Letters in re Postoffice Outrage

August 17, 1912.
Mr. E. R. Monfort, Postmaster,
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Dear Sir:
I respectfully request your immediate attention to the enclosed affidavit setting forth a statement of the insult which I received from Myron L. Hurney, a clerk in the mailing division, which instance occurred at window No. 9, August 15th, at 9.10 P. M., as set forth in this statement.

While I was asked to accept an apology for this atrocious conduct, and while I patiently waited to see if the apology would he really forthcoming, I had, however, decided that I could not consider accepting an apology under the circumstances, and thus condone the insult and become a party to this wanton assault upon the part of a public servant.

While there is no malice in the course which I am taking, at the same time this decision is unalterable. Should this man remain in the postal service, and should you see fit to ignore this letter, please remember that in so doing you are committing yourself to a policy that will protect postal employees in almost any insulting conduct which it may occur to them to inflict upon the public.

Thanking you for an early reply, and desiring action upon this matter at once, I am, Very sincerely yours,
Jeeemiah J. Crowley.

Jeremiah J. Crowley, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he is a resident and a citizen of the city of Cincinnati, in the State of Ohio, and that he is a patron of the Postoffice in Government Square in this city.

And further, that on the 15th day of August, 1912, at or near the hour of nine o’clock in the evening, he went to the said Postoffice for the purpose of stamping and sealing certain special letters, which he also there had weighed; that during this transaction, after purchasing the stamps, he went across the hall to window No. 9 ; that there, while sealing certain envelopes with mucilage there provided, a certain clerk, then unknown to the said Jeremiah J. Crowley, came to this window and said, “You ‘d better hurry up if you want to catch the Detroit mail.”

That then the said Jeremiah J. Crowley replied, ” Thank you, some of my mail is for the West.”

And further, that just at this time an unknown man stepped up to the window and asked this clerk when the next mail went to New York. The clerk replied, giving him the information, and that then the same man asked when this mail would reach New York, and also asked about the sailing dates of certain mail steamers for Great Britain.

And further, that this certain mail clerk answered the questions, and the man, after thanking him, went out, and that immediately this clerk began singing or humming these words : ” Great Britain and Ireland, Scotland and Wales—I’m an Irishman, my name is Hurney, and I ‘m from the parish of ______, County Galway, Ireland.”

And further, that just at this time, while receiving parcels of letters from the hands of the said Jeremiah J. Crowley, and placing them on the receiving desk behind the window, this clerk asked, “Are you an Irishman?” After a pause he repeated this question, thus: “Did you come from Ireland?”

And further, that this said deponent replied to this question, “Yes, I was born in that country.” And further, that this said mail clerk, with illy concealed anger, asked the question, “Are you a Catholic?” And further, that to this question the said deponent replied, “I am, in the broad and real sense of the word.”

That this said clerk further asked, “Do you go to church ?” to which the said Jeremiah J. Crowley said, “Which church?” And that to this question this certain mail clerk, whose name the deponent has since learned to be Myron L. Hurney, replied, “The Catholic Church.” And that to this the said deponent replied, “No, I do not.”

Said deponent further states that then the said Myron L. Hurney did viciously and angrily and insultingly say, “I do not give a ______about you, and I refuse to talk to you!”

That then and there the said Jeremiah J. Crowley in substance uttered this rebuke: “Young man, I did not ask you to talk to me. I came here to mail my letters, and while doing so you asked me questions. I answered you politely, and you have no right to use such language to me or any one else. You are a public servant and should discharge your duties without insulting any patrons of this Post office.”

And further, said deponent states that the said Myron L. Hurney repeated the above foul, filthy, obscene, and unmentionable word, adding to it others still more foul, when the said Jeremiah J. Crowley spoke of reporting this conduct to Mr. Monfort, the Postmaster, and that this said clerk, Myron L. Hurney, then said, “I don’t give a ______or a_______ for you or Monfort or anybody else who doesn’t go to the Catholic Church!”

And the deponent further states that it is his belief that this said wanton assault was made in order to provoke a personal attack from him.

And the deponent further states that he then turned away and left the said window and reported this matter in full to Mr. Raine, the Assistant Superintendent, who was then in charge of the postoffice building, in his private office.

And further, that the said Mr. Raine agreed with .the said Jeremiah J. Crowley that this assault was of so vile and filthy a nature that the Postoffice Department could not countenance such employee in the service.

