The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-04-06
THE ENORMOUS ESTIMATES.


THE ENORMOUS ESTIMATES.
Mr.. Holmes, the Chairman Of the Naval Com.
mittee in the House, we sec, has addressed note
to the editor Of the Union, in which he states thai
Mr.. Bancrofts letter, asking for only ten steam
rigaes to be added to the navy, did not accompany
the letter OF the four commodores from the bu.
rcaus) recommending forty-threc steamers-thus
giving us an impression, that Mr. Bancrofs lettsr
Of the alleged 9Th, after thought, pre-datcd
in order to ward off the alarm the enormous esti-
mates had excited. The following is MIR. Holmes'a
letter - .
To the Editor of the Union:
SIR 1t would be well for you before you censure
others, to ascertain the truth.
In your paper of yesterday, you say:
alt is to be regretted that the chairman of the
Naval Committee of the House, when he stated his
uncertainty to the accordance Of the Secretary OF
the Navy with the suggestions Of the bureaus, had
not communicated to the House the secretary's let
ter Of the 9th January, which accompanied the re-
ply Of the bureaus to the resolution Of the House
committee. Had he done 80, misrepresentation would
have been avoided"
Sir, had | done so, Misrepresentation would not
have been avoided, but by telling untruth for,
the letter of the 9Th Of January did not accompany
the reply of the bureaus to the resolution Of the
House committee. I. E. HOLMES,
Chairman Naval Committee,
House of Representatives.
Thus, it appears, the letter, recommending forty
three Steamers went alone to the Committee, and
the only recommendation they knew Of! Mr..
Bancroft's 9th of January letter has every appear
ance of having been sent in, only when people be-
gan to talk about the extravagance of the recon-
mendation from the bureaus.
Mr.. Holmes will doubtless regret the chase
uses" which thus seek to shelter themselves under
the sanction of his name. He will also regret, we
think, the slight ambiguity of the words in his sec
ond note of 4th inst. We reprint it here: ".
To the Editor of the Union: ..t.....
Sir: l send you a copy of the letter received at
the time the honorable Secretary of the Navy trans
mtted the report Of the bureaus to the nary commit
Tee. 1t is dated after the 9Th Of January, and con-
cludes the matter. " '.N
~. E. HOLMES,
Chairman Naval Committee.
NAVY DEPARTMENT, Jan. IL, 1886.
SIR: have the honor to enclose for the informa-
ton of the naval committee of the House Of Rep
resentatives, a copy of report made to this de-
partment by Commodores Morris, Warrington,
Crane, and Shubrick, in reference to the necessity
and manner Of increasing the navy.
The resolution Of the Senate committee having
been somewhat more specific in its inquiries than
that of the House committee, the enclosed copy
will be found more detailed in its statements than
that which had the honor to transmit to you du-
ring last week. wv
Very respectfully, yours,
GEORGE BANCROFT.
Hon. l. z. HOLMES, &c. &c. &c. ,,,....r-,-,
The facts in tho case are now fully ascertained.
They are follows: gr"~ Or aanHzf.a.
LIST. In reply to ttco calls, made between the Goth
and 25th Of December the one by the House COM
mttee, and the other by the Senate committee, the
bureaus addressed to the Secretary tgo reports.
I'd. These reports recommended eractiy the sam,
increase Of Jorce but they differed in this, and this
only, that the report in reply the House commit
tee did not estimate IN detail the cost Of such in
crease, while the report in reply the Senate COM
mttee gave the recommendations and the detailed
estimates together. ..F ....
81, Both Of these reports were sent to the COM
mittees on the 9th OF January, each enclosed in a
copy Of the letter Of the Secretary bearing that date
which we have published. The reports 40 covered
were duly received by the respective committees.
4th. On the l4th Of January, the Secretary, in
consequence Of verbal communication from Mr..
King Of the House, sent to the House committee,
enclosed in his brief letter Of that date, given
above in Mr.. Holiness card, the report of the bu-
reaus, which had been sent to the Senate committee
on the 9Th Of January. This report asked for
by the House committee, because, though is recon
endaiions Of increase sractg the as those in
the report before sent TO them, its estimates of cost
were given more in detail than in the House report,
These are all the facts OF the case Now what the
slsnderer Of the Express may say Of them il Of no
mom.nt But any statement made over the sigma
ture of Mr.. Holmes, and left liable, however min