nchap made of hay. He says he doesn't want it. Understand the Government\ncannot force these straw and hay men to take it. Then they go to the\nfourth fellow, who bid four thousand dollars. It is a good thing at four\nthousand, and he says, \"Yes; I will take it.\" That is what they call\nfraudulent bidding. If you had found Dorsey and Miner and Peck bidding\non the same route and one of them failing and another one taking it, you\nwould not only have suspected fraud, but you would have known it.\nNow, if it is a badge of fraud for them to bid upon the same route and\napparently against each other, I will ask you if it is not a badge of\nfair dealing that they were not found bidding against each other. They\nbid on about twelve hundred routes, and much to their astonishment they\ngot one hundred and thirty-four contracts.\n\nYou have heard here a great deal of talk about the number of men and\nhorses. We will show you all about it. Men differ upon this subject. If\nmen did not differ upon it at all these bids would be alike. Instead of\nbeing a dozen bids, all different, and differing sometimes as much as\nten, twenty, thirty, forty, or a hundred dollars or more, they would bid\nthe same. If they all agreed on the number of horses and men it would\ntake, and about what it would cost, they would bid about alike, wouldn't\nthey? But when they are bidding they honestly differ. One man says it\nwould take twenty horses, and another says \"no, it will take forty.\"\nDo you not know that the number of horses depends a great deal upon\nthe kind of man who makes the estimate. Here is a man who is hard and\nbrutal, and he says a horse can do so much work. He says it is cheaper\nto buy him and wear him out than it is to feed him decently. You have\nknown men who were perfectly willing to make fortunes out of a horse's\nagony, and out of animal pain. There are hundreds of them in the world.\nNow, take it on horse railroads, and with freighters, and teamsters.\nWhenever you find a mean, infamous man, if he cannot whip his wife,\nhe will take his spite out on his horse. If a man is a good, broad,\ngenerous, free fellow he will say, \"I don't want to work that horse to\ndeath; I think it will take four horses. I am going to keep my horses\nfat, and I am going to treat them as a gentleman should.\" Another man,\na wretch, will come up and swear it would not take more than fifteen\nhorses. When his horses are through the service you will simply see a\npile of bones wrapped in a lamentable hide. You understand that.\n\nWell, these men made twelve hundred bids and got one hundred and\nthirty-four contracts. Ah, but they say, here is another badge of fraud,\nanother badge. Ah, they bid on small routes, on cheap routes, on routes\nwhere the mail was carried infrequently and on slow time. If it is a\nbadge of fraud to bid on such routes the Government can never let out\nany more. Most of these routes were cheap routes. Now, I owe it to you\nto give you the reason for this. We will prove in the first place that\nthese men were not rich men. If they had been very rich they probably\nwould not have gone into the business at all. They would have gone into\nthat perfectly respectable business of buying Government bonds. They\nwould have bought Government bonds and made other fellows pay the\ninterest, and twice a year they would have formed a partnership with\na pair of shears, and thus in the sweat of their faces they would\nclip their coupons. They bid on poor routes. Why? They were poor,\ncomparatively speaking.\n\nThey had not the money to stock the expensive routes where four horse\ncoaches were run. They preferred to take the cheaper lines. Why? Because\nthey could stock them. They would have been able to have stocked the\nroutes if they had only obtained the number they expected. But as I\ntold you, they got many more routes than they expected. Was that for the\nbenefit of the Government? How did these men come to bid so cheaply on\nsome of these routes? I will tell you. Because they had the information,\nbecause they had received the facts from all the postmasters on the\nroutes, and consequently they made a good close calculation, and the\nresult was that their bids were below others, and the fact that their\nbids were accepted saved the Government hundreds of thousands of\ndollars. When they found themselves with all these contracts, the first\nhard work they did was to give away all they could. That was the first\nhard work. They had contracts, not for sale, but just to give, and they\nsucceeded in giving away several of them. I believe they sold two of\nthese children of conspiracy for the enormous sum of one hundred dollars\neach. That was the highest sale they made at that time. Afterwards\nanother route was sold which I will explain when I come to it. Now there\nis no rascality yet. No fraud yet. No conspiracy yet. Well, they then\nwent to work to get their bonds. But first let me say that there was\nanother reason for bidding on cheap routes. Whenever the bid is above\nfive thousand dollars, then the man who bids must, at the time he bids,\nput up a check for five per cent, of the amount.\n\nA check certified by a national bank. For instance, if it all comes to a\nhundred thousand dollars he has got to put in a certified check for five\nthousand dollars. Even in the little bids we made we had to deposit with\nthe Government some twenty-six or twenty-eight thousand dollars, and I\ndo not know but more, in cash, or what is the same as cash, for the bank\ncertifies that the money is there. That is another reason they bid on\nsmaller routes. What is the next? The Government asks such frightful\nbonds, such terrible amounts, that a man must be almost a millionaire,\nor else there must be a confidence in him that is universal, before he\ncan give these bonds.\n\nThere was one route at this very bidding where they had to give bonds\nfor six hundred and forty thousand dollars, and the sureties upon these\nbonds under oath had to testify that they had real estate to the value\nof six hundred and forty thousand dollars, exclusive of all debts, dues,\nand demands. So there was another reason for bidding upon small routes.\nWhere the amount was under five thousand dollars no certified check had\nto be deposited, and the smaller the route of course the smaller the\nbond.\n\nNow, I have endeavored to show you the reasons that we bid upon these\nroutes instead of upon the larger ones. The reasons as stated by the\nGovernment are that we took these routes where the service was once a\nweek, so that we could have the service increased; that we took those\nroutes where the time was long so that we could have it shortened, that\nis to say, expedited. But I tell you that when a perfectly good reason\nlies at the very threshold of the question you have no right to go\nfurther. The reasons I have given to you it seems to me are perfect and\nyou need no more.\n\nNow, then, we got, I say, about one hundred and thirty-four routes. Of\nthese, one hundred and fifteen are without complaint. There is not a\nword about the other one hundred and fifteen. Recollect it. We got one\nhundred and thirty-four routes. In this indictment are nineteen; one\nhundred and fifteen appear to be perfectly satisfactory to this great\nGovernment. There is not a word as to those routes, not one word, I say,\nas to one hundred and fifteen routes, and they want you to believe\nthat these defendants deliberately selected nineteen routes out of one\nhundred and thirty-four about which to make a conspiracy, and that\nthey left one hundred and fifteen to go honestly along, but picked out\nnineteen for the purpose of defrauding the Government.\n\nNow, then, when these gentlemen found themselves with these routes, the\nnext thing was to put the stock and the carriers upon them. As I told\nyou, a good many more had been awarded to them than they anticipated.\nThey had not the money. So, in putting the stock upon several of the\nroutes, they found it necessary to borrow some money, and here comes\nanother suspicious circumstance. Mr. Miner borrowed some money of\nStephen W. Dorsey, and everybody is astonished that any man would be\nmean enough to loan money to another; that any man could so far forget\nthe dignity of the office that he held as to help a friend. Their idea\nof a Senator is of such a lofty and dignified character that he ceases\nto take interest in anything except national affairs; that after he has\nbeen sworn in he forgets all the relationships and friendships of\nthe world, and the idea of asking him to loan money seems, to the\nprosecution, to be the height of unconstitutionality. But as a matter\nof fact he did loan some money, and we will show you how that loan was\ntreated, showing you that at that time he had not the slightest interest\nin it. He loaned some money, and kept loaning money until, I believe,\nhe had given them about sixteen thousand dollars to get these routes on.\nThen he, being on his way to New Mexico, met in the city of Saint Louis\nJohn R. Miner, who at that time was coming back, I think, from Montana\nor Dakota, where he had been putting stock on a route. Miner saw Dorsey\nin Saint Louis, and said to him, \"We have got to have a little more\nmoney, and I want you to indorse my note or to loan me your note and\nI can get it discounted in the German-American Bank in Washington.\"\nFinally, Dorsey said to him, \"You have already obtained from me about\nsixteen thousand dollars: I will give you the note you ask, or indorse\nyour note upon one condition, and that is that you shall give me\norders\"—what are called Post-Office drafts—\"not only for the amount of\nthis note, but for the amount of the sixteen thousand dollars.\" We shall\ninsist, gentlemen, that that evidence shows exactly our position, and\nthat you are entitled not only to draw from it, but that you must\ndraw from it the inference, the fact, that we had no interest in those\nroutes. Finally that was agreed to.\n\nNow, understand it, at that time a contractor with the Government who\nhad agreed to carry the mail for a certain time could give what are\ncalled post-office drafts or orders—you know, orders on his quarterly\npay—and they would be taken to the proper officer in the Post-Office\nDepartment and they would be accepted, not for the full amount,\nunderstand, but for any amount that might be due that contractor.\nFor instance, he might fail to carry the mail, he might be fined, and\nconsequently the amount of that draft might not be there, so that the\nonly thing the Post-Office Department agreed to do was to pay upon that\norder or draft anything that was due to the contractor. That was done at\nthat time, and why? Because there was no way other than that to secure\nthese advances. So he gave these drafts. He came on to Washington.\nThe note was put into the German-American Bank. The orders on the\nPost-Office Department were filed with it, and the money advanced by\nthe bank and charged to Stephen W. Dorsey. That made, then, at that time\nabout twenty-five thousand dollars that Dorsey had advanced. That being\ndone he went on about his business.\n\nNow, I will show you what happened after that. I think the note in the\nGerman-American Bank was nine thousand dollars or ten thousand dollars,\nI have forgotten which. Dorsey then went on to New Mexico from Saint\nLouis, and remained there, I believe, until December, 1878. Now, I want\nyou to understand this, because here turns a very important question,\nand a very important point. Now, you recollect the information about\nthese bids was collected in the autumn and winter of 1877. The last\nbid was to be put in, I think, February 28, 1878. Now, this was in the\nAugust of that year, 1878. Still being pressed for money, Miner, Peck,\nand J. W. Dorsey were in danger of being declared failing contractors.\nNow, recollect it. We will show that at that time Brady, who, according\nto the Government, was a co-conspirator, threatened to declare Dorsey,\nPeck, and Miner failing contractors, and if he had declared them failing\ncontractors even on one route that was the end of all. At that time\nMiner and John W. Dorsey sought out Mr. Harvey M. Vaile, and let me say\nthat is the first appearance of Mr. Vaile in these contracts. He knew\nnothing about the bidding, was not in Dorsey's house, knew nothing about\nthe letting. That is his first appearance in these contracts, August,\n1878. Now let us see what he did. He was a man of means. He had some\nmoney; had been, I believe, for a long time engaged in carrying the\nmails; understood the business. They will tell you that is a suspicious\ncircumstance as to him, and that the fact that that was John Dorsey's\nfirst experience is a suspicious circumstance as to him. Really to avoid\nsuspicion you would have to have a man that had been in it a long time\nbut never had anything to do with it. They got him, and offered what? To\ngive him a third interest in this entire business. I think that was\nit. They were to give him a third interest in this entire business,\na business that had been born of conspiracy, a business that had as a\nsilent partner the man who fixed the amount of money to be paid. Think\nof that. According to the statement of the Government, here was a\nconspiracy full-fledged, perfect in its every part, flanked by the\nSecond Assistant Postmaster-General, buttressed by all the clerks they\ndesired, and yet that conspiracy got so hard up that in August, 1878,\nnine or ten months after its creation, it was willing to give a third to\nanybody who would advance a little money to carry the thing on.