The 750-Page 'Blue Book' That Could Cost Seattle Its Customs Inspector

Washington City, April 10. — Gen. Dumont has been busy during the past week wading through the mass of testimony taken in the investigation of the charges against Inspector Bryant, of Seattle. Some weeks ago Inspecting Officer Bingham, of the First district, was ordered simply to take testimony in the case and report all the evidence to the department here without making any recommendation. Charges against Bryant had been made so many times and so continuously during his term of office that Gen. Dumont deemed it best that the official recommendation be made by him personally, hence the instructions to Bingham, which resolved into the necessary duty of reporting conclusions as to the facts presented in the testimony.

The evidence taken before Bingham has all been typewritten and fills 750 pages, closely written. This has been neatly bound in black morocco boards, numbered and finished in library style, the whole making a very handsome book, about the size of one of the volumes of the Century dictionary. The evidence adduced on the part of the prosecution fills 275 pages; the remainder is devoted to the testimony brought forward in refutation of the charges or in sustaining Inspector Bryant's character as an officer and a gentleman. Gen. Dumont is much displeased to think that so vast an amount of rubbish was permitted to be injected into the testimony, particularly as he is a very conscientious man and desirous of faithfully studying the evidence on both sides. His many duties here make it impossible for him to give more than a short time each day to reading the 'Bryant Blue Book,' as he calls it, and it may be some time before he is ready to make his final report in the matter.

While it may be possible to obtain some inkling of Gen. Dumont's conclusion when it has been reached, the general now says his recommendation cannot be given out until after it has been passed upon by the secretary of the treasury. After Gen. Dumont's examination of the testimony, the whole matter will be gone over by what is known as the supervising board, which under the act of 1892 consists of an inspector general and the assistant secretaries of the treasury department. Their findings will be submitted to Secretary Carlisle himself for final decision.

Bryant is represented here by Col. James Hamilton Lewis, of Seattle, who appears to be working very enthusiastically in the cause of his client. He has also been bringing some personal and political influences to bear upon the supervising inspector general, having been to the department in reference to this matter — among them Mahone, of Virginia, Hon. William F. Vilas, of Wisconsin, and John W. Johnson, president of the National Metropolitan Bank of this city. These, together with the internal revenue collector, a hold-over Republican, held a session with Gen. Dumont and said many good things in behalf of Col. Lewis and his client.

A similar trial is in progress at the same time, involving an inspector at Baltimore, and the same contentions are being made for his removal as in the Bryant case. The board has suspended sittings to await some matters from Baltimore and the attendance of the majority's attorney; the counsel for the government in these matters was taken ill. So, too, is Col. Lewis representing Bryant, with his client. The latter has gone down to his grandfather's plantation at Poindexter, Va., a run of eighteen miles, and will spend two or three days of the court's adjournment trying to recuperate.

Gen. Dumont is a very pleasant gentleman and talks freely upon all matters connected with the service. While he has made no direct statement regarding the Bryant matter, yet from certain expressions which he has let drop from time to time concerning it, it seems a safe prophecy to say that there is no reasonable probability of the removal of Inspector Bryant. Gen. Dumont has a high regard for Bryant as an individual, and the latter has many friends who are interesting themselves in his behalf. One statement which Gen. Dumont made to your correspondent may be considered significant. 'I would recommend,' he said, 'my own brother's dismissal from the service, should I find him dishonest, but such dismissal would have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.' He also said he was not in favor of a political warfare against a man just when his salary had been increased to the point which made the office worth fighting for.

Inspector Bryant's salary has heretofore been about $4,000 a year. By a clause in one of the appropriation bills of the last session, reorganizing the service and fixing a definite rate of pay for the inspector according to the amount of work done in the district in the way of inspecting vessels during the year, Inspector Bryant's salary will be increased. The Puget Sound district has grown very rapidly in the past few years and has now surpassed in amount of tonnage the Boston district, thus making Inspector Bryant's post one of considerable importance. This fact, together with the increased salary, Gen. Dumont believes to be one of the principal causes for the fight that is being made by certain disgruntled steamboat men on Puget Sound to get rid of him. His record as an inspector is certainly a good one, and it has been the experience of the department that more complaints are filed against men who do their duty faithfully in this service than against those assistants who are not entitled to the place because of incompetency, inactivity or personal friendship or favor.

What is considered the most serious charge of all made against Bryant is that he traveled many steamboat trips on the Sound which he was not required to pay his fare on, on account of his position as the special agent of the district, and then deliberately charged up to the government the amount which the fare would have been had he paid it, as a part of the expenses. Bryant's explanation of this is that he frequently did work about which he was entitled to pay which he did not take, but took the railroad fare in lieu thereof. Also in some cases where it is testified that he has not paid fare on a certain trip, the event shows he did, and he is able to throw light upon the fact that he frequently paid fare one way, and that he made no distinction as to class when making these trips for the government.