And further, that the said Mr. Raine offered to bring the said Myron L. Hurney before this deponent and cause him to apologize for this language: that the said deponent did then and there patiently wait while Mr. Raine went ostensibly to bring the said Myron L. Hurney into his office for the purpose of apologizing, and that after waiting a sufficient time said deponent left the Postoffice without seeing either Mr. Raine or Myron L. Hurney again.

And now, finally, the said Jeremiah J. Crowley does here state and set forth the fact that the words which were used by this mail clerk, Hurney, and represented in the above by blanks, are so vile and unspeakably vulgar that he refrains from inserting them herein at this time, but that he is prepared to repeat the same upon oath at any time or place before any Notary Public or Judge of a Court of Record.

And further, that the said Jeremiah J. Crowley, as an American citizen and a patron of the Cincinnati Post office, does hereby demand the dismissal of the said Myron L. Hurney from the postal service of the United States, in the name of decency and for the protection of the public.

And further deponent sayeth not.

(Signed) Jeremiah J. Crowley.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 17th day of August, nineteen hundred and twelve, in witness whereof I append my seal and signature:

(Signed) Earle R. Passel,
Notary Public in and for
Hamilton County, Ohio.
[Seal.]

My commission expires 17th of March, 1913.

EXECUTIVE DIVISION
United States Post Office
CINCINNATI, OHIO

August 17, 1912.
Jeremiah J. Crowley, Esq.,
619 Johnston Building, City.
Dear Sir: Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of August 17, 1912, relative to conduct of one ” Myron L. Hurney,’ ‘a postoffice clerk, and the matter will receive my personal attention.

Very respectfully,
E. E. Monfort,
Postmaster.

United States Post Office
Cincinnati, Ohio
August 24, 1912.
Mr. Jeremiah J. Crowley,
Johnston Building, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Sir: I enclose you herewith copy of the reply of Mr. Myron L. Hurney, for your information and for any further action you desire to take. Viery respectfully,
Elias R. Monfort,
Postmaster.

Mr. Myron L. Hurney,
Stamper, Mailing Section, Postoffice, City.
Sir: Charges have been filed against you for improper and discourteous treatment and profanity in your intercourse with Jeremiah J. Crowley, who had business at window No. 9 of the Postoffice on the evening of August 15, 1912.

You are hereby directed to reply to these charges in writing within ten days from this date, a copy of such charges submitted herewith.

Respectfully,
(Signed) Elias R. Monfokt,
Postmaster.
Enclosures.
AED.—

Cincinnati, 0., Aug. 23, 1912.
Elias R. Monfort,
Postmaster.

Replying to charges filed against me by Jeremiah J. Crowley ; beg to state that they are absolutely and entirely false.

I was working at window No. 9, on the evening of the 15th insl, and was humming to myself; but not the rot which the man1 says he heard. That sounds to me like the ravings of an unsound mind.

This Mr. Crowley came to the window and, without a word from me other than to ask if he had any mail for Detroit—as it was then closing time for that mail—this Mr. Crowley said, “You seem to be very happy.” I answered, “I am always happy.” “How is that?” he asked. I answered, “They say an Irishman and a Negro are always happy.” “Then you are Irish,” he said. I answered, “My father was born in Ireland.” “What part?” he asked. I answered, “The County Gralway.” “That is where all the Catholics come from,” he said. I answered, “Yes, I am a Catholic.”

Then I noticed the name “Jeremiah J. Crowley” on the package he had mailed, and I said, “Crowley is an Irish Catholic name, isn’t it?” He then became angry and said, “I am here on business, and not to be questioned by such as you.” I then said, “I have answered your personal questions without—” he did not give me a chance to finish the sentence. He said, “You are a public servant and are here to answer questions.” “Not such questions as you asked,” I answered. He then said, “I shall report you to Postmaster Monfort.” I said, “You can do as you like.”

That is all the conversation I had with Jeremiah J. Crowley.

He afterwards called on Mr. Raine. I do not know what was said ; but Mr. Raine came over to me—I was then canceling mail at the “Cummins Pick-up Table.’ Mr. Raine said, “This man said you insulted him, and demands an apology.” I told Mr. Raine that I had not insulted this man, but that if he thought an apology was necessary, I would offer one.