\n\nSo Mr. Vaile came in. Now, then, they had to secure Vaile against any\nloss, and it seems that on July 1, I believe, of that year, the law\nallowed the subcontract to be filed. It was a little while before that\nthat a law had been passed for the protection of subcontractors. That\nwas all explained to you yesterday. You know it is something like\na mechanic's lien; that if the subcontractor would only file his\nsubcontract in the Post-Office Department and let that department know\nthe terms of it they would not pay the original contractor until this\nsubcontractor was paid. Now, that law had gone into effect a little\nwhile before August, 1878, and the effect of that law, if anybody filed\na subcontract on these routes, was to cut out all those post-office\norders that Miner had given to secure Dorsey. You understand me now, do\nyou not? It was when he met him in Saint Louis that it was agreed\nthat these post-office orders were to be given and filed with the\nGerman-American Bank in this city. Now, then, the law passed for\nthe protection of subcontractors, and subsequently the filing of\nsubcontracts on those very routes, would render those post-office orders\nabsolutely worthless. Very well. When they made the contract with\nMr. Vaile they agreed to file the subcontracts with the department\nto protect Vaile and that rendered S. W. Dorsey's security absolutely\nnothing. That cut out all other claims, drafts, and everything else, and\nat that time Mr. Miner was fully authorized by power of attorney from J.\nW. Dorsey and from John M. Peck, who was at that time in New Mexico, to\nmake this transfer to Vaile.\n\nNow, see where we are on August 16, 1878. On Dorsey's return in\nDecember, 1878—he had not been here from that time, and do you not see\nhe had nothing to do with it—he found that these subcontracts had\nbeen filed. He found that the note in the German-American Bank had been\nprotested, and he found that his collateral security was not worth a\ndollar, that it was all gone. Thereupon he demanded a settlement. The\nmatter drifted along for a little while, and a settlement was made with\nthe bank; and Mr. Vaile, holding the subcontract, undertook to pay that\nDorsey note, and he did pay it. He took it up, and gave, I believe, his\nown instead, and that was finally paid. But the money due Dorsey, the\nsixteen thousand dollars that at that time amounted to something more\nby virtue of interest, was not provided for. The money that had been\nexpended by John W. Dorsey was not provided for. The money expended\nby Peck was not provided for. Now, I want you to see exactly how that\nmatter stood at that time. We have got it up to that time and here\nit stands, and the chief conspirator out sixteen thousand dollars and\nwithout any interest in one of the routes. There is where he was at\nthat time, and that is what we will show. The brother of the chief\nconspirator ten thousand dollars out, and not the interest of one cent\nin any route. The brother-in-law of the conspirator about ten thousand\ndollars out, and not a cent in. That was the condition of this\nconspiracy at this time, and when Vaile took these routes Brady\ntelegraphed him and asked him, \"What routes of Miner, Dorsey, and\nPeck, are you going to put the stock on? This thing can be continued no\nlonger. The stock must go on.\" We will show it. Now, having got to that\npoint, we will take another step. There is nothing like understanding\nthings as we go along.\n\nNow, from the time Mr. Vaile took the route, to the settlement in 1879,\nto which I will call your attention in a little while, Mr. Vaile had the\nabsolute control. Neither Peck nor S. W. Dorsey had the slightest thing\nto do with one of those routes until the final settlement, and I say to\nthese gentlemen of the prosecution now, that in that time they can find\nno line, no word from Stephen W. Dorsey upon the subject. They cannot\nfind that he wrote a word to any official, that he sent a petition to\nanybody, that he wrote a letter to any human being upon the subject,\nor that he took any more interest in it than in the ashes of Sodom and\nGomorrah. It went right along.\n\nNow, then, up to this time, Stephen W. Dorsey had made nothing. He was\nonly out about sixteen thousand dollars or eighteen thousand dollars.\nJohn W. Dorsey was in the same healthy financial condition. John M. Peck\nhad reaped the same rich harvest of ten thousand dollars lost, and\nall the things had been turned over to Mr. Vaile; John W. Dorsey put\nout—left out—with nothing to show. That is the first chapter in this\nconspiracy. [Resuming.]\n\nI believe when I stopped, the principal conspirators were substantially\n\"broke.\" The head and front was out sixteen or eighteen thousand\ndollars, and the other two ten thousand dollars each. Now, a contract\nwas made, and I propose to prove that contract in the course of this\ntrial. When that contract comes to be shown, it will be about this:\nThat, on the 16th day of August, 1878, H. M. Vaile, John R. Miner, John\nM. Peck, and John W. Dorsey made an agreement That agreement made a\npartnership, and we will show that a partnership was formed by and\nbetween Miner, Vaile, Peck, and Dorsey on the 16th day of August, 1878.\nWe will show by the articles of that partnership that H. M. Vaile was\nmade treasurer, and that all the other partners agreed, by suitable\npowers of attorney, to put the collection of all the money from the\nGovernment absolutely in his hands. When he got the money he agreed,\nfirst, to pay all the subcontractors; second, the expenses necessary\nand incident to the proper conduct of the business; third, to divide the\nprofits remain-, ing among the parties as provided in that contract. The\nprofits were to be divided as follows: From routes in Indian Territory,\nKansas, Nebraska, and Dakota, to H. M. Vaile, one-third; to John R.\nMiner, one-sixth; to John M. Peck, one-sixth; and to John W. Dorsey,\none-third. From routes in Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico,\nArizona, Utah, Idaho, Washington Territory, Oregon, Nevada, and\nCalifornia, to H. M. Vaile, one-third; to John R. Miner, one-third, and\nto John M. Peck, one-third. Before any division of profits was to be\nmade, the sums which before that time had been advanced were to be\npaid to the parties so advancing such sums; and if the profits were not\nsufficient to repay the entire sums so advanced, they were to be paid\nfrom time to time during the existence of the life of these contracts.\nNow, you will find that such contract was made on the 16th day of\nAugust, 1878, and that Mr. H. M. Vaile then took absolute and complete\ncontrol of every one of these routes, and the only thing they asked of\nhim was to repay the money that had been advanced, which, as you know,\nand as I have told you, was the sixteen or eighteen thousand dollars\nby S. W. Dorsey, the ten thousand dollars by Peck, and about the same\namount by John W. Dorsey. Now that is understood. At that time certain\npapers were executed by all the parties. I told you that a law had been\npassed by virtue of which a man could make a subcontract and have that\nsubcontract put on file, and thereupon he could be protected by the\nGovernment. Now, when H. M. Vaile took these routes, and they were to\nbe managed by him, subcontracts were made by the other parties to Mr.\nVaile, and Mr. Vaile put those subcontracts on record. Now you can see\nthat they gave him the absolute and entire control of every route.\nThat was the condition. I have explained to you the the liability of\na contractor. He cannot put it off on a subcontractor. He is the\nman primarily responsible to the Government during the life of that\ncontract, and for six months thereafter. Whenever a contract is awarded\nto any person, he is regarded as the original contractor, and his\nname is kept upon the books of the department during the life of that\ncontract. No matter how many subcontracts may be made, he is looked to\nprimarily if there is a failure of a a trip, or if there is a failure\nof the service, and he is responsible for its complete performance. If\nthere comes some great storm and the road is obstructed by snow, or if\nthe bridges are all carried away by flood, and the subcontractor throws\ndown the contract, the original contractor must be ready to take it\nup; and if he fail to do so, he can be fined three times what he has\nreceived for each trip. There is one case in one of these nineteen\nroutes, gentlemen, where the fines exceeded the entire pay simply\nbecause they did not carry the mail according to the contract. Now,\nthen, these parties finally made a settlement and they divided these\nroutes. They divided them. They ceased to have any interest in common.\nRecollect, that was in April, 1879. I want you to know it because this\nentire case depends on your knowing it. This entire case, gentlemen of\nthe jury, depends on your understanding it. In April, 1879, Mr. Vaile\nhaving had possession of these routes for several months, a division was\nmade of them, and all interest in common was at that moment severed. At\nthis time, I say, these routes were divided, and all partnership and all\npartnership interest was absolutely destroyed. I want to tell you why.\nWhen Dorsey returned from New Mexico and found that his orders on the\nPost-Office Department had been superseded by subcontracts and that his\ncollateral security was worthless he was indignant, and at that time\nhe and Mr. Vaile had a quarrel. He did not think he had been properly\ntreated, and for that reason the moment he got the note at the\nGerman-American Bank provided for, the moment he induced Mr. Vaile\nto assume the payment of that note, he gave evidence that he wanted a\nsettlement. Not that he wanted the routes divided at that time, because\nhe did not dream of such a thing. He wanted the settlement. He wanted\nhis money. The arrangement that had been made with Mr. Vaile was unknown\nto Mr. Dorsey, who at that time was in New Mexico; and, as I told you\nbefore, when he returned and found that the note that had been given to\nthe German-American National Bank was protested, and found, as I\ntold you twice, his collateral security was worthless, he wanted a\nsettlement. He wanted his money refunded to him. They said to him, \"We\nhaven't the money. We have just got the stock really upon these routes.\nWe have just got under way, and we cannot pay out the money.\" \"Very\nwell,\" said he, \"what will you give me?\" I want you all to see that this\nwas a simple, natural, ordinary proceeding. Said he, \"I want my money.\"\nSaid Vaile to him, \"We haven't the money, but I will tell you what we\nwill do. We will divide the routes with you.\" Now, recollect at that\ntime that they had a hundred and thirty-four routes, and had given some\nof them away. At that time they agreed upon a division, and they agreed\nhow that division should be made. We will prove the agreement to you.\nThe agreement was that Mr. Vaile should choose first, taking the route\nhe wanted—he and Miner being together at that time—that Mr. Dorsey\nshould choose the next, and Mr. Miner should choose the third route;\nand then that Mr. Vaile should choose the fourth, Stephen W. Dorsey the\nfifth route, Mr. Miner the sixth route, Mr. Vaile the seventh route, and\nso on. They finally concluded it would be fair for Mr. Vaile to take\nthe best route, Dorsey the next best, and Miner the next best, and then\nagain Vaile the best, Dorsey the next best, and Miner the next best,\nand that that would be an average that would do justice to each. In\nthat way, gentlemen, they divided these routes. There was no conspiracy;\nnothing secret. This division was made on the 6th day of April, 1879,\nnot only after Dorsey had gone out of the Senate, but after he had\nadvanced this money, after they had failed to repay him, after he had\nfailed to collect it, and when he finally had said, \"I must have some\nsettlement that recognizes my claim.