| Show F H DYERS STATEMENT the following statement is furnished for publication by ex united states marshal dyer the report of the grand jury of the third district court published on the che instant contains some criticisms on my conduct while united states marshal of utah which are unjust to me because they are not based upon facts and it is only fair to myself and my friends that I 1 should correct these errors it is I 1 am aware an ungracious thing to assail a document which emanates from a body of selected citizens sworn to an impartial discharge of official duty but as honest men are often misled and may with the best beat motives err to the pre prejudice j udice of others a correction of their mistakes is no imputation upon them and so without any wish to impugn the good faith of ahe he grand jury I 1 wish to defend myself while saying this I 1 do not conceal from myself nor wish to have the public understand that influences were not at work to do me personal wrong it is to those influences I 1 attribute what ever of injustice to myself is found in that report it was my misfortune while united states marshal to incur the displeasure of some prominent persons in this community and they continued since my retirement from office to pursue me I 1 do not noi core care to resort to personal vituperation for my defense I 1 shall dismiss that leaving my statement to such weight as the public may give to my assertion I 1 come to the matter which I 1 desire to correct I 1 THE POTATO MATTER when I 1 was appointed marshal I 1 found that the custom had wen been for the marshal to furnish the seed need and team and the prisoners to do the work necessary to raise a crop of potatoes potato and charge the government for the potatoes the market price in accordance with this practice which had prevailed with my predecessors and by the suggestion of my immediate predecessor mr ireland I 1 bought the necessary seed at a cost of about forty dollars furnished the teams and raised in 1886 about two hundred and fifty bushels of potatoes for them the government was charged at the cur rent rate the net amount received did not pay for the use of the team in 1887 1 I raised over one thousand and two hundred bushels of pita potatoes toes which were used and no charge whatever wa swade was made because while I 1 did not believe the we sale of them to the government was we I 1 improper roper I 1 knew that it might I 1 be 1 ob objected oil n acted to and I 1 desired to do no nothing ing that could be open to any creaso reasonable criticism and save for the first year of my I 1 never charged or received a single dollar for potatoes raised on the reservation and then was not recompensed for the actual cash cost a and use of team doing that work the report states tee thattie that the amount of potato vouchers was nt not known to them the remark could not apply to my accounts for my entire transaction in that respect was open to them por for my predecessors I 1 could not be expected to answer IT 11 THE MILK QUESTION I 1 furni bed milk not from one or two cows as stated in the report but never less than three and as many as seven head I 1 instructed the warden to charge the regular market price and if at any time that was exceeded it was without my knowledge mr brown was the warden in charge and had bad entire control of this matter necessarily I 1 had bad no cusp suspicion I 1 CIO n a at t 9 any n y ume that excessive char charges 0 were being made for milk a and while ahil t cannot say that this milk account is correct to the drop it always appeared so reasonable that even now making some allowances for unfaithfulness in m my y subordinate which I 1 after warda was discovered and which induced me with other things to remove him from the position about the iston ast 1st of february 1888 the grand jury evidently got their information from this man as I 1 understand he was before them I 1 still think the 0 government received all on this account acid for which it ever C paid id as all the other wardens who have ve been there do affirm in FLOI TIEt CAND CANDLES HAN HAM AND BEEP BEEF As to flour candles candies beef and ham furnished I 1 only say this in reply to abo he critic lam ahat hat the VW extravagant and the supply excessive 11 1 1 that goods furnished to the united states were not always paid for in cash every year for the last live five years there was a deficiency extending over a period of about four months tach each year and I 1 wa completely at the mercy of those furnishing the goods some of whom at one time notified me that they could not furnish thern them on such long and uncertain time at the usual cash priem prices under these circumstances what was I 1 to do would they have me turn the prisoners loose keep them in prison and starve them or buy goods at a small advance from merchants merchant 4 who were willing to carry the government if permitted to make a fair profit and I 1 do not believe any of them ever made more they are reputable honest men and I 1 assert that the government has never suffered by reason geason of its dealings with any of them but to all this criticism about the prices I 1 have but ono one general answer furnished by the grand jurys report namely that the expense of keeping aw prisoners 61 including pay and board of guards and