I then went into the office with Mr. Raine, but Mr. Crowley had left. Barely two minutes had elapsed during the time Mr. Raine spoke to me and the time I went into his office.

I wish to state that never in my life have I used foul or vulgar language; I have had very strict home training in that respect, not only from my parents, but also from my older brothers and sisters.

I have been in the service three years: two years and one month as a substitute, and about eleven months as a regular, and there is not a man in this office who can truthfully say he ever heard me use such language as this Jeremiah J. Crowley says I used. There is not a man in this office who can say I have ever had an argument with him about religion or any other subject.

Then, does it seem possible that I would risk my position, especially after subbing so long, by arguing with a total stranger, whose position or influence I knew nothing about?

I can not afford to take such a chance, not only because I respect the position I hold, but also because I have a family to support and am also paying on my own home.

I have always tried to do the best I know how in my work while in the service, which I believe all my superiors and brother clerks will corroborate.

I am willing and ready to swear that what I have written is the absolute truth.

Respectfully,
(Signed) Mykon L. Hubney,
Cleric, Mailing Division,

United States Post Office
CINCINNATI, OHIO
September 18, 1912.
Mr. Jeremiah J. Crowley,
Johnston Building, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Dear Sir:

On August 24th I mailed you copy of the reply of clerk M. L. Hurney to the charges you made against him, for your information and for any further statement you desired to make. The matter is not yet closed, and I would be glad to hear from you on the subject before making a report in the matter.

Very respectfully,
Elias R. Monfort,
Postmaster.

D.—
EXECUTIVE DIVISION
United States Post Office
CINCINNATI. OHIO
October 24, 1912. ,
Mr. Jeremiah J. Crowley,
Johnston Building, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Sir: Again referring to the charges against clerk Myron L. Hurney, I must dispose of this case. I would be glad to have you come to my office at 3 o’clock to-morrow to meet the postoffice inspector and Clerk Hurney for an examination of the questions at issue between you and Clerk Hurney.

Kindly advise me by telephone whether you can come at that time, or, if not, what time would suit you, and I will arrange to have all the parties together. This case must be disposed of. Very respectfully,
Elias R. Monfort,
Postmaster.

October 24, 1912.
Mr. Elias R. Monfort, Postmaster
Cincinnati, 0.
Dear Sir:
I have received your various reminders regarding the Hurney case.

Mr. Hurney ‘s letter, which you forwarded to me through the United States mails, added to his previous profanity and vulgarity the further insulting statement that my specific charges against him were not only absolutely and entirely false, but likened them to “the ravings of an unsound mind.”

Compare this denial with his offer to apologize! In the absence of any apology from him, and with further insults added to the original, as above quoted, the matter is in your hands. When you are through with the case you can advise me of the results if you choose.

I do not feel that at present I have anything further to do with the case. Any further action on my part must depend on your own attitude. I am, Very sincerely yours,
Jeremiah J. Crowley.

EXECUTIVE DIVISION
United States Post Office
CINCINNATI, OHIO
October 25, 1912.
Jekemiah J. Crowley, Esq.,
619 Johnston Building, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Sir:
Qn August 17th you filed a sworn statement of charges against clerk Myron L. Hurney, an employee of the postoffice. This statement was referred to the clerk for a reply. He replied, and a copy of his reply was, on August 24th, mailed to you for your information and any further action you desired to take. No reply was received. On September 18th I again wrote you and said that I would be glad to hear from you before making a report.

On October 24th I wrote you, fixing the time at my office for the examination at 3 P. M., October 25th. You, on October 24th, acknowledged receipt of this letter, and said you had received various reminders of the Hurney case and stated as follows:

Mr. Hurney’s letter, which you forwarded to me through the United States mails, added to his previous profanity and vulgarity the further insulting statement that my specific charges against him were not only absolutely and entirely false, but likened them to “the ravings of an unsound mind.” Compare this denial with his offer to apologize. In the absence of any apology from him, and with further insults added to the original as above quoted, the matter is in your hands. When you are through with the case you can advise me with the results if you choose. I do not feel that at present I have anything further to do with the case. Any further action on my part must depend on your attitude.