\" Gentlemen, I want you to know\nthat. In this case that fact will be one of the great central facts. On\nthe 6th day of April, 1879, these routes were absolutely divided, and\nafter that they had nothing in common. But you recollect that these\nroutes were divided by chance. Mr. Vaile chose the first route. He might\nchoose a route that had been bid off by Peck, or he might choose a route\nthat had been bid off by John W. Dorsey. Stephen W. Dorsey took the next\nroute, and that might have been a route that had originally been awarded\nto his brother, or to Peck, or to Miner. You can see how that is. The\ndivision was here complete. Mr. Miner did not have the routes he had bid\noff and that had been given to him by the Government. Mr. Vaile came in,\nand as Mr. Vaile was not an original bidder he took routes that had\nbeen awarded to Miner and to Peck and to John W. Dorsey. By the division\nStephen W. Dorsey came into possession of routes that he never had bid\noff, because he never bid for one. Consequently as he went along with\nthose routes, he needed and he had oftentimes the affidavit or the\ncertificate of the original contractor. That was a necessity. Otherwise\nthe division could not have been carried out. Anything that arises from\nthe necessity of the case does not tend to show any conspiracy or any\nillegal partnership. I hope you understand perfectly that on the 6th day\nof April, 1879, these routes were divided and Stephen W. Dorsey took his\nshare because they at that time owed him between sixteen and eighteen\nthousand dollars.\n\nWhat more did he do, gentlemen? He agreed at that time that he would\nrefund to John W. Dorsey all the money he had expended. That amount was\nabout ten thousand dollars. It was nine thousand and something. He also\nagreed that he would refund to John M. Peck, who is now dead, the money\nhe had expended, which was between nine and ten thousand dollars. He\nalso agreed that he would take the routes for the money he had expended,\nand that was between sixteen and eighteen thousand dollars. So, when\nthose routes were turned over to him they were taken in full of over\nsixteen thousand dollars advanced by him, ten thousand dollars that he\nwas to give to his brother, and ten thousand dollars that he was to give\nto John M. Peck—in the neighborhood of thirty-eight thousand dollars\nin all. Speaking of the sum without interest it amounted to thirty-six\nthousand dollars. Those routes were turned over to him. Gentlemen, it\nwas not done in secret. When that division was made, the law having\nprovided no way for A to assign a contract to B, that assignment had to\nbe accomplished by a subcontract, and consequently subcontracts had to\nbe given to Vaile, subcontracts to John R. Miner, and subcontracts to\nS. W. Dorsey, and yet the original contractor was still held by the\nGovernment. When the subcontract was made, it was for the entire amount\nof the pay; not one dollar remained for the original contractor. Now,\nI want to state to you what we are going to prove about that. After\nthe division was made, to show you the interest taken by the\narch-conspirator, we will prove these facts: That when the routes\nawarded to him by chance, on the 6th day of April, 1879, had been\nawarded, he left the city of Washington in a few days, and went to New\nMexico; that he returned here on the 15th or 16th of May; that he left\nagain on the 19th of May, and went to Arkansas; that from Arkansas he\nwent to New Mexico, and returned to Washington on the 21st day of June,\nand that on the 27th of June he left for New Mexico. The next time he\nvisited Washington was in July of the following year, 1880. He remained\nhere one day, left and returned again to witness the inauguration of\nGeneral Garfield. From June 27, 1879, up to the present hour I challenge\nthese gentlemen to show that Stephen W. Dorsey ever wrote one line,\none word, one letter, to any officer of the Post-Office Department. I\nchallenge them to show that he ever took the slightest interest in any\nstar route, or said one word to any human being about that business,\nexcept in explanation when attacked by the Government or in the\nnewspapers. Now, gentlemen, after the division of these routes what\ndid Stephen W. Dorsey do? This is a story, complicated, it may seem,\nperfectly plain when you understand the surroundings. It is a story\nnecessary for you to know. After he got these routes what did he do? Did\nhe want them? Did he want to engage in carrying the mail of the United\nStates? Was that his business? At that time he had a ranch in New Mexico\nwhere he was raising cattle. That was his business, and is up to to-day.\nDid he want to stay here? Did he want to attend to these contracts? That\nis for you to determine. Did he want to enter into some partnership by\nwhich the Government was to be fleeced? That is for you to say. I tell\nyou he had another business. I tell you he had a ranch in New Mexico,\nand we will prove it to you, and that ranch was of more importance to\nhim than all the star routes in the United States. We will show you\nthat at that time he could not have afforded to waste his time on these\nroutes; that the business he was then engaged in was too profitable\nto waste any time in the mail business. Profitable as these gentlemen\nappear to think it was, what did he do? Just as soon as he could make\nthe arrangement he went to a gentleman living in Pennsylvania by the\nname of James W. Bosler. Who is Bosler? He is a man well acquainted with\nthe business of contracting with the Government. He has been in that\nbusiness for years and years. He is a man of ample fortune, excellent\nreputation, considered by his friends and neighbors to be a gentleman\nand an honest man. He went to him. That we will show you. He said to Mr.\nBosler, \"I have advanced money by the indorsement of a note. I am in a\nbusiness that I do not understand. We have had to divide the routes in\norder for me to have security for my debt. I want to turn these routes\nover to you. I am not acquainted with the business of carrying the mail.\nI know absolutely nothing about it. I want you to take it.\" How did he\nturn it over? We will show. He said to Mr. Bosler, \"You take all the\nroutes that have been given to me; every one. You run them and you pay\nme back my money, and then we will divide the profit.\" Mr. Bosler\nsaid he was not very well acquainted with post-office business, but\nhe understood how to transact any ordinary business, and he would take\nthem. That is all there is to it. He took the routes; every one. I\nbelieve that he took absolute control within a few months of the 6th day\nof April. I do not know but the warrants for the first quarter were\npaid or came in some way to S. W. Dorsey. But for the second quarter Mr.\nBosler took them, and from that day to this Mr. Bosler has controlled\nthose routes. He has carried every mail or has contracted with the man\nwho did carry it. Every solitary thing that has been done from that day\nto this has been done by him. Every dollar has been collected by Mr.\nBosler, and every dollar has been disbursed by Mr. Bosler. And before we\nget through I am going to tell you how all the routes that were given to\nMr. S. W. Dorsey came out. Let me tell you how they came out. Mr.\nBosler has carried the mail, paid the expenses, kept the accounts, and,\ngentlemen, I am going to tell you how much he made out of this vast\nconspiracy that has convulsed that part of the moral world that has been\nhired and paid to be convulsed. I am going to tell you exactly how we\ncame out on all this business. I will give you the product of all this\nrascality, of all this conspiracy, of all the written and spoken lies; I\nwill tell you our joint profit on this entire business; a business that\npromised to change the administration of this Government; a business\nabout which reputations have been lost, and no reputations will be\nwon; counting it all, every dollar, and taking into consideration the\nmidnight meetings, the whisperings in alleys, the strange grips and\nsigns that we have had to invent and practice, you will wonder at the\namount. I will give it to you all. Mr. Bosler has kept the books, has\nexpended every dollar, collected every warrant, and I say to you to-day\nthat the entire profit has been less than ten thousand dollars, not\nenough to pay ten witnesses of the Government. Our profits have not been\none-fiftieth of the expense of the Government in this prosecution—not\none-fiftieth, and I say this, gentlemen, knowing what I am saying. It is\ncharged by the Government that these gentlemen were conspirators; that\nthey dragged the robes of office in the mire of rascality; that they\nswore lies; that they made false petitions; that they forged the\nnames of citizens; that they did all this for the paltry profit of ten\nthousand dollars. That is what we will show you. And the moment this\nreform administration swept into power they cut down the service on\nthese routes. They not only did that, but they refused to pay the\nmonth's extra pay, and they committed all this villainy in the name of\nreform. And do you know some of the meanest things in this world have\nbeen done in the name of reform? They used to say that patriotism was\nthe last refuge of a scoundrel. I think reform is. And whenever I hear\na small politician talking about reform, borrowing soap to wash his\nofficial hands, with his mouth full and his memory glutted with the\nrascality of somebody else I begin to suspect him; I begin to think that\nthat gentleman is preparing to steal something. So much, then, for the\nconspiracy up to this point, up to the division of these routes in 1879.\nNow recollect it.\n\nNow, the next charge that is made against us, and it is a terrific\none, is that these defendants, my clients, have filled the Post-Office\nDepartment with petitions—false petitions; forged petitions. I want\nto tell you here to-day that these gentlemen will never present any\npetitions upon any route upon which my clients are interested that they\nwill claim was forged—not one. Have we not the right, gentlemen, to\npetition? Has not the humblest man in the United States a right to send\na petition to Congress? Has not the smallest man—I will go further—has\nnot the meanest man the right to petition Congress? Why, it is\nconsidered one of our Constitutional rights not only, but a right back\nof the Constitution, to make known your grievances to the governing\npower. Every man always had a right to petition the king. There is\nno government so absolutely devoid of the spirit of liberty that the\nmeanest subject in it has not the right to express his opinion to the\nking—to the czar. Upon what meat do these officers feed that they are\ngrown so great that an ordinary citizen may not address a petition to\none of them? Now, I ask you, if you were living in Colorado and could\nget a mail once a week, have you not the right to petition your member\nof Congress to have it three times a week? Do you not know that\nevery member of Congress from every State, every delegate from every\nTerritory, is judged by his constitutents by the standard of what he\ndoes. By what he does for whom? By what he does for them. They send a\nman to Congress to help them, and they expect that man to get them a\nmail just as often as any other member of Congress gets his people a\nmail, do they not? And if he cannot do that they will leave that young\ngentleman at home. They will find another man. It is the boast of a\nmember of Congress when he returns to his constitutents, \"I have done\nsomething for you. You only had a mail here once a week. I have got it\nfour times a week, gentlemen.\" \"Here is a river that was navigable. I\nhave got a custom house.\" \"Here is a great district in which the United\nStates holds a court and I have an appropriation for a court-house.\" Up\nwill go the caps; they will say, \"He is the man we want to represent us\nnext session.\" But if he sneaks back and says, \"Gentlemen, you do not\nneed a court-house, you have mails often enough,\" the reply of the\npeople is, \"And you have been to Congress often enough.\" That is nature,\nand no matter how highly we are civilized when you scratch through the\nvarnish you find a natural man.\n\nNow, then, every member of Congress felt it was his duty, his privilege,\nand his leverage, to have the mails established, and when the people\ngot up petitions he would indorse them. He would look at the petitions.\nThere was the principal man, you know, in his town. He would look down\na little farther. There was a fellow that had an idea of running against\nhim. He would look down a little farther, and there was the man who\npresented his name at the last convention; there is the fellow who\nsubscribed three hundred dollars towards the expenses of the campaign.\nThat is enough. He turns it right over—\"I most earnestly recommend that\nthis petition be granted. So and so, M. C.