but my principal work has been the translating from the German, and editing the Iconographic Encyclopedia.

Question, (by Mr. Meacham.) Have you any testimony to give in relation to the 1st and 2d specifications?

Answer. I prefer answering questions.

Question. Have you ever been annoyed by any espionage on the of the secretary, by his claim to open letters?

part

Answer. I never heard him claim the right. Several letters came to me opened.

Question, (by Mr. Meacham.) Do you know of the secretary's having claimed that right of his subordinates?

Answer. I have heard that he did; I never knew, of my own knowledge, of any such claim.

Question. What was the practice in regard to opening the mail that came to the Institution?

Answer. The mail comes to the Institution, and after being assorted, my letters are sent to me at my room.

Question. Have you ever been required to go to the secretary's room to open your letters?

Answer. There was, at one time, a rule established, or proposed, that all the officers of the Institution should assemble in the office of the secretary, after the arrival of the mail, or at some specified hour, each one then and there to open the letters addressed to him; that all business requiring reference to the secretary, or consultation, on the part of the officers, might be then attended to. I cannot remember how long this rule continued in force, but that has ever since been, to a certain extent, an understanding among us.

Question. Why were the subordinates required to open their letters in the presence of the secretary?

Answer. I think I answered this question before, when I said that the reason assigned for the rule was, that all business requiring consultation might at once be attended to.

Question. Have you ever felt or expressed it as a personal grievance that the secretary required this at your hands?

Answer. I have so considered it.

Question. Why did you so consider it, if it was for the purpose you named above?

Answer. For several reasons; first, on account of the loss of time involved in visiting the secretary's room at times when he himself was not present; secondly, a personal preference of reading my letters in my room at my leisure, and subsequently referring them to the secretary.

Question. Did you ever consider this requisition as a system of espi-onage over your correspondence, on the part of the secretary? Answer. I did at one time so consider it.

Question. Has the secretary ever threatened to dismiss you; and if so, for what cause?

Answer. I have no recollection of a threat from the secretary. I have heard him mention the possession of the power of removing subordinates.

Question. Has he ever threatened to dismiss you unless his orders were obeyed implicitly, and without question.

Answer. He has never made any such threat to me, as far as I can recollect.

Question. Has the secretary ever used towards you ungentlemanly and abusive language; and if so, in what respect?

Answer. I have had one (at least) interview with the secretary, in which there was a somewhat warm discussion in regard to certain supposed facts. This was in reference to an article for appearance in Putnam's Magazine, by a friend of mine, and supposed to have been prepared at my suggestion or instigation. The data of which were supposed to have been derived from myself. Professor Henry charged me with having been concerned, in that way, with the article, which I denied. The circumstances of the interview I cannot recall, my memory of facts not being very good. I have no recollection of the interview beyond the facts stated, and that it was a warm one and lasted some time. It concluded, however, I think, with a considerable weakening, as far as I could judge, of the impressions of the secretary in regard to the circumstances. I denied entirely the allegations.

Question. Had you any reason to suppose that the secretary had had access to your private correspondence?

Answer. I had no knowledge of his having had access to my private correspondence.

Question. How, then, did the secretary suspect you of having furnished the data referred to?

Answer. I presume from the fact that the article had been written by a particular friend of mine.

Question. How many hours per day have you been compelled to labor in the Institution?

Answer. I get up at 7, and go to bed about 11; all the intermediate time is devoted to the Institution. I have no other business.

Question. Is that labor bestowed exclusively upon your own depart

ment or not?

Answer. My duties in the Institution consist in having charge of publications, exchanges, and the museum.

Question. Has the secretary afforded you the necessary mechanical and clerical assistance in your department?

Answer. For some time he did not afford what I considered the necessary and proper assistance in those branches.

Question. Have you complained that your overworking there was bringing upon you a disease which you believed would terminate your life?

Answer. I labor under incipient disease of the heart, the symptoms of which become much aggravated by long continued and laborious mental, clerical and mechanical efforts.

Question. Have you not stated that your duties at the Institution compelled your wife to forego her ordinary domestic duties, to aid you, for want of proper clerical assistance?

Answer. For want of clerical assistance, my wife has, at different times, been compelled to devote a considerable portion of her time to assisting me.

Question. Have you ever put in a written form your complaints in regard to the Institution, that you recollect?

Answer. That is a question that I prefer not answering. I may state that I have made a memorandum of such things, but as a purely pri

vate matter.

Question. Was that memorandum ever communicated to any other person?

Answer. The circumstances of any such statement having been made are of such a character that I prefer not mentioning them.

Question. I will ask whether the witness has a copy or the original of the written statement or memorandum referred to?

Answer. I do not know whether I have a copy or not.

Question. Would you have any objection to furnishing a copy if a copy was produced which you would acknowledge as being made by you?

Question. I would so object.

Question. Do you believe the production of the statement or memorandum would endanger your position in the Institution?

Answer. My objections to answering this question has no reference to my position in the Institution.

Question, (by Mr. Witte.) Have any private letters, addressed to you, been opened by the secretary?

Answer. No letter for me has been opened by the secretary that I would not have shown to him, as far as I recollect, and have no impression now that I ever thought the secretary had opened or would open letters that I would not have shown him.

Question, (by same.) Has the practice of the secretary in regard to opening letters been such as, in your opinion, was necessary to the proper conducting of the business of the Institution?

Answer. I do not think the instances of opening at all are sufficient to illustrate any principle in regard to myself.