The rules of the Department require a careful and impartial examination of such cases before any condemnation or penalties shall be fixed. In this case the complaint and the reply are in direct conflict. To make an impartial ruling, further evidence is necessary at least to settle the question of the credibility of the witnesses. A man charged with so serious an offense has the right to face his accusers in the presence of the officers who are to pass judgment upon the case, and such officers after examining the parties in most cases are able to settle the question of the credibility of the testimony. Where there is no such opportunity, a determination of the facts can not be safely made without the danger of doing injustice either to the complainant or the person charged with the offense.

I hope you will see the equity of this statement and be willing to come and submit to an examination, as Mr. Hurney will be required to do. He has been ordered to appear at 3 o’clock. I hope you will reconsider your refusal to take any further action, and deal justly with this office in enabling the officers to make a proper statement of the case to the Department.

Hoping to see you at the office at 3 o’clock, I am, Very respectfully,
Elias R. Monfort,
Postmaster.

October 25, 1912.
Mr. Elias R. Monfort, Postmaster,
Cincinnati, 0.
Dear Sir:
You have my sworn statement, dated August 17, 1912, of the occurrence in the Postoffice. I have nothing to add to, or take from this statement. With such a statement made under oath, Mr. Hurney should have been forthwith suspended, pending an investigation. As you have done nothing of the kind, your invitation to come to your office at 3 o’clock evidently means a wrangle with a man beneath my notice. I am,
Very sincerely yours,
Jeremiah J. Crowley.

Three months after the foregoing letter, dated October 25, 1912, The Menace published January 25, 1913, the following article:

CROWLEY AND THE POSTOFFICE!

Author of “Romanism, a Menace to the Nation/’ is Grossly Insulted by Postoffice Employee at Cincinnati—His Action Evidently Upheld by the Postmaster.

Jeremiah J. Crowley, for Twenty Years a Roman Catholic Priest, Allowed No Redress for Unspeakable Abuse by Myron L. Hurney, an Employee of the Cincinnati Postoffice, by Postmaster E. R. Monfort, Who Poses as a Protestant.

By H. George Buss, Staff Correspondent.

When confronted with the damning proofs of their intrigues and unspeakable depravity, Romish priests find refuge in the “howly” mother Church’s “conspiracy of silence,” but renegade Protestants and non-Romanists who are sufficiently Rome-soared when confronted with an official duty that might incur the anger of the dupes, resort to a conspiracy of concealment! No more efficient or cowardly conspiracy is possible to Rome’s nominal Protestant allies than that of concealment and clever evasion. As a striking example of this latter traitorous policy, The Menace calls the attention of every free-born American to the following startling proof of Catholicism’s stupendous power as evidenced by the following authentic proofs, which are copied from the original documents in a very recent case, showing the defiant and triumphant prostitution of the freedom of American public institutions in thie interests of Rome’s implacable spirit of vengefulness toward one who for twenty years was gathering from the very inside the material for the most terrible arraignment of the Romish political hierarchy that has appeared in the twentieth centnry!

Briefly told, the story is this: On the 15th day of August, 1912, at about nine o’clock in the evening, Mr. Crowley, well known to our readers as the author of “Romanism, a Menace to the Nation,” was insulted by an employee of the Cincinnati postoffice, by name Myron L. Hurney, at window No. 9, while preparing a number of letters for mailing in the postoffice building in Cincinnati.

So vile, so unspeakably vulgar and obscene was the language in which these insults were couched by this particular Catholic dupe, that Mr. Crowley for decency’s sake refrains from quoting it in his complaint, and The Menace can not reproduce it in print.

The letter is omitted. The following, however, is a verbatim copy of the sworn affidavit of Mr. Crowley, which accompanied his letter of complaint to Mr. E. R. Monfort, Cincinnati’s postmaster. We would especially call every Menace reader’s attention to this sworn affidavit, remembering that if there is a single false statement in it, Mr. Crowley is subject to prosecution.

After you have read carefully this simple statement of the treatment accorded an American citizen at the hands of an employee of the Governmental service, in pursuance of a deeplaid plot to inveigle Mr. Crowley into a personal brawl wherein, if goaded to the pitch of resentment the Romish masters calculated, he might strike this cowardly tool and thus give him apparent opportunity to safely assassinate this uns daunted foe of Romanism, we would particularly invite your closest scrutiny to the dilatory and protective tactics which Mr. Monfort, the recreant Cincinnati postmaster, saw fit to resort to in the unblushing protection which he has accorded to this Catholic cur!

[Here follows my affidavit. See pp. 18-22.]