\" Then he would put it in his\ncoat-pocket, and he would march down to General Brady with a smile\non his face as broad as the horizon of his countenance. He would just\nexplain to the gentleman that there are miner's camps springing up all\nover that country, towns growing in a night like mushrooms, Providence\njust throwing prosperity away in that valley; that they have to have\na daily mail then and there, and he would show this petition. In three\nweeks more there would come fifty others, and it would be granted. Why,\neven the counsel for the prosecution would have done the same, strange\nas it may appear. They would have done just the same—maybe worse, maybe\nbetter. The Post-Office officials might have granted more to them.\n\nNow, I have always had the idea that it was one of my rights to sign a\npetition; that no man in this country could grow so great that I had not\nthe right just to hand the gentleman a paper with my opinion on it. Do\nyou know I do not think anybody can get so big that an American citizen\ncannot send a letter to him if he pays the postage, and in that letter\nhe can give him his opinion. There is no fraud about that; not the\nslightest. These men all out through the mountains, men that went out\nthere, you know, to hunt for silver and for gold, live in little camps\nof not more than twenty or thirty, maybe, but they wanted to hear from\nhome just as bad as though there had been five hundred in that very\nplace. And a fellow that had dug in the ground about eleven feet and had\nfound some rock with a little stain on it and had had the stain assayed,\nwanted to hear from home right off. He stayed there and dreamed about\nfortune, palaces, pictures, carriages, statues, and the whole future\nwas simply an avenue of joy upon which he and his wife and the children\nwould ride up and down. He wanted to write a letter right off. He wanted\nto tell the folks how he felt. Do you think that man would not sign a\npetition for another mail? Do you think that fellow would vote to send a\nstupid man to Congress who could not get another mail? He felt rich; he\nwas sleeping right over a hole that had millions in it, and he had\nnot much respect for a Government that could not afford to send a\nmillionaire a letter.\n\nNow, Mr. Bliss tells you that we forged petitions, and in only a few\nmoments, as the Court will remember, he had the kindness to say that\nanybody in the world would sign a petition for anything, and the\nquestion arises if people are so glad to sign petitions why should we\nforge their names. Do you not see that doctrine kind of swallows itself.\nYou certainly would not forge the name of a man to a note who was\nhunting you up to sign it. And yet the doctrine of the Government is\nthat while the whole West rose en masse, each man with a pen in his hand\nand inquiring for a petition, these defendants deliberately went to\nwork and forged it. It won't do, gentlemen. Oh, my Lord, what a thing a\nlittle common sense is when you come to think about it, when you come to\nplace it before your mind.\n\nNow, the next great trouble in this case, gentlemen, is that we bid on\nroutes that were not productive. When you remember that Congress made\nall these routes—now Congress did it; we did not do it—you will\nprotect us. We did not make a solitary route upon which we bid, strange\nas it may appear. Congress, with the map of the Territories and the\nStates of the Union before it, marked out all the routes. Congress\ndetermined where these routes should run. And yet this case has been\ntried as though in reality we were the parties who determined it.\n\nNow, let me say something right here. It is for Congress to determine\nfirst of all on what routes the mail shall be carried. I want you\nto understand that, to get it into your heads, way in, that Congress\ndetermined that question, and that there has to be a law passed that the\nmail shall be carried from Toquerville to Adairville, from Rawlins to\nWhite River. That law has to be passed first, and Congress has to say\nthat that route shall be established. Now, get that in your minds. I\ngive you my word we never established a mail on the earth. That was done\nby Congress, and the moment Congress establishes a route it becomes the\nduty of the Second Assistant Postmaster-General to put the service upon\nthat route, and the duty of the First Assistant Postmaster-General to\nname the offices on that route. Is not that true? That is the doctrine.\nNow, that had all been done before we entered into a conspiracy. These\nroutes had not only been established, but the Government had advertised\nfor service on these routes, and we bid. That was our crime.\n\nThese gentlemen said, I believe, at one time, that they were about to\nlift a little of the curtain, to expose the action of Congress. You\nsee this suit has threatened the whole Government. If the Constitution\nweathers this storm it will be in luck. They were going to raise the\ncurtain. They were going to be like children hanging around a circus\ntent. One lifts it up and hallooes to another, \"Come quick, I see a\nhorse's foot.\" They said that they were going to show the rascality\nof Congress. They have never done it. I suppose the reason may be that\ntheir pay depends upon an act of Congress, but they let that alone. Now,\nthey say that Congress committed a great mistake. Why, they say they\nwere routes that were not productive, and we knew it, and that when\nthe people asked for expedition and increase on a route that was not\nproductive we were guilty of fraud.\n\nNow, gentlemen, let us see: There are not a great many productive\npost-offices in the United States. They say that a post-office that is\nnot productive should be wiped out. Let me say to you, you cut off the\npost-offices that are not productive and you will have thousands the\nnext day that are not productive. It is the unproductive offices that\nmake others productive. You cut off those that are not productive and\nyou will have double the number that are not productive. You cut off all\nthose that are unproductive and you will have nothing left but the\nmail line. You might say that there is not a spring that flows into the\nMississippi that is navigable. Let us cut off the springs. Then what\nbecomes of the Mississippi? That is not navigable either. It is on\naccount of the streams not navigable, emptying into one, that the one\ninto which they empty, becomes navigable. And yet, these gentlemen say\nin the interest of navigation, \"Let us stop the springs because you\ncannot run a boat up them.\" That is their doctrine. There is no sense in\nthat. You have got to treat this country as one country. You have got\nto treat the post-offices business as a unit for an entire country. You\nhave got to say that wherever the flag floats the mail shall be\ncarried, wherever American citizens live they shall be visited with the\nintelligence of the nineteenth century. That is what you have got to\nsay. You have got to get up on a good high plane, and you have got\nto run a great Government like this that dominates the fortune of a\ncontinent, and you have got to run it like great men. There has got to\nbe some genius in this thing and not little bits of suspicion.\n\nProductiveness! Let us see. We are informed by Mr. Bliss, who is paid\nfor saying it, otherwise he would not, that the West is perfectly\nwilling to have mail facilities at the expense of the East. I do not\nthink the gentleman comprehends the West. There is nothing so laughable,\nand sometimes there is nothing so contemptible, as the egotism of a\nlittle fellow who lives in a big town. Some people really think that New\nYork supports this country, and probably it never entered the mind of\nMr. Bliss that this country supported New York. But it does. All the\nclerks in that city do not make anything, they do not manufacture\nanything, they do not add to the wealth of this world. I tell you,\nthe men who add to the wealth of this world are the men who dig in the\nground. The men who walk between the rows of corn, the men who delve in\nthe mines, the men who wrestle with the winds and waves of the wide sea,\nthe men on whose faces you find the glare of forges and furnaces, the\nmen who get something out of the ground, and the men who take something\nrude and raw in nature and fashion it into form for the use and\nconvenience of men, are the men who add to the wealth of this world. All\nthe merchants in this world would not support this country. My Lord! you\ncould not get lawyers enough on a continent to run one town. And yet,\nMr. Bliss talks as though he thought that all the mutton and beef of the\nUnited States were raised in Central Park, as though we got all our wool\nfrom shearing lambs in Wall Street. It won't do, gentlemen. There is a\ngreat deal produced in the Western country. I was out there a few years\nago, and found a little town like Minneapolis with fifteen thousand\npeople, and everybody dead-broke. I went there the other day and found\neighty thousand people, and visited one man who grinds five thousand\nbushels of flour each day. I found there the Falls of Saint Anthony\ndoing work for a continent without having any back to ache, grinding\nthirty thousand bushels of flour daily. Just think of the immense power\nit is. Millions of feet of lumber in this very country, and Dakota, over\nwhich some of these routes run, yielding a hundred million bushels of\nwheat. Only a few years ago I was there and passed over an absolute\ndesert, a wilderness, and on this second visit found towns of five and\nsix and seven thousand inhabitants. There is not a man on this jury,\nthere is not a man in this house with imagination enough to prophesy the\ngrowth of the great West, and before I get through I will show you that\nwe have helped to do something for that great country.\n\nProductiveness! Let me tell you where that idea of productiveness was\nhatched, where it was born, the egg out of which it came. It was by\nthe act of March 2, 1799, just after the Revolution, and just after\nour forefathers had refused to pay their debts, just after they had\nrepudiated the debt of the Confederation, just after they had allowed\nmoney to turn to ashes in the pockets of the hero of Yorktown, or had\nallowed it to become worthless in the hand of the widow and the orphan.\nIn 1799, the time when economy trod upon the heels almost of larceny,\nour Congress provided that the Postmaster-General should report to\nCongress after the second year of its establishment every post-road\nwhich should not have produced one-third the expense of carrying the\nmail. Recollect it, and I want you to recollect in this connection\nthat we never established a post-route in the world. We will show\nthat, anyway, if we show nothing else. By the act of 1825 a route was\ndiscontinued within three years that did not produce a fourth of the\nexpenses. Now, when those laws were in force the postage was collected\nat the place of delivery.\n\nBut in old times, gentlemen, in Illinois, in 1843, it was considered a\nmisfortune to receive a letter. The neighbors sympathized with a man\nwho got a letter. He had to pay twenty-five cents for it. It took five\nbushels of corn at that time, five bushels of oats, four bushels of\npotatoes, ten dozen eggs to get one letter. I have myself seen a farmer\nin a perturbed state of mind, going from neighbor to neighbor telling of\nhis distress because there was a letter in the post-office for him. In\n1851 the postage was reduced to three cents when it was prepaid, and the\nlaw provided that the diminution of income should not discontinue any\nroute, neither should it affect the establishment of new routes, and\nfor the first time in the history of our Government the idea of\nproductiveness was abandoned. It was not a question of whether we would\nmake money by it or not; the question was, did the people deserve a mail\nand was it to the interest of the Government to carry that mail? I am a\nbeliever in the diffusion of intelligence. I believe in frequent mails.\nI believe in keeping every part of this vast Republic together by\na knowledge of the same ideas, by a knowledge of the same facts, by\nbecoming acquainted with the same thoughts. If there is anything that is\nto perpetuate this Republic it is the distribution of intelligence from\none end to the other. Just as soon as you stop that we grow provincial;\nwe get little, mean, narrow prejudices; we begin to hate people because\nwe do not know them; we begin to ascribe all our faults to other folks.\nI believe in the diffusion of intelligence everywhere. I want to give to\nevery man and to every woman the opportunity to know what is happening\nin the world of thought.