wardens salary was about 48 cents berday per day anil and deduct tag pay of guards 35 cents per day with this statement ma le ie by the report I 1 think I 1 can fairly submit to the common judgment of the public that no extravagant prices could have been paid fur for subsistence when it is admitted that the supplies to the prisoners were generous in quantity and quality and that the resulting cost only 35 cents per day I 1 think no man who has any knowledge of the cost of living will find any place to lodge a successful charge of extravagance upon such management I 1 find by a letter now in my possession from the attorney general of the united states that in the years 1886 and 1887 the prisoners in the penitentiaries aries of the territories ri of idaho and montana cost for subsistence from to per day nearly twice the cost of the prisoners in my charge the rho marshal of idaho at that time is now the honored delegate in congress from that territory and no charge even th in the heat and bitterness of a partisan el active contest was ever made of extravagance although the cost per prisoner was nearly twice the cost in n utah under my administration tra tion if I 1 paid from 10 to 25 per cent too coo much for supplies bup plies then the cost of subsisting prisoners prison rs would have been advanced accordingly wilt will any honest or sensible man pretend to believe that the cost of subsisting my prisoners could have been r deuced below the price which the grand jury state in their report by any such percentage IV THE WAGON ACCOUNT the report states this matter with substantial correctness my team delivered goods for all firms firm who supplied the prison and some of those firms paid me for the service they ahey preferred to pay me to deliver them themselves and the department of justice on enquiry from me approved my action as without any objection UP was Nj wholly holly a matter abr the she seller seher of the goods as to how they would deliver them tham and they employed my team on terms that were satisfactory to them and the arrangement was certainly as fair as any like labor could be done by any one the government was in in no way defrauded nor is it pretended that it suffered in any degree I 1 fail to see for what purpose the matter is brought forward except to criticism criticise critic ise cise the department of justice for not supplying its own transportation As I 1 am not the manager of the department and am in no way responsible for its manner of doing business it can have na no pertinence in a report of this kind save in the war department where the military are furnished wagons and teams in some parts of the country to transport supplies and a horse and carriage for cabinet officers I 1 believe it has never been the policy of the united states to furnish its own necessary transportation and it may be that the report of this grand jury will have the effect to change this general policy and to induce it to buy and operate railroads stage lines wagons buggies and teams but I 1 would suggest that to effect that purpose it had been better to have adopted a memorial to congress than to make a report to the third district court of utah I 1 may add however as to the estimate in ia this report like estimates which are common in all hasty and ill considered reforms that ata all wagon aon and team costi costing ng would suffice for this service M is totally at fault no single team could perform the service I 1 oftentimes had two actively engaged and on many occasions in addition my private carriage and some hired in relation to the entire question of the management of the penitentiary I 1 can say I 1 a always ways practiced the same economy I 1 should have done had I 1 been doing the work for my individual account and that I 1 have used at least fair skill is evident when comparison is made with the management elsewhere I 1 find that the daily cost of the ohio state I 1 rison risen per prisoner as by report of its keeper is 43 7 10 cents within 4 cents of the highest cost of the utah prison while in my charge I 1 also find that the joliet penitentiary illinois illinoi Illi illinois noi the model prison of the united states where subsistence is probably cheaper than any other in the entire country is stated in the official report at 42 cents per day only 6 cents lower than the utah prison and there was an average of over fourteen hundred prisoners in each of these prisons they pay th their elgh guards bards much less than we do in utah but if the grand jury or others who are having this spasm of reform desire to cut the waged wage of these men who earn well their money I 1 hope they may have to assume the responsibility I 1 therefore submit that in insisting that the management of the utah prison while in my charge was extravagant the grand j jury u ry have been hasty and inc as well as u unjust nj V FAVORING the statement in the report is true in certain cert aio cases and the explanation is that cob co habs ahall were generally sentenced for short terms and under circumstances cum stances which offered no temptation to escape work in the fields could be done by them without requiring any guard while if I 1 sent convicts sentenced for larceny or other offenses to haul sagebrush or dig potatoes or do any other prison work guards were always