Postmaster Monfort acknowledged the receipt of Mr. Crowley’s affidavit and charges, and promised that the matter would receive his “personal attention.’ ‘ Seven days later Mr. Crowley received a letter from the postmaster, together with a letter from Clerk Hurney denying the charges, but making admissions which showed that he was evading the truth, and that Crowley’s charges were true and correct. He even states that he had previously agreed to apologize to Mr. Crowley, notwithstanding the fact that he protested his innocence.

In his own statement (which bears evident earmarks of dictation from either a priest or a Jesuit) this Catholic Hurney makes a fatal blunder when he says,

“I told Mr. Raine that I had not insulted this man, BUT THAT IF HE THOUGHT AN APOLOGY WAS NECESSARY I WOULD OFFER ONE!”

Why be so ready and willing to volunteer an apology, if you had not insulted Mr. Crowley?

And what valid reason does this Catholic Hurney produce to avoid the dismissal from the postal service that his guilty conscience^ tells him is so richly merited? Does he prove innocence of the charge? Far from it—his denial is not even in the form of an affidavit, but he whines in closing,

“I am willing to swear that what I have written is the absolute truth!”

But at the same time he was extremely and curiously careful not to do so! No, his real plea is confined to the fact that he “can not afford” to be dismissed, because, forsooth, he has a “family to support’ ‘ and is also paying on his own home!

Why not have taken time by the forelock and have thought twice about these things before you followed your master’s voice in inflicting this wanton assault upon Mr. Crowley to afford you an opportunity for a murderous assault wherein you might claim Government protection?

Postmaster Monfort managed to keep the case alive to near the first of November last by correspondence with Mr. Crowley, even writing him seeking to make appointments for meetings in the postoffice when himself, Crowley, Hurney, and a postoffice inspector might all be present. Mr. Crowley refused to be trapped by what he considered a scheme to bring himself and this Romish tool of the postoffice into personal encounter, and on October 25th, last, wrote the postmaster the following letter:

[For my letter of October 25, 1912, see p. 31.]

The next move made by Postmaster Monfort was to send P. 0. Inspector Fletcher to visit Mr. Crowley personally, which he did within a few days after this last letter was mailed. After some little conversation, Mr. Crowley astounded the inspector on the point of his “credibility’ by furnishing him a copy of a fervent and glowing recommendation of the book, “Romanism, a Menace to the Nation,” and of its author (Mr. Crowley), written by Postmaster Monfort ‘s own brother and published in his paper, The Herald and Presbytery of Cincinnati, O., of which the following are the closing words:

“This book is in the interest of civil and religious liberty, of sound doctrine and purity of life, all of which are too often sadly lacking in the personal leaders of the organization against which the flaming indictment and warning is issued BY ONE OF THE CLEANEST, MOST CHRISTIAN-HEARTED, MOST NOBLE- SPIRITED, AND MOST COURAGEOUS OF MEN.”

The inspector vanished, carrying to Postmaster Monfort his own brother’s estimate of Mr. Crowley’s ” credibility.” And Postmaster Monfort is a nominal member of the Presbyterian Church—and Mr. Crowley is a member of the Presbyterian Church!

Since this visit by Inspector Fletcher, Postmaster Monfort has become absolutely mum — “mum’s the word”—and any real redress or further investigation of this unspeakably cowardly insulting of a peaceable American citizen by a Government employee in a Federal building seems very remote, indeed, if not impossible.

If this wanton and despicable assault is to go unpunished, if Government employees are to vent their venomed Romish ire in unprintable verbal filth and find protection behind the soiled skirts of Catholic-scared, un-American public service officials, then where is the vaunted liberty of this greatest democracy of the world’s history? And what shall the end be?

DID MONFORT, CINCINNATI’S POSTMASTER, HEAR “HIS MASTER’S VOICE?”