\n\nI want to carry the mail to the hut as well as to the palace. I want\nto carry the mail to the cabin of the white man or the colored man, no\nmatter whether in Georgia, Alabama, or in the Territories. I want to\ncarry him the mail and hand it to him as I hand it to a Vanderbilt or\nto a Jay Gould. That is my doctrine. The law of 1851 did away with your\nproductiveness nonsense, and when the mails were first put upon\nrailways in the year 1838, the law made a limit, not on account of\nproductiveness, but a limit of cost, and said the mail should not cost\nto exceed three hundred dollars a mile. Let me correct myself. In 1838 a\nlaw was passed that the mails might be carried by railroad provided they\ndid not cost in excess of twenty-five per cent, over the cost of mail\ncoaches. In 1839 that law was repealed, and the law then provided that\nthe pay on railways should be limited to three hundred dollars a mile.\nSo you see how much productiveness has to do with this business. In\n1861 Congress provided for an overland mail. Did they look out for\nproductiveness? The overland mail in 1861 was a little golden thread\nby which the Pacific and the Atlantic could be united through the great\nwar. Just a mail, carrying now and then a letter in 1861, and they were\nallowed, I think, twenty or thirty days to cross. Was productiveness\nthought of? Congress provided that they might pay for that service eight\nhundred thousand dollars a year. The mail did not exceed a thousand\npounds. Including everything. Some letters that were carried from this\nside to the other cost the Government three hundred dollars apiece. What\nwas the object? It was simply that the hearts of the Atlantic and the\nPacific might feel each other's throb through the great war. That is\nall. Suppose some poor misguided attorney had stood up at that time and\ncommenced talking about productiveness. In the presence of these great\nnational objects the cost fades, sinks. It is absolutely lost. Wherever\nour flag flies I want to see the mail under it. After awhile we\nestablished what is known as the free-delivery system. That was first\nestablished on the idea of productiveness. Whenever you start a new\nidea, as a rule, you have to appeal to all the meanness that is in\nconservatism. Before you can induce conservatives to do a decent action\nyou have to prove to them that it will pay at least ten per cent. So\nthey started that way. They said, \"We will only have this free delivery\nsystem where it pays.\" We went on and found the system desirable, and\nthat many people wanted it, and that the revenues of the Post-Office\nDepartment were so great that we could afford it, and we commenced\nhaving it where it did not pay. Right here in the city of Washington,\nright here in the capital of the great Republic, we have the free\ndelivery system. Is it productive? Last year we lost twenty-one thousand\ndollars distributing letters to the attorneys for the prosecution\nand others. And yet now this District has the impudence to talk about\nproductiveness. If anybody wants to find that fact it can be found on\npages 42 and 45 of the Postmaster-General's report. Productiveness! We\nhave now a railway service in the United States. I want to know if that\nis calculated upon the basis of productiveness. A car starts from the\ncity of New York, and runs twelve hours ahead of the ordinary time\nto the city of Chicago for the simple purpose of carrying the mail,\nstopping only where the engine needs water, only when the monster whose\nbones are steel and whose breath is flame, is tired. Do you suppose that\npays? You could scarcely put letters enough into the cars at three cents\napiece to pay for the trip. At last we regard this whole country as a\nunit for this business. We say the American people are to be supplied.\nWe do not care whether they live in New York or in Durango; we do not\ncare whether they are among the steeples of the East or the crags of the\nWest; we do not care whether they live in the villages of New England or\nwhether they are staked out on the plains of New Mexico. For the purpose\nof the distribution of intelligence this great country is one. Do you\nsee what a big idea that is? When it gets into the heads of some people\nyou have no idea how uncomfortable they feel. I have as much interest in\nthis country as anybody, just exactly, and I am willing to subscribe\nmy share to have this mail carried so that the man on the very western\nextreme, on the hem of the national garment, may have just as much as\nthe man who lives here in the shadow of the Capitol. You see whenever\na man gets to the height where he does not want anything that he is not\nwilling to give somebody else, then he first begins to appreciate what a\ngentleman is and what an American should be. Productiveness! I say that\nall the State and Territorial lines have been brushed aside. We do not\ncarry the mail in a State because it pays. We carry it because there are\npeople there; because there are American citizens there; not because it\npays. The post-office is not a miser; it is a national benefactor.\nThere are only seventeen States in this Union where the income of the\nPost-Office Department is equal to the outlay; only seventeen States in\nthis Union. There are twenty-one States in which the mail is carried\nat a loss. There are ten Territories in which we receive substantially\nnothing in return for carrying the mail, and there is one District,\nthe District of Columbia. I do not know how many miles square this\nmagnificent territory is; I guess about six. Thirty-six square miles.\nHow much is the loss in this District per annum? About one thousand\nfive hundred dollars a square mile. The annual loss right here in this\nDistrict is fifty-eight thousand dollars, and yet the citizens of\nthis town are rascally enough to receive the mail, according to the\nprosecution. Why is it not stopped? Why is not the Postmaster-General\nindicted for a conspiracy with some one? This little territory, six\nmiles square has a loss of fifty-eight thousand dollars.\n\nIf there was a corresponding loss in Kansas, Nebraska, California,\nDakota, and Idaho, it would take more than the national debt to run the\nmail every year. And yet here in thirty-six square miles comes the wail\nof non-productiveness. It is almost a joke. We are carrying the mail in\nKansas at a loss of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year, and\nyet Kansas has a hundred million bushels of wheat for sale. Good! I\nam willing to send letters to such people. It is a vast and thriving\ncountry. It contains men who have laid the foundation of future empires.\nI want people big enough and broad enough and wide enough to understand\nthat the valley of the Mississippi will support five hundred millions of\npeople. Let us get some ideas, gentlemen. Let us get some sense. There\nis nothing like it. We pay five hundred thousand dollars a year for the\nprivilege of carrying the mail in Nebraska. Do you know I am willing to\npay my share. Any man who will go out to Nebraska and just let the wind\nblow on him deserves to have plenty of mail. You do not know here what\nwind is. You have never felt anything but a zephyr. You have never felt\nanything but an atmospheric caress. Go and try Nebraska. The wind there\nwill blow a hole out of the ground. Go out there and try one blizzard,\na fellow that robs the north pole and comes down on you, and you will\nbe willing to carry the mail to any man that will stay there and plow a\nhundred and sixty acres of land. When I see a post-office clerk sitting\nin a good warm room and making a fuss about a chap in Nebraska for not\ncarrying the mail against a blizzard, I have my sentiments. I know what\nI think of the man. In the Territory of Utah we pay two hundred and\nthirty thousand dollars a year for the privilege of carrying the mails,\nand the males in that country are mostly polygamists. I want you to get\nan idea of this country. In the State of California, that State of\ngold, that State of wheat, the State that has added more to the\nmetallic wealth of this nation than all others combined, an empire\nof magnificence, we pay five hundred thousand dollars a year for the\nprivilege of distributing the mail. I am glad of it. I want the pioneer\nfostered. I want the pioneer to feel the throb of national generosity.\nI want him to feel that this is his country. You see the post-office is\nabout the only blessing he has. Every other visitor that comes from the\nGeneral Government wants taxes. The Post-Office Department is the only\nevidence we possess of national beneficence. It is the only thing that\ncomes from the General Government that has not a warrant, that does not\nintend to arrest us. In Texas, which is an empire of two hundred and\nseventy-three thousand square miles, a territory greater than the French\nempire, which at one time conquered Europe, we pay four hundred and\nfifty-nine thousand dollars for the privilege of distributing the\nmail. I am glad of it. It will not be long before that State will have\nmillions of people and give us back millions of dollars each year, and\nwith that surplus we will carry the mail to other Territories. A man who\nhas not pretty big ideas has no business in this country; not a bit.\nWe pay one hundred and eighty-nine thousand dollars for the sake\nof carrying letters and papers around Arkansas; one hundred and\neighty-three thousand dollars for the privilege of wandering up and down\nAlabama; one hundred and seven thousand dollars in Missouri; two hundred\nand forty thousand dollars in Ohio; two hundred and eight thousand\ndollars in Georgia; three hundred and twelve thousand dollars in old\nVirginia. When I first went to Illinois the Government had to pay for\nthe privilege of carrying the mail in that State. Now Illinois turns\naround and hands six hundred and sixty thousand dollars of profit to\nthe United States each year. She says, \"You carry the mail to the other\nfellows that cannot afford it just the same as you carried it for us.\nYou rocked our cradle, and we will pay for rocking somebody else's\ncradle.\" That is sense. In other words, in seventeen States we have a\nprofit of seven million dollars. In twenty-one States, ten Territories,\nand the District of Columbia we have a loss of five million dollars.\nWhen we regard the country as a unit, then we make money out of the\nwhole business. That is good. We have in the United States about a\nhundred and ten thousand miles of railroad now, and we pay about two\nhundred dollars a mile for carrying the mail on those railroads. We have\ntwo hundred and twenty-seven thousand miles of star routes, and we pay\non them between twenty and thirty dollars a mile. I want you to\nthink about it. In looking over the Post-master-General's report I\naccidentally came across this fact. You know, gentlemen, the present\nperiod is a paroxysmal period of reform. We are having what is known\nas a virtuous spasm. We have that every little while. It is a kind\nof fiscal mumps or whooping-cough. I find by this report that a mail\naveraging twenty pounds carried in a baggage-car from Connellsville to\nUniontown, Pennsylvania, is paid for at the rate of forty-two dollars\nand seventy-two cents a mile. Under General Brady the star routes cost\nbetween twenty and thirty dollars a mile.\n\nNow, gentlemen, I have told you our connection with the star-route\nbusiness. I have told it all to you freely, frankly, and fully. Some\ncharges have been made against us, and I want to speak to you about\nthem. You understand that it often takes quite awhile to explain a\ncharge that is made in only a few words. One man can say another did so\nand so. It is only a lie, and yet it may take pages for the accused man\nto make his explanation. The worst lie in the world is a lie which is\npartly true. You understand that. When you explain a lie that has a\nlittle circumstance going along with it, certifying to it, and attesting\nto its truth, it takes you a great deal longer to explain it than it did\nto tell it. The first great charge is that for us—and I limit myself to\nmy clients—orders were antedated. That is one great charge. Let me tell\nyou just how that was. Mr. Bliss calls attention to the fact that Mr.