required so as a matter of economy in the employment of guW his fils and to save the sending of prisoners out who boull embrace every opportunity to escape I 1 employed this class of prisoners often in preference to the other kind in other respects prisoners were treated alke and this discrimination was practiced as a matter of economy ece nomy nd I 1 fully justify it such is the practice in all prisons and I 1 used my best judgment and in no case was my confidence ever abused VI compensation OF MARSHAL AS SUCH the report deals somewhat at length with one branch of the marshals Is compensation and complains that the government has pai pail more than it should fur for cert certain aill service the conclusion is arrived a iu in some of the instances i cited on an incorrect statement of facts notably the following for instance deputy marshal armstrong was working for 60 per cent of his earnings he served a subpoena in the case of the people vs taylor in the second district in the month of november 1887 at an expense of 67 40 of which was charged as actual expense of team the deputy owned his bis own team mr dyer had 40 per cent of this 10 that is to say the deputy recel received veil 24 which represented the actual expenses while mr dyer had the 1 h lance of 16 the above quotation shows how carelessly the investigation of the grand jury was conducted for the rhe truth is that mr armsttong Arms tiong did not pay to the marshal any part of the subsistence or team hired as stated and he be received neither 16 nor any portion of this charge any more than the grand jury did mr armstrong was not before the grand jury as a witness while my accounts were accessible to them and they show that instead of receiving the 16 as alleg alleged eJ I 1 did not receive a cent of ic it is difficult to understand how the jury could have been imposed upon in this case and been led to illustrate what they call an illegal practice when the instance given is a fiction because I 1 had deputies of whose earnings I 1 did retain 40 ier er cent it was concluded that mr armstrong was in the category and without proof it is stated that I 1 did take 40 per cent to in this instance the grand jury however assert amert that the marshal has no right to receive such moneys and on this proposition I 1 take issue with them I 1 affirm that it is neither illegal nor u unjust to do so and that the criticism of the grand jury upon the right of the marshal to retain a portion of the F earnings of his deputies is is both unjust and unreal unreasonable anable A deputy Is the employed of the ulam marsha bal their relations are the subject of arrangement between themselves ves and it is scarcely likely thata that any nyman man woul be willing willingto to take all the responsibility of the marshals office let his deputies perform the labor in the field taking the entire compensation leaving him under heavy bonds liable for their acts abw and receive nothing this being the case cage it is the custom for every marshal in the united states and has always been to employ liis his deputies on such terms as is agreeable to themselves thistle this the treasury department and the department or of jd justice atice have always sanctioned and it is the universal custom it is wall known that the fees provided by law for the service of process are but a trifle they would not pay for the washing that one change of clothes a week would demand in this land of dirt but the statute provides that in lieu of mileage while travel is required reau ired in serving process the officer may have actual expenses if the officer hires the means of traveling it is the cost paid for horse or tea ruif there be one and subsistence and if he has his own teams or horse the reasonable price for tiia tire use the prices of uch such things of course vary with the locality and circumstances and because of this variance a rate was fixed and at the department and by the officers these prices have always been fixed in the territories so as to provide such compensation as will insure faithful service and prompt attention to duty whether this construction of the law be correct it is not for me to say it was at least reasonable it has been a adopted by the department as the rule all these western territories and if any other were prescribed it would result in vacating every marchalls mare haPs halls office in the west if for instance the officer could on a two days trip into thoele dodele county to 11 serve erve a warrant for the arrest of a cocab in no event receive anything except the two dollars fee which is given for serving the warrant and nothing whatever if he failed to catch his game for in euch ease case he gets nothing how long would any man remain in the service the report of the grand j jury u ry claims this is the proper construction of the law allowing expenses to the officer in lieu of mileage now to avoid such a hardship and to to insure fair treatment to the officer the department has always made such allowance for team learn hire as would be just and they could do no DO less without ruin to the public service I 1 have only to appeal ta the common knowledge of the cond ifton of things in Territory thi to satisfy any reasonable person that to interpret the law as the grand jury would have it would work a ruinous |