United States Post Office
EXECUTIVE DIVISION
CINCINNATI. OHIO
January 24, 1913.
Me. Jekemiah J. Crowley,
Johnston Building, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Dear Sir:
I have just read the bitter and unjust attack made upon me from your pen in The Menace of January 25, 1913, and I assume that when you learn that your article was written under a wrong misunderstanding of the facts, you will be glad to correct the error. You filed in this office with the postmaster, charges against Myron L. Hurney, clerk in the mailing section of the postoffice, for misconduct at window No. 9. Under the rules of the Department, I sent a copy of your charges to the clerk with a request for a written reply. Mr. Hurney made his reply, and a copy of it was sent to you for any further action you desired to take. It was in direct conflict with your statement. No reply was received from you. On September 18th, I wrote you again calling attention to former letter, and no reply was received. On October 24th I wrote you, fixing the time for a hearing at my office October 25th, at 3 P. M. You replied the same day, saying that the answer of Clerk Hurney was a new insult, and refused to take any further action, and added, “Any further action on my part would depend upon your attitude.’ ‘ On October 25th I wrote you at some length, giving reasons for an examination and emphasizing the importance of determining the credibility of the evidence in so far as it was in conflict and saying to you “That the rules of the Department require a careful and impartial examination of such cases before any condemnation or penalty shall be fixed. In this case the complaint and the reply were in direct conflict. To make an impartial ruling, further evidence is necessary at least to settle the question of the credibility of the witnesses. A man charged with so serious an offense has a right to face his accusers in the presence of the officers who are passing judgment upon the case, and such officers, after examining the parties, in most cases, are able to settle the question of the credibility of the testimony. Where there is no such opportunity, ‘a determination of the facts can not be safely made without danger of doing injustice either to the complainant or to the person charged with the offense. I hope you will see the equity of this statement and be willing to come and submit to an examination, as Mr. Hurney will be required to do. He has been ordered to appear at 3 o’clock. I hope you will reconsider your refusal to take any further action, and deal justly with this office in order to enable the officers to make a proper statement of the case to the Department.”

You replied on October 25th, asserting that I ought to have suspended Clerk Hurney and saying, “As you have done nothing of the kind, your invitation to come to your office at 3 o’clock evidently means a wrangle with a man beneath my notice.”

The rules of the Civil Service are very rigid as to the manner of examining a charge against a delinquent, and this office has no power to suspend an employee without the approval of the Department, which is not granted in cases of this character. I requested the Chief of the Postoffice Inspection Department to permit an inspector to be present during this examination for the purpose of preventing any unnecessary wrangle and also to reach the correct conclusion as to the merits of the case. I never express an opinion until after this is done, no matter whether I have formed an opinion or not. You made the charges and failed to prosecute. I, therefore, on October 29th, sent the case with all the papers on both sides and an abstract to the Department at Washington, and from that time it has been entirely out of my hands, and the Department ordered the postoffice inspectors, over whom I have no control, and who are a distinct departmental branch of the service, to take up and determine this case. They have had it in their hands since that time, and so there is no ground for the charge that I was dilatory. I understand an inspector did call upon you, and also examine Mr. Hurney, but as to the course of action or what was done I have no knowledge, so that your statement that the Cincinnati postmaster heard his master’s voice is groundless. I have no master except my Chief in Washington, and in all cases involving religion and politics I have strictly and impartially followed the rules of the Department, and did not treat this case as a religious case, but as a case in which a patron of the office complained of improper treatment by an employee of this office, and if you had appeared at the examination in October the matter would have been settled and the controversy ended. Your statement that Inspector Fletcher reported to me an estimate of my brother as to your credibility is without foundation as the inspector does not report to me, but reports through the Inspection Department at Washington, and I have not seen his report or anything connected with it. If you have any doubt about any of these statements, I will be glad to have you call at my office and I will show you the evidence, as I have carbon copies of the entire transaction. I have a right to presume that, when acquainted with the facts, as an honorable man you will make restitution.
Respectfully,
Elias R. Monfort,
Postmaster.

Making no reply to Postmaster Monfort’s letter of January 24, 1913, inspired evidently by fear of The Menace’s criticism, I was, on January 29, 1913, made recipient of the following:

United States Post Office
EXECUTIVE DIVISION
CINCINNATI, OHIO
January 29, 1913.
Mk. Jeremiah J. Crowley,
Johnston Building, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Dear Sir:

I have not received reply to my letter of January 24th, nor have you called at my office for an interview. Unless I hear favorably from you, I shall write to The Menace and demand that my letter to you should be published as my defense, as I can not reach a half-million people in any other way. If they refuse, then you are forcing me to publish a pamphlet containing the correspondence and send it to 20,000 Protestant preachers and societies in order to set myself right before the public. This is the first time in forty years of public life that I have been publicly charged with unfair treatment of any one. You can set the matter right, and as a fair-minded man you can correct the mistake that you have made. Sincerely,
Elias R. Monfort,
Postmaster.