\nBrady made orders relating back, and in one case he alleged that the\norder was made, for the benefit of my clients, to take effect six weeks\nprior to its being issued. I want to explain that. A railroad was being\nconstructed along the line of one of these routes. It may be well enough\nfor me to say that it was the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad. The\npoints from which the mail was carried had to be changed as the road\nprogressed. As it grew Mr. Brady increased the service on the route to\nseven times a week. He increased it from the end of the railroad, and\nhe made it seven times a week because the mail on the railroad was seven\ntimes a week. We were to carry the mail from the end of the railroad,\nwherever that end might be. He increased the service on this route from\nthe end of the railroad to the other terminal point; that is, he made it\na daily mail so as to connect with the daily trains on the railroad. At\nthe time the seven trips were to be put on, distance tables were sent\nout to postmasters at the terminal points to get the distances. Let me\ntell you what a distance table is. The names of the post-offices are on\na circular, and the Post-Office Department sends that circular to the\npostmasters along the route and they are asked to return it with the\ndistance from each station to every other marked upon it. Now, until\nthat table is returned it is impossible for the Second Assistant\nPostmaster-General to tell how far they carry the mail. This railroad\nwas progressing every month, and as the railroad advanced the distance\nfrom the end of the railroad to the other terminal point decreased. Now,\nthe Postmaster-General or the Second Assistant cannot fix that pay until\nhe has a return of the distance table. But before he has that return he\ncan order the contractor to carry the mail, and after the distance table\nis returned then he can make up the formal order and have that order\nentered upon the records of the department. That is all he ever did. I\nwant you to understand that perfectly. It might be four weeks after the\ncontractor was ordered to carry the mail from the termination of the\nrailroad, or it might be five or six weeks before the distance tables\nwere returned and the distance calculated. But do you not see it made\nno difference? There was first an order either by telegraph or a short\norder, and after the distance tables were returned then the distance\nwas calculated, the amount of money calculated, and the regular order\nwritten up and made of record, and a warrant drawn for payment. That is\nall there is to it. And yet this is what Mr. Bliss calls defrauding\nthe Government. We are charged on that kind of evidence with having\ndefrauded the United States. We will show you that no order of that\nkind was made except when the distance was unknown; and that when the\ndistance was ascertained, the formal order was made, another order\nhaving been made before that time. Let me say right here that orders of\na similar nature have been made in the Post-Office Department since its\nestablishment. Since the construction of railways there has not a month\npassed in that department—certainly not a year—when such orders\nhave not been made. And yet for the first time in the history of the\nGovernment it is brought forward against us as an evidence of fraud. We\nwill show that the order was made exactly as I have stated.\n\nThe next badge of fraud that is charged is that after a route had been\nawarded to us it was increased or expedited, or both, before the stock\nwas put on. Well, I will tell you just how that is, because you want to\nknow. This case, apparently complicated, is infinitely simple when it is\nunderstood. There are in the United States, I believe, some ten thousand\nof these star routes. They are all or nearly all in some way connected.\nOne depends upon another. It is a web woven over the entire West, and\nhow you run a mail here depends upon how one is run there, and the\neffort is to have all these mails connect in a certain harmony so\nthat time will not be lost, and so that each letter will get to its\ndestination in the shortest possible time, and it requires not only a\ngreat deal of experience, but it requires a great deal of ingenuity.\nIt requires a great deal of study and strict attention for a man so to\narrange the routes and the time in the United States that the letters\ncan be gotten to their destination in the shortest possible time. And\nyet that is the object. You can see that. Now, you may be looking at the\nroute from A to B, and say that there is no sense in having it in that\ntime; but if you will look at the time of other routes, if you see with\nwhat routes that connects you will say that it is sensible. Now, you go\non to another route, and, gentlemen, you see that every solitary route\nis touched, is compromised, is affected by every other route. That is\nwhat I want you to understand.\n\nNow, then, Mr. Bliss says that it was a badge of fraud to increase the\ntime and the service on a route before the stock was put on. Now let\nme show you. Here you have your scheme. Here is the route, we will say,\nfrom A to E. You let that for a weekly route, once a week. How fast?\nA hundred hours. When you get the other routes and look at this\nbusiness you see that that crosses several places where the mail is\nlost. That is where a day is lost, and you see, if instead of that being\na hundred hours it were seventy-five hours the mail at many stations\nwould save one day or two days. Now, then, the law vests in you the\npower before a solitary horse or carriage goes upon that route to say\nto the man to whom the contract was awarded, \"You must carry that in\nseventy-five hours instead of one hundred hours, and you must carry it\nfour times a week instead of once a week.\" If you take that power from\nthe Postmaster-General and from the Second Assistant those offices\nbecome useless. It is impossible for any human intellect to take into\nconsideration all the facts growing out of this service.\n\nThere is another thing, gentlemen, which you must remember, and that\nis that these advertisements for this service are not made the day the\nservice is wanted. These advertisements are put out six months before\nthere is to be any such service.\n\nIt is sometimes a year before that service is wanted, and if you know\nanything about the West you know that in one year the whole thing may\nchange. That where there was not a city there may be a city, and where\nthere was a city nothing but desolation. Now, then, the law very wisely\nhas vested the power in the Second Assistant and the Postmaster-General\nto rectify all the mistakes made either by themselves or by time, and\nto call for faster time or for slower, that is, for less frequent trips.\nNow, then, you see that that is no badge of fraud, do you not? If,\nbefore you put a man or a horse on that route, the Government finds it\nwants twice as many trips there is no fraud in saying so, and if they\nfind they want to go in fifty hours instead of a hundred hours there\nwould be fraud in not saying so. That has been the practice since this\nwas a Government.\n\nNow, what is the next? The next great charge against us, gentlemen, is\nthat when they agreed to carry a greater number of trips, or any swifter\ntime for money, Mr. Brady did not make us give an additional bond, and\nMr. Bliss talked about that I should think about a day. Nearly all the\ntime I heard him he was on that subject. \"Why did they not when they\nwere to carry additional trips give a new bond?\" Well, I will tell\nyou why: Because there is no law for it. There never was a law for\nit—never. And Mr. Brady had no right to demand a bond unless the\nstatute provided for it. When I give a bond to carry the mail once a\nweek, and the Government finds that it wants it carried three times\na week, the Government cannot make me give an additional bond. Why?\nBecause the statute does not provide for it, and Mr. Brady had not the\npower to enact new laws. That is all. Why, there never was such a bond\ngiven, and any bond that is given under duress, by compulsion, not\nhaving the foundation of a statute, is absolutely null and void.\nEverybody knows it that knows anything. And yet the gentleman comes\nbefore you and says it is a sign of fraud that we did not give an\nadditional bond. There never was such a bond given in the history of\nthis Government—never; and in all probability never will be unless\nthese gentlemen get into Congress. You know the law prescribes every\nbond that the contractor must give, and it is bad enough without ever\nbeing increased during the contract term.\n\nSo much now for that frightful badge of fraud. I want to make this\nstatement so you will understand it. They have the unfairness, they have\nthe lack of candor to tell you that it is one of the evidences that we\nare scoundrels, that we failed to give an additional bond, and when\nthey made that statement they knew that by law we could not give an\nadditional bond, and they knew that if we had given an additional bond\nit would not have been worth the paper upon which it was written. And\nyet they lack candor to that degree that they come into this court\nand tell you that that is one of the evidences that we have conspired\nagainst the United States. It won't do.\n\nWhat is the next badge of fraud? And I want to tell you this is a case\nof badges, and patches, and ravelings, and remnants, and rags. It is a\nkind of a mental garret, full of odd boots, and strange cats, thrown at\nus, and altogether it is called a case of conspiracy. Another badge of\nfraud is that whenever we carried the mail one trip a week, and it was\nincreased to two trips a week, Brady was such a villain that he gave us\ndouble pay; and Mr. Bliss informed the jury that they knew just as well\nas he did that it did not cost twice as much to give two trips a week as\nit did to give one. Well, who said it did? And yet they say that is an\nevidence of fraud. Well, let us see. There is nothing like finding the\nevidence.\n\nNow, when we come to this case we will introduce a bond that we gave\nat that time, and when the jury read that bond they will find this, or\nsubstantially this:\n\nIt is hereby agreed by the said contractor and his sureties that the\nPostmaster-General may discontinue or extend this contract, change the\nschedule, alter, increase, or extend the service, he allowing not to\nexceed a pro rata increase of compensation for any additional service\nthereby required, or for increased speed if the employment of additional\nstock or carriers is rendered necessary, and in case of decrease,\ncurtailment, or discontinuance, as a full indemnity to said contractor,\none month's extra pay on the account of service dispensed with, and not\nto exceed a pro rata compensation for the service retained: Provided,\nhowever, That in case of increased expedition the contractor may, upon\ntimely notice, relinquish his contract.\n\nNow, it is in that provided that if they call on him for double service\nhe is entitled to double pay. That is the law, and it has been the\npractice, gentlemen, since we have had a Post-Office Department. And\nwhy? Let me show you. Here is a man who carries a mail from A to Y.\nThere are supposed to be some commercial transactions between those two\nplaces. It is supposed that now and then a human being goes from one of\nthose places to the other, and the man who carries the mail, as a rule\ncarries passengers and does the local business. Now, do you suppose that\nhe would agree with the Government that he would carry the mail once a\nweek for a thousand dollars a year, and that they might hire another man\nto carry it once a week for a thousand dollars a year, and maybe\nthat other man take all his passengers and all his business. The\nunderstanding is that when I bid a thousand dollars a year for once a\nweek, if you put it to three times a week I am to have three thousand\ndollars; four times a week, four thousand dollars; seven times a week,\nseven thousand dollars, and that has been the unbroken practice of this\nGovernment from the establishment of the Post-Office Department until\nto-day. You can see the absolute propriety of it, and you can see that\nany man would be almost crazy to take a contract on any other terms, and\nthat contract is this: \"I will carry for you so much a trip, and if you\nwant more trips you can have them at the same price as that fixed.\" That\nis fair. That is what we did.\n\nSo much for that badge of fraud. What is the next one? It is that the\npay was increased twice as much by the increase, and, as I said, that is\nthe law.\n\nNow let us see what is the next great badge of fraud. That we received\nthe pay when the mail was not carried. I deny it, and we will show in\nthis case, gentlemen, that we never received pay except when the mail\nwas carried. And how do I know? Because General Brady established a\nsystem of way-bills, so that a way-bill would accompany every pouch in\nwhich letters were, and they would put on that way-bill the time that it\ngot to the post-office, and when that way-bill got to the terminal point\nit was sent here to Washington and filed away, and at the end of every\nquarter a report was made, and if a mail was behind at any post-office\nyou would find it on that way-bill, and if they had not made the trip\nthen they were fined. That way-bill system was inaugurated by General\nBrady, and under that way-bill system we carried the mail, and we could\nnot get pay unless we had carried the mail. I call them way-bills. They\nare mail-bills that go with the pouch and give a history of each mail\nthat is carried. That is all.