Question, (by Mr. Pearce.) Have you not leave of absence from the Institution every year?

Answer. Yes, sir, three months every year.

Question, (by Mr. Wells.) Are the rules and usages of the Institution, as practiced, the same you would prescribe for its management if you were at its head?

Answer. There are some customs which, if I had the power, I might be inclined to wish modified; in regard to the matter of letters, I might require them to be delivered at an earlier hour in the morning; the other arrangement in regard to the letters I would not desire to see changed.

Question. Have you ever made any written statement of your complaints, with the understanding that it was for the perusal of a member of the Board of Regents?

Answer. That belongs to the class of questions I prefer not to an

swer.

Mr. Meacham asked that the witness be directed to examine, and if he has a copy of the communication of complaints made for a Regent, that he be requested to produce it.

The committee ordered the request to be made, as above.

Rep. 141-6

Committee then adjourned to meet again on Monday evening next at 7 o'clock.

MONDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 19, 1855.

The committee met pursuant to adjournment.

Present: All the members, as well as a number of witnesses. Professor Baird was called upon for the statement or memorandum requested of him at the last meeting. He answered that he had made diligent search and could find no such copy. He had no copy of it in his possession. He was under the impression that he took a copy in the copy press, but, as it proved to be an inferior one, he did not pre

serve it.

Mr. Meacham.-I believe that a statement of grievances or complaints was made by Professor Baird, in May last, for the eye of the Hon. Mr. Choate. I believe that at the time Mr. Chcate visited this city, in January last, he had the paper. I believe it to be in existence in this city now. I believe, if presented, Professor Baid will acknowledge that he has forgotten many complaints set down in his memorandum in May last; and I ask the committee to make a requisition upon Professor Jewett for that paper to be produced before them. I believe it to be in this city. I do not know whether it is or not. I regard it as my duty to call on the committee to make the requisition.

Professor Baird.-I may state, in regard to that paper, that I had an interview with Mr. Choate in April last, in which I made some statements in regard to myself and my relation to the Institution and the secretary. I made these statements, not as preferring a public complaint before a Regent, but as a confidential communication to a friend whom I had known years before. On concluding the interview, Mr. Choate requested me to give him a memorandum of my remarks in writing, adding, that the matter would be confidential between us, and the paper to be used only for his own private reference. Concluding that the spontaneous assurance of Mr. Choate was as binding upon him as a sworn oath would be, I complied with his request, and gave or sent him the memorandum the next day. I had not the slightest anticipation that the promise would be nullified in any way by Mr. Choate. or any one else, and accordingly reproduced some remarks of a purely domestic nature, which no man who regarded the privacy of his household would desire to have made public. In what way this statement, in view of all these circumstances, can have got from Mr. Choate's hands I cannot say; but I must respectfully protest against the production of this paper under any circumstances; and I cannot understand how any persons, but those who were then present, could be aware of its existence, or how a knowledge of such existence could be spread about. I am not aware of having said anything in the memorandum to which I have not testified, more or less, before this committee already. I may have made some statements there more forcibly than I have done before the committee, but I have endeavored to keep fully in view the difference in the circumstances. Before the committee I swear to what I know personally. The intensity of my memorandum was affected materially by what I believed on the tes

timony of others. I enter my respectful protest against the production of this paper, the existence of which Mr. Meacham only inferred at the the last meeting, but which I hold to be sacred, and not to be communicated to any one without my consent.

Mr. Meacham.-I became interested in the matter of the Smithsonian Institution, and in this investigation, for two causes: First, because I sincerely believed the funds were not being expended in accordance with the laws of Congress; second, because I believed that if reliance could be placed on the testimony of the assistants of the secretaryProfessor Baird among them-that there were evils that called for correction. It was on these grounds I made the first and second specifications. I believe Professor Baird has forgotten some parts of the statements or conversations which led me to these conclusions; and I therefore ask for the production of the paper, to prove the statements I have made.

Professor Baird made a few remarks touching the private and confidential character of the statement, which were not taken down.

Mr. Meacham inquired of Professor Baird, through the chairman, whether there were any marks on the paper showing it to be private and confidential.

Professor Baird.-I do not remember the precise words of the paper; I do not remember any special arrangement having been made between Mr. Choate and myself as to his pursuing a confidential course towards me in regard to the paper. I supposed a gentleman of Mr. Choate's character would not require any direct bargain beyond the interview we had to secure that end.

Mr. Meacham.-Will you (Professor Baird) produce the portions of the paper that do not refer to domestic matters?

Professor Baird.-I should prefer not to produce that paper at all. Mr. Meacham.-I saw on the paper no marks indicating that it was of a private or confidential nature. I have no desire to bring before the committee any private matters. I make this statement to shield myself from improper imputations. I believed it to be as much public as any other paper I ever saw on any subject.

Mr. Meacham then inquired of Professor Baird whether the paper was wholly of a private or domestic character, so as to render it improper to make it public?

Professor Baird.—In addition to other things, there are private matters in it that I should be unwilling to see made public.

Chairman.-Was it on account of the domestic statements contained in the paper that it was rendered confidential?

Professor Baird.-Not wholly; it was in regard to all of it.

Mr. Meacham.-Is there anything in the paper to show that you relied on the statements of others in making the memorandum, and not on your personal knowledge?

Professor Baird.-I answer by repeating what I have already stated, that the intensity of the statement was produced by the representations of others. I have no distinct recollection of the precise wording of the paper. In making the memorandum, I had no intention of stating any thing that I did not believe-I testify before the committee to what I know.