EXECUTIVE DIVISION
United States Post Office
CINCINNATI. OHIO
January 24, 1913.
PUBLISHERS,
The Menace, Aurora, Mo,
Gentlemen :
In your paper of January 25th you have an article in which you hold me up to contempt and which is in itself libelous, and I believe when your ‘attention is called to it, you will make such corrections as will set the matter right. I have written to Mr. Crowley, and enclose ai copy of the letter sent to him. By this letter you will see that this office made a very strong effort to have Mr. Crowley appear at the examination of Mr. Hurney and which he refused to do, which of course delayed the case. After he had refused, the matter was reported to the Department at Washington and put into the hands of the postoffice inspectors for examination, which took the matter entirely out of my hands on October 29th, since which time I have had nothing whatever to do with the case, nor have I heard from the Department what had been done. Trusting that you will siee that, by want of information, I have been placed in a false position, and that you will correct the same, I am,
Sincerely,
(Signed) Elias E. Monfort,
Inclosure.
Postmaster.

January 29, 1912.
Mr. Elias R. Monfort,
Postmaster, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Dear Sir:
Your letter of the 24th instant, with enclosures, was received in due course and the same have been forwarded to our Washington, D. C, office, in charge of Mr. H. George Buss, who handles all staff matters east of the Mississippi River. We are sure that he will give it the attention it deserves.
Yours very truly,
The Menace Pub. Co., (Inc.)
Aurora, Mo., U. S. A.

EXECUTIVE DIVISION
United States Post Office
CINCINNATI. OHIO
January 31, 1913.
Mr. H. George Buss,
Staff Correspondent, The Menace,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Sir:
I received this morning a letter from The Menace, Aurora, Mo., saying that the matter of the unjust and injurious attack upon me in The Menace of January 25th had been sent to you as the one who handles all staff matter east of the Mississippi River and saying, “We are sure that he will give it the attention it deserves.’

I want this matter corrected in The Menace as fully as the attack was made, and I will be satisfied if you will print my letter to Mr. Crowley exactly as it is written. You will understand that my reputation is wider than this city. If it had been local, I would have given the matter no attention, as I am known here. I have been a Ruling Elder of the Presbyterian Church for thirty years. I have been a Trustee of Lane Theological Seminary for twenty-five years. I have been a Trustee of a Protestant College for thirty years. I was appointed by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church as a Member of the Committee on Christian Unity, and said Committee had a representative from all Protestant Churches, among them Bishop Cox, of New York. I was also appointed by the General Assembly a Member of the Committee on Union with the Southern Presbyterian Church. I have had many other appointments of this kind, unsought by me. I was a Delegate to the Evangelical Alliance that met in London ten years ago. I have recently received an appointment by the Presbyterian General Assembly as a Delegate to the Evangelical Alliance of all Churches in the World holding the Reform Faith, to meet in Aberdeen, Scotland, June, 1913.

The Menace has a half-million subscribers among Protestants, so that such a charge is very serious. While your name appears as writer of the article, I have written to Mr. Crowley as the author because the scientific tests of authorship as applied to the article give at least evidence that he wrote all or the most of it. I have no documents of the same kind from your pen to make such tests, but I have from him on the same subject. You will understand that these tests involve rhetoric style, the applications of the rules of logic, and the counting of five hundred or more words or letters and space, etc., etc. I have never found two men with the same literary style, closely inspected, where the tests would show close similarity in authorship, so that these tests are prima facia proof of authorship. As your name appears as the author, you are, of course, responsible, but I assume that your sense of fairness, when you understand the situation, will lead you to make such correction as will set me right before the world.
Very respectfully,
(Signed) Elias R. Monfort.

Cincinnati, Ohio, February 13, 1913.
Mr. Elias R. Monfort,
U.S. Postoffice, Cincinnati, 0.
Dear Sir:
I am very sorry that I have been too busy to acknowledge before this the receipt of your letter and enclosure of January 31st.

I desire to say that you are mistaken as to Mr. Crowley’s having been the author of the article in question, as I wrote every word of it myself. With all due respect to you, I do not believe there is anything that I care to add to that article at this time.
Very respectfully,
(Signed) H. George Buss.