\n\nNow another great badge of fraud. The first was that he was to impose no\nfines when the mail was not carried. The next was that he was to impose\nfines and then take the fines off for half—fifty per cent. Now, would\nnot that be an intelligent contract? I carry the mails. You are the\nSecond Assistant Postmaster-General. I agree with you that if you fine\nme and then will take the fine off I will give you half of it. About\nhow long would it take you to break me up? And yet that is honestly and\nsolemnly put forward here as a fact in the case. They tell a story of\na man who was bitten by a dog. Another man said to him, \"I'll tell you\nwhat to do. You just sop some bread in that blood and give it to the\ndog; it will cure you.\" \"Oh, my God!\" says he, \"if the other dogs hear\nof it they will eat me up.\" And here it is, without a smile, urged\nbefore this jury that we made a bargain that a fellow might fine us\nfor the halves. Well, there may be twelve men in this world who believe\nthat. They are unfortunate.\n\nThe next charge is that a subcontract was made for less than the\noriginal contract. Well, that is where most of the money in this world\nis made. Thousands and millions of men have made fortunes by buying corn\nat sixty cents a bushel to be delivered next February, and selling\nthe same corn for seventy cents. There is where fortunes live. The\ndifference between a contract and a subcontract is the territory of\nprofit in which every American loves to settle. You make a contract with\nthe Government to furnish, say, a thousand horses of a certain kind for\none hundred and fifty dollars apiece. You go and make a subcontract\nwith some one to furnish you those same horses for one hundred and\ntwenty-five dollars apiece. Is that a fraud? You have taken upon\nyourself the responsibility and if your subcontractor fails you must\nmake it good. There is no harm in that.\n\nSuppose I agree with you to-morrow that if you will furnish me one\nthousand bushels of wheat on the first day of January, I will give\nyou one thousand five hundred dollars, and I find out that you made a\nbargain with another fellow to do it for a thousand dollars. If I am an\nhonest man I suppose I will jump the contract, won't I? Not much. If I\nam an honest man I will say, \"Well, you made five hundred dollars; I am\nglad of it; good for you.\" But the idea of the prosecution is that the\nmoment Brady saw a subcontract for less than the original contract\nhe should have had a moral spasm, and said, \"I won't carry out the\ncontract; I will swindle you, I will rob you, and I will do it in the\nname of virtue.\" And that is the meanest way a man ever did rob—in\nthe name of virtue, reform. So much for that. But if you ever make a\ncontract with this Government and can make a subcontract at the same\nprice you do it as quick as you can.\n\nThe next is, that whenever he discontinued a route or any part of a\nroute, rather, he gave us a month's extra pay; you heard that, did you\nnot? He was on that subject about a half a day. How did he come to do\nthat? I will tell you. There is nothing like looking:\n\nAnd in case of decrease, curtailment, or discontinuance of service, as a\nfull indemnity to said contractor one month's extra pay on the amount of\nservice dispensed with.\n\nThat is first the law, secondly the contract, and thirdly it was made\nin the interest of the United States. And why? Suppose the United States\nmade a contract with a man to carry a mail from New York to Liverpool,\nand in consequence of that contract the man bought steamships to perform\nthe service, and then the United States made up its mind not to carry\nthe mail. That man might get damages to the amount of hundreds and\nthousands of dollars. Therefore the United States endeavored to protect\nitself and say the limit of damage shall be one month's pay, and that\nhas been the law for years, and that law has been passed upon by the\nSupreme Court of the United States. It was passed upon in the case of\nGarfielde against the United States, where he claimed greater damages\nbecause he had all the steamships to carry the mail from San Francisco\nto Portland, and the Supreme Court said it made no difference what\nhis expense had been. He was bound by the letter of the law and the\ncontract, and could have only one month's extra pay as his entire\ndamage.\n\nNow, these gentlemen bring forward a law to protect the United States\nGovernment, and they bring that forward as an evidence of conspiracy,\nas evidence of a fraud. Nothing could be more unfair, nothing on earth\ncould show a greater want of character. Now, let us see what else.\n\nThe next great charge is false affidavits. They tell you that we made\nlots of them; that we just had them for sale. False affidavits! And that\nMr. John W. Dorsey made two false affidavits in two cases. The evidence\nwill show that he did not. The evidence will show that he made only one\nin each case, when we come to it. But I want to call your attention to\nthis fact, that in one case one affidavit was made where it said the\nnumber of men and horses then necessary was eight, that on the expedited\nschedule it would be twenty-four. Three times eight are twenty-four. The\nsecond affidavit said the number of men and horses then was fifteen, and\nthe number on expedition and increase would be forty-five. Three times\nfifteen are forty-five. So that the amount taken from the Government\nwould be exactly the same on both affidavits. You understand that. For\ninstance, if it took five horses and men to do the then business, and\nwould require fifteen to do the expedited and increased business, then\nyou would be entitled to three times the amount of pay. So in this case\none affidavit said it took eight and would take twenty-four, the other\naffidavit said it took fifteen and would take forty-five. Three times\neight are twenty-four. Three times fifteen are forty-five. So that the\namount of money taken from the Government would be exactly the same\nunder each affidavit. Now, that is all there is of that.\n\nIn the next case, where he made two affidavits, I find that by the\nsecond affidavit it took, I think, thirteen thousand dollars less\nfrom the Government, and yet they call the second affidavit a piece\nof perjury. And here is one thing that I want to impress upon all your\nminds. Where you not only carry the mail but carry passengers, it is\nan exceedingly difficult problem to say just how many horses and men it\nrequires to carry the mail, and then how many men and horses it\nrequires to carry the passengers. It is hard to make the divide you\nunderstand—very hard. You can tell, for instance, the cost of mounting\na railroad for a hundred miles, but it is very difficult to tell the\ncost of the bridges or what the spikes cost or what the deep cuts cost.\nYou can take the whole together and say it cost so much a year. So\nin this case we can say it requires so many men and horses doing the\nbusiness that we are doing, but it is almost impossible for the brain\nto separate exactly the passengers, the package business, from simply\ncarrying the mail. As I said before, men will differ in opinion. Some\nmen will say it will take ten horses, others twenty, others twenty-five,\nand then the next question arises, and I want to call particular\nattention to that question, and that is, whether the law means only the\nhorses absolutely carrying the mail; whether the law means by carriers\nonly the men who ride the horses or drive the wagons. Now, I will tell\nyou what I mean. I undertake to carry the mail, we will say from Omaha\nto San Francisco. How many men will it take? Now, I will count all the\nmen who are driving the stages, all the men who are gathering forage,\nall the men who are attending to that business in any way, and if on\nthe way I have blacksmiths' shops where my horses are shod I will count\nthose men. If I have men engaged in drawing wood a hundred miles, I\nwill count those men. In other words, I will count all the men I pay, no\nmatter whether they are keeping books in New York or carrying the mail\nacross the desert. I will count all the men I pay; so will you. What\nhorses will you count? All the horses engaged in the business; those\nthat are drawing corn for the others, as well as the rest, will you not?\nThere is an old fable that a trumpeter was captured in the war and he\nsaid to his captor, \"I am not a soldier, I never shot anybody.\" \"Ah,\"\nthey said, \"but you incited others to shoot, and you are as much a\nsoldier as anybody; we want you.\"\n\nNow, I say that we are entitled to count every man who carries the mail,\nand every man necessary to perform that service. So do you. Now, there\nwe divide. The Government says we shall count simply the men carrying\nthe mail, nobody else, and we shall count simply the horses in actual\nservice. That is nonsense. For instance, you have got to have thirty\nhorses. They are going all the time. Do you depend on just that thirty?\nNo, sir. If one gets lame you cannot carry the mail. You have got to\nhave twenty or thirty horses in your corral, in the stables, so that\nif one of the others gives out you will have enough. That is one great\nquestion in this case, gentlemen. What I say to you now is that on every\none of these routes in which my clients are interested, or, I may say,\nin which anybody is interested, the evidence will be that the affidavits\nwere substantially correct. In many cases there was a far greater\ndifference between the men and horses then used and the men and horses\nthat were afterwards necessary.\n\nYou must take another thing into consideration. In a country where there\nare Indian depredations one man will not stay at a station by himself.\nHe wants somebody with him; he wants two or three with him, and the more\nfrightened he is the more men he will want. On that route from Bismarck\nto Tongue River, as to which it was sworn it would take a hundred and\nfifty men, the statement was made at a time when the men would not stay\nseparately; that they wanted five or six together at one station; that\nthey wanted men out on guard and watch. You will find before we get\nthrough, gentlemen, that the affidavits do not overstate the number. You\nwill find in addition that these petitions were signed by the best\nmen; that that service was asked for by the best men, not simply in\nthe Territories, but by some of the best men in the United States; by\nmembers of Congress, by Senators, by generals, by great and splendid\nmen, men of national reputation. So when we come to that we will show to\nyou that the affidavits made were substantially true. There is another\ncharge that has been made, and that is that the affidavits in Mr. Peck's\nname were not made by him; that he never signed these affidavits.\n\nYet, gentlemen, we will prove to you as the Government once proved\nby Mr. Taylor, a notary public in New Mexico, that Mr. Peck appeared\npersonally before him; that he was personally acquainted with Mr. Peck,\nand that he signed and swore to those affidavits in his presence. That\nwe will substantiate in this trial as the Government substantiated it\nin the other. These gentlemen, are among the charges that have been made\nagainst us. I say to you to-day they will not be able to show that we\never put upon the files of the Post-Office Department a solitary letter,\na solitary petition, a solitary communication that was not genuine and\ntrue. Not one. They cannot do it. They never will do it. You will\nbe astonished when you hear these petitions to find the Government\nadmitting that they are true. If they do not read them we will read\nthem. That is all.\n\nNow, I have stated to you a few of the charges made against my clients\nup to this point. I want to keep it in your mind. I want each man on\nthis jury to understand exactly what I say. Let us go over this ground\na little. I want to be sure you remember it. In the first place, S. W.\nDorsey was not interested in these routes. All the bids were made by\nJohn W. Dorsey, John M. Peck, John R. Miner, and a man by the name\nof Boone. All the information was gathered by Mr. Boone by sending\ncirculars to every postmaster on the routes. Upon that information John\nW. Dorsey, John M. Peck, and John R. Miner made their calculations and\nmade their bids, numbering in all about twelve hundred. Of that number\nthey had awarded to them a hundred and thirty-four contracts. Recollect\nthat. After those contracts were awarded to them they were without the\nmoney to put the stock on all the routes, because more contracts were\nawarded than they expected. Thereupon John R. Miner borrowed some money\nfrom Stephen W. Dorsey and kept up that borrowing until the amount\nreached some sixteen or eighteen thousand dollars. Don't forget it.\nAfter it got to that point Mr. Dorsey started for New Mexico. At Saint\nLouis he met John R. Miner, then coming from Montana, and John R. Miner\nsaid to him, \"We have got to have some more money of you;\" and Dorsey\nreplied, \"I have no more money to give you.\" Miner then said, \"You give\nyour note or indorse mine for nine or ten thousand dollars.\" Dorsey\nreplied, \"If you will give me post-office orders and drafts, not only to\nsecure the note I am about to indorse or make for you, but also to the\namount of the money I have advanced for you, I will give the note.\" That\nwas agreed upon. Thereupon he gave the note. It was discounted in the\nGerman-American National Bank, and Mr. Miner deposited with the note the\norders on the Post-Office Department, not only to secure the note, but\nthe sixteen thousand dollars that Dorsey had before that time advanced.\nDorsey went on to New Mexico, and in May or July of that year another\nlaw was passed, allowing a subcontractor to put his subcontract on file.\nAfter he had advanced that money and indorsed or signed the note, they\nmade the contract with Mr. Vaile, turning these routes over to him and\ngiving him subcontracts on all these routes. When Stephen W. Dorsey came\nback from New Mexico in December of that year he found that the note\nat the German-American National Bank had been protested, and that his\ncollateral security was at that time worthless, because the subcontracts\nhad been filed and these subcontracts cut out the post-office orders or\ndrafts. Thereupon he wanted a settlement. Matters drifted along until\nApril, 1879, and a settlement was made. I have told you that from the\ntime the routes were given to Mr. Vaile until that time nobody had the\nslightest thing to do with them except Mr. Vaile; that in April,\n1879, the division was made; that Mr. Vaile paid the note at the\nGerman-American National Bank; that the division was made, as I told\nyou, by Mr. Vaile drawing one route, Mr. Dorsey one, and Mr. Miner one,\nand keeping that up until they were all drawn. I forgot to tell you\nbefore that Mr. S. W. Dorsey had sixteen thousand dollars, to which, if\nyou add the interest, it would be about eighteen thousand dollars;\nthat John W. Dorsey had ten thousand dollars and John M. Peck had ten\nthousand dollars, and when that division was made Stephen W. Dorsey\nagreed to pay John W. Dorsey ten thousand dollars, and to pay John M.\nPeck ten thousand dollars for his interest. Gentlemen, he did pay John\nW. Dorsey ten thousand dollars, and he did pay the same amount to Peck,\nand from that day to this John W. Dorsey has never had the interest of\none solitary cent in any one of these routes. He was simply paid back\nthe money that he expended. Not another cent. John M. Peck never made by\nthis business one solitary dollar. He simply received back the money he\nhad expended. After he had paid back that money to both of these men,\nStephen W. Dorsey took these routes with a debt to him of between\nsixteen and eighteen thousand dollars. Now, as to Mr. Rerdell. They say\nhe was the private secretary of Stephen W. Dorsey. He never was; not for\na moment, not for a single moment He attended to some of this business.\nI have no doubt that the Government imagine they can debauch somebody\nin order to get information. I give them notice now—GO on. There is no\nliving man whose testimony we fear. There is no living lawyer who has\nthe genius to make perjury do us harm. I want you to understand it.\nAnd I want them to understand that I know precisely what they are\nendeavoring to do. There is only one way for them to surprise me, and\nthat is for them to do a kind thing.\n\nNow, gentlemen, at that time—I want you to remember it; I do not\nwant you to forget it—when these routes came to Mr. Dorsey, he, not\nunderstanding the business, turned it over to Mr. James W. Bosler.\nMr. Bosler, as I told you before, is a man of wealth. But, say these\ngentlemen, \"While these routes were in your possession, and while\nStephen W. Dorsey had an interest in them he asked men to sign petitions\nin favor of an increase of trips and decrease of time.\" What if he did?\nSuppose you have a house out here somewhere; you can petition to have a\nstreet opened, even if you have the contract for paving the street.\nYou have a right to petition to have a schoolhouse located in your\nneighborhood even if you have children. There is no harm about that. You\ncertainly can petition to have cows prevented from running at large even\nif there is no fence around your yard. I think you could do so without\nbeing indicted for conspiracy. I think a man might start a subscription\nfor a church, even if he owned a brick-yard and expected to sell bricks\nto build it. Now, suppose I had a contract to carry the mail through the\nState of California from one end to the other once a week, is there\nany harm in my asking the people of that country to petition to have\nit carried twice a week? Do you not remember what I told you? All the\nmembers of Congress out there, when they go home want to say to the\npeople when they meet at the convention with all the delegates on hand.\n\"Why, gentlemen, you did not used to get the New York Herald or New York\nTimes, or The Sun, until it was two weeks old, and now it is only a\nweek old. Where you only had one mail I have given you three. I have got\nfifty thousand dollars to improve your harbor, and one hundred thousand\ndollars for a new custom-house. Look at me, gentlemen, I am a candidate\nfor re-election.\" That is natural. This Court will instruct you that any\nman who is carrying a mail anywhere in the United States has the right\nto use his influence in getting up petitions for the increase of that\nservice or the expedition of that time. They say Dorsey did this. What\nof it? They say Dorsey tried to manufacture public opinion. That is what\nthese gentlemen of the prosecution have been doing for eighteen months,\nand now they object to the manufacture of public opinion. Public opinion\nis their stock in trade.\n\nLeaving that charge, every man who has a contract for carrying the mail\nhas the right to call the attention of every editor in that country to\nthe fact that they need more mail service. He has the right to send his\nagents there and if the people want to petition for more service, and\nif Congress is willing to give them more service, no human being has a\nright to complain in this manner and in a criminal court. If any offence\nhas been committed it is of a political nature. If a member of Congress\ngets too much service his people can keep him at home. If he does too\nmuch for his locality they need not elect him the next time. It is\na political offence for which there is a political punishment and a\npolitical remedy. So much for the right of petition. I am perfectly\nwilling to tell all he did in regard to the increase of service and the\nexpedition.\n\nWhile I am on that point I want you to distinctly understand what\nincrease is and what expedition is. Increase of service means more of\nthe same kind. Suppose I am to carry the mail from one place to another.\nWe will call it from Si-Wash to Oo-Ray. If I am to carry that mail once\na week for five hundred dollars and they want it twice a week, I\nhave one thousand dollars, but do not carry it any faster. That is an\nincrease. Suppose I am carrying it in say two hundred hours and they\nwant it carried in half that time. That is what they call expedition.\nNow, the question is as to the difference in cost of carrying the mail\nat six miles an hour, or at two and a half, or two, or one and a half.\nIf I carry it slowly, I can go at a reasonable rate in the day and can\nlie by at night. I want you to understand distinctly the difference\nbetween increase of service, which is more of the same kind, and\nexpedition, which means the same kind at a faster rate. Now, I can carry\nthe mail twenty miles and back in a day and do that a great deal\neasier than if I were to make the distance in four or five hours. The\ndifference is just about the same with a locomotive as with a horse. If\na train runs twenty miles an hour and you want to increase its speed to\nthirty, it will cost altogether more than twice as much as it does to\nrun it at twenty. If you want to increase it still further to forty or\nsixty, it will cost at sixty more than three times as much as at twenty.\nThe cost increases in an increased proportion. I want you to understand\nthat. Now, we are charged with having done some frightful things on\nseveral of these routes, and for three days and a half your ears were\nfilled with charges of the rascality we have perpetrated. We had some\nten or eleven routes, and we are charged with having defrauded the\nGovernment on those particular routes. Let us see what my clients did.\nDo not understand me as saying that because my clients have done nothing\nthe other defendants have. I do not take that position. I take the\nposition that according to the evidence in this case there is nothing\nagainst any of these defendants. Leave out passion, prejudice,\nfalsehood, and hatred and there is absolutely nothing left. If you will\ntake from Mr. Bliss's speech all the mistakes he made in law and fact,\nthere will be nothing left to answer; not a word. But I think it due to\nmy client, gentlemen, my client who is not able to be in this court, my\nclient who sits at home wrapped in darkness, that I should answer every\nallegation touching every route in which he was interested. I think it\ndue to him. [Resuming]\n\nI will call your attention to a few of the routes, possibly to all, in\nwhich my clients were interested. It will take but a short time. I want\nyou to know whether or not these routes were important, whether it was\nproper to carry the mails as they were carried, whether it was proper\nthat they should be carried from once to seven times a week, and whether\nit was proper that the speed should be expedited. Now, you may think\nafter hearing the evidence that there were some routes that never should\nhave been established; but that does not establish a conspiracy. That\nsimply establishes the fact that Congress created routes where they were\nnot absolutely necessary. You may come to the conclusion that General\nBrady ordered more trips on some of these routes than he should have\nordered. That does not establish a conspiracy. The most that it could\nestablish would be extravagance, and extravagance is not a crime. If it\nwere, the penitentiaries of the day would not be large enough—or rather\nwould be large enough, and too large, to hold the honest men. You may\nsay after you have heard the evidence that the time was faster than it\nneed be; but you must take into consideration all the connecting routes,\nand even if you should so feel, it is for you to say whether that\nestablishes any conspiracy. All these things must be taken into\nconsideration.\n\nWe will take first the route from Garland to Parrott City. ***\n\nNow, I have gone over just a few of these charges. I have shown you that\nthey are false; that they are without the slightest shadow of foundation\nin fact. Now, gentlemen, after you hear all this evidence, it is for\nyou to determine. It is for you to say whether these men entered into a\nconspiracy to defraud this Government. It is for you to say whether our\ntestimony is to be believed, or whether you are to decide this case upon\nthe suspicions of the Government. It is for you to say whether you will\nbelieve the contracts and the witnesses, or whether you will take the\nprejudice of the public press; whether you will take the opinion of the\nAttorney-General; whether you will take the letter of some counselor at\nlaw, or whether you will be governed by the testimony in this case. It\nis for you to say, gentlemen, whether a man shall be found guilty on\ninference; whether a man shall be deprived of his liberty by prejudice.\nIt is for you to say whether reputation shall be destroyed by malice and\nby ignorance. It is for you to say whether a man who fought to sustain\nthis Government shall not have the protection of the laws. It is for you\n[indicating a juror] and it is for you [indicating another juror] and\nyou [indicating another juror] and you [indicating another juror] to\nsay whether a man who fought to take the chains off your body shall have\nchains put upon his by your prejudice and by your ignorance. It is for\nyou to say whether you will be guided by law, by evidence, by justice,\nand by reason, or whether you will be controlled by fear, by prejudice,\nand by official power. That, gentlemen, is all I wish to say in this\nopening.\n"
}